+ Register

[AsymBacGuy]

Casinos win money because of their mathematical expectancy and this is linearly related with the numbers of bets we'll make.
Betting less alone will not cancel or invert the casino's math edge, still casinos will collect less money from us for sure.
Moreover our winning probability is directly related with the probability of success and inversely related with the number of attempts made to get a profit.

The negative edge impact will show up for sure itlr, yet our probability of success will improve when p is quite huge.
Thus we should consider the game as an infinite series of very short sessions and not as an infinite session.
Short sessions may get the casino as loser, almost never long sessions will make casino as loser.

If for whatever reason we could discard 4-5 numbers from the whole 38 numbers spectrum we'll get a temporary edge.
Surely this situation cannot last for long but it will happen. Definetely.

as.
 



 



 

[Blue_Angel]

Pure gold. No jokes.

as.

Thank you for your kind words, really appreciated it.

[esoito]

Are you implying that Max acting as affiliate of online casinos?

If Max fails to reply this, it would mean that he silently confirms it.

Mike has already answered your question in the negative.  Thank you, Mike.

Just for the record:  I. Am. Not. An. Affiliate. For. Any. Service. Or. Product. Associated. With. Gambling.  Nor do I ever intend to be.

[esoito]

Thanks esoito. Good luck with your testing of the RSW system. I have to say that  I might be a little less sceptical if there weren't several links to online casinos at the end of the document. 

And thank you, too, Mike.

Like you, I was somewhat put off by the author's links to casinos at the end.  In such cases the document is usually a cynical vehicle to simply make money from others' losses via the affiliation links(s).

I was on the point of deleting it for that reason, but my internal editor told me not to be too hasty and to at least read the document first.

Glad I did.

Basically, I'm testing the various tweaks and changes I've made to the formulas. Early days, but results thus far have been been positive enough to deserve a bit more of my remaining life-span in some more tests.

Golden Ratio
I'm hoping to have the same success I did with a program I wrote to exploit the Golden Ratio.

One of the members here uses it both for roulette and for baccarat, and is delighted with the profits. 

In case you're wondering, then no, I didn't sell it to him as it's not for sale. I gave it to him.  After all, he believed in what I was trying to achieve. And he was so supportive and encouraging during some very dark moments that he deserved to share in the final success.


Sound Roulette
Another successful program was based on the sound frequencies of the colours black and red.

I paid to have it coded as a bot.  [Once one accepts that everything is energy and vibrates at a particular frequency then such an approach is less confronting to closed minds. Anything that challenges their orthodoxy is, to them,threat.]

It was going really well when WHill changed the screen display of their airball and the bot ground to a halt.

Sadly, Tiago, the bot coder took up further tertiary studies and had no time to make the modifications. So Sound Roulette awaits another kickstart...one day...when I get around to it....

Chords
Related to the approach is software based on chords created by numbers and combinations of numbers. Now that is doing really well. 

Each session is a maximum of 4 spins only. A session stops on the first profit. Or it stops on a 4-spin loss.

Tests were done on live spins collected from Wiesbaden, Dortmund and DunlinBet.

Here are Cumulative Profit summaries -- FOR 1-UNIT FLAT BETS ONLY ON 12 NUMBERS MAXIMUM, PER BET -- from multiple test-sessions run on live spins from the three casinos:

Wiesbaden 50 Sessions: ENDED: 06:47:16 AFTER  4  SPINS and 4 bets
Won:   Lost: 4  PROFIT: -46    [CUMULATIVE PROFIT: 105]   Count = 50
--------------------------------------------
Dortmund 32 Sessions: ENDED: 09:43:00 AFTER  2  SPINS and 2 bets
Won: 1  Lost: 1  PROFIT: 12    [CUMULATIVE PROFIT: 195]   Count = 32
--------------------------------------------
DublinBet 135 Sessions: ENDED: 15:28:54 AFTER  1  SPINS and 1 bets
Won: 1  Lost: 0  PROFIT: 25    [CUMULATIVE PROFIT: 630]   Count = 135
--------------------------------------------

I mention all this not to brag. 

And not to sell anything -- nothing is for sale.

But to reassure members on two points:

1  flat betting can work if you find the right bet and play short sessions. It certainly works for me, as you can see above.

2  despite naysayers and closed minds there are profitable approaches if one is prepared to be open-minded [not gullible], creative, explorative and -- above all -- patient.

Suspending disbelief can so often have positive effects.


Some Advice

If they've read this far, some will shake their heads and probably wonder if I'm the full dozen in the egg carton. Doesn't bother me. I'm the one with the runs on the board!

A few might decide to follow-up some of the ideas in the Brainstorming thread.

If that's you, then a word of advice:  If you're not a persistent or a patient person, then my advice is don't do it.

Why?

Because you will likely become very frustrated, irritable and stressed during the process. And that's not good, especially if you're in a relationship.


And Finally...

Any requests for more information on my approaches mentioned above will fall on deaf ears [or, rather, blind eyes] so don't bother.

I have no intention of giving away the fruits of months and months of time, patience, persistence, creativity and energy.


Follow your own star...

[AsymBacGuy]

Nice to read this!

I have always sayed that roulette players are the best gambling researchers providing a lot of useful thoughts and inputs that most part of bj or baccarat experts cannot dream of.

I'm proud to be a member of this site.

as.

[Blue_Angel]

I mention all this not to brag. 

And not to sell anything -- nothing is for sale.

But to reassure members on two points:

1  flat betting can work if you find the right bet and play short sessions. It certainly works for me, as you can see above.

Flat bet provides milder fluctuations, your highs will be lower and your lows will be higher, all in all no advantage there.
Besides, if you really believe in what you are doing why not reinforcing selection with a progression?

2  despite naysayers and closed minds there are profitable approaches if one is prepared to be open-minded [not gullible], creative, explorative and -- above all -- patient.

Suspending disbelief can so often have positive effects.


Some Advice

If they've read this far, some will shake their heads and probably wonder if I'm the full dozen in the egg carton. Doesn't bother me. I'm the one with the runs on the board!

A few might decide to follow-up some of the ideas in the Brainstorming thread.

If that's you, then a word of advice:  If you're not a persistent or a patient person, then my advice is don't do it.

Why?

Because you will likely become very frustrated, irritable and stressed during the process. And that's not good, especially if you're in a relationship.

I'm embracing your thesis, great advice! 

And Finally...

Any requests for more information on my approaches mentioned above will fall on deaf ears [or, rather, blind eyes] so don't bother.

I have no intention of giving away the fruits of months and months of time, patience, persistence, creativity and energy.


Follow your own star...

Nobody asked you a thing, so what are you blathering about?
Perhaps you secretly hope for someone to offer you a good deal of money in order to convince you.
Last but not least, since you always bet by softwares I assume you are not playing at B&M casinos, or your approach will be as good as random without your electronic aid.

[esoito]

Nobody asked you a thing,  so what are you blathering about?

I'm getting in first to prevent any such requests for more information eventuating.

People often join these sorts of forums simply as leeches. They download stuff, copy stuff and feed off others' efforts, but contribute nothing whatsoever back into the forum.

They're easily identified, of course.

I don't have the time or energy or inclination to deal with enquiries from those users who show no active participation in the forum.


Blathering apparently means "to talk foolishly". 

If you and I are to get on, let it be from a basis of politeness and respect.



Perhaps you secretly hope for someone to offer you a good deal of money in order to convince you.

And perhaps not. 

That's twice now you have tried to impugn me. [The other time was when you suggested I benefited from casino links even though I was clearly not the author of the document concerned.]

Be warned -- if you do it again I will take action. 

[esoito]

Card counting for Baccarat!

The best way to predict the future is to create it!

Imagine each casino as different universe, now imagine each table as different galaxy with its own reality, separate from the others.

Create a sequence of hypothetical outcomes, go to casino, pick a table and see the first few results how they are.

Remember, the good day seems from the morning, whatever is more possible will happen during the first few outcomes.

Did you like what you saw?
No? Then it's time to move to another galaxy.
Yes? Then just stick around!

The above is a response to Reply 15 by alrelax.   

Moved from Brainstorming Thread to here. 

[esoito]

In the Brainstorming thread I wrote:  "Quantum entanglement and number flows is a rich seam for exploration."

So ponder this:     http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-40594387      [Thanks to Bally6354 for the alert]

The whole topic is based on Quantum Entanglement.

[Blue_Angel]

Regarding the inverted strategy mentioned by Esoito I'd like to add a few things.

By analyzing results in a retrospective fashion we could realize the significance of the sequence's order.

Each and every new result leads us to a new decision to make (what and/or how much to bet).
For example 2 players applying the same betting system but entering on game in different time would bet different and their bottom line would also be different.
You could imagine the whole situation as a tornado/cyclone, variance "pushes" bets gradually higher and towards the outer rings like a centrifugal force.

But why this happens?
A fixed set of rules (system/bet selection) is a static condition while variance is a dynamic, when 2 opposing conditions meet it's going to prevail the stronger, they couldn't coexist because are different, but in case we had 2 of the same then they would merge to 1 greater.

In other words don't try to tame in vain the variance waves when you only have to "ride" them.
Progressions and stop win/loss limits wouldn't be necessary if there was proper bet selection on the first place.
It doesn't help to realize the obvious after it happens, "I'm losing so let's stop from this table or for today..."
"I'm winning so let's run to the exit before my luck changes..."

The really important and useful would be to prevent big loss before it happens, so the million $ question is how!
Common sense says that before it's going to rain you'll see clouds in the sky...from the time you notice the first clouds gathering till the first raindrops there will be sufficient time to open an umbrella or to get indoors...

It's all about perception and interpretation, when I focus on what I should then I've 2 available options since I cannot stop the "rain", change what I'm currently doing (umbrella) or quit (get indoors).
We cannot set a universal stop win/loss limit simply because there's no 1 size fits all situations!

Therefore we have to adapt a flexible strategy in order to adjust to the ever changing stream of events.
The game could be one or two way street, we've to live with both situations in order to come out on top.

[AsymBacGuy]

Therefore we have to adapt a flexible strategy in order to adjust to the ever changing stream of events.
The game could be one or two way street, we've to live with both situations in order to come out on top.

Again another great post from Blue Angel.

And I personally like the quoted part of it.

"Flexibility" is what a roulette strategy should aim for, the problem arises when we want to assess the terms of intervention of such flexibility.
We can't predict if the actual rain will stop in minutes or hours or days. But we could better estimate how many different rainy days will stop in a given amount of minutes, hours or days.   


'Inversion' is a strategy that looks at problems in reverse, to minimise the negatives instead of maximising the positives'

Excellent strategy. I'll write my personal comments later.

as.

[AsymBacGuy]

Unfortunately negative situations are longer and more frequent than positive situations.

So in order to reduce negative situations, imo the best tool to utilize  is stopping them right at the start.
From an economic point of view, after any loss the most likely scenario will be another loss.
The same after two conseuctive losses and so on.

Without going into statistical details, imo the magic number to look for is 1 and only 1.
1 may go to 2 or going back to zero.
On the losing side 1 will go more often to 2 whereas on the winning side 1 will go to zero more often than not.

Of course whenever the actual state is zero, we'll get more losing 1s than winning 1s.

Everything up to some points as a random walk deprived from a shifting factor (negative edge) must follow some statistical (still unbeatable) guidelines.

Good news are that after having reached different cutoff 1 points, certain machines cannot forget to go forward or back in somewhat predictable fashions as their basic random process dictates this.

At the eyes machine, the negative edge remains the same, but it's not our probability of success.

Nonetheless and given the general huge disadvantage, our strategy should be oriented to minimize the losses forever and ever. 
At the risk to lose the rare situations where we could have missed a lot of consecutive winning hands.

as.

 

   


 


   








 

[Blue_Angel]

Without going into statistical details, imo the magic number to look for is 1 and only 1.
1 may go to 2 or going back to zero.
On the losing side 1 will go more often to 2 whereas on the winning side 1 will go to zero more often than not.

By reading this someone could assume that you are speaking about EC bets exclusively, that principle is not valid for other kind of bets.
In general when you win you don't lose, and when you lose you don't win, there is no middle ground and you cannot have one without the other.

So by focusing on how I could win more I'd effectively minimizing my losses too, the strongest attack is the best defence...when gamblers reacting on given outcomes they get controlled by the variance, but when there is a well laid out plan beforehand then you take the lead instead of reacting and victimising yourself.

[AsymBacGuy]

By reading this someone could assume that you are speaking about EC bets exclusively, that principle is not valid for other kind of bets.

Exactly and you know well I wasn't talking about EC bets :-)

Hope to meet you in Vegas for a dinner. Or, most likely, in Montecarlo ;-)

as.

[Blue_Angel]

Thank you Max for sharing something so interesting (I rarely thank anyone for sharing as I rarely see appreciation from others for my efforts).


Just a couple of questions, I assume you had good results but for how long, are the results sufficient in order to prove something?


Does it have to do with numerology?