Our members are dedicated to PASSION and PURPOSE without drama!

Denzies Parlay

Started by Denzie, November 13, 2015, 06:42:10 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

ppkkint

Quote from: ales0690 on December 13, 2015, 03:13:40 PM
I think you are being mistaken by the graph. I've had only few big wins since i was targeting for the 256 units bet win

To play in a land casino with this method (min$10-max2000) Is it worth to risk 1000 units ?

Denzie

Quote from: ppkkint on December 13, 2015, 09:47:26 AM
Why only invest one time not two?

Sorry to bother you but can you give me some example?

Coz you jump in later. BB P B  P  BBBB this is a example of a normal play starting at 2u. As you can see ...you would jump in after 3 results so there only 1 opportunity to invest. BBB P BBBBB

Denzie

Quote from: ales0690 on December 13, 2015, 02:44:31 PM
hey, did some testing. doesn't look that good. got some solid profits for the first 7k spins but then can't get above 12k profit it just goes up and down for 8k spins...

was tested on a no zero roulette btw

Not so good? You still made a lot of profit without DD. But my results are a lot better than yours. But my DD is bigger too.

Are you sure you playing it correctly? (66 is really not much. Almost unbelievable )
RNG or live?

Denzie

Quote from: ppkkint on December 14, 2015, 08:55:17 AM
To play in a land casino with this method (min$10-max2000) Is it worth to risk 1000 units ?

Never play with money you can't afford to lose. And pls try at home first with smaller stakes. Build up your confidence.

Is it worth it ? I would say yes. But don't forget it takes time.
Even on the graph he goes to 11k in 15000spins. But normally it should be 50% more. Hope you can play at home though.


ales0690

Biggest dd is not 66 but 3916. And dd of 1000 units and more happen often.

It was RNG but no zero

ales0690

And yes i m pretty sure i was playing it correctly. Not saying it s a loser need more testing like 100 k spins. Sometimes u need few thousand spins to reach a New profit

Denzie

Quote from: ales0690 on December 14, 2015, 09:38:11 AM
Biggest dd is not 66 but 3916. And dd of 1000 units and more happen often.

It was RNG but no zero

ah ok it was RNG. But it still won .I'm surprised.
I always play live. But of course RNG is muuuuuch faster. For sure with the fast spins.

Would I trouble you If I ask to run some more? I'm curious how RNG ga do with this. (Just thinking out loud...0,10-1000...you can probably make a few 100 in hours...just click till your hand hurts)


ppkkint

Quote from: Denzie on December 14, 2015, 09:54:53 AM
ah ok it was RNG. But it still won .I'm surprised.
I always play live. But of course RNG is muuuuuch faster. For sure with the fast spins.

Would I trouble you If I ask to run some more? I'm curious how RNG ga do with this. (Just thinking out loud...0,10-1000...you can probably make a few 100 in hours...just click till your hand hurts)

If you don't mind asking how much was your biggest DD(how many shoes?) so far playing online?
I can only play in the land casino...wish I can play online


nOrMy2o0o

Hi All,

I finaly decide to build a tool to test this idea.
I have tested 32768 hands so far, the data is from Beat-the-wheel file posted in first page..
All test are made once stopping at 128, once at 256 and once at 512.
No Wingoal, no stoploss, no limited number of hands to play... just to see what is the best way to play it. I will try to tweak later with the above settings.

Here is what i got so far:

[attachimg=1]

At first look, i would go for the 512 big win, but as i said, this was simply playing hands after hands without any logic.

Will continu tomorrow the other half of the file... then i will chose the worst result and try to find a way to make it winning,

Cheers, Normy  8)




Denzie

I'm bit surprised again. These aren't so good. Of course we would use a stop loss but ....I didn't got that bad results yet.  Needs to remind me I need to be careful.

I'm curious for the rest.

nOrMy2o0o

I realize my yesterday test was wrong. i was testing from last to first results, so i erase every thing and re-start.

Here are final results just betting hand after hand, no logic at all:

[attachimg=1]

We can see from the stats below, that our strike rate is a bit better than inspected by our invests.

Now i will start testing with some realistic settings...  :glasses:



Stats:
Original Zumma 72 days at the tables; origin and authenticity is unknown;
it is however used as a base line for testing by many.

600 shoes, 41,698 decisions.

Streak Length = Occurrences = Percentage

1's = 10297 = 24.6% of all results
2's = 10296 = 24.6%
3's = 8232 = 19.7%
4's = 5148 = 12.3%
5's = 3220 = 7.7%
6's = 1932 = 4.6%
7's = 1127 = 2.7%
8's = 648 = 1.54%
9's = 360 = 0.86%
10 = 200  = 0.479%
11 = 110  = 0.264%
12 = 60
13 = 39
14 = 14
15 = 15

Denzie

It's starting to look better. Of course we use a stop loss of 1000u/1000hands

Good job Normand

Denzie

Final stats...I'm going in after a 100/150 virtual down draft . This wins a lot more than just ok  :thumbsup:

Denzie

About 2 hours play today... made 10 steps twice  :nod:

from100