I was at Sweden yesterday and was watching one of the lads who was in his mid 30s placing bets on neighbours. After half an hour realised that it was very systematic and his pile was also building up. I could not resist asking and he did explain what he was doing. Surprised to learn something simple but very effective. I have given up Borders. So when one idea dies another one takes birth.
He was playing either the neighbours on the number that came on the board plus two neighbour sets on both sides or a similar one on the number that is bang opposite on the wheel. He was tracking the trend of whether the neighbours are coming through or the opposites are coming through in sets of two. He was following an up as you go progression with 20 Krono bets. His aim was to win closer to 2000 Kronos every day. I will test this on the same casino archive spins that I used for testing Borders.
foolwise i suggested similar method check my post on bet selection ... icashbot revolver
Nice game there you have got icshbot. But this one is different. I will quickly do the first example from the archive and post.
1.1.16
+88 units
19 spins
-45 low point
17
12 Opposite side of wheel
2 Opposite side of wheel
7 Opposite side of wheel
33 Same side of wheel
28 Same side of wheel
20 Same side of wheel
21 Opposite side of wheel
4 Same side of wheel Opposite same is trending
13 -15 Same side of wheel
34 -30 Same side of wheel
28 +21 Opposite side of wheel
7 +42 Same side of wheel
11 +21 Opposite side of wheel
8 +42 Same side of wheel
6 -15 Same side of wheel
0 -30 Opposite side of wheel
14 +21 Opposite side of wheel
5 +42 Same side of wheel
(I'm simply picking your thread, sorry).
So many NEW ideas/methods in the last couple months. Other than scanning for spam/links, I have not read one of them (never even looked at GUT). I hope you guys are "holding up" well. Thats a compliment BTW.
Ken
Quote from: MrJ on Mar 22, 08:51 PM 2016
I hope you guys are "holding up" well. Thats a compliment BTW.
Its like praying in a massage for it to "hold up" till the happy ending. Its just one day of testing and good outcome. If it holds up for the entire month, then its a crack. Seriously, I like it more as it just throwing up three chips to the dealer and calling 5,20 and 18 neighbours. Great feeling.
Quote from: Foolwise on Mar 22, 08:59 PM 2016
Its like praying in a massage for it to "hold up" till the happy ending. Its just one day of testing and good outcome. If it holds up for the entire month, then its a crack. Seriously, I like it more as it just throwing up three chips to the dealer and calling 5,20 and 18 neighbours. Great feeling.
I at least half agree with you on one thing but the MATH might say another.
In terms of *MY* methods (I cant speak for every method from every member, sorry) I would rather bet my 3 numbers (my way) compared to tossing 3 chips up into the air, I agree on that part.
Should it all "be the same"? It should, thats what I hear/read.
Ken
Quote from: Foolwise on Mar 22, 06:40 PM 2016
Surprised to learn something simple but very effective
Unfortunately, such play is no more effective then almost any other system here.
QuoteHe was tracking the trend of
We cannot rely on trends and hope that one of our bets will win. Hoping leads to random play and trends lead to random play.
QuoteI like it more as it just throwing up three chips to the dealer and calling 5,20 and 18 neighbour
Having said all the above, tts perfectly the same.
Best of luck
Drazen
>>>>>Unfortunately, such play is no more effective then almost any other system here.
Someone here says nothing is truth until it is proven. Can you prove that such play is no more effective or is just based on what you think.
>>>>>We cannot rely on trends and hope that one of our bets will win. Hoping leads to random play and trends lead to random play.
No one is hoping here. Are you saying trends dont exist. I thought you were a math guy. Does math not say trends do exist. What about all the nice things that mathmematicians say about Time series, regression analysis, correlation, casual relationship. By saying we cannot rely on trends, are you accepting that math cannot help winning in roulette?
>>>>>Having said all the above, tts perfectly the same.
Then you know nothing about roulette. You have to bet 15 numbers. Two ways of doing it. Bend yourself over those sweaty shoulders, stretch your hands in hurry, and try distributing 15 tokens over 15 numbers in the table. Give 3 tokens to the dealer and say I need 1, 2 and 3 neighbours. Which one is a more pleasant experience. If am a very sensible person, I would say the latter.
All am saying is I saw this win, well once. It interests me. So I test. Dont spread negative messages, if you can help test this, more than welcome. If at the end of 30 days I am having good results, then I test more. If I dont then I either read here or observe to find another interesting idea.
Quote from: Foolwise on Mar 23, 04:56 AM 2016
or it is just based on what you think.
I dont think. I know.
QuoteDoes math not say trends do exist. What about all the nice things that mathmematicians say about Time series, regression analysis, correlation, casual relationship.
Trends do exist of course, but possibility of utilizing them in profitable way is another story. Same as many other fancy math things you named as an example there.
Quoteare you accepting that math cannot help winning in roulette?
I am undecided at best 8)
QuoteThen you know nothing about roulette. You have to bet 15 numbers. Two ways of doing it. Bend yourself over those sweaty shoulders, stretch your hands in hurry, and try distributing 15 tokens over 15 numbers in the table. Give 3 tokens to the dealer and say I need 1, 2 and 3 neighbours. Which one is a more pleasant experience. If am a very sensible person, I would say the latter.
I was referring only to the profitable side of any playing experience. The way I see it, only long term profitable strategy can be considered as a pleasant experience in the casino. And yes no matter how much where and in which way you have to scatter chips on the table.
QuoteCan you prove that such play is no more effective
Regarding this and trends you mentioned earlier, there is a nice tool from Bayes, called sequence analyzer, with which you can create any trend you want, positive or negative, on few different betting locations, and resolve game spin by spin after that. So you can see where the trends will bring you.
Quoteregression analysis
Bayes also has a brilliant tool for testing regression, created to be used and interpreted in most simple way so, find it and start answering your questions.
QuoteDont spread negative messages
:-X
Cheers
>>>>>>I dont think. I know.
Now you speak like a GOD.
>>>>>>I am undecided at best 8)
That answers. Thanks for sharing your views anyway.
>>>>>>The way I see it, only long term profitable strategy can be considered as a pleasant experience in the casino.
Putting things in perspective, it helps. ^-^ Not true for everyone and hence assume not. For some comps are a very pleasant experience. For some, boasting to their friends once in a while in the casino is a lot more fun. Once I took my entire team to a casino for a party. They all got tokens to play for charity. They did have fun and even now talk about it, not a long term profitable strategy though.
>>>>>>Regarding this and trends you mentioned earlier, there is a nice tool from Bayes, called sequence analyzer, with which you can create any trend you want, positive or negative, on few different betting locations, and resolve game spin by spin after that. So you can see =where the trends will bring you.
Because you answer, I ask. Is this any different from me testing 30 day worth of spins from a casino archive?
Also, there lies the catch. You can keep creating a trend which will make you fail. But that is the not the point, the point is how rare is that trend and whether the profits that you can make from millions of other trends can overcome the loss you make from that trend? I bet the tool is not capable of doing that if you can create any trend you want. That is living in a false universe in my opinion.
>>>>>>Bayes also has a brilliant tool for testing regression, created to be used and interpreted in most simple way so, find it and start answering your questions.
Thanks for the information. But fortunately or unfortunately I dont have any questions. I am very clear on my belief that math cannot help beat roulette, unless someone comes with a proof. By the way, the common subject that gets discussed here is regression to mean. The thing that i pointed was regression analysis which is completely different subject.
We can agree to disagree. No hard feelings.
Results from 2.2.16
+108 in 45 spins. Low point was -63.
33
9
7
32
19
34 21
33 -30
23 21
21 -30
5 -15
21 -30
15 21
10 42
0 -15
15 42
34 21
26 -30
13 -15
20 -30
2 -15
32 42
30 21
25 -30
10 21
18 -30
22 -15
32 -30
--
22 -15
22 42
29 -15
21 42
7 -15
13 -30
25 -15
10 42
36 21
1 -30
30 -15
--
27 -30
17 21
1 42
20 21
25 42
Well Foolwise It seems to me that there is no need for further discussion about any principles here. It wont change anything. And you obviously know more then me. But considering that I can recommend to you to hire a programmer and spend some time with him. It will be the best and the fastest way to test your ideas as and get answers as provable facts. But at the same time I wouldnt put my money that you dont have any coding knowledge.
I am definitely not considering my self a GOD of any kind but there is a reason why I replied in certain manner. I told one member here few days ago that you are suspicious to me. There is something very strange with you. Your seemingly naive questioning together with your attitude and points you are trying to prove, dont correspond what seems to be hidden under the surface. It might be just my imagination, dough.
I think this should be enough.
Be widely free to disagree on this ;)
Cheers
Nice results fool wise
>>>>>>>>It will be the best and the fastest way to test your ideas as and get answers as provable facts.
There is no fun in finding the fastest way to fail. Learning along the way is important for me. I will take your advice though and get a programmer to test this after this "holds up" for at least a month.
>>>>>>>>I told one member here few days ago that you are suspicious to me. There is something very strange with you.
You make me sound like a terrorist. I dont think any one can plant bombs in a forum. Stay relaxed.
>>>>>>>Nice results fool wise
Thanks Ghost.
Results from 3.1.16.
+117 from 105 spins. Low point was -261. I am thinking keeping a stop loss of 400. If this can win 4 times in 5 days then we are breaking even.
13
33
11
25
0
18
3
16 -15
29 -30
6 -15
27 -30
23 21
22 -30
33 21
10 42
26 -15
10 42
34 -15
31 -30
17 -15
29 42
--
20 -15
28 -30
27 21
26 42
35 -15
16 -30
7 -15
22 -30
15 21
4 -30
15 -15
3 -30
26 -15
30 42
20 -15
4 -30
35 -15
31 -30
13 -15
36 -30
21 -15
--
2 42
29 -15
30 42
11 21
6 42
3 -15
24 42
30 21
13 42
11 21
4 -30
36 -15
9 -30
1 21
17 42
16 -15
7 -30
26 21
31 -30
15 -15
--
14 -30
22 21
36 42
0 -15
36 -30
6 21
21 -30
34 21
17 -30
14 -15
12 -30
26 21
11 -30
5 21
15 -30
4 21
7 -30
20 21
26 42
5 -15
27 -30
6 21
3 42
28 21
11 42
24 21
12 42
16 -15
8 42
30 21
13 -30
--
24 -15
4 42
9 -15
24 42
11 21
21 -30
2 21
5 42
Results from 4.1.16
+108 from 13 spins. Quickest win so far. Low point was -15.
28
9
4
17
23
2 -15
27 42
3 -15
4 42
19 -15
33 42
28 -15
7 42
Many winning session
Ill test this weekend
>>>>>>>Ill test this weekend
Many thanks Ghost.
Another day 5.1.16.
+99 in 26 spins. Low point was -42
25
14
26
24
5
32
19
30 21
2 -30
20 21
12 -30
11 21
19 -30
25 -15
31 42
17 21
17 42
8 -15
31 -30
35 -15
17 -30
21 21
16 42
--
24 21
19 42
6.1.16 Our first loss. -504 in 101 spins.
7.1.16 +99 in 18 spins. Low point -33
8.1.16 +93 in 25 spins. Low point -60
9.1.16 +111 in 85 spins. Low point -96
10.1.16 +99 in 58 spins. Low point -159.
It is slowly becoming apparent that with a 200 stop loss against a 100 target this method can work well. But testing still continues. I will not change the target and stop loss limits until we do more testing.
11.1.16 - One of those cluttered happenings in the wheel section. Fastest win in 4 placed bets. +126 in 14 spins. Low point 0
12.1.16 - +93 in 34 spins. Low point - 36.
11.1.16
30
3
27
29
20
20
7
33
10
33 21
30 42
6 21
36 42
12.1.16
21
17
36
18
16
23
1
14 21
4 -30
19 21
27 -30
5 -15
8 42
35 -15
2 -30
3 21
26 42
10 -15
31 -30
25 -15
33 42
0 -15
36 42
6 -15
2 42
--
6 -15
33 -30
1 -15
31 42
23 -15
11 42
25 21
Quote from: Foolwise on Mar 23, 12:04 PM 2016
6.1.16 Our first loss. -504 in 101 spins.
7.1.16 +99 in 18 spins. Low point -33
8.1.16 +93 in 25 spins. Low point -60
9.1.16 +111 in 85 spins. Low point -96
10.1.16 +99 in 58 spins. Low point -159.
It is slowly becoming apparent that with a 200 stop loss against a 100 target this method can work well. But testing still continues. I will not change the target and stop loss limits until we do more testing.
QUESTION.....lets say you hit your 200 stop loss. When do you start back up again?
Ken
>>>>>>>QUESTION.....lets say you hit your 200 stop loss. When do you start back up again?
Good question and it makes one think.
This method is all about flat betting. If it is all about flat betting, then what is the stop loss about, if there is no strategy for when to start. Because the whole method is not based on triggers for a start, it can start exactly on the next spin. Then why go holy about stop loss. It should be played continuously without any stop loss. Stop loss would have made sense if there was a progression here.
By the way, I did complete my test for full three months worth of spins. Whatever cut you take, the method wins equally as it losses. To be precise, it wins when it wants to and it loses when it wants to. No one can predict which way it goes, as it completely depends on the sequence of spins which is random. Thanks for following this thread.
I will be welcoming any suggestions for tweaks, but otherwise this idea is a failure.
try a progression 111 222 444 888 161616
0.10p on each number starting bet
1 being your lowest progression last 16 being highest.
not looking at the Maths.!!!!! of this progression Just to make it clear..!!!!!
just catching wins at diffrent stages in progression
once progression complete start again from 1 continue as normal
set a small profit target once reached End.
worth testing out. :question:
works better using a bot due to long periods of continous play
icashbot.
Thanks. Tested this and even the winning sessions are turning out to losing ones :o
hi sorry foolwise must ask are you testing manually if so might take a while...
please explain how you playing again ..
are you playing just last number and nieghbour only ?
so i can get back to you on this with my own results
icashbot
Quote from: Foolwise on Mar 25, 07:48 PM 2016
>>>>>>>QUESTION.....lets say you hit your 200 stop loss. When do you start back up again?
Good question and it makes one think.
This method is all about flat betting. If it is all about flat betting, then what is the stop loss about, if there is no strategy for when to start. Because the whole method is not based on triggers for a start, it can start exactly on the next spin. Then why go holy about stop loss. It should be played continuously without any stop loss. Stop loss would have made sense if there was a progression here.
By the way, I did complete my test for full three months worth of spins. Whatever cut you take, the method wins equally as it losses. To be precise, it wins when it wants to and it loses when it wants to. No one can predict which way it goes, as it completely depends on the sequence of spins which is random. Thanks for following this thread.
I will be welcoming any suggestions for tweaks, but otherwise this idea is a failure.
"Good question and it makes one think" >> Thank you, thats WHY I'm here and thank you for replying. (I hope this post is ok?)
Ken