Red or Black system - Am i crazy or does this make sense

[Oldman]

Im new to roulette forums but want to see what users thoughts of my system

i been wining with it for over 6 months now

Its not exciting  and u dont win huge amounts

personal background

Im 71 on a pension,  wife has passed away and Im bored ( Kids live over seas due to work)

Use to go to the pokes but never win and i mean never all that i  got is the free coffee 


now for the system

a) i walk up to the roulette table (computer one )
B) look at teh red black split eg black 56% Green 2% red 42% ( so i bet on red)
C) what ever colour is the lowest % i bet on that non stop and never change colour win or lose
D) never increase or decrease the bet
E) admittly its so very very boring
F) I dont leave the table until Im ahead by 3 wins irrspective of how long it takes
G) bet roll is 300 X's the bet  eg  $10 bet x 300 = $3000 bet roll
H) I leave when Im ahead by 3 units eg I have won $30
I)  Sometimes it takes  10 minutes other time it takles alot more on average i would say 2 hours    so its like working for $15 per hour plus free drinks & parking ( They gave me a better loyalty card )

So in theory it makes sense and Im making $150 per week lately tax free

I truly believe from research that redc black split over time will always be 50/50 but small windows where there is a margin to make money and time will fix that

But Im scared that there is something missing in this and i could lose my bank roll of $3000 it would take me another 100 days of betting to get it back

How i built up to the current betting level see example below

bet $1 bet roll $300
bet $2.50 bet roll $750
bet $5  bet roll $1500
Bet 10 bet roll $3000


So please show me the holes in this method. Is this a sound system or is it just luck

As most of you are young people you dont have the time to spend long periods  like i do and im happy to take little wins  but i would like to build up to win $100 per visit but would need a bank roll of 10K 


Everyone  thoughts would be appricated .. Please be ruthless in yoru thoughts as to why this isnt a good system for the long term

thankyou have  agreat day

[ego]

 Hello Oldman - that is regression towards the mean that one color is behind and one colour is ahead.
Then you bet for balance or correction.

There is a way proving you Point and system Proving existence of lower variance


This is a qoute from Kav at hes forum:

According to current probabilities theory, roulette is a game of independent trials and independent probabilities. No mainstream professor on probabilities would accept that past results can influence future results.

One of the reasons for this thesis, is that academics care about "single spin" probabilities than groups of spins.
Anyway, if someone can prove that previous spins can give us information for next spins, he would turn mainstream probability theory upside down, and most probably would win a Nobel prize.
Here's a simple test to prove that previous spins offer info for following spins.

Research
1. Take a database of past roulette spins - like that of Wiesbaden
2. Search for series of 50 consecutive spins with less than 12 appearances of one color. (that is around three standard deviations from normal distribution)
3. Record the appearances of that color in the following 50 consecutive spins.

Result
Theoretically in step 3, both colors have the same probabilities of appearing. For example, in 20 tests, 10 times should be in favor of the one color (the prevailing color in the previous 50 spins) and 10 times in favor of the other (the less appearing color in the previous 50 spins).
However, real tests show that the next 50 spins are in favor of the color that did not appear in the previous 50 spins.
Test for yourself.


This quote is from Bayes reply about the theory and software:

I knocked up this little tool for experimenting -

But don't get too excited, for one thing, I coded a win to count as "not a loss" (ie; win or break even).
Also, it's one thing to get > average in the next sequence MOST of the time, but that's not the same as making a profit overall, you have to take into account how much you LOSE in those sessions where you get less than average. Another thing to be aware of are those cases where you get a rush of wins early on and then losses later;  just betting the next X spins mechanically through to the end may not be the best way to test the hypothesis. I tend to agree with Ego in that the best way is to wait for the correction to manifest before you start your attack.

Note that the 2nd sample (the one you would actually be betting in) doesn't have to be the same length as the first sample (but obviously, the trigger has to be less than the first sample!). Play around with different figures and see what you get.

I haven't actually implemented the file option yet, so you're stuck with RNG for now. Also, it can take a long time to do the analysis (250,000 spins are taken at a time), so be patient. It takes 2-3 minutes on my computer.

I'm pretty sure I coded this idea years ago and the end result in terms of profits was... you guessed it - right on the mathematical expectation.

[Chrisbis]

Well...let me be the first to say......"Well done You"!
Wonderful to see that someone CAN post a good winners story from time to time.

I have to tell you, I'm currently winning also, at my favoured Betvoyager.com NoZero formate RNG machine.
No progression, just flat betting 5 or sometimes ten inside numbers.
Betvoyager doesn't give you red/black results% coverage, so I would need a monitor software to analysis this info to be able to play that game, but I bet it has legs!
I may look into it.

Oh...my system, I hear you all ask?......just playing with hunches and a feel for the vibe of the Sha256! lol
Started yesterday with E100 and I'm at E175 now, playing with 0.05 and 0.10 stakes

Anyways.....welcome aboard OLDMAN (I like the pun in the user name)...and happy winnings.
Chrisbis

[Tamino]

"Oldman"   you are not crazy but   are demonstrating  patience and discipline.


HAPPY WINNINGS !!!



Tamino

[Oldman]

Thanks everyone who has emailed me or mentioned to keep up the good work

But as strange as this my sound thats not what im looking for. Im looking for where the problem is  in the system

I see it is this way

1) it could be one step forward 2 back over an extended period i lose the BR
2) I cant stay awake any longer i i leave and this locK in the loss
3) Ive had it where i was one win away from my 3 ahead and then its takes another 3 hours to actually win
4) Sheer boredom hours of red black re bet etc

Question :  using $1 bets how much of a bank roll would you need to not run out of money ( statiscally that is)

I use to own a cafe and i always thought it was amazing that every year revenue was always the same but with a slight increase ) PRICE iNCREASES),, sure I had regulars but not all were and not all ordered the same thing every time but some how it always reverted to the normal level with a slight lift. its seems that the world operates on averages and it all works out  just like numbers coming up on a roulette table

Why is the world evely split male and female if we cant controll the gender ( This why Im against gender choice)

Search for :::::wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sex_ratio

sure there will be periods of more males or females but ultmatley it will revert to 50/50 just like in red black in roulette

SO PLEASE RUTHLESSLY DESTORY ME ON THIS METHOD I USE AND TELL ME WHY IM WRONG AND WHY I WILL  ULTIMATELY FAIL OR AT LEAST WHERE THE WEAK POINT IS USING THIS SYSTEM

THANK YOU I REALLY APPRICATE YOUR THOUGHTS 

[TwoCatSam]

OLDMAN

I'm 68 and retired.  Well, from a paying job anyway!

I once had the privilege of testing a robot.  The goal was to win on black, red, odd or even.  The progression was up one on a loss and down one on a win.  Most of the time it won.

One night I lost 34,000 pennies.  Yes, I had set the bot to play pennies at BetVoyager Non Zero.  That shakes out to $340 in real money out of Sam's pocket.  What happened?, you ask.

It went red and never evened out.  Or maybe it was black.  But it never evened out.  Had I not been playing the progression, I might have lost less.   The point is:  There is absolutely no guarantee that equalization will occur.  It probably will and usually does, but the one time it doesn't is murder.  With a robot or even an excel sheet by Nick, you can test hundreds of thousands of spins and see the big picture.

NOW

There are those who say, "Hey, I never play hundreds of thousands of spins." and they're right.  The rub is that you never know when the devil will rear his ugly head.  You may actually rock along for a couple of months doing quite well.  Then you hit the wall and you ask yourself:  Do I cut my losses and quit or do I dig deeper and keep on playing? 

I can assure you beyond speculation that--if you play long enough--you will encounter the run from hell and it will destroy you.  It can be show mathematically that the illusion of equalization is just that--an illusion.

But, hey, we're playing for the fun of it anyway, right?

TwoCatSam

[thelaw]

How about waiting until an ec is behind by 10 and then start a Labby/Divisor/etc?

[ego]

I never forget this quote from WIKI:

"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."

So i run 1 million trails to see the worst and extreme for even money bets:

Low: 18 in a row (once)
High: 18 in a row (once)
Red: 19 in a row (once)
Black: 20 in a row (twice)
Odd: 18 in a row (twice)
Even: 18 in a row (once)

So two times in 1 millon trails, so was there no hit or regression towards the mean.
I just test this as i would like to confirm that 10 events are extreme and that our expectation for the next 10 trails will include at least one winning bet.

[Tamino]

Oldman,


In a PM I forwarded to you a published  system on Flat betting   Will give you more peace of  mind regarding loss of bankroll.

This wil put YOU in control at the table.

This sysytekm was  played by the author at a B & M casino.  NO test gimmick


For recreational purposes only. Play at your own riTamino

[GLC]

I'm not going to say you "are", but you "might" be crazy just like the rest of us.  Since the expectation is to lose more bets than you win, (thank you Mr. Zero) in the long run a flat bet will lose.  With 300 units, I think you are relatively safe from going bust in your remaining life time, but it's still possible. 

My suggestion is to not double your bet size until you have won 300 units.  If you ever do lose 300 units, you're one of the unluckiest persons ever, next to TwoCat, and you should throw in the towel.  Nobody can love playing roulette that much.

I suggest that you play the following system instead of the one your now playing.

link:s://archive.org/details/montecarloanecdo00bethiala

It's the barometer system on page 123.

Good Luck,
GLC

[RAJ]

OldMan,
i am new to roulette forum. I often read GLC, Tamino, and many others contributions. They are like Guru's in Roulette IMHO.
I often play with 2 dozens to get close to average ratio with mild progression. most of the time it works.
I would highly  recommend to take their advise.
Thanks to GLC, Tamino, many others for sharing your ideas

[TwoCatSam]

GLC

If there is such a thing a luck--and I wonder--I am one of the luckiest people on the planet.  If I die next week, I will have been one of the luckiest people on the planet.  Because mathematics are what they are (or is it "is what they is"), the system failed.  The man who gave me the robot and swears by the system still does not know why it failed.  It failed because there is no guarantee of "return to the mean" withing a reasonable period of time. 

As we all know, the wheel can stay erratic longer than we can stay solvent.  Zero has little to do with it. 

Many, many of my own ideas have flopped.  No, all of my ideas have flopped!  I am just NOT the person who can do a thousand push-ups when no one is looking. 

Play on, OLDMAN.  If you get a lot older, you will find what I say is true.

TwoCat

[come_on_melb_ole]

GLC

I am just NOT the person who can do a thousand push-ups when no one is looking. 


TwoCat

Of course you can't, your 68 years of age!

[Azim]

GLC

If there is such a thing a luck--and I wonder--I am one of the luckiest people on the planet.  If I die next week, I will have been one of the luckiest people on the planet.  Because mathematics are what they are (or is it "is what they is"), the system failed.  The man who gave me the robot and swears by the system still does not know why it failed.  It failed because there is no guarantee of "return to the mean" withing a reasonable period of time. 

As we all know, the wheel can stay erratic longer than we can stay solvent.  Zero has little to do with it. 

Many, many of my own ideas have flopped.  No, all of my ideas have flopped!  I am just NOT the person who can do a thousand push-ups when no one is looking. 

Play on, OLDMAN.  If you get a lot older, you will find what I say is true.

TwoCat

Sam and everyone,

There is such a thing called Luck.  I can assure you on any given day, there is a point in life were you have said something and it has happened.

We all know, RNG is a number picked from the sky. No 2 computers will pick the same number's at the same time unless the algorithm to pick the number's is same.(there is an exception to this).

Example: try this Sam you have multiple computer's.  Go to Random.org and pick 5 number's on 1 computer and 5 number's on the 2nd one. Both will be different. Considering different timing. Once you picked 5 on each. try and refresh both screen at the same time. It will be noticed that the 2 computers will generate 2 different sets.

Even Random.org has said it, if you want to be able to re-track the number's produced by their site. Please use pre-generated numbers.(This is the exception).

Going back to luck. Yes, every person has/his or own luck. I also am in a similar situation. From 5 people playing Gut as a bot, randomly 1 of them has a couple of losing session here and there. But never the same person. To me all that means is timing of play is were luck comes into play.  Similar to buying the lottery.

[Tamino]

LUCK :

When  preparation meets opportunity.(unknown author)