Hi Sumit . . .

"Can you simulate a few more sessions the same way?"

Yes, as a matter of fact, I left those two systems running and have attached the updated graphs.

We now did over 261,000 spins and 82,000 placed bets and as you can see the Z-score doubled to a a whopping 5.

Both of these were flat bets and both had Stop Loss of (-2).

Cheers
Nick

Thanks for your comments gr8player, blueangel Sumit and a special thanks for Mark for his in depth analysis of the VDW. It is great to explain your ideas with facts and statistics.  It makes it more understandable so we all can learn and improve.

To recap, this is a Non-Random System, ie one that is based on both Math and Statistics.

Once again let me state that the VDW (the Math part), ie what Adulay and others are are basically playing does NOT give you an "Edge".  Mark, gr8player, blueangel, Sumit and others are right, it is 50-50.

It does however, give you a new way to play, one that plays both live and RNG equally, it is mechanical and has it's foundation in math. It is a solid system that may be better that what most are playing now. If you have old shoe data or spins, just test the VDW against what you are using now and see if any better.

But there is more as Mark pointed out:

"As we have 186 ways to successfully complete a series of bets positive and only 70 ways to end up negative, our ratio is 2.7, a vast improvement on BP when using a negative progression and it's 1.5 figure, in basic terms when you commence an 8 hand sequence you have a 27% chance of failure and a 77% chance of success, compared to 40.6% for BP.  I did not micro-analyze VDW I suspect the figures would be as weak as the "Birthday Paradox" option 1:1."

What if we had similar statistics that would give the VDW more positive combinations than negative ones?

Remember, Statistics is the second part of a Non-Random Method:  Math and STATISTICS. Statistics is the area of testing that I have been immersed in for the last few months.

Attached is what today's statistical testing has produced for me. Two different but similar VDW statistics used, both produced profits flat betting after 100,000 spins. However, the one on the right had about twice the profit and a Z-score of 2.5 with over 35,000 placed bets so I will use that one as the baseline to test future statistical anomalies.

Cheers
Nick

Hi TheLaw, we have just updated the bot so will be redoing a lot of the graphs.

Welcome, Whopper1967.  Perhaps Adulay would be kind enough post his current method.

Mark is right when you get repeating doubles like PPBBPPBB you will get a -3 loss. This method of play does not win every session.

However, using the 2 back restart, which is recommended, you will have an equal chance to get streaks of PPPPPPPP which will give you a +6.

Cheers
Nick

Thanks for kind words Alberto.

Mark is right that progressions are an individual matter.  I prefer Flat Betting but TheLaw sparked some  interest in progressions and I have a few test in the hopper.

Congrats Adulay and Trbfla for your successes.  Yes, Trbfla, going back 2 spins after a win is another way to get more action.  Mathematically it makes no difference where we start the 9 spin cycle.

Plolp, do not give up on the VDW.  Remember what Einstein said "It is not that I'm smart, it is just that I stay with problems longer."

Let me recap the VDW principals for those newcomers to this thread:

There are 2 ways to play roulette/bacarrat:

1. Random Systems

Random Systems are what 99% of people play.  They wait and hope for a number to repeat, they wait and hope to hit a matrix, they wait and hope for an imbalance, they wait and hope to follow a streak, etc.  I have tested 1,000's of random systems over the years and not one of them was a consistent winner.

Waiting and hoping is not a way to the winner's circle.

2. Non-Random Systems are: 

1. Physics

A roulette wheel that is out of balance can produce a bias that will allow you to predict a sector where the ball will land.

2. Math and Statistics

VDW is a mathematical formula that will  accurately predict a binary event in 9 spins.  It says that if you have RR then bet R to complete a 1-2-3 Arithmetic Progression (AP).  If that misses then on the 5th spin when you might get  RRBRB then you bet R to complete a 2-4-6 AP, etc.
VDW is a Bet Selection that allows you to Bet when a known condition will produce a winner.  Think about that.  You only Bet on known outcomes. 

No more waiting and hoping.

It is purely mechanical and it does not matter whether live or RNG spins, all numbers have to behave according to the VDW theorem.

Does it win every time?  Of course not.  But look at the results some members have shared.   If you have a system generating the same or better results, then please share.

Once immersed in Non Random methods, you won't ever think about going back to random systems.

Cheers

Nick

Hi TheLaw and Trbfla

I checked my results and while betting only on the 9th spin/hand sounds like a great idea, in reality, we cannot get to 8 spins/hands without having a win or mutual bet.

For example, RRBBRRBB, eight spins, with a 1-5-9 AP for Red and and 7-8-9 AP for Black.

Do you know of an 8 spin result that would force a single win on the 9th spin?

Cheers

Nick

Hi TheLaw . .

I have some results doing something like this.  When I get back home
later today I will look them up and report.

I might only have them for 1 EC, if so, will test out your suggestion of using all 3 EC.

Cheers

NIck

"Congrats on your live trial BTW......"

Thanks Mark . . . The casino had a live roulette dealer and a live baccarat dealer, back to back in the same pit.  They were surrounded by 24 video stations so we could choose either to play and with the roulette being Double Zero we chose baccarat.  We went back the next day and it was closed due to some malfunctioning machines. Yuch.

Thanks for your idea of playing the mutual bets.  I know most of you don't have the tools to test like I do, so I am posting the results of a quick 25,000 spin test.

What I tested was playing VDW on NZ roulette for all 3 EC and if a mutual bet occurred we would bet a Double Dozen.  All flat bets.

Now you can see that betting something when a mutual bet occurs might be another way to go.

Trbfla,  I am not sure what you are doing, can you explain further?  Thanks

Cheers
NIck

Hi Trbfla. .  the bot played the entire 9 spin cycle every time except for when it hit the Profit Target of 1 unit then it would start a new cycle.

Hi Justme, yes those are important statistics to have.  Since this is Flat Betting, the maximum drawdown is the difference between the HIGH and the LOW as shown on the bot.  The HIGH is the highest value achieved and the LOW is the lowest amount.  So if High = 40 and Low = (-30) then you can assume your bankroll should be about 70 units.

I cannot get you the statistics as to how many losses in a row you will achieve.  The main excel sheet I use is only 9 rows and we keep starting a new sheet every time we get a profit or loss.

I am sure Vic can add it to the bot somewhere but right now he is busy packaging the NicBot for release and I am not going to stop him as it has already been 2 years in the making.

Cheers

Nick

Hi Mark, bbbbbb128

Mark is pointing out that this method is not the Holy Grail and he is correct.  However, it is one of the safest, most consistent and stable bet selections I have ever found.

A few weeks ago at the Mohegan Sun, Ct,  my brother and I played baccarat for the first time.  We flat betted and In 1 1/2 hours we doubled our meager $100 buy in.   It was fun and easy.  No Stress.

With this thread I hope to expose more people to a new way of playing roulette/baccarat.

The question is can we improve this basic VDW system?

Some of your suggestions might lead us to a better method.  Like, bbbbbb128 asked "how do we handle the Mutual Bets".

Right now we skip (no bet) when there is a Mutual bet and start a new cycle.

But what if we bet instead of skip?

What would you bet?  Would it help to bet just one side, like banker or Red for the entire cycle?

Could we bet both Banker & Player for first 4 hands and then bet just one of them for the last 5 hands of the cycle? Or vice versa?

Could we bet all 3 EC instead of just one in roulette?

Would be bet all 3 EC Independent of each other or dependent on each other?

Could we bet something other than an EC?

Just food for thought.
Cheers

NIck

Hi Trbfla . . .

I finished running 2 progression tests.  The results shown in the attachment.

The graph on left was tested with a full martingale progression but it reset to 1 unit on any mutual bet.

The graph on left was tested with a 1-2-4-8 martingale that reset to 1 unit on any mutual bet or when bet hit 8 units.

Cheers

Nick

Hi Trbfla . . .

I continued the first progression and it ultimately tanked.

Picture attached.

Flat Betting (as TheLaw suggests) has been the best so far, however, I will give your suggestion a try just to see how it does.

Cheers

NIck

Hi Justin . . .

Attached is the raw data for the 3,000 spin sessions.

There are 3 tests shown.

The first on the left is with Stop Loss (-1).  We stopped at 40 sessions as it was much weaker than Stop Loss (-2).

The one in the middle is for Stop Loss (-2).  We carried on to 100 Sessions just to be sure it held up.

The one on the right is for Stop Loss (-1) but with a Profit Target of 2.  This shows some promise.

As this is Flat Betting only, there is very little drawdowns.  The -37 is the lowest the bankroll reached before recovering.

I don't keep statistics on how many cycles lost in a row, the bot does not count that.

Cheers

Nick

Hi Trbfla

Have not had much luck with progression but have only started to take a close look at them.

Attached is a 10,000 spin results which looks promising so tomorrow will have some 3,000 spin sessions run and see how it holds up.

Cheers

Nick

Hello Justme . . .

When I tested for the Stop Losses, I started a new cycle every time it hit the Stop Loss setting.  So if Stop Loss set a (-1) then at the first loss we would start a new cycle.

A Stop Loss of (-2) would mean we had a loss of -1 followed by another loss of (-1) OR we first had a loss of (-1) then a Win of (+1) and then and then we had 2 losses in a row.

The same is true for the Profit Target.  Almost all the time the Profit Target is set for (+1) so at first profit we start a new cycle.

Yes I did test 100 sessions of 3,000 spins and the results below.  A Stop Loss of (-2) was better than (-1).

Cheers

Nick

Good question Trbfla . . .

Is there any advantage to betting ONLY when we have 2 of the same AP forming at same time, such as 1-3-5 and 3-4-5 or 2-4-6 and 4-5-6, etc.

I tested it 2 ways:

1.  If there was a completed AP before the "synced" pair occurred, then start a new cycle.

2.  Just play for the "synced" pair every time no matter if a completed AP would have occurred.

The results were about the same.  The graph is attached.

Besides poor results there were very few opportunities to bet.

Be glad to test any other ideas or tweaks you can think of.

Cheers

Nick