My long time observations on EC play and progressions.

[Ralph]

What ever negative progression we ever use, it will soon or later fail.


Sometimes we are a head when it happens.




What ever method we use it will not win forever.
We can not beat the unfair odds.
The chance to stay a head is minor, if not none.
It is some who win for long and even much,
but it is rare and luck.


On a NOZ we should in the longer run break even.




Looking at this, it is no reason to try
00 and 0 wheel, even if we pay 10% of the
winnings, a NOZ is a lot better to play.


But how?


If we flatbet a enormously number of times, it
is likely to stay close to break even.
It can even on a static EC go both up and
down a lot, but ends close to break even
if played zillions of spins.
I have done millions flat EC on NOZ, and
it can "if stop while a head" earn 1000 of
units as it can be down 1000 "forever".


Methods like one up on loss and one down
on win, will never work for long at a zero
wheel, and it has the same behavior as flat
on the NOZ, we can win much for a period of
time, and we can lose so much we stake.


The negative progressions can in some cases
win a lot, but the risk to lose a lot fast
is allways there.


A positive progression is opposite to the
negative, and a lot of methods can be reversed.
If we go for a positive progression on a NOZ
we have a reasonable chance to hit some good
streak before the bankroll is gone.


If we look at the two ways from the casinos point
of view and the players.


We can say we bet against the casino, they
take any bet we place according to the game rules.
Without a zero the play is like flipping coins on the EC.


If we say martingale is a losing method, used by new to
the game, and should be avoided.


Then if we reverse it we force the casino to play it.


If we put a chip on red, the casino put a chip on black at NOZ.
The winner get both chips.


If we play reversed, the casino play opposite IE Martingale.
If it is so bad to play, and will eventually bust,and
not to recommend at all, why should not we force the
casino to use it?


We will still not be sure to win, there is still limits
on the bets, but it is not so hard to follow the progressions
to the highest level if the progression is positive, at the
table limit we bust the casino, and it has not the power of
its large bankroll.


I have tried a lot of progressions on EC, as I think many has done.
Slow and soft progressions on EC use to not work, positive or negative
it is more a question on "stay in the game longer", not win as much as possible.
A negative bold progression win more and lose more, if we
are lucky we get a feeling "it works".


The positive progressions on EC works better if it is bold, the
losing rate is not heavy, and we are never forced to lay out
a large part of the bankroll at session start in one spin.


I have tested positive progressions which "lock in" winnings, but
it seems to be fooling ourself, we do not use the full power of
the winning streak. what's really the difference stake 2,1,3,6
or 1,2,3,6 ?


The Martingale reversed cost an unit a trial, and the
Grand Martingale reversed cost an unit every spin if we
win or lose, until we decide to stop (on new high).


So I think the worse progression we can use playing negative,
we should use positive, so the casino get that role, stake
higher and higher against us, defending a small bet.


I have used among other progressions this:


1 2 3 6 9 18 27 52 156 312 624


Fib


Martingale


Grand Martingale


Grand Martingale gives the best result, it use the
power of shorter winning streaks.


I seldom use the progression at start, I bet just
one unit, and use the progressions just to catch up
if I am down, and stop then it is recovered.


After a lot of spins we can be down 100 units, and
if we win a few times in a row it is back.


1,3,7,15,31,63


Winning six times in a row happens near
100% in 200 spins, and some spins (50%) we win
first attempt.


Playing EC what ever bet selection we use, I
think the best is NOZ and bold positive progressions.
My test shows, it may be the best chance to get to a winning
point in limit of time.

At least I feel better risking 10 for 100 than risking 100 for 10.

[Nickmsi]

Great Post Ralph . . .

Your experience with EC's extremely helpful.

Thank you.

NIck

[Ralph]

Here we easy can see why progressions on EC not works well on 00 and 0 wheel.


We turn over a lot of chips, here we bet  355 chips to get 25 chips. An American Wheel takes  18.64 , an one zero takes  9.32 and if it is surrender on
any wheel it is half or 9.32 or 4.16. The NOZ takes 2.5.


The zero wheels takes it allways even if we lose!!

[TwoCatSam]

Ralph

After reading you for months, I can boil it down:  If you ain't lucky, you ain't gonna win.  Yet you win consistently.  Are you consistently lucky?  It would seem so.

Any comments?

Sam

[Ralph]

Ralph

After reading you for months, I can boil it down:  If you ain't lucky, you ain't gonna win.  Yet you win consistently.  Are you consistently lucky?  It would seem so.

Any comments?

Sam

If you have no luck, you will not win!!  We can play better or less better, but we can never know whats going to happen next.
There are more clever ways, but it will not be enough, it is gambling and will so be.


Yes I use to have luck.


We can bet flat 100000 spins on NOZ and still be a head, they who get such a streak, thinks sometimes it has to do with skill.


I think we can not for long beat a zero wheel.


My fun account is still growing, but this week I am down about 100 Euro in real money.

[Ralph]

I forgot to say, get the stakes low, and we will need quite a few units. If we put the casino in martingale state, we know some martingalers will not bust soon, they will think the "system" is unbeatable. It can take some time to hit very good.  It is a good feeling hitting a high table limit and convert  a 0.05 to tens of Euros!! They eventually bust, so it is a very reasonable chance to get a few but high winnings.


I do not hesitate to parlay any penny bet.


We still need some luck, as if the chances is 50%, the largest bankroll have the best chance to win, it is in zillions of spins, that which decide the winner.
We can go well with 10000 cents, and IF we reach the table limit we win 10 time that( minor winnings before).

[Ralph]

Time for updating my fun account!

[Ralph]

Here is 146 spins and the plus is only a fraction of the turnover.   46.8 total bet, and 1.2 in result.


That is 468 units to get 12. If the wheel had been with a HE of 2.7%, it should by high probability been no plus.


The real net is 10.8 due to taxing the winnings. 


The last bet could be higher, but it is at a level for recover and some plus. If we miss the last bet and use full progression, we have to wait
very long and go deeper until a longer winning streak. If the last missed with the lower stake, we need a shorter winning streak to catch up.

[Ralph]

What makes the casino profiting from a fair odds game? Or from some games which the advantages is less than a 1%?


They decide the min and max bet, that's one reason. They have a large bankroll, which is an other reason.


In the most cases it will on a fair odds game be possible to recover a drawndown, as it should be a winning streak soon or later which make it possible to recover a dip.


But there will be cases, if rare, the losing streak will be too long.


The player must have a bankroll to stand it or the casino will win.   If the player hit the table limit, and still not reach new high, an other winnings streak must come rather short after.


We have a lot better chance without the house advantage, but the mathematical  model which says it will be break even in the long run, is either sure or practical true.
The casino will still eventually win, it may take billions of spins. A player can get a lot of winnings, if lucky to not get the wrong numbers, but the methods are all losing at a certain condition.


I have lifted my fun account to a level it may match the casino, but I am not allowed to bet as much which may be needed at the time I am a lot back, and I will have 20 winnings in a row.


The chance are quite small a very large bankroll will be wiped out, fast as a negative progression can do, but it can dip a lot, and "never" reach back, at the end even  net 360000 losing spins is possible.


At the end if we play so long  the part which has the largest bankroll win, if the odds are equal( or even a fraction advantages to player). The advantages of deciding the bet size and max bet
help the casino. The casinos  divide the risks as they have many player, do not play the same numbers.


The cut of 10% of the winnings of course make the game profitable for the casino, less than HE, if it not attract more players money.


We can win, but however we play, there is not any way to be sure.


The only sure way of winning, is not possible to do practical, but it is to bust a casino with no table limit. If the player knows how much money the casino has, and put that at the first bet. If the player allways have money to the next bet, and martingale or use any classic system, he must win, even if the game has an negative expection. This situation is not in the real world, so there is not any sure way.


I can not risk a bankroll big enough to have a chance, the strategy in real is play less and keep the winnings.
The only way to win  is to die when a head!


In fun I will try and see if it is possible to reach  a million, 2/3 left.

[TwoCatSam]

The only way to win  is to die when a head!

From "The Gambler" by Kenny Rogers:  And the best that you can hope for is to die in your sleep.

Ralph

Something I've pondered:  When I walk up to the table, my name is "Player".  And your name is the same.  And everyone who walks up to that table.  Now player Sam may lose and player Ralph may win, but in the end--player, whomever he is--will lose.  So they don't care who wins or who loses, because "Player" always loses and they win.

Just my two cents...

Sam

[Ralph]

The only way to win  is to die when a head!

From "The Gambler" by Kenny Rogers:  And the best that you can hope for is to die in your sleep.

Ralph

Something I've pondered:  When I walk up to the table, my name is "Player".  And your name is the same.  And everyone who walks up to that table.  Now player Sam may lose and player Ralph may win, but in the end--player, whomever he is--will lose.  So they don't care who wins or who loses, because "Player" always loses and they win.

Just my two cents...

Sam

We can win a day or lose.   We can not construct a method which make us win for sure. We know everthing afterward. If we play continuous or enough long time, the casino will win. We do play a limit of time, so still there is a chance, if we stop forever when we are a head.

We simply do not have the fund to take the worse cases, and the casino rules make it impossible even if we got millions. People has lost millions at casinos. One here in Sweden 7 million USD. A few billionares has lost more. So in many cases we lose so much we can effort or  have accessable.


It is a matter of time before we lose it all, if we not stop.  We can sim every posted methods and they will bust in time. That time can be very long, so a player can win, due to limit in time.


The casino should not care if you win, other will lose. If all bets are placed equal, a player can do it, and see the casino wins. Many players together make this over the time. A casino barred a player for winning, is silly, if they no have reason to suspect cheating, or  the casino is bad funded. A casino must be well funded to win in the long run.
In the short run we can of course win, and from time some blow a bank, which is the max capital the table is allowed to lose in a day.


I have got messenger from BV, I have extend the limit of payouts. I have placed bets which I do not get the max payouts as it is limit.

[Ralph]

Updating my fun account, passing 400 000.

[ego]

Well you can play no zero wheel - even if it is a zero wheel and only deal with variance ...
If you deal with what is current and present using numbers, then you will never face 37 degree of freedom.
That is the nice framework using cycle play.

So we know each event is independent and the wheel has 37 degree of freedom.
But in reality we will never observe does odds based upon the principals above.

[Ralph]

As you will see I use 25  chips now, the balance allow it, but may be not the table limit. It is not so critical if using positive progressions.


The recovery rate is rather good, it needs a few winnings most of the time, and up to now (since the balance was 320000) I have never put more than 15 units to recover the last losses.


We can see the amount bet is rather much towards the winning amount. That make progressions not so good at a zero wheel playing ECs, 2.7% or worse 5.25% on the amount below (1750) would eat a large part. I would not play without surrender on a zero wheel.

[Ralph]

Today's plus is 10000.  No very difficult runs, largest down  40 units (25 chip). It is 100 sessions aiming for 4 units
(100).