Grassroots-1,2,3 A dozens idea

[Tacwell]

Some 123 sequence test results:

Bet selection is to wait for 1st and 2nd dozen to appear consecutively then bet against the 3rd dozen, using 1-3-9 negative progression.
On a winning bet we reset the progression and start again, on a losing bet we increase progression and wait for next occurrence of the 12 sequence.
After losing on the 3rd stage of the progression we reset back to 1. No insurance bet on 0.

Starting bank was 2500, betting with a unit value of 5. I stopped after 2000 bets placed in each test. The spins are from live wheel results I downloaded a few years ago.

My results files are attached for anyone interested. If you find an error please let me know.

Set 1
--------
Bets Placed: 2000
Bets Won: 1291
Bets Lost: 709
Spins: 18895
End Bank: 895
Lowest Bank: 365

Set 2
--------
Bets Placed: 2000
Bets Won: 1315
Bets Lost: 685
Spins: 19115
End Bank: 2145
Lowest Bank: 1705

Set 3
--------
Bets Placed: 2000
Bets Won: 1276
Bets Lost: 724
Spins: 19230
End Bank: 1080
Lowest Bank: 820

I should also mention these spin results are from a European wheel.

[Tacwell]

Same as above using 231 sequence


Set 1
--------
Bets Placed: 2000
Bets Won: 1312
Bets Lost: 688
Spins: 18771
End Bank: 2300
Lowest Bank: 1955

Set 2
--------
Bets Placed: 1924
Bets Won: 1213
Bets Lost: 711
Spins: 18188
End Bank: 0
Lowest Bank: 0

Set 3
--------
Bets Placed: 2000
Bets Won: 1316
Bets Lost: 684
Spins: 18890
End Bank: 1280
Lowest Bank: 1095

[NextYear]

Hi Tacwell, which software you use for testing?

Thanks

[Nick-the-Greek]

At this point we may looking too deep into it

We arent going to play over 100 spins or 50 spins for that matter at a table

Im getting PMs from people making money against 123 and making money against previous 3 so i think we might be overthinking this

Tomorrow im going to do tests with these theories based on columns and see if colums are better or worse then dozens

But we got something here

No matter what method we create there will be losers

I think we have in our favor that if we play 3 mini games at a table seeing 123 is slim. We are testing 100s of spins proving to ourselves 123 happens etc etc. We know it will but tons of money to be made with this

Unless a new system proves itself to be 100% profitable from day one, changes and variations of play are quickly volunteered and the original idea is diluted within a matter of days - please don't get me wrong as I'm certainly not knocking all the great input that comes through this forum but sometimes you need to step back and give the original idea a chance to shine. 

Thousands of historical spins prove that multiple '123 combos' will always be just around the corner but by playing for a limited number of spins or jumping from table to table for each '3 spin combo' they can be avoided in the short term - long term may be a different story......................watch this space!

This system is a hard one to test as the play method is hit and run so the only true way to find out if it works is to play for real money using low value stakes as it is all about timing (what time you join a table/how long you stay and do you wait for a trigger or play immediately).

Happy testing.

Nick

[RouletteGhost]

Some 123 sequence test results:

Bet selection is to wait for 1st and 2nd dozen to appear consecutively then bet against the 3rd dozen, using 1-3-9 negative progression.
On a winning bet we reset the progression and start again, on a losing bet we increase progression and wait for next occurrence of the 12 sequence.
After losing on the 3rd stage of the progression we reset back to 1. No insurance bet on 0.

Starting bank was 2500, betting with a unit value of 5. I stopped after 2000 bets placed in each test. The spins are from live wheel results I downloaded a few years ago.

My results files are attached for anyone interested. If you find an error please let me know.

Set 1
--------
Bets Placed: 2000
Bets Won: 1291
Bets Lost: 709
Spins: 18895
End Bank: 895
Lowest Bank: 365

Set 2
--------
Bets Placed: 2000
Bets Won: 1315
Bets Lost: 685
Spins: 19115
End Bank: 2145
Lowest Bank: 1705

Set 3
--------
Bets Placed: 2000
Bets Won: 1276
Bets Lost: 724
Spins: 19230
End Bank: 1080
Lowest Bank: 820

I should also mention these spin results are from a European wheel.

2000 spins. 700 123 sequences? No thats not right. Recheck your tests. Thats 666 mini games

[Tacwell]

2000 spins. 700 123 sequences? No thats not right. Recheck your tests. Thats 666 mini games

Hi RG. Where do you see 2000 spins? The lowest number of spins is 19230 in those tests. 2000 is the number of bets placed.

[Tacwell]

Hi Tacwell, which software you use for testing?

Thanks

Hi nextyear

I wrote a simple desktop application to use for testing, I code a new function for each system I want to test.

[RouletteGhost]

So 20000 spins is 6,666 mini games

If your numbers are right you saw 123 an average of every 9 mini games

6'666 divided by 700

Impossible

Every 28 spins. Every 9 mini games.

Not once. Not twice. 6 different sets?! No way.

About 3 people testing euro not in this thread PMing me never saw anything like that

One of the most important things i learned from Mr. J is not to trust a member who tests a system negatively who is brand new and has less then 50 posts. Something doesnt smell right. I dont need to say that though, people know

[Tacwell]

So 20000 spins is 6,666 mini games

If your numbers are right you saw 123 an average of every 9 mini games

6'666 divided by 700

Impossible

Every 28 spins. Every 9 mini games.

I think you're misunderstanding the bet selection, I'm waiting for 12 to show before betting against the the 3rd dozen, so many spins occur between bets being placed. When 12 appears, the "bets placed" counter gets incremented and the bet is placed. If it's a win the win counter is incremented and if not the loss counter is incremented as well as the progression. 
So the 123 sequence occurred once for every loss, e.g. in the first test the sequence it occurred 709 times in 18895 spins.

[RouletteGhost]

I think you're misunderstanding the bet selection, I'm waiting for 12 to show before betting against the the 3rd dozen, so many spins occur between bets being placed. When 12 appears, the "bets placed" counter gets incremented and the bet is placed. If it's a win the win counter is incremented and if not the loss counter is incremented as well as the progression. 
So the 123 sequence occurred once for every loss, e.g. in the first test the sequence occurred 709 times in 18895 spins.

Impossible. 123 every 9 mini games on 3 separate 20000 spin test

Impossible

Ill never understand why people join and just try to trash a system with fake results

Under 5 posts. Geesh

[Tacwell]

Impossible. 123 every 9 mini games on 3 separate 20000 spin test

Impossible

Take some time to understand what you're looking at. There's a total of 3149 mini games for the first test. I'm not betting on every mini game, only on the 3rd part of the mini game, so if the first dozen comes up, there's no bet, if a 1 comes up again, that's your mini game complete, but with no bets, so it's not counted as a win or lose.
So 18895/3 = 3149. Of those 3149 mini games 2000 qualified for bets, and of those 2000 bets, the 123 sequence completed 709 times. Perfectly plausible.

[RouletteGhost]

Take some time to understand what you're looking at. There's a total of 3149 mini games for the first test. I'm not betting on every mini game, only on the 3rd part of the mini game, so if the first dozen comes up, there's no bet, if a 1 comes up again, that's your mini game complete, but with no bets, so it's not counted as a win or lose.
So 18895/3 = 3149. Of those 3149 mini games 2000 qualified for bets, and of those 2000 bets, the 123 sequence completed 709 times. Perfectly plausible.

2000 bets. 700 times 123

Impossible

[Tacwell]

Impossible. 123 every 9 mini games on 3 separate 20000 spin test

Impossible

Ill never understand why people join and just try to trash a system with fake results

Under 5 posts. Geesh

I'm providing test results, which you can use, or not, who said anything about trashing? I don't have share these tests, I'm providing value to your thread. I would have posted the results if they were positive too. So no more testing then.
Cheers.

[RouletteGhost]

I'm providing test results, which you can use, or not, who said anything about trashing? I don't have share these tests, I'm providing value to your thread. I would have posted the results if they were positive too. So no more testing then.
Cheers.

I appreciate testing

But what u just posted is so far off the cuff

You didnt see this 1 time. U saw it on 6 different sets

Either u have cruel intentions OR u tested wrong because what u saw is impossible

[Tacwell]

2000 bets. 700 times 123

Impossible

Well that's why i attached the test result files, go through them and see where it's possibly going wrong. betting against the 3rd dozen coming up 2000 times and losing 700 times is perfectly in line with the realm of probability, so very probable not impossible.

And this is just testing, not negative testing. If the results are not what you expect to see it doesn't make it negative testing.