Here is the following 200 spins. This time the drawndown was about 100 unit, once otherwise a few.   208 units plus.




I got post from some who not get all of the method, I answer here  it is faster.




We bet 3 EC.s from our betselection, I use the last number.




If all miss the round ends and  we add a chip to the three EC's next spin.




If we got a hit the first spin, we parlay the hitted bet once, the not hitted we leave.




That is only two spins before next run. If we are back we add a chip.




We add a chip if we lose, but we reduce as soon as possible, even if we not are back.
If it lacks two chips to be back, and we bet two, we can reduce to one.








Try a couple of sessions with a win target of 200 in fun mode, and you will find everthing out, it is not very hard!
And remember  if you win some sessions, it is not the same as it will always win.
You always risk money in game.

Quote from: TwoCatSam on March 09, 2013, 08:02:12 AM
Ralph

I assume you have this in your bot.  I see one session went 11 hours.  Will you be releasing it?

Sam

Sam!


It is not coded. If the session is long, it means I have made pauses, and on ZERO wheel it can last for week, on NOZ it is 24 hours, and we must make a spin an hour to not get it closed. It happens I play manual for hours.


I will test it some more, and it if I code it it will be uploaded to all using the bot.

Played  238 spins to reach the target of 200 units. Using BVNZ and the lowest chips. The max drowndown was 40 units.


I will test more playing, the method is complicated to test using formulas, play can  tell if we do it long.


It should be used at NZ as we then have only the variance to handle. A zero will probably make a lot to the worse.


If we try it on B&M we would need a larger bankroll, and chose a (EU) wheel which pays back half on zero hit. Such
wheels are not hard to find in Europe.


I have done several 1000 spins in play, and the method seems to be well performing, it can as all still lose, I do not know the best stop/loss yet, as a  bankroll loss is needed to know the limits.

Quote from: MarignyGrilleau on March 08, 2013, 05:53:34 PM
The thing i find about no-zero roulette is that the algorithm of randomization for Even Chances is the same as for any combination of 18 numbers. That being so, the variance and the distribution presents more extreme than the arrangements of pockets in the physical wheel.

At BV it is not an algorithm, as they use physics to produce the random bits, and it should be as any fair wheel. Such as sector play has anyhow not any advantages if the wheel is perfect and that may be the case a live wheel is the device which is "less" random.




We see 10 times more spins at a RNG than on a live wheel, someties 4000 in a day, and then more odd and not odd things have time to show. I have yet not meet any who can see a difference of 10000 spins from live or RNG BV.




http://www.idquantique.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=9

Quote from: TwoCatSam on March 08, 2013, 05:06:48 PM
So, Mr. Ralph, let me see if I have this down............

34 spins

I bet large, red and even.

11 spins and I lose all three.

I raise one chip.

I bet small, odd, black

35 spins

I parlay odd and black.

The second bet always ends the "game".  Then we begin again.  We only raise the bet when all three lose and only parlay those who win one time.

That it?

Sam

Yes I think you got it as I tried to explain!

He believe more or less in SF, The world will not better in 20 years. (I have not seen the film, but know the guy). He be live in eternal progress from now and forward.

Sam!


If you make a square which is 6x6 divided, 36 smaller squares, and trough a handfull beans without aiming more than  general at the square,you will find the law of third. Every strange things we see at the table, we find in all random situations. Random is by definition not predictable. Everything can happen. We see often funny things, when we ride against or with it, and ignore it otherwise.


I we decide to flatbet red, and red comes 10 times in a row, we will be happy, IF NOT we recent were losing trying to parlay in many steps, and change the method to flat.


All streams are good or bad, depending on our bettings. We spread the risks somewhat using different methods. It may even out some loss/win. We do not know the landing next spin, but we can assume, red will not fall forever.


Handle the variance on NOZ so it works for us, we can to some extend do, the price for smaller losses is the opportunity to larger wins decrease. 

Quote from: The Crow on March 08, 2013, 10:48:25 AM
There is another approach which does not entail linear thinking, which drives the math guys crazy, synchronistic events.

"Synchronicity refers to those random yet seemingly meaningful coincidences that enrich our lives, sometimes to our amazement, sometimes to our distress, and sometimes to our delight," a foreword by Alan Combs to Dr. Kirby Surprise's book called Synchronicity.

There are many roulette players who experience these events as they are deciding what numbers to choose. It's almost like they know what numbers are coming in. I'm sure at one point or another many have experienced such an event. You say to yourself, number seven is coming in and the dealer says no more bets. The number seven come in.

I believe lateral thinking combined with synchronistic events offers the roulette player an advantage over randomness.

TC

This guy on the picture was the "inventor" of Synchronicity, and roulette number streams are similar to this, but more in our minds than in the wheel.

On a NOZ we do not have the -EV, which many (poker)math guys tell us we lose every bet on. It is true the unfair odds in the longer run will beat even the best variance to our advantage.


If we keep the betting so the variance is so low as possible, we try to break even, which we should do in the longest run.


To keep the variance down as much as possible is to bet all numbers, never win and never lose, some do it during tracking an opportunity according the theire way of play.


We need some variance to be able to win, small enough to rid out until we are on the right side.


If we bet two doz, we have a lower variance. We have on the other hand experience of that, we always lose a chip, and if we get many loss in a row, we can hardly catch up. THERE IS NOT ANY POSSIBILLITY TO WIN BOTH BET.


On a NOZ wheel we can reduce the variance on EC, and bet two or three. In this case THERE IS A POSSIBILLITY TO WIN ALL BETS.


I see a big difference in this, both from calculating and practical play.


I was trying several 1000 spins using three EC and got good results. Flat it is probably not better than betting one EC, but using positive and negative progressions  make a difference, I have in the trials never lost and never got heavy drawdown.


Use a bet selection of your best, I used last spun number.  We bet all three EC using the last spun number.


If we got  hit we parlay those bets once, the missing bets we do not play. If non of the parlay hits, or all miss first attempt, we add a chip in the next trial. As soon we catch up or nearly do it we reduce the betsize to the minimum.


As it looks, this method is very stable, it can of course lose. I got 576 Euro using 0.1 chips with 100 Euro in bank.

1017 more spins. The bets went sometimes very high, and the bankroll was very close to reach zero. It went plus by 346 units.
It is not tested enough, but we can probably find better ways playing dozen.


Total  455 units plus in 1260 spins, not too bad at all, but the bets went high.

243 spins, about 50 drowndown. Plus 109 units.

I seldom play dozen, but will give it a try. I will play a dozen 10 times, and add a chip next trial if back, run until plus on NZ. I will chose the dozen which has less hits the last 12 spins.  I have never run it before, will try an BV NZ using 0.1.  Risk money 1000 units.


Results will come.

I see no problem  that anybody can lose 200 Euro, In fact all who gambling do it. The problem is then the player do not know the risk of it before it happens. We can win and we can lose. We can be lucky for long. I do have doubts it is possible to win any but small using 2 doz bet.  I lost 40 Euro this morning, on straight ups .I have just catch up 41.80, so the net is not even 2 Euro in 1000 of spins. I run a play risking 100 Euro, pocket the plus, and busted with 60 in pocket. I recovered using SMALLER bets on reversed martingale on red and black, FTL.


If we think we will never lose a session, or sometimes not get burn, we should may be consider an other game.

Playing reverse martingale, start with a streak of 8, stopped at a net of 125 units. Here I did not wait for an entry as the streak started on the third spin. If we remember we lose only one chip a trial, it should not be scary to wait for 7 or more.

Have anybody test this.  Jump in at a point then a lot of numbers have been choppy an EC without any series over 4, for a long time.
Test is then to see if we can get  long series of any of the EC. Say we go for 12 in a row. Starting a reversed martingale give us over 1000 trials before we lose the 1000 units. Any early success will gain good.