Yes...  It's GUT.

Yes, its play money. 

However, there is no knowing what the next number will be.

I am not asking for numbers and reverse engineer a winning session.

As most have given up, this is an advanced strategy to http://www.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=13756.0

I have banned myself at rouleteforum.cc due to personal reasons. I can't even get to the site as a guest. I hope I have the thread right. The thread link is from an old email.

Gentleman,

Here is a strategy that will have you wondering.

https://youtu.be/xt5ZMUd2JCQ

https://youtu.be/hzh3SpRCRPM

Ignore his. Look at the explanation by Gizmo.

Quote from: Blue_Angel on March 21, 2016, 04:14:07 PM
I thought it was pretty obvious the way it works.

I don't share something like this if I don't have something better...

So this betting plan begins by defining the minimum expectation for any given bet selection within a specific amount of results.

If we  know the minimum possible expectation then we use it in combination with the respective payout of our selection.

The payout and the minimum expectation are creating the progression, the progression I've used in the above examples.

The second example was smoother, milder than the first because the minimum expectation moved towards the probability, in other words its deviation declined as the total of spins increased.
This is what we call regression towards the mean and both of the above examples are VERY extreme occasions!

Let's say that 66 wins out of 200 results is the minimum possible for any EC, 66/200 is roughly 1/3, BUT it's different to use the one third of 30 results and different of 300 or even 3000.

As the total of outcomes increases events tend to average out as their probability indicates, in small samples such as 30 or 50 results we could experience huge deviations from probability.
This is what we call law of large numbers.

Back to my mathematical progression, I prefer to use a minimum expectation of a relatively large total of results because I know that sooner or later I'm going to achieve my minimum expectation.
To be more specific, I believe that this total should be between 222 to 333 outcomes if we are talking about EC on roulette.
222 spins are 6 x 37 and 333 are 9 x 37, anywhere within those spins even the most extreme deviation can be tamed as the time passes by.
So we have to be careful and conservative in the beginning and act more drastically as time is on our side.

If I establish my minimum expectation on 100 wins out of 300 results most likely I'm going to get these 100 wins before I bet 300 times, by the time I achieve my 100th win I must be in positive balance.
Every time I win my bet I deduct from the minimum expectation the same amount I just won from my bet, if I raise my bet to 2 units I'm multiplying the remaining wins by 2, if I raise my bet to 3 units I multiply the remaining wins by 3 and so on...

However there is an "Achilles heel" in my progression, if I'm in negative balance and the remaining wins are too few, like 1 or 2, at that time the bets would increase rapidly like Martingale.
If the last expected win is far from the before last win and on the same time I'm in negative balance my bets would increase like Martingale.
If this happens during I'm in positive balance, it's not problem because I can stop right there and restart from scratch.

Of course I've found a solution for the other case but I'm not going to share it with you, I've already told you enough.

You are right with your explanation.
However, let me ask you this:
I create a set of 300 spins, I will give you the source after i have had you play 30 sessions of 10 spins, will you tell me what your next bet will be after each session?

Quote from: Albalaha on April 13, 2016, 06:27:00 AM
No offence meant but I never saw Gizmo writing anything that can ever be put to real play in any defined manner. Can you point to the topic where Gizmo mentioned this?

I could do it any other way. Sorry if i have broken any rules. LET me know.

Quote from: Gizmotron on December 01, 2015, 07:33:01 PM
Why does there have to be a mathematical edge for there to exist an advantage? If there are fluctuation waves that exist in early play, where the waves cycles above and below the base line value of the expected long term distribution of outcomes, commonly known as the house's edge, then for a while, the player has a mathematical short termed possibility of choosing to exit the game while in a positive position, especially if that position is just 1 unit up.

I find it disconcerting, that at a discussion forum about gambling, that my point is anything that excludes unclear. So don't act like I don't make sense. My point is simple. Why do I have to end my sessions on the base line value of the houses advantage or worse? You can't negate the existence of being ahead early on in a session. You can't deny the existence of fluctuating results from a session of betting. You are also clearly oblivious to the knowledge of coincidental circumstances. It is clearly possible to exit a steep downturn whenever you feel like it.

It takes all the spins to create a house's advantage. The casino doesn't make you bet the same amount and every spin too though. You have the control on when to quit, when to increase a bet, and when to pull back your bet amounts.

I can't play more than 300 spins in a session. There are often three or four magnificent opportunities that occur every 300 spins. I don't ignore them, you do. You use arithmetic as an excuse not to discover what I'm trying to show you. I'm glad you do that stubborn thing though. It makes discussions here kind of my advantage. And what's funny about that is you have no idea what you are missing, and that comes through with that stone wall of probability is king thingy you do.

He is right.

Quote from: Jimske on March 17, 2016, 01:27:34 PM
It seems to me that the problem lies in the impossible task of measuring variance.  We can only guess at it and perhaps calculate the outer limits of SD.

Labby, Fib, Marty, etc. out?  Yes.  D'Alembert?  Not so fast.  Sorry to be a one horse show but this endeavor always brings me back to S. Bailey contemplating the flaw of D'Alembert and refining it to adjust to variance with various mechanical or semi-mechanical progressions.  A favorite of mine (and his) is -X, +X; Flat.  Whereby we go up 1 on a loss and if win stay at that level until a loss then go up 1 again.  Of course adjustments can be made to taste and not always have the same unit size for both sides.

Variance comes in as a matter of perception or SD if one could calculate risk of ruin for a win/loss "likely" sequence.  So how does one accomplish this to gain a net profit?

It's mostly guessing of course but there are limitations that one can count on.  Baccarat shoes:  I know that in the 5000 + shoes I've logged the lowest I've ever gone is a 32% hit rate within about 60 or 70 "spins" and that is rare.  The overwhelming majority of closed spin sessions are going to be between 47% and 53% I'd guess.

So when you begin to go south you got to increase but only to a point.  But when you go too far south you got to decrease.  At some point when a north trend begins you must increase.  Maybe incorporating rules such as Seth uses with "Turnaround" or his latest stuff to help soften the curve.  Half back, Cut back, dump and pump . . . ??  Big bankroll required.

This whole concept reminds me of "Price Cost Averaging" (not Dollar Cost Averaging) whereby algorithm used to buy as stocks drop and sell as they rise.  Works wonderfully for cyclical movements such as we are dealing with.

J

I think, when you reach a certain ratio you revert to minimum bet as mentioned by Victor.
Once you see the numbers getting favorable increase the bet size as mentioned.

Quote from: Albalaha on March 17, 2016, 09:31:10 AM
Absolutely.
            You won't find any such progression that can beat 405/1000 wins of an EC in all patterns they can appear.

What happens if you have the worst numbers and have a go at it after a count is at a certain level?

Quote from: VLS on October 28, 2014, 03:38:22 AM
Hello dear Sumit,

When you talk about progression for long sessions, I can relate it to progression in the style of the "boom" technique for a single number; rising the base unit back and forth, consciously.

ie. after two missed tries player goes back to minimal unit while keeping track of current unit size. Later on right after a successful attack the player resumes further attacks back at the same tracked unit size level.

When dealing with measuring after those 200-some "short" sessions, -likewise- a boom-style money management for several numbers at a time (working cooperatively) can be worth a try.

With the added benefit of knowing there's a clear stop-loss "check-point", with no chasing.

I think,this is the same approach mentioned somewhere by GIZMOTRON, is it?

BEAT-THE -WHEEL,
Your idea will not work.
However,
Do you have baccarat results from reliable source? If you do, write me the rules and I will write you a tracker for it.

This way, everyone gets to see it for them self.

How can random beat random?
You might have to download the 2 files to view them.
You be the Judge.

Start: https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=DB42187C82F8D954!349&authkey=!ADTJSIATDbWH0bY&ithint=video%2cavi

End: https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=DB42187C82F8D954!350&authkey=!AJhOZgPnKrk_ggk&ithint=video%2cavi


I hope it works. Answers a few questions for everyone...

Steve,
I don't doubt you at all.  Just giving out a way it can be done based on the question asked.

No. It has been set up so players can't see what's been bet by other players.

However, the program can keep track of your betting patterns.

Hence, keep a log of your betting patterns and analyze them after.

klw,

Keep a log of every player how they play. Meaning their bets placed and analyze them after.

It wasn't 16000 for 1 spin it was 16000 for 37 spins.