Ayup!
[Edit: Northern English word of greeting, surprise or warning. From Old Norse "Se Upp" meaning 'look up' or 'watch out'. ]
I've been studying EC, Regression to the mean, Singles and series etc.
I thought of this after seeing an EC tracker...by Bayes I think
The more ECs we track...the more we will see what we are looking for quicker.
So if you are looking for following the wheel, or against the wheel, or dominant reds, or 3SD E/c regression..what ever we need to see more EC's at any time. More than 3 that is...H/L, R/B, O/E
So, Natural lines 123 vs 456 is an EC. infact its H/L of course.
but 124 356 is also an EC and 234 156 is too.
infact, if you look, there are 10 combinations of 3 vs 3 denoted by 6!/3!/3! =20
that's both ways round, so divided by 2 =10
So there are 10 e/c's to monitor using 3 lines vs 3 lines.
There are 10 ec bets in the lines (1-6, 7-12 etc)
123 456
124 356
125 346
126 345
234 156
235 146
236 145
245 136
246 135
256 134
I have made a basic tracker which I have used to great effect.
Depending what you are looking for in EC bets, depends on how you use this tracker.
perhaps someone could knock up a better tracker with an input carpet....anyhow, this is just to get the idea of 6 lines = 10 EC's
Good try Turner.....and what next ??? ???
Know you very persistent/all chess pl.are/am giving you further deeper task to solve,but
once you do....you be there.
Do that with 2lines + 2 streets,,,,versus,,,,,2 lines + 2 streets......and hear this;
2 identical bets..........each consists of same amount of combos regarging BR,HL,OE....
and hear further this.........85% ----15%----W/L RATIO...on one side
then you in the driving seat......RR.......good luck
Typo,should stay 75%
Thanks Flat....I will consider your kind addition.
And your intuition is very good. Persistent, I most definitely am.
A caveat.....there are 462 6 streets vs 6 streets in 12 streets
If we tracked all 462, we would always have an EC at any one given time with 14 vs 1 with an SD of 3.0
If we computed this in a clever tracker, we would be given 6 streets to bet every spin..which were predictions of a regression towards the mean. A holy grail? ??? ...hmmmm
Consider that its Turner who thought this up before you consider that...lol
Thanks for making up the sheet Turner :thumbsup:
It's a great idea for anyone playing a method where you have to wait a while for triggers. This should certainly speed things up a bit!
Quote from: Bally6354 on September 16, 2013, 09:29:02 PMThanks for making up the sheet Turner :thumbsup: It's a great idea for anyone playing a method where you have to wait a while for triggers. This should certainly speed things up a bit!
Well....i was hoping someone could make something that looked less like a 12 year old had done it...but my excel skills are limited. I can only do the formulas because i programmed in BASIC and compiler and C+....and they are same idea
Hi Turner . . .
I added Excel's RNG to your sheet, now you can simply F9 for another 500 spins and see your possible triggers.
If you decide on a trigger, just let me know and I can easily add it in for you and see how it will work.
I started my programming with Basic as well and now just Excel which is not too far different.
Enjoy
Nick
Quote from: Nickmsi on September 16, 2013, 10:14:39 PM
Hi Turner . . .
I added Excel's RNG to your sheet, now you can simply F9 for another 500 spins and see your possible triggers.
If you decide on a trigger, just let me know and I can easily add it in for you and see how it will work.
I started my programming with Basic as well and now just Excel which is not too far different.
Enjoy
Nick
kind of you...cheers.
I've used RANDBETWEEN(0,36) in the past
now with 12 E/Cs...includes R/B, O/E.....not H/L as this is 123 vs 456
"FOR ALL YOUR NEEDS IF YOU BET EC'S"
(A bit of marketing there)
Hello Turner,
Thanks for your post and the spread sheet. Nick, thanks for the Excel.
I believe we can add more triggers if we include FTL vs OLD (follow the last vs opposite last decision) for each of the 12 triggers you mentioned in your post.
I also include TB4L vs OTB4L (time before last vs opposite time before last) for each of the 12 triggers in my testing.
I used GreatGrampa's idea for the entry signal. Track the last 8 spins and bet the stronger side ( must be at least 6 to 2 or higher) for maximum 3 spins, Stop on a hit. Retrack by looking back the last 8 spins and continue as above.
Progression is 2,3,4. (up on a loss).
At this stage I am still testing. So far it look's interesting. More testing is needed before we can come to any conclusion.
Best wishes & Regards
Hi Guys,
I have been playing 'Lines' as EC's for many years. My Method is somewhat different. I track the last 3 or 4 spins and decide whether the trend is chopping or repeating. Then bet accordingly. The constantly changing pattern of the 20 possible EC's evens out the results, and reduces the variance to the minimum. I bet in sessions of 40 spins. The 1st 3 or 4 to get the feel of the trend and to cancel any carry over from the last session. The remaining 36/37 spins rarely show a variance of more than 1 SD, 15/21. Generally it is less. This is easily handled by a number of fairly weak progressions, with quite low bankrolls.
If you don't get greedy it's easy to grind out 4 or 5 units per session. Very little risk!!
Regards Harry
when you say 20, do you mean 10 lines vs 10 lines, and the reverse...i.e. 123 vs 456 reverse 456 vs 123 (same thing)
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. 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.,,,,, Bet last 3 lines that appeared..... 2-3-4
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
thanks HarryJ for example. And what progression do you prefer for this?
Harry....that's intersting.
In my tracker though....the opening 1,4,2 would be 1 ec hitting 3 times. The 124 vs 356 ec..
This is not chopping when viewed this way
I build a march based upon playing lines.
Pick any three alternating lines, like 246 or 134 or 532 or any other combination.
Then you follow the wheel playing does three lines.
If you lose then you add the last hitting line and play 4 lines to break even.
You only lose if you get 5 alternating lines.
it's a pretty cool idea and i have not test it so much.
Would also work playing 4 lines and recoup playing 5 lines preventing all 6 to show.
Dozen play.
[reveal= Win/Loss results]
WL
WWWL
WL
LW
WWL
WL
WWWL
WL
LL
WWL
LL
WWWWWL
WWL
WL
LL
WL
WWWL
LW
WL
WL
LL
WL
WL
WL
LW
WL
LW
WL
WL
LL
LW
LL
LW
LL
LW
LL
LL
LW
WL
LW
WWWL
LW
LW
LW
LW
LW
LW
WWL
LW
WL
2
1
6
2 W
4 L
4
3
2
2 W
3 W
2 W
6 L
4
1
6
4 W
3 L
6
5
2
1 L
1 W
2
4
6
4 W
4 W
3 L
4
1
5
4 W
3 L
2
4
1
2 W
1 W
2 W
6 L
2
4
3
2 W
1 L
3
2
4
5 L
6 L
[/reveal]
Hi!
I have tested docen, it works very good!
60 bets just flat bet +10 units
230 bets +92 units
I played +1/-1 in progression
with this extra
If i was down more than 2 in progression
like 3,4,5 etc
I played until i had won 2 times before decreased the unit size.
Nice!
Agesta
Agesta...i would be interested to know the trigger....like play last 3 unique lines plays for dominance
Turner
Hi Turner!
I played these 2 sessions with last 3 unique lines.
I will try other triggers to.
Agesta
The last 2 unique dozen of course, not 3 lines.
Sorry for that!
agesta
I got pretty good result testing the last three.
They are recent and present.
Then you know one line is at sleep, so you face one or two lines against your three lines.
I think regression would work with this kind of selection.
WL
WWWL
WL
LW
WWL
WL
WWWL
WL
LL
WWL
LL
WWWWWL
WWL
WL
LL
WL
WWWL
LW
WL
WL
LL
WL
WL
WL
LW
WL
LW
WL
WL
LL
LW
LL
LW
LL
LW
LL
LL
LW
WL
LW
WWWL
LW
LW
LW
LW
LW
LW
WWL
LW
WL
--For years have been playing and preaching this bet/mostly cause of constant sleep of 1 or even
2 lines/...playing,especially in casinos with more playing tables with displays.
hi flatino,
I think I've figured out the two groups.
but I haven't figured out what you point at with this statement. maybe you could explain it a bit more?
Quote from: FLAT_IN_O on September 16, 2013, 08:21:24 PM
and hear further this.........85% ----15%----W/L RATIO...on one side
then you in the driving seat......RR.......good luck
thanks and cheers
hans
Quote from: HansHuckebein on September 26, 2013, 05:45:01 PM
hi flatino,
I think I've figured out the two groups.
but I haven't figured out what you point at with this statement. maybe you could explain it a bit more?
thanks and cheers
hans
--Can't,except that conclusion was wrong...thought was testing 18/18 while actually it was 19/17.
Quote from: FLAT_IN_O on September 26, 2013, 07:27:53 PM
--Can't,except that conclusion was wrong...thought was testing 18/18 while actually it was 19/17.
We put that one to bed didn't we Flatino mate
An interesting idea for consideration.
Albeit with 1u = £5 in this screen grab
bet the last 3 unique lines and you have a trending EC vs EC from my tracker.
Play with the wheel...not against it.
Play for 2 wins in 3
WW
WLW
LWW
LWL
LL
Re-track after any of the above. DO NOT play for WWW or LWWW
on LWL or LL double the stake.
and......on W....stop and retrack. On LW play for W and retrack (we are erasing the blip with a progression. The power isn't in the progression)
on LL it's a stop
...the session is over.
this attachment only stopped because of LL on a double progression
(it is 1 session)
Quote from: Turner on September 26, 2013, 08:01:49 PM
We put that one to bed didn't we Flatino mate
But it is now waking up something else/can't get rid of old habits/from the bed...soon
to you,mate.
Quote from: FLAT_IN_O on September 27, 2013, 03:38:29 PM
But it is now waking up something else/can't get rid of old habits/from the bed...soon
to you,mate.
Lol....look forward to it
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
harry...you have my attention....but there are many ways this comment could be assessed. Care to elaborate?
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.
i hope that's not a secret ingredient [size=78%][smiley]aes/thumb_down.png[/smiley][/size]
Hi Turner,
No secret ingredient, just a matter of mindset. Like many people I believe that anything that occurs 3 times is part of a trend. The chance of it continuing is slightly better than the 50% odds. Many years of play have so far proved me right!
You will note that my progressions only look for a win on the 1st or 2nd spin. after that I am in recovery mode and simply spreading the risk. If i can win 47% of my bets and lose less than 15% I'm on to a pretty good thing. The killer, of course, is those freak results that swallow the progression whole.
With the 3 or 4 spins used to assess each decision, a 7 step progression will encompass 10 or 11 spins. This should lose once in a 1000 or 2000 spins. Plenty of time to recover from a loss.
You will see from the sample I posted that I only virtual bet the 1st 3 or 4 spins. after that I backtrack the results and bet every spin. Using a 7 step cool delayed martingale, the cost per 'game' is 38 x 3 units. Unless I am in the middle of a progression, play stops on bet 40. I then clear my mind restart the count and track 3 or 4 virtual spins as if I had just arrived.
The stepped Progression is a different proceedure. The 'games' tend to be a little longer but I have never had a complete 'Bust'. loses are due to aborting lines that linger too long. at spin 40 I stop, go through the restart proceedure, and pick up the progression from where I stopped.
I hope this clears thing up. If not just ask.
Best wishes Harry
Quote from: HarryJ on September 28, 2013, 09:54:22 PM
I hope this clears thing up.
Nicely [smiley]aes/smile.png[/smiley]
And this is my way to beat last & furthest 3 lines.
With tweaked I boba's staking plan-MM......only 6 sessions/sequent.--no chosen ones/
and there are much more alike.....good luck.
Forget to mention...whenever 3 or more un.plus,restart from 1.
flatino where zero gone?
also need very hogh bank for this, i saw ~250- , don't forget 250 x3 ,because you are betting on 3 dblstreets
Quote from: Biagle on September 29, 2013, 05:36:52 PM
flatino where zero gone?
also need very hogh bank for this, i saw ~250- , don't forget 250 x3 ,because you are betting on 3 dblstreets
For those that play BV.......If you wana be a winner....only with....money wins money...this
is not a lottery/small invest to win large/but roulette where you only can win with sufficient BR.
Test 100 session and you will find out something that you all dream of.
so this system is not playable with zero? im talking about live wheels
Quote from: Biagle on September 29, 2013, 06:55:06 PM
so this system is not playable with zero? im talking about live wheels
---Hardly you or anybody will ever find it......to beat a zero wheel on cons.basis.
I did only cause of sufficient BR/just satisfaction of winning...regardless amount/but
no more challenge there.
Quote from: FLAT_IN_O on September 29, 2013, 09:19:57 PM
but
no more challenge there.
why not? zero remains as challaenge
Quote from: Biagle on September 29, 2013, 09:38:10 PM
why not? zero remains as challaenge
Roulette playing.....
tried some with zero, about 200 spins both total +111u
One can play with zeros also....but the problem arises when you get 2/3 zeros in say 10 spins,losing on both sides.....then it is very diff.to catch up and level things.Did start testing
it with zeros...but on the long run it is hard to come on top.Topping on one side only can fight it.
ok, lets try to test it with zero
here is the session with many zeros, total -85u
I have played variations of this ,, it's a great bet,, thanks for all of the worksheets Flat
I also test variations of this and come up with a killer method ...
Cheers
Quote from: Biagle on October 01, 2013, 12:08:47 PM
here is the session with many zeros, total -85u
You see what I meant.
Quote from: Sputnik on October 01, 2013, 01:39:12 PM
I also test variations of this and come up with a killer method ...
Cheers
maybe you can share your ideas? because i like it, but zero stops me.
Second for that.....donkey and the man know more then man alone...
it is domestic anecdote in this part of the world, where donkey is a man
good friend.
Back to the original post.....
Playing for a change from series to single. RRRBBRBRRRBBBR Playing for a single.
There is always one of these in my tracker, looking back recent, to see more series than singles and notice the end of a series...betting for a single
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
betting for a single.
I tried 122 but i can't get it. so i played a mini martingale of 1,2
betting the 3 lines indicated, a session ends:
LL
LL
with a loss of 18u
See attached session
Turner
I really like your novel idea for lines as ec's. One thing I've been having trouble with is with all the information that's handed to us. Trying to find which set will hit for whichever reason. They say to much info is just as bad as not enough info. Not saying your chart is bad ... it's just too much for our needs.
Now, if you've noticed, not all your sets are balanced. I'm not talking about r/b h/l e/o. I'm talking about balancing your left column and your right column. I've reduced your 10 sets to 3 balanced sets. These are the only sets that have 3 of each line.
Less info but just as potent and less intimidating than the original 10 lines.
Without going into too much detail, I'll let you look at them and play with only these sets and let me know what you think. I hope you see what I see.
Here are the sets:
1,2,4
3,5,6
1,3,5
2,4,6
1,4,5
2,3,6
Playing with only these sets you'll realize their all you need to get a good read of the table.
Enjoy ;)
B
p.s. sorry for the lousy presentation. My php skills are not great.
Hi Turner -- Great thread and I love the idea of creating more even chances = less waiting for bets.
@ buffster can you explain in more detail what you mean by this
" I'm talking about balancing your left column and your right column "
and this
" These are the only sets that have 3 of each line. "
explaining unintelligent fashion for this unintelligent would be just fine, many thanks.
Cheers.
Buffster. Glad you like it.
Personally.. The whole idea was to get away from balance. To see ecs where you didn't know there were any.
I have got very used to seeing 10 and quickly seeing what I want to see.
The only advantage I see from having 3 line ecs over the 3 usual ecs is the ability to play 50p a line so £ 1.50 per ec rather tha £5 table min.
What I am currently playing with is this...with good results.
Only look at the last hit. I will talk in R/B for demonstration
Last hit is left
So.....R B RRR B RRRR B RR B RR
Red is last hit
I will see all red series...so play for a single...so Black
B R B RRR B RRR B RR B RR
a win....now black is all singles so I play for a series. Play Black.
With 10 line ecs.....there is usually a trigger
R BB RR B RRR B R B R
playing R/ B....I would play for a single....but there is a single recently....but I can't wait all day for 4 or 5 series. Its rare.
With 10 lines as ECs.....some EC will be 4 or 5 singles or series now....or in the next spin or 2.
Like I said....Im only playing around with this.
Its currently in the "wow this works" phase" closely followed by the "hmmmmm" phase
@Chris -- I really don't see a problem with me calling myself an I-d o t although after the censorship the end of my original post now looks idi otic !
@Turner --- You've most probably already noticed but if you are looking for a single or a series of 2 to hit they are usually more common in an even chance that is hitting less than it's partner and vice versa with a series of 3 or more , they tend to hit more often in the even chance that is hitting more than it's partner , this alone brings other betting opportunities in to play.
Is this your main betting system for roulette now ?
Keep up the good work.
Cheers.
Quote from: klw on October 31, 2013, 01:37:41 PM
@Chris -- I really don't see a problem with me calling myself an I-d o t although after the censorship the end of my original post now looks idi otic !
@Turner --- You've most probably already noticed but if you are looking for a single or a series of 2 to hit they are usually more common in an even chance that is hitting less than it's partner and vice versa with a series of 3 or more , they tend to hit more often in the even chance that is hitting more than it's partner , this alone brings other betting opportunities in to play.
Is this your main betting system for roulette now ?
Keep up the good work.
Cheers.
Im only looking at ec....and knowing R v B is same as single v series....I thought I would look at single v series within 1ec. Just a thought worth testing
In R v B....if I see red singles...I bet for a series. I have got what I wanted if series 2.....I can't bet here because series is what I wanted an series is what I got.
If it goes to 3,4,5...I have to wait until B shows to look at B.
With 10 lines as ECs....I can find another without waiting
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.
Interesting.....thanks...I'll take a closer look on the laptop tonight.
Anyone have the system in dgt?
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
Quote from: Turner on October 31, 2013, 04:17:24 PM
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!
:thumbsup:
I apologise Turner for this digression of your thread.
Cheers.
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....)
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
@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
Cheers matey
Quote from: HarryJ on September 27, 2013, 05:59:36 PM
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?
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
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
Quote from: HarryJ on November 01, 2013, 06:47:22 PM
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?
???
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
Quote from: HarryJ on November 02, 2013, 05:53:41 PM 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! :thumbsup:
great explanation...
Thanks for sharing your game strategy. Experienced players like you, helps us a lot to understand the game better.
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
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
Quote from: HarryJ on September 24, 2013, 10:04:36 AM
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!
Quote from: Turner on June 21, 2014, 05:48:35 PM
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.