thanks Drazen - very handy 


Do you like waiting to hit the 3SD before making your move?

http://www.bettingexpert.com/racing/daily-naps


This site has given a decent return on nap's, 'value angles', a lay-a-day, that kind of thing..


You just have to get up early enough to get the odds they quote.

Do you think a stoploss using no. of spins rather than units won/loss is possible? (Or maybe a combination of both.)


I know in some of Vic's cycle-based methods you would stop after a full cycle of spins.

Quote from: Turner on May 16, 2013, 09:18:11 AM

that's harder because i find it far easier to stop when losing than stopping when winning.

What to do when you're winning can be a tricky business - on Betfair for instance, I kick myself for 'greening up' to a no-lose position too readily, while not dealing with the losses in a similar way.

Quote from: Trebor on May 10, 2013, 06:53:12 PM

The last few weeks I've been playing for real on Dublinbet but getting nowhere fast.  I'm still hovering around break even so I'll carry on and hope it's just a bad spell.


Thinking I need to apply a lower stop loss, maybe even the -35 you suggested in an earlier post.


Trebor

We saw from some of our tests that 60 or 70 sessions & more (a couple of months at a session a day) can hover around break-even or even drop some.. how many games do you reckon you've actually played with no progress?


I'm still not sure about the stop-loss. I guess it won't turn a losing system into a winning one, but it might take away the pain of a big loss on any given day.

My results were still slowly creeping up, though Danes losses made me take a step back.


I played it for real on Dublinbet and was up until all the connection problems & bets not being taken.


Taking the results of Dane, Trebor &myself, it was still up a couple of thousand units before the wind was taken out the sails slightly.


2CS - I didn't realize you'd botted it, flat betting it tanked badly?
The only progression i tried was the Guetting - you would need to scale the unit size of the increase to  the size of loss if you were going try the d'alembert I think, though I'm still not sure that would work.


I think the 'oner' part of the bet has merit, don't want to throw the baby out with the bath water, part of a straight-up strategy maybe..

These show the difference in my results [The -35u stoploss results can be out by a few units here & there, but they can be taken as fairly reliable approximations]:


No Stoploss:        +1569 in 358 sessions (avg. 4.38)
Stoploss of -35u: +1383 in 358 sessions (avg. 3.86)

On a month-by-month basis:
                No Stoploss        -35u Stoploss
Jan:       +176                      +46
Feb:       +282                      +226
Mar:       -2                           -100
Apr:       -29                          +26
May:      +155                       +157
Jun:        +448                      +382
Jul:         -23                          -25
Aug:       +85                         +47
Sept:     -195                         -30
Oct:        +97                         +103
Nov:       +368                       +300
Dec:       +207                       +190


I've done about another 60 sessions comparing the results, & I think what the Stoploss will do in general is minimise the effect of the worse months, but also clip some units off the good/better months.
It may not affect the final result by much after 1000's of tests, but it may make it a smoother line getting there.

It would be interesting to see how much it could mitigate the effect of the losing sessions in Dane's tests. I might look at that now.

Best Wishes to you Bally 

Jan-Dec 2012


Jan: +176
Feb: +282
Mar: -2
Apr: -29
May: +155
Jun:  +448
Jul:  -23
Aug: +85
Sept: -195   
Oct:  +97   
Nov: +368      
Dec: +207   




Total: +1569 in 358 sessions
(avg. 4.38)




largest single session loss: -155u
biggest drawdown from highest point: -271u




Similar results to those obtained by Dane for 2011 - a 300u bank would've been sufficient.
An average of about +130u per month, playing a single game per day.

Jan-Aug 2012
Jan: +176
Feb: +282
Mar: -2
Apr: -29
May: +155
Jun:  +448
Jul:  -23
Aug: +85


Total: +1092 in 240 sessions
(avg. 4.55)

Jan-Jul 2012
Jan: +176
Feb: +282
Mar: -2
Apr: -29
May: +155
Jun:  +448
Jul:  -23


Total: +1007 in 209 sessions
(avg. 4.82)

The largest single session loss in July (& in all tests so far) was -146u.

Thanks for testing too Trebor.

Quote from: Dane on March 26, 2013, 12:22:59 PM
Hi monaco; your results are even more impressive than mine! Yes, it is useful to look closer at  some periods.  We cannot know for sure, however, how many chips we´ll need tomorrow.

More tests bring more interesting data to learn from, & sometimes surprise us   


Looking at some smaller periods can suggest what we may possibly expect in way of drawdowns, & how long we might expect a level period of no noticeable profit or loss to last -
for example, in my results, both March & April were slightly negative, so we can see that we might have 60 consecutive sessions without a noticeable profit, but due to more testing, we might expect it to turn +ve again at some point - giving us the motivation to carry on, even after 60 consecutive sessions where no profit has been obtained.
BUT, I agree, we cannot know how many chips we'll need tomorrow.

QuoteThe session always starts with the first spin of the day. We do not want to manipulate results  by chossing another starting point.

I always start with the first spin of the day, play until a hit, & then move on to the first spin of the next day. All test results are from this.


I start the first day of each month on Table 2 & alternate from then on.
If there are no results from Table 2 on a particular day, I will try Table 3 & vice versa.

QuoteAnd I do not want to choose another table whenever I feel like it.  Why are you alternating between table 2&3?

I like to see results from different sources, to show that it is not the source giving the results, but the strategy itself.
Different tables, different dealers, different dealers on different tables - all just adds to the impartiality of the results.
Perhaps the next 6 months a different casino could be tested.


It doesn't seem to have had an affect on the results so far, as can be seen from the similarity in our tests.

Test results for Jan-June 2012, Wiesbaden, alternating daily between Table 2 & 3, playing four/five:


Jan: +176
Feb: +282
Mar: -2
Apr: -29
May: +155
Jun:  +448


Total: +1030u (178 sessions)




June had only 3 losing days of -3, -21 & -25.




It's useful to look closer at May 2012 also, which was much more variable:
up +200 after 15 days, it then dropped -230 in 3 days, before recovering to +155 by the months end.
The 3 consecutive loss days were -104, -83, -45.

Quote from: soggett on March 23, 2013, 10:57:58 AM
so you are playing for 1 hit a day?

yes

Quote
why not more, like till you are in plus for that day?

that is a possibility -


As Dane says though, you can't guarantee reaching a + moment, so you'd then need to consider if you wanted some kind of stoploss in case you didn't reach plus at any point, or play the game until its natural end when there are no more numbers to bet & just see where you were.


I did look into it a bit before (not with this particular version, but when we first started testing the original 5 in a row), sometimes it works well with the 2nd & 3rd hit not far behind the 1st, but... of course sometimes it didn't, so then you would need to decide what you were going to do - work out your mm basically.


The '5 repeaters in a row' mainly plays the part of bringing the session to an end if the 4 oners in a row don't win (which they will do 90% of the time).
At some point there has to be 5 repeaters in a row. There doesn't have to be 4 oners in a row during any game.

Quote
how many spins per day is it on average?

Off the top of my head, I would say on average 20-40

Quote from: VLS on March 22, 2013, 12:56:07 AM


[6x6]1,2,3,4,5,1[/6x6]

Trebor - just type in exactly what it says above & press 'post'..

no worries Sam, any time.