Folks lets not get personal and focus on methods that can stand!
How about the idea that i posted. I had also posted the excel with how that idea stands by and delivers results. Is that idea not good enough to get moderate profits from a long term loser. If not, can someone improvise more on that and other ideas posted so far.

Bayes! Being a wiz, you can comment on whether its mathematically possible?

Hey GreatG.....
                       If you make a claim and feel that has some worth, the onus to prove that lies on you.

He proved it already!!  your like a wound up clock who has the same reply saved on your pc that you just copy and paste.. Nobody is doing it the WAY YOU want. So move on.

Juiced,
          Do not put your expert comments here because that is not sought. If you can illustrate how GreatGramp's method wins, do that here. He has yet to prove anything and he has just put a theory like many others which he feels, should win.

Quote from: Albalaha on May 11, 2013, 05:25:33 AM
Juiced,
          Do not put your expert comments here because that is not sought. If you can illustrate how GreatGramp's method wins, do that here. He has yet to prove anything and he has just put a theory like many others which he feels, should win.

Sumit did u not see the excel I posted with the results for the entire 15000 spins?

Ok. What does your excel say to you, let me know? What is the max bet, biggest drawdown, best figure in winning and how much did it finish with?


        Greatgr...
                   I am asking to you.

Quote from: Marshall Bing Bell on May 10, 2013, 07:33:07 AM

To be fair, why would he bother?

All you'll do is say, "Yep, played that like a tournament too, and won +1550 units. 

No, if he can come up with the "next worst number" I can attempt to validate MY own solution to his goofy challenge and put an end to this waste of time for once and for all.

I'm not quite sure what Al is looking for but it's evident his exposure to roulette is limited to a very small subset of the game.

Has nobody here ever played in a roulette tournament?  Any gambling tournament?

Hopefully his next "challenge for the ages" will have a bit more structure to it than "beat this number" and then tell me how you did it.

It's been beat.  Now I just need another number to validate my process to make sure it wasn't just a lucky streak.

I'll be more than happy to post up a play by play, just need to make sure the first one wasn't a "fluke" win.

AD (actually I believe the first win was something like +79)

Ad,
       If it looks as waste of time, don't waste that. Nobody is asking you, particularly to take this challenge. It is not like you do not understand the meaning and purpose of this challenge. You never did number 3, otherwise you would have come up with results jumping like a frog.
              This challenge is much like a very difficult hurdle race. It needs a balance of speed and control over lead leg and trail leg. Let me clarify you that all basic negative/positive progressions or regressions will fall flat on this challenge. To beat this challenge you should be able to pass through very tough challenges. It is like driving in a road that is bumpy and smooth at places. Not everyone can dare to do this.
              Those who know "extreme variance management" and a suitable money management that can handle persistent variance/scatter can do something positive in such challenges.
             Copy+paste members have no leg room. Only innovative ones can think of doing something here.

With due respect to all concerned on this thread, why make life hard for yourself so as to have to cope with 'extreme variance'.


Playing every spin, and by perverse hindsight selecting only to play the 'runt' number that random distribution offers, is indeed masochistic, if not insane.


Why would you bother? To find a supposed strategy that could handle anything? Well in this small sample it is like a puddle compared to the oceans of opportunity out there for really nasty outcomes.
In other words this quest with a paper sword is futile in the real world.


Instead, find a bet that has specific characteristics that demonstrate, for at least some or even most of the time it is a winning bet, then apply measures of the variance that unfolds with this more benign skew.


There will still be unplayable passages but a simple stop loss can deal with it.


Most of the time the variance will be within known parameters and a money management that combines flat staking with short stopped progressions will give you the most consistent winning outcomes you could wish for ( with occasional small setbacks in reality).


Pay homage to Mr Keynes in your thanks.
Best XXVV

QuoteWith due respect to all concerned on this thread, why make life hard for yourself so as to have to cope with 'extreme variance'.

Then you do not need to read around systems on any forum. Play anything with positive expectation of getting  goodey-goodey sessions and curse  your luck on bad ones. Later when you end up your bankroll, you have sayings to support your loss, at last from Albert Einstein.
                     There is always no worries in good times but bad sessions are much more obvious.


                           Those who have no idea about how to do this challenge please stay away from commenting in this topic.

Quote from: Albalaha on May 11, 2013, 10:57:37 AM
Ok. What does your excel say to you, let me know? What is the max bet, biggest drawdown, best figure in winning and how much did it finish with?


        Greatgr...
                   I am asking to you.

Sumit,
I have attached the excel again so that you can see easily. As you can see i have played my method both using flat bet and cyclical progression. Flat bet gave me a loss of 65 units at the end and cyclical progression gave me a win of 287 units.
No re-engineering of results nothing. Concepts that i have clearly explained and results based on that.

With flat betting
best figure - +64 units
Biggest drawdown - -147 units
Finish with - -65 units
max bet - flat 1 unit

With cyclical progression(up as you lose, down as you win, reset at a new high)
best figure - +323 units
Biggest drawdown - -188 units
Finish with - +287 units
max bet - 3 units

Any queries, please ask.

I still can't understand whether the figures that you arrived at are correct or not by  your explanations. Can't you work it out spin by spin? If 36 spins are a cycle for you and u increase by every cycle loss and decrease by every cycle win, how could u bet 3 unit max?
            Can GreatGr or anybody else explain this?

Quote from: Albalaha on May 12, 2013, 03:15:31 AM
You never did number 3, otherwise you would have come up with results jumping like a frog.

Well, if you'll remember back a few weeks, I did jump up and down when I told you how I solved this odd challenge with the help of my losing, craps player, brother.  Even posted up the results on your board.  Too bad only 4 people saw it.

Quote from: Albalaha on May 12, 2013, 03:15:31 AM
              This challenge is much like a very difficult hurdle race.

This challenge is pointless.  However, it does keep your name up "in lights" so you can pretend to be somebody in the finite roulette world.

Quote from: Albalaha on May 12, 2013, 03:15:31 AMOnly innovative ones can think of doing something here.

I think I already did that.

Anyway, how about sending out the next spreadsheet with the second worst number.   DO NOT tell me the number, just post up the spreadsheet like you did with the first one showing "W" and "L".   My curiosity is now getting to me and I'd really like to see if it can beat it again.   I'll run it EXACTLY like the first one, bet by bet, spin by spin.

AD

Darn it.

I made another reply to this thread and I swore I wouldn't.

Oh well, if Al won't send me the penultimate bad number from that spreadsheet I'll just send my solution to the problem to Victor and if he believes I've solved the problem legitimately, I'll post it up.

AD (180 replies to a pointless challenge.  Go figure.)

QuoteOh well, if Al won't send me the penultimate bad number from that spreadsheet I'll just send my solution to the problem to Victor and if he believes I've solved the problem legitimately, I'll post it up.

Ad,
                             This is the last time I am asking you to put your work openly here, if you have beaten it really. So far, whoever claimed to beat it is only doing reverse engineering of this particular data or calculating wrongly. Whether you played like a tournament or a 100 meter sprint, doesn't matter much. Why will you show your work to Victor, Privately? It shows you are not confident of doing it correctly or you merely used reverse engineering or you just lied about it. Flat betting will never work in such situations unless you are a clairvoyant who knows when exactly you will bet and fetch wins in such wild scatter of wins and losses.
                               This open challenge is working like a mirror and showing real faces of all who claim to be masters of the game. Many frustrated members facing identity crisis are also coming to this topic only to make empty comments. I never knew those who write so much are so hollow inside that they only keep looking for good sessions to win or getting good luck to get wins in clusters.
Many of them come up with a new method of losing money, every week. LoL.