0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

*

reddwarf

  • 50+ posts Member
  • **
  • 79
  • Rated: 0
Re: The Very Near Infallible Roulette System
March 22, 2011, 07:50:49 AM
Hi GLC,

Yes, I used the 3 player system. I actually resetted as soon as I was in the plus. My guess is that adding more players will:

1. make the system really complex
2. extend the duration of a session

However, I will try to implement some of the changes you suggested (more subcategories) this week.

I'll post the results.

reddwarf

albalaha

  • Guest
Re: The Very Near Infallible Roulette System
March 22, 2011, 01:22:27 PM
Dear Albahala,

I'm not going to answer you anymore. YOU are a waste of time for me from now on. A lost case.

Be happy,
Carlos.
Dear Carpanta,
               I would get nothing demeaning you and so would you. So, let's not pull legs of each other and participate in meaningful discussions.[/size]

*

GLC

  • 3000+ Posts Member !!!
  • *****
  • 3467
  • Is it better to be good looking or smart?
  • Rated: +13
Re: The Very Near Infallible Roulette System
March 22, 2011, 04:01:22 PM
Hi GLC,

Yes, I used the 3 player system. I actually resetted as soon as I was in the plus. My guess is that adding more players will:

1. make the system really complex
2. extend the duration of a session

However, I will try to implement some of the changes you suggested (more subcategories) this week.

I'll post the results.

reddwarf

Hey reddwarf,  If you don't think they are of any value, no need to waste time on them.  I have done a couple of tests and I like the way this plays.  I know that it will run across a losing pattern, but I think that I can incorporate some stop gap measures to keep from giving it all back in 1 fell-swoop.  Every system loses at some point.  I'm not too worried about that.  The question is if we can stay ahead of losses or not.

We'll see.  If you have any more info that you think will help guide us, we are listening.

George
In my case it doesn't matter.  I'm both!

*

reddwarf

  • 50+ posts Member
  • **
  • 79
  • Rated: 0
Re: The Very Near Infallible Roulette System
March 23, 2011, 07:44:42 AM
Hi GLC,

Thanks. I'd rather not test.

I do agree with you that the method has some very nice features: a very slow buildup of money on the carpet etc.

I do not have any additional info. Personally I think that it is a long term loser, on the other hand, if you are not too greedy and use it only once and leave when in the plus, it might be a rewarding one.

In general what `i like about it: most of the systems here fight the streaks, this one basically uses some of them. Somehow I feel that with this system the probability of reaching say 500 units is larger than with other systems. I should check if this is true (if so, than this method should be really close to a bold play strategy). But I will not  ;)

reddwarf


grts reddwarf

esoito

  • Guest
Re: The Very Near Infallible Roulette System
March 23, 2011, 09:29:40 AM
Moderator's Advisory

A couple of you are letting things get to you. (Hint: a  and c)

Just agree to disagree and leave it at that, please!  :thumbsup:

Life's too short...

*

GLC

  • 3000+ Posts Member !!!
  • *****
  • 3467
  • Is it better to be good looking or smart?
  • Rated: +13
Re: The Very Near Infallible Roulette System
March 23, 2011, 02:47:53 PM
Reddwarf,

Thanks for your input.  I will test this until I see what a losing session looks like.  I have tested enough of these things to be able to tell if, when the loser hits, it is exactly like other ones, or I feel like I have a little more control with this one.

Usually, when a loss starts with 99% of the systems it drives you so quickly into the hole, that you feel like you're totally out of control and before you know it your so deep that short of very large bets, the grind out seems insurmountable, and it may indeed be.

I will, from time to time, report my findings.  Till I have any, stay tuned.

Geo
In my case it doesn't matter.  I'm both!

*

GLC

  • 3000+ Posts Member !!!
  • *****
  • 3467
  • Is it better to be good looking or smart?
  • Rated: +13
Re: The Very Near Infallible Roulette System
March 25, 2011, 12:07:02 AM
Update time.

My initial findings are very good.

I am approaching this system with these parameters.  I follow the author's suggestion of having a 50 unit bank.  I play the system with a little tweak.  It doesn't make that much difference since there are a lot of tweaks that can be made without altering the final outcome, in my opinion.

I play until I reach +5 units.

I have played sessions so far and won all 6.
Largest draw down so far is -16.
Largest bet 6 units.

I know that a few of you have warned that in the long run this system will fail.

You may be right, but so far I feel very confident playing this system.  Movement is gradual.  Bet sizes rise slowly so there are no violent swings.

A 50 unit bank can easily be $500.  That means a 5 unit win is $50 units.  This can be accomplished in and hour easily.  Always may be a little too confident, but unless you start out really bad, you should get there.

More later,

George
In my case it doesn't matter.  I'm both!

*

GLC

  • 3000+ Posts Member !!!
  • *****
  • 3467
  • Is it better to be good looking or smart?
  • Rated: +13
Re: The Very Near Infallible Roulette System
March 25, 2011, 03:58:17 AM
3 more sessions to +5

Largest draw down -10
Largest bet  3 units
Most spins for a session 26

 
In my case it doesn't matter.  I'm both!

*

GLC

  • 3000+ Posts Member !!!
  • *****
  • 3467
  • Is it better to be good looking or smart?
  • Rated: +13
Re: The Very Near Infallible Roulette System
March 27, 2011, 05:06:08 AM
I've been playing around with this system and I think I have discovered the very near infallible way to play it.

This system can be played on single zero or double zero roulette although single zero is preferable.  En prison rules are a bonus.

This system can be played on bacarrat, craps (pass/don't pass line), flip a coin, a series of foot races between Flatino and me, a series of boxing matches between Chris and me (just kidding).  In short any even chance bet no matter what the game.  It would be complicated, but it just may be teaked to work with Blackjack.

Summary of the package is:

We are going to play the 3 recovery bank method.

We are going to play a series of mini-games to keep our bets low.

We are going to incorporate a progression.

So, here's what you need to know.  We will be playing exactly the way the author has presented using the 3 recovery banks method.  This is somewhat complicated and will take some effort to understand.  A link has been provided above for you to be able to read the original document.  I have presented some clarifying posts above that should help you decipher what the author is saying since English isn't his 1st language.

We will follow the author's suggestion on page 55 regarding win target and stop loss.
We are going to play to +10 units or -10 units. 
We will end the game if the amount won + the next bet is >= +10.
We will end the game if the amount we are down + the amount of our next bet is <= to -10.
This will keep our games short and keep our bets low.

We will base our progression on my stretched Oscar's Grind or pluscoup.  This means that we won't raise our bet size until we have won 2 games. 

Let me elaborate.  In the original pluscoup, we stay at the same level until we win and then we increase our bet by 1 unit.  We play at 2 units until we win again and then we go to 3 units.  At any time we are at a new high bank level, we start over at  1 unit.  We never bet more than necessary to win 1 unit.

To stretch this pluscoup all we have to do is increase the number of wins needed before we can increase our bet size.  For this system I recommend that we increase our bet size after 2 games won at a level.  Once we reach +1, we reset to 1 unit.

Each game is treated like a unit.  Our 1st game will be played at a 1 unit level.  If we win game #1, we will be at +1 and our 2nd game will be at 1 unit also. 

If we lose our 1st game we will be at -1 and we will play game 2 at 1 unit also.  If we lose game 2, we will be at -2 and we will play game #3 at 1 unit.  (remember, we don't increase our bet size until we win 2 times at a level.  These wins don't have to be consecutive.)  If we lose game #3 we will be at -3 and our next game still be at 1 unit.  If we win our 4th game and lose our 5th game and win our 6th game we will be at -2 and since we have won 2 games at level #1, games 4 & 6, we will play our 7th game at 2 units.  If we win our 7th game we will be even and will play our 8th game at 1 unit because we never bet more than needed to reach +1 on a win.

Note:  Remember each “game” is played to + or – 10 subunits so when we are at +1 in our stretched pluscoup, we are really at +10 units because our pluscoup is based on games which are based on subunits.  I say subunits because our pluscoup is based on units represented by games and games are based on units which represent the size of our bets.  I'm laboring on this point becuase it's a new concept on this forum as far as I know.

That's it.  It apprears to be complicated, but is really made up of a lot of easy to understand pieces that are very hard to teach in a few words.

As with all these roulette systems, once you understand the fundamentals of roulette systems, you can pretty much figure out how to play a system if you know what fundamentals the author is employing.
 
Same here.  If I say that you can play any even chance bet method with this system, just base the system on games so that a game = a unit in your bet method, you should be able to incorporate that without the author having to explain every nuance of what he means.

If I say you can play this system using a basic labouchere bet method starting with a line of 1, you should be able to make the adjustment with almost no explanation from me.  As a matter of fact, I like to play this system with a labby as well as the stretched pluscoup.

I know that many or none of you will want to take the time to explore this system.  I'm fine with that.  It does have a lot of learning to do and you need to believe in it to make the effort.  No sweat off my back.  Take it or leave it.

I'm going to start playing it on my airball machine.  If I ever change my mind on whether or not I feel that it's a winning system, I'll update this topic.  If I continue to win with it, I will let you know from time to time.

If I continue to win with it, I will check in with our brother Thomas Grant and see if he's still helping us poor US based players play on the internet.

If anyone has a valid question, please ask.

If anyone has a criticism, feel free to make it.

If anyone wants to use this idea of creating bet methods based on games representing units, be my guest.  I personally think it's a stroke of genius and am going to post a new topic under money management so the whole world can take advantage of it.

All right, it's late and I've probably had too much coffee and getting a little carried away.  To tone it down a bit, I think this new idea is at least worth thinking about.

LOL,

George
In my case it doesn't matter.  I'm both!

*

GLC

  • 3000+ Posts Member !!!
  • *****
  • 3467
  • Is it better to be good looking or smart?
  • Rated: +13
Re: The Very Near Infallible Roulette System
April 17, 2011, 05:10:53 AM
I have been playing this system a slightly different way than it was presented by the author.

It's a simpler way I think.

Here are some points:

1.  We are still going to wait for a series of 2 to form.
2.  We are still going to have multiple recovery banks.
3.  We will still share units between banks.
4.  Any time we reach a new high overall bankroll, we will zero out all the banks.
5.  We will still need pen and paper.
6.  There is no limit to the number recovery banks.
7.  All losses will be divided evenly between the banks.

We start by waiting for a series of 2 colors in a row.  We make a bet of 1 unit for a chop.  If we get a chop we put that unit in our profits category.  Since this is our 1st bet, there are no losses to recover so we wait until we have another series of 2.  We make a bet of 1 unit for a chop.  If we lose the chop and the series goes to 3, we put the unit we just lost in recovery bank #1 and we bet 1 that unit for a chop to recover the 1 unit we just lost.  If we lose the recovery bet, we place the unit we just lost trying to recover in a 2nd recovery bank.  We wait for a series of 2 to form and try again.

We will always bet the exact same way.  We have a series of 2 or more.  We bet 1 unit for a chop. If we lose that bet, that unit is added to the recovery banks.  If we win on the chop bet and we have no losses to recover, we just wait for another series of 2 to form.  If we win on a chop and we do have losses to recover, we bet the units in bank #1 for a 2nd chop, we bet the units in bank #2 for a 3rd chop and we bet the units in bank #3 for a 4th chop.  If we win all 3 bets we stop betting and wait for a series of 2 to form.  When we win 3 recovery bets in a row, we re-distribute our units in our banks.

Anytime we lose a recovery bet, the units lost will be divided between all the recovery banks. 

We will start with 3 recovery banks.  The number of units in each bank will be equal.  If there are odd units we will add them to the lowest banks working our way up. 

Anytime our 3 banks reach a level of 4 units in each, we will create 3 more banks and divide our 12 units equally between the six banks giving us 2 units in each bank. 

Any time our six banks reach a level of 6 units each we will add 3 more banks and divide the 36 units by 9 banks giving us 4 units each.

Anytime the 9 banks reach a level of 9 units each we will add 3 more banks and divide our 81 units by our 12 banks and distribute our units as evenly as possible.  The lower banks get the odd units, etc...

We will reduce the number of banks and number of units in the banks in the same order that we increased them.

If at anytime we reach a new high water mark in our bankroll, we zero out all recovery banks and start fresh. 

That's it.  This actually works pretty well, and it keeps our bets low.

You may think it's more work than it's worth, and I might agree with you.  To each his own.

I know that I sound like a broken record, but please test any system before playing for real money and only bet money you can easily afford to lose.

George
In my case it doesn't matter.  I'm both!

*

GLC

  • 3000+ Posts Member !!!
  • *****
  • 3467
  • Is it better to be good looking or smart?
  • Rated: +13
Re: The Very Near Infallible Roulette System
April 17, 2011, 04:18:04 PM
For all the work this takes, the profits are slow and the drawdowns are difficult to recover from.

The terrible twos are what kill.

This needs a lot of chops to run smoothly.

It could be a good system to use right after seeing a 37 unit cycle of a lot of 3-4 & 5 streaks.

G
In my case it doesn't matter.  I'm both!

*

reddwarf

  • 50+ posts Member
  • **
  • 79
  • Rated: 0
Re: The Very Near Infallible Roulette System
April 18, 2011, 01:30:28 PM
Hi GLC,

This does not suprise me, it's still random play - hence a looser in the long run.

grts reddwarf

*

GLC

  • 3000+ Posts Member !!!
  • *****
  • 3467
  • Is it better to be good looking or smart?
  • Rated: +13
Re: The Very Near Infallible Roulette System
September 18, 2011, 04:13:30 AM
Some people just can't let dead dogs lie.
I'm one of them.

 
This system up to this post is way too complicated, but once again I have simplified it considerably.

 
We are going to bet 1-2 for chops. Every time we win a unit on a chop, we will put that unit into our profits bank.

 
Every time we lose, we will put those 3 units into our recovery bank.  If we lose because we got say RBRBRRR then we put those 3 units into our recovery bank and we start betting from our recovery bank for the streak to continue.  Any time we lose twice in a row betting for a chop we go into recovery mode.

 
Our recovery bank can be divided into 3, 4, 5 or 6 bets depending on the number of units in the bank to be recovered.

 
If we have from 0-50 units, we will divide our recovery bank into 3 equal bets.  Any odd units will remain in the recovery bank to be recovered with the next series.  In other words if I have 10 units to recover, I would divide them into 3 bets of 3 units.  The remaining unit will be left in the bank to be recovered at a later time.  And believe me it won't be much later.

 
If we have from 51-100 units, we will divide our recovery bank into 4 equal bets.

 
If we have from 101-200 units, we will divide our recovery bank into 5 equal bets.

 
If we have from 201-400 units, we will divide our recovery bank into 6 equal bets.

 
As soon as we have  a  loss while in recovery mode, we stop betting from the recovery bank and go back to betting 1-2 on chops until we have another 2 losses which sends us into recovery mode and betting on streaks.

 
So, the idea is to win normal profits on chops and recover losses on steaks.

 
It's a simple idea and it has been working perfectly so far.

 
The idea is the strong part of the system.  The actual numbers used are not that important.

 
In other words you could flat bet on chops and go into recovery mode after 1 loss.  You could return to flat bet mode after 2 losses in recovery mode.

 
You can change the number of units to trigger dividing by different divisors.  In other words use 0-20 with a 3 divisor, then 21-40 for a 4 divisor, etc...

 
You can start with a divisor of 1 then 2 then 3, 4, etc...  You can also go farther than 6 for a divisor.

 
All these tweaks make the system either more or less aggressive.  You can decide how you want to play it.

 
As you can see, we are trying to recover based on getting a certain length of streaks.

 
This is a very effective way to play roulette.

 
If any of you are still not glassy eyed and want to give this a short test, please let us know what you think about it.
I suggest that you start by playing it the way I have presented at the beginning of this reply.  Then, if you want, try some tweaks and see if you like playing it  a little more or less aggressive.
Thanks,

 
GLC
In my case it doesn't matter.  I'm both!

*

GLC

  • 3000+ Posts Member !!!
  • *****
  • 3467
  • Is it better to be good looking or smart?
  • Rated: +13
Re: The Very Near Infallible Roulette System
September 18, 2011, 03:09:52 PM
I've been noticing a tendency that I think calls for a little tweak.


I think that when we are in recovery mode, we should only make recovery bets until we have reached a new overall high bank. 


Anytime we reach a new total high bank we should zero out everything and reset to 1.


There's 1 more tweak that I think will make a difference for recovery, and that is as we move to the next level of recovery, not only do we increase the number of recovery bets, but we also add 1 unit to our flat bet.


So, we flat bet 1 from -1 to -50, we flat bet 2 from -51 to -100, we flat bet 3 from -101 -200 etc...

Also, I'm on the fence as to whether it's better to wait for 2 losses in flat bet mode to go to recovery mode or should we go to recovery mode after the 1st loss in flat bet mode.

Waiting for 2 losses nets us more units won in flat bet mode, but it costs us a win had we gone to recovery mode and our recovery mode bets are usually larger.  Also, we get a lot more 3 color streaks than 4 color streaks, etc...

Help!

G
In my case it doesn't matter.  I'm both!

*

Nathan Detroit

  • Member
  • *
  • 39
  • Guys & Dolls
  • Rated: 0
Re: The Very Near Infallible Roulette System
September 18, 2011, 03:33:50 PM
The  casino execs love the   " recovery"  players. They are throwing  good  money after bad.
 
 
Nathan Detroit
 
Expert roulette player for  31  years and  in the  " Winners  Circle".

 

Popular pages: