The test results included your AP plus a few more.

Basically what the ES system does is looks at the last 8 spins to see if a 3-6-9, 5-7-9 or 1-5-9 can be formed on the next spin.

If not, it looks at the last 7 spins to see if a 2-5-8 or 4-6-8 can be formed.

If not it looks at the last 6 spins to see if a 1-4-7 or 3-5-7 can be formed, etc.

Nick

Great thinking Plolp.

You hit upon 2 interesting concepts about using the VDW theorem.

1.    There is No Rule that says you have to use all 9 Spins
2.    There is No Rule that says you have to use ALL 16 AP's.

I did a quick test of 5 bots betting 5,000 spins each (25,000 total) using your 4 AP you suggested and have attached the results in pic "25,000 9 Spin".

The problem with using the conventional 9 Spins is you don't get many bets making it difficult to play even with a bot.

Your idea of making the 9th spin the 5th spin is a better approach.  It is similar to what  I call betting "Every Spin" on a rolling basis.  This gives you a lot more betting opportunities.

I have attached a second pic (25,000 ES Spins) to show you the difference in the number of bets and profits from an ES system verses the 9 Spins.

So far, I have found that ES is the best way to use the VDW theorem.

Cheers
Nick

Hi Dane, I too do not have a math background and do not understand your bet selection.

Could you give an example with further explanation.

Thanks

Hi All,

Aduly says that after a BBB wins start a new session.
 
This is correct if you are playing the conventional VDW method which is to play the next 9 spins.

VDW can be played in many different ways.

Think about playing the LAST 9 spins instead.
 
Mathematically it is the same but you get so many more bets.

Cheers
Nick

RG, you may be right but I got 3-4 people interested and that's what counts.

Those that see the merit will try, others just deny, deny, deny.

Cheers

Nick

Here is a better explanation of what I am trying to do.

How do the people playing biased wheels keep winning? EC bets still have two outcomes.  The odds have not changed.  Why are they winning?

They are winning because the Laws of Physics have increased the accuracy of their predictions.

They still win because they are not playing random.  They are playing with the Laws of Physics.

If you can understand this, then the same principal applys to using the Laws of Math as to using the Laws of Physics.

Using the Laws of Math, like VDW, we don't care if each bet has a 50/50 chance of winning.  We are not playing the random game.  We are not changing the odds. It does not matter. It still wins.

It still wins because  the Laws of Math increase the accuracy of predictions.

Hi Blue Angel,

The way we play wins Flat Betting.  Flat Betting has a lot of ups and downs and does not win that much per spin so we have some unique progressions that we use if we want to increase our profit/spin.  However, Flat Betting works just great when using a bot.


Cheers

Hi All,

Adulay, I don't mind the imbeciles over at GF or here or anywhere, I just ignore them as I know someone will understand what I am trying to do.

It is not an easy thing to explain but Blue Angel says that on all EC bets there are always two possible outcomes, always

I say so what. That makes no difference in preventing someone from winning.

For example, look at the people who play biased wheels.  They still win, even though all EC bets still have two possible outcomes.

They still win because they are not playing random.  They are playing with the Laws of Physics.

If you can understand this, then the same principal applys to using the Laws of Math as to using the Laws of Physics.

Using the VDW I don't care if each bet has a 50/50 chance of winning.  It does not matter. It still wins.

Cheers

Nick

Is this what you are looking for?

Cheers

Nick

Merry Christmas Vic and all . . . .

We wish you peace and joy for the Holidays and a prosperous New Year.

Thanks for all you help with the NicBot.

Cheers

Nick

Hi Bally6354 . . .

Nice application of the VDW theorem.

As you have shown, it can be applied to any binary event.

Thanks for sharing your creative thinking.

Cheers

Nick

Hi Azim . . .

Sorry I have not posted recently but Vic and I are trying to get my new bot released September 1st and I have to visit my Grandsons in Colorado for a week but always glad to answer your question.

You have 5 numbers (29,22,14,28,16  or BBRBR).

On the 6th spin there are 2 Arithmetic Progressions (AP) than can be formed:

4-5-6
2-4-6

The 4 and 5 are BR so 4-5-6 would not form an AP of either RRR or BBB

The 2 and 4 are BB so if the 6th spin is a B they would form an AP of 2-4-6

B B R B R B
1 2 3 4 5 6

So we would bet B to complete the AP of 2-4-6.


Hope this helps.

Cheers
Nick

Hi Denzie . . .

Bayes could better explain this but in my opinion the laws of probability will most likely RTM (Return to Mean) at some point if you continually bet one EC.

However, it may take 100,000 spins or more.

On the other hand, this is random so conceivably the one EC you are betting on may never RTM, it will however RCTM (Return CLOSER to Mean).

That is the problem with random and random systems.  Nothing is for sure, it is all probable.

This is why I prefer Non-Random systems, ie VDW.

Cheers
Nick

BA . . .

In theory it is a great idea to play a 50/50 system with the hopes it will ride the waves of profit/loss so you can take advantage of it.  In reality, Variance does not allow it.

If the results were all chops, RBRBRBRB OR RRBBRRBBRRBB then we could possibly do it.  In reality we also have streaks of wins and streaks of losses.  The attached graph is for betting Red only,  a 50/50 system.  It can take up to 25,000 spins/hands to get bet back to profit,  not practical in this instance.

The VDW tweaks that I am testing, either win or lose, I can't find one that breaks even.

Gizmatron. . . I agree that RNG and the seeding problem might affect results so we have included in the bot,  9 RNG sources to choose from. See attached pic.  Now we can verify results using different RNG sources. 

Vic is squashing a few bugs in the bot today so we will be re-testing 28 tweaks of the VDW system this week and will report the results when known.


Cheers

Nick

thanks for the compliments.

BlueAngel, this was tested on roulette NZ wheel and my bot does not keep score of the R's or B's.

TheLaw, this is flat betting 1 unit at a time but with a Stop Loss of -2 per 9 spin cycle which would mean we do not play all 9 spins in the cycle but start a new cycle when we reach a -2 loss.  Yes it is a grind but with a bot it is not problem.  I have not addressed making this more profitable as yet, my main concern is to find something stable, solid and consistent.

I think there may be one of these tweaks that could be successful flat betting.  Testing continues.

Sumit, yes we will be final testing in BV Demo mode to be sure these results hold up.

Cheers
Nick

Hi Mark . . .

Wow, that was a very tedious job entering all that data by hand.

Be glad to help, so as not to unnecessarily bore others with coding details, kindly email me at nickmsi@aol.com and show me exactly what you want on the spreadsheet as I am not sure what you want and how you want it coded.

Cheers

Nick