Binary Long-Run System

[BellagioOwner]

I was thinking some time now for such a system and to be honest I don't know where is its flaw. I don't pretend I have found the Holy Grail (I have actually been bored with excessive use of this expression here  ) but at least in theory it looks solid.

If anyone is willing to try it in software or in real or to suggest any improvements or mistakes it has he is more than welcomed. So...

The theory supporting it

In a fair and random game of roulette (whether is in B&M casino or RNG) the more you go into long run(more spins) the closer the probabilities will be to turn even for 50/50 chances like RB/HL/OE (variance as a number will be bigger in long run of course but the percentage of let's say Red and Black will be closer and more precise to 50/50% rather than the percentage in 50,100 spins)

So let's split  1M spins into sequences of 2spins. (I will ignore zero only for the binary part now)
What we will see in 2 spins will be one of these 4 situations. RR, RB, BR or BB. It's all the 4 possible combinations.

00 (RR)
01 (RB)
10 (BR)
11 (BB)

Theoretically every of these 4 combinations will appear 250.000 times in a fair and random game. In any order. But they key point is that they will end up roughly 250.000 times each and closer to 1/4th each the more spins we test it.

Use of the theory
So... Knowing that straight forward theory part we can wait for 2 times in a row RR. The next 6 spins should be the remaining 3 combinations in any order (IF NOT RIGHT AT THESE 6 SPINS BUT IN AVERAGE of all the times we repeat this proccess)

So after the "trigger" of RR we start betting for the next 6 spins on the opposite, on B. After we finish the 6 spins (whether we are in profit or loss) we stop betting and wait for RR to repeat again.Once it comes RR we start betting for 6 spins on Black again and so on and on and on.

"Average 8 spins-cycle" (containing every one of the 4  combinations once) will look like this using the above betting pattern.

RR <-- no bet/ trigger
RB <-- 2 bets on B (-1,+1 bankroll)
BR <-- 2 bets on B (+1,-1 bankroll)
BB <-- 2 bets on B (+1,+1 bankroll)

Total after 6 spins +2 Units bankroll

So...Having completed the average cycle we end up +2 units for every 6 spins. Keep in mind that we won't have constant profit of 2 Units every 6 spins we play but in average

The combinations are supposed to turn even (1/4th of the times each) in LONG RUN and not after 6,12,18,24 spins.

Conclusion- TL/DR: Waiting for a trigger of RR and then betting 6 times on Black it should turn into +2 units/ 6 spins on average in the log run.

What you think guys? Where have I fouled in my thinking?

Have a nice day and feel free to give feedback, comment, test, try or anything you want

[nottophammer]

Bare with me
After many games of 60 spins, been able to say in spins 11-40, 30 spins average is 15.7/15.8 non-hits.
Now if the bubble world was what we lived in and we got
LWLWLWLWLWLWLWLWLWLWLWLWLWLWLW
SO LETS SAY YOU HAVE 27 NON-HITS LEFT and bet 1 unit L, now 2 units W -9
Next 26, L 52 W -6
25L 50 W -3
24L 48W -0
23L 46 W +3
22L 44 W +6
21L 42 W +9
Back to even after 14 spin, we’d be plus all the way for next 16 spins where we would win on 8 with 2 units.
Just a shame that the spins do not come this way in the real world

[BellagioOwner]

i'm sorry but I don't actually understand what you want to say and what it had to do with the binary system I explained. The phrasing wasn't so clear to be honest.

If I got anything right it might be that you think that it will never be so geometrically balanced as I say in my average example? But I  never said it will always be WLWLWLWLWLWLWLWLWLWLWLWL. I said quite the opposite actually. That it won't be like this in the short run BUT ONLY IN THE LONG RUN. (And I don't think 60 games of many spins is counting as too much long run either)

I hope if anyone reads the system will understand that I am not counting on WLWLWLWLWLWLWL but in the average expected results. I explained it pretty thoroughly.

[RouletteGhost]

After RR you flat bet B for 6 spins?

[BellagioOwner]

Yes. That is the idea basically as explained in the description. Now I know it sounds weird and it may looks like you just flat bet continuously so you will end up -1Units every 37 spins (House Edge) but I can't see where the theory i wrote is flawed. 

[RouletteGhost]

im with you

i totally understand

in the long run (million spins) the results should be OK

but....that pesky 0....thats the HE

[BellagioOwner]

based on the HE the zero comes 1 every 37 spins. I will EVEN say once every 36 for easier maths.
On the theory above we are supposed to have +2Units/6spins (which is +12Units every 36 spins) This profit is based on only Reds and Blacks without the zero. 0 is eating from our bankroll 1 Unit every 36 spins, as we rounded down. (without changing any other part of the balance that was calculated on R/B only). So instead of +12Units/36 spins we should end at +11Units/36 spins counting 0

BUT

I'm not totally sure about the truth of my calculations based on zero. I may have it totally wrong and adding 0 really fucks up binary and it's not just -1U/37 spins. So because of this, this method could be played then at no-zero table like on BV. That could solve the misbehaving 0 

That's why I'm not so focused on fighting zero but finding any actual flaw or improvement of the method

[mogul397]

I will say two things.

First, am I correct that you are taking the footprint of 1 million spins
and compressing it to 8 spins?  If so, this makes no sense at all to me.

None.

Second, for no connecting reason, I recently fell into a time where
I was looking for 2 of the same and then betting for it to change.
A 5 step martingale.  After a time it seemed a little more reliable
to bet the 5 step for it to continue. And NOT get RRBBBBB or
BBRRRRR, but get some repeat just once to resolve the martingale.
I still like it as an approach.

But I don't think you're plan of attack makes sense. If I understand
what you are saying.  However if it does make sense, it could be
an explanation of why what I am doing works.

[BellagioOwner]

I don't know about compressing. All I wanted to say and gave that balanced exampe in 8 spins-cycle is that if not in on 8spin-cycle but looking the whole image on all the results of these cycles they should look like this. They should look balanced after millions of spins yes. That's why I say on average.

You may be at a moment at-200units you may be another moment +300 units. In overall if you take all the 8spins-cycle they must be balanced as I mentioned. Not in one. It's not compression It's taking the average for the example as this is what I expect to happen repeating the cycle many times.

I hope you have success with the 5-step marti Martingale I admit is one of the very few systems it actually HAVE meaning having a stop loss limit. It gets pretty soon and pretty bad out of control... 

[MrG]

I scripted this system as described, so after two reds, bet black for 6 spins. From testing without 0 it seems it is kind of system that doesn't lose much but doesn't win much either. At 1 000 000 spins the max number of losses in row was 19. Attaching picture of bankroll graph. It was flat bet, no progression.

[Dutchy]

Mr G,because of double zeros in America not so good.But good for baccarat?

[BellagioOwner]

From testing without 0

thank you for your interest and testing it what software you used?
Without zero is a different story for the systems yes. It's not my only system I have tested that is positive after 1M+spins. Some months ago I  had a system tested that still turned positive after 4 millions spins. Without Zero though. Testing the exact same system with 0, tanked big time in less than a million spins

The big question is can we make a positive results mechanical system for european roulette (so that to be played also live)? For nozero it's not that hard

[MrG]

thank you for your interest and testing it what software you used?
Without zero is a different story for the systems yes. It's not my only system I have tested that is positive after 1M+spins. Some months ago I  had a system tested that still turned positive after 4 millions spins. Without Zero though. Testing the exact same system with 0, tanked big time in less than a million spins

The big question is can we make a positive results mechanical system for european roulette (so that to be played also live)? For nozero it's not that hard

I used Excel. I test without 0 as Betvoyager has no 0 roulette.
Yes that is a big question I believe most people here look for answer to.

[DoctorSudoku]

Mr G,because of double zeros in America not so good.But good for baccarat?

I had the same thought. This might be a worthwhile system to try at baccarat.

If anyone insists on using this method for roulette, then betvoyager's no-zero version might be worth a try. Otherwise, the zeroes would kill you in the long run.