Escape the Effects of the Long Term by Only Playing in the Short Term

[rjeaton1]

I've been seeing this comment thrown around a lot lately:

"If you go to the casino, and only play for an hour or so a day, or even just a set amount of spins, like 100 or so, you won't have to experience the effects of the long run - I.E. - the house edge.  The reason you don't have to worry about it is because you're only playing in the short run.  So, if you're up, you walk away.  If you're down, you try to get back up unless you've hit your loss limit and then you call it a day.

Playing this way can ensure you'll be a long term winner, because each time you play, you're only playing the short run.  Long term effects don't matter unless you expose yourself to the long run by playing long sessions."

I just saw a comment like this today actually, over at gamblers glen (I will not be posting any part of this entire post there.  If you'd like to feel free) Here it is:

Person A: "....... ANYONE who plays for over 100 or so spins, over a period of hours,days,weeks,months,years is exposed to the long term expecations"

Person B: "That sounds like personal conjecture. Got any proof of any kind?

          It may seem 'logical' but it isn't."

Well, no matter how short your sessions are, you're going to experience the house edge.  It is inevitable.  The only way you can avoid it, is to play roulette once, if you win, walk away and never play again.  (Unless you employ some sort of advantage play technique.)  I won't entirely dismiss the idea of a long term winning system.  I just know I tried for what seemed like forever to try and come up with one and couldn't.  The real kicker was when I took systems that I thought were good and compared them to random betting...with the exact same result.

Now, I know people come onto these forums and argue points all day.  Unfortunately, it would seem all we can do is argue because no proof can be had other than "math theory" and "logic" which doesn't seem to ever be enough to make a point.  I should know, I used to argue with people all the time that systems could win.  But, I'm not going to be "that guy" and just make a post that is sure to start an argument and just leave it at that without trying to at least offer some sort of proof (I wish people had helped me when I first started out by offering me actual proof and not just what seemed like erroneous comments)

There is the idea that you could prove it manually...but that would take ages.  I mean, somebody would have to follow somebody into a casino for one hour a day once a week maybe for a couple of years.  Eventually, it would come out to -2.70%, but given the time frame and the way people like to argue, I'm sure it would be said that somebody made an error.

But, finally, we're in a day and age where A: we have computers that can test things and B: we have real Brick and Mortar casinos posting their numbers on the internet.

So, I'm going to put this out there for anybody that would like to give it a go that believes playing only in the short term will allow you to escape the effects of the long term.

Pick a system, I don't care what it is.  Then, say how often you'd play (how long each session is, how many times a week, month, year...whatever, the rules of the system - win goal, stop loss, etc., all the details that allow you to escape the effects of the long term) and I'll program it.

Once programmed, I'll then play your system against Weisbeiden spins (real casino spins) at the sheduled interval...and we'll see what happens.  Best part is, since I can download spins from a year ago until now, I can do all of this in an hour.

So, for example.  You give me the details of the system (technically, any system should do as the argument is that you're only playing short term, so long term effects should affect anything anyway) but whatever.  You give me the details of the system.  I'll code it.  Then, lets say you would play for only 1 hour a day, every other day of the week.  I'll assume that you can do 30 spins in an hour.

I would then download spins from September 14th 2008 from Weisbeiden, and play 30 spins.  Then, download spins from September 16th 2008 (since we're only playing 3 days a week) and do the same thing...another 30 spins.  Repeat...repeat...repeat, etc.

Then, we'll see what happens...

I'm posting this at a couple of other forums.  When a decision is made on a system and the rules involved, I'll post all the details here and everywhere else.  Then, we'll begin.

[Spike]

playing only in the short term will allow you to escape the effects of the long term.>>

The argument is moot, you're always in the long term. The game itself is always in the long term, how can there be any short term involved? Its random outcomes and its eternal. Can you get any more long term than eternal?

[rjeaton1]

playing only in the short term will allow you to escape the effects of the long term.>>

The argument is moot, you're always in the long term. The game itself is always in the long term, how can there be any short term involved? Its random outcomes and its eternal. Can you get any more long term than eternal?

I agree, that is the purpose of this post.

[Mr Chips]

Hi Rob,

Perhaps you have been a bit hasty here

Pick a system, I don't care what it is. Then say how often you'd play (how long each session is, how many times
a week, month, year... whatever, the rules of the system - win goal, stop loss etc, all the details that allow you to escape
the effects of the long term) and I'll program it.

Are you up for a challenge?

The 4Selecta system requires human intervention in order to maximise profits, make use of the info available from the system
and make informed decisions, when to exit a session and take account of the minimum loss strategy.

I did an analysis in the 4Selecta thread and produced the following  totals for 5 and 10 select spins as follows :

nolinks://vlsroulette.com/mr-chips'-section/4selecta-testing-5-and-10-select-spins/

When I was doing the hand test for 4Selecta, I did not realise until I produced the analysis that at both the 5 and 10 select
spins it was showing a profit. Up to select spin 10 it is completely mechanical and no human intervention is required. The only
requirement in a session, would be on those occasions when the profit is 90+ then it must not fall below the +90 profit. If for
example a win produced +105 at select spin 5, then shows +92 at select spin 8, there must be an exit here, as further bets
would go below the +90 cut off figure. The small C Table can be ignored.

So as to mirror the 2008 test I would suggest a session each day or if a block of spins advance 500 continuous spins to
produce the equivalent of another day. I used Spielbank Table 3 2008 and I don't know what spins you have downloaded.

If it's a problem to code it I will quite understand, I don't want to give you a headache. I had several, headaches that is,
when I was testing the whole system

Best Regards

Richard

[rjeaton1]

Mr. Chips,

I seriously can't tell you how much I admire you right now, and I am being 110% sincere.  There a A LOT of people that come onto these forums and say they have a way of playing that won't fail and they get followed around being asked questions and what not, but when it comes to a proving it, we get...zilch.

You on the other hand, have posted methods and systems and have gone to painstaking lengths to explain them, and at times people tear you apart (very unfair).

Then, I post something like this thread...still, no responses from those I was hoping to get a response from.

And again, you come through.  You obviously believe in your method, and if it were to fail I'm sure you would accept that.  To be honest though, if there were one person I would absolutely love to have prove roulette can make you money, it would definitely be you << again, 110% sincere.  You definitely would deserve that honor.

So, to answer your question, yes.  I am definitely up for the challenge, and I appreciate you coming forward.  This will be one the books guys!  

(now, care to PM me the details of the system you'd like me to test.  Be gentle...)

[rjeaton1]

Alright, I'm officially accepting Mr. Chips as the person who will give me all the rules to follow (I truly can't think of a better person to be doing this for...exciting) 

He has sent me a PM containing the details of the system, (I'll need some clarification on some things, but at least we're started.  It is going to be a variation of the 4Selecta system - I.E.: 5 through 10 Selecta System, I if I understand correctly).

Where we're at now, is me getting this coded...more details to follow...

Can't tell you how excited I am to see where this goes  

Before any part of the test takes place, I'll make sure Mr. Chips verifys the coding is working properly.  I will then announce the dates and tables from which I'll be using spins from (so others can verify if they'd like).

[The Spiders Kiss]

Well this is gonna be interesting...well done Mr Chips for putting your money where your mouth is..

TSK

[Spike]

whatever, the rules of the system - win goal, stop loss etc, all the details that allow you to escape
the effects of the long term>>>

But you can't escape the long term, you're always in it. The test will show nothing. Short term and long term is a word game for people who don't understand how random works. Random is ALWAYS in the long term, its universal and is always trying to balance itself, something which is impossible to achieve.

[Spike]

I challenge anybody here to prove there is a short term. You can take 50 so called short term outcomes and if you add them together, they are the long term. You can't take a 10 foot length of the Nile river and say its seperate from the rest, just because you singled it out. Its part of the whole, just like short term is inseperable from long term.

[bombus]

Alright, I'm officially accepting Mr. Chips as the person who will give me all the rules to follow (I truly can't think of a better person to be doing this for...exciting) 

He has sent me a PM containing the details of the system, (I'll need some clarification on some things, but at least we're started.  It is going to be a variation of the 4Selecta system - I.E.: 5 through 10 Selecta System, I if I understand correctly).

Where we're at now, is me getting this coded...more details to follow...

Can't tell you how excited I am to see where this goes  

Before any part of the test takes place, I'll make sure Mr. Chips verifys the coding is working properly.  I will then announce the dates and tables from which I'll be using spins from (so others can verify if they'd like).

This should be educational.

Good on you Mr Chips & rjeaton1.

[ChickenDinner]

Good on you guys. Nice to see people working together again for a common cause on VLS (rather than just bashing and insulting each other like school kids all the time).

I admire the thinking behind Richard's methods, but do not have the time to test them. But if they can be coded, I look forward to the results. 

Cheers

CD

PS Thanks to rjeaton1 for accepting the offer and also for pushing VLS forward in his role as a moderator, contributor and coder (and all round friendly guy) in recent months! 

[Mr Chips]

This short term test will show whether the "mechanical" element of 4Selecta up to select spin 10 can make a profit.

In theory it should not have produced the results as shown for 2008. It may all be down to luck, but then when does
luck end and an obvious advantage begin. I consider 4Selecta is a very strong system having tested it by hand and
used it for real in a number of casino's. In my opinion the strength of the system is showing in the first 10 select spins
and is therefore an indication of the potential of the system and once the human element makes informed decisions in the
remaining part of a session, it will produce long term profits.

Whatever the outcome it should make for some interesting results and how much it differs from those of 2008.

Richard

[mistarlupo]

Well done, Rob & Richard!
Good to see some real challenge here, not just empty statements.

Good luck! Hopefully you'll keep us updated.

Regards,
/

[Mr Chips]

Rob,

I sent you a PM.

[TwoCatSam]

Now this is what bothers me:  "its universal and is always trying to balance itself," said Spike.  I take it that "its" should be the contraction "it's" as in "it is universal......"

This uses the literary tool personification.  "The long term is always trying to balance itself....."  A child on a curb tries to balance "itself" and not fall into the street.  Get it?

So we have ascribed--well Spike has--a human characteristic to a--what?--concept?  The inequality wishes to become equal.  The darned inequality is bothered by its inequality!!  How daft is that?

This is exactly what R.D. Ellison spoke of when the used the term "statistical pressure".  The sides "want" to be even.

The question:  Why?  Why do the sides "want" to become even?  How can they "want"?  Inquiring minds want to know!

Sam

[TwoCatSam]

-