Quote from: Mike on October 20, 2013, 07:37:41 PM
I know about variance and regression to the mean. Could you post exactly what you're doing please? and how long have you been playing this way? and with what results?

What I do in basic is to wait strong deviation (like z-score not before 3.0 ) and then enter in the play  betting for "correction". That "correction" doesn't mean that I expect that underrepresented events will catch the difference in the short term, nor I actually even need that.. Nothing but average hit rate or even less than that with MM I use. And that is what RTM says : if a variable is extreme on its first measurement, it will tend to be closer to the average on its second measurement...

But of course we must be aware to far end of a bell curve which is z score about 5.28, and when in roulette something can happen, it WILL happen. That is the law of probability. Those are so called "black swans" (named by Nasim Taleb) or very rare statistical events. You must be aware of them and have a plan in your MM how to dodge them when they visit you. And they will. I showed on forum some time ago one example where in 28 spins on EC-s I had only 2 wins.. Nasty one... But you know that after that it can't go much more against you , so on the same side it is good opportunity for nice blitzkrieg ambush

So MM is very important part. Even with so nice BS, you will see that isn't enough to have some predetermined (stiffed) progression or plan of staking... It is much wiser to start slowly and raise you stakes depending on the situation. The longer the sequence over which the deviation occurs, the safer it is to be more aggressive in your staking.

I haven't lost as yet and I started as I shown on forum.

And at the moment I use software tracker for that purpose, made by Bayes form this forum. But in the future I think I ll made one custom made for myself.

Hope this helps.

Drazen

 
Nice Drazen ...

I stopped YEARS ago trying to convince others regarding my VIEW, the best way to play roulette. These days? I could careless how others play, way too many other things going on in life. If someone wants to only play the red numbers because red is a pretty color.......let them.

Ken

mrJ


I agree. I don`t care if  someone  wants to play the GREEN(s) Happy Winnings !!!

What did Rhett Butler say to Scarlet O`Hara  : Frankly , ny  dear,  I don`t give a damn.

  HAPPY HALLOWEN>

Quote from: Turner on October 20, 2013, 08:18:01 PM


I do believe you can win more than you lose. I do.


Importantly, you have to forget making a living out of it.

Turner, you can't have it both ways. If you win more than you lose - CONSISTENTLY (ay, there's the rub), then why can't you build up your bankroll over time so that eventually, you ARE making a living at it?

Quote from: Mike on October 21, 2013, 07:25:38 AM

Turner, you can't have it both ways. If you win more than you lose - CONSISTENTLY (ay, there's the rub), then why can't you build up your bankroll over time so that eventually, you ARE making a living at it?

I think i answered that. You would expose more money and time to the HE.
I don't win consistently do I ?..because I lose some days..I just win more than I lose.

Turner,


It doesn't make sense. If in the long term you win more than you lose (taking account of the days when you lose), then you surely must be winning consistently. This means you must have an advantage, in which case playing more often won't expose you to the HE.


On the other hand, if you find you lose if you play more often, it means you don't have an advantage, and you can't be winning consistently - it's a temporary run of good luck.

Quote from: Drazen on October 20, 2013, 08:27:54 PM

I haven't lost as yet and I started as I shown on forum.

Drazen, I looked at your recent posts and couldn't see anything about how long you've been winning. Do you keep records of your play and can you give me a ROI and the number of actual bets you've made?


Or something like total staked x 100% / total returned

Quote from: Mike on October 21, 2013, 12:45:51 PM

Drazen, I looked at your recent posts and couldn't see anything about how long you've been winning. Do you keep records of your play and can you give me a ROI and the number of actual bets you've made?


Or something like total staked x 100% / total returned

Sorry Mike I don't record such stats. When I sit at the table I am only concentrated to win the session. Every session is for itself and every session is new and different fight.

If all that isn't enough, I can't nor have intention to prove you otherwise that long term winning on roulette is possible. Sorry.

Drazen

People

The house edge of 2.7%=an annoying mosquito.

Variance=a hungry alligator.


"When you're up to your butt in alligators, you don't swat the mosquitos."....Unk

Mike is correct on one thing:  If you constantly build your bankroll, you must be beating variance or, if you must, the house edge.  Now, how obvious is that.

I'm pretty much done with all this stink!

Sam

Quote from: Drazen on October 21, 2013, 12:52:09 PM
Sorry Mike I don't record such stats. When I sit at the table I am only concentrated to win the session. Every session is for itself and every session is new and different fight.

If all that isn't enough, I can't nor have intention to prove you otherwise that long term winning on roulette is possible. Sorry.

Drazen

some time ago i looking in your all posts too, but didn't found how you are playing.


Maybe you have a time/wish to show us more about your game style?

 
You can find one way among others at roulette cc ...
Bayes made a software based upon this methodology ...
The first one who spook about it and wrote about the original by Marigny is me ...

Quote from: Biagle on October 21, 2013, 02:18:05 PM

some time ago i looking in your all posts too, but didn't found how you are playing.


Maybe you have a time/wish to show us more about your game style?

My friend I tried to explain that  several times here and in the thread where I shown my progress when I started... I can't tell you do everytime exactly this and that and you ll be fine. Unfortunately it isn't so straight forward and simple.

I understand that some lazy non sayers are just waiting for someone who says that is winning consistently, but without some set in stone rules, to argue with him...

You must understand that maybe  "blur" of my explanation is coming from part where money management and progression(s) are. They are closely correlated with betselection and they are made on "the fly". Nothing too strict or set in stone. It is dynamic. They are made at the moment of playing depending on the situation with the bet. Most simply said it would be to bet more as deviation is more stretched or stronger.

As betselection I use "correction" or regression to the mean after strong deviations on different bet selections on outside EC-s (DBL, FTL, but series, singles and some other things when I recognize too). I use software tracker made by Bayes from this forum for that purpose (you have it on RF.cc. I gave the link somewhere in the past posts)

And that is pretty much it. Now thing is that one would need to spent enough time with this,  to see what are the worst scenarios and how to deal with them. That is the time and place where you need to search best suitable money management and practice your play.

For that purpose I was again using one Bays-es tool, which BTW I consider most brilliant piece of software for roulette that exists out there. It is called "sequence analyzer" (you have it on RF.cc too) with which you can actually  "create" and deviation on any bet selection you need and play as many spins after that as you want... So with that I was  practicing play countless times and Iearned how to row a boat on our random sea...

Regards

Drazen

Quote from: Drazen on October 21, 2013, 03:08:00 PM

I understand that some lazy non sayers are just waiting for someone who says that is winning consistently, but without some set in stone rules, to argue with him...

Another snide remark directed at me? When I actually hear a real argument instead of evasions and personal attacks, I'll leave it alone.


And FYI, I'm doing quite well sports betting, thanks.


Sam, you're the one creating the stink. Calm down, it's bad for your blood pressure.

Drazen,


What you have to realize is that no matter how you select your bets, it doesn't change the variance. You can wait for 12 standard deviations from the mean if you like, it won't make any difference to the standard deviation of your actual BETS, over time. Your apparent success to date is due solely to your progression.


I did some work on this myself. What I found was that no matter how you selected your bets, the pattern of wins and losses on the Even chances was exactly the same as Red vs Black or any similar bet. That is to say, half the time you get single wins, one quarter of the time you get two wins in a row, an eighth of the time you get 3 wins in a row etc, and exactly the same for losses and consecutive losses. Do you realize the implications of this discovery? it means it isn't possible to reduce the losing runs. If you could reduce your longest losing run to say, 7 in a row, you could clean up. But that, in turn, would mean that your expectation had changed (i.e.: the house edge would be reduced), which is not possible. So my simulations showed exactly what the theory predicted.


But no doubt you'll discover this for yourself, eventually. I really hope you don't lose too much in the meantime (sincerely)...