Quote from: mogul397 on June 29, 2016, 12:26:16 AM
Somebody MIGH be playing it. Like Ignatius...

The problem that I have is I don't see the drawdowns that I experienced
in actual testing.  Don't really happen that often, but you see them.

Like I said, maybe some protection. I've seen NAthan say "3 losses in a row and we're out".
That kind of methodology.

When trading online the idea is to have a stop loss and let your profits run.

The largest dd I see on the above testing charts would be around 120 units deep (not sure the actual count of progression).

What dds did you see that concerned you?

Thanks!

Quote from: TheLaw on June 29, 2016, 12:52:09 AM
The largest dd I see on the above testing charts would be around 120 units deep (not sure the actual count of progression).

What dds did you see that concerned you?

Thanks!

I did not closely examine the charts presented for that. Although since you called it
to my attention they exceed my wildest expectations.

My concern was with my own testing in zumma. I didn't write down the page, but
once or twice the double dozens just happened in a row, maybe toward 10+ in a row.

My tolerance for a betting progression like that is around 7.  Or 10. Once it goes there,
you have to have the bank, confidence, and patience that you will come back.  That
was the source of my concern.  But the dips in the chart are surely a concern.

So to separate and start over a bit I guess you need to define what "never lost" means.
What that means in terms of bank and betting level. I chose a simpler, more wimpy
way to look at it. I guess my own internal brake kicks on. Possible a brake that would
prevent me from ever logically playing and winning. Or I would have to disarm that
brake and go with the correct set of parameters of betting level and bank.

Having said that, I already mentioned stuff about playing the other side after losses. It also
seems prudent common sense what Nathan said about not chasing losses past 3. And I mentioned
the notion of "stop loss". A valid tool.

Having said that, if you are losing, then bet the opposite way, and you will win. OR stop losing.
During those loss spikes in the graph.

I'm trying to develop a pattern of thought her.

I'll be working on this over the next few days to produce a W/L record. Perhaps that will help with progression selection.

The main downside is that you're left sitting at the table without betting for stretches at a time.......not a great scenario, but can be worked around.

9000 spins is not necessarily bulletproof..........but pretty impressive for such a simple method.

Great work as always Ignatus!!!

I don't look at it like 9000 spins or bullet proof. But in case you missed my latest
experience with grass roots, on paper or real, I'd like to know I could experience
a win (like 26 units) before I lost the 1,3,9. Something I can wrap my head around.
And I lost TWICE by the 5th set. Once on paper and once real. (Which, BTW, has me
intrigued how randomly I can pick 3 single dozens in a row to lose 3 double dozen in
a row)

Page 229 in zumma. Haven't looked at it yet.

2
1
2
1
3
3
3           3
1
1           2
3
1
3
3
3           3
3
2
1
3
1
2
3
0
1
3
1
2
3
2
1
0
1
2
2             2
1
2
3
2
3
2
1
1              2
2
0
3
2
2              3
2
1
1              2
2
2              2
3
3              2
1
1
1             3
3
2
2
2              3

Page 230

3
3               2
2
1
2
3
3               2
1
3
2
1
3
1
2
1
1
1                 3
2
1
3
2
2
2                 3
2
3
3                 2
1
1                 2
2
1
1                 2
3
1
0
1
1                  3
1
1
1
2
2                   2
1
2
3
1
2
2                  2
1
2
2                   2
1
1                   2


And awful lot of doubles.  And statistically I think it is more likely for
a double. In the case of dozens, like 2-1 instead of even on EC's.

So yeah, you're laying odds. But if you don't have a crazy progression,
it doesn't get out of control. Even though a 1.3.9 (or even 27) progression

Weisbaden Table #2 06.01.2016 #289 Spins

WWWLWLWLLWLLLLWLWLLLLLWLLLLWWLLLLLWLLLWLLLLLWLLLLWWWLWLLWLLW (20/41)

Total : +58

DD :     -50

Highest Bet : 15 units

.......not for the faint of heart........but recovery is incredibly fast.

Sitting at a table, you get a bet every 5 spins on average........double if you play columns.

Weisbaden Table #1 01.06.2016 #185 Spins

LLLLWWLLWLLWLLLLLWWLLLLWWWLLWLLLWLLW (12/24)

Total : +39

DD :    -01

Highest Bet : 06

I have to process this.  But good work law and thanks. I think that you
quite quickly demonstrate the quick chance for a swing.  Maybe I need
to think more aggressive.

If nothing else it is good to put out nose to the grindstone together. Just
checking my mail at bed time.  Sure I will be dreaming about this.

Thanks

Maybe I should process the data that I posted.

Quote from: mogul397 on June 29, 2016, 03:43:43 PM
I don't look at it like 9000 spins or bullet proof. But in case you missed my latest
experience with grass roots, on paper or real, I'd like to know I could experience
a win (like 26 units) before I lost the 1,3,9. Something I can wrap my head around.
And I lost TWICE by the 5th set. Once on paper and once real. (Which, BTW, has me
intrigued how randomly I can pick 3 single dozens in a row to lose 3 double dozen in
a row)

Page 229 in zumma. Haven't looked at it yet.

2
1
2
1
3
3
3           3
1
1           2
3
1
3
3
3           3
3
2
1
3
1
2
3
0
1
3
1
2
3
2
1
0
1
2
2             2
1
2
3
2
3
2
1
1              2
2
0
3
2
2              3
2
1
1              2
2
2              2
3
3              2
1
1
1             3
3
2
2
2              3

Page 230

3
3               2
2
1
2
3
3               2
1
3
2
1
3
1
2
1
1
1                 3
2
1
3
2
2
2                 3
2
3
3                 2
1
1                 2
2
1
1                 2
3
1
0
1
1                  3
1
1
1
2
2                   2
1
2
3
1
2
2                  2
1
2
2                   2
1
1                   2


And awful lot of doubles.  And statistically I think it is more likely for
a double. In the case of dozens, like 2-1 instead of even on EC's.

So yeah, you're laying odds. But if you don't have a crazy progression,
it doesn't get out of control. Even though a 1.3.9 (or even 27) progression

OK, so I looked at my data above. Pg 230 ended with 4 doubles.

And I continued to page 231.  Without typing it out, I see 6 more doubles
before there is a triple.  So that is 10. That's a lot, and is a specific topic to address.
I think we have the issue cornered and defined.

Which is why I advocate switching sides at some point until the tide turns.
As it happens, on page 231, after the first triple, there are a couple more.

So my question is, do we play the method with a large bankroll and let it work
out, or is it prudent to have a stop gap of some kind?

In your examples, law, I don't think I see any terrible streaks of losses that created
your "not for the faint of heart" run.  But it also seems true that it didn't take much
to find it. Seems like it turned up pretty quick in the examples.

Which is what I refer to a bit in my "wallpaper test".

But I will also admit that I agree and love how quick it recovers with 2-1 payouts.

Thoughts?

Whatever I think, I can't ignore the fact that everyone says this thing hasn't lost.
I also can't ignore how cool it does recover.

So I think I need an attitude adjustment, and am trying to find it.

My working theory about this method is that there will be large draw-downs, but other more conservative methods have issues as well, so best strategy is to look to win 2 out of 3 games. This allows for nasty sequences from time-to-time without much risk.

At this point the magic number appears to be #200 units win or lose. This allows for bets up to 20 units starting @ 1 unit base.

In the charts provided by Ignatus, 200 units would cover the dd easily.

Still working on this.........will post more W/L records soon.

Scrapping this bet selection..........too many misses already on just 3rd game tested.....bets up to 22 units


#177 spins

LLLLLWWLLLLWLLLLLLLWLLLLWLLLWLWLLLLLLLLL

The following is a W/L from Grassroots 1-2-3 using Table #1 from 1.06.16 #185 spins

Note the long runs of wins.........perhaps a parlay?

WWWWLLWLWWLLLLWWWWWLLWWWWWWWLWLLLWWWLWWWWWWWLWLWWWWWWLLWLWWWWLWWLWWWLLWWLWLLLWLWLWWWLWWWWWLWWWWWWWWWWWLWWWW

WWWWLWWWWWLLWWLLWLLWLLWWWLWWWWWLWWWLLWWWWWLLLWWLWLWWWWLWWLWWWLWWWWWLWWWWWLWLWW

I always thought it would be worths while to use the star style bucking up against the roulettes dozen. A single win pay off at 2 to 1 allow you capture the profit and re-set, hey hey.

Quote from: TheLaw on June 30, 2016, 11:44:31 PM
The following is a W/L from Grassroots 1-2-3 using Table #1 from 1.06.16 #185 spins

Note the long runs of wins.........perhaps a parlay?

WWWWLLWLWWLLLLWWWWWLLWWWWWWWLWLLLWWWLWWWWWWWLWLWWWWWWLLWLWWWWLWWLWWWLLWWLWLLLWLWLWWWLWWWWWLWWWWWWWWWWWLWWWW

WWWWLWWWWWLLWWLLWLLWLLWWWLWWWWWLWWWLLWWWWWLLLWWLWLWWWWLWWLWWWLWWWWWLWWWWWLWLWW

Just went to Plainridge quick. Here are my results. I was seeing a lot of doubles
and I played them. Put $10 in and took out $20.  Met a friend playing slots and he
lost $20.

17B   2        B
6B     1        C
10B   1   2   A
15B   2        C
00
13B   2        A
17B   2   3   B
7R     1        A
3R     1   2   C
13B   2        A
14R   2   2   B
4B    1         A
28B   3        A       2
33B   3   2   C
13B   2        A
35B   3        B
9R     1        C
22B   2        A
13B   2   2   A       2
5R     1        B
27R   3        C
31B   3   2   A
16R   2        A       2
36R   3        C
26B   3   2   B
16R   2        A
18R   2   2   C
12R   1        C       2
31B   3        A
4B     1        A
19R   2        A       3
14R   2   2   A
1R     1        A
19R   2        A
14R   2        B
14R   2   3   B        2
12R   1        C
17B   2        B
3R     1        C
15B   2        C        2
29B   3        B
20B   2        B
00


12 2's and 3 3's.  Just flat betting was OK.
Played the other two. I wasn't aggressive. Just
won my $10 while watching.

OK,  So I stopped by yesterday. I attached my session.

I sat down and wrote the marquis data just to get some data and
caught up about at the top of the 2nd columb.

So I put my $20 in and figured I'd try to get some double hits.
double dozen $5 bets. Look at the 1st columb.  All doubles.
Wouldn't you know, I bet the ONLY TWO that went over 2 dozen,
and lost my $20.  That's all I brought.

So I continued to track. But the double dozen thing worked out
wonderfully.

What do you think Law? OR anyone else?  Did everyone run off the deck
like a sinking ship?

I can't explain how going for 3 dozen after two has survived this long. But the
logic is backwards. Especially where you have a lay situation.

Isn't it funny how EC's can go on consistently for many streaks, but the
double dozen can't?  And it is for the matter of 6 numbers.  Seems like
if you could isolate which double street that is, you could do something with it.
I don't think you can. But what a dramatic change in results. For the
matter of a double street.