maestro

I fully believe that you would never lose the 1,000.  I believe Jl was right; random has its limits.  Call it regression to the mean, if you will.

Anyway, a test is under way to see if that theory is true.  I will continue to post it.

Sam

Guys

A video will soon be posted to this thread.  While it is long, it would be to your benefit to watch it.  Attached here is the log sheet of all the runs I've done in the past week or so.  There are 87 of them.  There were more, but I went nuts and went to a .50 bet and did not have enough bankroll to cover my loses!!  So I started over at $104 and am now close to $150.

In the 87 trot study, five times the D'Alembert went to level 5.  From there it won.

There were 87 trots; 27 lost and 60 won.  That means that I won more than twice as often as I lost.

Who you gonna call................??

Sam

EDIT:  I missed and "L" so it's 28/59.  Who hoo!!  Also, the orange marks new highs.

Buffster

I am soon posting a video of Normy's Bot.  That does not mean I think it's better.  The bot is not the thing.  I'm sure Nick could program Normy's idea into Stef's bot and it would work the same.

I can't discuss costs as I don't really know.  I know what I'm charged and that's all.  I never ask.

My definition of the "Holy Grail".  Over time, it simply wins more money than it loses.  It does not win every bet; that is pie in the sky.

There are two or three sheets for the ExcelBot that I feel are the "Holy Grail"  IF  1) Bet Voyager is fair and Superman has pretty much convinced me they are.  Bayes, too!  2)  You have a healthy bankroll.  3)  You have a lot of guts and a good internet connection.

You must be willing to risk and lose 1,000 Euro to win 100 Euro a week. 

So, again, it's not the bot.  It's the driving media within the bot that does the winning or losing.

Here is a contrast:  Normy's bot is fixed.  It is what it is.  He and he alone can modify it.  It will explode if someone else tries.  It will destroy your home!!  Kill your dog!!  Don't do it!!

The ExcelBot however is easily made to do a myriad of functions.  Some fellow can have Nick write a sheet and send it to you.  You may test that sheet or play with real money.  There are many bells and whistles on the ExcelBot which can be set dozens of ways. 

If Normy were not a bot builder, he could have had Nick write a sheet with his idea for the ExcelBot.  So....who's better?

Sam

The occasional Rum and Coke will be served in the evenings!!   

Drazen

I meant I used the "IMO" abbbbrrreeevaaation.  Can't answer your question!  Hopefully Pockets will later on.

Sam

Hi People.

Welcome to the TwoCat Cafe.  Sit down, have a cup and tell us what's on your mind.

In this corner, I will discuss whatever I choose and you should feel free to do the same.  Feel free to disagree with me on any subject.

While I will answer on a thread, I will not create any threads except here.

Moderation will be almost non-existant by me.  I can't see the need to ever delete a post at this point.

I did not seek this area; it was offered to me.

Sam

Pockets

This is no criticism.  I once wrote a piece named "New Eyes On the Marquee".  (I can't find it!)  Anyhoo...........I laid out the dilemma you describe with your two guys.

I came to the conclusion that if Tom could sit down and get a trigger before Dick did, there was something wrong.  All players should see the same trigger, IMO.  (There, Drazen.)

So I just naturally assumed you were just looking back three spins as that is what you normally would do.  You must have a dominance in three spins, zero excluded.

Drifting off a bit...........

This is a type of HAR as you're not wanting to play back-to-back triggers.  As with HAR, I always asked if the fellow who sit down when you left--is he doomed to loose?  Can't be, can it? 

Carry on...

Sam

esoito

I started with around 200 real.  I play this thing for dimes and made one dollar each trip.  I felt it could not lose and went to .50 bet bet.  I soon found the Run From Hell and it took me down to 104.00.  I chickened out.  Had I continued to bet, I would have fully recovered.  But I didn't........

So I began from 104 and went back to betting dimes.  I am now at almost 150, so I am climbing out of the hole.  I will eventually get back to 200 and then I will go for .20 instead of .50.

Let's just say my pocket is full of hope.

Sam

esoito

I am playing this system daily on Normy's bot.  For real dimes!

I totally do not understand how it works; have not had time to really study it.  I have too many irons in the fire, as they say.  But no matter.  I need only set the bot and walk away for a while.  I don't know how this computer works either....

I am doing very well. 

Sam

Pockets

First let me say I find this fascinating.  A lot of work on your part.  Thanks a ton.....

Now for my question:

BRR – R dominates and we started betting Red
Next spin B – Stop betting. One signal, dominance ended.........you wrote..

Now if B comes it looks like this B R R B.  Since the last three are dominated by red, why do we stop?

And why did the dominance end?

Sam

I wouldn't count on .01, but a live wheel is good news!!

Pockets

The "Hiccup Effect" pays the same whether you're at level 1-2 or at 10-11 or wherever.

I set the bot like this:  I am at .05.  I either win .50 or I lose .50.  That is my first bet.  If I lose, then my D'Alembert cannot go very high.  Maybe 5?  I've never checked it out.  But say I lose.  I then set the bot for "Basebet = 2"  Now I am shooting for the same win, but double the bet and win/loss ratio.  Still my D' can't go very high or the bot will cut off and go to "Basebet = 3"

It may not be the best way in the world to bet; the 25% surely could be better.  If GG and Drazen recommend it, I'm sure it is.  But the bot won't do that.  I asked Stef for a D'Alembert and I got one.

Lastly, if your bet goes too high, I feel the selection process is poor.

We shall see.  Right now the thing is in a downturn.  I'll have to see where the bankroll is.

Sam

Pockets

"Cut off" means Bet Voyager or something cut me off and I had to re-start the bot.  I just continue on from where I was.

The "Hiccup" effect is when you are using a D'Alembert and you go up and win and down and lose many times in a row.  Here is the way it shakes out.  (Bet 1 and lose.  Bet 2 and win) (Bet 1 and lose.  Bet 2 and win) (Bet 1 and lose.  Bet 2 and win).  Each one of those bets within the parenthesis will net you one unit.  So for this little batch of hiccups, you would gain 3 units and still be at level 1 in your progression.

The D'Alembert merely says if you lose, go up one unit and if you win that bet, go down one unit.

Sam

I believe in random outcomes clustering together in pockets of patterns and numbers.

Pockets

Absolutely they do!!

All we ever need to know is two things:  When to get in and when to get out. 

I'm looking forward to your study!

Thanks for your time and effort.

TwoCat

The numbers on the second column are more clustered than the other two or the dozens.  I had a piece on it, but can't find it.

Sam