Blue Angel's HG (Fallacious)

[Blue_Angel]

IF you going to answer can you answer this too:

Code Select Expand


Red ->     460 LastHit ->     951
Black ->   464 LastHit ->     950
Even ->    464 LastHit ->     949
Odd ->     460 LastHit ->     951
High ->    464 LastHit ->     950
Low ->     460 LastHit ->     951

In this case like the previous there's nothing to separate between Red and Low, so pick 1 from these 2 randomly.

[Azim]

Well glad you said that cause that's exactly what I have done.

[Steve]

Come on BA, do you agree to my challenge? Maybe you should agree before you find the result of proper tests. But in either case, the truth will be obvious. That would be enough for me.

[Blue_Angel]

Come on BA, do you agree to my challenge? Maybe you should agree before you find the result of proper tests. But in either case, the truth will be obvious. That would be enough for me.

What's your challenge?

The only objective and valid criterion is the risk of ruin test.

If a method can double the initial bankroll and then re-doubles it without losing it, then that method must be considered winning method.

Achieving two times +100% before one time -100% is valid regardless of the amount of units a bankroll may be.
Whether it's 100 or 1000 units the +/- 100% applies equally to every bankroll.

[Steve]

Ok, so let's look at one thing at a time:

If a method can double the initial bankroll and then re-doubles it without losing it, then that method must be considered winning method.

1. Say I start with $200, and this happens:

a. I bet $100 on red and win. Bankroll = $300.
b. I bet $100 on red and lose. Bankroll = $200
c. I double my bet to $200 and bet on red. I win, and bankroll is $400.

So I just doubled my bankroll. Now if the same thing happened over the next three spins, I can double the bankroll again. And this is your definition of a "winning system".

You've just showed me you have even less experience than I thought. You said you had a physics degree, right?

Kav, first you were all confident that your system would pass a 1m spin test. Now you have backed right off saying you only need to double your bankroll. And we saw above how easily it is done from luck.

The only objective and valid criterion is the risk of ruin test.

Yeah ok, so let's do a proper test then. The martingale is like a gambling addict making a bet with his friend. He keeps losing, so makes a new bet with higher stakes. He thinks eventually he'll win back all his losses. And if he had unlimited money to bet with, and the friend accepted any bet size, then yeah eventually the gambling addict will win. But the problem is the gambling addict doesnt have unlimited money, and the friend wont accept any sized bet.

The martingale with roulette is no different, except the payouts and odds are unfair. Unless the player has an edge with more accurate bet selection, the player is guaranteed to eventually reach the maximum bet and blow the bankroll.

Why is this so hard for you to understand?

Any person with half a brain here would understand the logic. Do you want to do a proper challenge, or not?

If you want to proceed with your potentially 6 spin challenge, then ok. But I get to replicate your test with a red/black martingale to show the results are no different. And if I replicate your results, then I win the challenge. If I cant replicate it, then you win. And what happens in each case is explained in my earlier post. Basically you apologize to me etc, or I pay you $100k and close all my roulette sites.

But if you are going to persist with your suggestion of short term test, then anyone with a brain here can see you backed right off, because you know what will happen with any proper test.

Achieving two times +100% before one time -100% is valid regardless of the amount of units a bankroll may be.
Whether it's 100 or 1000 units the +/- 100% applies equally to every bankroll.

Now you are really wasting my time. I think you now know your mistake but I dont think I'm getting my apology.

[Blue_Angel]

You keep on mention Kavouras but I don't care because I'm not him.

You have misunderstood, I never suggested 6 spins test, for God's sake where this 6 spins came from??

My method is calculating in 37 spins cycles, therefore to properly evaluate it we should test it for  370 cycles.

[Steve]

Kav I dont care if you have secret identity or not.

So now you are saying 37 x 370 =  13,690 spins for a test. You do know that a martingale can still profit over that, right? Again its just a question of available bankroll and maximum bet. So what are you trying to prove, that a gambler can get lucky with the martingale?

Sure we can test over 13,690 spins, but I'm not wagering $100k on that because, like I keep saying, any martingale can get lucky in the short term. See above. If you dont want to do proper tests, then we can keep it simple, we do some tests and eventually you and everyone see the martingale doesnt work. Then you can just say sorry for wasting everyone's time, ok?

[Steve]

I never suggested 6 spins test, for God's sake where this 6 spins came from??

From this:

If a method can double the initial bankroll and then re-doubles it without losing it, then that method must be considered winning method.
Achieving two times +100% before one time -100% is valid regardless of the amount of units a bankroll may be.
Whether it's 100 or 1000 units the +/- 100% applies equally to every bankroll.

So by your logic the 6 spins would prove your system worked.

Really this is a waste of everyones time.

[Azim]

Hi Azim, thanks for your kind offer, really appreciated.

After waiting for the first 37 spins only on the beginning of each session, then you don't wait,you just bet every spin till the end of the session.
A session ends when the player is satisfied with the profit, there no standard spins to play or units to win.

You must set the counter for ALL 6 EC's to non stop recording from the beginning of each session till the end.

Every time there is another least shown EC you change to that one regardless of how many units the bet is, selection and progression are 2 different things!

Every time there are 2 or 3 EC's with the same hits, select the one which is missing for more spins (older), if after applying the second criteria there is tie between 2 or 3 EC's, then choose the one which its opposite EC has appeared most recently.

Whenever the balance reaches a new high you are resetting the betting amount to 1 unit regardless of which EC you are betting at that time.

So the answer to your question is yes, you carry on with your selection as long it remains least appeared.
You track without betting ONLY the first 37 spins of each session.

I'll be on your disposal if you need further clarification.

Angelo

So now the rules have changed to 370 spins or cycles and not become rich overnight?

I honestly think you are full of shit and want your system tested for free.  No one on the other forums would do it for you so you decide to get it going here..

Well I have codded the original system. Anymore changes for this to be tested will cost from here on. Be it you or Steve, someone will have to remit the money for any more changes.

[Steve]

Azim, as I said in PM:

* I have no doubt his system will lose. There is no value in coding to test it, except to teach other people a lesson.

* If he changes the rules after it loses, then you know he's full of shit and just wants free testing.

Thankyou Azim for putting time into this, but I suggest you dont waste more time. All testing indicates the system is just another losing martingale.

So blueangel, you lost. I think at the very least you should stop selling your systems, since now you know they lose. They all apply the same losing principles.

[amk]

This is what I do not understand.


The worst case scenario in millions of spins is only 68 Red hits in 200 spins which is just a 34% hit rate.

BA's MM did not pass these 200 spins as he was -466.5 at spin 200.  (Data below)

However within 29 spins after this point at spin 229 his MM secured the win.

So there were 87 hits in 229 spins which is a still just a 38% hit rate, a 4% difference from 68 hits in 200 spins.

I am pretty sure that was also the worst 229 spin sequence in millions of spins. But lets say a 34% hit rate in 229 spins is the worst case scenario which would total just 77 hits. This will only happen once, let say twice in 1 million spins where a hit rate is between 34% and 37% during a 229 spin stretch. All other scenarios have a 38% or higher hit rate.

1 million consecutive spins divided by 229 is 4366 total sessions played (each consisting of 229 spins)

Total BR (that BA uses is 1000 units) an average win per session is +-? 10 units (I am sure its higher,  but lets go lower say just 2 units)

4364 x 2 = +8728 

minus 2 losing sessions = 2 x -1000  (a hit rate of less than 38% in a stretch of 229 spins) = -2000 units

+8728 - 2000 = +6728 units for 4366 session played of 229 spins each


My conclusion is: as long as we achieve a 38% hit rate for 229 spins we will be in the plus which should be everytime you play in a casino for the next 11 years if you played one 229 spin session per day. However, there will be +- 2 days when you lose out of the 4366. The average session will not be 229 spins long.......


Yes, BA played this on a French roulette wheel with the Le Partage rule for the zero, but this should not matter as we can also choose to play on the French wheel ( at least in Europe)


Blue Angels Data for only 68 hits in 200 spins and 87 hits in 229 spins
BETTING ALWAYS ON RED / FRENCH ROULETTE WITH "LE PARTAGE" RULE

S=Spin R=Result T=Total   
S           R           T

1          -1          -1
2          -1          -2
3x        +1         -1
4          -1          -2
5x        +1         -1
6          -1          -2
7x        +1         -1
8          -1          -2
9          -1          -3
10x       +1         -2
11         -1          -3
12x       +1         -2
13         -1          -3
14/ZERO -0.5      -3.5
15          -1        -4.5
16x        +1       -3.5
17         -1        -4.5
18         -1        -5.5
19         -1        -6.5
20         -1        -7.5
21x       +1       -6.5
22         -1        -7.5
23x       +1       -6.5
24         -1        -7.5
25         -1        -8.5
26         -1        -9.5
27         -1        -10.5 
28         -1        -11.5
29x       +1       -10.5
30         -1        -11.5
31x       +1       -10.5
32x       +1       -9.5
33         -1        -10.5
34         -1        -11.5
35x       +1       -10.5
36x       +1       -9.5
37x       +1       -8.5
38x       +2       -6.5  BET RAISES TO 2 UNITS
39         -2        -8.5
40         -2        -10.5
41         -2        -12.5
42x       +2       -10.5
43         -2        -12.5
44         -2        -14.5
45x       +2       -12.5
46x       +2       -10.5
47         -2        -12.5
48         -2        -14.5
49         -2        -16.5
50         -2        -18.5
51         -2        -20.5
52x       +2       -18.5
53         -2        -20.5
54         -2        -22.5   
55x       +2       -20.5
56         -2        -22.5
57         -2        -24.5
58x       +2       -22.5
59         -2        -24.5
60         -2        -26.5
61         -2        -28.5
62x       +2       -26.5
63         -2        -28.5
64         -2        -30.5
65x       +2       -28.5
66         -2        -30.5
67         -2        -32.5   
68x       +2       -30.5
69x       +2       -28.5
70         -2        -30.5
71x       +2       -28.5
72         -2        -30.5
73         -2        -32.5
74         -2        -34.5
75x       +4       -30.5   BET RAISES TO 4 UNITS
76         -4        -34.5
77x       +4       -30.5
78         -4        -34.5
79         -4        -38.5
80x       +4       -34.5
81         -4        -38.5
82         -4        -42.5
83         -4        -46.5
84         -4        -50.5
85         -4        -52.5
86         -4        -56.5
87         -4        -60.5
88         -4        -64.5
89         -4        -68.5   
90x       +4       -64.5
91         -4        -68.5
92x       +4       -64.5
93         -4        -68.5
94         -4        -72.5
95x      +4        -68.5
96        -4         -72.5
97x      +4        -68.5
98        -4         -72.5
99        -4         -76.5
100      -4         -80.5
101x    +4        -76.5
102x    +4        -72.5
103      -4         -76.5
104x    +4        -72.5
105/ZERO -2     -74.5
106       -4        -78.5
107       -4        -82.5
108       -4        -86.5
109       -4        -90.5
110       -4        -94.5
111       -4        -98.5
112       -8        -106.5  BET RAISES TO 8 UNITS
113       -8        -114.5
114x     +8       -106.5
115       -8        -114.5
116       -8        -122.5   
117x     +8       -114.5
118       -8        -122.5
119x     +8       -114.5
120       -8        -122.5
121       -8        -130.5
122x     +8       -122.5
123       -8        -130.5
124       -8        -138.5
125       -8        -146.5
126       -8        -154.5
127       -8        -162.5
128x     +8       -154.5
129x     +8       -146.5
130x     +8       -138.5
131x     +8       -130.5
132       -8        -138.5
133       -8        -146.5
134x     +8       -138.5
135       -8        -146.5
136       -8        -154.5
137       -8        -162.5
138x     +8       -154.5
139       -8        -162.5
140x     +8       -154.5
141       -8        -162.5
142       -8        -170.5
143x     +8       -162.5
144       -8        -170.5
145x     +8       -162.5
146x     +8       -154.5
147x     +8       -146.5
148       -8        -154.5
149x     +16     -138.5  BET RAISES TO 16 UNITS
150x     +16      -122.5
151       -16       -138.5
152       -16       -154.5
153/ZERO -8     -162.5
154x     +16      -146.5
155x     +16      -130.5
156       -16       -146.5
157       -16       -162.5
158x     +16      -146.5
159       -16       -162.5
160       -16       -178.5
161       -16       -194.5
162       -16       -210.5
163x     +16      -194.5
164x     +16      -178.5
165       -16       -194.5
166       -16       -210.5
167       -16       -226.5
168x     +16      -210.5
169       -16      -226.5
170       -16       -242.5   
171x     +16      -226.5
172x     +16      -210.5
173       -16       -226.5
174x     +16      -210.5
175x     +16      -194.5
176       -16       -210.5
177       -16       -226.5
178       -16       -242.5
179       -16       -258.5
180x     +16      -242.5
181       -16       -258.5
182       -16       -274.5
183       -16       -290.5
184x     +16      -274.5
185       -16       -290.5
186/ZERO -16    -306.5     BET RAISES TO 32 UNITS
187x     +32      -274.5
188       -32       -306.5
189       -32       -338.5
190/ZERO -16    -354.5
191       -32       -386.5
192x     +32      -354.5
193x     +32      -322.5
194       -32       -354.5
195       -32       -386.5
196x     +32      -354.5
197       -32       -386.5
198       -32       -418.5
199/ZERO -16    -434.5
200          -32    -466.5     34% Hit Rate in 200 spins
201     10      -32   -498.5
202     6        -32   -530.5 
203     14      +32   -498.5       
204     21      +32   -466.5         
205     30      +32   -434.5         
206     11      -32    -466.5         
207     12      +32   -434.5         
208     10      -32    -466.5       
209     22      -32    -498.5       
210     34      +32   -466.5       
211     10      -32    -498.5       
212     16      +32   -466.5       
213     0       -16     -482.5     
214     14      +32   -450.5     
215     8        -32    -482.5     
216     34      +32   -450.5     
217     18      +32   -418.5     
218     19      +32   -386.5     
219     25      +32   -354.5     
220     35      -32    -386.5     
221     34      +32   -354.5     
222     29      -32    -386.5     
223     16      +64   -322.5     BET RAISES TO 64 UNITS
224     21      +64   -258.5     
225     12      +64   -194.5     
226     30      +64   -130.5     
227     9        +64    -66.5     
228     34      +64    -2.5     
229     32      +64    +61.5   BET RESETS TO 1 UNIT     38% Hit Rate in 229 spins

[Azim]

This is what I do not understand.


The worst case scenario in millions of spins is only 68 Red hits in 200 spins which is just a 34% hit rate.

BA's MM did not pass these 200 spins as he was -466.5 at spin 200.  (Data below)

However within 29 spins after this point at spin 229 his MM secured the win.

So there were 87 hits in 229 spins which is a still just a 38% hit rate, a 4% difference from 68 hits in 200 spins.

I am pretty sure that was also the worst 229 spin sequence in millions of spins. But lets say a 34% hit rate in 229 spins is the worst case scenario which would total just 77 hits. This will only happen once, let say twice in 1 million spins where a hit rate is between 34% and 37% during a 229 spin stretch. All other scenarios have a 38% or higher hit rate.

1 million consecutive spins divided by 229 is 4366 total sessions played (each consisting of 229 spins)

Total BR (that BA uses is 1000 units) an average win per session is +-? 10 units (I am sure its higher,  but lets go lower say just 2 units)

4364 x 2 = +8728 

minus 2 losing sessions = 2 x -1000  (a hit rate of less than 38% in a stretch of 229 spins) = -2000 units

+8728 - 2000 = +6728 units for 4366 session played of 229 spins each


My conclusion is: as long as we achieve a 38% hit rate for 229 spins we will be in the plus which should be everytime you play in a casino for the next 11 years if you played one 229 spin session per day. However, there will be +- 2 days when you lose out of the 4366. The average session will not be 229 spins long.......


Yes, BA played this on a French roulette wheel with the Le Partage rule for the zero, but this should not matter as we can also choose to play on the French wheel ( at least in Europe)


Blue Angels Data for only 68 hits in 200 spins and 87 hits in 229 spins

229     32      +64    +61.5   BET RESETS TO 1 UNIT     38% Hit Rate in 229 spins

I am not here to argue with you.Just trying to make my point why this is garbage.  Never mind the Marty. We have proved that .

However, lets think about it from bankroll perspective. A bankroll of  1000 and in the spins you have presented the highest drop down was 500+.

I will use 500 as a base and not 1000. Giving you advantage there.

your win was only 61.00  do the math. 61 / 500 = 12.2%   You just said your win rate is 38%.    from my books 38% of 500 is 190.00  so unless you make more that 200 every time you will never come out ahead.

Sorry I might as well give my money to charity.

[Steve]

BA do you agree to my simple terms? You're very quiet lately...

[Azim]

To give you a number?
Are you serious?!
Are you expecting me to use my money, teach you and pay you??
I'm going to repeat it for final time, the greatest reward is the HG, it's priceless!

If you don't accept, here is your excuse to retreat in dignity and please don't make me repeating myself!

Steve,

I think he has retreated thinking he still has dignity.

[amk]

Thanks for your reply Azim but I dont quite get your math explanation, keep in mind I am not that good in math. However, my basic math concept should hold up.

My question:

If the worst case scenario is 87 Reds in 229 spins (38% hit rate) and the MM passed this, why wouldnt it pass all other scenarios which have more then 87 Reds in 229 spins (more than a 38% hit rate)? Keep in mind that a session ends at spin 229 win or lose.