+ Register

[ADulay]

There is a shoe posted today by Alrelax in a thread titled "Sections".

As he was kind enough to post it so I just had to run the VDW on it.

It finished at +16 for that shoe.

Copy and play it yourself to see how it comes out for you.

I did run into three sets where the "No Bet" came up, but none back to back so it wasn't a problem.

This shoe also demonstrated how the long runs help out when doing a back up after the 1-2-3 and 1-3-5 win.

AD

[Nickmsi]

Here are final results of testing which cycle length Tracker generates the most profits.  All of these were tested for 30,000 spins/hands.

Cycle Length   Profit/Loss(-)
3         +11
4         -86
5         -42
6         +75
7         +111
8         +91
9         +30   (Basic 9 Cycle Tracker)
      
On all of these test we started a new cycle on a Win but continue to virtual bet to end of cycle on a Loss.

By stop betting at spins 6 or 7 or 8 we avoid getting the Mutual Bet.  This I think is the big reason for the Profits shown.

I now going to run longer sessions for the top 3 results to see how they perform.   

Cheers
Nick

[Big EZ]

Thanks Big!

You must do something very different from us, as how can you get so many wins in 9 spins?!
Or there is something that I don't get?
Can you post some examples of your play?

I didn't explain well enough. I posted 15 different shoes, and the W/L for each shoe with the number of units won after each of the shoes

[Bayes]

Hi Nick,

Interesting thread. Here's a suggestion: since the VDW works on any binary (two-valued) sequence, perhaps you could try it on multiple representations. For example the stream of P/B or R/B could be converted to Chop/Streak and Singles/Series. You could then apply VDW to each of these and only bet when they all "agree". Just a thought.

[sqzbox]

Works on others as well. For example the magic number is 27 for trinary such as dozens and columns. But after that the number really gets too big.

How about dealing with the ambiguous ones by betting both? That is, run a bank on both B and R, say, and use a simple D'Alembert net betting the two. That will halve the cost of zero as well.

[Big EZ]

Here is another set of shoes I tested, 25 more for a total of 40 shoes.


w
w
w
w
w
------ +5

w
w
x
w
------ +2

w
w
w
w
------ +4

w
x
x
w
w
------ +1

w
w
x
w
x
x
w
------ +1

w
w
w
w
x
w
------ +4

w
w
x
w
w
x
------ +2

w
w
w
------ +3

w
x
w
x
w
w
------ +2

w
w
w
w
w
w
------ +6

w
w
w
w
x
w
x
w
------ +4

w
w
x
x
w
------ +1

w
w
x
x
w
------ +1

w
x
w
w
w
x
w
------ +3

w
w
x
w
w
x
w
------ +3             

w
x
x
w
w
w
------ +2

x
w
w
w
w
x
w
------ +3

w
w
w
x
w
------ +3

x
w
w
w
w
x
w
------ +3

w
w
w
w
w
------ +5

w
x
x
x
w
w
------ +0

x
w
w
x
w
------ +1

x
w
w
w
w
------ +3

x
w
w
w
w
------ +3

w
w
w
x
w
------ +3                           

[Nickmsi]

Thanks Bayes and Sqzbox for your ideas and suggestions and yes there is a lot more that can be done with the VDW Theorem.

To finish up the current testing, if you recall the following results were for 30,000 spins.

Cycle Length   Profit/Loss(-)
3         +11
4         -86
5         -42
6         +75
7         +111
8         +91
9         +30   (Basic 9 Cycle Tracker)

I have tested for 250,000 spins the 7 Cycle (+111) vs 8 Cycle (+91) and have attached the results.

The picture on the Left is the 7 Cycle result and the one on the right is the 8 Cycle result.  I think we can forget the 7 Cycle method.

The 8 Cycle result is impressive.  We don't see often a Flat Bet method ending up in profit after 250,000 spins.

The final test to conclude the Cycle testing will be 250,000 spins for the 6 Cycle (+75) vs the 9 Cycle (+30).

Stay tuned . . .

Cheers

Nick

[ice789]

WAIT FOR ROULETTE

BACCARAT?

[Nickmsi]

Hi Ice789 . .

Sorry I don't understand your question, kindly elaborate?

For those baccarat players who find it hard to play this by completing an Arithmetic Progression (AP) I have attached a VDW Baccarat Tracker.

This tracker will automatically tell you what your next bet is based on the AP to be completed.

You don't have to do anything but enter "P" or "B" in Column A and if there is a bet it will show up in Column L.

Enjoy

Nick

[plolp]

@ Big Ez
Can you show how you doing with that?

0
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
1
1    random .org   

Thanks

[Nickmsi]

Hi Plop . .

I ran your numbers through my bot for roulette (1=B, 0=R) and got a -4 result.

Hope this is what you wanted.

Nick

[plolp]

Hi Plop . .

I ran your numbers through my bot for roulette (1=B, 0=R) and got a -4 result.

Hope this is what you wanted.

Nick

this is the procedure that interests me . Not the résult.

Thanks

[ADulay]

For those of you who are working with this method I would REALLY recommend that you take the time to run these test manually so that you can see just how the numbers flow to make the sets complete.

Waiting on Nickmsi to run his bots is great for the overall picture but it doesn't help YOU, the player, to see what is happening in front of you.

For those who have taken the time to work this out hand by hand, you will no doubt see where the problem comes in eventually and it's an 'oldie but goodie" to boot!

It is not insurmountable but it does rear its ugly head from time to time.

If you flat bet this, you should be OK and you'll be even better if you can increase the session/set wager once you run into the "-4" set.

AD

 

[ADulay]

@ Big Ez
Can you show how you doing with that?

0
1
0
0 . . . . .

. . . .1    random .org   

Thanks

How did it comes out when you ran it?

I'll run your session tonight when I get back from tonight's short casino run after my match.

AD

[Big EZ]

@ Big Ez
Can you show how you doing with that?

0
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
1
1    random .org   

Thanks

There are 49 outcomes here. I have been testing in blocks of 60, because I can count on 60 playable hands in a bacc shoe. But for your results I get the following W/L string.

w
w
w
w
w
------ +5