An apology to Stef, soggett and trebor

[Still]

Ok, well i voiunteered to look at the data in my own way but could not get a copy of the data. 

[speed]

Ok, thanks. 

I'm wondering how speed's method differs from that of ego and/or alberjonas' approach.  My understanding is they do wait till the deviation starts to turn back around, and even then, not many bets are made.  So the number of spins spent waiting might make it unplayable.  But a 20K drawdown is, in my opinion, manageable/reducable  if you just put something on it like a moving average and work on following the trend, possibly even following the trend down...if the signature of the data (a fairly steady direction) permits.  in my opinion, a moving average would only work if the over all trend is up, and best when only taking crossovers in the direction of the trend.  But depending on the signature of the date, maybe possible to go both ways.

hi Still

The first difference is in the formula for calculating the deviation, and second when the trigger occurs then I use a positive progression.
At the beginning the system had a very large hole in the bank that are reaching up to 70 000u in several million spins. With the latest modifications tested on 36 milions spins holes were reduced to about 40 000u. I must admit that I have tried it all, the worst thing is that it sometimes takes about 100 000 spins to turn out from the minus of about 40 000, this is the reason why the system is not playable on live wheels. Could you explain a little more detailed what u mean by "moving average"? i don't remember did i try this.

I see that you're not a beginner and i wonder why You are entering into a debate about roulette with iggiv , I am 100% sure that he even does not know what is a positive progression, he is expert who believes in hit and run because he read that in some book..

[iggiv]

Speed, u already have dinned it into our ears how good positive progression is. The true thing is that on the long run progressions usually don't work at all, be it positive or negative. If the flatbet doesn't work, then a long progression is usually a way to disaster. Just like in your method with -40k, which u "manage" to achieve.

I work with flatbets by the way.  If u just knew how well flatbet may work...U would keep silent about your "magical" progressions.

I won't start about hit-n-run, everything has been said already. And it is not just "some book", there are lots of books i have read on the subject, some of them u will not even find anywhere anymore.

As concerning "beginners"....Some beginners at least are willing to learn something they have no clue about.

[speed]

why do you write about something you do not Understand 

[iggiv]

What i don't understand, Speed? this "up on the win, down on the loss" stuff i passed long time ago. What u r trying to do now, i already did. It does not work.  U will never beat roulette like this. U will stay in your "-40k" holes managing to get to "-25K" hole.

U can't beat roulette like this. U r just stuck in the "tunnel vision" syndrome, i am sorry. U have to get wider views to succeed in this game.

[Still]

hi Speed,

I must admit that I have tried it all, the worst thing is that it sometimes takes about 100 000 spins to turn out from the minus of about 40 000, this is the reason why the system is not playable on live wheels. Could you explain a little more detailed what u mean by "moving average"? i don't remember did i try this.

A moving average can reduce draw-downs in an upwardly mobile system.  I've tested that already on some of my own data.  When data is running underneath the moving average, the player can sit out.  Or, if the signature of the data permits, may allow to reverse directions.  This won't work on completely random data, in my experience.  While the Moving Average reduces drawdowns, it also decreases overall profits.  That's the price to pay to play.

The time spent sitting out, or all the math needed might make this unplayable as well on live wheel.  But if could be applied to a portfolio of data-streams coming from multiple even chance bets, it might work.  Again, the overall progress must be upwards. 

As for positive progression i much prefer it.  I have done tests on both negative and positive.  I found that positive only works when the overall trend of flat bet is positive.  So if your system is working over that many spins, it may well be positive flat betting.  A positive progression would exploit that. 

i'm fairly new to roullete but have some experience in financial markets, testing auto trading robots on data for potential use going forward.  I also have four months of data from a robot i ran automatically that risked about $200 average per attempt.  I think it was over a hundred trades going forward, based on optomistic data going back three years. Later, i analyzed those trades to see how the modest profit could have been maximized.  Moving average and positive progression were very impressive. 

[speed]

As for positive progression i much prefer it.  I have done tests on both negative and positive.  I found that positive only works when the overall trend of flat bet is positive.  So if your system is working over that many spins, it may well be positive flat betting.  A positive progression would exploit that. 

i'm fairly new to roulette but have some experience in financial markets, testing auto trading robots on data for potential use going forward.  I also have four months of data from a robot i ran automatically that risked about $200 average per attempt.  I think it was over a hundred trades going forward, based on optomistic data going back three years. Later, i analyzed those trades to see how the modest profit could have been maximized.  Moving average and positive progression were very impressive.

I would never use a positive progression if only with flat bet can be in plus. With testing I noticed that with flat bet on deviation only(without prog), system reduces the house edge for around 1.3%, on french roulette still have -0.15% and -1.4% at european roulette. With my positive progression in stages system manages to overcome the house advantage but problem is that holes which are created by progression. Yes, the system is in big plus after 36m spins, but I did not understand, or I'm very tired or my English is really bad, how u think to use that "moving average"?? Can  you to set an example for some other system? So i can see how it works. I'm very interested

[iggiv]

Working just with EC is limiting your opportunities in roulette. It is just like betting 18 numbers every time. There are only six sets of 18 numbers u can bet. These are extremely stiff patterns to bet on.
Just food for thought. It is like u come to play roulette and say u wanna bet 10 numbers. Then someone (in your head) says: " hey, u r not allowed to play those 10 numbers, u have only 6 sets of
18 numbers to bet on". Now think how many opportunities u got with 37 numbers to track trends.
How many sets of how many numbers u can use.

And roulette kills stiff patterns. All this BRBRBBR and so on-- rulette just kills them. Any pattern u take, u will play it a few times and then u gonna lose on it. That's a very nature of roulette. Now think how many patterns u can create with 37 numbers.

that's why the roulette table with this nice convenient layout was created. Because an average human being is lazy by his nature. If u got this layout, it's much easier just to place 1 chip on a dozen or red,
than bet 10 or 12 numbers. Why bother? That's a mental trap. Casino knows that outside bet is mostly for outsiders which are gonna lose sooner or later...

[iggiv]

that's a mistake that progression can overcome a house edge. If u can't win flatbet, usually u will not win with progression as well.

If u don't believe me ask Steve. What will he say about it? That progression can overcome a house edge? I doubt it.

if u overcome a house edge u will never get those huge holes in your bankroll. U may lose 40 units then gain 50 then lose 60 gain 40 then gain 40 again...it will look roughly like that. Gradually u go up, not that much down. U will not get huge downdraws if u overcome the house edge.

The truth is that with your method house edge is much smaller than your method negative edge...

[speed]

to avoid this iggiv and troling enyone who wants can continue discussion on this system here where it belongs

link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=9762.msg84278#msg84278

[iggiv]

it's not trolling, it is a roulette discussion, Speed.

it is not about your personality, it is about your wrong idea which will never beat roulette.

Look, i have here a nice pic of my play of martingaling RNG for 50 spins. that's very luring, looks like  a holy grail

All i did is this: when i get 2 reds i bet black, on the loss i double. This looks just as good as your graph, just shorter

and why do u want to talk about your method in your own thread only? because there u r able to delete things u can't argue with? But man, this will not help u defeat roulette. Even if u defeat in the forum 500 iggivs and 1500 JLs 

[Still]

that's a mistake that progression can overcome a house edge. If You can't win flatbet, usually u will not win with progression as well.

If u don't believe me ask Steve. What will he say about it? That progression can overcome a house edge? I doubt it.

if u overcome a house edge u will never get those huge holes in your bankroll. U may lose 40 units then gain 50 then lose 60 gain 40 then gain 40 again...it will look roughly like that. Gradually u go up, not that much down. U will not get huge downdraws if u overcome the house edge.

The truth is that with your method house edge is much smaller than your method negative edge...

Dang.  I wrote quite a bit in first answer but then lost it all in a flash when somehow hit the wrong buttons on my keyboard.  So this answer may be shorter.

A scientist is not satisfied with terms like "usually".  I would like to know what happens whenever the usual (losing) pattern is broken.  Some simple tests would reveal the answer. 

I don't know how any progression could overcome house edge either.  But i've never seen anything overcome 36m spins either.  Yes, any 36m spins could end up positive.  But its what it looks like as it goes positive that is interesting.  Is there a trend?  Does it look non-random?  Can random generate any such data signature?  One way to test that is test 36m on random several times and see what it looks like.  Better yet, break 36m down to 1000 parts and see if all parts are positive.  If so, that suggests non-random phenomenon, even if can't be explained yet. 

[Still]

it's not trolling, it is a roulette discussion, Speed.

it is not about your personality, it is about your wrong idea which will never beat roulette.

Look, i have here a nice pic of my play of martingaling RNG for 50 spins. that's very luring, looks like  a holy grail

All i did is this: when i get 2 reds i bet black, on the loss i double. This looks just as good as your graph, just shorter

and why do u want to talk about your method in your own thread only? because there u r able to delete things You can't argue with? But man, this will not help u defeat roulette. Even if u defeat in the forum 500 iggivs and 1500 JLs 

Nah i wouldnt say it looks just as good.  my tests show that even if a positive progression cannot overcome house edge, it will be much safer to use.  The signature of the chart will be more like reverse to a neg marty.  Gradual descent with occasional spike.  Speed's chart looks like the stock market. 

[iggiv]

i am not saying that negative progression is just the same. U guys can explore this stuff, i don't mind. but practically it has very little sense comparing to watching the roulette wheel and single numbers, i think.

[Still]

i am not saying that negative progression is just the same. U guys can explore this stuff, i don't mind. but practically it has very little sense comparing to watching the roulette wheel and single numbers, i think.

Do you mean MJ style of betting?  Maybe it works, i can't say.  I don't think EC deviation betting is against anything else that might work.  It's just that its hard to generate deviation data on single numbers, at least the kind of deviations ego and or speed look for...without waiting a long time.   Must use something that is supposed to happen frequently, like a coin flip.

Did not know betting on black after two reds in a row could overcome ten million or ten billion spins.  But if it did, no matter the drawdown, seem to me like it could be called down to earth.

What i think about the earth is a whole other story!