So, i have a staking plan that shows profit at break even..
Isnt that a holy grail for no zero roulette? Or am i missing something?
If by staking plan you mean a money management/progression, then it's definitely not a HG.
Bet selection always has to come first. If you have a system that has static bets that never change based on current conditions, then there will always be at least one unlucky sequence that can make your system lose. And that unlucky sequence will definitely happen eventually and can last a very long time.
If you play flat bet, that's when previous profits will be lost. If you play with progression, that's when your entire bankroll will be lost.
can ayone give me a horror R/B sequence? BUT the reds/blacks need to break even at one point.
thx!
Give some parameters:
R/B ratio, in how many spins, what sequence length?
Or try the Linus Sequence, 1 being R or B, 2 being the opposite:
1, 2, 1, 1, 2, 2, 1, 2, 1, 1, 2, 1, 2, 2, 1, 1, 2, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 1, 2, 1, 1, 2, 2, 1, 1, 1, 2, 1, 1, 2, 2, 1, 2, 1, 1, 2, 1, 2, 2, 1, 1, 2, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 1, 2, 1, 1, 2, 2, 1, 2, 2, 2, 1, 1, 2, 1, 2, 2, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 1, 2, 2, 1, 1, 2, 1, 2, 2, 1, 2, 1, 1, 2, 2, 1, 2, 2, 2, 1, 1, 2, 1, 2, 2, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 1, 2
Could be any,as long the red 50% and black 50%. So break even.
I'm afraid it's not that simple. What the horror sequence is, is completely depends on your bet selection.
For example if you play follow the last, then RBRBRBRBRB is your worst enemy.
If you play for alternating colors, then RRRRRRBBBBBB sequences will make you lose.
There is an extreme large number of possible variations.
If you don't know how to write excel formulas to test a system, there is still an easy way to find even chance patterns using microsoft word.
Simply go to link:s://:.random.org/integers/ and generate 10000 numbers between 1 and 2, in 1 column. (1 can represent R, 2 can represent B)
Copy the numbers into a word document
Hit Ctrl+H to open the replace window
Enter the following into the Find what field: ^p then click "replace all"
Then hit ctrl+F to open the search window and type in the sequence you are looking for
Quote from: Robbert on Jan 03, 02:24 PM 2020
So, i have a staking plan that shows profit at break even..
Isnt that a holy grail for no zero roulette? Or am i missing something?
If you ran enough spins, like millions, and it really is profitable, then the curb should be an almost straight uptrending line. If it swings up and down but stops on the positive side after the trial, you could have doubts.
The more spins you consider, less variance will be seen on the graph, the more the edge will appear, if any.
If theres no house edge, the long term result is break even.
exact. So if i profit at break even?
Quote from: Steve on Jan 03, 08:52 PM 2020
If theres no house edge, the long term result is break even.
That's not true if you play with negative progression. From time to time you will either reach your loss limit, or lose your bank roll and cannot continue. Those losses add up over time and get you in a deep hole. The more you play the more you lose. It doesn't matter if there is no house edge, variance is still there and a bad series can happen any time.
If there is no house edge and you are in negative or positive territory, it is due to variance. As more spins go by, the result will tend towards the mathematically calculated edge.
Run more spins. Do a billion spins.
Progressions don't matter. If the house edge is zero, the overall result will revolve around zero.
Steve is right.
If there is no house edge, and you have a smaller bankroll than the bank ,then the bank has a higher probability to win in the long run.
ati is right. :wink:
Let's say the HE is zero.
Let's say you play a basic Martingale on ECs, topped at 16 units.
In the long run, the sum of all your bets at 1u will tend towards zero, the sum of all your bets at 2u will tend towards zero, the sum of all your bets at 4u will tend towards zero, the sum of all your bets at 8u will tend towards zero, the sum of all your bets at 16u will tend towards zero, and the sum of all the sums will tend towards zero.
No matter what progression of table limit, the sum of all equal bets tends toward zero.
Quote from: Robbert on Jan 04, 05:14 AM 2020
exact. So if i profit at break even?
Depends what you mean by profiting.
100u after 100k spins? Variance or you see a real straight up line?
Quote from: Bigbroben on Jan 04, 08:06 AM 2020
Let's say the HE is zero.
Let's say you play a basic Martingale on ECs, topped at 16 units.
In the long run, the sum of all your bets at 1u will tend towards zero, the sum of all your bets at 2u will tend towards zero, the sum of all your bets at 4u will tend towards zero, the sum of all your bets at 8u will tend towards zero, the sum of all your bets at 16u will tend towards zero, and the sum of all the sums will tend towards zero.
No matter what progression of table limit, the sum of all equal bets tends toward zero.
Make sense, but I'm still confused. 🤔 See the following scenario.
Your bankroll is 511 units. If you lose this roll, you don't continue the progression, you deposit a new bankroll and start again from 1 unit bet.
You only bet on red with a negative martingale progression.
In order to lose the bankroll, there has to be 9 blacks in a row, which happen statistically once in 512 spins.
So after losing the 511 units, you would need to win the 511 back before the 9 in a row happens again in 512 spins. And this is where I see the problem, because then you would need to average 1 unit per spin profit, which cannot be done with a martingale.
So in theory you are right, but that applies if you have unlimited bankroll and table limits. Otherwise the last bet that your stop loss/bank roll allows, will always be negative and won't converge toward zero.
I know from experience :twisted: As I posted a couple days ago, I played at least 200K no zero real money spins with progressions and my losses were kept increasing. I've lost tens of thousands of units.
It applies to any stoploss, table limit or Wingoal.
If you played 200k spins and ended in negative territory, it is due to variance. Trends can be astonishingly long.
I'll explain in two different manners:
1) If both chances of winning or losing are equal, in the long run, cal it the law of large nrs or whatever, this mathematically even chance will overcome variance and the sum of all results will tend towards zero. So as said before, all 512u bets will even out, all 8u bets will even out...
2) Step by step.
Spin nr 1 with 1u. 50% chance of +1, 50% chance of -1. Even out.
Spin nr 2 following a loss, with 2u. 50% chance of +2, 50% chance of -2.
75% chance (3/4) of +1, 25% (1/4) of -3. Even out.
Spin nr 3 following a loss, with 4u. 50% chance of +4, 50% chance of -4
7/8 chance of +1, 1/8 chance of -7 (-1-2-4) Even out.
Spin nr 4 following a loss, with 8u. 50% chance of +8, 50% chance of -8.
15/16 chance of +1, 1/16 chance of -15 (-1-2-4-8)
So on.
Running a macro now to show results after 10 million spins.
So,
10 million spins later.
See the result of 10k runs of 1000 spins, playing Martingale without zero, stopping at 64u.
The score varies but tends towards zero, the edge even more direction zero.
Thanks for the charts. So it's fair to say that in the extreme long term your expected result can be break even, but you might lose more than you win in the next couple million spins. If I understand correctly and the left chart shows the full 10 million spins.
Yes.