Full Systems vs Notepad vs Testing?

[GLC]

                                  I hate those who write a system daily here in this forum without even knowing what a system is all about. To me, a system is a very specialised and calculated way of playing which earns far better than random games in all normal sessions. A good system should have logic, sensible progression (when required), stop-loss and loss recovery feature. These things are almost absent from most of the so called systems in various forums. Very few of them are actually tested upon various sessions to be called as a workable system.

I just re-read this statement by Albalaha and it gave me a twinge of embarrassment.  I must admit that I am guilty of this very thing.  So much so that some systems I have posted before even testing them for more than a few spins, and often only on paper.


Recently, I have started posting ideas under Notepad to prevent this very thing.


What if we had a policy that stated that you can't post a system under "Full Systems"  until you have given it a thorough examination. 


1)  Tested it thoroughly
2)  Determined what a proper bank is
3)  Determined a reasonable win target
4)  Come up with a valid stop loss point
5)  And have a viable recovery method in case of a losing session.


This will keep "Full Systems" category more specialized.  Right now it's full of systems that should be under Notepad or Testing.  I have a few that I'd like to move to Notepad myself.


What if we said that all systems should be posted in Notepad until we can get at least, say 5 members to agree that it is complete enough to be moved to "Full Systems"?


Just a thought.


GLC

[warrior]

 

[catalyst]

What if we had a policy that stated that you can't post a system under "Full Systems"  until you have given it a thorough examination. 

1)  Tested it thoroughly
2)  Determined what a proper bank is
3)  Determined a reasonable win target
4)  Come up with a valid stop-loss point
5)  And have a viable recovery method in case of a losing session.

GLC

this is a fine proposal and need to be enforecd by the moderator, so that the 'full system' area will be crystalized and 'fake' members will be clustered to a 'compartment'. thanks to George.

[RouletteExplorer]

Yes I also think that its the best choise.
But from the other hand , IF we test any system in a lot of spins it will fail(they all do)...so the full systems area will be empty forever.

[Proofreaders2000]

When Victor was sysop, the standard for "Full Systems" posting involved two successful sessions with the new system explained in detail.  Why not continue this format?

[VLS]

Hey guys, in my OPINION, a FULL SYSTEM is just that: A bet selection AND a money management working together.


System creation usually goes like this:


- You have an idea (to the notepad!).


- You test the method (results to the testing area!)


- After the tests usually there are improvements/tweaks made to most systems, those are kept in the two sections above, and when you have the final product (complete system) you should feel to post the tweaked method at the full systems section.



The notepad and testing section are there to document those stages, others may choose not to document and post straight to the systems section. That's fine.
...Hey, the section is not called "WINNING systems", but FULL systems


Cheers!
Vic