Testing the Star System + modifications

[falkor]

I need to get £600 before the end of the month to fly to LA for an event!

Using 1,000,000 real casino spins, I am going to be scripting and performing my own simulation tests on the Star System - modified for a cheaper bankroll and able to overcome 30 losses in a row as quoted by GLC.

As a further "add-on" would you recommend I use flukey luke's strategy to help with tracking ECs ahead of triggering the Star System?
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=6106.0

I am also looking at the claim that 3 double streets can lose less compared to traditional EC bets, though that would require a more higher bankroll if the claim turns out to be true.

Now is there any further refinements, alternative mods, or any additional research you think I ought to be aware of before I commence scripting this?

Any last minute help would be much appreciated!

I have tried tweaking the progression in the past and have tested this to +25 units 15 times and never lost a progression.  I can tell from playing it that it will definitely lose every now and then.


The first 2 bets are our base bets.


1 - Start by betting 1 unit.  If win repeat.  If lose next.
1 - Bet 1 unit.  If win start over.  If lose next.


These next 6 bets are like the star's pre-progression, let-it-ride bets.


1 - These next 6 bets will be let-it-ride.  If win start over.  If lose, next.
2 - If win let it ride if win again we are +3, start over. If lose, next. (we are now -5 units)
2 - If win let it ride, If win we are +1, start over.  If lose we are now -7, next.
3
4
5


The next 8 bets represent the Star's main progression.  Bet each level 2 times for full recovery.


10
15
25
35
55
80
120
180

There are no recovery progressions.
If we lose all 16 bets, we will be down -539 units plus all units won before the progression loss, which could be considerable or it may not be that many at all.  Like I said above, I've won 375 units without losing a progression.  The highest I've had to bet is 80 units.

If I had  shortened my progression to a high bet of 80 units and lost that bet mentioned above, I would have lost 239 units which would still leave me up +136 units.  I just take progressions out to around 500 units as a general rule.  We don't have to go that far.

There's nothing sacred about this progression. You can tweak it however you want.  One way is to make the 2 base bets 1 and then 2.  Since most of our wins will be in these 1st 2 bets, making them both winners is a very good idea.  You would have to adjust the rest of the progression, of course.

Here's another one that's made up of 7 let-it-ride bets and 7 repeat bets.

1
1
1
2
2
3
4

8
12
18
27
40
60
90

A total loss is -269 units.

The basic idea behind this system has always intrigued me.

GLC

Nice post Flukey Luke.

Your group method looks interesting.  Is it a very new idea or have you had a chance to test it some?

I just thought I would post the following.  I had forgotten about this little gem.  Enjoy the read.

Star System Variant

    Here is a little progression that was first introduced by Carsch on GG.

    It is a variant of the original Star System (one of the better public MM systems available on the web), but is better. It requires only about 55% of the original star systems BR and only busts after 30 straight losses...

    Any two wins clear the progression. It allows you to catch streaks, as well as allows you to not go broke with WLWLWL.

    The progression

    Base level:
    1
    1
    2
    2
    4
    4
    8
    8
    16
    16 

See how to play below. 

    1 win & parlay (lose and move on to the next bet)
    1 win & parlay (lose and move on to the next bet)
    2 win & repeat the same bet (In here, in order to move on to the next step, you must lose this bet the first time, or win it and then lose it twice in a row)
    2 win & parlay (lose and move on to the next bet)
    4 win & repeat the same bet (In here, in order to move on to the next step, you must lose this bet the first time, or win it and then lose it twice in a row)
    4 win & parlay (lose and move on to the next bet)
    8 win & repeat the same bet (In here, in order to move on to the next step, you must lose this bet the first time, or win it and then lose it twice in a row)
    8 win & parlay (lose and move on to the next bet)
    16 win & repeat the same bet (In here, in order to move on to the next step, you must lose this bet the first time, or win it and then lose it twice in a row)
    16 win & parlay (lose and move on to Recovery 1)

    Recovery 1 (this is played just like above)

    2
    2
    4
    4
    8
    8
    16
    16
    32
    32

    Recovery 2  (This too is played just like above)

    6
    6
    12
    12
    24
    24
    48
    48
    96
    96

As you can see, it requires 558 units to play base level, recovery 1 and recovery 2.

Base level = 62 units
Recovery 1 = 124 units
Recovery 2 = 372 units

LoL,

George

More info here: link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=10041.0

Here's another way to play the star system.

To begin with, we must win 2 times in a row to reach a new high bank and reset.

It starts with a pre-progression mode.  In the pre-progression mode we bet parlay bets.  I use 1-1-1-2.  That means if we win on any bet, we let-it-ride.  A 2nd win in a row puts us ahead and we reset.

If we lose all 3 pre-progression bets, we move to 5-10-15-25-40.  These are the main bets and represent Proofs 1-2-3-5-8 series only it's times 5.

These are repeat bets.  Let's say we're betting the 5 unit level.  We must win betting 5 units 2 times in a row.  This will put us up +5 units.  It's different from the pre-progression bets because we don't let-it-ride, we repeat the same size bet.  We still must win 2 times in a row but the advantage is that if we win the 1st 5 unit bet and lose the 2nd 5 unit bet, we haven't lost anything yet, so we repeat the 1st 5 unit bet.  We don't move to the 10 unit bet unless we lose the 1st 5 unit bet. 

The same thing for the 10-15-25-40 bets.  They are all played the same way.  If we win 2 times in a row, it will put us ahead 5 units overall and we can reset for another attack.

The author suggests having recovery banks in case you lose all 9 bets of the basic attack.  He has a special formula, but basically you can figure doubling the size of your units for each recovery stage.

Base bet sizes are:  1-1-1-2  |  5-10-15-25-40
Recovery 1 bet sizes are:   2-2-2-4  |  10-20-30-50-80
Recovery 2 bet sizes are:   4-4-4-8  |  20-40-60-100-160

That represents a 100 unit loss for the base bets, a 200 unit loss for recovery 1, and a 400 unit loss for recovery 2 for a whopping 700 unit loss if you lose all 3 attacks.  That's 700 units less any won units prior to losing a 9 bet sequence.

If you want, you can add a small measure of safety by 1 more step in the pre-progression stage.  By using 1-1-1-2-2, you still reach a new high bank on a parlay win, but you only win 3 units when you win a double win in the repeat stage.  That extra shot to stay in the game can make a big difference sometimes.  Other times not so much.

The Star system was originally designed to be played on blackjack because it takes advantage of the double down bets and the 1.5 payout for a blackjack, but it can be played on any even chance bet.

[GLC]

Falkor,  I noticed that I made a mistake on my last post re: the Star system.  I showed that the 2nd recovery bank was 4-4-4-8 etc... when in fact it should have been 6-6-6-12 etc...  I have tested this system quite a bit but have never played it at a casino because I don't like it enough to risk 900 units on it.  I can tell you that I've never lost all three the base bet, recovery 1 and recovery 2 but I have had to go to recovery 2 and except for a couple of lucky wins, could have lost it also.

Please note that my statement ...It requires only about 55% of the original star systems BR and only busts after 30 straight losses...  What I mean by busts is a total loss of all 558 units.  We will always win some units along the way.  You can play for hours at times trying to get ahead after a loss at the base level.

Please do test it thoroughly before risking money on it.  The thing I've noticed with these kinds of systems is when you start playing, you have a really good chance to win say 100 units rather than lose 3 attacks.  But after losing the base level and the recovery 1 level you realize that the recovery 2 level is just as easy to lose as the base level and it loses 6 times as much as the base level.

You do have to have nerves of steel if you get to the 2nd recovery bank.

Good Luck,

GLC

[falkor]

I just ran the simulation for 1,000 spin and it was very exciting to watch! It went into Recovery 1 after only making about 25 units profit, and it took 53 sets to recover! Later it went into Recovery 2:

HIGH SESSION 3 (RECOVERY 2) - SET 36
SPIN                                                          DAILY BANKROLL, TOTAL SAVINGS
739   48 Unit(s) on High   19   Win   48 Units   481   20053                  
740   48 Unit(s) on High   20   Win   48 Units   529   20053

The above was the highest bet, and it took 41 sets to fully recover!

Unfortunately, after 1,000 spins there was only 100 profit:
1000   Ses: 1 Par: 0 Rep: 1 Ch: 1 Bet H res: 1   1 Unit(s) on High   33   Win   1 Units   559   20100

Will be posting the results for all those spins and more once I fix some table/cell issues...

NOTE: I haven't programmed bet selection at the moment, but this system is defo. going to need it!

[ugly bob]

The Star progression looks good. However in reality it's not a very deep progression and you will find yourself in recovery a lot.

Another poster uploaded Mr Majik's 12 STEP MM yesterday and that's not deep enough either.

Here is the 'Rambler MM'

1,1,2,2,3,4,5,7,9,12,16,22,29,39,52,69,92,123.

That's 18 steps.

You are parlaying these steps and looking for a double win before you revert back to the 1st step.

1=4 +3
1=4 +2
2=8 +4
2=8 +2
3=12 +3
4=16 +3
5=20 +2
7=28 +3
9=36 +2
12=48 +2
16=64 +2
22=88 +4
29=116 +3
39=156 +4
52=208 +4
69=276 +3
92=368 +3
123=492 +4

BANKROLL = 488.

Even 18 steps is not enough to be safe looking for a double win. You need DOUBLE that.

Take the 4 different e.c's.

RR RB BB BR,  OO OE EE EO,  LL LH HH HL.

The longest I have seen one of these pairs go missing over the last few years is 32. So that's 64 spins because each of these groups comprises of two spins.

So even using the Rambler, you would need to wait for 14 (28 spins) times to see one of these groups not appear and then attack it knowing that you can only lose your 488 unit bankroll if the group eventually goes missing for a grand total of 32 times (64 spins)

Tracking all three e.c.s will only give you a few bets every 100 spins on average (yes, I have tested it)

That will be hard to break but the day will come for sure. But it just shows you what you are up against. Plans like the original Star are not deep enough to keep you out of trouble for very long.

[falkor]

Hi Bob, thanks for your insights and testing feedback! I will be tweaking bet selection and target profits to see how they affect things in the long run: Daily Bankroll vs. Total Bankroll. I may reach the same conclusion as you.

What kinds of impressive systems have you come across where we can exploit roulette's vulnerabilities in your opinion? How about those being developed by winkel? Where would you recommend I concentrate my efforts on?

[sniper]

Hi Falkor,

Since you asked about impressive systems, I would suggest Ralph's Magnificent Seven.

Just work on the first seven bets and ignore the last three.

Forget about adding a chip on each hit number.

I have been working on this for a while and I noticed the hit rates were impressive.

I have tried a few MM and the results show potential.

It's worth working on this system.

Regards and Best Wishes.

[ego]

It seems very difficult to aim to win twice on regular basis.
I test 300 trails and my longest strike with no hit was 9 steps.
I am pretty sure that can go up to 18 and beyound.
Feels risky ...

Cheers

[ugly bob]

Hello Falkor and Ego,

The way I described above is something I tried out in a B+M casino for one month with a 2.5k bankroll.

That's betting £/$ 5 units.  It takes a month playing 4/5 hours a day just to win a bankroll of 488 units. Well the good news is that I never busted out. However I did go close with a few runs of high 20's. Like I said above, I waited for 14 pairs of any e.c (28 spins) to go missing and then bet for it to appear within the next 18 pairs. This gives me 32 pairs (64 spins) for a double win not to hit.

I am not saying it's impossible. It could happen sooner rather than later or you could go maybe a whole year and make 12x your bankroll. Who knows? It is really just like a low paid job if you do it that way and the risk is one day that you have to give back the boss all your wages

I ran a quick test today just for old times sake.

170 spins.

win on 15th group. +3.
win on 18th group. +2.
win on 15th group. +3.
win on 21st group. +2.
win on 15th group. +3.

13 units would have equalled +£/$ 65.00 for around 4 hours of my time. It's a grinder.

The one thing that stopped me continuing was because I had in the back of my mind that I was a sitting duck. If you sit and mark all e.c groups looking for an absence of 14, you are really just setting yourself up eventually for the worst scenario to eventualize. Lucky for me I never hit 32 groups.

[ugly bob]

Here is an example of a close shave.


LL=1, LH=2, HH=3, HL=4.

36 H
19 H (3)
15 L
33 H (2)
25 H
28 H (3)
17 L
10 L (1)  NOW COUNT HOW MANY TIMES THE LL IS ABSENT.
7  L
0  -  x1.
27 H
7  L  x2.
12 L
30 H  x3.
12 L
19 H  x4.
12 L
35 H  x5.
17 L
36 H  x6.
15 L
34 H  x7.
21 H
7  L  x8.
21 H
5  L  x9.
0  -
18 L  x10.
19 H
23 H  x11.
4  L
32 H  x12.
36 H
31 H  x13.
25 H
3  L  x14.  I WOULD START BETTING HERE THE RAMBLER 18 STEP MM.
20 H
10 L  x15.
18 L
0  -  x16.
10 L
26 H  x17.
32 H
27 H  x18.
35 H
34 H  x19.
23 H
18 L  x20.
27 H
3  L  x21.
31 H
29 H  x22.
36 H
26 H  x23.
11 L
32 H  x24.
13 L
22 H  x25.
21 H
3  L  x26.
33 H
7  L  x27.
28 H
21 H  x28.
17 L
15 L  WINS ON 29TH STEP.

[ego]

ugly bob i do the oppisite way.
You aim to catch a sleeper and i aim to catch one repeat.

Lets say you have following clustering patterns.

XOX
XXX
OXX
XXO

Now if i have XOX then i would play same next after R or B to become RBR or BRB
If i had XXX and got R then i would play RR and if i had B i would bet BB
And so it continues.

I like having a dice with 4 sides and you hope that one side will repeat.

2
2
1

2
2 W    
1 W

2
1 L
1

2
1 W
1 W

1
1 L
2

1
1 W
1 L

1
2 L
2

1
2 W
2 W

1
1 L
1

1
2 L
2

1
1 L
2

2
2 W
2 L

1
1 W
1 W

1
2 L
2

[ugly bob]

Thanks Ego, I will study that. I should add that I am looking for the dominant factor nowadays instead of hoping for sleepers to wake up. They can outsleep any bankroll.

One idea I had looking at the run of 29 groups above without an LL is the 'reverse labouchere'.

Let me explain....

The LL is missing. Therefore you can only get one of the other three groups appearing. So that's either HH, HL or LH. The dominant factor in those three is the H. You know for certain that you are going to get an H in either the first or second result of a group if the LL remains absent. So what tends to happen is you will just get a lot of single interval L's surrounded by a lot of H's. (see pic)

This is great for the Reverse Labouchere as in its original format, you can only afford one loss to every two wins. So the thing to do is monitor all 12 e.c's as groups.

They are RR, RB, BB, BR.  OO, OE, EE, EO.  LL. LH, HH, HL.

See which one is sleeping the most and then play for the dominant e.c using the reverse labouchere.

[falkor]

Following Bob's replies I am intrigued to study sleeping pairs, etc. Anyhow, I think this Star System could be well overrated--meant to triple your money--not take 30 times as long to make it! One thing I noticed with the Carsch variation is that 2 wins in a row on the Progression Ladder sets do not seem to hardly result in a profit, and I think it was the design of the original Star System that aimed to do just that: with 2 wins. Before I abandon this I will try the original rules and see how it compares. And do let me know if you spot any bugs in this 10K sample - or I could well be doing something totally wrong that is affecting a positive result. Bare in mind also: there are currently no bet selection rules, so we shall see which variation warrants further implementation of them, if any...

Again, please check carefully for bugs as I'm sure there will be several in this early prototype script:

1K attached; 10K coming very soon!

[ugly bob]

Following Bob's replies I am intrigued to study sleeping pairs, etc.

Here is something that may interest you Falkor.

The number of the pairs as they come out are on the left. I am tracking all 12 pairs and put an X when a pair appears and put a 1 for an absent pair. Then I keep adding 1 to that total each time a pair misses.

You can see in the sheet that the OE is missing here 8 times in a row. But like mentioned earlier, these pairs can go missing for anything up to 32 pairs at times.

So what to do if OE is missing.....well then only three other pairs are available to appear. Those are OO, EE and EO. You are guaranteed at least one win if you bet for the first E and the second O otherwise the missing pair OE will appear and you will lose two bets.

So just as an example, I have shown in the sheet the pairs that did appear from the ODD and EVEN e.c's and also shown the Reverse Labouchere in action with the Wins and Losses.

A nice 31 unit profit in this example for a small 2 unit outlay. Of course you never know what you are going to get. However you will get some nice runs on the missing pairs for sure and depending on how those W's and L's line up can make for some interesting times playing the Reverse Labouchere.

[falkor]

Is that your main system, Bob? As you know I'm quite interested in Reverse Labby just because of the excitement it generates from using it! Would you say your bet selection, based on analysing those different groups of pairs, gives R Labby a noticeable advantage?

[ugly bob]

It gives it a good boost IMO Falkor because tracking 12 pairs gives you plenty of times where a sleeping pair will go absent. Then you are hoping for a nice run where you get an e.c dominating with the other e.c just appearing in single intervals. It happens plenty enough and just taking small to medium profits every so often with the RL is the way to go instead of shooting for the stars.

As our old friend Two Cat Sam used to say, 'a little bit of something is better than a lot of nothing'