QuoteAs to your "challenge", there is no equivalent wagering problem than can be made in baccarat.   That "3 out of 300" or whatever it is, just does not exist so there's no reason to work on it!   AD

AD,
           With due respect, I ask you to stop speaking like this. What kind of challenge do you face and win? Ok do one thing, beat zumma 1600, in whatever manner you can and show all. Is it OK?

Quote from: albalaha on January 02, 2013, 04:52:47 AM
Katilla,
          Can you please explain which method led you with this result, flat bet? Should I give another session too?
MG. You can at least produce results of whatever you have tested and elaborate your method too.

Post if you want another 10 000 spins, but you must know i have mixed results (bad and good RX test results )
and the *system* is here ....http://www.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=9562.0

cheers

Quote from: albalaha on January 02, 2013, 05:23:29 AM
AD,
           With due respect, I ask you to stop speaking like this.

Speaking like what?   Asking straight forward questions to silly challenges?

Quote from: albalaha on January 02, 2013, 05:23:29 AMWhat kind of challenge do you face and win?

Another "challenge" type question, eh?   I face the same challenge as anyone else at the casino.  Play to bring a profit out at the end of the accounting period.  That could be a session, a day, a week, a month.   Wins and losses are much larger than spin to spin or hand to hand.

Quote from: albalaha on January 02, 2013, 05:23:29 AM
Ok do one thing, beat zumma 1600, in whatever manner you can and show all. Is it OK?

Again?   Why would I want to do that again?   Many people have "beaten" both houses of Zumma and once posting the results, are usually discounted for a variety of reasons by people who can't figure it out on their own.   Besides that, "beating" Zumma is merely a good way to see if your BASIC plan of attack is a valid one.

Hmm, perhaps I should make a run through the Zumma stuff again, if not only to see if my current methods and style still hold up against "The Book" as well as in REAL LIFE.   Thanks for the idea.

So, would there still be a point to posting it here?  (It's a rhetorical question, of course.)

AD

Thanks Kattilla for clarifying. No point in giving u another 10 k since you are admitting yourself that u had mixed results and you can't term it "consistent". MG has PMed me that he is preparing a tracker before showing results on this challenge.


        Ad,
                 I don't know whether you are doing good or bad for last 3 1/2 years in gambling. Challenges are meant for takers. If you do not have courage to take one, just watch it. Do not spoil any topic like this.

I voted yes, but it was a conditional yes.


The conditions are that the principles of accurate timing, smart bet selection, and super cool money management are applied at all times by the player in short cycle sequences, to enable an extremely efficient performance to sustain an average return ( say+5%) on investment sufficient to sustain compound growth of free money utilised exclusively for this purpose.

I have cleaned up this thread a bit!

It's not about selling so-called holy grails.

Anybody with a holy grail could be out playing it or entrusting colleagues to play it for them and get slowly rich. They would not be on here talking about it.

Thank you!

I am sorry for the delay but i can not seem to get the tracker going, so i will have to post results of the first 1k spins.
As the vast majority of you expected from my nickname, the system is no secret.


[attachimg=1]


[attachimg=3]

MG,
       I couldn't get what u did and how. Can u please elaborate this?

If you know Marigny Grilleau work you must be familiar with this approach. He wrote two or three books on this, so it is a bit hard for me to explain it all. In the most basic form as i show, you track series and singles and search for a window frame that has 3.0 or more STD (Ecart in French). After that huge imbalance found, you have to develop a march to try and capture correction. There are 3 essential concepts.
Raw betting, based on Gamblers Fallacy, expecting immediate correction to manifest and accepting fluctuation.
Play after indication that correction may start ...
Play after a tendency for correction manifests itself.


Check Ego's writings and also Bayes works on regression to the mean.


As the vast majority of you i think this is almost impossible to do in a casino by yourself, as huge tracking is involved to get a betting opportunity. But this is the best method for flat betting that i have ever came across. At least the one with the best Z-score.


I can show minor applications based on this concept that are more playable. As i thought there would be a general BUUUU from the readers, i can submit another method to the test. However, the results will not show as amazing as with the former.

Quote from: albalaha on January 03, 2013, 04:37:37 AM
        Ad,
                Challenges are meant for takers. If you do not have courage to take one, just watch it. Do not spoil any topic like this.

Fair enough. 

I will remove myself from "The Challenge" as most realistic people have already done.

Carry on.

AD

Little more "realistic" people do not gamble at all.

MG,
    You could neither provide the method clearly nor did u provide result in an appropriate manner. Could you please clarify what u actually played and what were the results?

In clear figures, showing max and min level and net win.

I gave a few examples on how to look for 3.0 STD imbalance following the law of series (using Series Vs Singles, although there are more options) and ways of betting with it.
So know i will show another simplistic way of looking for imbalance. The pdf with the examples should be self explanatory.
Here is the graph and the LW registry.


[attachimg=1]


LW registry:
W W L W L W L W W W L W L W L L L
W W W W L L L
W L L W W W W W W L L L
W W W W W L W W L W W L L L
W W L W W L L W L L L
L L L
W L L L
L L W W W W L W W W W L L L
W L W L W W L L W W L W L W W L L W W

---

I ran two other flat bet methods, here the results:


1st
[attachimg=1]


2nd
[attachimg=2]



On the bottom of both graphs, is the number of placed bets.
Cheers