jimske, your post makes no sense! what did you post already?

If you are meaning the shoe. I didn't take it from anywhere else. It's an original one mate.

It's stubborn in the sense that there were no reversals from negative territory into positive territory using the three different strategies that I tried, however I am going to try one more later and see how that fares.

Martingale and linear bets +Martingale and geometric bets.

These are the final strategies in the book and a little more complicated than the others.

I have already looked at a linear x3 bet. This would be 1,2,3,4 increasing on a win and reverting back to 1 on a loss. Now I am going to add a martingale element to things. This could be a martingale x1, x2 or x3. I will show an example of the martingale x1 in conjunction with the linear bet.

Hand 1. Bet 1.  win +1.
Hand 2. Bet 2.  lose -1. (you are in linear mode here)
Hand 3. Bet 1.  lose -2. (you are still in linear mode here but because you lost, you now switch to martingale mode)
Hand 4. Bet 2.  lose -4. (now because it's only a martingale x1 strategy and I just lost, I need to revert back to the linear mode)
Hand 5. Bet 1. win -3.
Hand 6. Bet 2. win -1. (still in linear mode going up the x3 scale, this was the first step of x3)
Hand 7. Bet 3. win +2. (this was step two of the linear mode)
Hand 8. Bet 4. win +6. (this was step 3 of the x3 linear mode and now the linear mode gets reset)

The above small example was the linear x3 with mart x1. You can increase the martingale to x2 or x3.

Now let's look at the Martingale and geometric bets.

The geometric bet x3 was a let it ride 1,2,4,8 bet and reverting back to 1 on a loss. Now again, you can add a martingale x1, x2 or x3 into the mix.

Here is a example of the geometric x3 with the mart x1 in play.

Hand 1. Bet 1. lose -1. (you were in geometric mode here to begin with and now switch over to martingale mode.)
Hand 2. Bet 2. win +1. (That was a win on the mart x1 and now you reset and go back into geometric mode. A loss here would have put you back into geometric mode as well because you are only using mart x1.)

Working this out was a bit of a headscratcher and was the one letdown in the book because Koetsch explained the linear and geometric strategies earlier in the book along with the martingale and then just assumed you would be able to work out how to combine the linear and martingale as well as the geometric and martingale strategies. There was no real clear instructions for this.

I will say now that the favourite strategy of Koetsch was what he terms G3M1 for short. That's the allowing of any winning bet to ride three times (1,2,4,8) and betting two chips after losing any 1 chip bet.  In other words, a geometric x3 with the mart x1 added on.

I will put up the final tables in the next post. Also I will do a few examples with the different strategies in action.

It's all interesting stuff for sure Jimske. I am trying to figure out if RTM (regression to mean) could be used in conjunction with these stats. If we know how many reversals on average to expect and what the average peak wins are, then can we use that as a kind of cheat sheet and profit by using some kind of RTM strategy? It's a thought anyhow!

Here are the tables for the Linear + Martingale bets.

[attachimg=1]

[attachimg=2]

I will be back shortly with the Geometric + Martingale table.

Tables for Geometric + Martingale bets.

[attachimg=1]


[attachimg=2]


All that leaves left is the chart which highlights the strongest points for each strategy.

Here is a type of master chart with all the pertinent figures at a glance.

So there we have it. All that leaves left for me to do is a few examples.

What I will do is use the first 100 spins from the Spielbank Casino for a few days starting from tomorrow. I will stick to Table 2.

It's just a case of picking your poison depending on your comfort zone with regards to risk.

I like L3M2 (linear x3 with mart x2)

The worse net loss in 600 rounds (60,000 results) came in at -84. So that's less than 100 chips.
There is just over a 10% risk for your game to be always in a net loss. The peak net win average per round is nearly 3 times that of flat betting. It offers the most amount of average reversals of the lot with 3.7 (so remember that's a losing position turning into a winning position nearly 4 times.) What's not to like about it, LoL.

And all of this assumes you have no bet selection which just might cut down on the variance a bit. And who says you need to bet every spin either?

I hope you enjoyed the review.  I would recommend buying the book. I have condensed things a lot whilst still trying to get across the most important parts. Even chances are not really my speciality and I am 100% certain there are loads of insights in the book which I have not put across.

So good luck to anyone who gives this a workout and let us all know how you get on.

Thanks

Hi horus --- would really like to thank you for your quality thread , it has been a big help to me at my stage of my roulette education. Please continue with your insightful posts on this and other threads , they are much appreciated.

Thank you klw for your kind comments.

I am going to remove any unneccesary comments from this thread and lock it. I am not here to get into a childish slanging match with people. I think Koetsch did some good work here by asking the right kind of questions.