the Half Labby (for EC)
This is an idea based on a traditional Labby with a large line structure, so please forgive me if this has been posted here before. I found the 65 Labby idea below on the Roulette30 forum, but they were playing it through (suicidal of course).
So the idea behind this system is to create a situation where you are ahead at some point by a small number of units (10 seems to be the sweet spot) with bets covering up to 100 Spins. You will play as if you are going to complete the Labby, but just stop when you are ahead (could end at 20 spins, or at 78 spins-so quite a range). The beauty of this system, is that is keeps the number of spins large enough to find a reasonable average.
Start by using a 50-line Labby :
l l l l l
l l l l l
l l l l l
l l l l l
l l l l l
l l l l l
l l l l l
l l l l l
l l l l l
l l l l l
------------------------------------------
Here is an example of a of the final line chart after 70 Spins :
Bankroll Needed : 100 units
Largest Draw-down : 15 units (worse than average-pretty bad run)
Win Target : 10 units
Actual Win : 11 units
lll
lll
lll
lll
lll
lll
lll
lll
lll
lll
lll
lll
I starting testing this system, after looking for something less risky than the Labby Breaker/Supa Labby Breaker. Feel free to give an example where the system fails ( I haven't found one yet).
Bonus for Super-Conservative Play: the 65 Labby
One modification of this system is to use the 65 Labby. This is based on the "worst case scenerio" of 135 losses over 200 spins. Simply use 65 lines, and set a modest win goal (10 is very conservative)
theLaw
Hi Law.,
Very interesting strategy, but can't understand,
May u please make a step by step example of betting below.
The 69 red in 200 spin is still the record.[ not 65win, in 200.]
The HP.Johnson and 1/65 LANKY DIVISOR,can beat , but alas not on BM casino as, the staking too complex.
HAMBURG 25/10/1999 TABLE TISH 1.
THE WORST EVER RECORDED OF 'RED' APPEAR ONLY 69 OUT OF 200 SPINS...
200 SPINS, START FROM SPIN NO 37..TO 237..BUT RECORDED BY ME AS NO. OF
SERIES.
RED APPEAR AT SPIN OF...3RD,5TH,7,10,12,16,21,23,
29,31,32,35,36,37,38,42,45,46,
52,55,58,62,65,68,69,71,75,77,80,90,92,95,97,101,102,104,114,
117,119,122,128,129,130,131,134,138,140,143,145,146,147,149,
150,154,155,158,163,164,168,171,172,174,175,180,184,187,192,
193,196..
ZERO=14,105,153,186,190,199.
IF U CAN FIND A SYSTEM TO WIN THESE SERIES, U MAY WIN AT CASINO.
69red appear in worst roulette 200 spins ever recorded.
ZERO=14,105,153,186,190,199.
please show step to step how to beat this
spin =1th to 200th spin,x=red hit.
1
2
3x
4
5x
6
7x
8
9
10x
11
12x
13
14
15
16x
17
18
19
20
21x
22
23x
24
25
26
27
28
29x
30
31x
32x
33
34
35x
36x
37x
38x
39
40
41
42x
43
44
45x
46 x
47
48
49
50
51
52x
53
54
55 x
56
57
58x
59
60
61
62x
63
64
65x
66
67
68x
69x
70
71x
72
73
74
75x
76
77x
78
79
80x
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90x
91
92x
93
94
95 x
96
97x
98
99
100
101x
102 x
103
104 x
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114x
115
116
117x
118
119 x
120
121
122 x
123
124
125
126
127
128 x
129 x
130x
131 x
132
133
134x
135
136
137
138 x
139
140x
141
142
143 x
144
145x
146 x
147 x
148
149 x
150x
151
152
153
154 x
155 x
156
157
158x
159
160
161
162
163x
164 x
165
166
167
168 x
169
170
171x
172x
173
174 x
175x
176
177
178
179
180x
181
182
183
184 x
185
186
187 x
188
189
190
191
192x
193 x
194
195
196 x
197
198
199
200
Quote from: BEAT-THE-WHEEL on July 14, 2014, 03:32:42 AM
Hi Law.,
Very interesting strategy, but can't understand,
May u please make a step by step example of betting below.
The 69 red in 200 spin is still the record.[ not 65win, in 200.]
The HP.Johnson and 1/65 LANKY DIVISOR,can beat , but alas not on BM casino as, the staking too complex.
HAMBURG 25/10/1999 TABLE TISH 1.
THE WORST EVER RECORDED OF 'RED' APPEAR ONLY 69 OUT OF 200 SPINS...
200 SPINS, START FROM SPIN NO 37..TO 237..BUT RECORDED BY ME AS NO. OF
SERIES.
RED APPEAR AT SPIN OF...3RD,5TH,7,10,12,16,21,23,
29,31,32,35,36,37,38,42,45,46,
52,55,58,62,65,68,69,71,75,77,80,90,92,95,97,101,102,104,114,
117,119,122,128,129,130,131,134,138,140,143,145,146,147,149,
150,154,155,158,163,164,168,171,172,174,175,180,184,187,192,
193,196..
ZERO=14,105,153,186,190,199.
IF U CAN FIND A SYSTEM TO WIN THESE SERIES, U MAY WIN AT CASINO.
69red appear in worst roulette 200 spins ever recorded.
ZERO=14,105,153,186,190,199.
please show step to step how to beat this
spin =1th to 200th spin,x=red hit.
1
2
3x
4
5x
6
7x
8
9
10x
11
12x
13
14
15
16x
17
18
19
20
21x
22
23x
24
25
26
27
28
29x
30
31x
32x
33
34
35x
36x
37x
38x
39
40
41
42x
43
44
45x
46 x
47
48
49
50
51
52x
53
54
55 x
56
57
58x
59
60
61
62x
63
64
65x
66
67
68x
69x
70
71x
72
73
74
75x
76
77x
78
79
80x
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90x
91
92x
93
94
95 x
96
97x
98
99
100
101x
102 x
103
104 x
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114x
115
116
117x
118
119 x
120
121
122 x
123
124
125
126
127
128 x
129 x
130x
131 x
132
133
134x
135
136
137
138 x
139
140x
141
142
143 x
144
145x
146 x
147 x
148
149 x
150x
151
152
153
154 x
155 x
156
157
158x
159
160
161
162
163x
164 x
165
166
167
168 x
169
170
171x
172x
173
174 x
175x
176
177
178
179
180x
181
182
183
184 x
185
186
187 x
188
189
190
191
192x
193 x
194
195
196 x
197
198
199
200
Hey Beat,
Ran that sequence, and here's the results :
Method : Standard 50 Line Labby (bet from first line, add to last line)
Max Draw-down : 342 units
Win : +50 units at Spin #142
Largest Bet : 130* (last 3 spins)
* I would have probably added some lines after $75 bets, as it was clear that this was a monster run, but I followed the strict rules for this test
It's possible that with a Labby of fewer or more lines, the bets could have hit a really bad sequence (like the few 9-in-a-row runs), but there are ways to deal with that by adding lines if necessary
Unfortunately, I can't show all the work step-by-step as it would take up dozens of full pages on the forum (remember 50 lines) :)
Thanks Law,
Unfortunately as u can't show step by step, its hard for me to understand.
Thanks anyway.
BTW, do u have any progression, or strategy, that good to win the double dozen bet???[Labby,Lanky or anything that win mostly in, the average bet selection]
Thanks in advance.
Hi Law,
U have any idea to solved this? I can't as the staking out of my preferences.
[double dozen bet, bet every spin] start with 1unit for both dozen.
LLLLLWLLLLLWLLLLLWLLLLLWLLLWLLLWLLLWLLWLWLWWWWWWWWWWW
Quote from: BEAT-THE-WHEEL on July 14, 2014, 04:26:22 AM
Thanks Law,
Unfortunately as u can't show step by step, its hard for me to understand.
Thanks anyway.
BTW, do u have any progression, or strategy, that good to win the double dozen bet???[Labby,Lanky or anything that win mostly in, the average bet selection]
Thanks in advance.
Something that I'm working on right now is a flat betting opportunity for dozens based on JL's Pattern Breaker. Here is a summary :
take your normal Pattern Breaker lines
213
122
331
321
etc
...now, you notice where the first 3 on the third line matches with the first 3 on the fourth line-this is a rare event. If the next bet is based on a 3 (like the one in the third line over the 2), then bet that the 3 over 3 will not repeat (highly unusual to see this pattern). SO your bet in this situation would be...
331
3-trigger - bet for this patter not to repeat (bet dozens 1+2)
331
32-winner
So far this has won with flat betting (warning-this is a bit of a grind) about 4 units per hour live, or 20 units using RNG.
Good luck! :)
Quote from: BEAT-THE-WHEEL on July 14, 2014, 04:33:58 AM
Hi Law,
U have any idea to solved this? I can't as the staking out of my preferences.
[double dozen bet, bet every spin] start with 1unit for both dozen.
LLLLLWLLLLLWLLLLLWLLLLLWLLLWLLLWLLLWLLWLWLWWWWWWWWWWW
A 20 line Labby would work ( for a full explanation, just search Labby on the forums)
Quote from: TheLaw on July 14, 2014, 04:44:25 AM
Something that I'm working on right now is a flat betting opportunity for dozens based on JL's Pattern Breaker. Here is a summary :
take your normal Pattern Breaker lines
213
122
331
321
etc
...now, you notice where the first 3 on the third line matches with the first 3 on the fourth line-this is a rare event. If the next bet is based on a 3 (like the one in the third line over the 2), then bet that the 3 over 3 will not repeat (highly unusual to see this pattern). SO your bet in this situation would be...
331
3-trigger - bet for this patter not to repeat (bet dozens 1+2)
331
32-winner
So far this has won with flat betting (warning-this is a bit of a grind) about 4 units per hour live, or 20 units using RNG.
Good luck! :)
Hi TheLaw
I've actually played this approach in a B&M casino's, it seemed to hold up well (I didn't flat bet). The issue I had was how many results to write from left to right, writing via rows of 3 is really of no significance, I was looking for some optimum figure when really there isn't. Also I found waiting a little tedious and ended up including other factors.
Quote from: Rolex-Watch on July 14, 2014, 04:52:18 PM
Hi TheLaw
I've actually played this approach in a B&M casino's, it seemed to hold up well (I didn't flat bet). The issue I had was how many results to write from left to right, writing via rows of 3 is really of no significance, I was looking for some optimum figure when really there isn't. Also I found waiting a little tedious and ended up including other factors.
Agreed. A bit too much of a waiting game, but a super conservative winner! :)
Quote from: TheLaw on July 14, 2014, 05:48:08 PM
Agreed. A bit too much of a waiting game, but a super conservative winner! :)
It has been a long time since I played this and I recall rationalising writing in rows of 5, more variables (spots) less likely a triple repeat in the same spot.
Quote from: Rolex-Watch on July 14, 2014, 07:36:54 PM
It has been a long time since I played this and I recall rationalising writing in rows of 5, more variables (spots) less likely a triple repeat in the same spot.
makes sense - I'm sure there are 100s of different ways to create these "rare" patterns and win long term. Perhaps everyone is chasing ghosts on these forums, when a simple system already exists :)
Quote from: TheLaw on July 14, 2014, 08:25:59 PM
makes sense - I'm sure there are 100s of different ways to create these "rare" patterns and win long term. Perhaps everyone is chasing ghosts on these forums, when a simple system already exists :)
My personal opinion having played this, is you won't win flat betting, because you are laying out 2 to win 1, all it takes it the odd back to back repeat (very rare, but I've had it), include the odd zero then try and come back from that betting flat, so then it is the usual progression issues for playing the 3rd's, some form of a Labby was my preference than the expected triple up. Also I ran it on the Dozen's and Columns at the same time.
Quote from: Rolex-Watch on July 15, 2014, 12:46:33 AM
My personal opinion having played this, is you won't win flat betting, because you are laying out 2 to win 1, all it takes it the odd back to back repeat (very rare, but I've had it), include the odd zero then try and come back from that betting flat, so then it is the usual progression issues for playing the 3rd's, some form of a Labby was my preference than the expected triple up. Also I ran it on the Dozen's and Columns at the same time.
I use a 3-line Labby as well, but it may be a little to slow for my taste-also, not sure that there isn't a monster sequence out there waiting to destroy it.
I'm talking to GLC now about a 50-line Labby method that so far has won against every nightmare run that I can find (I started with the "horror" sequences provided a couple of years ago in the Bayes, Fripper discussion). Still waiting for the sequence that can kill it :)
@Law
Please try to do this real data with worst "High" EC bet over 1600 spins. If your any progression wins over this data without getting too deep in drawdown, it is really worth focusing upon. I worked upon a variety of Labouchere (including my own versions) and found it promising but only if u have millions of chips.
Quote from: Albalaha on July 15, 2014, 08:16:03 AM
@Law
Please try to do this real data with worst "High" EC bet over 1600 spins. If your any progression wins over this data without getting too deep in drawdown, it is really worth focusing upon. I worked upon a variety of Labouchere (including my own versions) and found it promising but only if u have millions of chips.
If you can send me a text doc or pdf (I don't use xcl)I would be happy to take a look :)
Sure,
I am giving the L/W of this in a text file here.
:thumbsup:
Quote from: Albalaha on July 15, 2014, 12:41:46 PM
Sure,
I am giving the L/W of this in a text file here.
:thumbsup:
Update : Labby failed at bet #126 of the sequence provided - Thanks for your help-much appreciated!!! :)
QuoteUpdate : Labby failed at bet #126 of the sequence provided - Thanks for your help-much appreciated!!!
No pushing progression can sustain till the variance can drag us. If it gets possible, playing roulette will become a fearless job.
Quote from: Albalaha on July 15, 2014, 04:14:53 PM
No pushing progression can sustain till the variance can drag us. If it gets possible, playing roulette will become a fearless job.
Update!!!The sequence that was previously a bust, has been beaten with a 65-Line Labby. Here are the results:
Win : +50 units @ spin 167
Max Draw-down : -600 units (worst I've seen by far)
Largest bet : $252 (last bet)
W/L Breakdown : 103 losses / 64 wins (62% loss/38% win)
Notes : Here are the next 33 spins for reference (i've also attached a text file with the full sequence) :LWWWWLLWLLWLWLWWLLLLWWLWWWWWLWWLLL
-as you can see, there is still an enormous amount of wiggle room for the betting.
the Labby is still alive!!! :)
what's the big deal ....given session by alabala,what you do just bet spin 1,2,4,8,16 when you go to spin 16 start count again 1,2,4,8,16 and so on ... till the end....you should get "w"235/"l"265 it should work for any sequence
Quote from: maestro on July 15, 2014, 11:03:46 PM
what's the big deal ....given session by alabala,what you do just bet spin 1,2,4,8,16 when you go to spin 16 start count again 1,2,4,8,16 and so on ... till the end....you should get "w"235/"l"265 it should work for any sequence
I'm confused - are you suggesting a limited Martingale with the result being a final loss of 30 units???
I thought that we were trying to win at Roulette :)
:P no...you get labby and start bet spin 1, bet spin2 , spin 3 no bet, bet spin 4 ,no bet spin 5,6,7, bet spin 8,no bet 9,10,11,12,13,14,15 , bet spin 16,then start count again as after 16th spin is spin 17 so for your count spin 17 will be spin 1,spin18 will be spin 2 and so on...
Quote from: maestro on July 15, 2014, 11:22:28 PM
:P no...you get labby and start bet spin 1, bet spin2 , spin 3 no bet, bet spin 4 ,no bet spin 5,6,7, bet spin 8,no bet 9,10,11,12,13,14,15 , bet spin 16,then start count again as after 16th spin is spin 17 so for your count spin 17 will be spin 1,spin18 will be spin 2 and so on...
I'm confused - how are you choosing which spins to bet? (also, please note that I am playing a 65 line Labby betting from the first line, and adding losses across all lines available) :)
i don't just from start...spin 1 i bet so spin 2 no bet pin 3 bet spin 4 and so on as i wrote earlier
Quote from: maestro on July 15, 2014, 11:35:32 PM
i don't just from start...spin 1 i bet so spin 2 no bet pin 3 bet spin 4 and so on as i wrote earlier
Thanks Maestro! :)
Update - Modified Labby
Just bet every other spin using a standard 33-line Labby
Results :
#1 Bet then every otherWin : +50 units @ spin 188Max Draw-down : -210 unitsLargest bet : $165 (last bet)#2 - then bet every other :Win : +50 units @ spin 142Max Draw-down : -30 units (yes-you read that right-30)Largest bet : $26 (last bet)[/size][/size]Once again, Thanks to Maestro for for the great modification!!! :)
minor correction for bets starting with #1 :Max Draw-down : -156Largest Bet : +216Win : +50 at spin #189 (not 188 as before)Here are the percentages :#1 : 33wins/62 losses (35%/65%)#2 : 33wins/37 losses (47%/53%)
@Law
QuoteUpdate!!!The sequence that was previously a bust, has been beaten with a 65-Line Labby. Here are the results:
Buddy, if you re-configure the solution as per the problem, anything can be beaten but there has to be a general strategy to play because we can't guess the kind of variance that we may get in a coming session.
Plus, if your strategy wins in 1600 bets somewhere, try to bet same way the entire 1600 spins. If it wins even 1 unit finally, it is worth re-looking.
@Maestro,
You said:
Quoteno...you get labby and start bet spin 1, bet spin2 , spin 3 no bet, bet spin 4 ,no bet spin 5,6,7, bet spin 8,no bet 9,10,11,12,13,14,15 , bet spin 16,then start count again as after 16th spin is spin 17 so for your count spin 17 will be spin 1,spin18 will be spin 2 and so on...
Would you mind showing this on the given data, for the sake of clarity?
Quote from: Albalaha on July 16, 2014, 04:28:30 AM
@Law
Buddy, if you re-configure the solution as per the problem, anything can be beaten but there has to be a general strategy to play because we can't guess the kind of variance that we may get in a coming session.
Plus, if your strategy wins in 1600 bets somewhere, try to bet same way the entire 1600 spins. If it wins even 1 unit finally, it is worth re-looking.
@Maestro,
You said:
Would you mind showing this on the given data, for the sake of clarity?
Albalaha,This is not changing the betting pattern to suit the results, as that would clearly do none of us any good. I simply cut the system in half (Labby included) and caught a more usable average (keep in mind we are talking about up to 200 spins). Trying a larger or smaller Labby must work consistently on all testing sequences, not just one to be effective. I usually try to post results as they become available.Maestro was very clear in his explanation - simply bet every other spin-that's it; nothing more.
Quote from: TheLaw on July 15, 2014, 12:59:20 AM
I use a 3-line Labby as well, but it may be a little to slow for my taste-also, not sure that there isn't a monster sequence out there waiting to destroy it.
I'm talking to GLC now about a 50-line Labby method that so far has won against every nightmare run that I can find (I started with the "horror" sequences provided a couple of years ago in the Bayes, Fripper discussion). Still waiting for the sequence that can kill it :)
This 50-line Labby may win against every nightmare run thus far, but at what cost? What is the draw-down (how deep are you in for), largest required bet?
One time I was playing this, trigger occurred and I was winning every bet placed, then some guy sitting next to me, say's look at that. The prick of a dealer had only spun 4 zero's in 5 spins, he was expecting me to bet the columns / dozens and was getting miffed me winning.
Quote from: Rolex-Watch on July 16, 2014, 05:21:21 AM
This 50-line Labby may win against every nightmare run thus far, but at what cost? What is the draw-down (how deep are you in for), largest required bet?
One time I was playing this, trigger occurred and I was winning every bet placed, then some guy sitting next to me, say's look at that. The prick of a dealer had only spun 4 zero's in 5 spins, he was expecting me to bet the columns / dozens and was getting miffed me winning.
The rare event bets may be a good strategy long term to win with a low draw-down. I'm stuck on this Labby idea at the moment, simply because of the sequences that it can withstand. A $210 draw-down for one of the worst runs ever recorded (65% losses) is pretty impressive.
If we're stuck with rare events betting to win, then that's fine by me. I'm just seeing how close I can get to a solution before this thing goes tits-up :)
@Law,
Will your 65 step labby or 50 step labby (pick any one you like) clear entire 1600 spins with a net win?
@ Maestro,
Same question for your suggested progression.
We may reverse engineer any given/known session and create a progression that can beat it but that is not workable in random sessions.
If any of your progression beats this 1600 spins entirely, I can give another similar case and if they win both, everybody will admire that.
Quote from: Albalaha on July 16, 2014, 06:00:29 AM
@Law,
Will your 65 step labby or 50 step labby (pick any one you like) clear entire 1600 spins with a net win?
@ Maestro,
Same question for your suggested progression.
We may reverse engineer any given/known session and create a progression that can beat it but that is not workable in random sessions.
If any of your progression beats this 1600 spins entirely, I can give another similar case and if they win both, everybody will admire that.
1600 Spins challenge completed (note that I just started each new game with next spin-if someone would like to play the opposite w/l record, be my guest)
33 Standard Labby with 1/2 modification (just bet every other spin) beats #1512 Spins (stopped due to #200 spins needed for another game)
Bankroll : $1000
Win total : +550 units
Largest Bet : -$795
Max Draw-down : -$745
***note that I played this as a standard Labby as described in earlier posts with 1/2 mod - so all Martingale scenarios were played through without adjustments (adding lines)-hence the massive bet and dd from game #7***
Results :
#142----+ 50 units win end of game #2 ( game ended first starting with 2nd spin)
#189----+ 50 units win end of game #1 (starting with bet #1 and then every other spin)
#346----+50 units win end of game #3 - largest bet = $98 - dd=-$29
#505----+50 units win - end of game #4 - lb=$123 - dd=-$31
#640---+50 units win - end of game #5 - lb=$180 - dd=-$150
#817---+50 units win - end of game #6 - lb=$129 - dd=-$202
#948---+50 units win - end of game #7 - lb=$795 - dd=-$745
#1099---+50 units win - end of game #8 - lb=$15 - dd=-$16
#1224---+50 units win - end of game #9 - lb=$82 - dd= (less than 10)
#1351---+50 units win - end of game #10 - lb=$18 - dd=-(less than 10)
#1512---+50 units win - end of game #11 - lb=$50 - dd=--$30---last game (200 spins needed for game)
**spin results file attached
@ Law,
Incredible stuff!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Can someone please show this step by step, preferably in an excel sheet? The given session was the worst EC case that I got in a million spin analysis that lasts for 1600 spins. Beating this successfully means we can beat the worst stretch of an EC that should come in a million spin (little worse is possible too but this one was standard example of long lasting and irritating variance). I can't understand as explained or exhibited in the text file but it is serious.
If someone does this step by step, I will put another similar session. If that gets beaten too, with the same methodology, we need a tracker of this way of playing.
Great job after a long time. I hope calculations have no fault. :thumbsup:
The theory of this type of betting is, bet every increasing increment, to avoiding long losing streaks,
...since win and lose, will always at nearly 50/50 chance.
After a long spins, the profit /loss, result will always near equilibrium, meaning if u play FLATBET, u either lose or win only a few chips!
Given this kind of result, any labby strategy will win, as the WIN/lose ratio will always more than 1/3.
quote:
[just bet spin 1,2,4,8,16 when you go to spin 16 start count again 1,2,4,8,16 and so on ... till the end....you should get "w"235/"l"265 it should work for any sequence]
Bet spin number 1, then bet spin number 2, then 4, then 8, then 16, so on till positive, and RESTART!....Bet NEXT spin AS number 1, then bet spin number 2, then 4, then 8, then 16, so on till positive, and RESTART!
Thus u avoid being trapped in the long losing streaks, and since the probability= near 50/50, then the result will always nearly equilibrium, win alittle or lose a little and with a godly progression, this betselection a good choice.
QuoteBet spin number 1, then bet spin number 2, then 4, then 8, then 16, so on till positive, and RESTART!....Bet NEXT spin AS number 1, then bet spin number 2, then 4, then 8, then 16, so on till positive, and RESTART!
How doing this guarantees any benefit over playing all spins? Since we do not know the future, it could go opposite too. Like after trying fourth failure at 8th spin, there may be many wins from 9th to 15th and a loss at 16th. It would be like firing randomly while blindfolding yourself expecting better hits than with open eyes.
see attached excel..with your numbers betting high..you can change formulas depend on what EC betting and how many spin so you can get count of <w> and <l> right..hope it helps...it is not reverse eng...
Quote from: maestro on July 17, 2014, 09:48:01 AM
see attached excel..with your numbers betting high..you can change formulas depend on what EC betting and how many spin so you can get count of <w> and <l> right..hope it helps...it is not reverse eng...
Hi Maestro,
Since I am spreadsheet illiterate,
may u please tell,
how is the averages, of
say, 1000spins of any EC result.
1]worst win/lose ratio ever encountered.
2]longest losing streaks count.
3]longest winning streaks count.
if the win/lose ratio is good, and the losing streaks very short,
then this bet selection good.
thanks in advance.
Quote from: Albalaha on July 17, 2014, 05:54:18 AM
@ Law,
Incredible stuff!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Can someone please show this step by step, preferably in an excel sheet? The given session was the worst EC case that I got in a million spin analysis that lasts for 1600 spins. Beating this successfully means we can beat the worst stretch of an EC that should come in a million spin (little worse is possible too but this one was standard example of long lasting and irritating variance). I can't understand as explained or exhibited in the text file but it is serious.
If someone does this step by step, I will put another similar session. If that gets beaten too, with the same methodology, we need a tracker of this way of playing.
Great job after a long time. I hope calculations have no fault. :thumbsup:
Hey Albalaha,
I'll do a bet-by-bet breakdown of the worst sequence (dd-745) when I get a chance in the next 48hrs.
The txt file just show 11 games one after another using the standard 33-line Labby, with the beginning and end of each game with details.
The 33-line Labby is simple :
-write out 33 lines
-next bet is always just the first line (not a combination of lines)
-always add losses to all lines starting with the last line
-only bet every other spin
That's it! :)
From this test, it appears that there may be a maximum draw-down that is possible mathematically with over 150 spins and a large enough Labby.
The worst sequence, for instance, had another 4 losses after reaching a $159 bet (hence the large draw-down).
Please note that I am making some adjustments to the system, so please hold off on any further comments until I post the new information (should be up in 24hrs) - Thanks! :)
Final Update : Failure : Labby 33 (bet every other spin)
After reviewing the spins, I found an error in the final few bets of the worst sequence (game #7) that brought the total draw-down to over $5000 busting both the bankroll and table limit. Although my error only effected the last couple of spins, and thus did not effect the outcome of the other games, it still indicates an overall failure of the system.
I subsequently tried to adjust the betting to insure against Martingale by capping bets at $100 and adding lines after each loss, but found this to ultimately be a losing strategy, as more and more lines meant imminent failure.
Thanks to Maestro, Albalaha, and GLC for their help with this system - Much appreciated!!! :)
Hi
Since the bet selection quite ok,...
I think the LABBY strat from one is SAFER!!!
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Below I do a LABBY start from a single 1
-------------------------
1st spins. Lose
start labby as
[1]
bet 1=lose=-1=-1
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
2nd. =Lose 2nd bet
[11]
bet 2=lose=-2=-3
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
4th spin. =W [3rd bet]
[112]
bet3=win=3=0
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
8th.= Win [4th bet]
[1]
bet 1=win=1=+1 win, reset.[total win=+1]
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
16th. =L [5th bet]
start labby as [1]
bet 1=lose=-1=-1
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
17. L1
[11]
bet 2=lose=-2=-3
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
18. L2
[112]
bet 3=lose=-3=-6
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
20. L4
[1123]
bet 4=lose=-4=-10
24. W8
[11234]
bet5=win=+5=-5
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
32. L16
[ 123 ]
bet 4=lose=-4=-9
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
33. L1
[ 1234 ]
bet 5=-5=-14
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
34. L2
[ 12345 ]
bet 6=lose=-6=-20
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
36. W4
[ 123456 ]
bet 7=win=+7=-13
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
40. L8
[ 2345 ]
bet 7=lose=-7=-20
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
48. W16
[ 23457 ]
bet 9=win=+9=-11
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
49. W1
[ 345 ]
bet 8=win=+8=-3
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
50. W2
[ 4 ]
bet 4=win=+4=+1 reset. total=win=2
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
52. W4[count as4
[1]
bet 1=win=+1. reset. total=win=3
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
56. L8
[1]
bet 1=lose=-1=-1
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
64. W[16]
[11]
bet2=win=+2=+1. reset. total=win=4
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
65. L1
[1]
bet 1=lose=-1=-1
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
66. W2
[11]
bet2=win=+2=+1. reset. total=win=5
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
68. L4
[1]
bet 1=lose=-1=-1
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
72. L8
[11]
bet 2=lose=-2=-3
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
80. W16
[112]
bet 3=lose=-4=-7
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
81. L1
[1123]
bet 4=lose=-4=-11
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
82. L2
[11234]
bet 5=lose=-5=-16
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
84. L4
[112345]
bet 6=lose=-6=--22
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
88. L8
[1123456]
bet 7=lose=-7=-29
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
96. L16
[11234567]
bet 8=lose=-8=-37
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
97. L1
[112345678]
bet 9=lose=-9=-46
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
98. W2
[1123456789]
bet 10=win=10=-36
xxxxxxxxxx
100. W4
[ 12345678 ]
bet 9=win=9=-27
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
104. L8
[ 234567 ]
bet 9=lose=-9=-36
xxxxxxxxxxx
112. L16
[ 2345679 ]
bet 11=lose=-11=-47
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
113. W1
[ 2345679,11 ]
bet 13=win=13=-34
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
114. W2
[ 345679 ]
bet 12==win=12=-22
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
116. L4
[ 4567 ]
bet 11=lose=-11=-33
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
120. W8
[ 4567,11 ]
bet 15==win=15=-18
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
128. L16
[ 567 ]
bet 12=lose=-12=-30
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
129. L1
[ 567,12]
bet 17=lose=-17=-47
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
130. L2
[ 567,12,17]
bet 22=lose=-22=-69
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
132. L4
[ 567,12,17,22]
bet 27=lose=-27=-96
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
136. W8
[ 567,12,17,22,27]
bet32=win=-64
==================
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
144.L16
[ 6,7,12,17,22, ]
bet28=lose=-92
and so on....
@Maestro,
222 Wins vs 263 losses. Don't you think that it is merely a coincidence to get such numbers? Do you expect similar counts in another worse session?