I also checked it out. There were 3 slightly different strategies being discussed, which made things rather confusing.  There was no finality. Shalaska's  method seemed to hold the most promise. It seemed to fail because the bet selection was too complex in real play.

       I believe that if the bet selection was simplified, and the progression reduced  this method could be successful.  There were several posts that claimed to have succeeded in this, but they were ignored as they no longer represented the "GRAIL".

        Harry

Hi Wannawin,
           My appologies for my slow response, but personal problems often make it impossible for a quick reply.

   I have never arranged my records in that way, and frankly the idea of a 6 step progression cares the pants off me!!   The average repeat seems to be  just over 2. No repeats is quite rare. I found one that consisted of 2 zeros and a triple. Rather unussual!!
    I was getting a 97% hit rate with only 3 steps. With 6 it must be  over 99.9%, but only ome really long term testing can show if it will beat the nearly 750 wins it takes to recover from a loss.

   I found it best to turn the bet into 1/1 by betting the 1st 3 DS to show, or the last, and the 2 sleepers.

Best wishes        Harry

   

  Hi Wannawin,
                   I tried betting any 4 DS that appeared in less than 6 spins. Despite a 97% suss rate in 3 spins, I couldn't quite make it work. It needed 2 3 bet stages and the progression was too brutal. You need a very good trigger to bet 24 numbers.
     I found betting the 2 sleepers or the 1st 2 of the 4 to be more profitable. I am still not quit sure what you are looking for. ie. The idea behind tracking the 4 from group 1 into group 2.  I need a better idea of your objective.

                  Harry

   Hi Wannawin,
                What exactly are you looking for? I have been betting  double streets for  many years. One of the methods I use involves 'seeing' 4 DS.
      Unfortunately I do all my testing manually, using previous records selected at random.

      If i had a better idea of what you were looking at I might be able to help. you can also reach me at Email: hpjosey(~)wemail.co.za [mod]~ = @[/mod]

      Regards        Harry

   Gentlemen,
           I am well aware of the math and that it generally works. That doesn't answer my question.

    Once the variance has drifted off track, what prompts it to return?? Bear in mind that each event is ompletely independent and has no connection with what has gone before.

      In your 10 coin toss example, if the first 4 tosses all produced heads, the next 6 would have to produce 5 tails to restore equilibrium. An unlikely scenario yet we ve all seen it happen.

      In any long term test the variance can swing from one extreme to thother many times. What causes this search for equilibrium??  Maths can describe it, but can it explain it??

     Regards        Harry

    Hi Bayes,
                 Pytharoras' Theorem can be proved using other mathematical tools. Not bernoulli's.

      Your neat formulae give an approximate result, but they offer no guarantee.

     Random Chance is under no mathematical control yet it generally conforms within a calculatable margin of error. The answer 'It jut does' is hardly satisfactory.

    Regards      Harry

    Hi Dragoner,
           You have clearly misunderstod my question. I was referring to Bernoulli's theorem not De Moivre's.

     Let me put it another way.

    Within a Bernoulli system, each event is entirely independent. There can be no connection with what has gone befe or comes after. That being the case, what mechanism allows the 'Law of Large Numbers to accurately predict that the percentage of variance will decrease??? Surely it is more likely that the prcentage of variance would increase the larger the numbe of events??

     What forces random chance to conform to Bernoulli's law??

     Regards           Harry

  Hi Bufster,
         LONG RUN and SHORT RUN are not mathematical terms and connot be accurately defined.

     I doubt any mathematician would consider 250 spins as sufficient to qualify for the LAW OF LARGE NUMBERS. 3 spins is too small a number to be considered at all.

       However your question does raise a point that is often overlooked. If those members who run tests of hundreds of thousands, even millions, of spins, were to break their results into a large number of very small segments; they would find that the average variations in the segments, whether selected from the beginning or the end, or in fact any where within the test, would remain roughly the same.( Sorry about that sentence. Like Topsy it just grew and grew!!)

       That tends to prove that random remains the same regardless of the number of spins or events. How then does the LAW OF LARGE NUMBERS work??? Or to put it another way, what causes the difference between the long and the short run??

      Regards          Harry

   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

  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

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

   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

   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
 

  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
 

   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