This is nothing new, it's one of my old system, but with a new progression. Works very well. (both on RNG and Live)...
it's a single dozen bet.
trigger: wait for one dozen to repeat -bet for a third repeat once, then STOP
progression +1/-1, +1u for each loss, -1u for each win. Reset when reach a new high
fist test, played with 25u bets
more spins (continued)...
5u bets...
Hello little rookie Questions
How much Bank should have for a 1 chip bet?
How big bets (units) do you make in these big drops ...
When do you decide that the bet has become too high???
and stop playing... accept the loss
and announce the " session lost"
P.s.
Only once I played a negative progression and it was terrible ...
I lost everything ... what a surprise and now I'm afraid ...
Was along time since i played this one, thelaw reminded me. thx
(played with 5u bets)
Would love to have RX Code for that, should not be to hard to code it.
Anybody skilled please ???
Thx
R.
Quote from: ignatus on December 29, 2014, 05:46:44 PM
This is nothing new, it's one of my old system, but with a new progression. Works very well. (both on RNG and Live)...
it's a single dozen bet.
trigger: wait for one dozen to repeat -bet for a third repeat once, then STOP
progression +1/-1, +1u for each loss, -1u for each win. Reset when reach a new high
fist test, played with 25u bets
How far up the betting progression ladder is typical for you?
I have tested this bet selection n MM against the results (american roulette) that wizard of odds gave out before. I tested till 20k spins now and did not bust yet if using 20th stage progression (210units). The return rate is around 3.5% of the bankroll per hour using rapid roulette (45 spins per hour). :P
Can you be more specific on drawdowns, or what constitutes
a bust?
Thanks for running tests. In my own simple tests, once in a while it seems to
"get away" from you and I have observed some fairly long streaks where
all you got were the 2 in a row. Do you have any data on how long the losing
streaks were?
It seems funny, but I feel road blocks with this method, but everyone seems to like
it and do well.
I just finished a jaunt with the "grass roots" method, playing 2 dozen. And lost.
It is interesting because what you are looking for with this method is to select the
single dozen (2-1 and less likely). When I saw my grass roots data, and finding it
was not that difficult to get 3 losses, it occurs to me that I am actually picking
3 single dozen in a row. And that somehow that methodology was good at doing that.
Anyway, just some single dozen thoughts. Looking forward to your comments about
the rest.
I just opened my zumma book to page 228. And I looked at columbs.
Should be no difference?
It was the 8th set of double dozens that hit 3 in a row. That's a lot
to chase with a D'alenbert.
There was an idea I had, which I still hang onto for paradigms like this where
there are two sides, where I say to bet the last thing happening. Weather it's
EC, or dozens. So I would have continued to bet the two other dozen on
page 228 till I lost (A 1-2 bet) . and change to the triple (which is a 2-1 bet).
This progression is pretty aggressive..........other more conservative progs might work better in the long-run.
Someone with the RX would have to check how behaves in the long run so aggressive progression, with reset after new high and stop limit of -210 units.
I think that it will not be the winner, in long run, but who knows.
We have seen on the graph, that Martngale for5 numbers supposedly brings profit.
Mayby this progression can also give you some profit.
There is another layer of defense required. An intermediate stop loss?
One thing that is pretty cool is that as you walk up the ladder, you make your
loss up in one bet (as opposed to equal wins and losses on EC.
1 -1 +2 win
2 -3 +3 win
3 -6 +3 win
4 -10 +2 win
5 -15 0 (even) win.
Stop betting after so many losses and wait for a virtual win.
Or maybe spread out the bets. 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5.
Either way it's pretty good. But I still see a lot of just double
dozens so playing flat on the other two dozen is good.
No hard testing. Soft testing. But it is attractive.
My first concern is.......it's too simple. If this worked long-term, then someone would be playing it.
Having said that, the charts are impressive over thousands of spins.
It looks like a 500 unit dd would be safe given these charts, so maybe each game is to +500/-500 units........attempting to win 2 of 3 games.
Somebody MIGH be playing it. Like Ignatius...
The problem that I have is I don't see the drawdowns that I experienced
in actual testing. Don't really happen that often, but you see them.
Like I said, maybe some protection. I've seen NAthan say "3 losses in a row and we're out".
That kind of methodology.
When trading online the idea is to have a stop loss and let your profits run.
Quote from: mogul397 on June 29, 2016, 12:26:16 AM
Somebody MIGH be playing it. Like Ignatius...
The problem that I have is I don't see the drawdowns that I experienced
in actual testing. Don't really happen that often, but you see them.
Like I said, maybe some protection. I've seen NAthan say "3 losses in a row and we're out".
That kind of methodology.
When trading online the idea is to have a stop loss and let your profits run.
The largest dd I see on the above testing charts would be around 120 units deep (not sure the actual count of progression).
What dds did you see that concerned you?
Thanks! :)
Quote from: TheLaw on June 29, 2016, 12:52:09 AM
The largest dd I see on the above testing charts would be around 120 units deep (not sure the actual count of progression).
What dds did you see that concerned you?
Thanks! :)
I did not closely examine the charts presented for that. Although since you called it
to my attention they exceed my wildest expectations.
My concern was with my own testing in zumma. I didn't write down the page, but
once or twice the double dozens just happened in a row, maybe toward 10+ in a row.
My tolerance for a betting progression like that is around 7. Or 10. Once it goes there,
you have to have the bank, confidence, and patience that you will come back. That
was the source of my concern. But the dips in the chart are surely a concern.
So to separate and start over a bit I guess you need to define what "never lost" means.
What that means in terms of bank and betting level. I chose a simpler, more wimpy
way to look at it. I guess my own internal brake kicks on. Possible a brake that would
prevent me from ever logically playing and winning. Or I would have to disarm that
brake and go with the correct set of parameters of betting level and bank.
Having said that, I already mentioned stuff about playing the other side after losses. It also
seems prudent common sense what Nathan said about not chasing losses past 3. And I mentioned
the notion of "stop loss". A valid tool.
Having said that, if you are losing, then bet the opposite way, and you will win. OR stop losing.
During those loss spikes in the graph.
I'm trying to develop a pattern of thought her.
I'll be working on this over the next few days to produce a W/L record. Perhaps that will help with progression selection.
The main downside is that you're left sitting at the table without betting for stretches at a time.......not a great scenario, but can be worked around.
9000 spins is not necessarily bulletproof..........but pretty impressive for such a simple method.
Great work as always Ignatus!!! 8)
I don't look at it like 9000 spins or bullet proof. But in case you missed my latest
experience with grass roots, on paper or real, I'd like to know I could experience
a win (like 26 units) before I lost the 1,3,9. Something I can wrap my head around.
And I lost TWICE by the 5th set. Once on paper and once real. (Which, BTW, has me
intrigued how randomly I can pick 3 single dozens in a row to lose 3 double dozen in
a row)
Page 229 in zumma. Haven't looked at it yet.
2
1
2
1
3
3
3 3
1
1 2
3
1
3
3
3 3
3
2
1
3
1
2
3
0
1
3
1
2
3
2
1
0
1
2
2 2
1
2
3
2
3
2
1
1 2
2
0
3
2
2 3
2
1
1 2
2
2 2
3
3 2
1
1
1 3
3
2
2
2 3
Page 230
3
3 2
2
1
2
3
3 2
1
3
2
1
3
1
2
1
1
1 3
2
1
3
2
2
2 3
2
3
3 2
1
1 2
2
1
1 2
3
1
0
1
1 3
1
1
1
2
2 2
1
2
3
1
2
2 2
1
2
2 2
1
1 2
And awful lot of doubles. And statistically I think it is more likely for
a double. In the case of dozens, like 2-1 instead of even on EC's.
So yeah, you're laying odds. But if you don't have a crazy progression,
it doesn't get out of control. Even though a 1.3.9 (or even 27) progression
Weisbaden Table #2 06.01.2016 #289 Spins
WWWLWLWLLWLLLLWLWLLLLLWLLLLWWLLLLLWLLLWLLLLLWLLLLWWWLWLLWLLW (20/41)
Total : +58
DD : -50
Highest Bet : 15 units
.......not for the faint of heart........but recovery is incredibly fast.
Sitting at a table, you get a bet every 5 spins on average........double if you play columns.
Weisbaden Table #1 01.06.2016 #185 Spins
LLLLWWLLWLLWLLLLLWWLLLLWWWLLWLLLWLLW (12/24)
Total : +39
DD : -01
Highest Bet : 06
I have to process this. But good work law and thanks. I think that you
quite quickly demonstrate the quick chance for a swing. Maybe I need
to think more aggressive.
If nothing else it is good to put out nose to the grindstone together. Just
checking my mail at bed time. Sure I will be dreaming about this.
Thanks
Maybe I should process the data that I posted.
Quote from: mogul397 on June 29, 2016, 03:43:43 PM
I don't look at it like 9000 spins or bullet proof. But in case you missed my latest
experience with grass roots, on paper or real, I'd like to know I could experience
a win (like 26 units) before I lost the 1,3,9. Something I can wrap my head around.
And I lost TWICE by the 5th set. Once on paper and once real. (Which, BTW, has me
intrigued how randomly I can pick 3 single dozens in a row to lose 3 double dozen in
a row)
Page 229 in zumma. Haven't looked at it yet.
2
1
2
1
3
3
3 3
1
1 2
3
1
3
3
3 3
3
2
1
3
1
2
3
0
1
3
1
2
3
2
1
0
1
2
2 2
1
2
3
2
3
2
1
1 2
2
0
3
2
2 3
2
1
1 2
2
2 2
3
3 2
1
1
1 3
3
2
2
2 3
Page 230
3
3 2
2
1
2
3
3 2
1
3
2
1
3
1
2
1
1
1 3
2
1
3
2
2
2 3
2
3
3 2
1
1 2
2
1
1 2
3
1
0
1
1 3
1
1
1
2
2 2
1
2
3
1
2
2 2
1
2
2 2
1
1 2
And awful lot of doubles. And statistically I think it is more likely for
a double. In the case of dozens, like 2-1 instead of even on EC's.
So yeah, you're laying odds. But if you don't have a crazy progression,
it doesn't get out of control. Even though a 1.3.9 (or even 27) progression
OK, so I looked at my data above. Pg 230 ended with 4 doubles.
And I continued to page 231. Without typing it out, I see 6 more doubles
before there is a triple. So that is 10. That's a lot, and is a specific topic to address.
I think we have the issue cornered and defined.
Which is why I advocate switching sides at some point until the tide turns.
As it happens, on page 231, after the first triple, there are a couple more.
So my question is, do we play the method with a large bankroll and let it work
out, or is it prudent to have a stop gap of some kind?
In your examples, law, I don't think I see any terrible streaks of losses that created
your "not for the faint of heart" run. But it also seems true that it didn't take much
to find it. Seems like it turned up pretty quick in the examples.
Which is what I refer to a bit in my "wallpaper test".
But I will also admit that I agree and love how quick it recovers with 2-1 payouts.
Thoughts?
Whatever I think, I can't ignore the fact that everyone says this thing hasn't lost.
I also can't ignore how cool it does recover.
So I think I need an attitude adjustment, and am trying to find it.
My working theory about this method is that there will be large draw-downs, but other more conservative methods have issues as well, so best strategy is to look to win 2 out of 3 games. This allows for nasty sequences from time-to-time without much risk.
At this point the magic number appears to be #200 units win or lose. This allows for bets up to 20 units starting @ 1 unit base.
In the charts provided by Ignatus, 200 units would cover the dd easily.
Still working on this.........will post more W/L records soon.
Scrapping this bet selection..........too many misses already on just 3rd game tested.....bets up to 22 units
#177 spins
LLLLLWWLLLLWLLLLLLLWLLLLWLLLWLWLLLLLLLLL
The following is a W/L from Grassroots 1-2-3 using Table #1 from 1.06.16 #185 spins
Note the long runs of wins.........perhaps a parlay?
WWWWLLWLWWLLLLWWWWWLLWWWWWWWLWLLLWWWLWWWWWWWLWLWWWWWWLLWLWWWWLWWLWWWLLWWLWLLLWLWLWWWLWWWWWLWWWWWWWWWWWLWWWW
WWWWLWWWWWLLWWLLWLLWLLWWWLWWWWWLWWWLLWWWWWLLLWWLWLWWWWLWWLWWWLWWWWWLWWWWWLWLWW
I always thought it would be worths while to use the star style bucking up against the roulettes dozen. A single win pay off at 2 to 1 allow you capture the profit and re-set, hey hey.
Quote from: TheLaw on June 30, 2016, 11:44:31 PM
The following is a W/L from Grassroots 1-2-3 using Table #1 from 1.06.16 #185 spins
Note the long runs of wins.........perhaps a parlay?
WWWWLLWLWWLLLLWWWWWLLWWWWWWWLWLLLWWWLWWWWWWWLWLWWWWWWLLWLWWWWLWWLWWWLLWWLWLLLWLWLWWWLWWWWWLWWWWWWWWWWWLWWWW
WWWWLWWWWWLLWWLLWLLWLLWWWLWWWWWLWWWLLWWWWWLLLWWLWLWWWWLWWLWWWLWWWWWLWWWWWLWLWW
Just went to Plainridge quick. Here are my results. I was seeing a lot of doubles
and I played them. Put $10 in and took out $20. Met a friend playing slots and he
lost $20.
17B 2 B
6B 1 C
10B 1 2 A
15B 2 C
00
13B 2 A
17B 2 3 B
7R 1 A
3R 1 2 C
13B 2 A
14R 2 2 B
4B 1 A
28B 3 A 2
33B 3 2 C
13B 2 A
35B 3 B
9R 1 C
22B 2 A
13B 2 2 A 2
5R 1 B
27R 3 C
31B 3 2 A
16R 2 A 2
36R 3 C
26B 3 2 B
16R 2 A
18R 2 2 C
12R 1 C 2
31B 3 A
4B 1 A
19R 2 A 3
14R 2 2 A
1R 1 A
19R 2 A
14R 2 B
14R 2 3 B 2
12R 1 C
17B 2 B
3R 1 C
15B 2 C 2
29B 3 B
20B 2 B
00
12 2's and 3 3's. Just flat betting was OK.
Played the other two. I wasn't aggressive. Just
won my $10 while watching.
OK, So I stopped by yesterday. I attached my session.
I sat down and wrote the marquis data just to get some data and
caught up about at the top of the 2nd columb.
So I put my $20 in and figured I'd try to get some double hits.
double dozen $5 bets. Look at the 1st columb. All doubles.
Wouldn't you know, I bet the ONLY TWO that went over 2 dozen,
and lost my $20. That's all I brought.
So I continued to track. But the double dozen thing worked out
wonderfully.
What do you think Law? OR anyone else? Did everyone run off the deck
like a sinking ship?
I can't explain how going for 3 dozen after two has survived this long. But the
logic is backwards. Especially where you have a lay situation.
Isn't it funny how EC's can go on consistently for many streaks, but the
double dozen can't? And it is for the matter of 6 numbers. Seems like
if you could isolate which double street that is, you could do something with it.
I don't think you can. But what a dramatic change in results. For the
matter of a double street.
I stopped testing for two main reasons :
1) Wait time between bets.......sometimes 10+ spins at a time
2) Saw the progression get out of control very quickly
Perhaps a more conservative progression could save this, but the lack of betting opportunities means it will always be flawed.
Ignatus has several other methods that use "rare events" to create profit or loss very quickly. Approaching it from a mm standpoint, those methods would be more effective and efficient using a 2 out of 3 games won strategy.
Having said that..........method still looks pretty solid with a large bankroll for each session, and time to wait it out. My worst was as high as +20 units bet, so a safe session bankroll would need to be 1000 units in my opinion. Keep in mind that in my last test it went downhill for over 100 spins.........so 2+hrs at a table waiting for recovery.
it's a pretty decent system and works even better on columns
have fun
Quote from: TheLaw on July 02, 2016, 01:44:28 PM
I stopped testing for two main reasons :
1) Wait time between bets.......sometimes 10+ spins at a time
2) Saw the progression get out of control very quickly
Perhaps a more conservative progression could save this, but the lack of betting opportunities means it will always be flawed.
Ignatus has several other methods that use "rare events" to create profit or loss very quickly. Approaching it from a mm standpoint, those methods would be more effective and efficient using a 2 out of 3 games won strategy.
Having said that..........method still looks pretty solid with a large bankroll for each session, and time to wait it out. My worst was as high as +20 units bet, so a safe session bankroll would need to be 1000 units in my opinion. Keep in mind that in my last test it went downhill for over 100 spins.........so 2+hrs at a table waiting for recovery.
Well your results are interesting. But so are mine. I'm glad you dredged out the
results that you did. To me, it always seemed curious about Ignatus, that all he posted was
charts. Pretty good drawdowns. But in some peoples mind, there is no meat on the bone or
skin in the game.
That's what you added. But I don't see a reason to throw out the baby with the bathwater.
Did you look at my latest (actual) run? Tells the same thing. Way more doubles than
greater than. I think it still has hope. All my results actually win, flat betting. And when
you play both you get better amounts of spins.
Basically your work seein up to 20 units bet confirms what I have been thinking.
I'd like a forthright answer from Ignatius about how it was actually working.
Keep plugging. Don't shut your mind of to
a) betting for doubles and
b) possibly switching sides.
B is a general concept that I think could be useful.
Quote from: Tomla on July 02, 2016, 04:34:33 PM
it's a pretty decent system and works even better on columns
have fun
What has your playing experience been with it? Doesn't take long
to generate a long list of losses looking for triples.
What is it about columns that might make it better?
More is needed than a general comment. We did tests and work on this.
And it's the way of people who post opinions with no work that make
threads stop
Quote from: mogul397 on July 02, 2016, 07:32:56 PM
Well your results are interesting. But so are mine. I'm glad you dredged out the
results that you did. To me, it always seemed curious about Ignatus, that all he posted was
charts. Pretty good drawdowns. But in some peoples mind, there is no meat on the bone or
skin in the game.
That's what you added. But I don't see a reason to throw out the baby with the bathwater.
Did you look at my latest (actual) run? Tells the same thing. Way more doubles than
greater than. I think it still has hope. All my results actually win, flat betting. And when
you play both you get better amounts of spins.
Basically your work seein up to 20 units bet confirms what I have been thinking.
I'd like a forthright answer from Ignatius about how it was actually working.
Keep plugging. Don't shut your mind of to
a) betting for doubles and
b) possibly switching sides.
B is a general concept that I think could be useful.
I think that Ignatus just enjoys the thrill of the hunt.
Betting against 2 turning to 3 dozens means betting 2 dozens......which does not have the same recovery ability.
Again, the pace is really what kills the method......unless we could create tons of dozen bets with different numbers.
The 2 dozen bet just seems like low-hanging fruit that would have been seen long ago.
Also interesting to note that the 2 and 3+ dozens almost rarely ever show back to back:
LLLLWWLLWLLWLLLLLWWLLLLWWWLLWLLLWLLW (W=3+/L=2)
222233223223222223322223332232223223
232323232323232323232323232323232323 (2 and 3 back to back)
s s ss ss s s ss s ss s s ss (where 2 and 3 back to back occur)
being called the thread stopper by the thread killer is quite an honor Mogul----thanks
Quote from: Tomla on July 02, 2016, 08:16:05 PM
being called the thread stopper by the thread killer is quite an honor Mogul----thanks
Didn't hand that title out yet.
Just referring to the methodology. "street behavior".
Not roulette street. Don't waste my time. If my title
precedes me, then you should just go. Not talk in riddles.
Or stay and talk about roulette.
Quote from: TheLaw on July 02, 2016, 08:01:27 PM
I think that Ignatus just enjoys the thrill of the hunt.
Betting against 2 turning to 3 dozens means betting 2 dozens......which does not have the same recovery ability.
Again, the pace is really what kills the method......unless we could create tons of dozen bets with different numbers.
The 2 dozen bet just seems like low-hanging fruit that would have been seen long ago.
Also interesting to note that the 2 and 3+ dozens almost rarely ever show back to back:
LLLLWWLLWLLWLLLLLWWLLLLWWWLLWLLLWLLW (W=3+/L=2)
222233223223222223322223332232223223
232323232323232323232323232323232323 (2 and 3 back to back)
s s ss ss s s ss s ss s s ss (where 2 and 3 back to back occur)
The low hanging fruit was addressed as grassroots on another forum for
120 pages. And I tried for real and lost.
So I don't see any3 triples in a row. But this goes to show that anything
can happen. All I mean is that this holds a lot more promise.
I don't see any triple 3,s in a row. OR you could play 1,3 and eat the
8 units from time to time.
You've got to do SOMETHING. And they all are like, as you say, Ignatius
picking unlikely situations.