A simple system that works

[klw]

Hi GLC -- Many thanks for the welcome and response. I've been around a couple of years now just wasn't able to register somehow on here for ages , the registration process seems to be much simpler now so that's why I have only just appeared on here as a member.

Thank for the information , will definitely have a look.

Beretta seems to know what he's talking about and low variance suits my personality hence my interest in the EC's. Nick made an excel tracker for me to record singles and series using the 3 base EC's and also the different line combinations. Beretta's posts have given me some ideas based on his quest for 1 unit win and with the series / single angle am just trying to reverse engineer a system. Dane is doing something similar I believe so will catch up with that also.

Thanks once again.

[klw]

klw,  Welcome aboard mate.  I just love being the first to respond to a new member's 1st post.

Mathematically you're correct.  Betting series vs singles is no different than betting Red vs Black.  In 1000 spins, perfect distribution would be 500 singles and 500 series.  In 1000 spins, perfect distribution would be 500 Reds and 500 Blacks.  Believe me, Baretta28 is fully aware of this.

I have read other authors who state that the series vs singles seems to do better than Red vs Black or Odd vs Even etc... One such system is Predictor Gold where the author states that for some reason his tests indicate that betting series vs singles performs better.
Another system is the BV system.  This is built on tracking singles vs series instead of Red vs Black.  The author states that the system was tested in 4 casinos for a whole year at 50 or less spins per day.  Each casino netted about 2500 units per year.  If you do the math, that's 6.8 units for every 50 spins or .136 units for each spin.  Not a glowing result other than it's a winning result.

That's the best answer I can give.  Other than beware, past results are no guarantee of future results.

GLC

Additionally, the author's system that can be found on this forum, uses Same vs Opposite as a bet selection method.  If you think about it, that's another way of saying Series vs Single.

Hi GLC . I ve had a quick look at the author's system. Not sure why the bet selection provides an edge if it does ? It seems to rely more on money management , will have another read to make sure I have digested it properly.

I ve done a search for the predictor gold and bv systems and come up with a blank Any chance some kind soul can provide a link to them ?

Cheers.

[GLC]

I have both systems and may be able to send them to you if you will PM me your e-mail address.  I say may because they are embedded within a group of systems and it's not always possible for me to isolate a system.

I can tell you that there's no reason why either of the systems should break the casino edge barrier.  I believe both systems were sold at one time which makes all claims to their effectiveness highly suspect if not outright unbelievable.

I only mentioned them as supporting statements regarding the efficacy of betting Series vs Singles instead of Red vs Black.  I'm not saying I believe it, just noting some people's tendency to use it as justification for their bet selection method.

GLC

[ego]

Everyone knows that deviation(ecart) is the rule and the balance(equilibrium) is the exception.
In 100 spins the most likely ecart between 2 chances is 10!
Everyone knows also that playing ALL the spins for hours is a suicide.
So I suggest:when an even chance has 5 outcomes more than the opposite,I play in order to reach an ecart of 10 outcomes
Example:15 Black,20 Red......I play Red.
If I lose,I stop playing and I wait for another difference of 5, if I win,I can continue to reach  10 or I stop playing,if my win goal is +1.
Play flat bet(boring) or smooth progression


Personally I play with a bankroll of 10000 â,¬ and a 50 â,¬ unit and a win goal of 2 units per day.Bread winner progression or 10 times 1 unit,10 times 2 units etc
Never bust after 94 sessions.

Golden rules:
--To play this system on classic even chances is not suitable,the killer session could happen.
Much better to create YOUR even chances(3 double streets vs other 3s,agglomeration vs isolated spin,half roulette on the right vs half on the left,etc)
In this way the permanence is more stable.

--Try to obtain your goal(ecart between 6 and 10) in 100 spins minimum,not less.

I crack the random flow.
I come up with a solution where the random flow has to show you the truth about Ecart play or regression towards the mean.
No bet selections or triggers.

With this solution you can observe how regression towards the mean unfold with out any fuzzy explanation.

Read this twice:

Regression toward the mean simply says that, following an extreme random event, the next random event is likely to be less extreme. In no sense does the future event "compensate for" or "even out" the previous event, though this is assumed in the gambler's fallacy (and variant law of averages). Similarly, the law of large numbers states that in the long term, the average will tend towards the expected value, but makes no statement about individual trials. For example, following a run of 10 heads on a flip of a fair coin (a rare, extreme event), regression to the mean states that the next run of heads will likely be less than 10, while the law of large numbers states that in the long term, this event will likely average out, and the average fraction of heads will tend to 1/2. By contrast, the gambler's fallacy incorrectly assumes that the coin is now "due" for a run of tails, to balance out.

What does this means:
This means i can pick any random combination of 10 events and compare them with the next 10 random events.
The expectation should be that they will not be the same combination and there will be present change.
So i can use opposite and same to see if this is the truth.

2
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
2
1

- - -

2 2 S
1 2 O
1 1 S
2 2 S
2 2 S
2 1 O
2 2 S
1 2 O
1 2 O
2 1 O

- - -

1 2 S
2 1 S
2 1 S
2 2 S
2 2 S
1 2 O
2 2 S
1 1 S
1 1 S
2 2 S

- - -

2 1 O
1 2 O
1 2 O
1 2 O
2 2 S
1 1 S
1 2 O
1 1 S
1 1 S
1 2 O

- - -

2 2 S
1 1 S
2 1 O
2 1 O
1 2 O
2 1 O
2 1 O
1 1 S
1 1 S
1 1 S

- - -

2 2 S
2 1 O
2 2 S
2 2 S
1 1 S
1 2 O
1 2 O
2 1 O
2 1 O
2 1 O

- - -

Lets say you have 10 red outcomes, then regression towards the mean says that the next 10 outcomes will be less extreme.
But it does not say it will even out with blacks 100% ...
So if i have 10 reds and no regression, then i would have 20 reds and that my friend is extreme and rare.


10 reds is rare and extreme, but 10 reds has the same probability as any random sequence with 10 outcomes.
This is why i can pick any sequence of 10 random outcomes and have the expectation that the next 10 random outcomes will not be the same 10 random outcomes.

That way i can see how regression towards the mean behave in the real world with real results with quick samples.
For example i don't need to wait for 3.0 STD window.

Now the beauty of this is that i can pick any window i think is extreme or rare.

This is one example how the LW-Registry can look like:
LWLWWLWWWW LLL WWWLWWLLWWLWWLWLWWWWLLWWWWWWLWLWWLWW LLL LWWLW

If you want to name this method for something else then regression towards the mean, then you can call it variance tracking.
You can pick any lenght, it does not have to be 10 - it can be 23456789 10 11 12 13 14 and so on.

[warrior]

I crack the random flow.
I come up with a solution where the random flow has to show you the truth about Ecart play or regression towards the mean.
No bet selections or triggers.

With this solution you can observe how regression towards the mean unfold with out any fuzzy explanation.

Read this twice:

Regression toward the mean simply says that, following an extreme random event, the next random event is likely to be less extreme. In no sense does the future event "compensate for" or "even out" the previous event, though this is assumed in the gambler's fallacy (and variant law of averages). Similarly, the law of large numbers states that in the long term, the average will tend towards the expected value, but makes no statement about individual trials. For example, following a run of 10 heads on a flip of a fair coin (a rare, extreme event), regression to the mean states that the next run of heads will likely be less than 10, while the law of large numbers states that in the long term, this event will likely average out, and the average fraction of heads will tend to 1/2. By contrast, the gambler's fallacy incorrectly assumes that the coin is now "due" for a run of tails, to balance out.

What does this means:
This means i can pick any random combination of 10 events and compare them with the next 10 random events.
The expectation should be that they will not be the same combination and there will be present change.
So i can use opposite and same to see if this is the truth.

2
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
2
1

- - -

2 2 S
1 2 O
1 1 S
2 2 S
2 2 S
2 1 O
2 2 S
1 2 O
1 2 O
2 1 O

- - -

1 2 S
2 1 S
2 1 S
2 2 S
2 2 S
1 2 O
2 2 S
1 1 S
1 1 S
2 2 S

- - -

2 1 O
1 2 O
1 2 O
1 2 O
2 2 S
1 1 S
1 2 O
1 1 S
1 1 S
1 2 O

- - -

2 2 S
1 1 S
2 1 O
2 1 O
1 2 O
2 1 O
2 1 O
1 1 S
1 1 S
1 1 S

- - -

2 2 S
2 1 O
2 2 S
2 2 S
1 1 S
1 2 O
1 2 O
2 1 O
2 1 O
2 1 O

- - -

Lets say you have 10 red outcomes, then regression towards the mean says that the next 10 outcomes will be less extreme.
But it does not say it will even out with blacks 100% ...
So if i have 10 reds and no regression, then i would have 20 reds and that my friend is extreme and rare.


10 reds is rare and extreme, but 10 reds has the same probability as any random sequence with 10 outcomes.
This is why i can pick any sequence of 10 random outcomes and have the expectation that the next 10 random outcomes will not be the same 10 random outcomes.

That way i can see how regression towards the mean behave in the real world with real results with quick samples.
For example i don't need to wait for 3.0 STD window.

Now the beauty of this is that i can pick any window i think is extreme or rare.

This is one example how the LW-Registry can look like:
LWLWWLWWWW LLL WWWLWWLLWWLWWLWLWWWWLLWWWWWWLWLWWLWW LLL LWWLW

If you want to name this method for something else then regression towards the mean, then you can call it variance tracking.
You can pick any lenght, it does not have to be 10 - it can be 23456789 10 11 12 13 14 and so on.

? How would you bet as far as mm goes .what your saying is you would bet opposite of the first ten? Then retrack another random event?

[ego]

Is just a simple way to observe and test if regression towards the mean exist.

[sturrock]

OK Guys, just Tested Ego's Method with good results on first test; I span a coin 20 times Heads/Reds  Tails/Black
RRRBBRBRBBBRBRRRRBBR I then played the opposite with these results WWLWWWWLLWLWWLLWLWW did not play the 20th spin as 19th was a win,  Any body else tried this method? If it bombed let me know so I don't carry on testing! I will do another test later and let you know how it goes. Thanks People. 

[sturrock]

Ego; Looking at the test I have done above is this how you play? And can you tell us what progression are you using?

[sturrock]

Next Test of Ego's Method  10 spins of a coin gives RRRRRBRBBR   betting the opposite of those on Smartlive Casino airball real money 25p bets martigale progression  WWLWLLWWLW up 6 units  £1.50!!!   

[sturrock]

Next test on William Hill Air-Ball  10 spins of a coin gave RBRBBRBBBR  Bet the opposite  LLWLWLLLLW  up 3 units 

[sturrock]

Last test of the day!  William Hill  Live dealer (UK Roulette) 20 spins of the coin this time. Heads/Red Tails/Black Played the opposite with
LWWLWWWLLWWLLWWLWWLW up 12 units 

[ego]

I did not post a system, i just wanted to show regression towards the mean.
You might only see one opposite or none, so be careful ....

[luckyfella]

Exactly n hopefully readers understands that. Which brings us back to the unique pattern which will give a sharp, consistent n stable fall off point of the distribution graph that I talked about.

Your previous extreme pattern did not show consistent results over time. However, further test revealed the unique pattern that did in my latest thread.  Thanks to you ego. Cheers!

[cheEsteban]

This looks interesting.

GLC, can i PM you for the methods? I would like to try them and this one for my tracker:
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=13506.0
Sounds like this would be a perfect case for tracking multiple outcomes (R/B, H/L, etc). 

But i still have trouble understanding the single & series method. Do you count the amount of singles and series and if there are 5 more singles that series, start betting on series (repeat of last) occurring?

Thanks everyone for sharing your ideas n expertise.

[GLC]

All members can PM me.  Fire away!