Hi Alrelax . . .

Glad to see that you have noticed the VDW math theorem.

I too held your same opinion for  a long time but am now convinced that playing Roulette or Baccarat with a NON RANDOM method like VDW is the way to go.

Look at it this way. Just as there is a math proof that shows 1 +1 = 2, there is a math proof that shows you will have a win within 9 hands/spins.

This is not speculation, this is fact.

You will ALWAYS have a winner in 9 hands.  No Doubt About It.

Give me any 9 hands (no ties) from any shoe anytime and I will show you a winner.

This is the premise for a Non Random way of playing.  Yes, the VDW does have some wrinkles but first you need to understand the power of ALWAYS PREDICTING A WINNER.

Cheers
Nick

Hi Ice789 . .

Sorry I don't understand your question, kindly elaborate?

For those baccarat players who find it hard to play this by completing an Arithmetic Progression (AP) I have attached a VDW Baccarat Tracker.

This tracker will automatically tell you what your next bet is based on the AP to be completed.

You don't have to do anything but enter "P" or "B" in Column A and if there is a bet it will show up in Column L.

Enjoy

Nick

Thanks Bayes and Sqzbox for your ideas and suggestions and yes there is a lot more that can be done with the VDW Theorem.

To finish up the current testing, if you recall the following results were for 30,000 spins.

Cycle Length   Profit/Loss(-)
3         +11
4         -86
5         -42
6         +75
7         +111
8         +91
9         +30   (Basic 9 Cycle Tracker)

I have tested for 250,000 spins the 7 Cycle (+111) vs 8 Cycle (+91) and have attached the results.

The picture on the Left is the 7 Cycle result and the one on the right is the 8 Cycle result.  I think we can forget the 7 Cycle method.

The 8 Cycle result is impressive.  We don't see often a Flat Bet method ending up in profit after 250,000 spins.

The final test to conclude the Cycle testing will be 250,000 spins for the 6 Cycle (+75) vs the 9 Cycle (+30).

Stay tuned . . .

Cheers

Nick

Hi Mark . . .

"My definition of 'catch' is to win within a series of bets"

I agree.  check out this thread to see how you can "catch" a win in 9 hands.

http://betselection.cc/roulette-forum/use-math-to-beat-roulettebaccarat/

Cheers
Nick

Here are final results of testing which cycle length Tracker generates the most profits.  All of these were tested for 30,000 spins/hands.

Cycle Length   Profit/Loss(-)
3         +11
4         -86
5         -42
6         +75
7         +111
8         +91
9         +30   (Basic 9 Cycle Tracker)
      
On all of these test we started a new cycle on a Win but continue to virtual bet to end of cycle on a Loss.

By stop betting at spins 6 or 7 or 8 we avoid getting the Mutual Bet.  This I think is the big reason for the Profits shown.

I now going to run longer sessions for the top 3 results to see how they perform.   

Cheers
Nick

Finished the 4 spin cycles and not finding any love here.

The 4 spin cycle a little better but neither worth writing home about.

Cheers

Nick

Finished the first test of 3 spin Cycle.

This means if you had PP bet P or BB bet B.  We know that this type method does not work and the results attached confirm you would lose all 3 sessions.

However, if you completed the 9 spin cycle the results attach show you would have won 2 out of the 3 sessions.  In other words, If you had PP and lost you would virtual bet the remaining 6 spins and then start a new cycle of 9.

Very interesting. 

Will now work on a test of 4 spin cycle and see if this trend continues.

Impressive results Big EZ . . .

Attached is results for 250,000 spins on Tracker # 3 which only bets the first 6 spins.

While it does not gives us the "Edge" it surely played positive for a long time.

As suggested by Big EZ I will test out all other spin counts to see if any better than this one.

Cheers

Nick

I noticed when testing that this system seems to win a lot in the earlier spins of the 9 spin cycle, like from 3-6 spins.

To test this theory I created VDW Tracker #3 which Bets R or B to complete the AP in spins 3 through 6.  No bets in spins 7-8-9 so this is now a 6 spin cycle.

The results are attached and they are much better. 

They show 2 out of the 3 sessions winning.

All this tells us at this point is we need a longer test to verify.

I am currently running a 250,000 spin test and will report the results tomorrow.

Cheers
Nick

Hi RG

"if this is so certain why not use martingale?"

This is not so certain yet.

It is simply a new and highly enjoyable way to play roulette/baccarat based on MATH.

Right now all we have is the BASIC VDW tracker/system.  We are like the starship Enterprise, exploring strange new worlds.

The reason we are not using progressions is that Flat Betting is the best way to determine if this Bet Selection can get an "Edge" and consistently win in the long run.

Our first simulations of this Basic VDW Tracker #1 C were not a consistent winner.

What I am looking for are other ideas how what we can test to improve.  One of the first things I thought of was to play only 1 Side.  Instead of having R or B complete the AP, just bet Red only.  I thought this would eliminate the Mutual Bet problem.

I created VDW Tracker #2 that only bets Red.  I have attached the results below and the results were worse that the Tracker # 1.

I am testing Tracker # 3 as I type this and will report the results in the next thread.

Cheers
Nick

I ran a simulation of this corrected Tracker #1 for 30,000 spins consisting of 3 sessions of 10,000 each.

The result is attached.

Not much to get excited about.

However I do notice that this Flat Bet system seems to have some recovery abilities.

OK, how do we improve this tracker which

1. Bets either Red and Black to complete an AP
2. No Bets on Mutual bets.

All suggestions welcomed and I will try and do simulations on each if possible.

Cheers
Nick

Yep, you were right, I messed up the code.

Try these 2 trackers and see if they work better.

Thanks again.

Nick

Thanks for the feedback from100 and plop

I will check the tracker as I use "copy and paste" a lot and often my senile fingers misfire.

Cheers

Nick

Hi All . .

Glad to see some of you trying out playing a Non Random game.

But remember, we are just exploring this concept right now.  This is not a finalized method but a solid one that needs to be improved so don't go betting Real Money just yet.

To make it easier to test this concept I have attached 2 more trackers, VDW Tracker #1 Manual and VDW Tracker # 1 RNG.

The VDW Tracker # 1 Manual allows you to enter the numbers spun, one at a time, into Column A row 5. As you enter each number the tracker will show you what to bet. 

The VDW Tracker # 1 RNG allows you to simply press Function Key F9 for another set of spins so you can quickly test the results.

This tracker is just ONE way of playing/testing the VDW theorem.  This tracker:

1.  Bets either Red or Black, whichever one will complete the AP for that spin.
2.  When it encounters a Mutual Bet (when both Red and Black can complete an AP on same spin) it does NOT Bet.

You do not have to play all 9 spins every time.  You only play until you have a winner or finished the 9 spins. When you have an winner, then clear the numbers in Row A and start again.

I will run some simulations on this Tracker #1 and report the results.

Hope this answers all your questions.

Cheers
Nick

Adulay , If I understand you correctly, we can only use an AP one time. Once it is used, there will never be another opportunity for it to be completed again. 

Garfield, there are only 9 spins in the cycle the first  spins do not get a bet because we need a minimum of 2 spins/hands before we can complete a 3 step AP.  All AP's are 3 steps.

The following is how each spin is bet in each cycle.  We are always trying to complete the same AP for the same spin.  Always Spin # 5 will try to complete 3-4-5 or 1-3-5 AP in every 9 spin cycle.  Spin # 6 of every 9 spin cycle will always try to complete 4-5-6 or 2-4-6 AP.

Spin              AP to be completed on next spin               
1      No Bet as No AP's to be completed on next spin            
2      No Bet as No AP's to be completed on next spin         
3      Bet that Spin 3 will complete a 1-2-3 AP, if not No Bet             
4      Bet that Spin 4 will complete a 2-3-4 AP   , if not No Bet      
5      Bet that Spin 5 will complete a 3-4-5 or a 1-3-5 AP, if not No Bet      
6      Bet that Spin 6 will complete a 4-5-6 or a 2-4-6 AP, if not No Bet   
7      Bet that Spin 7 will complete a 5-6-7  or 1-4-7 or 3-5-7 AP, if not No Bet
8      Bet that Spin 8 will complete a 6-7-8 or 2-5-8 or 4-6-8 AP, if not No Bet
9      Bet that Spin 9 will complete a 7-8-9 or 1-5-9 or 3-6-9 or 5-7-9 AP
Example:

If spin 1 is a P then no bet on spin 2 because you cannot complete a 3 step AP

If spin 2 is a P then you now have PP which is the 1-2 of a 1-2-3 AP so you would bet P for Spin 3 to complete the 1-2-3 AP of PPP.

Else

If spin 1 is a B then no bet on spin 2

If spin 2 is a B then you now have BB which is the 1-2 of a 1-2-3 AP so you would bet B for Spin 3 to complete the 1-2-3 AP of BBB.

You bet whichever side has the opportunity to complete the AP.

Cheers
Nick