Can we agree to disagree on this?

[MrJ]

'Testing' methods over thousands of spins (RX etc.) is fine but lets say that method FAILS.....poor results.

Does that mean its a 100% FACT to never play that method? Lets be honest, a profit of $200 over 700,000 spins is not very impressive (lol), I would not call that a success. Some say testing over 700,000 is too many and some will say testing over 1,000 spins is too few.

Sooo, if there is a method that you highly LIKE but it FAILS a long term test, never play it again??


Ken

[Master_of_pockets]

Yes I would not play it.
Because when we see that a method fails in the long run ,then it means that it can not overcome a bad run. So this bad run can happen very early when we will start playing it or very late.We can not risk that.Because it is gambling.
If we just like to gamble,then we don t need a system.

[nitrix]

At the same time, if you can tolerate a loss once in a while (depending on your bankroll), you can maybe avoid jumping in a betting tantrum spiral and lose many more units.

[Bayes]

So when you say, "can we agree to disagree..." I take it that you wouldn't dismiss a system if it fails a long term test, Ken?

I used to be in the "dump it" camp, but now I'm not so sure. 

I haven't seen a system yet that wins significant amounts while keeping within house limits and without ruinous drawdowns, and I've coded probably hundreds of them. There are some who say that a computer can't simulate all the nuances and subtle decisions a player can make at the table. I disagree with this, after all, computers can predict the weather to a certain extent, and there are hundreds of variables to take account of there. But the complexity of the code would have to be such that it would put off most programmers (at least those working alone).

Others say that it's not the system itself - it's the timing, in other words, the ability to recognise when an opportunity presents itself, and for this, ANY system will do. But from a mathematical point of view there are no "opportunities" (all outcomes are equally likely). 

I don't mean for this to be a negative post, because I'm continuing to do quite well playing roulette. It's just frustrating that nothing can be definitively nailed down into a series of IF-THEN statements. 

One pearl of wisdom which stands out for me was from a trader who said that the key to winning was to really and completely take on board that outcomes are RANDOM. It sounds easy but how many system players really do that? if you really understood what random means you wouldn't be using a system, because systems, by definition, assume certain outcomes are predictable and deterministic to some extent. It's ok to make a guess at what MIGHT happen, in a playful kind of way, just don't get into the mindset that it WILL happen, and be ready to adapt constantly. Flexibility is the key.

Again, mathematically speaking, this is nonsense; being flexible and adaptable doesn't change the odds one iota, and yet it seems to "work".

[iggiv]

John Patrick and Brett Morton are pros which use well known methods which are no way can win in long runs. The same was for Bruce Irwin (Midas) (RIP). it is not only about the method to beat the casino i guess. I don't know if there is a method in nature which can win long run consistently. probably not. but there are good methods out there which can be used, but u must be REAL GOOD to use them. to have lots of patience, discipline,  not to give up and so on.

[MrJ]

 "not to give up" >>> BINGO.

Ken

[MrJ]

"I take it that you wouldn't dismiss a system if it fails a long term test" >>> Correct, I would not dismiss it sir.

EVERYTHING ROULETTE RELATED COMES DOWN TO DEFINITIONS !!! (I cant say it enough)

Ken

[GARNabby]

... but u must be REAL GOOD to use them. to have lots of patience, discipline,  not to give up and so on.

It's not "giving up", after you realize there's nothing to give up.  No one can make something out of nothing.  And anyone can hold onto that which is already possessed, such as the money, time, passion, etc, to pursue something of real value (far away from the internet message-boards).

[kingsroulette]

Every system either takes big drawdowns or loses at last in long testings, or otherwise, gives negligible profit.