A Money Management Challenge

[RouletteMaster]

Kav, glc,  think either win-loss +1unit shd work fine/place bets on red always/stop when you are +1 unit at any time.


assume you have first 70 spins as black/You are  -2485.
next 30 spins as red. You are +2565/Net +80/maximum placed bet is 100 - much below 500 table limit.

did i miss something?

[Kav]

Hello D1,

I posted the question as a thought provoking puzzle.
I want to hear peoples ideas and approaches to the problem.
It is funny; we thing we know about roulette and money management and systems and probability, yet we find it almost impossible to solve a problem like that.

Anyway. Since you asked me and although I'm still working on the problem, my solution at this point would be as follows:

First of all, for simplicity purposes, please allow me to change the problem a bit and make the hits 33 instead of 30. (the logic remains the same even for 30 hit, but the calculation is much simpler for 33 hits.

So we expect a win ratio of 33/100.
That is a win for every 2 losses.

- In the beginning, for the first 4 spins, I propose a progression like: 1-2-4-8 So in case of a win in the first 4 spins we are in profit and we stop to bet. We won - problem solved.

After the first 4 spins I will use the following formula to calculate how many units I will bet each spin

B = LU/((LS/2)-WS) +1

B=bet in units
LU= Lost units so far
LS= Lost spins so far
WS= Won spins so far

According to this formula, my 5th bet would be
(remember in the first 4 spins I lost 1,2,4,8 = 15)

B=15/((4/2)-0)=15/2 +1=7,5  (+1) so my 5th bet would be 9 units. (we always round up)

For example, if I'm down 150 units and so far I have lost 26 spins and won 5 spins, my bet for the next spin would be:

B=150/((26/2)-5)=150/8=18,75 (+1) so my bet would be 20 units
If I won that bet then, I would be down 131 units the next bet would be
B=131/((26/2)-6)=131/7=18,71  (+1) so my bet would be 20 units again....etc.

Note that with this formula if at any point we reach the 33/100 win ratio then we are in profit and we stop to bet. We won.

If you have any questions or ideas please comment.
Also an excel with the formula would be helpful if anyone cares to make one...

[Kav]

Kav, glc,  think either win-loss +1unit shd work fine/place bets on red always/stop when you are +1 unit at any time.


assume you have first 70 spins as black/You are  -2485.
next 30 spins as red. You are +2565/Net +80/maximum placed bet is 100 - much below 500 table limit.

did i miss something?

In order to be +1 unit on a win you'd have to use Martingale progression 1-2-4-8-16-32-64-128-256-512... so you are out of limits. (if I understand you correctly) Furthermore you don't know when the wins will come. So it's more complicated than that.

[RouletteMaster]

i dint mean +1u at the end of a win and do marty. i meant, whether win or loss increase by 1 unit until you are up by a unit. spin bbbrrbrrb, bets will look like

1 - loss
2 - loss (-3)
3- loss (-6)
4 - win (-2)
5 - win (+3) - target achieved.

[Kav]

i dint mean +1u at the end of a win and do marty. i meant, whether win or loss increase by 1 unit until you are up by a unit. spin bbbrrbrrb, bets will look like
1 - loss
2 - loss (-3)
3- loss (-6)
4 - win (-2)
5 - win (+3) - target achieved.

I see. Still it won't work in most sequences (e.g. LLLWLLLWLLWLWLLLWLLWW)

[GLC]

Kav, glc,  think either win-loss +1unit shd work fine/place bets on red always/stop when you are +1 unit at any time.


assume you have first 70 spins as black/You are  -2485.
next 30 spins as red. You are +2565/Net +80/maximum placed bet is 100 - much below 500 table limit.

did i miss something?

RM-  If that would work all the time, the forced win progression would be all we need, but with a little different mix of Wins VS Losses, we don't come out so good.

Pretty much every negative progression idea works when we front load the losses and back load the wins. 

The problem, I think, is when we get the notorious LLWLLWLLWLLWLLWLLW sequence.  It doesn't have to be 2 and 1 exactly, but just enough losses between wins so that we never catch up with the losses.

I do think a modification of the forced win progression is a powerful bet progression idea, but I haven't been able to make it bullet proof yet.

GLC 

[Skakus]

The problem, I think, is when we get the notorious LLWLLWLLWLLWLLWLLW

This "notorious" sequence highlights the futility of setting up these specifically designed puzzles. Even if you were to able calculate the exact mathematical algorithm to deal with the puzzles requirements it will not help you figure out how to beat the EC’s in a real game full of real random where the next 100 spins are a mystery.

As for LLWLLWLLWLLWLLWLLW, in a real game with real random, after spin 7, whatever you’re using to make your bet selection you should be betting for it to lose, plain & simple. But in this fabricated puzzle you must stick to betting red to win, sure you can choose not to bet, but the point is in the real world if you’re bet selection is picking red, then after spin 7 you should be betting black until the tide turns again.

Seriously, in my opinion, about one third of all the information you need to consistantly beat the ECs is in the first 7 spins of this sequence.

Good luck with the puzzle game guys, but realistically, don’t hope to learn too much.

[soggett]

can we get the LW for the 100 spins? make the hardest one up if you want, just so we have something to try our thoughts on

[Kav]

can we get the LW for the 100 spins? make the hardest one up if you want, just so we have something to try our thoughts on

Soggett,
One of the interesting things about this problem is that there are, literally, millions of different possible sequences that you have to deal with.
However I understand that some people find the problem too abstract and need some kind of reference sequence to try their ideas on.
Here's one:

L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
W
W
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
w

[Nickmsi]

Hi Kav . . .

Here's an excel tracker with your formula included.

It contains an RNG so simply press function key F9 for another set of spins or you can just clear the numbers in Column A and insert them manually or from whatever source you wish.

Enjoy

Nick

[Nickmsi]

Kav .. . .

I went through this a while ago, trying to solve the problem of winning when you have 65 Reds in 200 spins.  I tried all kinds of labby and other progressions to no avail.

I find it pays to revisit this problem and others as we often evolve in our thinking and might have a different perspective.

Rather than trying to hit it over the head with massive progressions, I thought why not attack this from a different perspective.

We know that 30 reds in 100 spins will have many Singles and Series of Reds. In other words, in this 100 spin cycle we will see BBRB which is a Single Red. We will also see BBBRRB which is a series for Red.  We will also have BBBRRRB which is another series of Red.

They will not all be Single Reds. It is possible that they will be, but highly unlikely.

Therefore, my suggestions is to bet Red ONLY after a Red wins.  We are betting that the next spin will produce a series of Red.

With this type of betting, most any type of progression should get us the one win.

Attached is an excel tracker with this type of betting and 3 types of progressions you may want to try or you can enter any progression you want.

Don't know if this solves this problem but it's an interesting system nonetheless.

Enjoy

Nick

[RouletteMaster]

what about using a soft progression of 3 steps to bet after 3SD. it should work right?

[Kav]

How about this progression:

B=(LU/(33-WS)) +1  (we always round up)

B=bet in units
LU= Lost units so far
WS= Won spins so fa

The idea behind this progression is that we just need to recuperate our losses with 33 wins. (or the wins we have left from the 33 initial wins)

Example:

1rst bet = 1unit Loss
2nd bet = 1/33 +1 = 2 (we always round up) Loss
3rd bet = 3/33 +1 = 2 Loss
4th bet = 5/33 +1 =2
etc.
Let's say after 40 spins we are down 100 units and we have won 10 spins.
Next bet would be:
100/(33-10) +1= 100/23 +1 = 6 units
.....
Now let's say after 70 spins we are down 280 units and we have won 20 spins so far
Next bet would be:
280/(33-20) +1 = 280/13 +1 = 23 units
... etc.
Of course from then on, as we get some wins and the denominator decreases, the bets will increase rapidly. Still, I believe we won't reach the 500 units limit.

Gentlemen , I think I solved the problem. 

Nick, could you program this?

[Nickmsi]

Ok,

Here's the Tracker with the new formula.

Let us know how it works.

Cheers

Nick

[GARNabby]

How about this progression:

B=(LU/(33-WS)) +1  (we always round up)

B=bet in units
LU= Lost units so far
WS= Won spins so fa

The idea behind this progression is that we just need to recuperate our losses with 33 wins. (or the wins we have left from the 33 initial wins)

Example:

1rst bet = 1unit Loss
2nd bet = 1/33 +1 = 2 (we always round up) Loss
3rd bet = 3/33 +1 = 2 Loss
4th bet = 5/33 +1 =2
etc.
Let's say after 40 spins we are down 100 units and we have won 10 spins.
Next bet would be:
100/(33-10) +1= 100/23 +1 = 6 units
.....
Now let's say after 70 spins we are down 280 units and we have won 20 spins so far
Next bet would be:
280/(33-20) +1 = 280/13 +1 = 23 units
... etc.
Of course from then on, as we get some wins and the denominator decreases, the bets will increase rapidly. Still, I believe we won't reach the 500 units limit.

Gentlemen , I think I solved the problem. 

Nick, could you program this?

:.Roulette30.com

This entire post is completely messed up.

Skip all the fancy stuff, and focus on the basics.

There's an elegant solution to this.