Hi Every1,
I am new here, eager to share and learn.
I m looking for coder to test my systems,
cya
Averagejoe
I know I shouldn't get involved here but what they heck, it's raining outside......
Basic roulette system testing is usually accomplished using various subsets of MS Excel (or a clone) and/or the RX program. Once the basics are confirmed in that manner, you can move on to more detailed testing.
If you're going to stay in roulette for more than a few weeks, learn basic Excel skills and actually buy the Roulette Extreme (RX) program.
Or, if that's too much work, just bet any two dozens and get a little bit of luck on your side.
AD
Ok, I am allowed to have an opinion, correct? Dont have it tested.
Its not gonna pass 783 million trials. When it does fail (I assume it will)......you're gonna hear about how methods suck, blah blah blah. The point of LONG TERM testing is what again? Lets see, 783 million spins over time would be reached at a real casino in the year 2068. Yeah, that makes sense.
Ken
Long term tests is to test how the system does in the long run, not to see how you will fare in the casino over 10 sessions. You can go into the long term test manually and see the draw downs and compare them with the frequency of the winning sessions etc. The longest negative run versus the longest positive run. If the longest negative run is 25.000 spins, you know up front that YOU might be hitting such a period once you start playing in the casino.
Long term tests, tends to get peoples feet back on the ground after getting exited over 2000 spins handtesting that went very well. (Usually because the rules of the system is designed to match those 2000 spins)
Averagejoe its not spins its the amount of placed bets - its fun to test roulette systems i have done so for many years.
They all have on thing in common - they lose at the end and there is no positive expectation.
But i assume i should not destroy the fun developing, sharing and explore your ideas with others.
I suppose we all follow our own path in life :-)
Cheers
Quote from: Kelly on July 27, 2011, 12:49:31 AMLong term tests, tends to get peoples feet back on the ground after getting exited over 2000 spins handtesting that went very well. (Usually because the rules of the system is designed to match those 2000 spins)
Kelly,
That has to be one of the best explanations of system testing I've ever seen.
Simple and to the point.
I will use that in the future as it's perfect!
Thanks.
AD
just go to the casino and play for small stakes you will know one way or the other
Quote from: Kelly on July 27, 2011, 12:49:31 AM
...The longest negative run versus the longest positive run. If the longest negative run is 25.000 spins, you know up front that YOU might be hitting such a period once you start playing in the casino...
Thanks Kelly.
What Kelly explained above is most important. You need to know that unimaginable losing marathon runs can and do happen if you unbendingly stick to any one system of play. Some will argue that these hellish runs will also occur if switching between a few systems of play, but in my opinion they become less likely to roll back to back if using a good number of varied systems, and set sensible limits of some type... personally I like time limits or perhaps spin limits, but not win/loss limits.
The phrase "why would i need to test 1.000.000 spins because im only going to play 5000 spins in a lifetime" always comes up. There are plenty of info one can use in such a test, also even if the progression turns out negative. For example, if 8 out of 10 sessions always can be brought back to around break even with a bankroll of 100 units, but you have decided not to make the test and decided that your bankroll in the casino for the day is 70 units. There are a probability that you will hit a losing session sooner with real money than what it had to be by simply adjusting the bankroll.
I suppose that is the crux of the story. Find out via spins the worst case scenario by testing millions of spins and then prepare with MM for that. Off course anything can happen but I suppose you are better off that way than no homework at all.