The Van Keelen Test

Every serious system player is interested in an objective method, giving him information whether his system has a certain value and is going to produce a net profit in the long run.

Beside the "Statistical Ecart" and other test options, with which we will deal in one of the next issues of Basics, "the Van Keelen Test" is a simple measuring procedure, with which the player can determine the chances of success or failure of his system.

The Van Keelen Test, which was developed decades ago, will give the player information about the value of a system, and requires the player to check his system over a certain number of placed bets before he begins the practical play.
This again has the advantage that possible losses only develop on paper and not in reality at the table!

The Van Keelen Test sets into relationship the net gain of a system to the number of placed bets, whereby  the minimum number of the placed bets checked for all chances must amount to at least 1000.

The units wagered must be of equal value; no progression is to be used! It is very important to point out that we speak here of placed bets, not spins!
To check a system over 1000 spins, has no meaning!

This testing method has the inestimable advantage that a system must be checked at least over 1000 placed bets, and on this basis a prediction about the value of the checked system is possible.

With 100000 *checked bets, even a negative result can be still another feature of a good system. Because if a system indicates a real superiority over ZERO, the possibility exists, that with an adapted progression continuous gains can be obtained.

Even-Money-Bets (Black/Red/Even/Odd/High/Low):
A system indicates a genuine superiority:
1. if after 1000 placed bets a gain of  more than 100 units was obtained!
2. if after 8000 placed bets a gain of more than 60 units was obtained!
3. if after 100000 placed bets a result  better than - 1000 was obtained*[/size][/font]

Well i test by hand and now will see if you can use flat betting or regression based upon trending for domination.
So i set towards 1000 to indicate something and if i obtain 100 you can PM me and i will give you the method.

2013 03 30 TRNG

WWLWWWWWWWWL
WWWL
WL
WL
L
WWWWLWWWWWL
L
WWWL
WWL
WWL
WWL
L
LLWLWLWWWWWWWL
L
L
WWL
L
WWLWWWWWWWL

+50
-24
= +26
74 placed bets
- - -

2012 03 29 TRNG

L
L
WWWL
WLWWWWL
WWLWWLWL
WWWWWWWWWL
WWLWLWWL
LWL
L
L
WWL
WWL
WWWWWWWL
L
LWL
WLWL
LWWLWWWWWWWWWWL
WLWWWWWL
WWLL
WWWWWWWWL

+70
-32
= +38
102 placed bets

2013 03 28 TRNG

L
L
WL
WWWWL
WLL
WL
LLL
WWWWWWWL
LWWLWL
WWWL
WWWWWWWWWLL
WWWWWWWWWWLWWLLL
WLWL
LWLWL
WWWL
LL
LLWL
WWWWWL

+54
-33
= +21
87 placed bets

-
As you can see, almost 300 placed bets and up 85 units, i start to think that trending for domination would be something to take a closer look into ...
-
This is a raw idea that we can fine tune in the end, if we reach 100 units with 1000 placed bets.
Then i might argue that domination compensate ...

Daft Punk - Technologic

- - -

2013 03 27

WLWWWWL
WWWWL
WL
L
LWWLWWLWWWWWWWLWWWWWL
L
WWWWWL
WWWWLLWWWWWWWLWWL
WWWWL
L
LWWWWWWWWWL
L
WWL
L
L
WWWL
WWWWL

+65
-25
+40
90 placed bets

-
Well i notice after taking a closer look that i have been curve fitting the results with out knowing it, so the results are not valid and back to the drawing table again ...
-
Cheers

At least you tried. Well done for that. 

I often wonder how much curve fitting goes on elsewhere on the forum because the testers are unaware they are doing it. Just thinking aloud...

This test is very basis of all my methods. Van Keleen had put a very realistic test and a system to be successful or even playable should comply with this test.