Quote from: AMK on December 10, 2012, 10:22:35 PM
Thanks MG,


I like the idea of increasing the unit size after any losing sessions.


Could you see how this MM would have worked on your results so far.

Results are posted, you can work it out  . Tell me if you need the actual sessions with the bets, no problem.

My point here is that you can flat bet against or to match the previous random flow. Let's suppose we had a bot to play at BV no zero. We would just let it run until we reach a profit. It could be any number of spins between 1 and 3000 , we would get a profit, i believe.
We could even do it both ways.

It is just to make my point on hit & run and progressions. The longer one can hold up a bankroll is flat-betting, no doubt.
Just wait the graph goes your way and get out.

Quote from: AMK on December 10, 2012, 10:02:09 PM
Your just flat bettin this MarignyGrilleau?

Yes. Mechanically. 


Results can be verified inserting the date at Random.org web site.

04/12/2012
[attachimg=1]
05/12/2012
[attachimg=2]
06/12/2012
[attachimg=3]
07/12/2012
[attachimg=4]
08/12/2012
[attachimg=5]
09/12/2012
[attachimg=6]
10/12/2012
[attachimg=7]

The above is example how i suggest playing.

Lets go for the results:

01/12/2012
[attachimg=1]
02/12/2012
[attachimg=2]
03/12/2012
[attachimg=3]

We can set a stop Loss of -10 units. After that we abandon session and come back the next day.


Just for the kicks, I will illustrate this with this months Random.org randomizations. From 1st December, until today.




01/12/2012


     
2
1     
1     
2     
1     
1     
1     
1     
1     
1     
2     
2     
2     
2     
1     
2     
1     
2     
2     
2     
1     
1     
1     
1     
1   2   W
2   1   W
1   1   L
2   2   L
2   1   W
2   1   W
1   1   L
2   1   W
2   1   W
2   1   W
1   2   W
2   2   L
2   2   L
1   2   W
1   1   L
1   2   W
2   1   W
2   2   L
2   2   L
2   2   L
2   1   W
2   1   W
2   1   W
1   1   L

No need for progressions. 
No need for Hit & Run. 

You have 8 patterns of 3 outcomes = 24 spins, correct?

The random can not find himself, correct?

Why not play every sessions first 24 spins against the next 24? Or match the next 24? -It should work the same...
Why not set a loss limit and get out?

No Mechanical Bet Selection should be better than any other, correct?

Thanks a lot for this. Very generous of you to share. 

Quote from: VLS on December 05, 2012, 02:24:14 AM
"Is it better for the fugitive to change hideout each day to one of his 37 houses randomly -knowing that the guards would only seek a randomly chosen one each day- or would it be better to stay in a single house, waiting for him to be lucky to have more time keeping himself there hoping the guards would step him over without looking..... ."

It would be better to stay in the run. =) Choosing a single house only when sleeping. =) However the fugitive does not have the house edge, does he? =)
Nice allegory

Interesting.
I play to Win or Break Even. Once i get a profit i play with casino money and try to get a more relaxed game, enjoy my time.
Also i tink that it is very good to have a sensation of control over your game and bets. Know what to expect. This makes a difference for me.
So i believe your mental self awareness works good too.

Quote from: JohnLegend on December 03, 2012, 02:01:41 PM
Marigny its ongoing. Look at the BV challenge summertime next year. And tell me you don't see major progress.


An acorn doesn't turn into an oaktree overnight. Watch as the months roll by.

Still your hit rate is so much better in private...

Quote from: malcop on November 14, 2012, 07:27:52 PM
I saw the post over at rouletteforum.cc and had to reply to speed, why can't we have different views and sometimes just agree to disagree, I just think some people just feel they have to be right all the time, and to be honest it just dose my head in.


I think all views should be welcome!

I make your words, my view. We can have a civilized discussion.
If i post a voodoo like method, i must recognize that it has no mathematical or statistical reasoning behind it. Or, lets call it, against all odds. Still i am free to post it and test it. What i feel is that there is a lack of scientific and humble attitude when doing homework.
Everyone just contributes the best he can for a colective knowledge base on roulette.
The ones that don't keep the pace or disagree must present their refutations on their theories or commit to silence.
For all that is worth, the degree of seriousness on some bold statements is very low.
Hope for the best, aim for the better.


Good Luck.

Quote from: Bally6354 on November 29, 2012, 11:30:46 AM
Why not say then that you don't need to write any previous spins and the bet you were about to make on table A in Las Vegas could just as easily be placed on Table B at the Ritz in London. It has the same probability to appear wherever you place the bet. So what is the point in measuring anything?

It is true to say that it has the same raw probability but i still measure my personal permanence.

that is true. I could not have said it better. Still you might speculate on something about your permanence. 

Quote from: spike on November 28, 2012, 11:34:01 PM
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Lack of undersating of how random outcomes work is
the downfall of most systems.

Look at the casino. They understand random completely.
They know that it gives them their edge in roulette. They
start with the premise that the best you can do is 50/50,
throw in some unfair pay outs, a zero or two, and they
have their edge.

Set out first and foremost to understand how random works,
then come up a playable strategy. Don't make statements
like 'R/B is weaker than O/E or H/L.' Silliness like that just
shows you've never studied random. Learn it, grasp it, then
you're at square one. Anything else is just putting the cart
before the horse.   

I completely agree with the above statement. 
Maybe we will get somewhere here.
There is nothing that ensures that neighbors from last spun pocket are more likely to hit than the exact opposite pockets or any other location.
So no argument about wheel distribution will be fair. Like Red and Even are perfectly alternated on the wheel and Odd and Even are not---

Same difference for wheel and table play.

I Know that dealers do practice.
However, the Random Stream is independent from time. Time does not get into the equation.
If you pick the first 10 results of 10 different tables, and look for statistics, the results will be similar to 100 spins in a row on those same 10 tables. In the end you will get 11 statistically similar permanences.
I was joking around the idea of getting in and out at a specific point of the random stream. 


Lets take this further and specifically observe red and black.
When will we choose to interact with the game (get into the Random stream)? Suggestions:


a) Once we detect perfect balance. Ex. 5 Reds & 5 Blacks (crossing as in GUT from Winkel).


b) When there is one pattern left from groups of 3 (RRR,  BBB) as in JLegend systems.


c) When a statistical imbalance is measurable and hits 2.5 or 3.0 Standard Deviations.