Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Nickmsi

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 17
1
Bally's Blog / Re: Final thoughts/strategy on Roulette.
« on: November 14, 2018, 02:36:04 pm »
Great job Bally6354. 

It shows not only how to use Cycles of Dozens/Columns but also how to make a Binary function of Dozens/Columns by using
Same and Different.

Cheers

Nick

2
Hello Sumit, good to hear from you. 

And yes, both you and Glen are correct.

It is a negative progression that we first started with and that will fail in long run but what we want to  see if what defenses were necessary, ie, what stop loss would be the worse, what was the maximum bets, could a Trailing Profit Stop be employed, etc.

Now we are testing a positive progression as this system wins more than loses and we are still seeing how the defense is doing.

Cheers,

Nick

3
Thanks Patrick, that is just what I needed.

Cheers

Nick

4
Hi Patrik and Ozon,

Thanks for your insights Patrik and Ozon if you have the 46 Step Holloway progression could you post it here or send it to my
email nickmsi@aol.com.

I am finishing up my vacation with the grandsons and would love to test it with the Triplets.  I am sure I have it at home but it would save me some time.

Cheers

Nick

5
Hi Ozon,

I tested the Triplets with progression on 10,000 Single Zero spins and on 10,000 No Zero Spins, results per attached.

While both made a profit, the Single Zero was erratic and below profit for 3,000 spins or so.

Perhaps a different progression might help.

Cheers\\Nick

6
Hi Ozon,

With the flat betting for the 1st 100 spins we had a large bet of 33 and a drawdown of -226.

With the flat betting for 1st 50 spins we had a large bet of 55 and a drawdown of -695. Total profit was only 100 units more based on 100,000 spins.

With flat betting for 1st 25 spins, we had a large bet of 58 and a drawdown of -802.

We just did not think the extra profit worth the larger bets and larger bankroll but each to his own.

With flat betting for 1st 100 spins we anticipate a bankroll of 400 units.

Cheers

Nick

7
Hello jsintl

The progression we are using is as follows:

Flat bet for first 100 spins

If in profit after 100 spins, keep flat betting.  Always flat bet when in profit.

After 100 spins  if the total Losses greater than the total wins, increase bet +1 unit.

Keep bet the same for next 11 spins, then if in profit flat bet, else raise bet + 1 unit

Recheck for new bet every 11 spins.

We are currently winning 97/100 sessions.

The largest bet so far is 29 units.

The biggest drawdown so far is -304.

Total spins played = 68,117

Total Profit = 1,507 units

Average Profit/Session=15 units

Profit/spin=.022

Hope this helps.

Cheers
Nick


8
Hi Lugi

That is exactly what we are doing.  Playing on line with a bot in small sessions with a negative progression.

With the Triplets as the bet selection we have won 62 out of 63 sessions.

Cheers

Nick

9
Hi Lugi, rather than interfere with this thread I posted a response at:

https://betselection.cc/roulette-forum/use-mathstatistics-to-beat-roulettebaccarat-part-2/

Thanks

Nick

10
Hi Lugi,

This is a response to your post in

https://betselection.cc/baccarat-forum/can-anyone-figure-out-how-many-possible-outcomes-exist-in-a-shoe-of-baccarat/msg64459/#new

Yes, I couldn’t understand either how you could get an edge when you still get 4W and 4L.  I thought the exact thing and figured that since it has been 55 years since college math and dementia is slowing creeping up on me that it must be some kind of math voodoo or new math that I am not aware of.

They showed the bias when applying Fractions to the 3 spin/hand sets as follows:

OOO NB NB NB
OOX NB NB NB         Fractions
OXO NB L NB      L     0
OXX NB L NB      L     0
XOO NB W NB      W     1
XOX NB L NB      L     0
XXO NB W L      WL     .5
XXX NB W W      WW    1
                      2.5/6

If you can understand it then “ You’re a better man than I am, Gunga Din!”  But what I do understand is how to test systems.

I have a data file with 100,000 No Zero spins collected from BetVoyager.   So I tested both FOR and AGAINST to see if any difference.  I used a unit of 1 for both tests on the same data.

The FOR resulted in a loss of -358 units and the AGAINST had a profit of +173.

Having no more No Zero data or baccarat data I tested FOR and AGAINST with 10,000 Single Zero spins from a German Casino knowing that both systems will probably lose but I wanted to see which one loss less.

The FOR test resulted in a High of 11, Low of -229 and ended with -184.

The AGAINST resulted in a High of 39, Low 0f -159 and ended with -142.

Still not proof positive but a good indication.

Currently we are testing individual AGAINST sessions with Bet Voyager and with progression.  We have complete 43 sessions and have won 42.

Again, not proof positive but a stronger indication.  Testing continues.

Cheers
Nick

11
Hi Lugi,

This is a response to your post in

https://betselection.cc/baccarat-forum/can-anyone-figure-out-how-many-possible-outcomes-exist-in-a-shoe-of-baccarat/msg64459/#new

Yes, I couldn’t understand either how you could get an edge when you still get 4W and 4L.  I thought the exact thing and figured that since it has been 55 years since college math and dementia is slowing creeping up on me that it must be some kind of math voodoo or new math that I am not aware of.

They showed the bias when applying Fractions to the 3 spin/hand sets as follows:

OOO NB NB NB
OOX NB NB NB         Fractions
OXO NB L NB      L   0
OXX NB L NB      L   0
XOO NB W NB      W   1
XOX NB L NB      L   0
XXO NB W L      WL   .5
XXX NB W W      WW   1
                  2.5/6

If you can understand it then “ You’re a better man than I am, Gunga Din!”  But what I do understand is how to test systems.

I have a data file with 100,000 No Zero spins collected from BetVoyager.   So I tested both FOR and AGAINST to see if any difference.  I used a unit of 1 for both tests on the same data.

The FOR resulted in a loss of -358 units and the AGAINST had a profit of +173.

Having no more No Zero data or baccarat data I tested FOR and AGAINST with 10,000 Single Zero spins from a German Casino knowing that both systems will probably lose but I wanted to see which one loss less.

The FOR test resulted in a High of 11, Low of -229 and ended with -184.

The AGAINST resulted in a High of 39, Low 0f -159 and ended with -142.

Still not proof positive but a good indication.

Currently we are testing individual AGAINST sessions with Bet Voyager and with progression.  We have complete 43 sessions and have won 42.

Again, not proof positive but a stronger indication.  Testing continues.

Cheers
Nick

12
Hello Lugi  . . .

“everything and anything without exception resolves to a 50-50 state, PERIOD”

Yes, this is true when you are playing the Casino’s game of each single spin/hand.  They are indeed independent.

But if you play your own game of playing every 3 Spins/hands rather than each one, then you can change the 50% to 42%.

Spin # 1:  NO BET
Spin # 2:  FTL (Follow The Last)
Spin # 3:  FTL
End of Game

Spin # 4:  NO BET
Spin # 5:  FTL
Spin # 6:  FTL
End of Game
Etc.

Both Lisa Goldberg, PHD UC  Berkeley and Joshua Miller and Adam Sanjurjo in their dissertation  “Surprised by the Gambler's and Hot Hand Fallacies? A Truth in the Law of Small Numbers”  have concluded

“We prove that in a finite sequence of data that is generated by repeated realizations of a binary i.i.d. random variable, the expected proportion of successes, on those realizations that immediately follow a streak of successes, is strictly less than the underlying probability of success.”

I concur ancestry and heritage not appreciated until later in life.  I am off next week to appreciate my grandsons in Colorado.

Ciao

Nick


13
Hi Plolp
“Do you conclude that you have an advantage because you get +176 per 100000 spins?”

I concluded that we have an advantage because it was mathematically proven by PDF file attached earlier and by Professor Lisa Goldberg PHD as shown in her YouTube video.

Math doesn’t lie, or so they say.  But I needed to prove to myself that we actually do have an advantage so I set out to test it.

Since this is a binary event only 2 ways we could test this.

1.   Bet that Red follows a Red
2.   Bet that Black follows a Red.

Both of these are 50% chances when played consecutively.

But the test was for a Group of Spins, namely 3, hence my name Triplets.

So I flat bet 100,000 spins each way. 

Betting the first way- Red follows Red resulted in a net loss of -358

Betting the second way- Black follows Red resulted in a net gain of +178

Now I had my first validation that this Triplet theory has some merit.

Since then we have tested 100’s of different ways to play this I still see this method continually validating this theory.

It doesn’t win all the time but it wins more than anything I have seen to date.

Hi Katilla and Beat the Wheel

The Triplet method only wins when we bet it EXACTLY according to the theory, ie,

1st Spin-No Bet
2nd Spin-Bet OTL
3rd Spin-Bet OTL

No other way gives you the EDGE.

We are testing adding progressions and other streams, like the Fixed Doublet of RBRBRB.

Right now, we are finding that adding the Fixed Doublet of RBRBRB in front of the Triplet shows some good results.  In other words bet the RBRBRBRBRB for first 10 spins or first 100 spins and then bet the Triplet.

Cheers
Nick





14
Hi Beat The Wheel, we are concentrating 100% on getting the best combinations and progressions possible for the Triplet system that we are far behind in coding systems for others, like yourself.

Testing is time consuming so at this time we can report that we have several good results so far.

Let’s review.

The PHD’s and PDF mathematical reports shown earlier concluded:

“We prove that in a finite sequence of data that is generated by repeated realizations of a binary i.i.d.
random variable, the expected proportion of successes, on those realizations that immediately follow
a streak of successes, is strictly less than the underlying probability of success.”

This means that a “finite sequence of data” is 3 Spins/hands.

“binary random variables” is Red or Black, Banker or Player, Pass or Don’t Pass.

“immediately follow a streak of successes” is Red following Red, Player following Player etc.

is strictly less than the underlying probability of success” is the EDGE.

That’s the math of it. 

Our empirical data testing 100,000 spins confirms this EDGE.

What does it mean for playing.

A mechanical and simple to play system

Each of you can determine the best way for you to play, the best combination of systems and the best progressions to use or flat
betting.

Our priority is to find the best system to play for 1,000 to 2,000 spins/hands per day.  So far we can conclude that a combination of Doublets and Triplets is better than just the Triplets alone.

Cheers
Nick

15
We have shown that the Triplets have a bias of 2.5/6 instead of 3/6 but did the bias apply to following  the Hot Hand or Against them making the shots.

I was not sure, so I have tested both ways.

Earlier we showed how to bet FOR the Hot Hand to continue, ie, if they made a shot it would be followed by another basket, Red follow Red, Banker follows Banker etc.

Now let’s see what happens if we bet AGAINST the Hot Hand continuing, ie, we are betting that another basket will NOT be made. 
This means Black would follow a Red, Player would follow a Banker, etc.

Here are the rules for this 3 Spin/Hand Game betting AGAINST:

Spin # 1:  NO BET
Spin # 2:  If Spin #1 is Red Bet Black, If Spin # 1 is Black Bet Red
Spin # 3:  If Spin #2 is Red Bet Black, If Spin # 2 is Black Bet Red, End of Game
Spin # 4:  NO BET
Spin # 5:  If Spin #4 is Red Bet Black, If Spin # 4 is Black Bet Red
Spin # 6:  If Spin #5 is Red Bet Black, If Spin # 5 is Black Bet Red, End of Game
Etc.

I have attached 2 pictures of each result Flat Betting. 

Betting FOR the Hot Hand to continue won 5/10 sessions for a loss of -358 units.

Betting AGAINST the Hot Hand continuing won 6/10 for a profit of 173 units.

Based on the above results betting AGAINST the previous spin/hand in the 3 Step Triplet method has the EDGE.

Once again, the EDGE is small so we need to add a progression to make it playable.  More to come.


Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 17