+ Register

[Albalaha]

Making a plan to beat a particular data after seeing that, finding its peculiar weaknesses is what we call as "reverse engineering". That is no way to go ahead. Every session is different and every session pose a different set of challenge. The degree of variance may vary too. All these are not important. By putting a variety of variance through tough sessions(where losses surpass their natural ratio)we try to see if we can actually do with any idea in "not so good" cases too.
                 In two of my topics, viz. "anybody think..." and "Harsh sessions.." both one can see in my section I compiled various sessions touching even the boundary line of virtual limits and hardships that we keep facing time to time. I believe that these sessions together could make a nice compilation of "acid test" for any EC system. Unless a method can surpass most of them without needing tonnes of chips, that is no method.

[BetJack]

I completely agree with you
this is why  I started to doing it



max bet 5 /DD -27/ profit +18

BETJACK

[TheLaw]

I know that this has been discussed before.......but a large Labby (50+ lines).........including a degree of flexibility........might beat the right bet selection.

A large enough Labby can handle the blast of the worst loss in 200 spins. The question is where to start.........and where to finish.

Normal variance on EC (betting blind) is probably too risky.........but if you could buffer the extremes.......then a Labby might actually work.

Just my $.02.

[Blue_Angel]

There are more efficient progressions than labby...have you ever heard the "golden pyramid"?

[TheLaw]

http://www.rp2.ru/sys_96.php (needs google translate)

Like this?

[zuffle]

http://www.rp2.ru/sys_96.php (needs google translate)

Like this?

That link is a system.  Interesting one at that.  It is in English but the site is in Russian.

[Blue_Angel]

http://www.rp2.ru/sys_96.php (needs google translate)

Like this?

No, this is not.

Actually I 've checked it out, nothing new, just about biased numbers...

[zuffle]

Why don't you put us all out of our misery and tell us what the Golden Pyramid is Blue_Angel.

[Blue_Angel]

It's certainly not out there, somewhere you could find it like a forum, it's private highly regarded.

Just do your own homework, it could be worth it!

[zuffle]

It's certainly not out there, somewhere you could find it like a forum, it's private highly regarded.

Just do your own homework, it could be worth it!

Thanks for nothing, why mention if you are not going to share it.  Another masterbaitor to add to the list.

[albertojonas]

Making a plan to beat a particular data after seeing that, finding its peculiar weaknesses is what we call as "reverse engineering". That is no way to go ahead. Every session is different and every session pose a different set of challenge. The degree of variance may vary too. All these are not important. By putting a variety of variance through tough sessions(where losses surpass their natural ratio)we try to see if we can actually do with any idea in "not so good" cases too.
                 In two of my topics, viz. "anybody think..." and "Harsh sessions.." both one can see in my section I compiled various sessions touching even the boundary line of virtual limits and hardships that we keep facing time to time. I believe that these sessions together could make a nice compilation of "acid test" for any EC system. Unless a method can surpass most of them without needing tonnes of chips, that is no method.

If the wins surpass the expected just start playing with a stop loss within static frames of your method.

[bjb007]

Simple. You're betting on the wrong numbers.

Get my programme:

[attach=1]