Half Labby (w/65 Labby bonus)

[thelaw]

Update : Labby failed at bet #126 of a sequence provided by Albalaha

[GLC]

Update : Labby failed at bet #126 of a sequence provided by Albalaha

When you say the labby failed, does that mean you went over your 1000 unit buy-in?   If so, could you have recovered if you had continued with a larger buy-in?  And, did you add lines to reduce bet sizes?  Finally, what was the loss to win ratio.  Was the spread more than 35% wins vs 65% losses?
GLC

[thelaw]

When you say the labby failed, does that mean you went over your 1000 unit buy-in?   If so, could you have recovered if you had continued with a larger buy-in?  And, did you add lines to reduce bet sizes?  Finally, what was the loss to win ratio.  Was the spread more than 35% wins vs 65% losses?
GLC

Labby failed with 1-line (88 units) remaining and set to lose the next 7 bets. Unfortunately, there is no reasonable way to handle these losses.

-Martingale = bankroll and table limit

-add lines = 14 extra lines of 88 units each = breaks bankroll

The bets following these losses were not enough to recover even if you double the bankroll.

39% wins / 61% losses

I am currently in the process of running a final test with a larger Labby just for kicks. I'll let you know what happens

[thelaw]

When you say the labby failed, does that mean you went over your 1000 unit buy-in?   If so, could you have recovered if you had continued with a larger buy-in?  And, did you add lines to reduce bet sizes?  Finally, what was the loss to win ratio.  Was the spread more than 35% wins vs 65% losses?
GLC

Update!!!

The sequence that was previously a bust, has been beaten with a 65-Line Labby. Here are the results:

Win : +50 units @ spin 167

Max Draw-down : -600 units (worst I've seen by far)

Largest bet : $252 (last bet)

W/L Breakdown : 103 losses / 64 wins (62% loss/38% win)

Notes : Here are the next 33 spins for reference (i've also attached a text file with the full sequence) :

L
W
W
W
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
L
L
W
W
L
W
W
W
W
W
L
W
W
L
L
L

-as you can see, there is still an enormous amount of wiggle room for the betting.

the Labby is still alive!!!

[thelaw]

Updated Update - Modification

Update - Modified Labby


Just bet every other spin using a standard 33-line Labby


Results :


#1 Spin then every other

Win : +50 units @ spin 188
Max Draw-down : -210 units
Largest bet : $165 (last bet)

#2 - Spin then bet every other :


Win : +50 units @ spin 142
Max Draw-down : -30 units (yes-you read that right-30)
Largest bet : $26 (last bet)


Best I've seen so far

Thanks to Maestro for for the great modification!!!

[GLC]

What this shows us is that how the wins and losses arrive is more important than the percent of wins vs losses.

It's like a lot of system designers do when they front load the demonstration with heavy losses while you're betting small bets and then back load the demonstration with heavy wins while you're betting large amounts and coming out ahead with like 10 wins vs 27 losses.  But if you were to turn it around and have 10 wins early and the losses late, you'd loose your shirt.  It means nothing.

Regarding your tweak, if we take out the skipped spins and examine the wins/losses, what is the wins % vs the loss %?  That could have changed a lot.  It might also mean on a different series that would win relatively easy, skipping every other spin might leave us with such a high loss to win ratio that it turns it into a losing sequence.

I perceive that this is a very solid progression idea, but for sure it's not infallible.  Will it stay ahead while encountering a 1,000 unit loss periodically is the question.  Without a way to test by means of a computer program, I doubt that we can come to a "for sure" answer.

Thanks for all your hard work.  When I get a chance, I'll play around with this also.  It for sure has great promise.  Maybe this final tweak suggested by Maestro (evidently) is the cat's meow.

GLC

[thelaw]

What this shows us is that how the wins and losses arrive is more important than the percent of wins vs losses.

It's like a lot of system designers do when they front load the demonstration with heavy losses while you're betting small bets and then back load the demonstration with heavy wins while you're betting large amounts and coming out ahead with like 10 wins vs 27 losses.  But if you were to turn it around and have 10 wins early and the losses late, you'd loose your shirt.  It means nothing.

Regarding your tweak, if we take out the skipped spins and examine the wins/losses, what is the wins % vs the loss %?  That could have changed a lot.  It might also mean on a different series that would win relatively easy, skipping every other spin might leave us with such a high loss to win ratio that it turns it into a losing sequence.

I perceive that this is a very solid progression idea, but for sure it's not infallible.  Will it stay ahead while encountering a 1,000 unit loss periodically is the question.  Without a way to test by means of a computer program, I doubt that we can come to a "for sure" answer.

Thanks for all your hard work.  When I get a chance, I'll play around with this also.  It for sure has great promise.  Maybe this final tweak suggested by Maestro (evidently) is the cat's meow.

GLC

minor correction for bets starting with #1 :

Max Draw-down : -156

Largest Bet : +216

Win : +50 at spin #189 (not 188 as before)

Here are the percentages :

#1 : 33wins/62 losses (35%/65%)

#2 : 33wins/37 losses (47%/53%)

[thelaw]

1600 Spins challenge completed (note that I just started each new game with next spin-if someone would like to play the opposite w/l record, be my guest)


33 Standard Labby with 1/2 modification (just bet every other spin) beats #1512 Spins (stopped due to #200 spins needed for another game)

Bankroll : $1000

Win total : +550 units

Largest Bet : -$795

Max Draw-down : -$745

***note that I played this as a standard Labby as described in earlier posts with 1/2 mod - so all Martingale scenarios were played through without adjustments (adding lines)-hence the massive bet and dd from game #7***

Results :

#142----+ 50 units win end of game #2 ( game ended first starting with 2nd spin)

#189----+ 50 units win end of game #1 (starting with bet #1 and then every other spin)

#346----+50 units win end of game #3 - largest bet = $98 - dd=-$29

#505----+50 units win - end of game #4 - lb=$123 - dd=-$31

#640---+50 units win - end of game #5 - lb=$180 - dd=-$150

#817---+50 units win - end of game #6 - lb=$129 - dd=-$202

#948---+50 units win - end of game #7 - lb=$795 - dd=-$745

#1099---+50 units win - end of game #8 - lb=$15 - dd=-$16

#1224---+50 units win - end of game #9 - lb=$82 - dd= (less than 10)

#1351---+50 units win - end of game #10 - lb=$18 - dd=-(less than 10)

#1512---+50 units win - end of game #11 - lb=$50 - dd=--$30---last game (200 spins needed for game)

**detailed spins attached

[thelaw]

Please note that I am making some adjustments to the system, so please hold off on any further comments until I post the new information (should be up in 24hrs) - Thanks!

[JimmieB]

Hi the law,

I know you didn't want anything posted, however, I thought the following EC selection system may be of interest used with the large line labby, as it appears to be a pretty strong EC system on it's own. I came across it while looking back on old topics, I've not been a member for that long, and have been looking through old threads for ideas, and this EC system got my interest; I cant take any credit for it, it was posted by Atlantis (thanks Atlantis ) almost 4 years ago!!!

This is not exactly a flat bet system - but thought it might be of interest. I have used this mechanical system with some success in REAL casino simply betting the Red/Black EC. It also seems to perform well over 100 spin sessions.
Please note this DOES use a progression of 0.5 unit after each 2 consecutive losses...

To begin session: Wait for a single formation of a color to appear eg: RRRB or BBR

'========
STAGE A
'========

Bet the opposite color to the last spun result.

If WIN and level or ahead of current highest profit then restart from stage A at 1 unit stakes.

If WIN and still less than current highest profit (behind) then restart from stage A at SAME current stake level.

If LOSE go to stage B.

'=========
STAGE B
'=========

Bet the SAME color as last time ONE more time. (eg if you bet RED last time; bet RED again)

If WIN at stage B and now level or ahead of current highest profit then reduce stake to 1 unit and go back to Stage A.

If WIN at stage B but still behind current highest profit figure then keep to same stake level and go back to Stage A.

If LOSE at stage B that means you have lost twice in succession. WAIT for color sequence to end first and increase current stake by +0.5 units and resume betting at stage A at that stake level.



Recommended aim = +5 units.

A.

[Chris555p]

Hi Jimmy

Thanks for your post; It sounds very interesting.

Would it be possible to write the name of the ec system
posted by Atlantis that u are referring to; Or may post
the link as it may be useful for anyone looking
for a strong ec system.


Cheers

Chris 

[JimmieB]

Hi Chris,

Here is the link, it's a 7 page thread, therefore, there are some tweaks from A's original idea as the thread evolves; I can't seem to embed the link, just cut & paste...

link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=995.msg8977#msg8977

There are few members whose posts/topics I've been reading up on with interest since joining, Atlantis is just of the one, there are some really good contributors on this forum, keep up the good work guys (and girls) 

Jim

[JimmieB]

It hadn't embedded in my preview post  ....technology!!!

[thelaw]

Hi the law,

I know you didn't want anything posted, however, I thought the following EC selection system may be of interest used with the large line labby, as it appears to be a pretty strong EC system on it's own. I came across it while looking back on old topics, I've not been a member for that long, and have been looking through old threads for ideas, and this EC system got my interest; I cant take any credit for it, it was posted by Atlantis (thanks Atlantis ) almost 4 years ago!!!

This is not exactly a flat bet system - but thought it might be of interest. I have used this mechanical system with some success in REAL casino simply betting the Red/Black EC. It also seems to perform well over 100 spin sessions.
Please note this DOES use a progression of 0.5 unit after each 2 consecutive losses...

To begin session: Wait for a single formation of a color to appear eg: RRRB or BBR

'========
STAGE A
'========

Bet the opposite color to the last spun result.

If WIN and level or ahead of current highest profit then restart from stage A at 1 unit stakes.

If WIN and still less than current highest profit (behind) then restart from stage A at SAME current stake level.

If LOSE go to stage B.

'=========
STAGE B
'=========

Bet the SAME color as last time ONE more time. (eg if you bet RED last time; bet RED again)

If WIN at stage B and now level or ahead of current highest profit then reduce stake to 1 unit and go back to Stage A.

If WIN at stage B but still behind current highest profit figure then keep to same stake level and go back to Stage A.

If LOSE at stage B that means you have lost twice in succession. WAIT for color sequence to end first and increase current stake by +0.5 units and resume betting at stage A at that stake level.



Recommended aim = +5 units.

A.

Hey Jimmie,

This is an interesting idea, appears to use the "rare events" methodology. I have found this methodology to be problematic due to the eventual sequence event that will knock out your bankroll or hit table limits.

If you were going to test this, I would use a small (10 lines), medium (33 lines), and large (max 65 lines) Labby and test it with a "nightmare" sequence (I've attached the 1600 spin challenge that is used to test many systems for worst case scenario betting events) in a text file below. If you can weather the 1600 spins, then you may have a contender.

Good luck, and thanks for the interest!

[thelaw]

Final Update : Failure : Labby 33 (bet every other spin)

After reviewing the spins, I found an error in the final few bets of the worst sequence (game #7) that brought the total draw-down to over $5000 busting both the bankroll and table limit. Although my error only effected the last couple of spins, and thus did not effect the outcome of the other games, it still indicates an overall failure of the system.

I subsequently tried to adjust the betting to insure against Martingale by capping bets at $100 and adding lines after each loss, but found this to ultimately be a losing strategy, as more and more lines meant imminent failure.

Thanks to Maestro, Albalaha, and GLC for their help with this system - Much appreciated!!!