What win goal do use for the day?
What is the loss limit for a day?

Thanks
Phishalot

Quote from: cubanopro on Sep 15, 05:05 PM 2010
Great! By any chance may we see those results??

--YOU MUST BE JOKING,CUBANO,
--I'm all manual man,old fashioned,and
to do what you ask from me,woul first have
to take evening classes.No man,you just have
to take my word.

Okkk here is my 1st set of results


No
26
15 T1
32 -25
18 -25
9 +200

= +150

8
30 T2
19 +50
3
35

= +50

8
15 T3
1 -25
29 +50
16

= +25

4
2
0
29 T2
32 -25

= -25

25
7 T3
29 +50
15
11

= +50

28
4 T2
28 -25
0 -25
19 +200

= +150

13
31 T1
15 -25
26 -25
26 -100

= -150

25
22 T1
12 +50
10
14

= +50

2
31 T2
12 -25
15 +50
35

= +25

24
8 T3
11 -25
11 -25
20 -100

= -150


Total  +175


Would most ppl say this is a "typical session" ?

Hi fellas! I just wanted to say that I believe this is the end of our journey! Although this was an interesting post I have now mathematical proof that my system wonââ,¬â,,¢t work in the long run. Another person from another forum helped me out by explaining me why it could not work over many spins. I think itââ,¬â,,¢s imperative that I show you the message he wrote me so that you too can benefit from it. Perhaps you can understand why it wouldnââ,¬â,,¢t work in the long term.

ââ,¬ËœÃ¢â,¬â,,¢Iââ,¬â,,¢m sorry to disappoint you, but your system will not work. I will post this at the website as soon as the administrator approves my registration.

Your basic logic is sound, but your numbers are a bit sloppy. When you refine the numbers, the expectation turns negative. I donââ,¬â,,¢t doubt you have had success, but it was luck. Every five spins, this system loses an average of $1.82, but the standard deviation is huge, $87.64. That means it takes about 2,500 sequences of five spins before your negative expectation equals your standard deviation. Even at that point, there is one chance in six you will be ahead by luck.

To start with, your formula based on standard deviation is only an approximation. The chance of every column appearing between 1 and 3 times in five spins is actually 59%, not 68%. Things are a little better than that for your system, because 5% of the time only one column will appear, so only 36% of the time do you lose because two columns appeared but not three. If you ignore the 5% of the time you donââ,¬â,,¢t bet, you win 62% of the time and lose 38%. But that means you win only 1.65 times as often as you lose, not 2.125.

Next consider the amounts you win and lose. There are seven possible outcomes from your system, listed below with probability, result, reason:

9% +$150, win on third bet
31% +$50, win on first bet
19% +$25, win on second bet
5%, $0, donââ,¬â,,¢t bet
6% -$25, lose one bet
11% -$50, lose on second bet
19% -$150, lose on third bet

Overall, you win an average of $57.71 59% of the time and lose an average of $100.02 36% of the time (5% of the time is no bet). Your expected value from the series of five spins is -$1.82.

There is no way to adjust the system to make it work. Unless you think the roulette wheel is biased (which is bad for your system) or has a memory, each bet has negative expectation. Without some way to predict the next number, systems like this cannot work.ââ,¬â,,¢Ã¢â,¬â,,¢

Let this be an example of why systems using only statistics wonââ,¬â,,¢t work in the long run. **Each bet has negative expectation. Now I have the proof I needed to stop playingââ,¬Â¦eventually I will lose it all if I continue.
I wish you all a good day! And for those that genuinely believed I worked for a casino or something like that, well what can I sayââ,¬Â¦I guess itââ,¬â,,¢s not every day you see a guy that from its own good will wants to share a winning technique. Besides I never said it was the Holy Grail I simply said that it was, at the moment, working for me and I needed to know if it could work in the long term.   
Cubano

Almost every system works at the start.

C.

If we could find a system that lost gradually and every now and then had a really big win that recovered more than you lost,  we might be able to reverse that bet and be onto something really good.

Cheers, 

George

Thanks cubanopro for sharing your new infomation, it will save some ppl alot of money !  

What the guy told you is also only theory like yours. If you guys have a positive results that means you win more than lose than cubanos theory is the winning one. Test 2,500 spins and show results. If you are still winner forget the other guy.
Here is not going about holy grail but advantage over roulette game. I didn't tested it yet but as I can see the results you get are positive. Keep going don't stop just because somebody told you his opinion. Test 2,500 spins and tell the result! Nobody is perfect even that guy is not perfect.
Test more it is worth it. Tesla gave Edison homework and Edison missed 10,000 times until won forever.
Believe what you see not what you hear.
Hermes

Quote from: Hermes on Sep 20, 08:23 PM 2010
What the guy told you is also only theory like yours. If you guys have a positive results that means you win more than lose than cubanos theory is the winning one. Test 2,500 spins and show results. If you are still winner forget the other guy.
Here is not going about holy grail but advantage over roulette game. I didn't tested it yet but as I can see the results you get are positive. Keep going don't stop just because somebody told you his opinion. Test 2,500 spins and tell the result! Nobody is perfect even that guy is not perfect.
Test more it is worth it. Tesla gave Edison homework and Edison missed 10,000 times until won forever.
Believe what you see not what you hear.
Hermes

Hi Hermes,
Have tested this with my own 12000 spins-----and the results seems like
promessing at the start,but then it show it real face....but then I have tweak it
some,selecting it in diff. larger frame with some improvements,but still
no good....so gave up.
BTW---Edison stole my country man Tesla homework and become a winner at the
end.

Quote from: Hermes on Sep 20, 08:23 PM 2010
What the guy told you is also only theory like yours. If you guys have a positive results that means you win more than lose than cubanos theory is the winning one. Test 2,500 spins and show results. If you are still winner forget the other guy.
Here is not going about holy grail but advantage over roulette game. I didn't tested it yet but as I can see the results you get are positive. Keep going don't stop just because somebody told you his opinion. Test 2,500 spins and tell the result! Nobody is perfect even that guy is not perfect.
Test more it is worth it. Tesla gave Edison homework and Edison missed 10,000 times until won forever.
Believe what you see not what you hear.
Hermes

Thats a great point of view Hermes ! Thanx for sharing 

Twisteruk is still winning. Tweak it, tweak it, tweak it is the answer.
That's why I brought it here latino. Tesla was a genius and Edison plagiarist as usual but money and fame took Edison.
Hermes

Quote from: cubanopro on Sep 19, 04:29 PM 2010
Hi fellas! I just wanted to say that I believe this is the end of our journey! Although this was an interesting post I have now mathematical proof that my system wonââ,¬â,,¢t work in the long run. Another person from another forum helped me out by explaining me why it could not work over many spins. I think itââ,¬â,,¢s imperative that I show you the message he wrote me so that you too can benefit from it. Perhaps you can understand why it wouldnââ,¬â,,¢t work in the long term.

ââ,¬ËœÃ¢â,¬â,,¢Iââ,¬â,,¢m sorry to disappoint you, but your system will not work. I will post this at the website as soon as the administrator approves my registration.

Your basic logic is sound, but your numbers are a bit sloppy. When you refine the numbers, the expectation turns negative. I donââ,¬â,,¢t doubt you have had success, but it was luck. Every five spins, this system loses an average of $1.82, but the standard deviation is huge, $87.64. That means it takes about 2,500 sequences of five spins before your negative expectation equals your standard deviation. Even at that point, there is one chance in six you will be ahead by luck.

To start with, your formula based on standard deviation is only an approximation. The chance of every column appearing between 1 and 3 times in five spins is actually 59%, not 68%. Things are a little better than that for your system, because 5% of the time only one column will appear, so only 36% of the time do you lose because two columns appeared but not three. If you ignore the 5% of the time you donââ,¬â,,¢t bet, you win 62% of the time and lose 38%. But that means you win only 1.65 times as often as you lose, not 2.125.

Next consider the amounts you win and lose. There are seven possible outcomes from your system, listed below with probability, result, reason:

9% +$150, win on third bet
31% +$50, win on first bet
19% +$25, win on second bet
5%, $0, donââ,¬â,,¢t bet
6% -$25, lose one bet
11% -$50, lose on second bet
19% -$150, lose on third bet

Overall, you win an average of $57.71 59% of the time and lose an average of $100.02 36% of the time (5% of the time is no bet). Your expected value from the series of five spins is -$1.82.

There is no way to adjust the system to make it work. Unless you think the roulette wheel is biased (which is bad for your system) or has a memory, each bet has negative expectation. Without some way to predict the next number, systems like this cannot work.ââ,¬â,,¢Ã¢â,¬â,,¢

Let this be an example of why systems using only statistics wonââ,¬â,,¢t work in the long run. **Each bet has negative expectation. Now I have the proof I needed to stop playingââ,¬Â¦eventually I will lose it all if I continue.
I wish you all a good day! And for those that genuinely believed I worked for a casino or something like that, well what can I sayââ,¬Â¦I guess itââ,¬â,,¢s not every day you see a guy that from its own good will wants to share a winning technique. Besides I never said it was the Holy Grail I simply said that it was, at the moment, working for me and I needed to know if it could work in the long term.   
Cubano

Nice to clarify the real math behind your system.

I´m not sure but the problems with these measures is that when you have already the 2 different dozens it happenned in the past and fall into Gambler´s Fallacy.

I guess, to have the real 68% you must play the 5 spins on 1 dozen each spin.

Because the SD is applied to the group of 5 trials you played.

Waiting for 2 different dozens to play the sleeper you must calculate only the time you place your bets, that´s why you missed in takkng the 68% instead of 59%.

Very nice of the guy who explained the real math.
BR

Cubano must live in Miami, Florida because I went through whole Varadero and didn't found a casino. There can be some in Habana but that's too far from Varadero.
About the deviation we use it in Forex trading in terms of Bollinger Bands of 2nd deviation. If the 2nd deviaton gets touched, pierced or overhauled by the price we place an entry for trade. If it is on support level we place buy and if it is on resistance level we place a sell orders. Deviation means overstretched. Deviation 1 is average.
What is overstretched must come in the middle after while, cannot stay overstretched, cannot hold the pressure forever.
Happy gambling
Hermes

Hi cubanopro,

It is really working,thank you for posting that 

Its good to read all this post from all that time ago, from something that I m developing for some time...

Actually I'm using standard deviation and applying it to my betting logic (A bit different from what Cubano presented). Its being hard, but i don't want to say impossible, to get positive profit at long-term.

One thing I can say right now, for sure: it improve significantly the edge against house.

When I get something usefull to see I will open a new topic to show my software