Hello . . .

Attached is what I have on Lanky's

Hope it helps

Nick

I have finished testing whether it is better to bet the complete full 9 spins each time or to start a new session after any win or mutual bet.

I did 3 sessions each of 50,000 spins.

Results attached show that both methods won 2 out of the 3 sessions.  The left portion of the picture are Full Cycle betting and the right is starting a new session after a win or mutual bet.

My thinking is that you can use either way.  It does not matter.

All you need is to complete an AP within any consecutive 9 spins.

In live play, though the starting a new session after a win or mutual bet seems the most logical and fastest way to play.

Cheers
Nick

Thanks Baelog . . .

That explains it.  You played the full 9 spins every time, no matter if you won or loss.

The bot was starting a new session on a win or a mutual bet.

I suspect Adulay doing something similar to the bot.

I will do some additional tests to see if the Full Cycle betting is better or not.

Cheers

Nick

Adulay and Baelog . . .

As I mentioned from the beginning, this is a work in progress. 

I would appreciate it very much if both of you can give me the spin by spin detail of how both of you played it. You can email the details to me at nickmsi@aol.com or you can post it in the forum, but I know it is hard to post in these threads.

I will then compare to what I have coded and test all methods to see which way is best for now.

Thank you so much for your help.

Cheers

Nick

Hi Patrik . .

Sure, will be glad to email what I have on Lanky and have not heard from him.

Cheers

Nick

Hi Plop . .

I ran your numbers through my bot for roulette (1=B, 0=R) and got a -4 result.

Hope this is what you wanted.

Nick

Hi Ice789 . .

Sorry I don't understand your question, kindly elaborate?

For those baccarat players who find it hard to play this by completing an Arithmetic Progression (AP) I have attached a VDW Baccarat Tracker.

This tracker will automatically tell you what your next bet is based on the AP to be completed.

You don't have to do anything but enter "P" or "B" in Column A and if there is a bet it will show up in Column L.

Enjoy

Nick

Thanks Bayes and Sqzbox for your ideas and suggestions and yes there is a lot more that can be done with the VDW Theorem.

To finish up the current testing, if you recall the following results were for 30,000 spins.

Cycle Length   Profit/Loss(-)
3         +11
4         -86
5         -42
6         +75
7         +111
8         +91
9         +30   (Basic 9 Cycle Tracker)

I have tested for 250,000 spins the 7 Cycle (+111) vs 8 Cycle (+91) and have attached the results.

The picture on the Left is the 7 Cycle result and the one on the right is the 8 Cycle result.  I think we can forget the 7 Cycle method.

The 8 Cycle result is impressive.  We don't see often a Flat Bet method ending up in profit after 250,000 spins.

The final test to conclude the Cycle testing will be 250,000 spins for the 6 Cycle (+75) vs the 9 Cycle (+30).

Stay tuned . . .

Cheers

Nick

Here are final results of testing which cycle length Tracker generates the most profits.  All of these were tested for 30,000 spins/hands.

Cycle Length   Profit/Loss(-)
3         +11
4         -86
5         -42
6         +75
7         +111
8         +91
9         +30   (Basic 9 Cycle Tracker)
      
On all of these test we started a new cycle on a Win but continue to virtual bet to end of cycle on a Loss.

By stop betting at spins 6 or 7 or 8 we avoid getting the Mutual Bet.  This I think is the big reason for the Profits shown.

I now going to run longer sessions for the top 3 results to see how they perform.   

Cheers
Nick

Finished the 4 spin cycles and not finding any love here.

The 4 spin cycle a little better but neither worth writing home about.

Cheers

Nick

Finished the first test of 3 spin Cycle.

This means if you had PP bet P or BB bet B.  We know that this type method does not work and the results attached confirm you would lose all 3 sessions.

However, if you completed the 9 spin cycle the results attach show you would have won 2 out of the 3 sessions.  In other words, If you had PP and lost you would virtual bet the remaining 6 spins and then start a new cycle of 9.

Very interesting. 

Will now work on a test of 4 spin cycle and see if this trend continues.

Impressive results Big EZ . . .

Attached is results for 250,000 spins on Tracker # 3 which only bets the first 6 spins.

While it does not gives us the "Edge" it surely played positive for a long time.

As suggested by Big EZ I will test out all other spin counts to see if any better than this one.

Cheers

Nick

I noticed when testing that this system seems to win a lot in the earlier spins of the 9 spin cycle, like from 3-6 spins.

To test this theory I created VDW Tracker #3 which Bets R or B to complete the AP in spins 3 through 6.  No bets in spins 7-8-9 so this is now a 6 spin cycle.

The results are attached and they are much better. 

They show 2 out of the 3 sessions winning.

All this tells us at this point is we need a longer test to verify.

I am currently running a 250,000 spin test and will report the results tomorrow.

Cheers
Nick

Hi RG

"if this is so certain why not use martingale?"

This is not so certain yet.

It is simply a new and highly enjoyable way to play roulette/baccarat based on MATH.

Right now all we have is the BASIC VDW tracker/system.  We are like the starship Enterprise, exploring strange new worlds.

The reason we are not using progressions is that Flat Betting is the best way to determine if this Bet Selection can get an "Edge" and consistently win in the long run.

Our first simulations of this Basic VDW Tracker #1 C were not a consistent winner.

What I am looking for are other ideas how what we can test to improve.  One of the first things I thought of was to play only 1 Side.  Instead of having R or B complete the AP, just bet Red only.  I thought this would eliminate the Mutual Bet problem.

I created VDW Tracker #2 that only bets Red.  I have attached the results below and the results were worse that the Tracker # 1.

I am testing Tracker # 3 as I type this and will report the results in the next thread.

Cheers
Nick

I ran a simulation of this corrected Tracker #1 for 30,000 spins consisting of 3 sessions of 10,000 each.

The result is attached.

Not much to get excited about.

However I do notice that this Flat Bet system seems to have some recovery abilities.

OK, how do we improve this tracker which

1. Bets either Red and Black to complete an AP
2. No Bets on Mutual bets.

All suggestions welcomed and I will try and do simulations on each if possible.

Cheers
Nick