Hi Guys.
I an new here and would like to share my mathematical system for winning at roulette.
I have been develping a system for use on the roulette wheel for a while now.
I am very intersted to see that so many people have systems which take into account previous spins of the wheel.
I mean no disrespect to these people, but I am of the opinion that it is a fact that previous spins do not have any impact at all on the next spin at all.
So for example if Zero was to come in 3 times on the trot, the probability of the next spin bringing a Zero is still a 1 in 37 chance. (European 1 Zero wheel).
As a scientist I have a very good understanding of maths, and I set out to develop a system that was undesputable. That is, it was based in mathamatics and not on the previous behaviour of the wheel.
Of course there is the exception of the rigged wheel, or a wheel with imperfections, but for my system I am assuming that it is a perfect roulette wheel that has not been rigged. This basically makes the roulette wheel a Random number generator that produces numbers from 0 - 36. (1 Zero)
So if we are dealing in the mathamatics of the roulette wheel, the first thing we find is that the roulette wheel cannot be beaten on any single spin.
The house always has an advantage of about 2.78% (1 Zero). It doesn't mater if you bet on a safe bet (Red or Black) or if you go for a long shot (say a single number). The odds offered by the house are always weighted in their favour.
For example, a bet on Red pays at even money (or 2.00). This would be fair odds if we had a 50% chance of winning, but we dont, we have a 48.65% chance of winning. So fair odds would be 2.055556. This descrepency in the odds gives the house a 2.78% advantage.
So lets get down to it. In the example I just gave the given odds (in decimal form) were 2.00, and the fair odds of winning were 2.055556. We can therefore say the ratio of fair to given odds was 2.055556/2.00000 = 1.0277778. For any given single spin of the roulette wheel you will get this ratio.
So in order to beat the house we must take this ratio and distort it to give a number below 1.0000000. Because if the ratio were 1.000000 we would be getting fair odds and it would be a draw between us and the house.
HOW DO WE DEFINE FAIR AND GIVEN ODDS???????????
I will awnser this question and elaborate further in my next post.
Does any one have any questions so far?
Back soon!
QuoteAs a scientist I have a very good understanding of maths
May I ask what kind of science you are involved in?
and
Quote
I mean no disrespect to these people, but I am of the opinion that it is a fact that previous spins do not have any impact at all on the next spin at all.
how do explain the binomial distribution then`?
br
winkel
I'm an Analytical Chemist.
binomial distribution???? Where???? Explain????
Thx for your answers.
pls go on explaining your strategy.
br
winkel
HOW DO WE DEFINE FAIR AND GIVEN ODDS??
Given odds are easy. If it pays even money it is 2.00. We will have to always deal in decimal odds so that a proper fair to given odds ratio can be calculated.
A bet on a single number pays at 36.00 (35/1). You get the drift!
Fair odds are a little more difficult as they are complicated by the persence of the Zero.
Lets work with the example of a bet on Red/Black.
The odds of loosing are 19/37. 19 of the 37 numbers will mean a loss. We can convert this into a decimal as follows 19/37 = 0.5135 (i.e 1.00 is a certainty)
If this is the odds of loosing the odds of winning are simply 1-0.5135 = 0.4865. And to convert this into a decimal odds (where evens = 2.00) we take its recpricle (or 1 divided by it) i.e. 1/0.4865 = 2.0555. These are the fair odds.
Let us do another example to drive this home.
Take a bet on the low dozen (1 - 12) The odds of loosing are 25/37 = 0.6757, so odds of winning are 1-0.6757 = 0.3243 so fair odds are 1/0.3243 = 3.0836.
Given odds are 2/1 or 3.00. So again our ratio is 1.0278.
Is this clear???
Intresting threat Gingermolloy ;) But how do you convert this all into making an bett or select an bett which works??
But continue your explanation.......
Carlitos 8)
Gingermolloy,
Thanks for your contribution, please go on as we sure want to know your take on this.
Also, please remember you can always lock the topic till you are fully done elaborating and then re-open it for comments.
Kind regards,
Victor
Gingermolloy,
Welcome to the forum. :)
Keep posting mate. We're interested in what you have to say.
Regards,
Marven
Quote from: winkel on January 02, 2009, 01:29:06 PM
Thx for your answers.
pls go on explaining your strategy.
br
winkel
Winkel already got the answer.. so did I .. ;) ;)
So, it is now clear that we need a ratio of less than 1 to be on the upper hand and to beat the house.
Lets take a simple version of my system!
This system can take the ratio down to around the 0.6 mark. That gives us an advantage of 40%. But for now I think i need to start with a simpler version of the system that is based on the same idea
( I am not trying to say people are to thick, i am just going through this step by step to reduce questions)
The systems roots are in the martingale system, which I'm sure you are all familiar with.
In the Martingale system we would make a bet and if we loose we make another on the same thing but with double the stake until we win. i.e a progression as follows: 1,2,4,8,16,32 and so on.
What this system does is make it so we win a unit for each set of bets. What i mean is, if we double up 5 times to 32 units we are still only 1 unit up.
In my system we would use the following progression if betting on Red/Black: 1,3,7,15,31,63.
Using this progression we ill win 1 unit per spin even for the spins we loose. and it is this that gives us the edge.
It seems maths is not that welcome here so i will go into that later if people would like me to, but for now i will just get to the meat of it.
The secret of this type of progression is to have a cut off point where you quit and go back to the start even if you have lost. The longer you go on the better because it will diminish your chances of a loss, but it also make the bank roll a lot higher.
Lets get to the real system then.
When this type of progression is applied to a more safe bet it becomes very powerful, because you can continue to win 1 unit per spin but reduce the chance of loosing to an outside chance.
Ill go into this later!
Hi Ging
Variations of the Martingale progression are as bad as the original in my view. They work for a while then murder all the gains you made then your bankroll. If you have made a good profit so far I would stop now before you get burned.
Ulysses
Quote from: Ulysses on January 02, 2009, 05:07:46 PM
Hi Ging
Variations of the Martingale progression are as bad as the original in my view. They work for a while then murder all the gains you made then your bankroll. If you have made a good profit so far I would stop now before you get burned.
Ulysses
gingermolloy.....you can lock this thread and start another for questions if you want
Quote from: Ulysses on January 02, 2009, 05:07:46 PM
Hi Ging
Variations of the Martingale progression are as bad as the original in my view. They work for a while then murder all the gains you made then your bankroll. If you have made a good profit so far I would stop now before you get burned.
Ulysses
My system is not a variation!
I said it has its roots in the martingale! im starting there as a method of explaining it.
Let us consider a different type of progression.
Instead of betting on a evens bet and then increasing that bet until you win. We bet on a better than evens bet.
For instance let us consider a bet of £1 on two dozens. If we win we still win £1 if we win and if we loose we increase the bet on both dozens.
We want to win £1 for each spin plus we need to cover what has been lost. So if we loose we need to up the bet to £4 on each dozen.
The progression would look like this: £1 on two dozens. If we loose. £4 on two dozens. If we loose. £13 on two dozens.
The critical thing is that if we loose again, we must stop and go back to the start.
So the bank roll is, £2 + £8 + £26 = £36.
The odds of loosing are really small and we will win £1 a spin.
I will go into the maths more if people are interested but the bottom line is that for this progression the ratio of odds is 0.965.
This is in our favor but not enough.
My best variation gives a ratio of 0.6 or so.
Ill go into that next
ginger,
You should pay attention to the words you use as when you wrote "This is in our favor but not enough" it is in your favor or it is not. This is a binary game which is not fair, ie 50/50, and trying to find a mathematical advantage is a pure lost of time, you can't. You can only try to influence the distribution of L/W but again can we really make such a difference ? to a certain point but it has some limits.
Quote from: Arteinvivo on January 02, 2009, 06:24:22 PM
ginger,
You should pay attention to the words you use as when you wrote "This is in our favor but not enough" it is in your favor or it is not. This is a binary game which is not fair, ie 50/50, and trying to find a mathematical advantage is a pure lost of time, you can't. You can only try to influence the distribution of L/W but again can we really make such a difference ? to a certain point but it has some limits.
please somebody lock this thread before he go away....I feel like there's finaly a good movie on tv but everybody start talking
Interesting Gingermolloy, please continue your explanation
the trouble with this is the lenght of time it would take to win anything worth while. and the longer you played the more chance of getting wiped out. if you lost two in a row what would your stakes be. good luck
Hey mates, let's give the man the opportunity to elaborate ;) Remember as much as it is accepted by math you can't win more than expected, it is also accepted you can't lose more than expected either.
I see sharing a gain from this point of view! If the system works, then aleluyah! If it does not (As no system can increase the house edge) at most, it the is same as random-play :)
Kind regards & please Ginger by all means do continue with your explanation!
[smiley=dankk2.gif]
Here's a premise. Yes you have the 2.7% house edge on an European Wheel and 5.4% on an American wheel.
Lets say the average comes to 2.7 and 5.4, respectively, but fluctuates up and down, perhaps with a sharp formula like LW you can benefit when it fluctuates into positive territory for the bettor.
btw, Welcome to the forum Gingermolloy.
Sorry!!! Whats LW????
Quote from: kompressor on January 02, 2009, 06:50:46 PM
please somebody lock this thread before he go away....I feel like there's finaly a good movie on tv but everybody start talking
Thanks mate! Ill elaborate tomorrow now, no time now i'm afraid.
By the Way! can I post excel spreadsheets on here?????
Quote from: Arteinvivo on January 02, 2009, 06:24:22 PM
ginger,
You should pay attention to the words you use as when you wrote "This is in our favor but not enough" it is in your favor or it is not. This is a binary game which is not fair, ie 50/50, and trying to find a mathematical advantage is a pure lost of time, you can't. You can only try to influence the distribution of L/W but again can we really make such a difference ? to a certain point but it has some limits.
As I said, the final system has a 40% advantage in our favour. Watch on for this!
Sorry again but I dont get this L/W. Explain Please, or give us a link to read that explains it.
Hi, gingermolloy ,
thank you for your interesting idea.
I am very curious to read more about it.
You can find all about LW`s here:
nolinks://vlsroulette.com/situational-strategy-play/ (nolinks://vlsroulette.com/situational-strategy-play/)
Best regards
kawa4711
Hi gingermolloy .
I am looking Forward to reading Your explanations.
This will be good to learn how the past spins have no bearing at all and You can still have a 40% Advantage with it.
Your Friend.
Lanky.
Quote from: lucky strike on January 02, 2009, 09:10:55 PM
Hi gingermolloy and welcome to the forum and thanks for sharing.
I have two question for you:
Do you know what an advantage is?
If you do can you define it?
And gingermolly I just want to mention this is a section for complete systems only.
Cheers Lucky Strike
This is a complete system, it is just taking a lot of time and multiple posts to explain. Patience!
An advantage has already been explained. It is having the odds bent in our favor i.e The ratio must be below 1.00
For example if you are given odds of 8.00 (7/1) on getting a 6 when rolling a dice. If you did it long enough, probability will give you an advantage. Ratio would be 7/8 = 0.875. A 12.5% advantage in our favor.
an advantage comes when an event has a probability of happening - of say 47% but the payout for it happening is say 2.15.
2.15 being the 1 stake and 1.15 return for the succesful bet.
in theory out of 100 times, there will be 53 losers so -53 and 47 winners returning 2.15 so 47 where you get stake back and 1.15 profit. The 47*1.15 outweighs the 53 loss giving the advantage.
Like the rest - i know wait to see the explanation of the system.
Hi Gingermolloy.
Mate seeing that this is Your Thread.
And if You think it would be better for it not to be interrupted by people asking and posting their comments. (Like Me as Well)
Then down the bottom past the end of the page You will see this.
Move Topic | Remove Topic | Lock topic | Set topic sticky | Merge Topics
You can click on Lock topic and then only You & The Mods are the only ones that can unlock it.
This would certainly stop this from blowing out into a much bigger thread then You might wish it to be.
Your Friend.
Lanky.
Hi gingermolly and welcome to the forum ;)
Please, just post the system and then we can talk about all the stuff is already in this topic (maths and odds and so on).
Because as far it's just teoreticall and I can't see it's going anywhere.
Br.
tryl.
OK gents, I feel an impatience in here. Apologies, but to understand this system I have to go through all this stuff. Apologies again If you guys know this lot already.
So we have the Martingale system as our starting point.
Instead of just winning 1 unit per win I have changed the progression so that we win 1 unit per spin, whether we win or loose on that spin. In order to achieve this we must increase the bet by an amount that covers all the previous bets made plus the number of spins in that we are.
Example I think!!!:
So.
£1 on Red Win!
If we win we go back to the start so
£1 on red Lose!
£3 on red (if we win we win £2, £1 for each spin, plus the £1 we have lost) Lose
£7 on red (if we win we win £3, £1 for each spin, plus the £4 we have lost) win
back to the start.
The progression therefore is as follows: 1,3,7,15.
What is very important here (for the maths to work) is that if we lose after the £15 bet, we must stop and go back to the start.
If you run this system on any evens bet you have a 93% chance of winning and a ratio of 0.93 giving us a 7% advantage. (again, i will elaborate on the maths later).
The rest of this system is all about applying this theory to different bets in order to balance your chance of winning with the ratio you can achieve.
The theory could be put into a statement as follows:
"A progression where the first bet will win 1 unit and each successive bet will win an amount that covers all loses sustained since its beginning plus the amount of spins since its start. In the event of a win, go back to the start, and we must have a cut of point where, even if we have lost all the way, we go back to the start"
Hope thats clear.
So, if we consistently win during a session, we will win an amount of units equal to the amount of spins since its start. 10 spins equals 10 units whether we have to go 3 spins for a win or we win every one.
From this point we can go one of two ways:
- We can reduce our chances of a loss, by making the bet a better than evens bet (like betting on 2 dozens)
or
- We can reduce the ratio, and increase our advantage, but increase the chance of a loss.
Basically, with this system, you may be able to reduce the ratio to a lower value but in doing so we increase the chances of loosing.
It is kind of like ending up with odds of 40/1 on a 1 in 20 chance of winning, you still only have a 5% chance of winning, but you are getting great odds on it.
I suppose it comes down to value. The great thing about roulette is it is a game of fixed mathematics that cannot be tampered with, and therefore we can define this value (i.e. good value is a ratio below 1)
These are the 2 extremes of the system ( as far as i have discovered)
- There is the example above that gives us a ratio of 0.93 and a 7% chance of a loss
- and the other extreme example is one i will explain later that give a ratio of around 0.6 but a 50% chance of a loss. (like getting odds of around 3.30 on an evens shot)
Any questions before I go on?
Quote from: lucky strike on January 03, 2009, 06:27:45 PM
Okay i have a question.
How do you know if you are going to play red or black?
LS
This system is based purely in maths and therefore, as there is no difference between any of the evens payout bets, you can play this with Red, Black, Odd, Even, 1-18 and 19-36. Always betting on the same or changing when ever you like.
It makes no difference what has come before. It has no effect on what is to come.
please continue ginger this is very interesting
i think it took winkel about 15 pages and he left the forum about 4 times before he finished explaining GUT.
Shall we let the full system out before we decide that it can or cannot work.
the thing is - that most systems are subject to the house edge. this we know. its the way it is implemented that decides if it wins or if it lose.
The LW is a great method. I bet that there would be plenty that would lose with it and plenty that would win with it. Its down to personal variations based on discipline and the like in how it is implemented
We are gentlemen here, so I know we all vouch for:
[attachimg=#]
So, let's both sides elaborate in peace.
We work on the accepted condition no mechanical roulette system work, but it doesn't mean one can't elaborate on one's take to roulette at this message board. This is why we are all here for: sharing ideas :)
Ginger, please go on mate.
Dear fellows, remember you can always open a thread at the dark side section explaining why any specific system doesn't work, reminding about the math of the game, performing the traditional 1.000.000-spin tests and displaying the stats; it is even okay to politely link it right from the thread; there is space for everyones' views, but not space for interruptions when a fellow poster is elaborating.
I think it is also we can agree on.
Kind regards.
Your friend,
Victor
Certainly there's room for criticism! But not particularly here at the Full Systems library.
There is a section for "straight talking about roulette systems and -2.7%" and it is the dark side section:
nolinks://vlsroulette.com/the-dark-side/ (nolinks://vlsroulette.com/the-dark-side/)
I'm splitting and pasting non-system-related posts to a thread there & link to it. Lucky, I know that you will be okay with setting the example to keep the Full System library a place for systems and have the debating at proper section.
Cheers & best regards to you dear friend.
Your mate,
Victor
Quote from: gingermolloy on January 03, 2009, 06:57:37 PM
I cant understand you im afraid. You make no sense.
Ill ignore your contributions from now on as you are being rude without reason
just lock this thread...and start a new one for questions and answer....so INTERESTED people can see what people have to say about your system
Quote from: gingermolloy on January 03, 2009, 06:32:02 PM
This system is based purely in maths and therefore, as there is no difference between any of the evens payout bets, you can play this with Red, Black, Odd, Even, 1-18 and 19-36. Always betting on the same or changing when ever you like.
It makes no difference what has come before. It has no effect on what is to come.
So you say the bet-selection has no effect and the outcome of the spins have no effect and what has come and what is going to come has no effect
then you can bet about 10 times using this progression and have lost 4083 units
so you have to win 4084 times in the first bet or
2042 times in the second bet
to equalize
How do you do this by a chance of 50:50???????????
br
winkel
are you gonna finish your explanation ??
If I gave you odds of 3.00 (2/1) on getting heads when you flip a coin, would you not take the bet because you only had a 50:50 chance of winning?
Of course you would, because over time, if you were to repeat the bet over and over, you would come out on top.
That is pure mathematics and cannot be argued against.
Think of the roulette wheel as a 37 sided coin flip.
If I gave you odds of 40/1 on Zero coming in instead of the 35/1 offered by the house you would take the bet because you are getting better odds than is fair.
If you bet on Zero with odds of 40/1 for ages and ages, over time you would come out on top. Irrespective of the fact that you only have a 1 in 37 chance of winning each individual bet.
My system makes this possible, it gives odds of above 2.00 on a 50:50 chance. Over time you will win more money than you bet. Fact!!!!!
Thoughts?
gingermolly
Please continue with your system. We who have played the game a while are skeptical. What you're describing is called the "Grand Martingale". But you may have a new twist no one has thought of before, so please continue.
kompressor is right. You--if you can--or Victor should lock your thread until you are finished. You can open a Q & A thread in the "Child Board" as it's called.
Don't be hard on Lucky Strike. He's a good guy; just impatient.
When it's all said and done, if you get it past winkel and Kon-Fu-Sed (KFS) you've got a winner!
Carry on!
Sam
Yes please continue gingermolly, maybe provide an example of how you play to backup your explanation
Quote from: TwoCatSam on January 03, 2009, 10:48:59 PM
gingermolly
Please continue with your system. We who have played the game a while are skeptical. What you're describing is called the "Grand Martingale". But you may have a new twist no one has thought of before, so please continue.
kompressor is right. You--if you can--or Victor should lock your thread until you are finished. You can open a Q & A thread in the "Child Board" as it's called.
Don't be hard on Lucky Strike. He's a good guy; just impatient.
When it's all said and done, if you get it past winkel and Kon-Fu-Sed (KFS) you've got a winner!
Carry on!
Sam
Im sure I do have a new twist. If I new you guys were as clued up as this I would have just started at the Grand Martingale and taken it from there.
Will go on tomorrow now.
Night
Ginger
"Skeptical"-TwoCat
Yes Ginger, after playing this game for a while, one can easily get skeptical and find it harder to be enthused about new ideas. If Einstein said (in essence) maths can't beat the wheel...
The house edge requires a typical system to win at least 60% of the time to stay viable.
Looking forward to "blowing the doors off", Ginger. (as the hype builds to a fever-pitch) :)
-PR
OK let get into the maths for a minute.
Because this is the bit that I am most worried about being discredited as a load of coblers.
Let us take the Grand Martingale Progression on any evens payout bet. It goes 1, 3, 7, 15.
The mathematical odds of winning are indisputable! The course of evens that leads to us loosing our bankroll of £26 is that we must lose 4 times on the trot. (If we are betting on red, then it must be a black or Zero 4 times).
The odds of this happening are easy to calculate. We take the odds of it happening once and multiply it by itself by as many times as it must happen. (i.e. (19/37) x (19/37) x (19/37) x (19/37) = 0.07)
So we have a 7% chance of loosing and a 93% chance of winning.
To convert this into decimal odds we take 1 / (1 - 0.07) = 1.075
So the fair odds for this progression failing would be 1.075.
Now the given odds are a bit harder and are up for dispute.
We need the given odds in decimal form so first we must define how to calculate odds given by the house.
Decimal odds may be defined as the amount payed out if the bet comes in including your stake divided by the stake itself.
i.e. if you take a 2/1 shot. This is stated as 3.00 as decimal odds,
Take a £3 on this 2/1 shot, total payout = £9 and stake = £3 So 9/3 = 3.00.
Yes I know basic stuff, but this is just showing the theory.
So for our Grand Martingale bet.
We could say that our stake is out bankroll and our payout is £4 (£1 for each spin)
So total payout = £30
Stake = £26
Given odds therefore equal 30/26 = 1.154
These given odds are better odds than the fair odds of 1.075 so over time we will have an advantage over the house. Ratio = 1.075 / 1.154 = 0.93.
Thoughts? , before I go on?
Even bets, Grand Martingale 1,3,7,15: $26 drawdown.
As roulette is a trial of independent spins, the house has a automatic 53% on a European roulette wheel (without the zero covered), typical even money bet (Black/Red, Odd/Even, High/Low)
I'm looking at your numbers, 7% losing. That would be true, provided the Grand Martingale were continuous (past $15), there were no table limits and we have a very large bankroll.
Again 60% or better for a viable system, if we lose, we would have to win twice in a row to cover the loss.
What are the odds of winning an even bet progression twice in a row (every time)?
Quote from: gingermolloy on January 04, 2009, 04:31:26 PM
We could say that our stake is out bankroll and our payout is £4 (£1 for each spin)
So total payout = £30
Stake = £26
Given odds therefore equal 30/26 = 1.154
These given odds are better odds than the fair odds of 1.075 so over time we will have an advantage over the house. Ratio = 1.075 / 1.154 = 0.93.
Thoughts? , before I go on?
[highlight]Your not serious, are you?[/highlight]
In Germany we would say "Thats apples compared with bananas".
Your counting only works if you win in the fourth (always)
but how is your math if you lose and not only once but 3 times in a row.
pls see also my earlier question you didn´t answer.
regards
winkel
True winkel but if you do the maths for the given odds when winning at an earlier stage the numbers actually look better.
looking for other question now!
ginger
Quote from: gingermolloy on January 04, 2009, 06:04:25 PM
True winkel but if you do the maths for the given odds when winning at an earlier stage the numbers actually look better.
looking for other question now!
ginger
Whats the other question!?
This one
Quote from: winkel on January 03, 2009, 08:18:30 PM
So you say the bet-selection has no effect and the outcome of the spins have no effect and what has come and what is going to come has no effect
then you can bet about 10 times using this progression and have lost 4083 units
so you have to win 4084 times in the first bet or
2042 times in the second bet
to equalize
How do you do this by a chance of 50:50???????????
br
winkel
I am all for a mathematical approach and it sounds good in theory but I have just coded it into MMMX and it doesnt work - it loses quite a lot!
gingermolly,
here are spins from todays joyland:
1
9
29
17
18
29
17
9
18
32
21
27
32
23
22
13
4
24
9
21
36
16
17
7
11
27
26
2
24
20
12
1
35
27
24
16
10
11
5
36
0
15
30
32
10
23
13
31
11
10
32
0
24
17
why won't you go this session and show as how it works with your comments (decisions you make to bet or not to bet).
best regards.
tryl.
Quote from: gingermolloy on January 03, 2009, 10:55:07 PM
Im sure I do have a new twist.
People......
I think we are all agreed that the Grand Martingale, in pristine form, will never win. Ginger said he had a twist to the system. I am waiting for that twist.
Sam
I agree with you Sam, that's my purpose of giving spins in the post.
Let's see what's special in this system.
br.
tryl.
He's misterious....girls like it... ;D
If some one considering to play this way, then plz, use a line like 111, before you increase you bets.
Its just an illusion to think you have to win and gain a profit for every step using a progression.
You will find it more easy and lose less if you delay your bets.
I can show you that you can pass 500 000 trails and end with a profit if you delay.
If you use any thing like the post above mention with a Marty you will not last for 300 trails.
L 1
W 1
W 1 +1
L 1
L 1
W 1 +0
W 1
W 1
W 1
W 1 +4
L 1
L 1
L 1
W 2 +3
W 1 +4
L 1
L 1
W 1 +3
L 1
W 1
L 1
L 1
L 1
W 2 +2
W 1 +3
L 1
L 1
W 1 +2
L 1
W 1
W 1 +3
L 1
L 1
W 1 +2
W 1
W 1 +4
L 1
W 1
W 1 +5
L 1
L 1
W 1 +4
W 1
W 1
W 1 +7
L 1
W 1
L 1
W 1
L 1
W 1
L 1
W 1
W 1 +8
L 1
L 1
L 1
L 2
W 3 +6
W 1
W 1 +8
L 1
W 1
L 1
W 1
W 1
W 1 +10
L 1
W 1
W 1 +11
L 1
W 1
L 1
W 1
W 1 +12
L 1
L 1
W 1 +11
W 1
W 1 +13
L 1
L 1
W 1 +12
W 1
W 1
W 1 +15
L 1
L 1
L 1
W 2 +14
W 1 +15
L 1
L 1
L 1
L 2
W 3 +13
W 1
W 1 +15
Cheers LS
been a pleasure guys, but this isn't the crowd for me clearly
Seya
Ginger
Quote from: gingermolloy on January 05, 2009, 05:51:08 AM
been a pleasure guys, but this isn't the crowd for me clearly
Seya
Ginger
This is a loss. We are all people, if we treat us badly or if we try the good, we welcome the good.
Colleagues, all that is needed is not to interrupt the person.
First to develop the system and then to leave the questions, the personal observations and the suggested improvements.
The solution is not in keeping all the topics closed, the solution lies in education and have the decency to leave people alone to develop its system.
Greetings
WannaWin
;) Hey Gingermolloy,
these guys only mean well. TCS and Winkel both come over very strongly and sometimes one can take it the wrong way.I know that I did have a hickup with TCS way back about basically the same thing that is upsetting you.
Believe me though that u should be very happy that these guys are devoting time to your posts. TCS is definately the top tester of systems around here, and Winkel (although I still haven't got to GUT) definately one of the top if not the top system creator around. So u see, u are in the presence of some knowledgable gents. And I assure u that they WANT u to succeed or at least find something special in what u are doing cause if it's beneficial to us all well that is just great.
Please reconsider leaving and continue your posts. When TCS said he was waiting for the "twist" believe me he was waiting for the twist. Not meaning it sarcasitically. Even if your system comes to nothing maybe the twist is what some of us needs in developing other systems.
Chhers
Jakk
Quotemaybe the twist is what some of us needs in developing other systems.
Exactly.
I too vouch for Ginger to reconsider leaving. We all know the house edge is there and we all know systems are accepted to fail when passed throught computerized long-term testing, but we still need to have this a sharing place where we learn form each other and listen first. Then after submitter has elaborated we submit our comments and personal views in a calmed and polite way.
Really, this is all about it!
We don't know who the top-contributors from the future are. First step is sharing their initial ideas, then elaborating on top of those ideas and then improving year to year.
I still want to know Winkel's take on advanced tracking based on GUT-like events, I still want to know what Mr. Chip has to say. I'm sure plenty of us want it. When a contributing member of the forum leaves, that is a loss to all of us as a roulette study community.
Remember: those bet selection or money management ideas some discard may be exactly what's missing to some others to complete the synergy to their own take at the game.
Hope Ginger is back again in the future when he calms down and hope all of us to be mature enough to do just one tiny little thing: Listening while a fellow elaborates! I don't think that's asking for too much :)
After he elaborates in peace we have all the time in the world to provide opinions, suggestions & verdicts... but if we cut the sharing prior the being complete, eventually what would be there be for us to debate?
Reflection time.
Best regards.
Your friend & concerned admin,
Victor
Ginger I too hope that you reconsider , You have me thinking out of the box , please forge ahead and continue , ideas that people believe are crazy are that ones that usually create the new paradigms . I now the world is not flat.... Thanks ....Charlie :thumbsup:
@ Ginger. I know my sense of humor may be caustic and offensive at times. If I said anything that may have done so, I'm sorry.
The only way I believe we'll beat the wheel is as a community. Please reconsider staying.
Quote from: lucky strike on January 05, 2009, 04:49:53 AM
If some one considering to play this way, then plz, use a line like 111, before you increase you bets.
Its just an illusion to think you have to win and gain a profit for every step using a progression.
You will find it more easy and lose less if you delay your bets.
I can show you that you can pass 500 000 trails and end with a profit if you delay.
If you use any thing like the post above mention with a Marty you will not last for 300 trails.
L 1
W 1
W 1 +1
L 1
L 1
W 1 +0
W 1
W 1
W 1
W 1 +4
L 1
L 1
L 1
W 2 +3
W 1 +4
L 1
L 1
W 1 +3
L 1
W 1
L 1
L 1
L 1
W 2 +2
W 1 +3
L 1
L 1
W 1 +2
L 1
W 1
W 1 +3
L 1
L 1
W 1 +2
W 1
W 1 +4
L 1
W 1
W 1 +5
L 1
L 1
W 1 +4
W 1
W 1
W 1 +7
L 1
W 1
L 1
W 1
L 1
W 1
L 1
W 1
W 1 +8
L 1
L 1
L 1
L 2
W 3 +6
W 1
W 1 +8
L 1
W 1
L 1
W 1
W 1
W 1 +10
L 1
W 1
W 1 +11
L 1
W 1
L 1
W 1
W 1 +12
L 1
L 1
W 1 +11
W 1
W 1 +13
L 1
L 1
W 1 +12
W 1
W 1
W 1 +15
L 1
L 1
L 1
W 2 +14
W 1 +15
L 1
L 1
L 1
L 2
W 3 +13
W 1
W 1 +15
Cheers LS
LS
I am very interested in your approach. What is a line 1 1 1? Do you increase your bet after three loses? Would it go 1 1 1 2 3 4 and then cross off the outside numbers when you win? I have worked on this for a couple of years. I'd love to hear your take on it.
Sam
QuoteDo you increase your bet after three loses?
Hi TCS.
Mate i am just saying as the PMs you got from me, that you can win for years and 1 1 1 is not 3 loses.
I have made tweaks and improvments to them, i send them to you if you want.
Important "The first bet you win +1, the secound bet you break even, the third bet you get -1".
That will happen TCS is this:
W and strikes of WW and above and LW will hit above LLW with a higher hit ratio.
There for they will generate a profit over time and over distribution of trails.
Then there is no reason to win at every step using a progression.
There for you can delay your bets to 1 1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 89.
TCS that is how i done things but know i do some thing else and i can also send that to you if you want.
Its a hybrid of Attila and some thing else for even money bets, but for now i am testing and experementing just to hit +2 like WW or WLWW or LWWW.
I am using a new approch to develop to hit wave or "trends" that produce a positive expectaion of +2.
Cheers LS
LS
Yes, please send me the information. TwoCatSam@cox.net
Thanks
Sam
I think gingermolly's system has some merit. He's using his progression to work on the most probable outcome. Under the Standard distribution curve this is the most prevalent area. It looks to me like his calculations are mostly correct. In probability and especially statistics, much can easily be miscalculated and misinterpreted. Something everyone here knows and is painfully aware of is that over the long run, the house edge will beat you. That is why, whenever you play roulette or any game of chance, your best bet is to enter when probability is on your side and only play a short period of time. In the short term, you can win. Play 50 spins, then stop and have a good chance of being ahead. Play 500 spins and you have a good chance of losing. It's the law of large numbers working against you when you leave yourself open to the Standard Deviation of this game. If you limit your exposure to it, that is when you take back control. Unfortunately for human nature, most of us lack the control and greed takes over thus not allowing us to walk away after a few wins. No, we have to keep playing until we win BIG or we lose all our bankroll. That is human nature. Systems based of standard deviation, probability and limited progressions are winning systems, it's us that makes them losing systems.
Xavier,
Excellent post With quoting material.
I took the liberty to do a separate thread for it:
nolinks://vlsroulette.com/quotes-and-phrases/human-nature/ (nolinks://vlsroulette.com/quotes-and-phrases/human-nature/)
Thanks for your contribution and may there be more to be read from you in the future, and I mean from now to the long run. :thumbsup:
Your friend,
Victor
Ginger, gambling is a tough jungle. Casinos don't use a soft gloves to take our bankrolls away. First thing you have to learn to accept constructive criticism. I self don't believe that math can beat the casinos but was patiently waiting for explanation of your strategy. I personally think that if you can "think out of the box" you can come with ideas what nobody else can see and beat the system. Jordano Bruno and Galileo knew that the globe is not flat and the poor Bruno gave even his life for it.
If you are sure you can beat the system explain it to us and you will beat the system and the ignorant one too. With one shoot.
The problem arises from your slow explanation and the impatient one cannot wait to go and spend their money, with your idea.
Don't let yourself to entourage if you are right. Be brave as Jordano Bruno was. Who knows, you could be Edison in gambling?
Don't let to lose your enthusiasm on trivial things.
Thanks Hermes
Quote from: xavier102772 on January 05, 2009, 10:36:25 PM
Something everyone here knows and is painfully aware of is that over the long run, the house edge will beat you.
Stastically that is true, yet hoardes of gamblers take to the internet and B&M casinos. It it "the game won't beat me, again" stubborness? The sport of it, (competition between the bettor and the game, or among other bettors?
Every so often someone comes along that confounds the experts and the wise. Ginger may have had the key, and now we may never know.
Hi everyone,
I would like to apologies for leaving the forum in a hough.
I would like to continue my explanations in a less technical manner.
Hope you are all still interested.
Welcome back gingermolloy,
guys, Please zip your mouths and let gingermolloy finish presenting his idea..
Yes, please do gingermolly
Btw, are you the liverpool fan gingermolly over at RAWK? There was a guy over there once with the same name and similar roulette ideas..
Ginger
So we can be clear--are you male or female?
Welcome back to the forum. We are eager to hear further explanation.
If you become annoyed at someone, please pm me and give me a chance to talk to them privately.
Sam
QuoteHi everyone,
I would like to apologies for leaving the forum in a hough.
I would like to continue my explanations in a less technical manner.
Hope you are all still interested.
Hi and welcome back, it makes me happy to see you here again.
I will not makes any replys to you post here, if you absolute don't want me to do so.
PLZ continue and post your idea and let us all know when you are ready for us to ask questions about your method.
Cheers Lucky Strike
here is the final bet!
wait for 10 numbers to come up with no repeaters.
1.e.
1, 23, 32, 3, 7, 33, 8, 0, 2, 31.
we then bet on these 10 numbers using the following progression.
Amount wagered on each of the 10 numbers|:
20p,
80p,
£1.20,
£2,
£3,
£4.40,
£6.40,
£9.20,
£13,
£18.20.
If we lose after this we go back to the start
If we win at at any point we go back to the start.
Only start the progression again when you have had 10 straight numbers that are all unique, i.e. no repeaters.
Example needed!!!!!
here we go!
3, wait
34, wait
6, wait
3, repeater
32, wait
9, wait
21, wait
20, wait
0, wait
5, wait
36,we have now had 10 numbers that are all different.
so we bet 20p on them all.
19, lose, bet 80p on them all,
17, lose, bet £1.20 on them all
20, win
keep on going, but only bet when the last 10 numbers were unique
Thoughts? comments?
Can someone test this for me?
I can´t believe it.
br
winkel
cant believe what?
hi gingermolloy. i was kinda expecting a system on the even chances ( black n red ) ??? il give this one some testing tho, cheers gingermolloy
Ginger, I am a little bit confused. You said that it must be a 10 unique numbers without repeat (we know already system strategy like that around) and than you take # 3 which is repeater into team. That's not kosher? I think from your explanation you should wait for one more unique number before bets. That means all 10 must be kosher, no gentile between.
Another thing, you started debate about completely different theme, this conclusion is a real surprise - not only for Winkel.
Thanks anyway and keep discovering you are on the right way.
Hermes
This is the end point of my system, which I believe is rooted in maths and I believe I can prove that.
I returned to the forum to give my system over for testing.
I decided to jump to the end because people were being impatient and i thought it was what people wanted.
Lets see if the system works. If it does and people are interested in how I came to it then i will elaborate.
I was trying to take it step by step but that just caused problems.
I have run this system with massive success, can anyone confirm that it works!
I will then resume my step by step explanation.
cheers
ginger
I for sure am glad you are back Ginger.
This system can be easily coded. I just want your confirmation you aren't making any human-based decisions at any point (i.e. 100% mechanical system approach).
Thank you.
Hi Ginger,
Assuming that my win/loss calculations for the progression below are correct, I think this system wouldn't work as a failure of the 10 steps progression would mean a -584 loss. I think the system can't recover for itself.
Step Win Loss
20p, +5.2 -2
80p, +18.8 -10
£1.20, +21.5 -22
£2, +30 -42
£3, +36 -72
£4.40, +42.4 -116
£6.40, +50.4 -180
£9.20, +59.2 -272
£13, +66 -402
£18.20. +71.2 -584
I have done a quick hand test for this and hit the wall twice, ending up with a -481.5 loss.
Your contribution is well appreciated though. :thumbsup:
Regards,
Marven
Hi ginger, and all.
Warning: This is...
An analysis based purely in maths, of a system based purely in maths.
Suppose you find 10 numbers to bet in 100,000 sessions (to cut at least some decimals)
The probability for 10 numbers to hit at the first trial is 10/37 and so you will win the first stage (26u) in 27,028 sessions = 702,728u
You started 100,000 sessions, won and ended 27,028 so 72,972 sessions to bet for the 2nd stage.
The probability for 10 numbers to hit at the second trial is 10/37 and so you will win the second stage (96u) in 19,723 sessions = 1,893,408u = total 2,596,136u
You bet the 2nd stage in 72,972 sessions, won and ended 19,723 so 53,249 sessions to bet for the 3rd stage.
The probability for 10 numbers to hit at the 3rd trial is 10/37 and so you will win the 3rd stage (106u) in 14,392 sessions = 1,525,552u = total 4,121,688u
You bet the 3rd stage in 53,249 sessions, won and ended 14,392 so 38,857 sessions to bet for the 4th stage.
The probability for 10 numbers to hit at the 4th trial is 10/37 and so you will win the 4th stage (150u) in 10,502 sessions = 1,575,300u = total 5,696,988u
You bet the 4th stage in 38,857 sessions, won and ended 10,502 so 28,355 sessions to bet for the 5th stage.
The probability for 10 numbers to hit at the 5th trial is 10/37 and so you will win the 5th stage (180u) in 7,664 sessions = 1,379,520u = total 7,076,508u
You bet the 5th stage in 28,355 sessions, won and ended 7,664 so 20,691 sessions to bet for the 6th stage.
The probability for 10 numbers to hit at the 6th trial is 10/37 and so you will win the 6th stage (212u) in 5,593 sessions = 1,185,716u = total 8,262,224u
You bet the 6th stage in 20,691 sessions, won and ended 5,593 so 15,098 sessions to bet for the 7th stage.
The probability for 10 numbers to hit at the 7th trial is 10/37 and so you will win the 7th stage (252u) in 4,081 sessions = 1,028,412u = total 9,290,636u
You bet the 7th stage in 15,098 sessions, won and ended 4,081 so 11,017 sessions to bet for the 8th stage.
The probability for 10 numbers to hit at the 8th trial is 10/37 and so you will win the 8th stage (296u) in 2,978 sessions = 881,488u = total 10,172,124u
You bet the 8th stage in 11,017 sessions, won and ended 2,978 so 8,039 sessions to bet for the 9th stage.
The probability for 10 numbers to hit at the 9th trial is 10/37 and so you will win the 9th stage (330u) in 2,173 sessions = 717,090u = total 10,889,214u
You bet the 9th stage in 8,039 sessions, won and ended 2,173 so 5,866 sessions to bet for the 10th stage.
The probability for 10 numbers to hit at the 10th trial is 10/37 and so you will win the 10th stage (356u) in 1,586 sessions = 564,616u = total 11,453,830u
You bet the 10th stage in 5,866 sessions, won and ended 1,586 so 4,280 sessions were lost.
4,280 sessions were lost.
First: Is that according to math - is the figure reasonable? (Reality check, you know)
The probability for at least one hit betting ten numbers for up to ten spins (quit on hit) is 95.71825892718769% or in 100,000 sessions 95,719 should win.
(Figure found here nolinks://vlsroulette.com/grabb/ (nolinks://vlsroulette.com/grabb/))
That is 4,281 lost sessions.
The calculated figure above was 4,280 lost sessions. A difference of ONE session (decimal error).
So our figure of 4,280 lost sessions is probably correct.
SO! 4,280 sessions lost - and they lost 2,920u each so that's 12,497,600u. Lost.
The total won was 11,453,830u so...
The net, based purely in maths, is -1,043,770u...
For 100,000 sessions = -10.44u/session.
Sorry. :(
KFS
PS. The loss is like -2.6% but it's because I rounded all the winning sessions UP when cutting decimals.
Had I not, it would probably end on -2.7% as it's based purely in maths.
Here's a hand test I did of your unique numbers system and I'm afraid it was not good.
(Riverbelle Live Wheel Casino: Date: January 10,2009: 8:00 am
(I converted the pence figure to American Dollars, starting at $1):: <$> means in the negative<---
1. (win) (Bet $1 on 10 unique numbers): $36-$9=$27
2. (x)--(1x)----<$10>
3. (x)--(4x)----<$40>
4. (x)--(6x)----<$60>
5. (x)--(10x)---<$100>
6. (x)--(15x)---<$150>
7. (x)--(22x)---<$220>
8. (x)--(32x)---<$320>
9. (x)--(46x)---<$460>
10.(x)--(65x)---<$650>
11.(x)--(91x)---<$910>
------------------------Total for the session: <$2920>+$27=<$2893>
Quote from: VLSroulette on January 10, 2009, 11:36:07 AM
I for sure am glad you are back Ginger.
This system can be easily coded. I just want your confirmation you aren't making any human-based decisions at any point (i.e. 100% mechanical system approach).
Thank you.
The bit of this system that is 100% mechanical is the progression, which is derived from the Grand Martingale.
The human decision is the waiting for 10 consecutive numbers with no repeaters.
It would be nice to do a comparison of betting on 10 arbitrary numbers using the progression (100% mechanical) as apposed to waiting for the 10 numbers (which does have a human decision).
The decision to wait for the consecutive numbers is based around the theory of repeating numbers.
Yes you could say that this is in contradiction of what I said earlier, but the mathematics of random numbers does suggest that numbers are more statistically likely to repeat than not to.
for example if this system is to fail for just 1 progression, we must see 20 of 37 numbers in a row with no repeaters, this is sooooo unlikely.
Just look al Winkels GUT! Check out his graphs.
You hardly ever get a graph where you get to the 20th spin without a repeater.
ginger
Quote from: Proofreaders2000 on January 10, 2009, 01:49:13 PM
Here's a hand test I did of your unique numbers system and I'm afraid it was not good.
(Riverbelle Live Wheel Casino: Date: January 10,2009: 8:00 am
(I converted the pence figure to American Dollars, starting at $1):: <$> means in the negative<---
1. (win) (Bet $1 on 10 unique numbers): $36-$9=$27
2. (x)--(1x)----<$12>
3. (x)--(4x)----<$48>
4. (x)--(6x)----<$72>
5. (x)--(10x)---<$120>
6. (x)--(15x)---<$180>
7. (x)--(22x)---<$264>
8. (x)--(32x)---<$384>
9. (x)--(46x)---<$552>
10.(x)--(65x)---<$780>
11.(x)--(91x)---<$1092>
------------------------Total for the session: <$1092>+$27=<$1065>
sorry i have no idea what all this means can you clarify for me with no jargon
plain English
sorry
ginger
Quote from: Kon-Fu-Sed on January 10, 2009, 12:15:19 PM
Hi ginger, and all.
Warning: This is...
An analysis based purely in maths, of a system based purely in maths.
Suppose you find 10 numbers to bet in 100,000 sessions (to cut at least some decimals)
The probability for 10 numbers to hit at the first trial is 10/37 and so you will win the first stage (26u) in 27,028 sessions = 702,728u
You started 100,000 sessions, won and ended 27,028 so 72,972 sessions to bet for the 2nd stage.
The probability for 10 numbers to hit at the second trial is 10/37 and so you will win the second stage (96u) in 19,723 sessions = 1,893,408u = total 2,596,136u
You bet the 2nd stage in 72,972 sessions, won and ended 19,723 so 53,249 sessions to bet for the 3rd stage.
The probability for 10 numbers to hit at the 3rd trial is 10/37 and so you will win the 3rd stage (106u) in 14,392 sessions = 1,525,552u = total 4,121,688u
You bet the 3rd stage in 53,249 sessions, won and ended 14,392 so 38,857 sessions to bet for the 4th stage.
The probability for 10 numbers to hit at the 4th trial is 10/37 and so you will win the 4th stage (150u) in 10,502 sessions = 1,575,300u = total 5,696,988u
You bet the 4th stage in 38,857 sessions, won and ended 10,502 so 28,355 sessions to bet for the 5th stage.
The probability for 10 numbers to hit at the 5th trial is 10/37 and so you will win the 5th stage (180u) in 7,664 sessions = 1,379,520u = total 7,076,508u
You bet the 5th stage in 28,355 sessions, won and ended 7,664 so 20,691 sessions to bet for the 6th stage.
The probability for 10 numbers to hit at the 6th trial is 10/37 and so you will win the 6th stage (212u) in 5,593 sessions = 1,185,716u = total 8,262,224u
You bet the 6th stage in 20,691 sessions, won and ended 5,593 so 15,098 sessions to bet for the 7th stage.
The probability for 10 numbers to hit at the 7th trial is 10/37 and so you will win the 7th stage (252u) in 4,081 sessions = 1,028,412u = total 9,290,636u
You bet the 7th stage in 15,098 sessions, won and ended 4,081 so 11,017 sessions to bet for the 8th stage.
The probability for 10 numbers to hit at the 8th trial is 10/37 and so you will win the 8th stage (296u) in 2,978 sessions = 881,488u = total 10,172,124u
You bet the 8th stage in 11,017 sessions, won and ended 2,978 so 8,039 sessions to bet for the 9th stage.
The probability for 10 numbers to hit at the 9th trial is 10/37 and so you will win the 9th stage (330u) in 2,173 sessions = 717,090u = total 10,889,214u
You bet the 9th stage in 8,039 sessions, won and ended 2,173 so 5,866 sessions to bet for the 10th stage.
The probability for 10 numbers to hit at the 10th trial is 10/37 and so you will win the 10th stage (356u) in 1,586 sessions = 564,616u = total 11,453,830u
You bet the 10th stage in 5,866 sessions, won and ended 1,586 so 4,280 sessions were lost.
4,280 sessions were lost.
First: Is that according to math - is the figure reasonable? (Reality check, you know)
The probability for at least one hit betting ten numbers for up to ten spins (quit on hit) is 95.71825892718769% or in 100,000 sessions 95,719 should win.
(Figure found here nolinks://vlsroulette.com/grabb/ (nolinks://vlsroulette.com/grabb/))
That is 4,281 lost sessions.
The calculated figure above was 4,280 lost sessions. A difference of ONE session (decimal error).
So our figure of 4,280 lost sessions is probably correct.
SO! 4,280 sessions lost - and they lost 2,920u each so that's 12,497,600u. Lost.
The total won was 11,453,830u so...
The net, based purely in maths, is -1,043,770u...
For 100,000 sessions = -10.44u/session.
Sorry. :(
KFS
PS. The loss is like -2.6% but it's because I rounded all the winning sessions UP when cutting decimals.
Had I not, it would probably end on -2.7% as it's based purely in maths.
Sorry, I am struggling with your abbreviated explanation.
You are however correct about the %age chance of this system failing. It is 95.71825892718769%
that is the number i get.
Quote from: Proofreaders2000 on January 10, 2009, 01:49:13 PM
Here's a hand test I did of your unique numbers system and I'm afraid it was not good.
(Riverbelle Live Wheel Casino: Date: January 10,2009: 8:00 am
(I converted the pence figure to American Dollars, starting at $1):: <$> means in the negative<---
1. (win) (Bet $1 on 10 unique numbers): $36-$9=$27
2. (x)--(1x)----<$10>
3. (x)--(4x)----<$40>
4. (x)--(6x)----<$60>
5. (x)--(10x)---<$100>
6. (x)--(15x)---<$150>
7. (x)--(22x)---<$220>
8. (x)--(32x)---<$320>
9. (x)--(46x)---<$460>
10.(x)--(65x)---<$650>
11.(x)--(91x)---<$910>
------------------------Total for the session: <$2920>+$27=<$2893>
I see you started out with .20 pence on the first attempt, so I started the betting at $1.00 and used a progression of 1,4,6,10,15,22,32,46,65,91 to coincide with you progression in British Pounds.
I betted each time there were 10 unique numbers that were hit only once.
Each time a number hit, I resetted the progression back to $1.
Out of eleven attempts, there was only one hit. Attempts 2-11 were misses.
gingermolly,
I'm sorry that you have trouble understand what I showed above.
Let's do it piece by piece:
Quote
The probability for 10 numbers to hit at the first trial is 10/37
If you bet ten numbers on a 0-wheel, your probability to hit is 10/37 (27.027027%)
Quote
and so you will win the first stage (26u) in 27,028 sessions
If you start 100,000 sessions, you will hit on the very first trial in 27,027.027027 sessions - I rounded that to 27,028 sessions.
Each time you win at the first stage of your progression you will have a net of 26u.
Quote
= 702,728u
You have won 27,028 times 26u = 702,728u
Quote
You started 100,000 sessions, won and ended 27,028
Now, as you won 27,028 sessions on the first bet you quit those sessions...
Quote
so 72,972 sessions to bet for the 2nd stage.
...so you will bet for a second time in 72,972 sessions.
Each stage is the same.
Now:
Quote
SO! 4,280 sessions lost - and they lost 2,920u each so that's 12,497,600u. Lost.
If you lose 4,280 sessions and each loses 2920u, that's a total of 12,497,600u
And you agree to the 95.7% figure... 4,280 sessions is 4.28% of 100,000...
As the total units won by the progression was only 11,453,830u... well.
I hope it's clear now.
KFS
Allow me to offer my mathematical analysis of the 100% mechanical part of this system, i.e the progression.
It is a Grand Martingale progression. That means that if we win at any point we win 1 unit for each spin.
Based the numbers I gave you i.e. in £
0.2
0.8
1.2
2
3
4.4
6.4
9.2
13
18.2
the unit is £7.
The actual profit at each stage is not exactly a multiple of 7 but the mathematics mean that the bets need to be approximated. (i.e one cannot bet £2.132, one would round this up to £2.20) we always round up so that the maths always give an under estimation if how good it is.
i.e.
If i win on the first spin the payout is £7.20 (£0.20 x 36) Therefore £7 profit. (£7 per spin)
if i win on the second spin the payout is £28.80 (£0.80 x 36) therefore £18.80 profit (£9.40 per spin)
if i win on the 3rd spin the payout is £43.20 (£1.20 x 36) therefore £21.20 profit (approx.£7.07 per spin)
if i win on the 4th spin the payout is £72 (£2.00 x 36) therefore £30 profit (£7.50 per spin)
if i win on the 5th spin the payout is £108 (£3 x 36) therefore £36 profit (£7.20 per spin)
if i win on the 6th spin the payout is £158.40 (£4.40 x 36) therefore £42.40 profit (approx.£7.07 per spin)
if i win on the 7th spin the payout is £230.40 (£6.4 x 36) therefore £50.40 profit (£7.2 per spin)
if i win on the 8th spin the payout is £331.20 (£9.2 x 36) therefore £59.20 profit (£7.4 per spin)
if i win on the 9th spin the payout is £468.00 (£13 x 36) therefore £66 profit (£7.3333 per spin)
if i win on the 10th spin the payout is £655.2 (£18.20 x 36) therefore £71.20 profit (£7.12 per spin)
So if from now on i say that we will win £7 a spin, that is an acceptable approximation because we will actually be winning more than that. (just by a little)
Now the way i see the mathematical chance of losing is this:
(27/37) x (27/37) x (27/37) x (27/37) x (27/37) x (27/37) x (27/37) x (27/37) x (27/37) x (27/37) = 0.0428174107281231 (i.e. 4.28%) or 1 in 23.355.
So, the mathematical chance of this progression failing is 1 in 23 (again rounding on the conservative side.)
So, 1 out of every 24 progressions will fail, and we will lose our bankroll of £584.
But, the other 23 will win.
Now, the amount of money we win from a successful progression depends on how long it takes before we win. i.e. if we win after 1 spin we will win £7, after 5 spins we will win £36.
We could say that the average number of spins taken to win would be the average.
i.e. (1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9+10)/10 = 5.5 spins
The amount of money won in 5.5 spins (underestimated) is 5.5 x £7 = £38.5
So the average money won from the successful progression is £38.50.
and for every progression lost (£584) we will win 22 (22 x £38.5) = £847.
for every £584 lost we will win £847.
This combined with the waiting for 10 consecutive numbers results in a system that I personally have never seen fail, EVER!!!.
Comments???
ginger
Quote from: Proofreaders2000 on January 10, 2009, 02:08:08 PM
I see you started out with .20 pence on the first attempt, so I started the betting at $1.00 and used a progression of 1,4,6,10,15,22,32,46,65,91 to coincide with you progression in British Pounds.
I betted each time there were 10 unique numbers that were hit only once.
Each time a number hit, I resetted the progression back to $1.
Out of eleven attempts, there was only one hit. Attempts 2-11 were misses.
Once you reset the progression you must wait for another 10 consecutive non repeaters to bet on!!!!!!!
Konfused!
I think your approach is mathematically right if you treat each stage of the progression individually.
We know that the wheel cannot be beaten on a single spin basis, that is why we must bet on multiple spins by using a progression.
Think of my system as a bet on a set of 10 spins, rather than 10 bets on 10 individual spins!
I am betting that 1 of 10 numbers will appear in a set of 10 spins.
Where i win in the progression is of no consequence.
It is whether it happens at all that is important!
ginger
Dear gingermolly,
I am sorry but what you write here is not correct:
Quote
We could say that the average number of spins taken to win would be the average.
i.e. (1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9+10)/10 = 5.5 spins
The amount of money won in 5.5 spins (underestimated) is 5.5 x £7 = £38.5
So the average money won from the successful progression is £38.50.
The
average amount of spins to win is far less...
You forget that you bet
sooo many more times on the first stage than on the last
because you quit on a win.
For the first stage you win 27,028 in
100,000 spins
For the second you win 19,723 in 72,972 spins
3rd stage is 14,392 hits in 53,249 spins
4th stage is 10,502 hits in 38,857 spins
5th stage is 7,664 hits in 28,355 spins
6th stage is 5,593 hits in 20,691 spins
7th stage is 4,081 hits in 15,098 spins
8th stage is 2,978 hits in 11,017 spins
9th stage is 2,173 hits in 8,039 spins
10th stage is 1,586 hits in
5,866 spins
Total is: 95,720 hits in 354,144 spins =
3,6998 spins to win x 7 = 25.898
So the average money won from the successful progression is £25.90
and for every progression lost (£584) we will win 22 (22 x £25.90) = £569.80
For each progression lost we will lose 14.20
Sorry :(
But please don't give up!
KFS
Example on real spins!!
The trigger to begin the progression is when the last 10 numbers are all different from each other.
1 wait
9 wait
29 wait
17 wait
18 wait
29 repeater
17 repeater
9 repeater
18 repeater
32 wait
21 wait
27 wait
32 repeater
23 wait
22 wait
13 wait
4 wait
24 wait
9 wait
21 repeater
36 we now have 10 unique numbers (27 32 23 22 13 4 24 9 21 and 36)
so on the next spin we bet £0.2 on these 10 numbers
16 lose
bet £0.8 on them
17 lose
bet £1.2 on them
7 lose
bet £2 on them
11 lose
bet £3 on them
27 win £108
now we must wait for 10 consecutive unique numbers again.
we already do ( 27 11 7 17 16 36 21 9 24 and 4)
26 lose
2 lose
24 win
bet 24 2 26 27 11 7 17 16 36 and 21
20 lose
12 lose
1 lose
35 lose
27 win
24 repeater
16 wait
10 wait
11 wait
5 10th number
bet 5 11 10 16 24 27 35 1 12 and 20
36 lose
0 lose
15 lose
30 lose
32 lose
10 win
for every spin that was part of a progression we won £7
I rest my case
ginger
Quote
for every spin that was part of a progression we won £7
Yes, that's fine with me. I also wrote:
Quote
spins to win x 7 =
I said that your
average number of spins to hit (5.5) is waaay too high: it's in fact (mathematically fact ;)) 3.6998
Best regards,
KFS
Quote from: Kon-Fu-Sed on January 10, 2009, 03:10:52 PM
Dear gingermolly,
I am sorry but what you write here is not correct:
The average amount of spins to win is far less...
You forget that you bet sooo many more times on the first stage than on the last because you quit on a win.
For the first stage you win 27,028 in 100,000 spins
For the second you win 19,723 in 72,972 spins
3rd stage is 14,392 hits in 53,249 spins
4th stage is 10,502 hits in 38,857 spins
5th stage is 7,664 hits in 28,355 spins
6th stage is 5,593 hits in 20,691 spins
7th stage is 4,081 hits in 15,098 spins
8th stage is 2,978 hits in 11,017 spins
9th stage is 2,173 hits in 8,039 spins
10th stage is 1,586 hits in 5,866 spins
Total is: 95,720 hits in 354,144 spins = 3,6998 spins to win x 7 = 25.898
So the average money won from the successful progression is £25.90
and for every progression lost (£584) we will win 22 (22 x £25.90) = £569.80
For each progression lost we will lose 14.20
Sorry :(
But please don't give up!
KFS
I think you are right!
this would give the house a 2.43% advantage.
I concede that your maths are right on this point.
I suppose this 2.43% advantage is better than the 2.78% enjoyed by the house on a single spin.
It must be the waiting for the 10 unique numbers that makes this system work so well.
Thanks for your clarification.
ginger
Guys
I find this very interesting as I have been down this road many times. At the end of the road was a big, black dog that always bit me arse! Let me reduce this to the question I always asked:
What are the chances of loosing the progression vs how much will I make each time I don't loose the progression? If I read correctly, Ginger says we will loose the progression once in 23 at-bats. The question is, on the progressions we don't lose, do we overcome that one in twenty-three?
I'm going to study on this will 1 unit bets and a unit is whatever you may call it.
This is very interesting!
Thanks GM
Sam
Quote from: Kon-Fu-Sed on January 10, 2009, 03:10:52 PM
Dear gingermolly,
I am sorry but what you write here is not correct:
The average amount of spins to win is far less...
You forget that you bet sooo many more times on the first stage than on the last because you quit on a win.
For the first stage you win 27,028 in 100,000 spins
For the second you win 19,723 in 72,972 spins
3rd stage is 14,392 hits in 53,249 spins
4th stage is 10,502 hits in 38,857 spins
5th stage is 7,664 hits in 28,355 spins
6th stage is 5,593 hits in 20,691 spins
7th stage is 4,081 hits in 15,098 spins
8th stage is 2,978 hits in 11,017 spins
9th stage is 2,173 hits in 8,039 spins
10th stage is 1,586 hits in 5,866 spins
Total is: 95,720 hits in 354,144 spins = 3,6998 spins to win x 7 = 25.898
So the average money won from the successful progression is £25.90
and for every progression lost (£584) we will win 22 (22 x £25.90) = £569.80
For each progression lost we will lose 14.20
Sorry :(
But please don't give up!
KFS
Sam
see the above post by Konfused!
the 22 wins doesn't make up for the 1 loss!!! we end up £14.20 down.
But i think the waiting is the key factor here, that combined with the 95.7% chance of winning £7 a spin makes this a winning system.
I have not beat the maths as I thought i had! but the system has still never failed.
I think it is the same reason Wikels GUT works!
Hi guys, have been tuning in and out for months. Just wondering if waiting for a set of 10 numbers that have not shown for say 25 spins (or more?) would change the outcome of this system?
Great thread
cheers
Mike
OK, Ginger or some European person.......
What is the little "P"? Is it pence? How many little "p"s in a pound?
Does 4.40 mean 4 pounds and 40 "p"?
Could we equate an American penny to a "p" and an American dollar to a Pound?
Sam
Quote from: TwoCatSam on January 10, 2009, 06:16:34 PM
OK, Ginger or some European person.......
What is the little "P"? Is it pence? How many little "p"s in a pound?
Does 4.40 mean 4 pounds and 40 "p"?
Could we equate an American penny to a "p" and an American dollar to a Pound?
Sam
hahahahaha
sorry i forgot this is international
£ or GBP or pound is 100p
so yeah 1.2 means 1 pound and 20pence
its just the same if you do it with dollars and cents (if there are 100 cents in a dollar)
ginger (British)
Ginger
Thanks! I thought that was it, but I wanted to be sure.
Yes, we are the world on this forum. From Ireland to Australia and everywhere in between. (Why did I just think of a kangaroo with a leprechaun in her pouch?)
Too much dust in the brain~~~!
Sam
Quote from: TwoCatSam on January 10, 2009, 06:25:06 PM
Ginger
Thanks! I thought that was it, but I wanted to be sure.
Yes, we are the world on this forum. From Ireland to Australia and everywhere in between. (Why did I just think of a kangaroo with a leprechaun in her pouch?)
Too much dust in the brain~~~!
Sam
LOL TCS, you crack me up sometimes. ;D
;) Hi Ginger,
Nice to see you back mate. I am playing other ways currently but I am always interested so thanks again and i will give it a go.
Cheers mate
Jakk
Quote from: gingermolloy on January 10, 2009, 04:03:14 PM
I think it is the same reason Wikels GUT works!
sorry, but you are wrong:
GUT works because
1. it is flat bet
2. it doesn´t bet always the same amount of numbers
it works because:
betting e.g. 10 numbers will make you win or lose and in the long run you will lose 2,7% of your wager
GUT is betting different amounts of numbers, if 10# lose, 11# will win, if 12# lose 9# will win.
There is no danger to run in a losing streak that is too long to survive or to recover.
pls explain:
you started with Grand Martingale
now you are betting
0.2 1
0.8 4
1.2 6
2 10
3 15
4.4 22
6.4 32
9.2 46
13 65
18.2 91
which is not the GMg
You made a test-Area where should Red/Black be tested with just 4 bets. ? ? ?
Where is the red hering?
On what argument do you have your advantage that compensates the house-edge?
What is the point of waiting for 10 numbers? Why not 6 or 9 or 5 or even 1?
br
winkel
Lets forget about explanations for now!
I would like to concentrate on whether this system works!
If it does, i will explain why! and how i came to it.
If it fails I will smash my house up and spit my dummy out!
Then we can explore why it failed.
To the tests please!
I have never seen this fail ever!
Does everyone get what i am doing??
Quote from: gingermolloy on January 10, 2009, 09:12:16 PM
Lets forget about explanations for now!
I would like to concentrate on whether this system works!
If it does, i will explain why! and how i came to it.
If it fails I will smash my house up and spit my dummy out!
Then we can explore why it failed.
To the tests please!
I have never seen this fail ever!
Does everyone get what i am doing??
You've never seen it failed in how many tests? How often do you play your method? Do you regularly play and win with this system at real casino's?
What is your profits to date?
Quote from: madupz4 on January 10, 2009, 09:33:32 PM
You've never seen it failed in how many tests? How often do you play your method? Do you regularly play and win with this system at real casino's?
What is your profits to date?
Im not dumb enough to have put real money on this yet, but i have done it on say 500 spins and it has never failed.
I dont have any software to do it without acually going through it all myself.
It seems to work on Random numbers and real spins
can you help?
Guys
I'd like to discuss one thing, and I'm not too good at math. Ginger wrote in reply #89:
"If i win on the first spin the payout is £7.20 (£0.20 x 36) Therefore £7 profit. (£7 per spin)"
Here he is betting 20 pence on--not one--but ten numbers. Yes, for the hitting number the math is right. What about the nine that lost? 9 x 20 = 180 or 1P 80p. So didn't the win amount to 7 - 1.80 or 5.2?
Sam
It does not work.
Quote from: TwoCatSam on January 10, 2009, 10:30:05 PM
Guys
I'd like to discuss one thing, and I'm not too good at math. Ginger wrote in reply #89:
"If i win on the first spin the payout is £7.20 (£0.20 x 36) Therefore £7 profit. (£7 per spin)"
Here he is betting 20 pence on--not one--but ten numbers. Yes, for the hitting number the math is right. What about the nine that lost? 9 x 20 = 180 or 1P 80p. So didn't the win amount to 7 - 1.80 or 5.2?
Sam
You are right!
working on the numbers now.
I thought the beginning of the progression looked a little odd
ginger
Just ran it through 100 spins, from Wild Jack's Live Wheel.
13 betting series - all series were won.
Average of 3.9 bets to get a win.
Interesting. Will have to try it with some of my B&M spins.
Ron.
Quote from: gingermolloy on January 10, 2009, 02:52:28 PM
Once you reset the progression you must wait for another 10 consecutive non repeaters to bet on!!!!!!!
Well, I have missed that part in my test. Whenever the progression was reset, I would for example take the last 6 spins with unique numbers and add 4 more unique numbers from the next 4 spins to form a new set of 10 unique numbers and start the progression.
I didn't know I should wait for ANOTHER set of 10 unique numbers (even if there are already 5 or 6 unique numbers from the last game).
I will redo my test, although I don't think this will make a difference anyway in the long run.
The following are the results of my last test's progressions. I have outlayed them in Lw format so that you can see which step of each progression won:
LLLLLLLw <-- Won at the 8th step of the progression.
Lw <-- Won at the second step of the progression. (and so on)
Lw
w
w
Lw
LLw
LLLLLw
LLw
w
LLLw
LLLw
LLLw
Lw
Lw
w
w
LLLLLLLLLL <-- Progression failed!
Lw
w
w
LLw
w
w
LLLw
LLLw
LLLLLLw
Lw
Lw
LLLLLLw
LLLLLLLLLL <-- Progression failed!
LLLw
LLLLLw
I also want to bring your attention to something.
You said that there is a mechanical aspect in this system which is the progression, and a human-based aspect which is the selection of 10 unique numbers.
The fact is that this is a totally mechanical system. Selecting 10 unique numbers IS a mechanical bet selection that can be easily coded into a program.
As far as I know, mechanical systems don't work in the long run due to their imposing of fixity on the stream of random outcomes, which ends up with the results averaging out to the mathematical expectancy that we all know. But it definitely doesn't mean we shouldn't try or let others try if not give them a hand.
There is always something to learn. :)
Regards,
Marven
Hey Ginger, looking good. I took you suggestion, plus a few tweaks: Same dealer, if there's a dealer change, restart tracking. It took about 40 minutes, but I played the 10 unique numbers and it won four times (in a row) on the first attempt. $72(winnings)-$18.00(numbers that didn't hit)=$54 profit, real money. Nice!
Hi i have a question.
What is the odds for picking 10 numbers and win 4 times in a row flat betting?
I just did that with an crazy idea.
Cheers Lucky Strike
hmm 10/37= 0.27 0.27^4=0.0053 so 0.53% ? I havent been in school for a while so might be wrong here
Quotehmm 10/37= 0.27 0.27^4=0.0053 so 0.53% ? I havent been in school for a while so might be wrong here
Okay thanks. If you want to see it drop by gambling framework section.
Cheers
LS
Worm om du will ha två bra böcker, tips om roulette så finns det två svenka som är intressanta.
hehe ok, finns det svenska böcker om roulette? Helt upslukad av pai gow och kina poker nu fattar inte varför så jävla kul bara :D
Sry about Swedish :)
take care
/Worm
Lucky and worm,
Maybe we should move this to a thread of its own...?
The probability to hit 4 times betting 10 numbers of 37 is (10/37) x (10/37) x (10/37) x (10/37) = 0,533572089057451% so worm's figure is OK.
(Most humbly I suggest that you read my "Roulette Probability Made Easier" in the reference area:
nolinks://vlsroulette.com/reference-area/roulette-probability-made-easier-t2193/ (nolinks://vlsroulette.com/reference-area/roulette-probability-made-easier-t2193/))
And one book that I would NOT recommend for buying is R Bergwall's "Roulette For Alla"...
But that's just me... (I've got it...)
But as I said: If this is to be discussed, I think it should be done in a separate thread.
;)
KFS
Quote(Most humbly I suggest that you read my "Roulette Probability Made Easier" in the reference area:
Okay thanks and you could read my post at gambling framework and see that there is no wrong with my math...
I get SD +3 or +4 then it gets weaker no matter what any one says...
QuoteAnd one book that I would NOT recommend for buying is R Bergwall's "Roulette For Alla"...
But that's just me... (I've got it...)
lol hahaha :) Har oxå läst den... I also read it... and that was not the book i was refering to :) lol Bergwall the Marty Guru Hahahaha
That was fun now we have 3 from SWE
LS
The question is:
Does waiting for any 10 not repetead numbers give a better result?
Therefore I will give an example!
I will bet 10 numbers on the same permanence as @Marven did. I don´t know it yet.
These will be the numbers:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Marven pls. post your numbers.
br
winkel
Quote from: winkel on January 11, 2009, 12:27:59 PM
The question is:
Does waiting for any 10 not repetead numbers give a better result?
Therefore I will give an example!
I will bet 10 numbers on the same permanence as @Marven did. I don´t know it yet.
These will be the numbers:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Marven pls. post your numbers.
br
winkel
To prove this we need a large scale test i think..(Even though i know it doesnt matter what 10 nrs you play)
I don´t hink so:
As the original I will start with spin 11 (the 1. possible spin to start)
After game ended with 10 L or any win, I will take the next following 11th spin.
br
winkel
ok be my guest 8)
Might be better to wait a couple of extra spins.
Last 12 spins are unique --> bet first 10 of those 12 numbers.
Ron.
Hey guys, this looks really good. So far, I've won 6 out of 8 attempts, the first four consecutive, real money.
Here are the money stats for me with this system: $108(winnings)-$40(numbers that didn't hit)=$68 profit
Hit miss ratio: 3/4 (75% accuracy) If it gets to 80%, it's in Holy Grail territory.
Quote from: Marven on January 11, 2009, 03:38:43 AM
LLLLLLLw <-- Won at the 8th step of the progression.
Lw <-- Won at the second step of the progression. (and so on)
Lw
w
w
Lw
LLw
LLLLLw
LLw
w
LLLw
LLLw
LLLw
Lw
Lw
w
w
LLLLLLLLLL <-- Progression failed!
Lw
w
w
LLw
w
w
LLLw
LLLw
LLLLLLw
Lw
Lw
LLLLLLw
LLLLLLLLLL <-- Progression failed!
LLLw
LLLLLw
I took any of my spins and played numbers 1 to 10
Can anyone see any difference to the results of Marven?
LW
W
LW
LLLLW
W
W
LLLLLLLLLL
W
LLLLLW
W
LLLLLLLLW
LLLLLW
LLLLLLLW
W
LLLW
LLW
LLLLW
LW
W
LLW
LLLLLLLLW
LLLW
W
LLW
LLW
LLW
LLLLW
LLLLLW
Winkel you are wrong. It is not equal what numbers you bet because if you take last coming not repeated numbers you play with the trend. From your 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10 could be 3 or more sleepers at the time, where the last coming are probably not a sleepers but busy or wake up numbers. I remember long time ago I played similar strategy and bet the last 12 numbers coming but any repeater between. It went good for long time. After 15 straight numbers spins without any repeater there must come soon a repeat, that's for sure. If the progression could hold it the system would win more than lose. Proof prove it right now. The online low minimums bets on numbers could be an advantage for that strategy. No advantage in land casinos, only perhaps in Las Vegas because of the competition.
Hermes
Hi Hermes,
what I have learned through all my testing and searching:
Any selection will give the same result long-term:
e.g.
you bet just one single number
there is no difference in betting allways the same number e.g. 1
or if you bet the last number
or if you bet the number before the last number
you even bet the numbers of the day before spin by spin
Test: take 1369 numbers from any actuals, you can even mix them up of two or three different tables/Rng as you like
bet the system of ginger
bet for control my numbers 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
bet for control any 10 numbers that doesnt change (your own selection)
bet for control always the last 10 numbers (go back as long as you need to get 10 exactly)
The difference will always be in the range of normal deviation
for easy test just bet flat bet
compare one of the bet-selections with the prog-rules
you will have a lot of fun and a big WOW
br
winkel
Quote from: Winkel on January 11, 2009, 12:27:59 PM
The question is:
Does waiting for any 10 not repetead numbers give a better result?
Therefore I will give an example!
I will bet 10 numbers on the same permanence as @Marven did. I don´t know it yet.
These will be the numbers:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Marven pls. post your numbers.
br
winkel
Winkel,
I am sorry but I can't recall what numbers I used. I selected a random session from my Hamburg spins and kept track of only the Lw.
I totally agree with you though.
I challenge anyone to pick any public spin records, play any set of ten numbers they want with this progression and show an improvement over my or Winkel's results, or any other results of playing 10 numbers with a 10 step progression.
Bet selection doesn't make a difference in the long run.
Face this reality please. Time is precious.
All the best.
Your friend,
Marven
I think bet selection is everything,
Your rate of hitting decide your success. There is no progression useful in order to beat the randomness, that is a fallacy. you will win if you hit equal or more than expectation.
JD
Yes, in long run everything will equalize but for the present moment it will make an escarts (shows the imperfection), that's what we are to exploit there. We cannot make money on 1 million spin balancing, our lives are too short, but we can take advantage of 12 reds in row.
Hermes
Quote from: J.Daniels on January 12, 2009, 12:39:15 AM
I think bet selection is everything,
Your rate of hitting decide your success. There is no progression useful in order to beat the randomness, that is a fallacy. you will win if you hit equal or more than expectation.
JD
This may be true, but the trick is finding a progression where it is statistically unlikely to reach the end without winning.
Hello all,
hermes wrote:
Quote
Yes, in long run everything will equalize
That's true - all numbers WILL eventually have
just about 2.7% hits each.
But allow me to quote myself from a post in "the Dark Side", regarding that...
Regards,
KFS
-----------
To some extent that is true: In the very long run all numbers will close to even out.
But the thing is that it is only MATH-PEOPLE who say that and really MEAN it.
[highlight]
BECAUSE THEY TALK ABOUT PER CENT![/highlight]
They DON'T mean amounts in NUMBERS or losses in UNITS.
So YOU have to decide if you
BET PER CENT or if you
BET UNITS.
If you bet per cent; by all means - continue believing that the numbers will even out...
Because they do.
Per-centage-wise...
The rest of us (
we who bet units) can look at it this way:
The mathematical average for any number to hit is 2.7% (1/37) and it's all too easy to show, given a substantial amount of roulette-numbers.
In a sample of - say -
3,700 spins each number will hit just about
100 times.
And in a sample of - say -
37,000,000,000 spins each number will hit just about
1,000,000,000 times.
But say that in the smaller sample one number has hit for
only TWO PER CENT: It has hit 74 times instead of the expected 100. Waaay below.
That's actually [highlight]
TWENTY-SIX[/highlight] losses for a difference of 0.7%
Now look at the larger sample and say that the hit % of that same number has
INCREASED to 2.69%.That's only a difference of 0.01% from the expected 2.7% and only 1/70 of the above.
It's VERY CLOSE to the expected 2.7%.But it is only 995,300,000 hits instead of the expected 1,000,000,000.
And that means [highlight]4,700,000[/highlight] losses.So while the AVERAGE "HIT PER CENT" has INCREASED
from [highlight]2.0% to 2.69%[/highlight] the NUMBER OF LOSSES has ALSO INCREASED -
from [highlight]26 to 4.7 MILLIONS[/highlight].
And this is called to "
even out in the very long run"?
Yeah, sure.
I'll buy that any day.
/KFS
good post Konfused,
I see it like a plain going from New York to Madrid. If the play moves his way only 2 or 3 degrees, the cause will be to finish the trip in Holland instead of Madrid. So a little change in the expectation can be BIG change in the long run.
QuoteThis may be true, but the trick is finding a progression where it is statistically unlikely to reach the end without winning.
In my opinion you can apply a progression when your hitting rate its 50%, otherwise it makes no sense to me. When you loose, you loose bigger, I dont think you have to aim to win every session with enormous progressions which will hit the wall sooner or later.
But you have to keep trying, failing over and over again is the key to success.
JD
new progression for the original system
1
2.4
4.4
7
10.8
16
23
33
46.8
65.6
should i start a new thread do you think
by the way ive been away for a few days because my missus has just given birth. A girl 8lb.
ginger
Quote from: gingermolloy on January 16, 2009, 05:21:51 PM
my missus has just given birth. A girl 8lb.
Congrats mate :thumbsup:
Quote from: gingermolloy on January 16, 2009, 05:21:51 PM
new progression for the original system
1
2.4
4.4
7
10.8
16
23
33
46.8
65.6
should i start a new thread do you think
by the way ive been away for a few days because my missus has just given birth. A girl 8lb.
ginger
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
i got two girls under 3 year old
Hello guys, this thread is to be Splitted.
As This is ginger's thread: System based purely in Maths :thumbsup:
Let's don't hijack other people's thread! There's a whole forum to post :)
Cheers!
I have still not seen this system fail!
I would like to invite people to post some real spins or random numbers and I will show the decisions made along the way to try and make this system as simple to you lot as it is to me.
ginger
Ginger
nolinks://vlsroulette.com/actuals-permanences/the-twocat-5000/ (nolinks://vlsroulette.com/actuals-permanences/the-twocat-5000/)
There you have 5,000 spins from Riverbell Live single-0 wheel.
Sam
GING.-Good nm you,mate
Ginger
I saw that. I think he means, "Good on ya, mate." It's a term Lanky taught us. It's like---may good things happen to you! May good fortune come your way.
It's a good thing to say to a person.
Sam
good on you,mate.But tell me,have you ever be involved in the real game,as I didnt get you.
TSC, Arent you painting???
iboba
I do get some time off!! Too cold to paint; going to Red Lobster and to a movie.
FRIED OR COOK.TRIE IT ON BUZZARA,WITH WHITE VINE.
Hi all,
What's new in Ginger's strategy? in betting selections (waiting for 10 consecutive unique numbers then bet),
or in progression? or new in making us wait to hear from him?
Cheers,
Dinh
Quote from: iboba on January 17, 2009, 05:34:20 PM
good on you,mate.But tell me,have you ever be involved in the real game,as I didnt get you.
Was this directed at me? I don't understand the question.
Sam
was dir.to Ginger,betting he wont comeback,
Quotenew progression for the original system
1
2.4
4.4
7
10.8
16
23
33
46.8
65.6
gingermalloy, are you serious? 65.6 units
on each of the ten numbers at the final step of the progression? :o
Quote from: Bliss on January 18, 2009, 11:19:42 AM
gingermalloy, are you serious? 65.6 units on each of the ten numbers at the final step of the progression? :o
Got to have iron balls with this one, but as I said, I think this is a holy grail system, I've never seen it lose.
The progression is a variation of the grand martingale with you winning 26 units per spin, bankroll of 2100 units. (a unit can however be as small as the table will allow. even 1p (1cent))
ginger.
Guys
You know, I think I will have a look at this. This person is persistent. I've been laughed at for believing in the G.U.T. and the 4Selecta, so why not this one?
That S.O.S. thingy is a type of progression as it goes from 1 unit to 36 and it's pretty darn good.
Sam
:-\Well i'm gonna be the bearer of bad new's-This will happen ,it will lose and eat your winning's and your bankroll.sorry!
Quote from: rev on January 18, 2009, 12:43:39 PM
:-\Well i'm gonna be the bearer of bad new's-This will happen ,it will lose and eat your winning's and your bankroll.sorry!
Ive never seen it fail, EVER!!
ginger, in all the time you've been playing the system, roughly how many bets would you say you've placed? and how far up the progression did you get?
I have made a little test and it fail after doubled the initial bankroll.
The casino used for test is Betvoyager at no zero roulette.
I think is the same to use Ux software, is a fair one.
Hi ginger, and all.
You bet on 10 numbers, it's close to 12, ie dozen. Why don't you use this progression:
1-1-2-3-4-6-9-14-21-32 (10 steps).
Could you demonstrate that after 9 spins, one of your unique consecutive numbers will appear.
Cheers,
Dinh
Anyone still interested in this?
as long it still winning !!
share or die ;)
k
I'm no math person, but it does seem to have a winning edge. In the end, how would you get all the bets down?
Sam
OK People.......
Has anyone calculated the odds of 10 numbers sleeping for 20 spins? Or the reverse: The odds of the casino winning on their 27 numbers for 20 spins? I have, but I'm so bad at math I'm reluctant to post my findings.
Would anyone agree that when you loose the progression, you loose 2100 units?
Ginger, put the baby down for a while and come talk to us!
Congratulations, by the way. Hope the "missus" is doing well.
aside: at least we know Ginger is male!
Sam
Sam,
The odds of hitting one of 10 numbers in 20 spins is 99.99979%. So the opposite is pretty rare but it can happen!!
Hope that helps.
Mocco
Mocco
I had it at 99.8%. Thanks.
So out of 1,000 spins, it wins 99.8% or 998 and looses twice. Roughly.....
More later....
Sam
Quote from: Moccoman on January 21, 2009, 03:36:36 AM
Sam,
The odds of hitting one of 10 numbers in 20 spins is 99.99979%. So the opposite is pretty rare but it can happen!!
Hope that helps.
Mocco
That´s nice but doesn´t help at all:
20 times 10 units = 200 units bet
1 time 26 units won = 26
result = -174
progression for 10 units
10
10
10
20
20
30
40
80
80
110
150
210
12 stages, 770 units bet, 21 units on a single number mostly hits every table-limit.
This is the other part of house-edge: As soon as you reach a good %-of profitchance the house-edge (table-limit) stopps you.
br
winkel
As I understand it we are looking for a sequence of 20 numbers where there are no repeats. The way I would tackle this would be to use the basic probability formula:
Probability = no of outcomes giving the "looked for" result/total number of equally likely outcomes
The "looked for" result is a sequence of 20 numbers with no repeats, so to get the number of outcomes, think of 20 "slots" to be filled, with each slot representing one spin. For the 1st spin, the number of possible outcomes is 37 (there are 37 ways of filling the slot), for the 2nd slot, there are only 36 possible outcomes (because one of the numbers has been "used up"). So far then, there are 37 x 36 outcomes (because each of the 37 outcomes on the first spin is combined with the 36 possible outcomes on the 2nd spin). So continuing, for the 3rd slot there are 35 "available" numbers to "choose" from, the 4th slot, there are 34 etc. In total we have:
37*36*35*34*33*32*31*30*29*28*27*26*25*24*23*22*21*20*19*18 = 3.86962 x 1028
That's the "top" of the fraction in the formula (this is tedious to calculate, but there is a formula you can use, if you have a scientific calculator) . To calculate the "bottom" part of it, just recognise that each outcome (spin) is equally likely over the 20 spins, so the total number of equally likely outcomes is just:
37*37*37*37*37.... etc = 3720 = 2.31225 x 1031
So the probability is 3.86962 x 1028/2.31225 x 1031 = 0.00167 = 0.167%
Remember this is the chance that all 20 numbers will be different, which represents a loss for the system (this will occur roughly one time in 600 attempts, on average) . So the chance of success (at least one number repeats) is 1 - 0.00167 = 99.8%.
This is misleading though, because you aren't actually placing bets for 20 successive spins, but waiting for 10 no-repeats and only then betting for another 10. Your actual chance of failure (busting the progression) would be quite a bit higher.
Quote from: gingermolloy on January 18, 2009, 03:30:13 PM
Ive never seen it fail, EVER!!
Get to the end of this and you will have lol
Spin Number Type Bet Unit Win Loss Net Unit Bal. Bet Layout
0 2200
1 21 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2200
2 30 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2200
3 36 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2200
4 33 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2200
5 23 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2200
6 13 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2200
7 23 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2200
8 0 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2200
9 18 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2200
10 29 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2200
11 23 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2200
12 18 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2200
13 20 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2200
14 29 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2200
15 8 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2200
16 31 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2200
17 17 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2200
18 35 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2200
19 10 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2200
20 32 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2200
21 12 Bet 10 0 -10 -10 2190 1 : 8,10,17,18,20,23,29,31,32,35
22 1 Bet 25 0 -25 -25 2165 2.5 : 8,10,17,18,20,23,29,31,32,35
23 12 Bet 45 0 -45 -45 2120 4.5 : 8,10,17,18,20,23,29,31,32,35
24 11 Bet 70 0 -70 -70 2050 7 : 8,10,17,18,20,23,29,31,32,35
25 7 Bet 110 0 -110 -110 1940 11 : 8,10,17,18,20,23,29,31,32,35
26 8 Bet 165 594 -165 429 2369 16.5 : 8,10,17,18,20,23,29,31,32,35
27 11 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2369
28 23 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2369
29 14 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2369
30 3 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2369
31 18 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2369
32 24 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2369
33 31 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2369
34 19 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2369
35 22 Bet 10 0 -10 -10 2359 1 : 3,7,8,11,14,18,19,23,24,31
36 1 Bet 24.5 0 -24.5 -24.5 2334.5 2 : 242.5 : 3,7,8,11,14,18,19,23,31
37 36 Bet 45 0 -45 -45 2289.5 4.5 : 3,7,8,11,14,18,19,23,24,31
38 8 Bet 70 252 -70 182 2471.5 7 : 3,7,8,11,14,18,19,23,24,31
39 18 Bet 10 36 -10 26 2497.5 1 : 1,3,8,14,18,19,22,24,31,36
40 25 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2497.5
41 23 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2497.5
42 18 Bet 10 36 -10 26 2523.5 1 : 1,8,18,19,22,23,24,25,31,36
43 11 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2523.5
44 34 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2523.5
45 8 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2523.5
46 20 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2523.5
47 21 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2523.5
48 28 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2523.5
49 13 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2523.5
50 13 Bet 10 36 -10 26 2549.5 1 : 8,11,13,18,20,21,23,25,28,34
51 23 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2549.5
52 20 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2549.5
53 34 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2549.5
54 36 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2549.5
55 29 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2549.5
56 3 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2549.5
57 36 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2549.5
58 21 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2549.5
59 27 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2549.5
60 26 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2549.5
61 29 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2549.5
62 1 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2549.5
63 27 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2549.5
64 4 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2549.5
65 17 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2549.5
66 33 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2549.5
67 24 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2549.5
68 2 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2549.5
69 32 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2549.5
70 32 Bet 10 36 -10 26 2575.5 1 : 1,2,4,17,24,26,27,29,32,33
71 27 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2575.5
72 1 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2575.5
73 16 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2575.5
74 35 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2575.5
75 27 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2575.5
76 1 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2575.5
77 0 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2575.5
78 17 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2575.5
79 25 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2575.5
80 19 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2575.5
81 31 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2575.5
82 23 No Bet 0 0 0 0 2575.5
83 30 Bet 10 0 -10 -10 2565.5 1 : 1,16,17,19,23,25,27,31,35,0
84 36 Bet 25 0 -25 -25 2540.5 2.5 : 1,16,17,19,23,25,27,31,35,0
85 3 Bet 45 0 -45 -45 2495.5 4.5 : 1,16,17,19,23,25,27,31,35,0
86 14 Bet 70 0 -70 -70 2425.5 7 : 1,16,17,19,23,25,27,31,35,0
87 7 Bet 110 0 -110 -110 2315.5 11 : 1,16,17,19,23,25,27,31,35,0
88 26 Bet 165 0 -165 -165 2150.5 16.5 : 1,16,17,19,23,25,27,31,35,0
89 29 Bet 230 0 -230 -230 1920.5 23 : 1,16,17,19,23,25,27,31,35,0
90 5 Bet 330 0 -330 -330 1590.5 33 : 1,16,17,19,23,25,27,31,35,0
91 6 Bet 470 0 -470 -470 1120.5 47 : 1,16,17,19,23,25,27,31,35,0
92 7 Bet 660 0 -660 -660 460.5 66 : 1,16,17,19,23,25,27,31,35,0
====================================================================================
Used a progression of
1
2.5
4.5
7
11
16.5
23
33
47
66
With dublinbet live wheel numbers.
Not good :-\
M
mananova, I hope you were playing in fun mode?
If you do a similar calculation to the one above using a sequence of 10 (which gives the true chance of success), the chance is 73.71%.
Quote from: Bliss on January 23, 2009, 08:12:04 AM
mananova, I hope you were playing in fun mode?
Yeah i done it on RX with 500 Db numbers just to see when it would go to the 10th.
M
Had a go with 6 unique numbers instead 10 with a prgression of:
6 -6 +30
6 -12 +24
6 -18 +18
6 -24 +12
12 -36 +36
12 -48 +24
12 -60 +12
And if lose go up one:
12
12
12
12
24
24
24 (probaly a bit dangerous though)
Quite suprised how many times 6 hits.
Spin Number Type Bet Unit Win Loss Net Unit Bal. Bet Layout
0 0
1 26 No Bet 0 0 0 0 0
2 16 No Bet 0 0 0 0 0
3 34 No Bet 0 0 0 0 0
4 18 No Bet 0 0 0 0 0
5 6 No Bet 0 0 0 0 0
6 28 No Bet 0 0 0 0 0
7 21 Bet 6 0 -6 -6 -6 1 : 6,16,18,26,28,34
8 2 Bet 6 0 -6 -6 -12 1 : 6,16,18,26,28,34
9 20 Bet 6 0 -6 -6 -18 1 : 6,16,18,26,28,34
10 3 Bet 6 0 -6 -6 -24 1 : 6,16,18,26,28,34
11 18 Bet 12 72 -12 60 36 2 : 6,16,18,26,28,34
12 31 Bet 6 0 -6 -6 30 1 : 2,3,18,20,21,28
13 34 Bet 6 0 -6 -6 24 1 : 2,3,18,20,21,28
14 25 Bet 6 0 -6 -6 18 1 : 2,3,18,20,21,28
15 34 Bet 6 0 -6 -6 12 1 : 2,3,18,20,21,28
16 8 Bet 12 0 -12 -12 0 2 : 2,3,18,20,21,28
17 11 Bet 12 0 -12 -12 -12 2 : 2,3,18,20,21,28
18 10 Bet 12 0 -12 -12 -24 2 : 2,3,18,20,21,28
19 7 No Bet 0 0 0 0 -24
20 15 Bet 12 0 -12 -12 -36 2 : 7,8,10,11,25,34
21 20 Bet 12 0 -12 -12 -48 2 : 7,8,10,11,25,34
22 10 Bet 12 72 -12 60 12 2 : 7,8,10,11,25,34
23 20 No Bet 0 0 0 0 12
24 4 No Bet 0 0 0 0 12
25 20 No Bet 0 0 0 0 12
26 14 No Bet 0 0 0 0 12
27 34 No Bet 0 0 0 0 12
28 25 No Bet 0 0 0 0 12
29 14 No Bet 0 0 0 0 12
30 36 No Bet 0 0 0 0 12
31 13 No Bet 0 0 0 0 12
32 32 No Bet 0 0 0 0 12
33 23 Bet 6 0 -6 -6 6 1 : 13,14,25,32,34,36
34 19 Bet 6 0 -6 -6 0 1 : 13,14,25,32,34,36
35 17 Bet 6 0 -6 -6 -6 1 : 13,14,25,32,34,36
36 2 Bet 6 0 -6 -6 -12 1 : 13,14,25,32,34,36
37 26 Bet 12 0 -12 -12 -24 2 : 13,14,25,32,34,36
38 30 Bet 12 0 -12 -12 -36 2 : 13,14,25,32,34,36
39 34 Bet 12 72 -12 60 24 2 : 13,14,25,32,34,36
40 34 Bet 6 36 -6 30 54 1 : 2,17,19,26,30,34
41 2 No Bet 0 0 0 0 54
42 25 No Bet 0 0 0 0 54
43 25 No Bet 0 0 0 0 54
44 31 No Bet 0 0 0 0 54
45 32 No Bet 0 0 0 0 54
46 10 No Bet 0 0 0 0 54
47 27 No Bet 0 0 0 0 54
48 1 No Bet 0 0 0 0 54
49 28 Bet 6 0 -6 -6 48 1 : 1,10,25,27,31,32
50 0 Bet 6 0 -6 -6 42 1 : 1,10,25,27,31,32
51 2 Bet 6 0 -6 -6 36 1 : 1,10,25,27,31,32
52 16 Bet 6 0 -6 -6 30 1 : 1,10,25,27,31,32
53 12 Bet 12 0 -12 -12 18 2 : 1,10,25,27,31,32
54 1 Bet 12 72 -12 60 78 2 : 1,10,25,27,31,32
55 8 Bet 6 0 -6 -6 72 1 : 1,2,12,16,28,0
56 27 Bet 6 0 -6 -6 66 1 : 1,2,12,16,28,0
57 19 Bet 6 0 -6 -6 60 1 : 1,2,12,16,28,0
58 28 Bet 6 36 -6 30 90 1 : 1,2,12,16,28,0
59 19 Bet 6 36 -6 30 120 1 : 1,8,12,19,27,28
60 30 No Bet 0 0 0 0 120
61 4 No Bet 0 0 0 0 120
62 17 No Bet 0 0 0 0 120
63 12 No Bet 0 0 0 0 120
64 4 Bet 6 36 -6 30 150 1 : 4,12,17,19,28,30
65 18 No Bet 0 0 0 0 150
66 34 No Bet 0 0 0 0 150
67 21 No Bet 0 0 0 0 150
68 28 Bet 6 0 -6 -6 144 1 : 4,12,17,18,21,34
69 4 Bet 6 36 -6 30 174 1 : 4,12,17,18,21,34
70 19 No Bet 0 0 0 0 174
71 24 Bet 6 0 -6 -6 168 1 : 4,18,19,21,28,34
72 5 Bet 6 0 -6 -6 162 1 : 4,18,19,21,28,34
73 6 Bet 6 0 -6 -6 156 1 : 4,18,19,21,28,34
74 24 Bet 6 0 -6 -6 150 1 : 4,18,19,21,28,34
75 22 Bet 12 0 -12 -12 138 2 : 4,18,19,21,28,34
76 24 Bet 12 0 -12 -12 126 2 : 4,18,19,21,28,34
77 13 Bet 12 0 -12 -12 114 2 : 4,18,19,21,28,34
78 28 No Bet 0 0 0 0 114
79 18 No Bet 0 0 0 0 114
80 27 No Bet 0 0 0 0 114
81 33 Bet 12 0 -12 -12 102 2 : 13,18,22,24,27,28
82 14 Bet 12 0 -12 -12 90 2 : 13,18,22,24,27,28
83 26 Bet 12 0 -12 -12 78 2 : 13,18,22,24,27,28
84 31 Bet 12 0 -12 -12 66 2 : 13,18,22,24,27,28
85 4 Bet 24 0 -24 -24 42 4 : 13,18,22,24,27,28
86 22 Bet 24 144 -24 120 162 4 : 13,18,22,24,27,28
87 14 Bet 6 36 -6 30 192 1 : 4,14,22,26,31,33
88 30 No Bet 0 0 0 0 192
89 10 Bet 6 0 -6 -6 186 1 : 4,14,22,26,30,31
90 4 Bet 6 36 -6 30 216 1 : 4,14,22,26,30,31
91 16 No Bet 0 0 0 0 216
92 27 Bet 6 0 -6 -6 210 1 : 4,10,14,16,22,30
93 15 Bet 6 0 -6 -6 204 1 : 4,10,14,16,22,30
94 15 Bet 6 0 -6 -6 198 1 : 4,10,14,16,22,30
95 20 Bet 6 0 -6 -6 192 1 : 4,10,14,16,22,30
96 35 Bet 12 0 -12 -12 180 2 : 4,10,14,16,22,30
97 2 Bet 12 0 -12 -12 168 2 : 4,10,14,16,22,30
98 36 Bet 12 0 -12 -12 156 2 : 4,10,14,16,22,30
99 3 No Bet 0 0 0 0 156
100 5 Bet 12 0 -12 -12 144 2 : 2,3,15,20,35,36
101 26 Bet 12 0 -12 -12 132 2 : 2,3,15,20,35,36
102 25 Bet 12 0 -12 -12 120 2 : 2,3,15,20,35,36
103 26 Bet 12 0 -12 -12 108 2 : 2,3,15,20,35,36
104 36 Bet 24 144 -24 120 228 4 : 2,3,15,20,35,36
M
the very first post you stated "So for example if Zero was to come in 3 times on the trot, the probability of the next spin bringing a Zero is still a 1 in 37 chance. (European 1 Zero wheel)."
That is incorrect, The ODDS are 1in37 for it to come again but the probablities is 1 in 35x35x35x35.
If what you said was truely correct you would see a single number hit dozens and dozens of time in a row, and this just does not happen. In theory yes, in real life, no. I have a thread @ rouletteforum.net that has 12 million spin stats, and the most a single name has hit is 5 times in a row. The point im trying to make is simple, in a way the last number does have a barring on the next, but more accuretly speaking the last say 100 or 1000 affect the next 1000 in the manner of speaking of probablity. Like rain falling on a foot path, every single rain dropplet has the same odds to hit the same spot, but the probabilities increase as one side of the footpath gets hit more than others for it to hit the other side. Say one side gets 50 drops and the other side gets 20, the 50 that landed on the first side has no memory, nor does the 20, but probablities dictate that given x amount of time both sides should be roughly equal. The same applies to roulette.
Just thought i'd throw my 2 cents in for what its worth.
Another thing, (im reading all the posts now, half way through) at the very begining you went on that the last spin has no bearing on future spins right... well whats with waiting for non repeaters 10 spin business... it shouldnt matter should it now? not by you reckoning of your understanding of roulette.
Dont mean to come across as rude, but I am rather confused.
OK
Bit confused now :)....I have been playin by tracking numbers til I get 10 non repeaters then betting those numbers to repeat in the next ten spins.........is this correct please?
If it is then I have had some success with that
TSK
Finally seen this progression fail! Its one hell of a hit when it does!! Thankfully im not stupid enough to have been betting real cash!
See this link for the theory behind the progression used:
nolinks://vlsroulette.com/money-management/extremes-of-the-grand-martingale!-t5585/ (nolinks://vlsroulette.com/money-management/extremes-of-the-grand-martingale)
ginger
Hi Gingermolly,
Care to answer my questions? Thanks
Quote from: poit on January 23, 2009, 11:14:03 AM
If what you said was truely correct you would see a single number hit dozens and dozens of time in a row, and this just does not happen. In theory yes, in real life, no.
Umm... The chance that a number will hit 6 times in a row is (1/37)
6Which is once in 2565726409 ... That's once every two and a half billion times.
Poit... You simply don't understand basic probability and should not humiliate yourself further on this subject.
I'm afraid I have to tell you once again that past numbers won't affect future ones.
Let me put it this way for you... Your little ventures in this area have been preceeded by millions of hours of research JUST like yours... And none of these millions of hours during over 300 years has lead to any solid conclusion that numbers (themselves) from the past, will tell you something about the future.
The fact that the hits even out are due to the fact of Binomial Distribution... Now please, stop wasting your time... Go to Google, make a search for "Binomial Distribution"... Read a little about it, try something new for a change.
I'm one of the good guys Poit. I'm your friend. I'm trying to free up your time and take you back from fairies and Santa Clause. I just want YOU to focus on something that's actually going to make you money instead of Gambler's Fallacy!
Quote from: alarian on February 17, 2009, 02:18:14 AM
Umm... The chance that a number will hit 6 times in a row is (1/37)6
Which is once in 2565726409 ... That's once every two and a half billion times.
Poit... You simply don't understand basic probability and should not humiliate yourself further on this subject.
I'm afraid I have to tell you once again that past numbers won't affect future ones.
Let me put it this way for you... Your little ventures in this area have been preceeded by millions of hours of research JUST like yours... And none of these millions of hours during over 300 years has lead to any solid conclusion that numbers (themselves) from the past, will tell you something about the future.
The fact that the hits even out are due to the fact of Binomial Distribution... Now please, stop wasting your time... Go to Google, make a search for "Binomial Distribution"... Read a little about it, try something new for a change.
I'm one of the good guys Poit. I'm your friend. I'm trying to free up your time and take you back from fairies and Santa Clause. I just want YOU to focus on something that's actually going to make you money instead of Gambler's Fallacy!
If that truely is the case then why was molly going about betting the last 10 spun numbers? he was saying same stuff as you "last number dont effect future ones" blah blah.... so then whats the deal with last 10? shouldnt have any different to any 10 numbers by YOUR reckoning and molly
[/B]