Quote from: Gizmotron on January 17, 2013, 09:12:52 PM
Two years ago I created a sim that I was sure beat this game. I messed up on the zeros. Once I added them in, the sim dropped back to the expected rate. It was so insignificant, but it made the difference.

In continuous play house edge means something. In H.A.R it means little that's why I play H.A.R it is the only sure way to negate the house edge.Again youll get it this year.

Quote from: Gizmotron on January 17, 2013, 09:02:57 PM
Rose colored glasses. I wonder why mathematics takes a holiday for this guy?

Youll get your answer on July 19th. don't be shy then will you. Remember you can dispute sim results till your blue in the face. Cold hard cash has a sobering effect.

Quote from: spike on January 17, 2013, 08:56:16 PM
And the problem with you is, you don't understand how
random works. You think you can trick it, outsmart it,
make it your slave. This monstrosity will be found to lose
right where its supposed to lose. Because it doesn't give
you the EDGE. To win consistently, you must have the
EDGE. You never talk about that, because you don't understand
it. You're too busy trying to be tricky..

Spike the day you have the nads to put up instead of talk a load of tosh. You might get somewhere.

You don't have an edge or the means to prove it. Just pure hot air. And condescending swipes. Put up or zip it.

Quote from: Bayes on January 17, 2013, 08:29:08 PM
Gizmo,

Wait until after tomorrow before you start coding it. My previous results didn't take into account the zero, but if you subtract the losses due to the zero (using the expected number of zeros) then the result is as per mathematical expectation. And don't forget that you get a trigger only once every 60 spins or so, which means that you would have to run a huge number of spins to get a million BETS, so the results I posted aren't quite as impressive as they might seem. I wouldn't say that in this case the trigger is simple and mindless. And aren't all triggers "mindless" in a sense? No matter how complex and "clever" the trigger is, it doesn't change the odds one iota.

The total mis-understanding here is what makes this bet different to another 5 step prog.

We arent betting against a code here. WE ARE BETTING AGAINST A VIRTUAL LIMIT. there's a world of difference. But ill prove that difference nonetheless. As I said before-if I have zero losses after 950 games. And not even a single challenge. I can see no worse than 15 losses per 10,000 games.

In my playing style. That will do very nicely.

Quote from: Gizmotron on January 17, 2013, 08:04:01 PM
I'm having difficulty accepting the results Bayes got. I spent this morning writing an app that is far more complex than this. It fails at just a little more than the amount you win at. I guess I'll be forced to write a sim for this and to test it myself. It's just not possible to use such a simple, mindless trigger and to beat this game. But if it does you will have more confirmation that it works. I'm sure it doesn't.

First off even if Bayes tests were negative zero or no zero. I will still be playing this method for the rest of my days.

LIVE is the only way I will play this method, and H.A.R, and those two facts are going to make 7 ON 1 a virtual H.A.R grail.

The problem for you Giz and your counterpart. Is you think you know too much. As if your years guarantee unlimited wisdom.

Unfortunately they don't. I don't know it all, and you don't know it all. But one thing I do know. Is this method played as I play it. Is going to make some serious cash over the coming years.

Quote from: Superman on January 17, 2013, 06:00:06 PM

IS 81 units X2 the most you've been asked to bet or have you not reached that size yet, if you have how often?

I've never been challenged ONCE yet Superman. I have gone to 27--27 Seven times in the 950 games I've played. But never 81--81.

In all the records I have for the Zone Superman nearly 3,000. There are only TWO challenges on the progression 81--81. But it survived them both and ended up being a 6 in both cases. That's where my enthusiasm comes from for this method.

Now I have no doubt Bayes will find plenty of losses in his million spin sagas. But if any method will make the argument for random entry into the cycle. H.A.R. You can bet your socks it will be this one.

Quote from: Superman on January 17, 2013, 05:42:31 PM
JL, can you inform us how you recover from a loss of progression, as it could be weeks worth of effort just to get back to where you were before the loss, or do you risk multiplying your bet size to regain faster? as 243 units is a lot of games AND even more spins on a live wheel, many hours.

Superman that's hard for me to answer at the moment. As I have yet to lose after 950 games. I think Bayes holds the answer. When he finally does the true breakdown for this method. Id like him to go into fine detail.

Lets say it loses 35 times in a Million spins with the ZERO FACTOR included. That would still show a profit. Now the next thing to find out is the average spacing of these losses.

And for your peace of mind as well as excellent progression thinkers like Atlantis. It would be well worth knowing. How many of the 15---16 thousand winners hit on the first two steps of the progression.

Im not saying 242 units and five steps is the best way to play this. Im only doing so, because A, I can well afford it. And B, I've never seen a loss on a LIVE WHEEL. That's what everyone has to take onboard.

It may be playable in a far more acceptable way to many others. Lets wait and see.

Well done Bayes. Okay so for some reason I skipped/missed that one. Must of been all the Jim Beem I was knocking back that day lol! Well 11 wins instead of 10 even better.

I will have to highlight that on my records. Thanks for the discovery.

Quote from: TwoCatSam on January 17, 2013, 04:11:31 PM
Thank you, Dr. John

You know, there may be a reason--other than voodoo--as to why your methods work.

I think on it daily!  If'n I truly figure it out, I'll post it.

Thanks again, John.

I hope you and I are OK.  If'n I can just make peace with Al, I'll be happy!

Sam

Sam weve had our differences, Im a true bloviator as you say. But where I blo I will go. That's the difference between me and others that I aim to prove.

I have more respect for you Sam than many. Because you get right to the point on things. Voodoo? I don't really believe I win because of some mysterious force or just luck.

My take on it is simply identifying things that happen rarely in randoms day to day behaviour.Then attempting to forge a workable method around those things.

All the time I ignore what im told is impossible or simply not done. Because of the negative expectancy built into this game.

If I was a yes man Sam I would have given up on this game years ago. If I just went along with all the experts porfolios of doom. I would have left this game alone 10 years ago. And I am sure glad I didn't.

Now on Al, he is a very intelligent guy. Steeped in math to the hilt. But very industrious and proud of his ability to overcome this game.

He is anti progression. Which is his right to be. He is also fiercely protective to other members if he thinks someone is misleading them. I understand that.

But democaracy has to have its day too. And that's why I made a disclaimer on 7 ON 1 about not wanting anyone to play at my level. Until they were strong enough and absolutely sure it's a winner.

He doesn't hold grudges as I don't Sam. But he has his agenda for what he wants to do with this thread. I think he overeacted both in my case and yours. It is a little short sighted and immature to delete posts at random. Im guilty of it too.

But we all have the common goal of beating this game out in the long haul. So we should overcome our differences/beliefs. And get on with that task as best we can.

Quote from: VLS on January 14, 2013, 10:54:02 AM
Break-Even Point March. It obeys the reason of betting two opposite events(Dozen repetition and Non repetition) alternatively. Which flat betting usually have the tendency to float up and down, in cycles, making it an option for a placeholder bet without rising the unit, or by the addition of a positive progression, a nice candidate for grinding some profits in regular sessions of play.

---

March's procedure:

A:When a dozen repeats, play the last spun dozen hunting "Dozen repetition" event, for 3 spins. Moving form dozen to dozen as they are spun.

B:If after 3 spins there is no dozen repetition, then switch to betting againstthe "Dozen repetition" event, by playing the other 2 dozens, uncovering last dozen spun.

When a dozen repeats, go back to A. this is a "loop", or better expresed, a March.

Zeroes aren't reacted to. When a zero appears, bet selection continues as usual, even as the bet is lost.

---

Ok, what use might a "Break Even" march have other than a placeholder bet? Well... adding a positive progression the charts tend to go upwards, enough to wrap a strategy around it.

I have used the pluscoup positive progression along with this and had good results.

i.e. this:

[attach=2]

Best regards,
Victor

Interesting suggestion Victor. The dozens have fascinated me for years. I believe the strongest methods to beat random can be forged with this 2/1 chance.

Quote from: Superman on January 17, 2013, 04:25:09 PM


That's nice, hey Juiced?

Im a nice guy Superman, but lets not let too many people know that. 

Quote from: TwoCatSam on January 17, 2013, 04:15:56 PM
Thanks again, John

Sorry I didn't read the post more clearly.

With your permission and when my wife feels the need to buy me another gift--she bought me Stef and Nicks Excel Bot for Christmas--I will pay the guys to program your method into my bot and play on BV.

If Uncle Ralph says it's fair, that's good enough for me.  I really need to hurry before he cleans them out!!

Sam

Sam that's what the methods here for. I don't know about BV for this method. I gave Juiced91 some pocket money to have a go with it there.

I know one thing for sure. there's an online casino that will have to stop me at some point. Or I will eventually play my way to a million bucks over the next two years.

Quote from: subby on January 17, 2013, 02:15:38 PM
Nice, I'll be back in action properly again from end of next week in the Speramus project. Just haven't time due to work to be playing it as much as I can.

Yes get 2013 underway for real, and reach the next level.

Quote from: TwoCatSam on January 17, 2013, 11:31:11 AM
But the truth of the matter is this:  You chose not to delete Stef's post when he asked the question but you chose to delete mine when I answered the question.  This tells me you took no time whatsoever to actually read my post and see that I was contributing to the conversation by saying I had been paid by one of the casinos Stef mentioned. 

Would you tell me and the forum how the answer was irrelevant but the question was not?  Would you mind telling the forum how, when the question of people contributing 1,000 units for a community pot, and how when someone raised the issue of what casino to use, and when Stef asked about payouts and I answered--would you explain how these are "chit chats that are not relevant."?  You certainly did not delete the posts about raising 1,000 units did you?

What you have done here tells people a lot about you. 

Go ahead; delete this.  But a few will have the chance to read it and understand.

Sam

Albalaha don't mess with Sam his tougher than Zeb Walton.

Quote from: subby on January 17, 2013, 08:26:41 AM
Looking good John. How many games a day are you playing?

Depending on time 5---10. Longest winning streak is 41 games.