+ Register

[BrenoGarcia]

Breno.. .if you mean what Im doing....I don't think its possible to code.....Im not always sure what or which to bet..or leave it etc. it's a bit gut feeling at times

Ok, Turner, It's all right!

[klw]

I apologise Turner for this digression of your thread.

Cheers.

[Chrisbis]

I have removed some threads that were not in line with the original Topic, and taking a tangent.


No one needs to be banned/muted Klw


Lets all keep to the Topic shall we.
Cheers
Chris

(Noted in Moderator Lounge....)

[Turner]

Chris.....not only did you remove KLWs comment off topic, you removed what he said on topic, which I wanted to read.


He talked of testing on DB


that's why I said Interesting.....thanks...I'll take a closer look on the laptop tonight

[Chrisbis]

@Turner


I have restored the Topic you mentioned........but I didn't delete that one!
Its halloween, must be the Ghosts and Ghoulies........ we all have to be aware tonight eh.
[smiley]aes/confused.png[/smiley]


And, here it is again, in case it gets 'guised' again tonight!!:-
...
Thanks for the reply Turner -- I've just done a quick 250 live spin analysis of Dublin bet and looked for an even chance of 3 x series of 2 or more hits e.g using red as an example,RR B RRRR BB RRR B
so here we have 3 series of 2 or more reds ( 2,4,3 ) and then bet for a single red to appear ( so we would wait for the next red to appear and then bet black )
Results for the 20 even chances were + 13 units , however , + 11 units came from betting on the " cold " partner alone and only + 2 units from the " hot " partner of the even chances.

This makes sense as the hot partner will have more hits of 3 and above and vice versa.
This is 18 wins and 7 losses , a 72% strike rate for an even chance, of course its only a small sample and the problem lies in determining which is the hot and which is the cold partner of the even chance, maybe someone with more experience could assist in helping identifying this , maybe a checkmark at 10 , 20 spins to determine hot or cold partner ?
Maybe this filter will help with your profitability Turner. Cheers. Klw

[Turner]

Cheers matey

[BrenoGarcia]

   Hi Everyone,
              My apologies I have not had much time in the last couple of days. I did write a long reply but it seems to have gone missing.
     My method is completely different to Turners. I bet each of the 20 EC possibilities separately, not in oppossing pairs. I bet in 40 spin sessions. The 1st 3 or 4 spins are are to track the flow of the wheel and reset my count. I then bet every spin after assessing whether the wheel will repeat the last 3 'lines to show, or the 3 that did not show.
    @ Biagle,
        I use use a number of progressions, but all are short. There is no point in chasing more than a few spins. I tend to rely on the 1st and sometimes the 2nd bet to show a profit the others merely break even or recover part of the initial loss. I regard any LOSS that is less than that produced by a flat bet series is a WIN. EG  With a series 1-1-2-3-5-9, a win at bet 5 would show a LOSS of 2u. A flat bet series 1-1-1-1-1 would show a LOSS of 3u. Therefor if the session variance is small this is a possitive result.
     While the loss of a full progression involves a large loss, the 1st bet should win better than 47% of the time. the 2nd & 3rd bets break even. that's 85% of all bets. Also if the 3 or 4 tracking spins are considered, the percentages are much better than that. I usually play this type of progression if I only expect to spend a short time at the table.
      With more time available a stepped progression works well.
  1]  1
  2]  2 
  3]  3
    This is a martingale series any win = EOS

4]  3  Total cost 9
  5]  3  Total cost 12
  6]  4  Total cost 16
    This is a recovery series. Each step becomes a flat bet until the line is clear, or the bet is lost. EG 3/9 is lost, bet 3/12 lost, bet 4/16 win, bet 4/12 win, bet 4/8 win =  EOS.
    Note 5 losses have been cancelled by 3 wins.

7]  4/20
  8]  5/26  The same technique is used. Each bet becomes flat until it is lost.
  9]  5/30  Each win will cancel approx 2 losses.

10]  6/36
11]  6/42  Same technique.
12]  7/49

13]  7/56
14]  8/64
15]  8/72

16]  9/81
17]  9/90     This series can be carried on 'ad infinitum' I have never reached
18]  10/100  this level as I start looking for a way to abort when the bet          reaches 5. With a few wins along the way, the 2/1 advantage is being lost. It's better to take a small loss and get back to the proftable 1st step.

    Hope this helps,
               Regards          Harry

Can anyone explain this progression HarryJ placed?
6]  4  Total cost 16 - How so?

[HarryJ]

hi BrenoGarcia,
         The 1st 3 bets are a martingale, any win = EOS. Total cost if lost 6 units. I normally look for a new target.
      Bet 4] is a flat bet series. Bet 3 units(cost 6+3 = 9). If this wins, pick up 6 units leaving a balance of 3. A 2nd bet of 3 units is made giving a total of 6. If this wins the line is clear. If this 2nd bet loses another 3 unit bet is made bringing the cost back to 9. If this bet is lost, the total loss is now 9 and we move to bet 5]

    5] Bet 3 total cost 12. Another flat bet series starts, continue to bet 3 units until the line is clear or 12 units have been lost. Then move to Bet 6].

  6] 4 total cost 16 (12+4). Once again a series of flat bets of 4 units is played until the line is clear or 16 units have been lost. I normally look for a new target after each 3 step stage, but you can move straight to bet 7]

  7] 4/20 eg bet 4 units total cost 20. Once again a flat bet series continues until the line is clear or the total loss is 20.
  8] 5/25,  Same technique.
  9] 5/30   same technique.

    If this 3 step stage is lost, bet 10] starts 6/36. If you count the number of loses required to reach each stage you will see that the number of wins required to clear the line is approximately 1/2. Win/lose sequences within the stages will eventually erode the 2/1 ratio. This is why once the bet reaches stage 4 (10] 6/36) I start looking for a chance to abort, even if it means taking a small loss.

   I don't know how to explain it clearer than this. Only bets 1 and 2 in the 1st martingale stage win. The rest of the bets are part of a recovery technique designed to clear the line with a minimum of risk, yet give a 2/1 advantage.

            Regards          Harry

[Buffster]

HarryJ


If your first three bets are Marty ... should it not be 1,2,4 and not 1,2,3


Are you betting EC or Dozens (2/1)


B

[BrenoGarcia]

hi BrenoGarcia,
         The 1st 3 bets are a martingale, any win = EOS. Total cost if lost 6 units. I normally look for a new target.
      Bet 4] is a flat bet series. Bet 3 units(cost 6+3 = 9). If this wins, pick up 6 units leaving a balance of 3. A 2nd bet of 3 units is made giving a total of 6. If this wins the line is clear. If this 2nd bet loses another 3 unit bet is made bringing the cost back to 9. If this bet is lost, the total loss is now 9 and we move to bet 5]

    5] Bet 3 total cost 12. Another flat bet series starts, continue to bet 3 units until the line is clear or 12 units have been lost. Then move to Bet 6].

  6] 4 total cost 16 (12+4). Once again a series of flat bets of 4 units is played until the line is clear or 16 units have been lost. I normally look for a new target after each 3 step stage, but you can move straight to bet 7]

  7] 4/20 eg bet 4 units total cost 20. Once again a flat bet series continues until the line is clear or the total loss is 20.
  8] 5/25,  Same technique.
  9] 5/30   same technique.

    If this 3 step stage is lost, bet 10] starts 6/36. If you count the number of loses required to reach each stage you will see that the number of wins required to clear the line is approximately 1/2. Win/lose sequences within the stages will eventually erode the 2/1 ratio. This is why once the bet reaches stage 4 (10] 6/36) I start looking for a chance to abort, even if it means taking a small loss.

   I don't know how to explain it clearer than this. Only bets 1 and 2 in the 1st martingale stage win. The rest of the bets are part of a recovery technique designed to clear the line with a minimum of risk, yet give a 2/1 advantage.

            Regards          Harry

HarryJ, you said that the total cost of the first 3 bets is 6 units, but how? You are not betting on 3 lines? This progression is not for betting on all 3 lines of the trend?

[HarryJ]

  Heck you guys are picky, it's all a matter of semantics or nomenclature.

1] A full marty is 1-2-4-8-16 etc doubling at each step. However it is common to tweak a marty to reduce the doubling effect. A progression remains a marty if it ends after a single win. Even if the result is breakeven or a small loss. By this definition 1-1-2-4 is a marty, as is 1-2-3-5. the sacrifice is well worth the saving in bankroll along the way!!

2] I am betting EC's made up of 3 lines. This is a single bet so each unit is divided into 3 and 1/3 is placed on each line. You can say that I am betting 3 units, but it is easier to calculate if you just specify the amount bet on each line.
      The important thing is 3 lines are bet each time. never 2 or 4. So wins and loses are always 3 times the amount specified.

3] The 2/1 effect is acheived in the slight rise in the flat bet series. Eg.
     Even ignoring any virtual bets that may form the trigger. After the 1st 3 bets have lost, the 3/9w  3/6w series cancels the loss with 2 wins. If 3/9 and 3/12 lose 4/16w 4/12w 4/8w  will cancel 5 loses with 3 wins.
      I know it's not quite 2/1, but it's a lot better than 1/1. The point is that almost 90% of the time you will not need the recovery tecnique. When you do, just tough it out in the knowledge you're not going to break the bank. You can handle a variation of 18 points with 100 units(oops sorry 300 units). You will need 10 wins. Very acheivable.
       
            Keep well          Harry

[BrenoGarcia]

  Heck you guys are picky, it's all a matter of semantics or nomenclature. 1] A full marty is 1-2-4-8-16 etc doubling at each step. However it is common to tweak a marty to reduce the doubling effect. A progression remains a marty if it ends after a single win. Even if the result is breakeven or a small loss. By this definition 1-1-2-4 is a marty, as is 1-2-3-5. the sacrifice is well worth the saving in bankroll along the way!! 2] I am betting EC's made up of 3 lines. This is a single bet so each unit is divided into 3 and 1/3 is placed on each line. You can say that I am betting 3 units, but it is easier to calculate if you just specify the amount bet on each line.      The important thing is 3 lines are bet each time. never 2 or 4. So wins and loses are always 3 times the amount specified.3] The 2/1 effect is acheived in the slight rise in the flat bet series. Eg.     Even ignoring any virtual bets that may form the trigger. After the 1st 3 bets have lost, the 3/9w  3/6w series cancels the loss with 2 wins. If 3/9 and 3/12 lose 4/16w 4/12w 4/8w  will cancel 5 loses with 3 wins.      I know it's not quite 2/1, but it's a lot better than 1/1. The point is that almost 90% of the time you will not need the recovery tecnique. When you do, just tough it out in the knowledge you're not going to break the bank. You can handle a variation of 18 points with 100 units(oops sorry 300 units). You will need 10 wins. Very acheivable.                   Keep well          Harry

Okay, HarryJ, now cleared all! 


great explanation...


Thanks for sharing your game strategy. Experienced players like you, helps us a lot to understand the game better.

[HarryJ]

   Then important thing to remember is that the casino has set up the game to work for them. Play to their rules and you are bound to lose. You must impose your own.
        I don't mean cheat!!

        Get out of the box and ambush them!!

   Hit and run!!  Make them accept bets no person in their right mind would consider!!   Never, NEVER, expose your whole bankroll to their greedy clutches.

                  HarryJ

[Turner]

Im very interested in Lines as EC's. 146 vs 235 is mathematically identical to R vs B or H vs L


Therefor, there is no advantage other than the fact that there are more opportunities. Say I see a series of 3 and consider a series of 2 or 1 is more likely from a maths point of view, I could play for a change. I could wait 15 spins to see a series of 3 (and, of course, see RRR BBB RRR BBB RRR)
However, there will always be a series of 3 somewhere in the 10 Lines as EC's withing the last 3,4,5,6 spins


Looking at Harry J's nice posts, he makes a nice way to see these without charting, but I can see the opposite too (red comments in his post)...so I am not sure of his method.


having said that, I have tested this extensively and found it better than just stable....with a different approach.


I play 123....I like this ....winning on 2 and recovering on the 3rd. If i have 3 losses in a row, I can leave 18u down (1-1-1, 2-2-2, 3-3-3) or continue to recovery with 2-2-2 until a new high.  This would take 6 losses in a row to lose 54. I haven't seen 6 losses in a row.


You are playing 2-2-2 as normal until your 18 loss is recovered....then continue with 1-1-1


More testing to continue

  Hi Turner,
      Short answer, definate NO!! I regard each possible combination as a separate possibility. I do not separate into high or low or any other way. I bet which ever 3 lines I feel have the best chance, based on the last few spins.
      I am really trying to predict the wheel trend. Either REPEATING or CHOPPING.
The following example will probably illustrate what I mean.
  1
  4
  2   3 lines have shown in 3 spins. This indicates that the wheel is currently chopping (It indicates, to me,124 has hit 3 times vs 356? so its repeating not chopping....series 2 and 1 have a better chance to hit, so betting 356 is still viable). This could stop at any moment, but there are more reasons to follow the wheel than to reject it. Therefor bet that one of the 3 missing lines will show next. WE don't know which one so bet all 3.... 3-5-6
  3 W...... now bet opposite last 3....1-5-6
  2 L....... only 2 lines have appeared in the last 3 spins. The wheel is now favouring repeating (it already was).,,,,, Bet last 3 lines that appeared..... 2-3-4 (but this is now a 4 series for 234, which is repeating, so mathematically, bet the opposite, if variance is low using this method, it won't repeat...will it?)
  5 L..... We are back to 3 in 3.... Bet opp....1-4-6
  4 W..... Still 3 in 3..... bet 1-3-6
  1 W..... still 3 in 3...... bet 2-3-6
  6 W.....       "              bet 2-3-5
  1 L...... 2 in 3 ..... bet last 3 to show...  1-4-6
  3 L...... 3 in 3 .....bet opp...   2-4-5
  6 L .....    "          bet opp ...  2-4-5
      This shows the how and why I change the combinations. Over a standard session, 40 spins ave 36 bets, the variance is generally small. 17/19, 16/20 a full 1 SD ie. 15/21 is quite rare. This small variance can be handled with any number of progressions and a small bankroll.

            Regards      Harry

See, the wheel defiantly shows series of 3 or more, in lines, all the time. In theory, we should always bet the opposite of the trigger. If variance is low, as Harry said, then the chances of 4,5,6,7 series is low too, so betting opposite all the time is preferable.


So there (again, as ever) 2 ways to look at it. Follow the wheel, and when its repeating, bet repeating. But this is the case in both Harrys triggers.
Or, if variance is lower than normal by claim, or design, then variant events are less, so repeating isn't the way to go, because repeating is variant....so bet for change.


Confused...you will be!

[klw]

Im very interested in Lines as EC's. 146 vs 235 is mathematically identical to R vs B or H vs L


Therefor, there is no advantage other than the fact that there are more opportunities. Say I see a series of 3 and consider a series of 2 or 1 is more likely from a maths point of view, I could play for a change. I could wait 15 spins to see a series of 3 (and, of course, see RRR BBB RRR BBB RRR)
However, there will always be a series of 3 somewhere in the 10 Lines as EC's withing the last 3,4,5,6 spins


Looking at Harry J's nice posts, he makes a nice way to see these without charting, but I can see the opposite too (red comments in his post)...so I am not sure of his method.


having said that, I have tested this extensively and found it better than just stable....with a different approach.


I play 123....I like this ....winning on 2 and recovering on the 3rd. If i have 3 losses in a row, I can leave 18u down (1-1-1, 2-2-2, 3-3-3) or continue to recovery with 2-2-2 until a new high.  This would take 6 losses in a row to lose 54. I haven't seen 6 losses in a row.


You are playing 2-2-2 as normal until your 18 loss is recovered....then continue with 1-1-1


More testing to continue





See, the wheel defiantly shows series of 3 or more, in lines, all the time. In theory, we should always bet the opposite of the trigger. If variance is low, as Harry said, then the chances of 4,5,6,7 series is low too, so betting opposite all the time is preferable.


So there (again, as ever) 2 ways to look at it. Follow the wheel, and when its repeating, bet repeating. But this is the case in both Harrys triggers.
Or, if variance is lower than normal by claim, or design, then variant events are less, so repeating isn't the way to go, because repeating is variant....so bet for change.


Confused...you will be!

Hi Turner --- I too am doing a lot of research in this area. I also am unsure of HarryJ's bet selection but would like to thank him for his contributions to this thread. I can see a potential advantage for playing the last 3 lines when 1 line is sleeping as then you would have 3 lines versus 2 lines in favour of your bet selection,of course it needs a lot of research.

I like your idea of waiting for a run of 3 ( or more possibly as they happen often enough with 12 E/C's being charted ) and then betting for a smaller run of 1 or 2's and will start my own research in this area and let you know.

I also have had an excel tracker coded to record a dominance of singles and series over the past recent spins and am hoping to use this information to filter the runs of 3 bet triggers, you never know there may be an added edge doing this. An example could be lines 124 are showing a dominance for singles , we then have a run of 3 trigger, would there be any advantage in expecting a single to show now as lines 124 are showing singles dominance as opposed to 235 say which are showing a dominance of series. As always lots of research to be done.

Keep up the good work.