Got a question fellas. What do you think is the best way to bet ONE number per spin (not the same number)...... not using a progression?
What I mean is, up or down a unit after "X" number of no hits...... then maybe up or down a unit after a win etc. What is the best approach to this? (BR is not an issue).
Ken
See attach file ...
RWD has a chart in his book with betting scales and plateaus that you can use going up and down depending on the success you are having.
Here it is. It's in old money but can be easily converted.
The RWD way is betting for 9 spins. I noticed Mike McBain's suggestion is to go for 13.
[attachimg=1]
just tried this 3 times. Totally simple on RX...just play 30 and see what pops up
1. 27 only qualified (hit twice after showing 2 times more) out of 6....never showed
2. no qualified number ever hit again (stayed at one)
3. same as 2
I think Turbo did something called "another hot number test" I think its coded into RX somewhere.
Here is RWD's summary of 566 sessions.
He suggested to play 3 strings on a wheel and then quit if no winner.
So 1 means a win on the first string on spin 1.
LL1 means the first two strings lost and the third string won on spin 1.
These figures look almost too good to be true and old Roy may have been cooking the books :whistle:
But what I can say is that it was a popular foil for many savvy blackjack players down the years.
cheers
[attachimg=1]
[attachimg=2]
I have my bet selection already, not an issue. It's the HOW to do it is my problem.
Ken
Well there was somewhere code of that system in RX.. I should have it somewhere I think...
It sinks like a rock (with assumption that is coded correctly by the rules)
What is the problem? Why would this be better than anything else?
Drazen
Quote from: Drazen on October 29, 2013, 09:52:21 PM
What is the problem? Why would this be better than anything else?
Drazen
I have to agree. random within random within random.
If you isolate a "way"....like this one...where some event happens after some amount of times, those isolated evens are again random.
Its an illusion that you have found something random does. Random doesn't do anything. Its random
Its like seeing a perfect Horse shape in a cloud. it's a cloud. it isn't a Horse
Now..... you saw a Horse. You arnt going mad. It was there
Now predict which cloud will be the next to make a Horse shape.
Different story.
if you bet only 1 number at the time you bet 1unit for 24 spins after that bet 2 units for 25spins and after that you bet 3 units for 24 spins if no hit stop the bet and start with 2 units for same cycles...
Apologies....Turbos hot number test was more than 1 number
Are the answers thus far answering your very specific question, Ken?
I like the idea of isolating a section of the wheel like the
area around zero(es) and betting a number when it shows.
Since you mention the bet selection jumping from one number to the next
you could target different hot spots of the wheel-or alternate between wheel and table bets.
"Are the answers thus far answering your very specific question" >>> Well, no.
This is what I was thinking, as of now >> Start out with "whatever" unit size. Every 30 spins without a win, up ONE unit.
On a win, down ONE unit but never going under the starting out unit size bet.
This I read years ago but I don't like it >> Every 30 spins without a win, up ONE unit AND with every win, up ONE unit. So, your unit sizes will never go down.
Ken
Well, Turbo said this >> 1) we are playing 5 numbers.
2) we increase +1 unit on all 5 numbers after any 5 spins
without a win.
3) we decrease -1 unit on all 5 numbers after any win.
So that's based on 5 numbers. So maybe for one number, I'll up it after 25 misses instead of 30. Him and I do agree, down a unit after any win.
Ken
No increase after so many losses or decrease after a win will work for a variety of situations.
If a number keeps hitting at a controlled pace and regular intervals, you can win with such things,
otherwise it will be a disaster in waiting.
How often are the hits coming?
Do you believe you actually have an edge? / have you taken into account your 'risk of ruin' ?
(the risk of ruin is the chance that the standard deviation will wipe out your bankroll before you have had a chance to win an amout which corerelates with your advantage)
I am not trying to be funny....but you can't expect concrete answers if you ask vague questions with little information to go on.
But one thing for sure! No good player IMO would be reducing his bets when he is winning (assuming he has an edge in bet selection which is the only way you are going to win long term.)
cheers
I know that RWD is valid method as i know two person who use it with success ...
And they have been using the method for years.
Can you still buy the Roy book on internet ?
"No good player IMO would be reducing his bets when he is winning" >>> I kind of agree but that's part of the problem. If you up your bets after a win, then what do you do after missing for 25 spins? Also up?....or even lower the bet after 25 misses? There are different choices for this, that's why I asked.
Ken
Ken, I play single numbers myself and I find a lot of the wins come pretty close together in clusters.
Yesterday was an extraordinary day at the B+M casino because they were hitting within a frequency of less than 10 spins apart for a good while. So obviously this is easy to take advantage of.
I will pull my horns in if I don't get a hit within 20 spins. There are also times now that I may not even bet if I go a few 15-20 spin cycles without a hit.
What I never see is a hit coming every 37 spins, lol. So it's not really that difficult to make decisions regarding MM in my opinion betting one number.
It's either working or it's not working as 'gizmo' would say.
If you are winning long term betting single numbers, you will definately get a feel for when things are going your way or not.
cheers
@ Ken: ...Just getting back to your original question.
It neatly intersects with what XXVV has published here:
http://betselection.cc/xxvv-studio/new-wf*-method-for-testing-by-xxvv/ (http://betselection.cc/xxvv-studio/new-wf*-method-for-testing-by-xxvv/)
Thanks for that link esoito !
Ken