• Welcome to #1 Roulette Forum & Message Board | www.RouletteForum.cc.

News:

Odds and payouts are different things. If either the odds or payouts don't change, then the result is the same - eventual loss.

Main Menu
Popular pages:

Roulette System

The Roulette Systems That Really Work

Roulette Computers

Hidden Electronics That Predict Spins

Roulette Strategy

Why Roulette Betting Strategies Lose

Roulette System

The Honest Live Online Roulette Casinos

Possible winning method to test for Nick MSI

Started by andreib1986, Apr 27, 02:38 AM 2019

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

andreib1986

I will begin manual testing myself soon, as there is no one to code this.

andreib1986

Ok so my idea its like this:

Wait 24 spins, locate dominant line, bet for the next 12 spins (or less if target win reached) numbers from the dominant line.
Budget for an average of 9 numbers:
Budget 1: 9 9 9 9. 18 18 18 18, 27 27 27 27 = 216 units Target 54 units, When line of 4 wins, go back 1 level. extend play untill budget is lost or target is reached.
Budget 2: 18 18 18 18, 27 27 27 27, 45 45 45 45 = 360 units (triggers when budget 1 comes on loss) Target win 108 units. Stay for 2 games in a row.

To be tested

Anastasius

I know this is clutching at straws...

But whats the max spins  to have one line complete itself  in hits... so when u have 2 of the numbers u start betting the 3rd on any line    bhaha
Boom boom sir

andreib1986

I will post my sessions soon with excel generated numbers. It could go through some changes on the way.

andreib1986

The last version:

Play 4 spins flat. If u win before 4th bet go down a level if possible. At 4th bet win remain at level. If u loose all 4 bets rise up a level. Always RESET at spin no 36. iF loss at the end of the game >100 units, budget 2 is triggered. Play budget 2 for 2 games in a row.

For an averadge of 9 numbers
Bankroll 1: 9 9 9 9, 18 18 18 18, 27 27 27 27 = 216 UNITS, stop at TARGET win 25 units.
                     
Bankroll 2: 36 36 36 36, 72 72 72 72, 108 108 108 108 = 864 UNITS, stop at target 100 units (x2 games)                     

ozon

If a flat bet selection does not give any real advantage, almost never negative progression is able to save it.

Roulettebeater

Quote from: ozon on May 10, 09:14 AM 2019
If a flat bet selection does not give any real advantage, almost never negative progression is able to save it.

A correction, if a system can win flatbet „sometimes“, it’s definitely gonna win with progression pretty almost the time.

And the contrary is also true !
A dollar won is twice as sweet as as a dollar earned

ozon

If we have an edge in the bet selection, automatically the virtual limits of losing bets will decrease and then you can adjust the negative progression not exceeding this virtual limit

ozon

Recently I saw something strange, simulations of negative progression, which with constant selection for some EC, say Black, and la partage rule, which after more than 100k spins continued to give profits and profits all the time grew during these spins.

I do not have rx code, the profit was not great, and progression probably would be good only on RNG, because you have to do a lot of spins, and you may not keep in longrun
But the results were interesting

andreib1986


Firefox

Quote from: ozon on May 10, 09:14 AM 2019
If a flat bet selection does not give any real advantage, almost never negative progression is able to save it.

Correction. If a flat bet selection does not give any advantage, never will a negative progression be able to save it, given that table limits are in place to enforce house edge profits resolution within a reasonable time period.

andreib1986

I stand for this case, roulette can not be beaten flat only by bet selection, at least not RNG. Only a progression can do it. You can say it will never happen, and I wont argue with that. Still, progression is my way.

Firefox

Such are the mathematics of the game, that there exist unfavorable runs, which will bust a progression.

Negative progressions simply alter your win loss pattern. To one of steady small wins followed by huge losses which wipe out all those gains when a bad run hits.

The steady wins give you the impression your system can win forever. The house limits ensure that your progression will not be able to continue on quite common adverse  events ensuring a return of  profit to the house on a regular basis.

The large progression bets mean you will lose large sums to the house edge when big bets are out.

The casinos like players to play progression systems. It means you will lose more money by making larger bets.

Progression betters will lose more long term than flat stakes small bet players.

Look at the nice carpets and plush interior of the casino. This is paid for by high rollers and progression players.


andreib1986

Quote from: Firefox on May 10, 02:10 PM 2019

Negative progressions simply alter your win loss pattern. To one of steady small wins followed by huge losses which wipe out all those gains when a bad run hits.

Look at the nice carpets and plush interior of the casino. This is paid for by high rollers and progression players.

The strategy is like this: wait for huge virtual losses and then start progression within the atack zone, below standard deviation limit. From time to time you might loose again, but you will remain in ballance most of the time.

Firefox

Virtual losses are an illusion. They offer no difference on safety.

Say a seven loss run busts your progression and has a chance of 1/128.

So you wait for seven losses and now start. What is the chance of another seven loss run now?

Is it still 1/128 or much less than that?

People subscribing to gamblers fallacy think it is much less, but wheel has no memory. It is still 1/128. You have not gained any security.

Same thing if you toss a fair coin 10 times and it comes up heads. What is the chance it will come up heads again? Still 50/50 but gambler's fallacy advocates would bet strongly on tails.

Your virtual losses do not change anything. Don't fall victim to the fallacy!





-