LETTER TO THE BIG MAN, JOHN SOLITUDE..THE BIG MAN WRITES BACK

[berlinerbruce]

Hi from Germany. I'm a Scotsman myself and I would just like to say that's a CANNY BOOK that you guys have put together. Ill get to the point great maths, great method, and its great wining nearly 95.58% of the time.............BUT MAN O MAN O MAN as the Germans would say, Its a hell of a long wait at times. Could you give me some advice as how I could play say more sections at once, eg.10 11 and 12 sections at the same time allthough its enough for me to concentrate on just 1 section. I personally i'm trying for someone to install in my mobile say something like java in my mobile that would alert me to sleepers say 8 to 12 this would simplify the paper work and give the player more time betting than waiting around for 12 numbers to fall asleep before he does.If someone could install a programme like this in a mobile it would undoutably be more popular than ROULETTE EXTREME Imagine ALL YOU WOULD HAVE TO DO IS PUNCH IN THE SPIN and the program could inform him that 8 section is ready to wake up and three spins later eg a 12 and a 6 and so on,and keep the player correct with betting symutainlasly as this would be impossible to do noting everything down on paper....95.3899938765% of the time,only joking.....PS I'm up 4500€ using your method and only lose because I have no patients I some time say eg I wait for 12 section for 12 then say the outside number is not properly out of site I sometimes start the progresion and this is my downfall.THANKS ONCE AGAIN FOR YOUR TIME AND EFFORT JS: all the best from BERLINER BRUCE......wait for your reply eagerly

[Herb]

Regarding the sleeper stuff:  It doesn't work.  This includes the John Solitude garbage.

Research the Wizard of Odds website or Gambler's Fallacy for more information.

Good Luck!

[berlinerbruce]

Himmm......Have you tested it by using roulette extreme and real spins from eg Hamburg are YOU a sour scammer.NOBODY CAN ARGUE that the maths are correct and BTW W O ODDS ALSO says the same about probability THOUGHT this was a constructive forum,and for people to criticise is so easy without backing up there claims.JOHN SOLITUDE CAN do THIS; CAN YOU.................TO CRITISISE WITHOUT BEING CONSTRUCTFUL IS NEGATIVE....I await your your constructive criticism..yours BERLINER[4500€ better off thanks to the MAN called JOHN SOLITUDE]BRUCE.....

[WannaWin]

This is constructive forum, some of the nicest there on the Internet.

Herb is trying to save return of all gained because it is so accepted that the roulette never be won long term.

Math people do not need tests to tell you that nothing in roulette wins. not hot numbers, not sleepers, no nothing. The proof is that the roulette not win because it paid less than the fair.

Better that way so casinos feel safe and continue providing the game. If the game was officially decreed as beatable, is immediately removed from the casino halls.

However, we accept that as roulette players and try to win consistently, we hope that our temporary gain for us last a lifetime.

You won temporary €4,500. You may win €1,000,000 and mathematicians will say that it is temporary.

Be proud of your gain, but also get used to be only temporary gain acceptance by math. This is what healthy and advisable to avoid fights and complex for wanting the math to accept that the game is beaten by your method or any other method.   

Many people want to be accepted that they have defeated roulette, but the math just simply find the combination that breaks the gain. Do not fall into fights because of that. Gain at the casino in peace of mind with your method when it works for you.

Hope this post is constructive. I encourage you to create simulator and see if it is winner in 1 million or 2 million or 2 billion spins but remember the 2 billion spin is unique. Next 2 billion spin are different.     

Nothing wins in the length of all samples, only important is it wins in your personal experienced numerical sample of your own.

WannaWin

[berlinerbruce]

Thanks WW,I TOTALLY agree...but it is I THAT PROPSED THE QUISTION about doing the  test, and so have many in the forum and they all had positive results.BUT PLEASE try runing 1 000 000 spins on my behalf and for many others out there that use the raindrop method.Nobody until now has told me that this method does not work please try to be zhe first.but remember this TEMPORARYwin also included many PERMANT losses

[Herb]

I stand by my previous comments.

I can back up my comments with mathematics.
The John Solitude raindrops method is built on the "Gambler's Fallacy".  (The notion that because an event has not occurred in a very long time that it's in some way due to catch up or occur).

There is not a need to test a system built on this backwards line of thinking.  The end results are already known.
The system came about because of John Solitude's poor comprehension and understanding of probability.

-Herb

[Kelly]

Its normal to have mostly won sessions on the book when you hand test a sleeper system with a progression. After maybe 10.000 hand testet spins you might have 500 placed bets and 1 - 2 losing sessions. And you think, "is this too good to be true ?", and well yes it is. I had a similar system heavyli in profit for 310.000 spins just to lose it all, and then some, between the spins from 310.000 and 350.000. On a 6 months basis it ran with typicly some 520 - 540  profit sessions and 3 - 5 losing sessions.

Test file: nolinks://nolinks.roulette-board.de/pages/kelly_1prozentplatzer.zip
Thread: nolinks://nolinks.roulette-board.de/index.php?showtopic=5452

The test zip file consists of some 10 separate tests where you see all numbers and placed bets and bet sizes as they appear. You have to scroll 99 spins between each session because the sleeeper tracking part was set as default to 99 spins. When you scroll down through the test documents you will find that there are a huge amount of spins between each losing sessions, hence why a handtester will get all exited after 1 week of hardd work and maybe only 1 or 2 losing sessions. The computer will pretty soon find the reality though.

You need to do it by computer and get so many placed bets booked so that it can be statisticly measured, when you do that, you will see that the math kicks in as it is supposed to be.

[Kelly]

When you reverse on bad trends, you will automaticly reduce the amount of winning sessions that needed just that little extra bet to become positive instead of negative.  For instance, in my system case, if I either cut 2 or steps of the progression to minimize losses, the amount of losses would automaticly increase from for example  500:3 to 490:133. So in the end , you end up with the - 2.7%. My experience is that you can`t counter trend your way out of the negative expectation, because you will stand with new sample sizes and combinations that will create new win/loss ratios, but the negative edge still remains the same.

In the program I used, it is pretty easy to analyse the bad scenarios and construct a helping rule to sort those out, just to realise that this extra rule stuffed other good scenarios up.  I  finished up blue in the head with with 5 - 10 different rule scenarios all finishing with - 2.7%. The enemy permanenz would just be moved to other months that were good months before.

Edited By Lanky.............Lets try & not use the F Word Please Guys

[Kelly]

My question is then: If you know you are facing a losing trend, why not just bet the opposit of what would be "correct" bet placement in the winning trend.

Obviously quitting while ahead makes more sense than the opposit, and minimizing losses should be essential in the day to day business, but it just doesn`t turn a  system positive  in the long run. Or at least no one has ever showed it could be done. And since the math is against us, i got a feeling that  the some 100 tests + indiviual changes (stop loss, progression, degression, session progression, Kelly betting) i ran that came out with the same procentual loss, no matter how they were applied, in fact you can`t really play roulette "wrong", that they werent just a unlucky fluctation that happened to endd up with - 2.7 or - 1.35%.

[berlinerbruce]

Hey Bruce,

Sorry it took me a while to get back to you, but I was out on vacation.

Thanks for the positive feedback.

To answer to your question: as you have experienced yourself, it is not so
easy in a noisy environment with lots of distraction going on to concentrate
on purely playing by the stats.

And it can also become quite boring sitting around, collecting a large
sample before playing. And... even doing so is no guarantee for success:
it's only a way to maximize your chances from a stat point of view.

Yes, it is possible to play several sectors at once (depending on how much
you are willing to risk and the specific limits of the table you are
playing, however it takes a lot of discipline, practice and a lot of
concentration to keep up with the stats while doing so).

As you may be aware in most venues it is illegal to use electronic devices
for tracking the tables.

I'm glad you're up at this point, however I must warn you:
the JSWFA is probably one of the more robust systems out there (and people
who do write and have reported very good results with it), but on a blue
Monday or when you experience a very bad run of the wheel it might fail you,
which typically leads to a set-back. If we do play it ourselves we search
for a table which allows for the most amount of repetitive plays on a
sector, between the lowest and highest amount of bets (the spread).

Playing automated roulette (NOT videoroulette) is also a way of cutting the
tipping cost to the dealer (and as such decreasing the house edge).

Friendly regards,

Ronald

[TwoCatSam]

John Solitude Wheel Frequency Analysis.....

Somehow, I have this in my collection of systems.

Does Matty's software identify this or was it jb's?  Or neither.

Someone write it and let's put this thing to the test.

Sam

[berlinerbruce]

NOW thats what am talking about SAM, HERB  just says it just dont work.gamblers fallacy,,,,,,,,maybe,,,,,,,well lets see.Maybe it mght be an idea if a junior member can put his tuppence in, to see how many times a 12 section doesnt APPEAR for over 22 spins,Then we could make quick calculation on the wins holding against the losses.Hamburg spins anyone

[berlinerbruce]

Hi sam, thanks for taking an interest,and for some here at the forum it mite just seem old hat,but not to bruceeboy oh no I'm there with you all the way.But I do feel to test the method to its full we should strongly consider my last post on the general board, testing sections from say 8 - 18 simultanesouly as others who play the raindrop here in Berlin would be a great interest as this is our goal. It would certainly combat the boredom.thanks again sam.Kind regards berlinerbruce

[Kon-Fu-Sed]

Hi Bruce, and All,


Regarding the 12-numbers sector hitting within 22 spins...

I don't know if it's doing you any good but I can show you stats for the hits within a 24-spins sequence.

Within some 350,000 24-spins sequences you will find APPROXIMATELY

5,500 x a pre-defined 12-numbers set repeats twice
19,700 x a pre-defined 12-numbers set repeats 3 times
49,000 x ... 4 times
93,300 x ... 5 times
141,700 x 6 times
174,400 x 7 times
177,500 x 8
152,600 x 9
110,000 x 10
67,700 x 11
35,000 x 12
14,700 x 13
  5,800 x 14
  1,800 x 15
   484 x 16
    94 x 17
    22 x 18

Why "pre-defined"? Because you have to look for something...
Suppose you look for 12-numbers sectors. So you have to define them first - all three of them.
Now take something like 350,000 24-spins sequences and look for the three 12-numbers sectors and you will find approximately 49,000 cases of a 4 times hit.
And you will find approximately 177,500 8-hits (maximum - well, thereabouts)
Note that up to three such cases can be found in the same sequence - one for each 12-numbers set.

As the figures are for all three sets, I guess you could divide them by 3 and find a guiding figure for a specific 12-numbers set.

Where I got the figures? Hamburg spins, actually.
nolinks://xerxx.se/oops/stats/rese/resein.html ("Repeats within a sequence")

Click "Columns" or "Dozens" in the menu to the right and you will find stats for 3, 6, 9...21 and 24...30, 33 and 36-spins sequences.
Simply do averages from the two tables for approximate numbers (I did above )

(Any 12-numbers set has the same probability as another to hit - a wheel-sector or a numerical dozen or a column or 12 randomly selected numbers doesn't matter; they are all 12 numbers - 12/37 to hit.)

Regards,
KFS

[berlinerbruce]

Thanks for your reply and a read it with great interest, but i think you misunderstand that we are not looking for predefined 12 section here with this method, no not at all as you state you say there are 3 sections of 12 this ofcourse would be correct if we would try and split the table by 3.But we are monitoring 37 sections of 12 as the same goes for an8 section and 18 section and so on, hope you get back to me on that KFS ,KIND REGARDS BERLINERBRUCE

[berlinerbruce]

-