*****FIVE*****

[Still]

Maybe this is a question that Bayes can answer.

Is excels random as random as an rng ?

Check out this thread:
Don't make this mistake with Random()

Must figure a way to make the seed value significantly different each call.  If you call too fast it may be same, or perhaps not different enough.  My solution was to add a delay in between calls to the RNG.  This gives the clock enough time to change significantly the seed value.  Doesn't need to be much.  Just slow down the calls and it should be fine.  Maybe there is another trick that could be found by googling.  I'm not convinced that Visual Basic's random number generator is less worthy than any other, if handled carefully. 

[Stepkevh]

i googled a bit and found that the random function in excel gets a seed from the sum of 3 numbers between 1 and +30000.

so i think excel is pretty random 

[Still]

Microsoft may have developed it a bit since 2002 when i had that issue.  I just can't believe that they would allow their Visual Basic product to have a less worthy RNG than any of their other language products, or to let those be less worthy than any other language. 

Sounds like they are doing something that Superman proposed in the thread mentioned.  I'm sure there are additional methods to insure a significantly different seed value per call...if one is willing to slow down the speed at which random numbers are grabbed in exchange for true(er) random.  I slowed it down by adding a loop that spun around x (1000?) times doing nothing.  But those loops could be used to do useful calculations insuring that each number is actually different and even more randomized on top of the other random. 

Otherwise, there is certainly a way to set up VBA to scrape Random.org and put the numbers into Excel.  I'm sure it could be reduced to two clicks, if not one, and a split second of waiting. 

 

[Johnlegend]

I am going to start giving real play game examples of what I experience with FIVE. My current strikerate is 922/0. Here is a game I played today on BV. In this game the eventual Pre--bet trigger formed at the same time as the first 4 GAP in the eventual GAME TRIGGER. This happens quite often.
-----D1-----D2-----D3
-----4-------5-------9
-----11------8------11
-----4-------4-------4--------------PRE BET TRIGGER DOZEN 2
-----4-------4-------9--------------GAME TRIGGER DOZEN 1--BET 1 DOZ 2 LOST---BET 2 DOZEN 3 WON.

[TwoCatSam]

John

Are you saying you bet on a single dozen?  The tracker calls for bets on two dozens.  Is it wrong?

Sam

[donik7777]

I tested 1000 spins and got that results
if we bet after 2 gaps.
1 step-87
2 step-18
3 step-7
4 step-3

[Johnlegend]

John

Are you saying you bet on a single dozen?  The tracker calls for bets on two dozens.  Is it wrong?

Sam

Explain what you mean Sam. The game trigger is 2 four gaps. The bet trigger is 1 four gap. And in that example Dozen 1 is the game trigger. Dozen 2 is the first bet and loses because it becomes a double 4 gap. Dozen 3 is the second bet and winner as it doesn't become a double 4 gap. Are you clear on that Sam?

[Johnlegend]

I tested 1000 spins and got that results
if we bet after 2 gaps.
1 step-87
2 step-18
3 step-7
4 step-3

Is that for breakdowns on a single dozen Donik777??

[donik7777]

Need more test for 2 gaps single dozen.
f.e.
1
2
1
3
--  we bet against 1 dozen
OTHER EXAMPLE
1
2
1
1
1
2
-- we bet against 1 dozen

  so i got my results WE CAN FLAT BET ONLY FOR 1 STEP  AND 2 STEP

[kevint3]

Here is a result from a "live" casino using their Bally's touchbet RNG roulette machines. I hope I am doing it right. My question is how are you tracking zeros? Do you ignore them and continue tracking dozens or are they tracked?  For example..is this a four gap A-B-C-C-ZERO-A?  Do I ignore the zero and count that as a four gap or continue on tracking as no 4 gap. HELP

[Johnlegend]

Need more test for 2 gaps single dozen.
f.e.
1
2
1
3
--  we bet against 1 dozen
OTHER EXAMPLE
1
2
1
1
1
2
-- we bet against 1 dozen

  so i got my results WE CAN FLAT BET ONLY FOR 1 STEP  AND 2 STEP

Still not sure what you have here Donik7777. Are we betting against 4 gaps or what?

[Robeenhuut]

I guess that discussion about a randomness of a RNG in Stef's tracker wont lead nowhere. The point is  that when you look at results you will see that you can have long winning streaks like i reported and John is experiencing now. We differ with John on a basic premise of his approach that random has a limit and there are some patterns that it can hardly produce. For me FIVE bet is just sequence of 4 Double Dozen bets with 1/80 odds. If you look at other similar concepts like Code4, Matrix5, Pattern breaker, D&C in this forum there were mixed results. As John himself stated his strike rate playing Code4 now stands at 120/1 and at the beginning it was 600+/1. I can not help being skeptical here.

[6th-sense]

I am going to start giving real play game examples of what I experience with FIVE. My current strikerate is 922/0. Here is a game I played today on BV. In this game the eventual Pre--bet trigger formed at the same time as the first 4 GAP in the eventual GAME TRIGGER. This happens quite often.
-----D1-----D2-----D3
-----4-------5-------9
-----11------8------11
-----4-------4-------4--------------PRE BET TRIGGER DOZEN 2
-----4-------4-------9--------------GAME TRIGGER DOZEN 1--BET 1 DOZ 2 LOST---BET 2 DOZEN 3 WON.

john i,m completley thrown here i thought the gaps were for each dozen seperatley? i thought from your explanation it was as in doz 1 ..and doz 2...we the results at 4 gaps each so we bet against it on the next spin....doz 3 only has 1 at a 4 gap so was we not to wait for another 4 gap before we bet against?....have i missed something?...or it might just be the way you just explained this example....

[Johnlegend]

john I'm completley thrown here i thought the gaps were for each dozen seperatley? i thought from your explanation it was as in doz 1 ..and doz 2...we the results at 4 gaps each so we bet against it on the next spin....doz 3 only has 1 at a 4 gap so was we not to wait for another 4 gap before we bet against?....have i missed something?...or it might just be the way you just explained this example....

No 6th we only wait for one double 4 gap. Which in that example was DOZEN 1. From there on we are betting agaimst that happening again. So DOZEN 2 was the first bet and lost as it formed another double 4 Gap. DOZEN 3 was the second bet and won as it remained a single 4 gap.

[Johnlegend]

I guess that discussion about a randomness of a RNG in Stef's tracker won't lead nowhere. The point is  that when you look at results you will see that you can have long winning streaks like i reported and John is experiencing now. We differ with John on a basic premise of his approach that random has a limit and there are some patterns that it can hardly produce. For me FIVE bet is just sequence of 4 Double Dozen bets with 1/80 odds. If you look at other similar concepts like Code4, Matrix5, Pattern breaker, D&C in this forum there were mixed results. As John himself stated his strike rate playing Code4 now stands at 120/1 and at the beginning it was 600+/1. I can not help being skeptical here.

Matt I think there's a distinct difference between CODE 4 and FIVE. CODE 4 is like a puzzle for random to figure out. FIVE is a mountain that random has to climb. Its npt likely to reach the top very often. I think 8 on 1 will ultimately prove even stronger.