+ Register

[BEAT-THE-WHEEL]

Hi,
Follow the last, for ec, is interesting, for...
1) streaking nature...
2) low br, or flatbet.
3) extreme variance avoidance...
4) variance stop loss management.
5) random management

Ftl, strategy, long existed, since baccarat and roulette were invented, nevertheless, I think we could, tweak this strategy,

Could anyone here,  please help,
post,  few CHART, for follow the last..flatbet 1 unit, 
.preferably more than a thousand spins, or baccarat,
Thus we could see how the line move, snaking up and down,  to southeast, ..due to HE.



IF the ftl,  is STABLE, then we could apply, random management, extreme variance management, virtual loss strategy, ...to take advantage of the STREAKING NATURE , of ftl
Thanks in advance

[VLS]

Hi BTW, I'm set to stay home for the next days doing intense coding; this is our BetSelection.cc giveaway #5 to open our weekly release schedule as we're in March

Do monitor our Patreon weekly space for it.

Cheers!
Vic

[Mr J]

Nope, follow the second last hit for your EC. Meaning, the 7 was the last to hit. Before that was the 33. Your next bet should be black. If a 0/00 was hit, same rule, second last color hit.

Your way for wins (L=black)
------------------------
R
R
R
R
R
R

My way for wins
-----------------------
R
R
R
R
R
R

*AND*
------------
R
L
R
L
R
L
R
L
R
L

My only true enemy is
--------------------------
R
R
L
L
R
R
L
L
R
R
L
L

Ken

[BEAT-THE-WHEEL]

Thanks Vic,
Thanks Mr.J, for your view.
Appreciate them,
Seems that follow 2nd last, is good vis a vis ftl,
It also take advantage of STREAKS! Which always happen, in roulette and baccarat.

Anyone here has charts of,
flatbet, follow last, and 2nd last?
Please post them here, so we could brainstorming,  to random management, extreme variance management,
And most important, to see whether they are STABLE selection.!

Thanks in advance!

[BEAT-THE-WHEEL]

If a selection, is stable, or quite stable, end result, will always hit AROUND HE EXPECTATION, after a 100, 200, or 300spins,
Simply mean, if we bet 1u, for 100spins, the losses for roulette, is just a few units, within HE expectation.

Of course, that not always happen, thus we need MANAGEMENT,  so every risk bet,
we take, we expect the end to hit within math expectation.

We can't beat random, we just wait and see for it to happen.
We can't beat variance, we just wait and see for it to happen.

[Mr J]

I don't play the outside anymore but when I did (my example above), if I got into this trouble >>

L
L
R
R
L
L

That's SIX, I would take a short break. Maybe 5-8 spins, then start up again.

Ken

[BEAT-THE-WHEEL]

Thank you Mr.J,
Seems that your variance management is "6",...
And wait for few more spins,  for them to "stabilized", before resume betting.
Why not wait for "6", to happened,  then wait till it "BREAK", and start to bet, at least we "save" many valuable units...
A million dollar question, does this ft2nd last, always near rtm after a few hundreds spins, or having the risk, similiar to betting a single color,
which may not rtm, even after a 100, 000 spins?
Thanks in advance, keen to learn from you.

[BEAT-THE-WHEEL]

As they said, extreme variance and losing random causes huge losse.

But we cannot predict variance and random behavior,
Thus we wait for the losing sequences to happen first, thus we save the virtual losses.

[Mr J]

Thank you Mr.J,
Seems that your variance management is "6",...
And wait for few more spins,  for them to "stabilized", before resume betting.
Why not wait for "6", to happened,  then wait till it "BREAK", and start to bet, at least we "save" many valuable units...
A million dollar question, does this ft2nd last, always near rtm after a few hundreds spins, or having the risk, similiar to betting a single color,
which may not rtm, even after a 100, 000 spins?
Thanks in advance, keen to learn from you.

Was busy, sorry.

What is it with "you people" and your triggers?

Triggers are a waste of time. There is an opposite to that waiting you know. How much are you NOT making because you are waiting for the trigger? EXAMPLE >>

Lets say we (YOU) wanted to wait for >.

L
L
R
R
L
L
Meanwhile, the last 9 were >>

L
R
L
R
L
R
L
R
L

So, none of those were wins (no bets made) because you were WAITING for your "trigger".

I played it my way (before I got into straight ups) maybe 50-60 times at a B&M casino, did pretty darn good. $25 units, maybe $300-500 net and quit for the day.

In closing, I would not wait for a trigger (and no progression) but that's just me. Play it or don't play it, have a great day regardless.

Ken

[BEAT-THE-WHEEL]

Thank you Mr.J,
Since we cannot foresee or predict random and variance,
We fear that losing sequences will hit when we start to bet,
So we reduce the risk, by waiting, for the losing variance and random to form first,
at least we avoid the losing sequence till it BREAK,  and the risk of not hitting within math expectation,
greatly minimized.
Waiting for losing sequence to formed, and wait till it break is not trigger, it is a strategy to avoid losses, when we can help it.

We don't know when a losing sequence will break, thus we wait for it break, no matter how many spins it may streak.

[BEAT-THE-WHEEL]

For example,
Mr.J stop the bet when hitting losing sequence at "6", then waiting for few more spins, as for them to stabilized,  before resume.
Thus if we wait for 6 to hit, then, it may goes on to hit 8, 10 or more!
We just outwait the losing sequence as long as it want to be, and only resume bet when it break, or stabilized to math expectation.
Just my 2cents.

[Blue_Angel]

A fact about EC bets is that every time something leads and the opposite follows, EVERY TIME by small or greater margin, but EVERY time!
What is on the tail, which means it follows, might or might not catch up during your session.
If you new which side is going to dominate you would win flat betting and the size of your profit would be equal to the difference between the 2 opposing sides.
BUT since you don't know which the FTL selection is your best bet because how any EC could lead if not forming long streaks or shorter but more frequent?!
Every chop doesn't make any difference in the sense that it doesn't decrease or increase the lead of any EC, theoriticaly are equal BUT it doesn't mean that it has to bring 1 result for 1 side and 1 for the other!
Sooner or later 1 of the 2 sides takes the lead, the only way to expose such persistent and universal fact is by exposing the streaks/series and the way to get advantage of them is by betting the last EC.
It's harder to find balance the more the results you see/bet, for example is much easier to find 1 black and 1 red in 2 results rather than 10 blacks and 10 reds in 20 spins, there might be decrease of the deviation BUT THIS DOESN'T MEAN BALANCE/EQUAL!
For example I flat bet FTL for 100 spins, do you think that there will be 49 blacks and 49 reds and 2 zeros as probability theory suggests?
Far out! It's much more possible to witness a difference of 10 to 20 for one of the sides which means 10 to 20 units net if not any zeros.
Let's take one step further and say that you bet 100 more spins and this time the opposite side takes turn for its streaks/series, that is profit too!
It could reduce the deviation but since you are betting streaks of either side you don't care!
I would play that way if I hadn't any better betting method.

[BEAT-THE-WHEEL]

Thank you BA for your thought,
You're right about the imbalance vs rtm risk.

When we bet ftl and ft2ndlast,
we try to take advantage of the streaking and clustering nature of the EC bet,
Flatbet them , and we risk little, but also gain little.

I think, the best way to bet them, is to outwait the variance and the losing sequence random, till them break.
At least we do not lose  the precious br.

Wish someone could  post charts of ftl and ft2nd last here.
Thanks

[Nickmsi]

Blue Angel is right.  We don't know when the streaks will start or stop, we don't know when the chops will start or stop.

Each spin is independent and as such each spin has the same probability each and every time.

I posted a 3,000 spin graph for both FTL and DBL using NZ spins as it is easier to see 50% probability without the zero.

As you can see both graphs have their ups and downs but it only a guess as to when they start and stop.

We can't win in the long run playing these methods or any method for that matter that relies on single spin independency.

If we can't win in the long run playing single spins, then what do we do?  Quit?

No, DON'T PLAY SINGLE INDEPENDENT SPINS.

Play multiple or groups of spins.  You will not only increase your probability but often you can increase the accuracy of your prediction.  Play 2 Spin Groups, 3 Spin Groups, 9 Spin Groups etc.

To give you an example, I included a 3rd graph on a 2 Spin Group method for 3000 NZ spins.  By playing 2 spins you increase your probability from 50% (single spin) to 75%. By playing 3 Spins your probability increases to 87.5%, etc.

Cheers

Nick

[BEAT-THE-WHEEL]

Thank you so much, Nickmsi, for your charts,  and thought, appreciate them.

I have zero knowledge about 2group, 3group strategy,
May you please teach me.
Thanks in advance!

From the ftl, and ftdbl charts,
(Albeit only 2charts, thus can't make a conclusion,)
We can see ftl, ftdbl flat bet line snaking up and down,
from but only 2charts, we could make temporary loose assumption, that these are
STABLE SELECTION.
simply mean , after a thousand bets, every spins risked, we lose ONLY at the HE!
Thus with flatbet, and variance random avoidance strategy, we could win constantly.
Hope Nickmsi, could post as many possible ftl, and ftdbl charts,
Thus we have better understanding about whether they are really stable.
Thanks