Hi Forum,
(https://www.vlsroulette.com/proxy.php?request=nolinks%3A%2F%2Fimg213.imageshack.us%2Fimg213%2F9509%2Frandombaccaratss2.jpg&hash=a6dfda60c222da00849213a4f4560517fec5821b)
Cheers, :) :) ;)
JLP.-
JLP you little teaser :D
What is this all about?
Quote from: Worm on January 07, 2009, 10:15:02 AM
JLP you little teaser :D
What is this all about?
Hello worm,
Is simple.
The column PB we previously fill with the 80 decisions from a past previous shoe.
We play against this.But I wait for 2 LL to occur before any betting(that is the signal I marked).
The prog. is simple L L 1 2 4 8 16 and stop (31 units).
It can also be used L L L 1 2 4 8 (15 units) and stop.
So we play random against random.I have read somewhere that is very difficult that a shoe replicates exactly on another one 7 blocks of decisions the same (it can be possible - but that can be easily recovered), so for this I divided the sheet in this way.
Cheers,
JLP.-
Hehe ok cool, but got one question you say you play against it but in the example you play with it...the P/B section that is
Quote from: Worm on January 07, 2009, 04:13:57 PM
Hehe ok cool, but got one question you say you play against it but in the example you play with it...the P/B section that is
Hi worm,
Maybe I not expressed it clearly.
You are right, I follow the filled shoe (PB) to collapse with the real shoe.
The point of collapse represents the win (
W) marked in red and yellow.
So I just was talking about this when I refer we play random against random.
That is the sense.
Now that I am looking at it maybe is good idea flat bet all the shoe and also apply the progression after the 2LL.
That is another instance of testing.
Cheers, :) :) ;)
JLP.-
Hi Forum,
Another test.
It seems the average win = 8 -10 units.
(https://www.vlsroulette.com/proxy.php?request=nolinks%3A%2F%2Fimg116.imageshack.us%2Fimg116%2F5395%2Ftest1az6.jpg&hash=84ef3d7f826bf02bf647fcf456975a8cfb6bfc70)
Cheers, :) :) ;)
JLP.-
Great i like this idea and thanks for sharing.
Now i would like to know more about how it becomes random against random.
I don't get it, i will read it again.
Cheers Lucky Strike
JLP, good job done! I think that it will be enough to write down the first 7 hands on beginning of the shoe and than just play against that formation the whole shoe. Try that, it could bring interesting results. I would start bet after LLL, not LL, that's too risky.
Thanks Hermes
Quote from: hermes on January 10, 2009, 12:15:07 AM
JLP, good job done! I think that it will be enough to write down the first 7 hands on beginning of the shoe and than just play against that formation the whole shoe. Try that, it could bring interesting results. I would start bet after LLL, not LL, that's too risky.
Thanks Hermes
Hello mate,
Yes that is another approach, it can be possible too.
But I think waiting for those 3LLL in a row will bring less opportunities to bet in the entire shoe , maybe 2 or 3 according to the tests, but in other way can be more secure to our bankroll.
Cheers,
JLP.-
That's true also. We have to find the most economical and secure way. Only testings will say what's right and what's wrong.
If there will be not too many lost sessions the LL trigger would be appropriate.
Cheers Hermes
Dont get why its diffrent from just pick banker or player random? Am I missing something here?
Well i can tell you the differens.
1) A "static bet selection" is when you use the same pattern or patterns to play with or against them.
It could be RRBB and BBRR and play FTL, DBL or OLD.
2) A "random bet selection" is that you pick any past spins and play against them, but if you use the same past spins that you collect randomly, then they are not random any more, they become the same thing as an "static bet selection.
3) A "random bet selection with an random element" is when you have a "static rule" to how you collect past spins for a bet selection and the firs bet selection you find will not be the same as the next bet selection you find to play with or against.
Then you have random against random.
If you want to know more about this i can make post about it.
There are ways to play even money bets for years with out losing using a random element with a bet selection.
Cheers Lucky Strike
okok i think i get it now.. ;) ;)
Lucky,
Yes please post more.
"If you want to know more about this i can make post about it.
There are ways to play even money bets for years with out losing using a random element with a bet selection." [smiley=dankk2.gif]
Okay i post some issues and questions to make a humbel start into this dimension.
I post it at gambling framework.
I will post the link here so you can find it here and there :)
Now i hope you will contibute to it... a comment or an opinion...
lol i forgot to mention that you can but if you will is a different story...
Cheers Lucky Strike
Here it is: "Static and random bet selections or educated guess work" at gambling framework section.
LS
Nice idea JLP, I'll be testing it out soon.
Cheers ;)
I'm playing more Baccarat over Roulette these days as a tie doesn't ruin your day when it hits like a zero does. The 5% commission on Banker is a small price to pay IMO.
Similar results from testing:
Averaging 6-11 units per session and longest L streak has been 5 (so only 3 if waiting for LL)
Cheers JLP
Quote from: roules on January 14, 2009, 08:26:42 AM
Similar results from testing:
Averaging 6-11 units per session and longest L streak has been 5 (so only 3 if waiting for LL)
Cheers JLP
Hi roules,
That looks pretty good.
So in that tests there were no busts??
How many tests you make??
You take always a new 80 previous hands shoe or use only 1 sample fixed??
I haven´t tested this other option yet.
We have to determine the frequency of the busts in a certain range - say 10 or 20 tests and see if the accumulated profit per session (from what we got 6 to 11 units/session) covers the busts so we always are 1 step ahead of the losses.I don´t care if it losses sometime, I care about to be step ahead.
The progression is 2 L L 1 - 2 - 4 - 8 - 16 = that is 31 units.
We know in general, in baccarat the min. unit = 10E so that equals 310E.
Taking 3 times this amount to take in count any possible busts it would be = 930E the bankroll.
So the session bankroll = 310E
And the backup bankroll = 930E
What you think mate??
Cheers,
JLP.-
I ran this method over 5 shoes. Won 62 units before commissions but lost 124 units (4 progression losses) for a net loss of 124-62=-62 units [smiley=Best_of_fichiers/4_9_12.gif]
Quote from: dennisbelle on January 14, 2009, 11:29:10 PM
I ran this method over 5 shoes. Won 62 units before commissions but lost 124 units (4 progression losses) for a net loss of 124-62=-62 units [smiley=Best_of_fichiers/4_9_12.gif]
4 progression losses in 5 shoes?? :o
Playing which way I wonder.....
@ JLP
Played about half a dozen live tests, 2 more just watching and have been furiously flipping a coin during lunch breaks - cheap way to test and scratches the gambling itch! And it gets the same results. But need to keep at this to see how often it breaks, so far it hasn't come close. The above test by dennis doesn't sound right. I'm not betting a static pattern although I think this might have merit from what I've seen. Also another perhaps worthy trigger could be LWL (2 in 3).
The more I look at it the more it makes sense that this will be hard to beat and the occasional loss will be offset by the wins. I'm having a re-think on the progression but, martingale usually doesn't have a happy ending although this is limited to 4-5 steps. With a lot of patience, I feel other progressions will make this bulletproof (is there such a thing in gambling? lol)
3 steps forward and 1 back is better than not forward at all. I've been thinking exactly the same thing about the 3 bankrolls too.
How would this go do you think in Roulette, say tracking 60-80 spins and following the same rule, waiting for LL etc on the next 60-80? The zero is the biggest problem but can just be treated as a loss I suppose.
Anyway, I like this system as it ties in well with something I recently read ;)
nolinks://vlsroulette.com/bet-selection/how-to-find-a-consistent-winning-roulette-bet/msg30770/#msg30770 (nolinks://vlsroulette.com/bet-selection/how-to-find-a-consistent-winning-roulette-bet/msg30770/#msg30770)
Reply #144
Quote from: roules on January 15, 2009, 08:28:51 AM
@ JLP
Played about half a dozen live tests, 2 more just watching and have been furiously flipping a coin during lunch breaks - cheap way to test and scratches the gambling itch! And it gets the same results. But need to keep at this to see how often it breaks, so far it hasn't come close. The above test by dennis doesn't sound right. I'm not betting a static pattern although I think this might have merit from what I've seen. Also another perhaps worthy trigger could be LWL (2 in 3).This last is interesting, will look on that.
The more I look at it the more it makes sense that this will be hard to beat and the occasional loss will be offset by the wins. I'm having a re-think on the progression but, martingale usually doesn't have a happy ending although this is limited to 4-5 steps. With a lot of patience, I feel other progressions will make this bulletproof (is there such a thing in gambling? lol) But which others we have - D`Alembert, Fibonacci??
3 steps forward and 1 back is better than not forward at all. I've been thinking exactly the same thing about the 3 bankrolls too.
How would this go do you think in Roulette, say tracking 60-80 spins and following the same rule, waiting for LL etc on the next 60-80? The zero is the biggest problem but can just be treated as a loss I suppose.
I think it would be more or less the same, but good idea to make some tests.
Anyway, I like this system as it ties in well with something I recently read ;)
nolinks://vlsroulette.com/bet-selection/how-to-find-a-consistent-winning-roulette-bet/msg30770/#msg30770 (nolinks://vlsroulette.com/bet-selection/how-to-find-a-consistent-winning-roulette-bet/msg30770/#msg30770)
Reply #144
I totally agree with that post of Ryan.
Cheers,
JLP.-
"4 progression losses in 5 shoes??
Playing which way I wonder....."
Actually it wasn't 5 shoes I tested over it was 500 decisions (sorry about that). I took 500 decisions from the Zumma 600 mini bacc tester book and pasted them next to 500 decisions (several hundred decisions later) in the Zumma mini bacc tester book and then waited until I had two non-matching decisions and then applied the 5 step martingale betting I would have a matching pair (PP or BB) within the next 5 decisions. I had 4 instances with 7 losses in a row (or more). [smiley=3D-gros-fix/36_2_9.gif]
Hi Dennis,
Thanks for that, it makes more sense now. And a relief too!
Cheers
Live test/play at a B&M casino playing Vegas Star (RNG). I wouldn't touch online RNG with a ten foot pole but this RNG is ok.
Tested on Roulette, instead of playing 60-80 Baccarat hands I played over 32 Roulette spins so continuously playing against the previous 32 spins.
176 spins total
17 betting opportunities waiting for LL then betting for 5steps:
Steps
1 - 9hits
2 - 4hits
3 - 1 hit
4 - 2hits
5 - 1hit
Total 17units.
Looking at what Hermes said previously about noting the first 7 spins/hands. This looks good also providing you stick to groups of 7 (no need to wait for LL though as it would take forever). But it would pay to stick to groups of 7.
Ie
RBRRRBB
Now in the next 7 spins/hands we play against this and stop on a win, wait for the next sequence of 7 to begin always stopping on a win. So thing only things to go wrong is the same sequence of 7 appearing exactly 7,14,21 etc spins/hands later and a zero coming at the wrong time if play Roulette. Obviously a 7 step marty is required (ugh - I know 128 units). At this level prob best to use a different prog. I'm thinking D'Alambert might be better.
Total on todays session playing this way would of been +24units.
I chose Roulette today as it's $1 min (I played $5 units) and the one and only Bac table open was $25min and it was empty so no chance of tracking the previous shoe. It was no commission baccarat too so technically it's a true even chance game. :)
Hi Forum,
Good on ya mate as would Lanky says ;D ;D ;D - Roules continue with your feedbacks and possible tweaks.That looks good.
Here I post another test taking in count what previously Hermes & Roules talk about the signals : WLL and LWL.
Here is mixed test using both so the opportunities to bet are more.
65 Hands = 11 units
(https://www.vlsroulette.com/proxy.php?request=nolinks%3A%2F%2Fimg107.imageshack.us%2Fimg107%2F6470%2Frandomsystemnj9.jpg&hash=a2113a9d5b1c669fefc2d3b96c002f191796d1ab)
Cheers, :D
JLP.-
Quote from: JLP on January 16, 2009, 03:06:41 PM
Good on ya mate as would Lanky says ;D ;D ;D
LOL :D ;D :D
Looking good btw JLP, maybe I will try this :)
A long session today - 350 spins
+42 units
Playing on Roulette against a 64 spin sequence - so after 64 spins the next 64 are played against the previous and after LL
Also side betting against a repeat of 7 as above for 5 spins - not played all betting chances here but made a nice little side profit.
In future, I'm over side bets. Going to see how playing all 3 E/Cs at once this way and aim for +5 units from each (H/L E/O R/B) or total +15. I will say while it works OK on Roulette, albeit slower, it's probably better suited to Baccarat and it's shoes. And after hitting the last step 5 after today I'm considering waiting for LLL. That happened once along with some 4th step hits. I hit seven wins in a row (7 of the same section repeat) so 7 losses in a row must also be possible......well, already knew that I guess. :-[
This aside, I more than doubled my bankroll and felt pretty confident most of the way through. Using 50%MM it wouldn't take long I think to do this several times - basically parlaying half of every bankroll won. It seems a bit greedy given most pros suggest a 10-20% gain, something that's been in the back of my mind.
But for now, this does take patience and time but is rewarding. Looking forward to trying Kingspins lines method also but for now I think this will be the favourite. And I'll be playing (read: "hammering") this method back on Bac real soon :D
Hi roules,
In the 64 spins you take to play against the new 64 how you take it - playing the 65 against the 1 of previous set or against the 64(going to 1-backwards) - this last is like a mirror??
1 ..........64 previous set
New set :
65 .........128
So is :
65 .........128
Against:
1 ..........64
Or against:
64..........1
I think there is no difference how we consider this.I think is the same.
What you think mate??
Cheers,
JLP.-
Hey JLP,
Recorded 64 spins, then started playing against those 64 spins.
So when that's finished Ive got another 64 spins recorded and ready to go, and so on.
Why 64 spins? There's 32 lines on the casino scorecard, so 2 rows of that does me plus it's close to a Baccarat shoe.
I played all 3 E/Cs today and it was pretty messy to track. I used Fibonacci progression and had two blowouts* - wiped 2/3 of my bankroll (which was casinos money anyway :)). I drowned my sorrows on the pokies with $20 and won $270 in 5 minutes! Funny how that works lol
The good news is, sticking to my original plan and staying with red and black I'm still yet to see a loss. BTW, today I was playing over 32 spins, not 64 (which I'm going back to in the future). It's all a learning game! Today's profit would've been +49units if I'd stuck with Plan A.
I had a go on Live online Bac yesterday and didn't go so good, using a 4 step marty. Not doing that again. The martys ok, but need 5 steps and wait for LLL. Many ways to skin this cat, at the end of the day there's still always roughly a 50/50 chance of winning and losing. But I take back what I said about this being suited only to Bac.
*Still haven't seen more than 7 straight Ws or Ls. There have been more but they've been interrupted by a zero then continuing. I consider this good news believe it or not.
P P 1
B B 2
B P 1
P P 3
B P 2
B B 4
P B 3
B B 5
B B 6
B B 7
P P 8 -1
B B 9 -2
B P 4 4
B P 5
P P 10
P P 11
B B 12
B P 6
B P 7
B P 8
B B 9
P B 10
B B 13
B P 11
B P 12
P P 14
P B 13
P B 14
P P 15
B P 15
B P 16
B B 16
B B 17
B B 18
B P 17
P P 19
B P 18
B P 19
P B 20
P B 21
P B 22
P B 23
B B 20 1
P P 21
B P 24
B P 25
B P 26
P P 22
B P 27
B P 28
P B 29
P P 23
B P 30
B P 31
B B 24
B B 25
B P 32
B P 33
P P 26
B B 27
B B 28
B B 29
P P 30
B P 1
B P 2
P P 1
P P 2
P P 3
P B 3
P B 4
P P 4
B B 5
P B 5
P P 6
B B 7
P B 6
B B 8
P P 9
P B 7
P B 8
B B 10
B P 9
B P 10
B P 11
P B 12
P B 13
B P 14
B P 15 -1
B P 16 -2
P P 11 4
P B 17
B B 12
P P 13
B P 18
B B 14
B P 19
B P 20
P B 21
P P 15
B B 16
P P 17
P B 22
B P 23
P P 18
P B 24
P P 19
P P 20
P P 21
B P 25
B B 22
P P 23
B B 24
P B 26
B B 25
P P 26
B P 27
P P 27
P B 28
P P 28
P P 29
P B 29
P B 30
B P 31
P B 32
B B 30 1
P B 33
P B 34
B B 31
B B 32
B B 33
P B 35
P P 34
P B 36
Un saludo cordial, Edgardo.
Hola Edgardo,
Cómo te va??
Entiendo que es un shoe contra otro shoe.
Podés explicar cómo es esto -realmente no lo entiendo - la progresión usada.
Profit
P P 1 1
B B 2 2
B P 1 1(-1)
P P 3 3(+2)
B P 2 2(-1)
B B 4 2(+2)
P B 3 3(-1)
B B 5 5(+2)
B B 6 6(+1)
B B 7 7(+1)
P P 8 -1 8(+1)
B B 9 -2 9(+1)
B P 4 4 4 (-5) -----> Y acá porque es así - la apuesta no es 1 si es un D' Alembert??
B P 5
P P 10
P P 11
B B 12
B P 6
B P 7
B P 8
B B 9
P B 10
Saludos,
JLP.-
Whats Edgardo doing here? Betting last hit (Same or Opposite) with a progression of some sort?
Looks good.
Playing this after a L could work very well.
Hi roules.
You could play for change of the previos momentum with an d alambert.
Bet selectionBBBBPPBPPBBP
bet result....BPPPPPBBBPPP
Total 24 trails.
And you can divide the d alambert into frames of attacks and continue from bet selection 1 to bet selection 2 and so on.
There is many ways and combinations...
Cheers LS