This system is tested for online roulette RNG. It does not use progression.
The system is based completely on the numerals 0 1 2 3.
System Numbers = 0 1 2 3 10 20 30 11 22 33 12 21 13 31 23 32
The 16 numbers bet does not change, the system numbers are bet on single every spin. The system is fully tested on playtech software based casinos only.
Hello Ulysses, thanks for posting.
May I make a suggestion: have start / stop points! It is my experience numerical combinations (no matter how elaborated) will come and go in cycles.
I suggest you to enter once one of your numbers appear and set stop point considering this formula: 36 /divided by/ <amount of numbers> (numerical cycle).
In this particular case, 36 / 16 = 2.25 spins. Rounded down = 2 spins per cycle.
Which means don't get stubborn, know after 1 missed cycle it could be the start of any lenght of dispersion for your numerical group. Don't get stuck at "it must hit", make pauses.
Also bear in mind in most cases you should get a hit within 3 cycles. Being your 16-number group's cycle 2.25 spins, then 2.25 x 3 = 6,75 rounded up = you should get a hit within 7 spins most times, further than that, just let it go.
Kind regards.
Victor
Hello Victor
What you wrote about cycles when playing numerical combinations is very true and thanks for the formula. I have currently been playing a thousand spins per day. Began with 2000 units and managed a large gain over 3000 units, the next run it stabalised with no gains. 3rd run it was reduced back to the beginning. 4th run gained over 3000. Now at 6th day/6th run has increased to nearly 4000 units. But there is the real danger it may decline now and continue that on a descent. So I am taking your advice hopefully keep my gains and push them futher up.
Cheers Ulysses
Ulyses,
I do know there is a timeline for every instance there can be one attached to.
Simply meaning to everything you can attach numerical event as coming from a random source, there is the possibility to create a registry or trail.
One can attach Dealers a timeline for the numbers they spin, also to players for the numbers they bet, wheels can be attached a timeline too for the numbers spun regardless of dealer changes.
They all should comply with statistical averages for random sources. Dealers on their own timeline are expected to spin 50% of series of 1 element on even chances, numbers 1 time per 37 spins average, etc.
Same as expected from roulette wheels regardless of dealer changes, as well as players to experiment on their own betting registries.
What I find curious is statistics allows for deviations from the norm, they are even expected. Meaning a dealer can actually happen to spin more blacks than reds over his whole lifetime or a wheel can be naturally biased towards some numbers (without needing to be physically imperfect, just because of -like Garcia pelayo would put- soft limits due to natural randomness).
Translated practically if you can find one of these naturally biased registries you can flat bet your way to profits. Of course, you need to be certain of this and need to achieve statistical significance* first, and even though being considered just a randomness quirk, statistics allows it to happen "naturally": the larger the compound samples, the larger the deviations; and deviations can last even for millions of spins (ask manucher and his losing system which came out positive at 600.000.000 -six hunder million- spins).
If you are planning on flat betting on what you think is a biased stream do find your way to some statistical certainty you are onto something. If you are just betting blindly on some numbers and find yourself up, do the "half peak" teachnique, keep on playing as usual never capping winnings (just in case you actually stumbled into something) but lock profits and never give back more than 50% on what you already got.
P.s.: "A statistically significant difference" simply means there is statistical evidence that there is a difference; it does not mean the difference is necessarily large, important, or significant in the common meaning of the word.
- Wikipedia (nolinks://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_significance).
Some say the best way to really win at the casino is to never come back after winning once, as to denying the possibility to lose, the casino can't simply win back what you don't wager, hence the half-peak aproach.
Kind regards,
Victor
Hi guys,
Victor why don't you tell him that rng is wrong and he should only play on live wheel?
I've heard a lot of people here latelly talking about RNG testing-playing etc..
All of you should know that it's worthless and waste of time.
Cheers
Sundowner.
You can win on rng but you have to take a lot smaller profits. I agree with you sundowner , rng is real dicey at best. >:(
Hello Uly. Glad to see your new RNG system and I'm glad it's profitable for you.
I remember your 2,5 and 4 and 7 approach. It did quite well for a while. I admire your courage for playing RNG roulette.
Do you think this system will work on other RNGs?
Many say that on RNG numbers repeats more often than on real wheels. I don't know because I don't play synthetic games but if that is true than we could exploit it by marking 37 spins and that playing 16 most coming numbers for next 37 spin cycle - flat. At least we will not bet on sleepers.
Cheers Hermes
Hello all
I seem to have jumped the gun with this system post. It has continued to decline and where I was positive that the upwards trend/bias stream would be there further on, it didn't happen. Why I did not follow the advice some suggested is just one of those things. With a number combination system like this you require a better strategy as Victor pointed out using statistical analysis. I will stick with rng though as scooby pointed out (hello scoob) a system I played a while back and still continue to use. In answer to the live wheels questions I might be tempted one day but contrary to this rng hiccup :-[, most of the other methods I use are reliable and safe-ish. Apologies to all. Victor if you want to delete this system please do. I wouldn't want any one else to make the same mistake.
Uly
QuoteVictor if you want to delete this system please do. I wouldn't want any one else to make the same mistake.
Hello Ulysses.
I'm moving this to our Roulette & Gambling framework section, precisely because there's a lesson to learn. It shouldn't just be deleted, it may serve others: if not as a full system, as a reflexive post.
By the way,
thanks Ulyses for sharing what you thought was working.
Bliss sumarized it right, we should always give the benefit of the doubt to those who share when they believe in their systems. Better approach than others sharing only
IF they know it won't work! :o Not unheard of!
Your posting is greatly appreciated, we all learn from our mistakes; may this post help others learn too.
Best regards and keep 'em coming. (your systems & posts).
Your friend,
Victor
Quote from: Kingspin on February 01, 2009, 09:52:54 PM
You can win on rng but you have to take a lot smaller profits. I agree with you sundowner , rng is real dicey at best. >:(
I used to think the same way, but as of late, I believe with an honest RNG, you can win - big and/or small.
Matt
MATTY where can 1 find an online casino thatoffer honest RNG numbers please.thank you .Colin
RNG's have a different kind of random than a real wheel does. They are quite unpredictable and unbeatable, IMO. You may find a way to beat them for awhile, then all of a sudden it won't work anymore and never works again. Quite frustrating.
Quote from: Colin on February 02, 2009, 08:27:40 PM
MATTY where can 1 find an online casino thatoffer honest RNG numbers please.thank you .Colin
You gotta do your research Colin. You can start by checking out nolinks.casinomeister.com (nolinks://nolinks.casinomeister.com)
They've got a ton of good info. After that you need to examine the auditing process with regards to the RNG generator.
Matt
Remember that guy who won a million + a while back. He said the number kept coming up, so he played it. I think it was an RNG wheel.
Who knows, maybe there are system numbers that "unlock the RNG door."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From article "Jason H., a Sussex businessman who won the astounding amount of £1,426,000 while playing roulette in a famous online casino site.
Mr. H. is a regular online player and this time the lucky combination for him was 23. The winner started his bets as usual and it turned out he was in a good run, since he won over and over again with the same number, against all odds.
Once he had a good amount of profits, Mr. H decided it was time to take a big risk and wagered his entire balance around his very lucky number. He could not believe his eyes as he saw the number come up and make him the winner of a six-figure amount.
However, he decided not to stop there and follow the same tactic he used all night, only to see number 23 show up again and again. Finally, Mr. H's payout came to a total of £1,426,000, which made him call the casino to make sure it wasn't just a computer mistake.
Luckily for him, Mr. H's winnings were as real as the fact that he is now a millionaire thanks to online roulette.
Source: Article originally published in MediaGambling
Good article ProofReader
I think we tend to miss numbers that show bias at certain time lines, as we are so distracted by the system or method we are currently playing. When we do realise and notice a number bias occurence, it's usually a little to late to make good on it. Or we reject the idea of betting it as we assume it has run it's course and become sceptical of it's future bias. Plus we are too rigid and maybe superstitiuos about changing the current state of play in a game.
Hello again
After more analysis and using a formula suggested by Victor
Quotehave start / stop points! It is my experience numerical combinations (no matter how elaborated) will come and go in cycles.
I suggest you to enter once one of your numbers appear and set stop point considering this formula: 36 /divided by/ <amount of numbers> (numerical cycle).
What has been occurring is smaller groupings of the 16 number combination bet come in cycles. The most prevalent groups that occur together most are listed below.
System groups1 & 2 & 12 & 21 -
Bet only when 12 or 21 has landed twice within 9 paper hits. Bet for 9 spins max.1 & 3 & 13 & 31 -
Bet only when 13 or 31 has landed twice within 9 paper hits. Bet for 9 spins max.2 & 3 & 23 & 32 -
Bet only when 23 or 32 has landed twice within 9 paper hits. Bet for 9 spins max.1 & 2 & 3 & 11 & 22 & 33 -
Bet only when 11 or 22 or 33 has landed twice within 6 paper hits. Bet for 6 spins max.0 & 10 & 20 & 30 - Bet only when 0 or 10 or 20 or 30 has landed twice within 9 paper hits. Bet for 9 spins max.
It is in testing at present. Results so far are very encouraging and dare I say it, consistent with a bias up to now. I would appreciate anyone's input to further improve on this.
Happy hitting
Ulysses
Since you're dealing with an RNG, may I suggest a time limit? 15, 20 minute sessions?
Also, are the numbers the same on each RNG or is there a formula for finding a set of numbers for each RNG (different brands--RealTimeGaming, Playtech, Microgaming)
When would it be a good time to make the 40 free spins? (I remember you mentioning doing so in a post a while back)
Hello Proofreader
Testing the system groups at present on two playtech platforms, sometimes I will play for real cash, but mostly just checking results to system groups for now.
If one of the groups is not performing then I will exlude it until I have confidence in it again. If a group performs badly over a long testing period then obviously it wll be rejected from system.
Free spin distance you asked about doesn't apply to this system, but it is worth keeping in mind as I continue tests. Let me know if you or anyone has tested the groups and what you thought of it.
Ulysses
Hello all
System groups tested and successful.
The Ulysses System
System groups
1 & 2 & 12 & 21 - Bet only when 12 or 21 has landed twice within 9 paper hits. Bet for 9 spins max.
1 & 3 & 13 & 31 - Bet only when 13 or 31 has landed twice within 9 paper hits. Bet for 9 spins max.
2 & 3 & 23 & 32 - Bet only when 23 or 32 has landed twice within 9 paper hits. Bet for 9 spins max.
1 & 2 & 3 & 11 & 22 & 33 - Bet only when 11 or 22 or 33 has landed twice within 6 paper hits. Bet for 6 spins max.
0 & 10 & 20 & 30 - Bet only when 0 or 10 or 20 or 30 has landed twice within 9 paper hits. Bet for 9 spins max.
When you begin a session you must wait for a win to hit on paper. That is you are not going to start betting after the first two paper hits. You must wait for an un-betted win before you begin. Now you observe paper hits that fit one of the groups, then bet that group.
The way to play each of the groups is, after you have identified two of the stated system numbers of a group. For example 23 and 32 have landed within 9 spins of each other, you bet 2 & 3 & 23 & 32 if any number hits (say the 2 has hit) before the 9 spins you do not continue up to the max. You bag the win. Then discard those numbers including your winning number 2, and wait for the next two paper hits that land within 9 spins of each other.
More importantly if you lose on a group, do not continue blindly on, in the hope it will come in with a few extra spins. Yes it might, but the rules are there for a reason and must be followed.
Apart from my own testing of 5000 playtech RNG spins I have pulled some (not many) actuals from 'real' random results and it faired well on those too[smiley=thumbup.gif] also on random.org results inputting 0-36 for 500 generated numbers. Don't ask me why I was just curious. A little thrown as to why it was fairly successful on pure randomness? But only dabbled with checks on real rand. But it makes no odds to me anyway as it would be to slow to implement on a live game, but worthwhile if it gave you the edge in the long run. Playtech rng though, has the ability to generate a number instantly so I can paper hit quickly through to a system group that can be bet. This success of this system is only based on 5000 spins, if in my next 5000 spins with real money it might fail, it might not.
We can only base the future success of a system on past results. But that is by no means a measure of how successful a system will be. A good system to me is one that is not volatile, that maintains a level of stability. Time will tell for this one.
Uly[smiley=beer.gif]
QuoteHitting repeaters on RNGs has been pretty successful for me. Ulysses, good luck with the rest of your testing.
Thanks Six.
I like your logical veiw on real and RNG. :thumbsup: