HABS: Horizontal Alembert Betting System

[Bigbroben]

HABS: Horizontal Alembert Betting System.      P.S.:  Please don't call it ''Ham And Baloney Sandwich''.

System is very simple and was described in the Discarded topic.  Still I decided to give it another name, now that I am very happy with the results and refined parameters.  And a new discussion, there were too many graphs on the other one. 
This is the most exciting I got to try so far in my short Roulette life.


So:
1. Wait 12 spins.
2. Put a unit on the numbers that showed up.
3.  Add the new ones as they come.
4. Remove the oldest whenever one of yours hits.

So instead of having a fixed nrs to bet on with a new one and another discarded at every spin, the amount of nrs betted on varies with your wins and losses.  +1/-1 nrs.  Always one unit on one number.  No vertical progression: horizontal.

There are 3 different steps/checkpoints possible:
1. Once profit goal is attained (50,100,200, whatever);
2. When a bet with 18nrs loses;
3. Recovery mode, when goal is unattained and step 2 is not in profit.

Recovery mode, starting at 19nrs, requires you to remain at the same amount of numbers until you win more or equal to what is betted without losing.  So, if at 22nrs, 2wins in row are required before to remove the oldest number.  If 1W the 1L, up to the next, 23nrs.  If at 28nrs, 4 hits in row are required (8u profit x4 is greater than 28).  Don't go beyond 35nrs, of course.
Recovery mode stops as soon as back in profit at zero or above.

A goal of 50 is safe.  A goal of 100 is more profitable.  To methodically wait until 18nrs fails lets you run on profits instead of stopping at a lower goal.  It can also prevent from locking in a profit, so...

Here are the results of 3 sessions of 10 games for a total of 30 games.  This is not much but I suspect later results will prove the behavior to be steady.

25/30 reached 50u (83%); 20/30 reached 100u; 12 reached 200u.
Of the 5 that went in recovery mode, one was longer than 100 spins.  They all came back to profit.

Here are the results after 3 sessions, with different goal options.


Goals of 200u or step2 seem to be the most paying.  They are if considered as games.  The goals of 50 or 100 are the most profitable when the profit/spin is calculated.  Discarding the 12 waiting spins, a goal of 50 showed an average of 5u won per played spin.

I'll keep updated with the other sessions that are to come.
I have yet to test on a platform other than R-Sim to make sure this is consistent at different places.

[daveylibra]

Hi Ben

This sounds great.
So Recovery mode - I think I understand. Any loss means we bet one more number, right?
I just wonder about a stop-loss. A lot of systems, as I'm sure you well know, do well for many sessions but there is the occasional session that goes ever lower and lower.
Is the only stop-loss used the maximum limit of 35 numbers?
Best of luck
Dave

[jekhb76]

HABS: Horizontal Alembert Betting System.      P.S.:  Please don't call it ''Ham And Baloney Sandwich''.

System is very simple and was described in the Discarded topic.  Still I decided to give it another name, now that I am very happy with the results and refined parameters.  And a new discussion, there were too many graphs on the other one. 
This is the most exciting I got to try so far in my short Roulette life.


So:
1. Wait 12 spins.
2. Put a unit on the numbers that showed up.
3.  Add the new ones as they come.
4. Remove the oldest whenever one of yours hits.

So instead of having a fixed nrs to bet on with a new one and another discarded at every spin, the amount of nrs betted on varies with your wins and losses.  +1/-1 nrs.  Always one unit on one number.  No vertical progression: horizontal.

There are 3 different steps/checkpoints possible:
1. Once profit goal is attained (50,100,200, whatever);
2. When a bet with 18nrs loses;
3. Recovery mode, when goal is unattained and step 2 is not in profit.

Recovery mode, starting at 19nrs, requires you to remain at the same amount of numbers until you win more or equal to what is betted without losing.  So, if at 22nrs, 2wins in row are required before to remove the oldest number.  If 1W the 1L, up to the next, 23nrs.  If at 28nrs, 4 hits in row are required (8u profit x4 is greater than 28).  Don't go beyond 35nrs, of course.
Recovery mode stops as soon as back in profit at zero or above.

A goal of 50 is safe.  A goal of 100 is more profitable.  To methodically wait until 18nrs fails lets you run on profits instead of stopping at a lower goal.  It can also prevent from locking in a profit, so...

Here are the results of 3 sessions of 10 games for a total of 30 games.  This is not much but I suspect later results will prove the behavior to be steady.

25/30 reached 50u (83%); 20/30 reached 100u; 12 reached 200u.
Of the 5 that went in recovery mode, one was longer than 100 spins.  They all came back to profit.

Here are the results after 3 sessions, with different goal options.


Goals of 200u or step2 seem to be the most paying.  They are if considered as games.  The goals of 50 or 100 are the most profitable when the profit/spin is calculated.  Discarding the 12 waiting spins, a goal of 50 showed an average of 5u won per played spin.

I'll keep updated with the other sessions that are to come.
I have yet to test on a platform other than R-Sim to make sure this is consistent at different places.

Looks Nice, Will test.

[Bigbroben]

Hi Ben

This sounds great.
So Recovery mode - I think I understand. Any loss means we bet one more number, right?
I just wonder about a stop-loss. A lot of systems, as I'm sure you well know, do well for many sessions but there is the occasional session that goes ever lower and lower.
Is the only stop-loss used the maximum limit of 35 numbers?
Best of luck
Dave

Absolute stoploss is 630 if started at 1nr (1+2+3...+35).  A real bad session like i had this morning went -307: unhits poured down like crazy.  The 18nrs checkpoint seems to do fine also for a stop.  Most of the times if 100 is attained, this checkpoint will be above zero.  I believe to start at spin 13 is good but of course i could be wrong...

Tested with the efbets also and it proved good.

Have a try!

[nottophammer]

HABS: Horizontal Alembert Betting System.      P.S.:  Please don't call it ''Ham And Baloney Sandwich''.

HABS: How About Bull shit
Couldn't resist it.

Good luck with your testing

[Bigbroben]

HABS: How About Bull shit
Couldn't resist it.

Good luck with your testing

Thanks!  Hot Air Balloon Spacecraft.

Dave, remember:
from 19 to 24: 2 wins in row;
25-27: 3
28:4
29-30:5
31:7
32:8
33:11
34:17
35:35

[Bigbroben]

Good luck with your testing

Did you mean it or was it arrogant?  Héhé...

Not ready yet to challenge you with KTF, maybe soon....

[Bigbroben]

Session4:

One to forget.

6 did not make it to 50 before step2.  So 6 failed, 3 only recovered.  The 3 others lost -215, -262, -305.
None reached 100u.



Overall, still very good for 40 games flatbetting.



Crossing fingers for next round.

[daveylibra]

Interesting. I prefer the Stop18 method, shorter sessions and a "finality" to any loss.
Are you testing manually? If so must be time consuming. I wish I could code it in rx.

One more thing, how do you manage to track the number to drop? Suppose one the number 1 comes up twice, this is a hit. Do you now drop it, or drop the oldest number that hasn't hit?

[Bigbroben]

You have to track, so writing down the numbers on a piece of paper.  On a hit, say with nr 13, scratch off the old 13 and put it up front.  Scratch also the oldest nr of all when required.

Old: 12 13 26 4 3 9 22 25 36 13 new.
Scratch off 12 and 13 on the left.

I think you're right about the 18nr checkpoint: makes the games shorter.  Why waste 100 spins to regain 100u if you can win 50u in 20sp or 10u0 in 30sp?
Results seem to show this would be right.

P.S.: results are calculated like this:
If not reached 50u, calculated until recovered (step3);
If reached 50u but not 100 or 200, results are calculated at step2.

Do you test a bit?

[nottophammer]

Did you mean it or was it arrogant?

no,  good luck with your testing 

[Bigbroben]

Notto,

thanks for encouraging me.  appreciate it.

The last graphs I posted in ''flatbetting'' topic were actually flat KTF played from 31nrs to 18nrs.  It worked so-so flat, certainly better with +1/-1 like you do.
Th one thing I did not like was the vulnerability of the idea:  if there are sooooooo many repeaters from the start there is nothing you can do but to hope for uniques and dig yourself down then try to climb back up with ever less chances of hitting as uniques fall.

As opposed to:  adding nrs, where you get more and more chances of hitting with time.  A RFH with KTF theorically may have no end.  You are bound to decide when to stop and exposed to continue digging if not well money-managed.
A RFH with HABS has a limit inbuit in them.

Did not try with the +1/-1 ''vertical'' prog yet, it probably is even more effective.  Would not start at spin 13 but maybe start with 15nrs?

Will not post another session today, family stuff.  I think still it is very promising.

[Bigbroben]

Session5:
tough one, again.

7/10 needed to go to step3, 3 of which never came back and ended in negative.



Game 44 was a special one: decided to go until the end and see, instead of stopping at >0 in a step3 grind.  Return to zero went somewhat quick with a low of -154 but recovery at spin 88 or so.
It turned out to be the best game so far!  The game oscillated from 18-24nrs for quite a while, I think it even went back below 18nrs at some point.  It reached a maximum of 567u at spin 230 and stopped at 187u, 35nrs.  Still, I did not take into account for overall results.

So I am wondering if worth trying to go on when step 3 is needed...


Surprisingly (or not), a stop at step2 would have caused the less damage.  Here is the cumul until now:


Thinking also about a little modification which I'll try for next session.

[Bigbroben]

P.S.:

working on an Excel sheet to semi-automatic-ize it.

Tough too!