Hello again,
There is fellow I know for quite some time that tells me he thinks he found a method that can win flatbet on the long run. I have every reason to believe he is telling me the truth. What I am not sure of is his methodology. What he studies is very simple but can become very fasidious and this could cause mistakes.
If someone could RX code this, I (and anyone interested) would know for sure. The good thing is it would be one the easiest RX code ever made.
It goes like this: whenever a # repeats, you would wait for this # to appear again, and then you play it for one spin only. That's it!!! Of course, after a while you be watching more than one #. You would be watching for all the repeats on the same table.
ex. 3 35 12 34 23 3 3 16 33 3 (trigger, play 3 for one spin) 5 5 30 11 5 (play 5 for one spin) 3 (play 3 again for one spin). You never play two #s at the same time. You just play the # to repeat again.
I guess you get the idea. This can only be implemented where there are veveral tables to watch. Otherwise, it just would take too long. Also, only play this for maybe 125 spins. If you go back too far, the repeats become less and less relevant.
Anyway, this dude I know tells me that his ROI is quite astonishing. If you are looking for a reason, I'm afraid I don't have one...
So please the few RX coders out there...
Insidebet
(the only way)
Insider
Would it create more interest if I said the dude in question claims it wins every 23 times ou play it??? I don t really think it is possible but it could be winning. Really nobody interested in this???
theres probably a lot of interest but the gaps would be very long, a numbe rhitting twice, back to back may happen failry often but 3 times, yes it does happen but not that often, is your target Live table or RNG, I think RNG would probably see it more than a live table, but you never know.
I don't code with RX anymore I just code into a bot and let it run against the wheel (the RNG manmade wheel that is) but a method like this would tie my pc up for hours, maybe an RX coder could do it for you, they're a dying breed now though sadly, I will email a buddy of mine and see if he will run it.
Superman,
My first post was not clear, I guess.
You don't want a number to hit 3 times in a row. You want the same number to repeat twice.
Ex.
34
7
3
3
15
10
36
3 (trigger) you bet 3 for one spin
4 lose 1
25
35
7
7
3 (bet again)
8 lose 1
7 (trigger)
and so on.
As said, you have to play this where there are multiple tables. True you don t play that often, but if the hit-rate is as good as my friend says, there is still a very good ROI (return on investment).
Insidebet
Ah ok, well
QuoteYou want the same number to repeat twice
So you are looking for any number to hit back to back, note it, then when it hits again you hope it backs to back again? if thats so then you really are hoping for a miracle, I cant see that working myself, it will take many many spins for that event, thats if I got you right
I dont really know. It should happen every 37 spins right? This guy I know says he has looked at that for many years. He says, over more than 6,000 virtual bets, (not spins, bets), his virtual hit rate is 1 every 23 bet, which is just fantastic and unrealistic if you ask me. But it could win 1 in 30 which would still be very good.
I want someone to code this and I will test it millions of spins taken from Wiesbaden. If someone RX code this, it would be a good idea to have a parameter that would say something like ''look at the past x spins''. I don t really know how far back in the past would be optimal.
Regards
Hi inisdebet,
From what I gather, betting begins after a number has appeared 3 times. Every time a number is spun that has appeared at least 3 times we make a single bet on this number to repeat again.
I have programmed a bot to play this system on RX...it is not actual RX code though so it will not run as quickly as native RX code, however, I can watch the system in action. I program it this way so that I can easily adapt the bot to play on real online casinos like DB, Playtech, BV, etc.
What is the rule regarding stoppage? You mentioned to only play for 125 spins. Does this mean you stop playing at 125 regardless of whether profit or loss. After 125 spins do you reset and keep playing on the same table. Do you factor in dealer change in any way?
So far I've had the bot just playing through previous saved sessions of 300-900 spins each, so results haven't been great in all sessions but would probably improve with stoppage rules enforced.
Whightknight,
Yes you wait for a number to appear three times, but the first two have to be a repeat.
125 spins is just an approximation. I dont really know how far back you can look to be optimal. It could be 100 or 75...
If you look too far back, it stops making any sense. Not that I have any idea why this would work. All I know is this fellow that told about this, well I know him pretty good and have no reason to think he is lying. Has he made serious mistakes compiling this stuff? Maybe.
He did not take dealer changes into consideration when studying this.
The best Rx code or bot would be one that would only take up to the last 125 numbers into consideration. (or any other number that would be better). In other words, at spin 126, you eraise spin 1 and so on,
Regards
Insidebet
Ahh...I didn't realize the number had to repeat bacK to back first. In that case, I don't have it programmed correctly then and will need to amend it but won't get around to it until after Christmas...probably sometime next week. Anyway, Merry Christmas and thanks for sharing!
WK
Quote from: insidebet link=topic=19592.msg142367#msg142367 date=1323922312
Hello again,
There is fellow I know for quite some time that tells me he thinks he found a method that can win flatbet on the long run. I have every reason to believe he is telling me the truth. What I am not sure of is his methodology. What he studies is very simple but can become very fasidious and this could cause mistakes.
If someone could RX code this, I (and anyone interested) would know for sure. The good thing is it would be one the easiest RX code ever made.
It goes like this: whenever a # repeats, you would wait for this # to appear again, and then you play it for one spin only. That's it!!! Of course, after a while you be watching more than one #. You would be watching for all the repeats on the same table.
ex. 3 35 12 34 23 3 3 16 33 3 (trigger, play 3 for one spin) 5 5 30 11 5 (play 5 for one spin) 3 (play 3 again for one spin). You never play two #s at the same time. You just play the # to repeat again.
I guess you get the idea. This can only be implemented where there are veveral tables to watch. Otherwise, it just would take too long. Also, only play this for maybe 125 spins. If you go back too far, the repeats become less and less relevant.
Anyway, this dude I know tells me that his ROI is quite astonishing. If you are looking for a reason, I'm afraid I don't have one...
So please the few RX coders out there...
Insidebet
(the only way)
Insider
Quote from: insidebet on December 15, 2011, 01:11:52 AM
Hello again,
There is fellow I know for quite some time that tells me he thinks he found a method that can win flatbet on the long run. I have every reason to believe he is telling me the truth. What I am not sure of is his methodology. What he studies is very simple but can become very fasidious and this could cause mistakes.
If someone could RX code this, I (and anyone interested) would know for sure. The good thing is it would be one the easiest RX code ever made.
It goes like this: whenever a # repeats, you would wait for this # to appear again, and then you play it for one spin only. That's it!!! Of course, after a while you be watching more than one #. You would be watching for all the repeats on the same table.
ex. 3 35 12 34 23 3 3 16 33 3 (trigger, play 3 for one spin) 5 5 30 11 5 (play 5 for one spin) 3 (play 3 again for one spin). You never play two #s at the same time. You just play the # to repeat again.
I guess you get the idea. This can only be implemented where there are veveral tables to watch. Otherwise, it just would take too long. Also, only play this for maybe 125 spins. If you go back too far, the repeats become less and less relevant.
Anyway, this dude I know tells me that his ROI is quite astonishing. If you are looking for a reason, I'm afraid I don't have one...
So please the few RX coders out there...
Insidebet
(the only way)
Insider
I have tested this method on 400 000 real single zero spins from rouletteresearch dot com. The result is:
-1046 units on 16 150 placed bets.
The max session length is 125 spins. If we get to spin 125, we immediately start a new session next spin. If we are ever in profit (Session profit > 0) we start a brand new session.
Also this scenario qualified as playable:
X
X
X --> Play X next spin.
So for example we have 1,
25,25,25 We now play the number 25 on the next spin.
Now even though the test was heavily negative, I still believe your friend could be winning with it. In this test, I had 8103 consecutive placed bets that were +448 units. I hope he continues to win with it, but it will lose long term.
I have attached a 125 spin sample in Excel format.
QuoteSo for example we have 1,25,25,25
We now play the number 25 on the next spin
From what I understand this is wrong, 1,25,25,3,7,19,25<--- trigger to bet on 25 again, right?
Quote from: superman on December 25, 2011, 09:18:16 AM
From what I understand this is wrong, 1,25,25,3,7,19,25<--- trigger to bet on 25 again, right?
Well here is what inside bet said:
"whenever a # repeats, you would wait for this # to appear again, and then you play it for one spin only. That's it!!!"
Based on that premise, I have done it correctly.
Hello again,
Here is another short sample to make every thing clear:
3
45
12
27
27
14
31
20
27 (trigger)
5
10
25
25
20
27(trigger)
28
4
25(trigger)
6
6
10
32
6 (trigger)
and so on...
If you have a three peat (7 7 7), you can bet the next spin or not bet. It will not make any difference overall since it happens so infrequently.
Irishman,
How did you test all those spins? Manually or with Rx? or with some other kind of code?
Insider
I tested using Microsoft Excel. I made the spreadsheet 100 000 decisions long, and ran 4 sets of 100 000 decisions and totaled the results.
QuoteBased on that premise, I have done it correctly
Not according to his example
Quotewhenever a # repeats, you would wait for this # to appear again
Quote3
45
12
27
27
14
31
20
27 (trigger)
Quote from: superman on December 26, 2011, 05:16:24 AM
Not according to his example
Actually yes. He says:
whenever a # repeats, you would wait for this # to appear again
He does NOT say a three peat does not qualify. He simply says if a number repeats, you wait for it to hit again and play it once. If it hits three times in a row, then it qualifies.
QuoteIf it hits three times in a row, then it qualifies
True, did you code to cover both eventuallities then? 3,3,3 BET 3,3,11,27,3 BET
Quote from: superman on December 26, 2011, 01:49:17 PM
True, did you code to cover both eventuallities then? 3,3,3 BET 3,3,11,27,3 BET
Exactly. Both would qualify: 3,3,3 and 3,3,11,27,3.
I did not mention the three peat. But it really does not change anything, as it happens so infrequently.
Insider