+ Register

[Gizmotron]

Nobody knows when six reds in a row will occur. The same is true for three in a row or ten in a row. The trick is to win the first bet and to ride the rest. You have a 50/50 chance of winning the first EC bet. Trying to ride the wave of a win streak is the idea. Each first try loss is a signal that your starting bets might be in a phase of all bad starts. This happens sometimes. You must play a game of money management that allows for streaks of bad starts. If you can out live the bad streaks then you can ride enough win streaks to finish in the positive.

[Schoolman]

Hi Gizmotron,

There was another thread by BEAT-THE-WHEEL ( which mysteriously disappeared ) in which he posted a sequence of wins and losses - 30 straight losses followed by 9 straight wins - and challenged the forum to find a solution. A very unlikely scenario, but easy enough to beat with the reverse martingale. All losses would be cleared and 1 unit profit made after only 5 consecutive wins. Are you suggesting that something like that can win consistently if you bet the same as the last decision ( which would have you winning every streak )?

[Gizmotron]

No to progressions. I'm suggesting that you have enough bankroll to make up for downturns caused by first bet attempts that tend to swarm for a while. Things will change. You will be able to enter times where your first bets win in swarms. you get to capitalize on all those streaks. Many streaks will pay off the few first bet losses. My favorite is the sleeping dozen. These streaks last from 10 to 30 spins in a row.

[sqzbox]

Quote by palestis *****You walk up to a roulette and decide in advance to bet on black. With a twist. First you wait until you lose 3 times in a row. Meaning RRR. (Of course you don't lose actual money. Only in the virtual loss mode). If the probability of the 4th spin to bring yet another red is 1/16,  then the probability of black should be 15/16. Overwhelmingly  in your favor. The question is this. With 50:50 chances, betting randomly, is it possible to keep on losing spin after spin after spin? How many times? And is there a limit after which, a 50:50 chance finally comes your way? ******

Yet when you do this you only win 50% of your attempts, not 15/16. If it were that easy we would all be doing it. For example, by extension of the above principle I predetermine the following - if I see 2 reds I will bet black and if I see 2 blacks I will bet red. On the principle above I should win 3 out of every 4 bets placed. Doesn't happen. I win 50%! Always! Virtual betting gives no advantage, changes nothing - wish it did, but it doesn't. Period. End of story. Use your creativity to look elsewhere - this one is a dead duck.

[esoito]

"Use your creativity to look elsewhere - this one is a dead duck."

Indeed.

And anyone who pursues it is quackers. (Or perhaps on quack cocaine)

[Rolex-Watch]

Virtual betting gives no advantage, changes nothing - wish it did, but it doesn't.

It will help you manage loss strings.  The actual odds are reflective to the actual number of bets you actually place :-)

[Albalaha]

It is true that virtual betting of any kind doesn't give you any advantage by itself but it may help you playing safer coupled with a few other safeguards. Having an "edge" over house is not possible by any means since opposite is the reality but still earning from it is possible.
       Winning flat bet, in long run, is absurd and not possible. Since you can't decide any better bet and have to suffer the house edge too, you can't win flat bet. No pain, no gain.

[Gizmotron]

" Winning flat bet, in long run, is absurd and not possible."

Everytime there is a sleeping dozen that sleeps from 15 to 30 spins in a row, and I'm there and see it, then I win big. It only takes getting in to take advantage of it. You must have a good exit strategy to play this way.

[Gizmotron]

Gizmotron, what if all this in and out fast doesn't change anything?  A lot of superstitious, albeit correct, players.

There's nothing fast about it. It's carefully chosen times. It's about reading the context of the current state and adapting to the conditions. The actual degree of difficulty has nothing to do with probability. Everything is circumstantial coincidence. I'm just taking advantage of coincidence.

[Rinzler]

Everything is circumstantial coincidence. I'm just taking advantage of coincidence.

I've heard of circumstantial evidence, but....

https://pathetic.org/poem/1083901034

[esoito]

"Winning flat bet, in long run, is absurd and not possible. Since you can't decide any better bet and have to suffer the house edge too, you can't win flat bet. No pain, no gain."

I doubt that XXVV, a successful and profitable flat bet devotee, would agree with that very dogmatic statement!

[XXVV]

"Winning flat bet, in long run, is absurd and not possible. Since you can't decide any better bet and have to suffer the house edge too, you can't win flat bet. No pain, no gain."

I doubt that XXVV, a successful and profitable flat bet devotee, would agree with that very dogmatic statement!

For someone who is so careful to wisely organise exit strategies, Albalaha appears in this quotation to have successfully painted himself into a corner by not so wisely excluding possibilities that could very much be used to his advantage at times but perhaps not so with the particular bet characteristic being extolled upon here.


I prefer to mix metaphors and leave the door open and not burn bridges (except BetForum.cc)


As a goal for myself, and as I trust his judgment and ethics as impeccable, I propose to forward to Esoito, over the coming seven weeks, an outline of one of my key playing methodologies that uses flat staking and harnesses cluster analysis over short, medium and long term playing cycles. After years of comparative analysis I found that in my bet the greatest efficiency was achieved through flat staking and not progression. One reason being that a 'bank loss' in the flat staking mode can relatively quickly be recovered, whilst as you will appreciate progressions make such options much more difficult.


As always, it comes to tuning, timing and the unique characteristics of a bet - and knowing these strengths and weaknesses.


I am sure there are certain bets where greatest efficiency is achieved through a smart combination of flat and short progression. In fact that is what we can successfully apply to the WF family of bets - unfortunately such as Bayes never got to see that as much empirical testing was required to refine this. Some people were so keen to see 'failure' their vision was distorted so that success was invisible to them. What we see is interpreted by the mind, and that must be clear and unbiased.


In due course I will ask Esoito to appraise, in general terms the bet and the flat staking approach used for the cluster analysis work. As I say, a useful test for my work.

[Albalaha]

Being aware of the realities and mathematics of casino gambling are the prime requisites to be a pro gambler. Every rational player knows that there is nothing like patterns, you can't determine future wins by looking at past wins, virtual betting may help you be safe from extremes but in no way, any or all of these help to have any better bet than we can randomly have. Negative variance that can arise while playing is beyond our control. House edge or house fees is already there to create a tilt against us.
                                                            Only a clairvoyant having mystical powers can guess what is going to happen in the near future and can claim to win, flat bet. Normal human beings need to either take risk with money management or totally rely upon luck to get a positive variance which can let him win flat.

             

[Albalaha]

Trying to ride the wave of a win streak is the idea. Each first try loss is a signal that your starting bets might be in a phase of all bad starts. This happens sometimes. You must play a game of money management that allows for streaks of bad starts. If you can out live the bad streaks then you can ride enough win streaks to finish in the positive.

               Such misconceptions lead a player to think that a positive progression or regression could be a remedy to all gambling uncertainties but in long run playing for a "ride" or "streak" doesn't win by itself. If they could win, casinos would have dried a few hundred years ago.

[XXVV]

No one said it was easy.


refer 'The Psychic Gambling Supersystem' by Sunil Padiyar


Also refer my simple notes on the Blog for Clump Theory - a simple bet if ever there was, and the short cycles are played flat staking. This is what you can characterise a yo-yo bet up and down and it is a simple matter getting off when slightly ahead. The cycles are so short if it goes wrong just pull the plug. At other times you can race ahead!