Beating roulette with math..

[Fripper]

Hey fripper can you just confirm this for me please,
is this system played exactly the same as the cancellation system but with 15 0s and a 1?
cheers ,

Hi danny

I don't know about this "cancellation" system.
This system is using the "labouchere progression"  as a base.
You can read about in this thread or here:
link:://:.x/2010/06/labouchere-progression-in-depth.html

Cheers

[GLC]

Danny,

No, it's not played exactly like a normal cancellation system.

1 main difference is that you play in 2 bet sequences and then if you lose, you add the 2 lost bets together and divide by 2 and place the 2 numbers to the right of the line.

The 2 bets per sequence is X and 2X or the 1st 2 steps in a martingale.  If you win either bet, you win 1 unit, or whatever your X equals.  If you lose both bets you take X+2X/2=Y.  Write Y down twice at the right end of the line.  Next bet will be a the sum of the two ends of the line.  For quite a while the left end will be a zero.

Line = 0000000000000001

Example:  Bet 1 unit and lose.  Bet 2 units and lose.  1+2=3/2=2 and 1 remainder.

Line = 00000000000000112

Bet 2 and lose.  Bet 4 and lose.  2+4=6/2=3.

Line = 000000000000011233.  etc...
There are other small difference that I don't really understand completely.

This looks pretty good though if Fripper continues to win at the rate he's going.

0.19 units won per spin is pretty good in my books.

George

[GLC]

labby is : 0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1

bet 1 lose
bet 2 lose

your labby is now 0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1,1,2 you replace 2 zero's by sum of the bets

Question guys.  Why do you replace 2 zeros by the number of bets you add to the right end of the line when you lose.  I thought we only crossed off zeros when we won the bet?

BTW.  I think this is still the closest thing to a guaranteed winning bet on the forum.  Thanks Fripper for starting the thread and thanks 06 for staying with it too.

I'm going to start testing my 20,000 continuous spins from a live wheel in the Casino de Macao with this system.  I will post my results when I have enough played to be post worthy.

Cheers,

George

[Fripper]

Question guys.  Why do you replace 2 zeros by the number of bets you add to the right end of the line when you lose.  I thought we only crossed off zeros when we won the bet?

by the way.  I think this is still the closest thing to a guaranteed winning bet on the forum.  Thanks Fripper for starting the thread and thanks 06 for staying with it too.

I'm going to start testing my 20,000 continuous spins from a live wheel in the Casino de Macao with this system.  I will post my results when I have enough played to be post worthy.

Cheers,

George

I have always replaced the zero's by the losing bets because Belgian spoke about it. If you only cancel zero's when you win bets you will be safer but it will take much more time to end the labby = less profit.
I don't know which is the best tho..
If you lose a "pair" you replace 2 zero's by the lost bets.
If you play in "tripple" you replace by 3 zero's and so on.

Thanks for your words George. I think that this is really good and we have done a lot of testing with some hard sessions.

Looking forward to your test results mate, also how bayes plays this baby.

I just want to give a warning to people who plays this on RNG. I have played more than 50 sessions at betvoyager and I have met some really hard sessions, therefore I'm not sure if I will continue playing there.
The thing I have noticed is that you will get a lot more losing runs than in the testing and if you split your figures to another EC after a while you will be having a hard time.
It doesn't matter which EC you choose, it will have less hits than the other. Therefore I'm warning you to split your figures to often, the software doesn't like us. And when we are on a bad run on two ECs the bankroll decreases very quickly and the bets get very high.

A live wheel would be better but much more time consuming I guess.

Cheers

[Fripper]

As we now, often when we play we will have a pretty easy time. The ECs are choppy and so on. So to maximize the profit I have played every spin until 2 losses come.
So if you bet 1 unit and win, you bet 1 unit again directly. With this, we follow the series of wins.
If a serie of 10 reds come we will win 10 units instead of 5. That's 100% more profit.

At any time you have two losses and a labby starts you play like we have before (Betting in pairs and so on).

What do you think?

[aleks06]

hi guys,

good idea about betting every spins until 2 losses. If you have 2 losses and the labby start if you win the first decision yon don't bet the next spin like before ?

I've already played 8 sessions 1548 spins and +212 units profit. no hard session so far.

Fripper you worry me about BV  Maybe it's just statistic. it's normal to find hard session you have played many spins (+30 000?) perhaps you remember only the hard times 

Do you think it is possible to make a bot for this system it would be great for a live wheel...

[Fripper]

Hi guys,

good idea about betting every spins until 2 losses. If you have 2 losses and the labby start if you win the first decision yon don't bet the next spin like before ?

Yes, if the labby has started you play like before. Wating one spin if you win the first bet in a pair and so on..

Good results!

Yes, I'm worried. I don't like what I see so far. I have only played about 9300 spins..

A bot would be nice, ofcourse it's not easy to code it but I'm certain that it can be done.

[GLC]

Fripper,

I've never understood the sense in skipping a bet after a win.  It will also decrease the number of spins it takes to reach a win target.  I think.

I have tested session 7 with a variety of martingales.  I even played it with a 3 and 4 step marty.  When you lose like a 4 step 1-2-4-8 and divide it, I usually use a 3 divisor or even 4 or 5.  Each step up the marty line say a 6 step marty makes it easier to win on these horror sessions.  The problem is that you have to divide the 63 units lost in a 6 step marty by like 15 which gives us 15 4's and 5's.  A six step marty starting at 4 goes 4-8-16-32-64-128 so to lose one of those wouldn't be so good.  But I must say that combining a labby and a marty together has sparked a lot of new research for me.

Cheers,

G

[aleks06]

I tested session 7 with a 3 step marty. I had amazing results on this session but horrific on others...

Fripper, what do you see so terrific on BV ?!?

[Fripper]

Fripper,

I've never understood the sense in skipping a bet after a win.  It will also decrease the number of spins it takes to reach a win target.  I think.

Well, imagine if we just started a hell session and it just continues. If so, then there will be more losses than wins and therefore you skip more losing bets and also reduce the losing streaks.

It isn't often but because I like it safe, I play it that way. If you don't skip bets you will get longer into the hole faster and it will be harder to get back.
The best would be to bet every spin in winning streaks, but how we know when they happen?

[Fripper]

I tested session 7 with a 3 step marty. I had amazing results on this session but horrific on others...

Fripper, what do you see so terrific on BV ?!?

After playing a while you will see what I mean. I can say that I have been down more than 1000 units in sessions. I have never seen that when we have tested these horror sessions..

[Bayes]

Fripper,

Are you saying you've seen sequences where you get less than 65 wins over 200 spins? 

My preferred bet selection is a "trend surfing" approach, which you can find here. I also have a stop loss of 5 consecutive losses, after which I wait for a single virtual win, then continue. If the stakes get to > 20 units, I flat bet and use the labby in "reverse" mode, ie; I add a zero and split each time the required stake is > 20 units. So far, so good. I've played 32 sessions this way and have stopped at a 50 unit gain. There have been tough sessions, but nothing too alarming yet. 

[Fripper]

No I'm not saying that I have seen less than 65 wins in 200 spins. I'm saying that if we have had a bad run and split the figures to another EC, then the bad runs have proceeded on both of the ECs. When that happens, there is no fun to play any more and your bankroll is in danger.
The difference can be like 40 on both of the ECs, like this:
79 reds, 119 blacks
and also at the same time
83 odd, 115 even

Now, if you played red and had a bad run and switched half of the figures to another EC, and the most choppy one was odd. If both of them continued to be bad you will have big problems.

Because of this, I'm experimenting with some new ways where I not switch EC.

Thanks for explaining how you play. Will look into it when I have the time.

[Bayes]

Ok. Personally I never switch ECs because (as you've found out) you might end up digging the hole deeper. Of course, that could just as easily happen if stay on the same EC, but it won't happen beyond a certain point.

[Fripper]

Yes I have noticed that. I think that I will not switch ECs again, only play my chosen EC all the time.

Here is a session for you guys to test out. If you clear it, then you can consider yourself good at this and go and make money

I checked with the sequence analyzer how often you get only 65 wins in 200 spins.

It took 55 miljon spins.

Second check:
It took 6 milj spins
That one was only 61 wins :O
Will post it up later.

Try it out