We can all get lucky! 

As an example! My session today.

I marked down 39 spins. played on 17 of those and made 9 units profit.

Now that was not particularly good. But I did not lose. I can say with 100% certainty that I could have lost a lot of money today if I played like it was 'summertime' throughout those 39 spins. It was snowing inside the casino as well as outside. 

But hey! That's the way it goes and you have to know how to handle it.

cheers 

You make some good points Ralph.

I think less is more when it comes to roulette.

There is no need to play every day for hundreds of spins in my opinion.

I have won more money over the last 2 years playing roulette cautiously than in the previous 5 put together. I agree luck has a big part to play. But I also like to give myself the best chance of winning. That certainly includes discipline, focus and smart money management.

I am still playing the game of roulette and enjoying it after many years. I do spare a thought for some who have crashed and burned along the way.

I was driving in the snow on the way back from the casino today and thought
that the changing seasons are much like the changing characteristics of the roulette wheel.

Now unfortunately some people play like it is summer all the time. (They are likely long gone)

You have to play to the conditions.

Quote from: TwoCatSam on January 20, 2013, 11:44:48 PM
  I would entertain suggestions from anyone.

Sam

After watching most of your videos, I get the impression that you are never really in control of the situation! It is like you are a passenger relying on good luck to come to the rescue.

A very good roulette player once told me that he only averaged a bet every 4 spins. This alone suggests a degree of self-control and analysis in his play. Roulette changes from spin to spin and you have to try and read the signals.

I watched one of your videos the other night and you encountered something like the following.....

W LL W LL W LL W LL

The single wins were directly followed by strings of losses for about 20 spins.

This would have indicated to me at least to wait for a win and then bet for a loss (which would have obviously involved you betting the opposite of what you would normally bet)

You ran into a cycle which was completely at odds to what you were following and using the progression made it toxic. It was painful viewing. 

My advice would be to spend more time studying the game on a spin by spin basis and actually try to get a feel for what is happening.

Just my 2 cents.

cheers

 as long as the above copyright notice accompanies the copy

This is written in the document. So I am assuming it's ok.

cheers

Well that's just your personal opinion Albalaha.

I have a bad opinion about some of the other MM plans floating around myself.

The bottom line is that no MM plan will save you unless you have some patience and a half decent strategy with which to capitalize with.

That's also one of the reasons why I titled the thread 'Experimenting with the Reverse Labouchere'

If you don't like something.... try and change things around a bit and see if it makes a difference.

cheers 

As an example....

Let's say I start with a line comprising of 1 1 1 1.

My first bet is 7 splits = 14 numbers.

I will place 2 chips on each of the 7 splits according to the rules.

A win would return me 36 chips meaning a gain of 22 chips.

My line now reads 1 1 1 1 2.

Now here is the interesting part. Suppose my average bet was only 7 splits. This will leave me with a residue of 8 chips.

The 2 on the end of my 1 1 1 1 2 line is the equivalent of 14 chips.

So I could now add an extra 1 to my line if I liked just to act as a bit of insurance and reduce the risk of a couple of losses wiping out my line quickly.

I would now have 1 1 1 1 1 2.

Let's say my line got to the following stage....

1 1 1 1 1 2 3 3 4 4 4 5 5 7

...and so I was betting 9 x 7 splits = 63 chips.

A win would give me a residue of 36 chips.

I could then add a couple of extra 2's to the left hand side of my line.

It does seem that there are some nice possibilities with the Reverse Labouchere.

This MM plan is traditionally played with the even chances, however I think it would be open to more manipulation playing something like the splits where you were not always necessarily betting the same amount (ie 9)

A bet selection which maybe ranged from 6-9 splits would allow you to have what I will call 'carry over' units. These extra units could then be added into the line to act as a cushion. One of the potential downsides of the Reverse Labouchere is that you are crossing out two figures on a loss and only adding one on a win.

I would like to start a thread on this particular MM plan with the idea of just experimenting and to see if it can be improved upon. This one fascinates me and I think it's possible that it could be manipulated to great effect.

Here is just one idea that I found on another forum. (see pdf attatched)

Thank you very much for explaining that Bayes. 

Sam

I am just trying to get my head around a few things and would appreciate any input!

Here is the thing.....

Singles are twice as likely as doubles and doubles are twice as likely as triples etc...

That to me also means that we can go in reverse. A second loss is half as likely as an isolated loss and so on....


This is where my negative expectation question comes into things.

The NE supposedly stays the same on every round. HOWEVER my chances of winning are increasing if a second loss is half as likely as the first loss and so on.

Maybe I am completely confusing myself 

A single could be either RED or BLACK.

If I decide to bet BLACK.. the odds are 1/1. Same as if I decide to bet RED.

Going for any double... RED BLACK, BLACK RED, RED RED, or BLACK BLACK is 3/1.

So I am twice as likely to get my single bet up as I am getting the double.

 
You will see twice as many singles as doubles.

Twice as many doubles as triples.

Twice as many triples as four timers etc...

A single is 1/1.

A double (parlay) is 3/1.

A triple is 7/1.

A four timer is 15/1.

Just getting a few opinions would be great as well. 

We all know that you will get twice as many singles as repeats and so forth....

So my question is the following.

Let's say you are playing a martingale. {1 2 4 8} Are you subject to the same negative expectancy on every bet?

Surely the answer then is to play on the NO ZERO wheel at betvoyager and pay them the 10% tax from your winnings.