Quote from: ADulay on March 12, 2016, 10:45:08 PM
That's our Albalaha.  He hates everyone's ideas equally. 

Don't take it personally, he's on a mission to rid the world of, well, I'm not really sure, but he's very passionate about it.

AD   

I'm sure it has nothing to do with him selling systems.......... 

Just posted this on Roulette.cc.

Hopefully this can move it forward.

Does Albalaha have something against Blue Angel?

All I see are tests that succeed, while he claims they fail............what am I missing?

Original Post :

http://forum.roulette30.com/index.php?topic=669.0

Quote from: BEAT-THE-WHEEL on March 03, 2016, 02:47:58 AM
posted by Albalaha in gamblingforum.
==============

qoute,

Now, when his progression has failed in almost every 10k session without betting a few thousands, he says his betselection is better and hence immune from such drawdowns which is the worst joke I have ever heard.
No way of picking bet is better than all other bets, in long run or multiple small run tests. Every bet gets momentarily good or bad and in long run, close to its mathematical expectancy.
To showcase what I said about betselections, I did entire zumma baccarat having nearly 115k hands without Tie bet in 5 types of betselection. Each go almost identical as a whole. No advantage or disadvantage in anyone.
http://albalaha.lefora.com/topic/11...et-selections-perform-zumma-1600#.VteMU3197Mw
unquote.

Except for the part where the 10,000 spins link that he provided actually ended @ +1710................so how is this a failure?

Quote from: Blue_Angel on March 02, 2016, 06:55:17 PM
He used only Red, always the same EC as user betjack did and busted on the 10,000 spins file I'm working now.

Progression without selection is party without music!

What is the sword without the hand whom wields it...?

Not sure about this.........

I just checked the tracker, and the w/L doesn't match the color of the number?

Quote from: BEAT-THE-WHEEL on March 02, 2016, 03:50:09 AM
The original poster of this topic , has written and attached in gamblingforums ,

an interesting  'TRACKER', to share with us,
please read on, or go to that forum.

Thanks.
=============================

QUOTE.
[by Albalaha]

I saw lots of hue and cry over the progression suggested by Blue Angel which I like to call "Delayed Martingale". i have created a tracker for the same for everyone to see. Anybody is free to post/attach the tracker to all relevant forums as I do not write in other forums. It tanks so badly that eventually, it will need infinite chips and unlimited table limits like regular martingale. I have attached a regular session and an RNG page where anybody can see infinite 10k spins sessions with this way.
I do not have any enmity with either Blue Angel or Nickmsi as both have been my friends and they have every right to suggest methods as I or anybody do. I just want to show all that just delaying the martingale by playing in spans of 37 spins, doesn't make a winner by itself.

I could not attach excel directly here so uploaded it on file upload site: http://s000.tinyupload.com/index.php?file_id=00136778777113954514

http://www.gamblingforums.com/threads/anybody-think-such-bad-streak-can-be-won.4269/

So now I'm a bit confused.......

The tracker, which appears to use BA's progression, comes out ahead with +1710 units after 10,000 spins.

What am I missing here?

"I have attached a regular session and an RNG page where anybody can see infinite 10k spins sessions with this way."

.........not sure what this means. 

Hey BA,

Steve weighed in on your system over @ Roulette.cc if you're interested.

If you would like to come over and discuss the method, we would love to have you.

If not, I understand, and thanks for the method-much appreciated!!!

Quote from: Blue_Angel on March 01, 2016, 03:17:32 AM
Since this method aims for long term profit I'm going with the probability which means that at some point the deviations will start to decrease towards the average.

It's different to play 50 spins which variance could dominate, if the event's horizon would be short I'd have went with the flow instead of the probability.

98% of the world's gamblers will not play 1,000,000 results during their lifetime, except if science finds the way to make us immortals, not like highlander but without death from natural causes.
As unbelievable it might sound it's NOT impossible, actually it has been rumored that in 15 to 20 years from now such practice will be considered formality due to genetic engineering and nanotechnology!

In this case we could continue our sessions into the millions of results and expanding our records into the infinity!
For the rest 2% of the gamblers' population, who by the way could be undercovered vampires, only 10% of them will encounter such session as Nick's.

Guys, we need to work under PRACTICAL terms, in other words what we CAN expect during our gambling lifetime!
That example could be equally possible as a very large comet crushing on earth, astronomical possibility, what's the point?!

I think the 1,000,000 spins was just to prove that the method actually worked long-term. If you say 1000, then they demand 2000......if 10,000, then they want 100,000. Just staying one step ahead of the critics.

@ 50 spins per hour it would take nearly 10 years playing 40hrs/wk to hit 1,000,000..........so if you wanted to play for a living.......

Quote from: Denzie on March 01, 2016, 01:54:07 AM
Btw... go check on cc
Nick did 1 million spin...
Congratulations my friend.

Just to clarify, he used a similar system, but not exact rules of this method. It did make it to 1,000,000 though!!!

His average was +1 unit per 55 spins vs +1 per 10 spins with this method.

"I also tried a very similar system to this one with the following small differences.

Instead of waiting 37 spins to get the least hit EC, I start betting after the 1st spin.  Blue Angel I believe  only bet one EC at a time even if there was a tie.  I bet all EC that are tied so after the first spin I would be betting on 5 EC that have not hit.  Eventually you will only have 1 EC to bet on but this gives us more action to start rather than wait for 37 spins before betting.

As soon as a new EC becomes the least hit, I start betting. No waiting until the 37 spin cycle completes.

Those are the only changes I can think of.

The graph of the results for 1,000,000 spins attached.

Cheers

Nick"

With his method, there was a 5422 unit draw-down and 128 highest bet. That's still pretty impressive for a million spins!!!

Quote from: Blue_Angel on March 01, 2016, 02:00:38 AM
Actually I'm waiting for no more than the initial 37 outcomes, at that time I'm betting the least shown EC regardless of the number of times has already appeared.
Then I bet continuously till the end of the session, always following the most unbalanced EC pair.

I've a question for ALL of you, do you think that by applying the same betting schedule but for the most shown EC would generated better results?
If yes, why?

Because you're following a streak, as opposed to the ec that's behind.

One is due vs another is ahead?

Anyone know where you can play .10 stakes in US online?

Quote from: Denzie on February 29, 2016, 08:44:14 PM
Martingale

This actually makes logical sense..........anytime someone writes about a large number of spins, they lose all of the "get-rich-quick" crowd.

Quote from: Denzie on February 29, 2016, 05:52:08 PM
Hey Blue_Angel. ...

Impressive your progression. It scares me though.
Did it ever busted ? 600 br ?

This is a grind.......no doubt, but if it averages +1 unit for every 10 spins, surely safe enough to play nearly anywhere without any heat,and well within table limits.

The only downside is that we must be prepared to stick it out until a new high is reached, and it would take about 100+hrs to double the bank.

Even if you went to the $128 level (in theory), then you could still play a $15 base pretty easily making about $100/hr........or $200,000/year.


Work=reward!!!

Quote from: Blue_Angel on February 29, 2016, 05:43:21 AM
Just an update report from the 10,000 spins file from random.org

After 1048 results I'm +110 units

Max bet 16 units

Max drawdown -161 units, from +55 to -106 in 121 spins, recovered at +70 units after 30 spins.

So roughly +1 unit every 10 spins.

Is that consistent with your previous tests?

Thanks!