Inspired by Priyanka's Quad/Dozen cycles framework and her tracker for KTF, I propose to carry out an interesting experiment on numbers:
*Play sleepers (0s) and potential repeaters (1s) for several repeats/extended cycles (at least 12 ala Law of the Third) keeping a separate BR for each bet type. If the sleepers come out with the most profit then it's +1 for them otherwise they get a -1 and the repeats get a +1. So for 12 cycles we might get results that look like:
+s +s +s +r +r +s +r +r +r +r +r +r
After those results have been generated we need to see what the most common row looks like as the average winning trot - and it has to look like that across multiple data sets. If that passes then I can then proceed to the next part of the test, but I am not sure what that will be yet.
We need to end up knowing whether to bet on 0s or repeaters every cycle based on the most likely path judging from the stats. And I need to find out how many cycles to play for in order to get maximum profit from flat-betting. If I even get that far - providing there are patterns across multiple data sets - then I might get to test if the profit can be extended by knowing when to switch to 2s and when to possibly add in a progression (potentially riding on any imbalances).
What do you think? Any feedback? How far will I get? What kind of results should I expect?
Sounds interesting....can you do a short session to get a little more understanding so we can attempt to test it out?
See attached... Here I am betting just sleepers and ignoring any negative results where the repeaters won:
(link:://s32.postimg.org/hya9nmt51/trot.png)
Judging by the first test results for cycles with 12 repeats the sleepers do well during the middle of the trot around repeat 6/7, but around repeats 1-2 and 11-12 they seem to lose more often.
I did 100K spins x 2 for both sleepers and repeaters. I never realised they could both lose, but a clear pattern emerges from the first repeat:
Sleepers 1st repeat:
-12253
-14883
Repeaters 1st repeat:
-296
-3029
So, clearly, if you had a choice of what to stick to - out of sleepers of repeaters - you would begin with the repeaters!
I've now figured out how the tests should proceed next, based on the first split of the tree:
Repeat 1 (1s) > Win > Repeat 2 (0s or 1s?)
Repeat 1 (1s) > Lose > Repeat 2 (0s or 1s?)
There's a clear pattern emerging here across all data sets: 8) O0
Repeat 1 (1s) > Win > Repeat 2 (1s)
-2734
-3768
Repeat 1 (1s) > Lose > Repeat 2 (1s)
33
-398
Repeat 1 (1s) > Win > Repeat 2 (0s)
?
?
Repeat 1 (1s) > Lose > Repeat 2 (0s)
?
?
Quote from: falkor2k15 on May 22, 02:40 PM 2016So, clearly, if you had a choice of what to stick to - out of sleepers of repeaters - you would begin with the repeaters!
Some Genius mentions that all the time lol - eh what does he know.
Quote from: TurboGenius on May 22, 04:01 PM 2016
Some Genius mentions that all the time lol - eh what does he know.
Well, without some suitable test I wouldn't have known either way...
Repeat 1 (1s) > Win > Repeat 2 (1s+)
-2734
-3768
Repeat 1 (1s) > Lose > Repeat 2 (1s+)
33
-398
Repeat 1 (1s) > Win > Repeat 2 (0s)
-4795
-3516
Repeat 1 (1s) > Lose > Repeat 2 (0s)
-2482
-2169
If we are in profit by the time of the first repeat then we should still follow the repeat trail - albeit virtually perhaps - and I guess in a few repeats time we'll be ready to switch to sleepers.
There's never a reason to play sleepers.
Quote from: TurboGenius on May 22, 07:58 PM 2016
There's never a reason to play sleepers.
We'll see... it seems the gap is closing depending on the accumulated success rate, but I could be wrong... will be carrying out further tests tomorrow to confirm.
Repeat 1 (1s) > Win > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Win > Repeat 3 (1s+)
-270
-293
Repeat 1 (1s) > Win > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Win > Repeat 3 (0s)
-3697
-3448
Repeat 1 (1s) > Win > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Lose > Repeat 3 (1s+)
-651
-1012
Repeat 1 (1s) > Win > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Lose > Repeat 3 (0s)
-938
-643
Repeat 1 (1s) > Lose > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Win > Repeat 3 (1s+)
-1296
1271
Repeat 1 (1s) > Lose > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Win > Repeat 3 (0s)
-286
-2751
Repeat 1 (1s) > Lose > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Lose > Repeat 3 (1s+)
85
343
Repeat 1 (1s) > Lose > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Lose > Repeat 3 (0s)
-778
-1089
Quote from: TurboGenius on May 22, 07:58 PM 2016
There's never a reason to play sleepers.
Very wise words. And notto, please dont jump on it. Sleepers are different from non-hits as per your definition.
The non-hits (0s) already won above in 1/8 situations, so the next series of tests is as follows:
Repeat 1 (1s) > Lose > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Win > Repeat 3 (1s+) > Win > Repeat 4 (1s+)
Repeat 1 (1s) > Lose > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Win > Repeat 3 (1s+) > Win > Repeat 4 (0s)
Repeat 1 (1s) > Lose > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Win > Repeat 3 (1s+) > Lose > Repeat 4 (1s+)
Repeat 1 (1s) > Lose > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Win > Repeat 3 (1s+) > Lose > Repeat 4 (0s)
Repeat 1 (1s) > Lose > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Lose > Repeat 3 (1s+) > Win > Repeat 4 (1s+)
Repeat 1 (1s) > Lose > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Lose > Repeat 3 (1s+) > Win > Repeat 4 (0s)
Repeat 1 (1s) > Win > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Win > Repeat 3 (1s+) > Win > Repeat 4 (1s+)
Repeat 1 (1s) > Win > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Win > Repeat 3 (1s+) > Win > Repeat 4 (0s)
Repeat 1 (1s) > Win > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Win > Repeat 3 (1s+) > Lose > Repeat 4 (1s+)
Repeat 1 (1s) > Win > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Win > Repeat 3 (1s+) > Lose > Repeat 4 (0s)
Repeat 1 (1s) > Win > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Lose > Repeat 3 (0s) > Win > Repeat 4 (1s+)
Repeat 1 (1s) > Win > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Lose > Repeat 3 (0s) > Win > Repeat 4 (0s)
Repeat 1 (1s) > Win > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Lose > Repeat 3 (0s) > Lose > Repeat 4 (1s+)
Repeat 1 (1s) > Win > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Lose > Repeat 3 (0s) > Lose > Repeat 4 (0s)
Soon I bring the 2s into the fray, but I don't think it's the right time yet.
Quote from: Priyanka on May 23, 07:45 AM 2016Very wise words. And notto, please dont jump on it. Sleepers are different from non-hits as per your definition.
But is it wrong
Priy
i'll tell you whats not wrong that KTF tester at Westspiel casino, using those 71'000 spins, 5'160 done in 60 spin games +3249
Quote from: nottophammer on May 23, 08:42 AM 2016
Priy
i'll tell you whats not wrong that KTF tester at Westspiel casino, using those 71'000 spins, 5'160 done in 60 spin games +3249
Well you jumped in :-X
in a few weeks we'll know if it is in profit after 71'000 spins, if it is what are the experts going to say then :thumbsup: O0
Quote from: nottophammer on May 23, 11:19 AM 2016
in a few weeks we'll know if it is in profit after 71'000 spins, if it is what are the experts going to say then :thumbsup: O0
Whr do you take those spins from
Quote from: nottophammer on May 23, 11:19 AM 2016
if it is what are the experts going to say then :thumbsup: O0
Not enough spins
Variance was in your favor
Lucky
It would fail a 1 million spin test
In the long run it wont work because you aren't increasing accuracy
Or my personal favorite: you are stuck in the gamblers fallacy box
The thing with the experts is even if you win, it does not matter. If you do not play their way it doesnt count
Quote from: RouletteGhost on May 23, 01:18 PM 2016Not enough spins
Variance was in your favor
Lucky
It would fail a 1 million spin test
In the long run it wont work because you aren't increasing accuracy
Or my personal favorite: you are stuck in the gamblers fallacy box
With all that knowledge you could become our new General...
Quote from: RouletteGhost on May 23, 01:18 PM 2016
Not enough spins
Variance was in your favor
Lucky
It would fail a 1 million spin test
In the long run it wont work because you aren't increasing accuracy
Or my personal favorite: you are stuck in the gamblers fallacy box
The thing with the experts is even if you win, it does not matter. If you do not play their way it doesnt count
A cynical, but in all probablility accurate viewpoint. Haters will be haters, they are just jealous most of the time because they are losers really.
So far the only rule for playing 0s and 1s is to play the latter unless the 2nd repeat fails to make a profit in itself in which case we play only 0s at least for the next 2 repeats.
Repeat 1 (1s) > Lose > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Win > Repeat 3 (1s+) > Win > Repeat 4 (1s+)
6
-123
Repeat 1 (1s) > Lose > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Win > Repeat 3 (1s+) > Win > Repeat 4 (0s)
-818
-902
Repeat 1 (1s) > Lose > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Win > Repeat 3 (1s+) > Lose > Repeat 4 (1s+)
197
-211
Repeat 1 (1s) > Lose > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Win > Repeat 3 (1s+) > Lose > Repeat 4 (0s)
-677
-200
Repeat 1 (1s) > Lose > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Lose > Repeat 3 (1s+) > Win > Repeat 4 (1s+)
25
-211
Repeat 1 (1s) > Lose > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Lose > Repeat 3 (1s+) > Win > Repeat 4 (0s)
-523
-633
Repeat 1 (1s) > Lose > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Lose > Repeat 3 (1s+) > Lose > Repeat 4 (1s+)
-88
113
Repeat 1 (1s) > Lose > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Lose > Repeat 3 (1s+) > Lose > Repeat 4 (0s)
-134
-350
Repeat 1 (1s) > Win > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Win > Repeat 3 (1s+) > Win > Repeat 4 (1s+)
-1103
765
Repeat 1 (1s) > Win > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Win > Repeat 3 (1s+) > Win > Repeat 4 (0s)
-1149
-2691
Repeat 1 (1s) > Win > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Win > Repeat 3 (1s+) > Lose > Repeat 4 (1s+)
-406
490
Repeat 1 (1s) > Win > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Win > Repeat 3 (1s+) > Lose > Repeat 4 (0s)
-591
-1484
Repeat 1 (1s) > Win > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Lose > Repeat 3 (0s) > Win > Repeat 4 (1s+)
-985
89
Repeat 1 (1s) > Win > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Lose > Repeat 3 (0s) > Win > Repeat 4 (0s)
-488
502
Repeat 1 (1s) > Win > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Lose > Repeat 3 (0s) > Lose > Repeat 4 (1s+)
-1436
-1051
Repeat 1 (1s) > Win > Repeat 2 (1s+) > Lose > Repeat 3 (0s) > Lose > Repeat 4 (0s)
-256
324
Here's an analysis of the first 4 repeats over 100K spins:
The first 2 repeats lost -3029 and -4295, respectively, but the 3rd repeat only lost -85 and the 4th repeat gained 1149.
Cumulatively, the first repeat ends in -3029, the first and second combined is -7324, and by playing the 3rd repeat we only drop in total to -7409, but by the 4th repeat we have reduced the deficit to -6260.
Ideally then we should not begin placing bets till 3 repeats have happened.
Quote from: nottophammer on May 23, 11:19 AM 2016
in a few weeks we'll know if it is in profit after 71'000 spins, if it is what are the experts going to say then :thumbsup: O0
Why wait for few weeks. Use the attached one and dont forget to set the win target as + and stop loss in negative.
Are we in a hurry for the outcome. I'll have to buy you a drink for the testers.
So you've set win for 50 and stop -800
Quote from: nottophammer on May 25, 04:47 PM 2016
Are we in a hurry for the outcome. I'll have to buy you a drink for the testers.
So you've set win for 50 and stop -800
No hurries. But time is precious. Anything you can automate you should ;). It does take the fun away sometimes.
Feel free to change those targets to what you would like.