Going through my worksheets an idea occurred to me and I have only briefly looked at it so don't know
if it's any good or not, but I liked the idea, so by all means have a look at it and see if you think it's
worth considering or improving on it in some way.
As we all know sleepers are notoriously difficult and your liable to run out of chips before they wake up!
If say there are 3 sleepers left, most times they will have numbers that have come in on either side on
the wheel e.g 25, 17, 34. 17 is the sleeper and 25 and 34 are numbers that have come in.
So this is the theme here, as soon as there is one space between two numbers on the wheel 11, ?, 8,
we make a note of ? = 30 and if it comes in that will be one of the numbers we will use .
The theory then is say after seven spins, we may say have noted #20. This will be considered a short
sleeper and as it has just had a nap lol, we will expect it to be an active number. We will want as many
short sleepers as possible, but as the session progresses the sleepers will transform into medium sleepers
and finally long sleepers, who knows when they will awake and they won't concern us here.
I worked through one complete session Spielbank-wiesbaden 5.12.08 and checked out a few others to see
if they produced short sleepers.
[table=,]
spins,,slps
17,,
25,,
23,,
6,,34
19,,
5,,10
3,,
10,,
14,,
28,,
20,,
34,,
21,,2,4
0,,26
7,,
8,,
2,,
29,,
3,,
1,,
15,,32
[/table]
It will soon be into the medium sleeper phase. If very few short sleepers appear then it is likely there will be
only the possibility of a small profit or may be accept a minimum loss if possible.
[disc]0,32,15,19,21,25,17,6,27,36,11,8,23,5,16,1,20,14,31,9,22,18,29,7,28,12,35,3[/disc]
There were nine numbers to note and there were a number of repeats from the short sleepers. When a number
hit I increased it by one unit, with a maximum of three units. It was a good session and at 79 spins the profit
was + 172.
I will take a further look at this idea soon and see how it checks out.
Mr Chips
Worked through another session Spielbank-wiesbaden 1.12.08, more difficult than the previous session, but managed
to get a profit of +24 units with 103 spins. One short sleeper was really active #16 and it was a three unit bet and
made the profit.
When to exit a session is always a problem but common sense should dictate on most occasions. It was not an easy
session with few short sleeper hits, which is the main theme of this idea and therefore a small profit at 103 spins seems
a sound decision.
Mr Chips
2.12.08, a really good session. A selection of hits from the short sleepers, but the outstanding number was #14, which
had two doubles and was a medium sleeper. Profit +107 from 82 spins.
Mr Chips
3.12.08, first loss, -151 from 112 spins. There was some active short sleepers, but they came too late to recover
the loss. The number of losses and the size of the loss will decide if this was a viable idea.
4.12.08, not many hits, but managed to get a small profit of +19 from 100 spins.
[table=,]
Date,spins,+/-
1.12.08,103,+24
2.12,82,+107
3.12,112,-151
4.12,100,+19
5.12,79,+172
6.12,92,+90
[/table]
Much interesting Idea Mr. Chips. Congrats for getting "back in the saddle" :thumbsup:
Being this a mechanical selection might be interesting to see it coded! :)
Bliss? ;)
Hi Victor,
This is very much at the idea stage and no where near a complete system.
Unfortunately I have a low opinion of certain so called programmers. I won't go into details here, as no doubt it will end
up in the pit, so I have drawn a line under it all and will be wiser in future.
Regards
Mr Chips
I thought it wouldn't be too long before the session from hell appeared :(
It recovered sufficiently to come out with a loss of -109 from 116 spins. So thinking cap on and I will look at possible
improvements.
Maybe a more hellish session will occur thing is will you be in enough profit if and when these occur The problem as always are the back to back to almost back to back hellish sessions
Maybe something like the Atilla progression might be an idea to look at
Regards Rodney
Quote from: Natural9 on March 25, 2009, 06:20:28 PM
Maybe a more hellish session will occur thing is will you be in enough profit if and when these occur The problem as always are the back to back to almost back to back hellish sessions
Maybe something like the Atilla progression might be an idea to look at
Regards Rodney
Hi Rodney,
I'm not that keen on progressions, but the good thing about hellish sessions at the idea stage is to get more ideas to try and
solve the problem.
Regards
Mr Chips
I have thought of a way of expanding on my original idea and will see how it develops. It has turned the 3.12 loss of -151
into +27 from 102 spins.
The expanded idea is to have 3 columns A, B, C. A column is the number that creates the gap number e.g if there was 34,
?, 27, then ? is the missing number 6, as yet to come in and 27 next to it, which has just come in means the missing number
6 now has an adjacent number either side, which has appeared at least once. In this example then 27 is A, 6 is B, and 34 is C.
As soon as one of the numbers in the top chart comes in, it is noted in the chart below and the column which is in the lead,
those numbers are used to place the bets.
The charts are as follows:
[table=,]
A,B,C
4,19,15
22,9,31
13,27,6
18,29,7
10,5,24
0,26,3
2,21,4
12,28,7
12,35,3
34,17,25
8,30,11
1,33,16
[/table]
[table=,]
A,B,C
4,19,3
12,29,25
10,27,3
13,17,25
18,35,15
13,9,15
34,26,24
18,5,24
0,29,25
34,5,25
1,27,15
22,33,25
13,17,15
22,28,
2,27,
0,26,
1,27,
1,9,
4,19,
18,,
8,,
34,,
12,,
4,,
1,,
[/table]
The B column went into the lead and after a couple of changes the A column maintained the lead and eventually went into
profit. I will check out the previous above results and see what difference this expanded version makes. One good aspect
is sometimes numbers will be in say two columns and if the number is very active there is every chance that if the lead
column changes it will still have the active number.
Mr Chips
I have made a good start with the expanded idea and will set out the results here. If I get close to +100 units I will
then exit at that point, just at this early stage.
[table=,]
Date,spins,+/-
1.12.08,54,+81
2.12,43,+85
3.12,102,+27
4.12,66,+37
5.12,57,+258
6.12,56,+38
[/table]
Changes are lookin good so far Mr Chips
regards
TSK
Quote from: The Spiders Kiss on March 26, 2009, 05:32:36 PM
Changes are lookin good so far Mr Chips
regards
The Spiders Kiss
Yes, I'm pleased with it so far, just waiting for the next session from hell, unless of course it turns out to be a HG ;) ;D
Regards
Mr Chips
[table=,]
Date,spins,+/-
7.12.08,97,-40
8.12,29,+94
9.12,58,+102
10.12,27,+84
11.12,81,+22
[/table]
As well as the current exit strategy of an exit at around +100, will also include a minimum loss exit around the 100 spins
of -50 approx.
Mr Chips
Hi mate
Using the table and figures in reply #9 can you explain a little more for me please as I dont get how the numbers fit in the table
Id like to maybe test it whilst playin
Thanks mate
TSK
Hi TKS,
You will either need to list the numbers from the wheel clockwise 0 to 26 or have a copy of the wheel handy.
Here are the numbers:
31
36
7
15
36
24
7
23
24
6
4
[disc]31,36,7,15,36,24,6,4[/disc]
Numbers 4 and 15 have created the first single gap which is 19. The three numbers will be noted in the chart as follows :
[table=,]
A,B,C
4,19,15
[/table]
The 4 created the gap so it goes in column A, 19 is the gap number, which goes in B and 15 is the adjacent number and goes
in C.
32
3
22 creates gap number 9
16
13 creates gap number 27
36
16
7
16
14
19 the first repeat and will be the first bet
[table=,]
A,B,C
4,19,15
22,9,31
13,27,6
[/table]
[table=,]
A,B,C
,19,
[/table]
If say 22 came in next, a check from the above shows 22 in the A column and this will be noted in the betting column A.
The next bet will still be 19 as A would have to be in the lead to change the bets from column B to A.
As I previously mentioned this is still at the idea stage and if it holds up after having done 30 sessions I will get a better
idea how it handles and whether any further improvements can be made and perhaps will be the seeds of a system.
Hope this explanation helps. I welcome of course any ideas you have on it.
Regards
Mr Chips
thank you Mr Chips
I get it now
Will test shortly and post results
your friend
The Spiders Kiss
Hi TSK,
I have been looking at a further improvement and applied it to the loss shown above and at 15 spins it showed +83, so will
apply it to the next five sessions and see how it turns out. By the time I've finished I will have turned a simple idea into a
complex system, but that happens to all my systems lol.
The improvement centres round the gap chart. As soon as a single gap appears we note it as usual, but we also now place a
1 at the side, when any of the three numbers hit and if it's in the lead, the three numbers are included in the bets. They will
remain single unit bets and not increase when there is a hit.
This appears to have the advantage, when bets are placed on the leader of the betting column say A, there is a chance to
pick up on an active number in another column.
As this is still at the experimental stage I will try it for a few sessions. You have to be careful to note 1,2,3 etc by the side
of the gap chart and include a number, which can appear in two different columns.
Mr Chips
With the additional improvements.
[table=,]
Date,spins,+/-
12.12.08,37,+104
13.12,22,+113
14.12,52,+52
[/table]
Hi Mr Chips
certainly made for nice results.
Im away for a couple days and though ill have access to pc not sure about roulette :-\
but will take alook as soon as I can
TSK
[table=,]
Date,spins,+/-
15.12.08,62,-86
[/table]
This is gradually turning into a constructive system. There was sufficient info in this session to come to a decision as
to when to exit. There were several occasions when the loss hovered between -50 and -100. The gap chart bets were
insignificant and became even less so as the unit bets got higher. The bets went up to 22 units and there were too
many numbers with 1 unit and not 3, in order get into profit. Column C was seven in front of the second column B and
so the session was locked into column C numbers.
Therefore weighing all this info up an exit in the -50 to -100 range was appropriate.
This will be a guide line for future sessions. Ideally an exit in the -50 range where possible or in the event of the above
situation, an exit in the -50 to -100 range.
Mr Chips
[table=,]
Date,spins,+/-
16.12.08,39,+137
17.12,89,-45
18.12,41,+205
19.12,43,+263
20.12,51,+74
21.12,30,+306
22.12,35,+86
23.12,62,+160
[/table]
24.12 [smiley=Santa001.gif]
25.12[smiley=Santa001.gif]
[table=,]
Date,spins,+/-
26.12.08,46,+92
27.12,63,-1
[/table]
Richard, this sure is coming to looking great! Winning in the averages is the way to go, as I doubt there is a true "holy grail" which never loses a session, yet there are viable propositions which can help the player put himself into a fair chance to be ahead of the game, given he isn't faced with the odd extreme conditions everytime.
Of course nobody beats prolonged dispersion of hits (no hits, no wins, nothing to do) but the usual flow of the game isn't like that, players do have some hit rate expected. Of course, you need the "tested events" for wrapping your system around, and to know when things are "regular" or "deviated from the norm" to make your decisions, I'm 100% here with you. From this (organization/tracking) point of view it is way better to bet systematically than just random bet without any bet selection to wrap anything around..
Looking forward to seeing the final version to go to "Full Systems" section mate :thumbsup:
Kudos to you and keep up the good work. Totally "delicious" to see "Mr. Chips" is back!
Hi Victor
Thanks.
I was pleasantly surprised how well it has developed. It is not the usual sort of system I would usually create,
but the results have been good and I have managed to incorporate many of the exit strategies I would normally
want in a constructive system.
With this type of system there is always the chance of a larger loss beyond the controlled losses, which I would
use with 'sections', so I would advise the use of building up bank rolls, which I will mention later on.
I have almost finished with the idea stage and then yes, it can go over to "Full Systems" for further testing.
It will be called the 'Isolani system' after a certain chess position.
Regards
Richard
[table=,]
Date,spins,+/-
28.12.08,68,+208
[/table]
Quote from: Mr Chips link=topic=7053.msg44727#msg44727It will be called the 'Isolani system' after a certain chess position.
For those interested on the Isolated pawn move:
Wikipedia - "An isolated queen's pawn is often called an isolani." (nolinks://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isolated_pawn)
Good name for the system Richard :thumbsup:
Victor
[table=,]
Date,spins,+/-
29.12.08,94,-327
30.12,71,+26
31.12,89,-88
[/table]
The first big loss. Hopefully exceptional wins will cancel out the big losses. The previous win of +306 was close to the loss,
so further tests will see if this works out. I will examine the loss in some detail to see if any improvements can be made.
The Totals for the December test as follows :
[table=,]
Totals,spins
+2654,
-587,
-----,
+2067,1664
[/table]
The idea tests have now finished and will do some further tests in the "Full Systems" and will explain the system in more
detail.
Mr Chips
Mr. Chips,
Thanks for posting your ideas. I am looking foward to any further changes/improvements to this idea. I am having difficulty understanding the second chart in reply #9. Hopefully this will be cleared up in your future posts.
Thanks again,
Phil
Phil,
I will eventually explain the system in detail in the Full Systems section together with any improvements.
Thanks for your interest.
Regards
Mr Chips