Hello All!
I have been lurking around this form for the past couple of years soaking up ideas. You guys are certainly creative I will say that. Some really great concepts flying around here. I am looking to have something tested over 10,000 spins if that is possible. I am in the process of testing based off of the WizardOfOdds 1 million spins. Ok here it goes.
Bet Selection: Static Bet
(6) Quad or Corner Bets
2,3,5,6
7,8,10,11
14,15,17,18
19,20,22,23
26,27,29,30
32,33,35,36
1 unit on each of those locations. If I win I stay at 1 unit. If I lose at 1 unit, I increase each bet 1 unit.
spin1...loss
spin2...2 units on each...loss
spin 3...3 units on each....win?
I keep it at 3 until I get back to my last high bankroll level.
Each loss I increase by 1 unit.
It is early on but through 202 spins I am +262 units.
The base bet is 6 units to profit 3...or a 2to1 bet.
Any testing help would be greatly appreciated. Let's keep pushing.
Joe
Looks like a simple +1 after loss, -1 after win progression. You'll find it is much the same with any other bet when the odds/payout are much the same.
One of my favorite mess around systems is the same but betting colors. It doesn't work long term though. Just a reasonably low risk short term strategy.
Well that is the thing. It isn't -1 after a win. I stay at the current level on a win, unless I am back to even. Also, I posted my idea here because I was looking to get it tested. I am aware of what the system is. Thanks though.
Joe
I once tested 6 quad bets see my thread American quads it did very well flatbet for a while but a tank from time to time so be careful
Maybe different results your way. But i can tell you had many sessions good flat bet and many bad
RG,
I am a fan of wheel coverage. After all, the more pockets that you cover, the more chances you have of striking. I have been testing with excellent results. Of course, every strategy has a pitfall. I really hope that somebody can get this tested. I am curious to see how it does over a larger amount of spins.
Joe
Quote from: Joma on Oct 12, 11:05 AM 2016
RG,
I am a fan of wheel coverage
Joe
Me to
I base a lot of systems i create off that
Quote from: Joma on Oct 11, 10:48 PM 2016
It is early on but through 202 spins I am +262 units.
Oh, dear.
You could continue your own testing by purchasing roulette extreme, then importing actuals from random.org and manually ploughing through 1000's of spins.
Or learn how to code it yourself then run vast simulations through suitable software.
Quote from: Joma on Oct 12, 11:05 AM 2016
RG,
I am a fan of wheel coverage.
This is sloppy wheel coverage.
So what amount of spins makes a system "legit" ?
Hey Roulette Ghost. I was following your thread about betting double streets where you said to bet against the 5th back street appearing. Forgive my ignorance but it sounds like you are betting the other 5 double streets (which I must be wrong.) Doesn't make since to me with only a 5-1 payout. Sorry for posting this in the wrong thread but that thread to which I am referring appears to have been closed, and I didn't see a way to PM you. Would you be so kind as to correct my interpretation of how you were/are betting this in detail. I'm a little slow sometime lol. Thanks much.
Quote from: Taotie on Oct 12, 12:25 PM 2016
Oh, dear.
You could continue your own testing by purchasing roulette extreme, then importing actuals from random.org and manually ploughing through 1000's of spins.
Or learn how to code it yourself then run vast simulations through suitable software.
That is the whole point of posting my strat in this section. Because people here have those resources already. This is a roulette community.
Also...please explain why you think this is "sloppy coverage"
Regardless of where the wheel is covered...I still have 24 chances to win...and 14 chances to lose. I rather do that than cover 4 or 5 numbers and hope to hit. Not my cup of tea.
Quote from: Joma on Oct 13, 12:04 PM 2016
Regardless of where the wheel is covered...I still have 24 chances to win...and 14 chances to lose. I rather do that than cover 4 or 5 numbers and hope to hit. Not my cup of tea.
So once you reach the 3 unit level, you flat bet 3 units on each quad until you recover? Is that correct -- sort of like the Hermes leveller?
Ah the hermes leveler
Memories
to OP
American Wheel Test
LLWWWWLWLWWLWLWLLWWWWWLWWWLLWWWWWWWLLWWWWW
13 LOSSES - 312 UNITS (13X24)
28 WINS - 336 UNITS (28X12)
I BET YOUR QUADS BUT INDIVIDUAL NUMBERS FOR EASY MATH
FLAT BET +24 UNITS
Rich,
I have never really tested the Hermes leveller with real money bets. Have you had any positive experience with it?
RG,
start at 1 unit...loss...
2units...loss...
3units...loss...
4units...win...
4units...loss...
5units...win...
5units...loss...
6units...win...
6units...win...
6units...win...etc
I stay at the current level until I get back to the high balance I had when I lost at 1unit.
It is more aggressive than a +1/-1
Quote from: DoctorSudoku on Oct 14, 01:34 AM 2016
Rich,
I have never really tested the Hermes leveller with real money bets. Have you had any positive experience with it?
Never played it
Tested briefly on paper some time ago
Never had a bad thing to say about it
Its not a steep dangerous martingale
Maybe works with a solid bet selection
No matter how strong the bet selection, there is negative variance
I had a 6 Quad method that went days on end, autobet celtic live wheel. Won big flat bet. Then lost. If i had a a way to fight the variance....
Many times i thought i had a method that could not lose with a 1 3 9. Then the variance comes
If i learned anything from ND, when lose 30 percent starting BR stop session and start new session at another wheel or in a half hour
Posting the truth to MrJ in the "unmoderated" section has got me on moderated status. Good i guess. Im really not that interested in posting on forums anymore
*Testing Update*
441 Consecutive Random Spins
+509 Units
1u=$1
....Testing Continues....
Nice
Not saying it works long term, or that it doesnt
But perhaps this particular progression, helps combat the double dozen bet variance
Perhaps can be applied to any 2 doz bet
Not beating the HE but maybe fighting that variance
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Oct 14, 07:17 AM 2016
If i had a a way to fight the variance....
Many times i thought i had a method that could not lose with a 1 3 9. Then the variance comes
Rich,
I can tell you from my own extensive empirical experience with double dozen (and other similar-sized bets) that you will never come out ahead -- on a consistent basis -- with a 1 3 9 progression.
I state the above with great confidence -- thanks.
Quote from: DoctorSudoku on Oct 18, 11:22 PM 2016
Rich,
I can tell you from my own extensive empirical experience with double dozen (and other similar-sized bets) that you will never come out ahead -- on a consistent basis -- with a 1 3 9 progression.
I state the above with great confidence -- thanks.
And i agree
Certain bet selections can survive 1 3 9 for awhile
But the variance comes. Wiping you out
1 3 9 is not sufficient to fight the variance
The OP hermes leveller type MIGHT help
Looking forward to his future results
Almost 500 spins and hes doing well
Variance is just variance. Luck is luck. You can't fight it. Double dozen betting, while splitting the zeros is just plain goofy. You're not going to win over time. Anyone that says otherwise is either lying, or doesn't play for very many spins.
Where was splitting zeros mentioned?
So General...how many spins will I have to be in profit at in order for you to jump on board?
Quote from: Joma on Oct 11, 10:48 PM 2016
Hello All!
I have been lurking around this form for the past couple of years soaking up ideas. You guys are certainly creative I will say that. Some really great concepts flying around here. I am looking to have something tested over 10,000 spins if that is possible. I am in the process of testing based off of the WizardOfOdds 1 million spins. Ok here it goes.
Bet Selection: Static Bet
(6) Quad or Corner Bets
2,3,5,6
7,8,10,11
14,15,17,18
19,20,22,23
26,27,29,30
32,33,35,36
1 unit on each of those locations. If I win I stay at 1 unit. If I lose at 1 unit, I increase each bet 1 unit.
spin1...loss
spin2...2 units on each...loss
spin 3...3 units on each....win?
I keep it at 3 until I get back to my last high bankroll level.
Each loss I increase by 1 unit.
It is early on but through 202 spins I am +262 units.
The base bet is 6 units to profit 3...or a 2to1 bet.
Any testing help would be greatly appreciated. Let's keep pushing.
Joe
What about +1/P P-1
L, L, L, W, W, W, W, W, W,
+1, +1, +1, P, P, -1, P, P, -1
Quote from: nottophammer on Oct 20, 03:31 AM 2016I am looking to have something tested over 10,000 spins if that is possible.
It is early on but through 202 spins I am +262 units.
441 Consecutive Random Spins
So General...how many spins will I have to be in profit at in order for you to jump on board?
General is not interested not because it has small sample but because he prefers a different approach not on negative, (more aggressive than +1/-1)progressions.
Back in topic :) Testing... For sure more than 10,000 spins if you want it properly tested. I would say a million or 2 for minimum. Even a simpe martingale can come up positive after a lucky 10,000 spins run. I understand that you can't run manually millions of spins for the system but try to make some thousands like 4,000-5,000. This can be done easily within 2-3 days. If the results are still promising I believe some of the people here that know how to code will be interested in helping out in long run basis.
Quote from: Joma on Oct 13, 12:04 PM 2016I still have 24 chances to win...and 14 chances to lose.
24+14=38=American Roulette. If you want to have any chances in having a good system to survive don't try it on 00 roulette. It's impossible. You can try the thousands and millions of spins in European Roulette though. You can get numbers from random. org
Playing in American even if there was a fool proof system only lowers your winnings and increases your risk without any good for the player.
Feel free to test it but DO prefer European or even better NoZero Roulette.
I once had a promising system tested on European Roulette. It tanked after almost 150,000 spins. Having the same system tested on NZ Roulette it stayed and still stays positive by some thousands units after 4M+ spins.
NZ > European > American :thumbsup:
Quote from: nottophammer on Oct 20, 03:31 AM 2016What about +1/P P-1
L, L, L, W, W, W, W, W, W,
+1, +1, +1, P, P, -1, P, P, -1
What does P stands for notto? What changes you recommend? I don't get it
Quote from: BellagioOwner on Oct 20, 07:35 AM 2016
General is not interested not because it has small sample but because he prefers a different approach
Yup
And the sooner he realizes people use or enjoy other approaches he will be wasting his entire life on these forums
As someone who has developed 6 quad strategies (american quads) i know there are spells of extremely successful periods. I went two nights on autobet for 8 hours each, flat betting and won big
Then after variance it tanks inevitably
If OP continues to have luck i will test that particular progression with my 6 quads (with the expectation it will lose but i will try)
His progression is not steep, and with a low denomination not much risk
Some airball machines are $3 minimum, you can play with .25 cents
Low risk for perhaps some fun and a few win streaks
Quote from: BellagioOwner on Oct 20, 07:35 AM 2016What does P stands for notto? What changes you recommend? I don't get it
P= like Denzie, parley,on a win rebet same unit,if win, down 1unit,if win,parley same unit,if win down 1 unit,if win, parley,with hope of getting back to single unit or the last high
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Oct 20, 07:42 AM 2016His progression is not steep
I didn't say steep. Said more aggressive (I guess steeper than normal +1/-1). Steep I would call Grand Martingale or +1u after every bet in straight up bets :)
Still point is that it needs more manual testing at least few thousand and then probably coded to millions and better be on Euro or NZ
Sorry bellagio i wasnt targeting you. I was speaking in general
Quote from: Joma on Oct 11, 10:48 PM 2016
Hello All!
I have been lurking around this form for the past couple of years soaking up ideas. You guys are certainly creative I will say that. Some really great concepts flying around here. I am looking to have something tested over 10,000 spins if that is possible. I am in the process of testing based off of the WizardOfOdds 1 million spins. Ok here it goes.
Bet Selection: Static Bet
(6) Quad or Corner Bets
2,3,5,6
7,8,10,11
14,15,17,18
19,20,22,23
26,27,29,30
32,33,35,36
1 unit on each of those locations. If I win I stay at 1 unit. If I lose at 1 unit, I increase each bet 1 unit.
spin1...loss
spin2...2 units on each...loss
spin 3...3 units on each....win?
I keep it at 3 until I get back to my last high bankroll level.
Each loss I increase by 1 unit.
It is early on but through 202 spins I am +262 units.
The base bet is 6 units to profit 3...or a 2to1 bet.
Any testing help would be greatly appreciated. Let's keep pushing.
Joe
It's an interesting thing. It looks like a MM paradigm that could work for evens.
It's almost like you tried to become creative with selection and MM. I have
tried to think of ways to cap a D'alenbert or the like. And sit and stew while
the results ran until it came back, thereby not running up a high progression.
I'll test this.
Since we are talking about 2 to 1 bets I have an approach about double dozens that looks solid. I have been in profit with it with less than 66.6% win percentage. (19 /32 win spins =59% win percentage in 2 to 1 bets ) and positive balance on this hard session with only 17 units drawdown.
You bet 2 dozens 1u. On win you are +1 and over. Start again at 1 u. On a loss, add 1u to both dozens. Continue adding +1u on all next spins(Won or Lost) until you are in profit BY 1 UNIT.
That means that if you are -3u for new bankroll high and your next bet is let's say 7u on each dozen, you will drop it to 4u each dozen. No need to be greedy. This greatly reduce bet sizes and drawdowns. It's fun system. Feel free to use/test it and tell me if you liek it or not :thumbsup:
Quote from: Joma on Oct 11, 10:48 PM 2016
Hello All!
I have been lurking around this form for the past couple of years soaking up ideas. You guys are certainly creative I will say that. Some really great concepts flying around here. I am looking to have something tested over 10,000 spins if that is possible. I am in the process of testing based off of the WizardOfOdds 1 million spins. Ok here it goes.
Bet Selection: Static Bet
(6) Quad or Corner Bets
2,3,5,6
7,8,10,11
14,15,17,18
19,20,22,23
26,27,29,30
32,33,35,36
1 unit on each of those locations. If I win I stay at 1 unit. If I lose at 1 unit, I increase each bet 1 unit.
spin1...loss
spin2...2 units on each...loss
spin 3...3 units on each....win?
I keep it at 3 until I get back to my last high bankroll level.
Each loss I increase by 1 unit.
It is early on but through 202 spins I am +262 units.
The base bet is 6 units to profit 3...or a 2to1 bet.
Any testing help would be greatly appreciated. Let's keep pushing.
Joe
Help me with the math. You win 2 units or 4 units or 6 units and you lose
6 or 12 or 18 units? Seems like a tough grind, but I haven't dug in.
Quote from: BellagioOwner on Oct 20, 07:04 PM 2016
Since we are talking about 2 to 1 bets I have an approach about double dozens that looks solid. I have been in profit with it with less than 66.6% win percentage. (19 /32 win spins =59% win percentage in 2 to 1 bets ) and positive balance on this hard session with only 17 units drawdown.
You bet 2 dozens 1u. On win you are +1 and over. Start again at 1 u. On a loss, add 1u to both dozens. Continue adding +1u on all next spins(Won or Lost) until you are in profit BY 1 UNIT.
That means that if you are -3u for new bankroll high and your next bet is let's say 7u on each dozen, you will drop it to 4u each dozen. No need to be greedy. This greatly reduce bet sizes and drawdowns. It's fun system. Feel free to use/test it and tell me if you liek it or not :thumbsup:
Do you have a stop loss or anything?
Quote from: Joma on Oct 18, 06:48 PM 2016
*Testing Update*
441 Consecutive Random Spins
+509 Units
1u=$1
....Testing Continues....
update?
I just did zumma page 171. 30 spins
Came out +7.
There was a double zero occurance. I played like if zero appears,
wait till a number and then continue, to stay out of that.
1st wallpaper test OK.
Quote from: Joma on Oct 14, 05:53 AM 2016
RG,
start at 1 unit...loss...
2units...loss...
3units...loss...
4units...win...
4units...loss...
5units...win...
5units...loss...
6units...win...
6units...win...
6units...win...etc
I stay at the current level until I get back to the high balance I had when I lost at 1unit.
It is more aggressive than a +1/-1
I thought you went to 3 units and stopped?
There are too many random reports of this method and unsupported
support. What's really happening? With this or the leveler progression?
Too much like armchair discussion.
Its pretty simple
On a loss +1. He stays at that level until recovered....
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Oct 24, 12:08 PM 2016
Its pretty simple
On a loss +1. He stays at that level until recovered....
Actually the original method says to go to 3 units. Not just +1.
Then reply #15 by him here has him continuing ad infinitum,
With +1.
Then you have this thread.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15367.0
Which has it's share of interesting bantor.
I'm wondering if this MM method has merit on it's own.
I played one session I know that one is nowhere enough but this shows what can happen.
Soon after starting I had 6 losses in a row (minus 90 units) I stayed on 3 units. All I recovered was 9 units playing on for about 60 spins. A net loss of 81 units.
I much prefer the single dozen system posted on the forum recently. Do not tweak it!!! play as is. I am having a load of success with it and if you want to be a bit more cautious use a sensible stop loss (I do not think that enough emphasis is put on stop loss with most of the systems on here - it is as important and should be an integral part of MM as long as it is a sensible one to that system.)
Bleep24
Quote from: bleep24 on Oct 24, 03:41 PM 2016
I played one session I know that one is nowhere enough but this shows what can happen.
Soon after starting I had 6 losses in a row (minus 90 units) I stayed on 3 units. All I recovered was 9 units playing on for about 60 spins. A net loss of 81 units.
I much prefer the single dozen system posted on the forum recently. Do not tweak it!!! play as is. I am having a load of success with it and if you want to be a bit more cautious use a sensible stop loss (I do not think that enough emphasis is put on stop loss with most of the systems on here - it is as important and should be an integral part of MM as long as it is a sensible one to that system.)
Bleep24
Which single doz system?
Hi Mogul397,
Nice to see that you are still alive and kicking.
I was referring Unique Dozen posted by Willie in Notepad (endish September)
I know that a dozen can snooze or sleep for a while but I have not seen it happen (perhaps because I only play Live/European)
The way I play this is keep playing until missing dozen comes up. It can get to 10 misses but that is no great shakes as it generally recovers.
Progression 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 etc. so even if you have 10 misses (not very often) it is only 30 units and you are only moving up 1 step on a loss and down 3 steps on a win.
BTW: I am still playing NLE and it is still working for me despite the naysayers.
Good luck, Brian
Brian,
Do you wait for the missing dozen to miss a certain number of spins before you start betting?
In other words, is there a trigger that you wait for before entering the fray?
Quote from: bleep24 on Oct 25, 02:38 AM 2016
Hi Mogul397,
Nice to see that you are still alive and kicking.
I was referring Unique Dozen posted by Willie in Notepad (endish September)
I know that a dozen can snooze or sleep for a while but I have not seen it happen (perhaps because I only play Live/European)
The way I play this is keep playing until missing dozen comes up. It can get to 10 misses but that is no great shakes as it generally recovers.
Progression 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 etc. so even if you have 10 misses (not very often) it is only 30 units and you are only moving up 1 step on a loss and down 3 steps on a win.
BTW: I am still playing NLE and it is still working for me despite the naysayers.
Good luck, Brian
Glad to see you posting, as well Brian.
You don't mean this thread, do you?
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=18171.msg167486#msg167486
As to the "nay sayers", well, try and make that hat fit. I legitimately made
30-40 day trips (15 min to get there) and pages of results, tracking the
difference between doubles, singles, triples..........
Am I a nay sayer? Or just insane (expecting a different result?)
You could say that I'm both. I'm certainly a fan. My time effort demonstrates it.
But your presence here seems elusive.
What I would like from you is an honest accessment of some of your
sessions. Specifically the bet range that you end up with. And then
the methodology of betting more than one EC at a time. That really
confuses me and never seems to go well mathematically.
OK. I found it......
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=18091.msg166490#msg166490
Still interested in talking about NLE.
Hi,
No I go straight in. When I see doz.1/doz. 2 I start betting for doz. 3 to appear. It usually happens within 1/2/3/4/5 spins but I have gone up to 11 misses. I just keep on playing on as 11 misses are unlikely to repeat very soon afterwards so giving you a chance to recover. Remember you are just moving up 1 step on a loss but down 3 steps on a win. Prog: 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 etc. so a miss 10 times puts you on betting 6 units. Wins are like buses: miss one then 3 come along together so you would move from betting 6 units down to betting 3 units. This is a snakes and ladders prog. and pretty easy on the nerves. I often see win 3 times - lose 1 so this is a pretty easy recovery prog. I just keep playing on and generally only pack in when I am on 1 unit or back down to 1 unit when I have had enough of playing.
I have tried using the trigger method in the post but found it not as good as you miss lots of opportunities and does not recover as easily.
Only possible downer with the way that I play it is if 15 or 20 misses happened, but personally because of the small amount of units involved I would play on, but a stop loss could be decided on: eg: after 12 misses. If you were betting 4 units then a 12 miss came along (total miss 16x) you would have to decide what to do. It has not happened to me (yet)
Brian
Hi Mogul397,
No I am not calling you a naysayer. All I can work on is my own experiences with NLE and they have been good.
I am hitty-missy on forum as I am retired and at my holiday home a lot (especially for 6 months in the summer) Internet signal can be very variable there making posting tricky.
Back to NLE. I do not totally use a +1/-1 progression which is what maybe confusing you. I calculate stakes on a rolling basis because you can be betting on 1,2 or 3 opps. at same time and cannot stick rigidly to +1/-1.
For instance, if I am down 4 units and 3 opps. come together I will bet 2 units on each, then recalculate after it has played out. I do not always try to recover/reach a new high on a single spin, whether there are 1, 2, or 3 opps. So it is playing it on the hoof or what ever way you wish to describe it.
Good luck,
Brian
Brian,
You start out with 1 1 2 2 etc. and you go up to n-n.
Just curious ...... What is your personal recommendation for
n-n at a live dealer wheel?