+ Register

[plolp]

Nickmsi ,
Do you conclude that you have an advantage because you get +176 per 100000 spins?

With or without the zero it is a score that does not mean anything!

Maybe I misread?
What do you call doublets?

Cheers

[Kattila]

Nick,
Could you give us an example how
to play the combination of doublets with
triplets.

And the other way the chops way seems to be
a good way to play.
1. No bet
2. Bet oposite spin 1
3. Bet oposite spin 2
1. No bet
2. Bet oposite spin 1
3. Bet oposite spin 2
Still good results with this one?

Thanks

[Nickmsi]

Hi Plolp
"Do you conclude that you have an advantage because you get +176 per 100000 spins?"

I concluded that we have an advantage because it was mathematically proven by PDF file attached earlier and by Professor Lisa Goldberg PHD as shown in her YouTube video.

Math doesn't lie, or so they say.  But I needed to prove to myself that we actually do have an advantage so I set out to test it.

Since this is a binary event only 2 ways we could test this.

1.   Bet that Red follows a Red
2.   Bet that Black follows a Red.

Both of these are 50% chances when played consecutively.

But the test was for a Group of Spins, namely 3, hence my name Triplets.

So I flat bet 100,000 spins each way. 

Betting the first way- Red follows Red resulted in a net loss of -358

Betting the second way- Black follows Red resulted in a net gain of +178

Now I had my first validation that this Triplet theory has some merit.

Since then we have tested 100's of different ways to play this I still see this method continually validating this theory.

It doesn't win all the time but it wins more than anything I have seen to date.

Hi Katilla and Beat the Wheel

The Triplet method only wins when we bet it EXACTLY according to the theory, ie,

1st Spin-No Bet
2nd Spin-Bet OTL
3rd Spin-Bet OTL

No other way gives you the EDGE.

We are testing adding progressions and other streams, like the Fixed Doublet of RBRBRB.

Right now, we are finding that adding the Fixed Doublet of RBRBRB in front of the Triplet shows some good results.  In other words bet the RBRBRBRBRB for first 10 spins or first 100 spins and then bet the Triplet.

Cheers
Nick

[BEAT-THE-WHEEL]

Hi Nickmsi,
Thanks for your posts.

Imho, a very stable bet selection, is utmost,

if in every 1000spins/hand, session...

If we can have at least,  worst=-3%, on or before the 1000th,

then it very easy to profit.

[Nickmsi]

Hi Lugi,

This is a response to your post in

https://betselection.cc/baccarat-forum/can-anyone-figure-out-how-many-possible-outcomes-exist-in-a-shoe-of-baccarat/msg64459/#new

Yes, I couldn't understand either how you could get an edge when you still get 4W and 4L.  I thought the exact thing and figured that since it has been 55 years since college math and dementia is slowing creeping up on me that it must be some kind of math voodoo or new math that I am not aware of.

They showed the bias when applying Fractions to the 3 spin/hand sets as follows:

OOO NB NB NB
OOX NB NB NB         Fractions
OXO NB L NB      L   0
OXX NB L NB      L   0
XOO NB W NB      W   1
XOX NB L NB      L   0
XXO NB W L      WL   .5
XXX NB W W      WW   1
                  2.5/6

If you can understand it then " You're a better man than I am, Gunga Din!"  But what I do understand is how to test systems.

I have a data file with 100,000 No Zero spins collected from BetVoyager.   So I tested both FOR and AGAINST to see if any difference.  I used a unit of 1 for both tests on the same data.

The FOR resulted in a loss of -358 units and the AGAINST had a profit of +173.

Having no more No Zero data or baccarat data I tested FOR and AGAINST with 10,000 Single Zero spins from a German Casino knowing that both systems will probably lose but I wanted to see which one loss less.

The FOR test resulted in a High of 11, Low of -229 and ended with -184.

The AGAINST resulted in a High of 39, Low 0f -159 and ended with -142.

Still not proof positive but a good indication.

Currently we are testing individual AGAINST sessions with Bet Voyager and with progression.  We have complete 43 sessions and have won 42.

Again, not proof positive but a stronger indication.  Testing continues.

Cheers
Nick

[Nickmsi]

Hi Lugi,

This is a response to your post in

https://betselection.cc/baccarat-forum/can-anyone-figure-out-how-many-possible-outcomes-exist-in-a-shoe-of-baccarat/msg64459/#new

Yes, I couldn't understand either how you could get an edge when you still get 4W and 4L.  I thought the exact thing and figured that since it has been 55 years since college math and dementia is slowing creeping up on me that it must be some kind of math voodoo or new math that I am not aware of.

They showed the bias when applying Fractions to the 3 spin/hand sets as follows:

OOO NB NB NB
OOX NB NB NB         Fractions
OXO NB L NB      L     0
OXX NB L NB      L     0
XOO NB W NB      W     1
XOX NB L NB      L     0
XXO NB W L      WL     .5
XXX NB W W      WW    1
                      2.5/6

If you can understand it then " You're a better man than I am, Gunga Din!"  But what I do understand is how to test systems.

I have a data file with 100,000 No Zero spins collected from BetVoyager.   So I tested both FOR and AGAINST to see if any difference.  I used a unit of 1 for both tests on the same data.

The FOR resulted in a loss of -358 units and the AGAINST had a profit of +173.

Having no more No Zero data or baccarat data I tested FOR and AGAINST with 10,000 Single Zero spins from a German Casino knowing that both systems will probably lose but I wanted to see which one loss less.

The FOR test resulted in a High of 11, Low of -229 and ended with -184.

The AGAINST resulted in a High of 39, Low 0f -159 and ended with -142.

Still not proof positive but a good indication.

Currently we are testing individual AGAINST sessions with Bet Voyager and with progression.  We have complete 43 sessions and have won 42.

Again, not proof positive but a stronger indication.  Testing continues.

Cheers
Nick

[Johno-Egalite]

They showed the bias when applying Fractions to the 3 spin/hand sets as follows:

OOO NB NB NB
OOX NB NB NB         Fractions
OXO NB L NB      L     0
OXX NB L NB      L     0
XOO NB W NB      W     1
XOX NB L NB      L     0
XXO NB W L      WL     .5
XXX NB W W      WW    1
                      2.5/6

If you can understand it then � You�re a better man than I am, Gunga Din!�  But what I do understand is how to test systems.

Exactly. 

It makes no sense to me either.

I will make a suggestion, testing to a degree is a waste of time, something is positive after 10,000 or 1M spins, what about those chunks in your results that inflict massive draw-downs or wipe the player out.  Might work gambling online with a bot.  Maybe change your focus to controlling the LIAR's and aiming for a 45~50% strike rate in the short term, than all you would have to do is wrap a mild negative progression around whatever it is, much more realistic 

When you have some spare time
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/CoinTossing.html
(doesn't work for Baccarat BTW)

[BEAT-THE-WHEEL]

[quote author=Lugi link=topic=9954.msg64468#msg64468 date=1534111629


aiming for a 45~50% strike rate in the short term, than all you would have to do is wrap a mild negative progression around whatever it is, much more realistic
[/quote]
100% agreed!
(This what I trying to say for so long,  but my poor english...sigh)

[Nickmsi]

Hi Lugi

That is exactly what we are doing.  Playing on line with a bot in small sessions with a negative progression.

With the Triplets as the bet selection we have won 62 out of 63 sessions.

Cheers

Nick

[Johno-Egalite]

Hi Lugi

That is exactly what we are doing.  Playing on line with a bot in small sessions with a negative progression.

With the Triplets as the bet selection we have won 62 out of 63 sessions.

Cheers

Nick

Well done, with your coding prowess you deserve it.

[jsintl]

Hi Lugi

That is exactly what we are doing.  Playing on line with a bot in small sessions with a negative progression.

With the Triplets as the bet selection we have won 62 out of 63 sessions.

Cheers

Nick

Hi Nick,

What progression are you using with your triplet bet selection and bankroll required.

Thanks

[Nickmsi]

Hello jsintl

The progression we are using is as follows:

Flat bet for first 100 spins

If in profit after 100 spins, keep flat betting.  Always flat bet when in profit.

After 100 spins  if the total Losses greater than the total wins, increase bet +1 unit.

Keep bet the same for next 11 spins, then if in profit flat bet, else raise bet + 1 unit

Recheck for new bet every 11 spins.

We are currently winning 97/100 sessions.

The largest bet so far is 29 units.

The biggest drawdown so far is -304.

Total spins played = 68,117

Total Profit = 1,507 units

Average Profit/Session=15 units

Profit/spin=.022

Hope this helps.

Cheers
Nick

[ozon]

Great results.
On this example, the edge is 2.2%

Using the wheel with the La Partage principle, we are able to generate a positive edge.

I still have a question, whether reducing the length of the first cycle when we play a flat rate of 50 or even 25 spins, the edge would be larger?

Because we are moving faster to recovery mode, drawdown can be bigger, but it can also be edge enlarged.

What kind of stop loss would you recommend?

[Nickmsi]

Hi Ozon,

With the flat betting for the 1st 100 spins we had a large bet of 33 and a drawdown of -226.

With the flat betting for 1st 50 spins we had a large bet of 55 and a drawdown of -695. Total profit was only 100 units more based on 100,000 spins.

With flat betting for 1st 25 spins, we had a large bet of 58 and a drawdown of -802.

We just did not think the extra profit worth the larger bets and larger bankroll but each to his own.

With flat betting for 1st 100 spins we anticipate a bankroll of 400 units.

Cheers

Nick

[ozon]

Thanks a lot.
It saved a lot of time for testing.

I have one more question
Do you think that this progression is able to survive, with such a small drawdown, on the wheel with zero and normal house edge - 2.7%?