Well i test by hand and now will see if you can use flat betting or regression based upon trending for domination.
So i set towards 1000 to indicate something and if i obtain 100 you can PM me and i will give you the method.
Our members are dedicated to PASSION and PURPOSE without drama!
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
#721
General Discussion / Re: The Van Keelen Test
March 30, 2013, 08:11:58 PMWell i test by hand and now will see if you can use flat betting or regression based upon trending for domination.
So i set towards 1000 to indicate something and if i obtain 100 you can PM me and i will give you the method.
#722
General Discussion / The Van Keelen Test
March 30, 2013, 08:06:21 PM
The Van Keelen Test
Every serious system player is interested in an objective method, giving him information whether his system has a certain value and is going to produce a net profit in the long run.
Beside the "Statistical Ecart" and other test options, with which we will deal in one of the next issues of Basics, "the Van Keelen Test" is a simple measuring procedure, with which the player can determine the chances of success or failure of his system.
The Van Keelen Test, which was developed decades ago, will give the player information about the value of a system, and requires the player to check his system over a certain number of placed bets before he begins the practical play.
This again has the advantage that possible losses only develop on paper and not in reality at the table!
The Van Keelen Test sets into relationship the net gain of a system to the number of placed bets, whereby the minimum number of the placed bets checked for all chances must amount to at least 1000.
The units wagered must be of equal value; no progression is to be used! It is very important to point out that we speak here of placed bets, not spins!
To check a system over 1000 spins, has no meaning!
This testing method has the inestimable advantage that a system must be checked at least over 1000 placed bets, and on this basis a prediction about the value of the checked system is possible.
With 100000 *checked bets, even a negative result can be still another feature of a good system. Because if a system indicates a real superiority over ZERO, the possibility exists, that with an adapted progression continuous gains can be obtained.
Even-Money-Bets (Black/Red/Even/Odd/High/Low):
A system indicates a genuine superiority:
1. if after 1000 placed bets a gain of more than 100 units was obtained!
2. if after 8000 placed bets a gain of more than 60 units was obtained!
3. if after 100000 placed bets a result better than - 1000 was obtained*[/size][/font]
Every serious system player is interested in an objective method, giving him information whether his system has a certain value and is going to produce a net profit in the long run.
Beside the "Statistical Ecart" and other test options, with which we will deal in one of the next issues of Basics, "the Van Keelen Test" is a simple measuring procedure, with which the player can determine the chances of success or failure of his system.
The Van Keelen Test, which was developed decades ago, will give the player information about the value of a system, and requires the player to check his system over a certain number of placed bets before he begins the practical play.
This again has the advantage that possible losses only develop on paper and not in reality at the table!
The Van Keelen Test sets into relationship the net gain of a system to the number of placed bets, whereby the minimum number of the placed bets checked for all chances must amount to at least 1000.
The units wagered must be of equal value; no progression is to be used! It is very important to point out that we speak here of placed bets, not spins!
To check a system over 1000 spins, has no meaning!
This testing method has the inestimable advantage that a system must be checked at least over 1000 placed bets, and on this basis a prediction about the value of the checked system is possible.
With 100000 *checked bets, even a negative result can be still another feature of a good system. Because if a system indicates a real superiority over ZERO, the possibility exists, that with an adapted progression continuous gains can be obtained.
Even-Money-Bets (Black/Red/Even/Odd/High/Low):
A system indicates a genuine superiority:
1. if after 1000 placed bets a gain of more than 100 units was obtained!
2. if after 8000 placed bets a gain of more than 60 units was obtained!
3. if after 100000 placed bets a result better than - 1000 was obtained*[/size][/font]
#723
Math & Statistics / Re: 66% probability to win or break even ... true or false ?
March 30, 2013, 06:19:39 PM
-
I have never seen such powerful methodology based upon hitting domination and trending at any gambling forum, my opinion.
-
Cheers
I have never seen such powerful methodology based upon hitting domination and trending at any gambling forum, my opinion.
-
Cheers
#724
Math & Statistics / 66% probability to win or break even ... true or false ?
March 30, 2013, 05:58:47 PM
-
As you know we can clustering the distribution to any kinds of states/patterns.
For example the principal of 1/3 give us 8 possibility's or states/patterns.
-
Now assume i can clustering the distribution into three states and there exist no other possibility's then does three states/patterns, then i have 1 in 3, just like the probability playing dozen's ...
-
And as you might understand i talk about even money bets.
Now to my question ...
-
If i have dozen one hitting once and i play dozen two and three, then i have 66% Chance to hit ...
Now then is also should apply to even money bets if i have the true probability of 1 in 3 and i face the same situation.
-
Let me illustrate this with some simple examples.
Assume i face this situation/sequence ...
-
RBBB this is one state, next i would bet that two series chop after each other or that i would get two singles in a row, that is the other two states.
I have the same situation.
RBBBRR or RBBBRBR
-
This three states follow the exact same distribution as dozen, no difference at all.
You can see with each sample of 300 how one state can sleep for 5 10 15 20 events in a row, just like dozen.
-
The issue do and the reason why i make this topic is the following.
When you play dozen you win placing one bet if you play against dozen one and if dozen two or three show.
-
But with even money bets you also place two chips but as two bets where you win or break even, covering the same probability area of 66% ...
That means you don't capitalize in the same way.
-
Then is the probability still the same for the secound bet as the first bet until they cancel out if does two other states will show or not, as in 66% ...
-
Cherrs
As you know we can clustering the distribution to any kinds of states/patterns.
For example the principal of 1/3 give us 8 possibility's or states/patterns.
-
Now assume i can clustering the distribution into three states and there exist no other possibility's then does three states/patterns, then i have 1 in 3, just like the probability playing dozen's ...
-
And as you might understand i talk about even money bets.
Now to my question ...
-
If i have dozen one hitting once and i play dozen two and three, then i have 66% Chance to hit ...
Now then is also should apply to even money bets if i have the true probability of 1 in 3 and i face the same situation.
-
Let me illustrate this with some simple examples.
Assume i face this situation/sequence ...
-
RBBB this is one state, next i would bet that two series chop after each other or that i would get two singles in a row, that is the other two states.
I have the same situation.
RBBBRR or RBBBRBR
-
This three states follow the exact same distribution as dozen, no difference at all.
You can see with each sample of 300 how one state can sleep for 5 10 15 20 events in a row, just like dozen.
-
The issue do and the reason why i make this topic is the following.
When you play dozen you win placing one bet if you play against dozen one and if dozen two or three show.
-
But with even money bets you also place two chips but as two bets where you win or break even, covering the same probability area of 66% ...
That means you don't capitalize in the same way.
-
Then is the probability still the same for the secound bet as the first bet until they cancel out if does two other states will show or not, as in 66% ...
-
Cherrs
#725
General Discussion / Re: The "Holy Grail" should be realistic
March 30, 2013, 04:06:35 PMRead again and deal with it ...
#726
General Discussion / Re: The "Holy Grail" should be realistic
March 30, 2013, 02:56:39 PMQuote from: MarignyGrilleau on March 30, 2013, 02:36:59 PM
You seem to understand something beyond what i just wrote. Read it again.
Pick up the bots and the trackers. Get any winning session flat bet. Then apply regression up&pull to it. then compare.
Cheers
MarignyGrilleau he still keeps talking about other things then simple fact to compare two different staking plans ...
No idea keep answering him as he does not understand.
#727
General Discussion / Re: The "Holy Grail" should be realistic
March 30, 2013, 02:45:22 PMQuoteYou seem to understand something beyond what i just wrote. Read it again..
I agree he twist things that has nothing to do with the subject and of course you can illustrate some loss and winning sequences and its not about winning or losing method - its about comparing flat betting and regression Up & Pull
#728
General Discussion / Re: The "Holy Grail" should be realistic
March 30, 2013, 10:01:40 AMWhy don't you write something we don't know, that has been known for the past 300 years ...
#729
General Discussion / Re: The "Holy Grail" should be realistic
March 30, 2013, 09:31:13 AMI would not play black with your example, still you twist it and say i should.
Lets say we play the same winning and losing bets and compare results.
.
I just show you that one loss cancel out one win when you flat-betting.
The other side is when the distribution goes zig zag you break even flat betting and you capitalize with regression.
.
That is two points i made that make regression superior towards flat betting.
Now with regression you would use Up&Pull when the hot strikes hit and capitalize way beyond flat betting.
.
I will pick some examples to illustrate it ...
Cheers
#730
General Discussion / Re: The "Holy Grail" should be realistic
March 29, 2013, 05:11:40 PMQuote from: Albalaha on March 29, 2013, 10:04:18 AM
I am playing Red and you are playing black. I am doing flat betting and you go by regression. Hopefully, it will sprinkle some water on you.
[attachimg=1]
Lets assume you play each time red show ...
Why don't you just tell us that it takes 3 reds to win 1 unit if you follow red ...
4 reds to win 2 units and 5 reds to win 3 units ...
-
Lets assume you just play red as it is ...
Then it takes 2 reds to win 1 unit and it takes 3 reds to win 2 units and so on ...
-
I can't still see how regression and up and pull would lose if you where flat betting and we play red.
#731
General Discussion / Re: The "Holy Grail" should be realistic
March 29, 2013, 09:20:36 AM
-
I ask you to show me how flat betting can be better in some situations then regression ...
I don't play online casinos and are not interested comparing my methods with your methods, but i still would like you to show me how flat betting can be better then regression.
I can just not see how it can be so, feel free to open my mind and eyes so i can see the light ...
I ask you to show me how flat betting can be better in some situations then regression ...
I don't play online casinos and are not interested comparing my methods with your methods, but i still would like you to show me how flat betting can be better then regression.
I can just not see how it can be so, feel free to open my mind and eyes so i can see the light ...
#732
General Discussion / Re: The "Holy Grail" should be realistic
March 29, 2013, 08:15:09 AMQuoteNothing is inferior or superior and none has proven advantage over all others. Every betselection and progressions/MMs are proportional and work better than other in different conditions.-
You are welcome to show me in what situation flat betting is better then regression, feel welcome doing so ...
#733
General Discussion / Re: The "Holy Grail" should be realistic
March 28, 2013, 06:35:43 PMQuote from: VLS on March 27, 2013, 10:05:27 PM
1) Powered by a Flat betting advantage.
I would change point one in this topic where regression is superior then flat betting ...
With regression you always hold a profit after each win and you capitalize more on hot strikes then flat betting.
You also capitalize on zig zag distribution where flat betting break even.
Regression put you more into the positive side of things when flat betting even out ...
#734
General Discussion / Re: Entering points and Exit points
March 28, 2013, 06:26:31 PM
.
The methodology to win two out of three sessions and stay ahead overall ...
.
If you win two sessions in a row you stop for the day and don't play any more, you won two out of three and that is three possibility out of seven ...
WW
WLW
LWW
.
Accept a small loss and that is two possibility's ....
LLW
LWLL
.
And one possibility to break even if they come as zig zag ...
LWLW
.
And finally three loses in a row ...
LLL
.
As you can see ND mention that the win goal is very close to your loss limit ...
So if you win two you are home free and if you win two and lose one you still ahead ...
If you win once and lose two you accept a small loss ...
And if you are really unlucky you lose three in a row ...
.
As we can see this set cruel and strict guide lines towards balancing on the blending edge.
Small and realistic win goals make us win more often and much easy to achieve.
But that does in return not allow us to use a big spread of units to have a big loss limit as it is in relation towards our win goal, as mention above ...
.
It also define that if you are going to play even money bets and have 1,5K then you don't get much room for error.
As you would divide 1200 mention above into four 400 400 400 400 ...
If you play and time pass by and you succeed doubled one small bank into 800, then your overall bankroll will grow.
Then we would have 2000 and divided into four 500 500 500 500 ...
.
But if we lose 400 we would have 800 and divide it into four 200 200 200 200 ...
.
Cheers
The methodology to win two out of three sessions and stay ahead overall ...
.
If you win two sessions in a row you stop for the day and don't play any more, you won two out of three and that is three possibility out of seven ...
WW
WLW
LWW
.
Accept a small loss and that is two possibility's ....
LLW
LWLL
.
And one possibility to break even if they come as zig zag ...
LWLW
.
And finally three loses in a row ...
LLL
.
As you can see ND mention that the win goal is very close to your loss limit ...
So if you win two you are home free and if you win two and lose one you still ahead ...
If you win once and lose two you accept a small loss ...
And if you are really unlucky you lose three in a row ...
.
As we can see this set cruel and strict guide lines towards balancing on the blending edge.
Small and realistic win goals make us win more often and much easy to achieve.
But that does in return not allow us to use a big spread of units to have a big loss limit as it is in relation towards our win goal, as mention above ...
.
It also define that if you are going to play even money bets and have 1,5K then you don't get much room for error.
As you would divide 1200 mention above into four 400 400 400 400 ...
If you play and time pass by and you succeed doubled one small bank into 800, then your overall bankroll will grow.
Then we would have 2000 and divided into four 500 500 500 500 ...
.
But if we lose 400 we would have 800 and divide it into four 200 200 200 200 ...
.
Cheers
#735
General Discussion / Re: Entering points and Exit points
March 28, 2013, 05:22:33 PMQuote from: NathanDetroit on March 23, 2013, 12:20:32 PM
Basic bet $ 10 x 40 = $400 per session x 3 sessions . Bankroll required $ 1, 200.
Win goal 15- 20 % LL 25 % or 3 losses in a row.
Attempt to win 2 out of 3 sessions.
Additional MM forwarded in a separate PM to you.
N.D.
For recreational purposes only. Play at your own risk.
This is very interesting and valid point you make ND.