It can be a way to work on group testing with several people involved with the same system for publishing their results?

Maybe this month a system. next month another system. Perhaps choice by a poll to see which system promises from those published in the month. We can go see what promising systems are working. I see many systems published and few systems being tested in the forum.

If we assign a calendar month to each promising system at least we can move forward with something by the end of next year. This is an idea which intrigues me. Maybe other people is the same.

Greetings.

That's a good idea Wannawin

I was thinking something similar the other day. I had in mind something like 'system of the week' where it could be explained and then tested. It could then be given a rating by the testers. That would then build up a nice library of systems which had some research behind them. I suppose it would be easy enough to setup. Let the members who want to participate put their name down and then randomly pick one members name out of the hat each week. We can all learn something from each others ideas. 

I think the only way to test is by doing it yourself, I understand the group thing but, if we look at methods such as PB, out of the whole forum, only 3 or 4 have reported, dare I say, good? results, which in many opinions isn't that good, the percentages are slowely coming to the norm that is expected, some members have even reported bad enough losses/hit rates that they have now discarded the method completely. Which is more and more pointing to luck for the chosen few.

Everyone was active on that thread at one point, that was a group thing, wasn't it?

There's so many methods in a month there wouldn't be enough months to test them all!!

Those of us who have been around for a long time know the instant we read a 'new' methods description wether or not it has testing value, as you know, if I see something that 'looks' like it 'may' work in my opinion, I code it and post results, suggest tweaks, try them and repost in a matter of days only, a month would be a total waste of time for all those involved.

BIG problem is, there's no mechanical long term method withoug heavy use of progressions, and we know were they get us, deep in it.

The only way I've found is going with the flow and that can only be done on the fly by reacting to what's happening, which as Gizmo says it can't be simply put, you either see it or you don't.

For this great idea to fly,how about a Poll to see which method has the most interest.

Seeing how most of the members here are into finding systems and rules that lead to an inevitable success. I thought to create a very simple method combining a most basic trend characteristic with a stepped positive progression. The steps have five stages and the trend is the very simple sleeping dozen & sleeping column. The purpose was to generate interest in watching the flow as some members here have referred to it.

Go create G.....any method to improve my strike-rate with D/C,would be very welcome.

I have always used my instinct with timing to make a profit which at times can be very hard work.

Regards.

Dino.

It is intended for the best method with better chances in agreement with the opinion of the forum. The survey can be done the first week of the following month.

If communal manual testing is promising for the system maybe we can ask a programmer to make an automated software for it.

To expect that each published system is to be programmed is too much to ask. This way forum programmers have easier work. It only takes a moment of their time for the willing group. All voluntarily. Initial efforts made by the people interested in the promising system.

It can be a good way to benefit members here.

If this all goes ahead,is there a thought to how the method is played,re.H+R and or Continuos.

I can be tester. I have time to test interesting systems...

Hi Smoczoor.

Would you be a B+M Live Dealer tester like me,or an Online tester ?

BTW, I'm already working on a simulator for my collision experiment. I wanted to prove how often these quality collisions occur.

Would be amazing to one day see how you actually play Gizmo.


Any clues how these collisions look or where to look for that matter.


I know you most likely mention it all but will have to really study all your posts from all forums.

I think it's a great idea.  You need a boss who hands out assignments.  If you don't want an assignment, don't join the study group.

Quote from: dino246 on December 20, 2012, 08:23:58 PM
If this all goes ahead,is there a thought to how the method is played,re.H+R and or Continuos.

No difference. 

Quote from: Bayes on December 21, 2012, 09:10:18 AM
No difference. 

LOLOLOLOL......Mr D Advocate rides again!!