10 against 10 against 10

[RouletteGhost]

We don't need a poll on falkor

The difference between you and him is that we know he is full of shit

You on the other hand are pretty straight forward.

[boyd30]

Tested 400 spins of this now. Of 61 triggers was 1 loss! The loss came in spin 363. +34 units if I'm right. I don't know if it's luck or something behind it. The math is in favour when you bet. With small money maybe you can try it, but I would like to be more confident. Has anyone more experience of this or could test it more?

[RouletteGhost]

Happy to hear it

That's what I want in a system. Where after a loss we are still in plus

Thanks

Any minute now a math guy or guru will come and bash

That's ok. 400 spins and 1 loss. They can say whatever they want.

[praline]

That's what I want in a system. Where after a loss we are still in plus

Can i ask at what stage you are with your "creating dozens" system??
A personal teaching deserve a bit more studies, and not just "it can't work".

[Taotie]

I just downloaded 70 numbers from random.org and I only did it once.

Below are the numbers and betting. You can see there is a progression bust on the third attempt.

Honestly, on the third attempt with the first set of 70!

That's enough for me... looking elsewhere.


26  3
23  2
13  2
22  2
27  3
24  2
33  3
0    -
24  2
9    1


30  3
30  3
0    -
18  2
21  2
3    1
2    1
12  2
36  3
31  3


19  2
2    1
18  2
1    1
22  2
25  3
23  2  win
24  2
31  3
29  3


22  2
19  2
21  2
1    1  lose
23  2  lose
14  2 win
7    1
27  3
31  3
31  3


31  3
13  2
23  2
34  3
21  2
14  2   lose
3    1    lose
29  3   wipeout!
13  2
30  3


4    1
8    1
7    1
6    1
11  2
19  2
11  1
5    1
9    1
29  3


11  2
1    1
29  3
28  3
8    1
28  3
34  3
6    1
22  2
32  3

[RouletteGhost]

Thanks for testing green

I don't use random dot org

I only use zumma and airball spins for tests

I don't know if I believe random dot org behaves like roulette patterns

"Looking elsewhere"----if you want something that never has a losing sequence then roulette most definitely is not your game. Because all strategies have losses

[Suecia]

This is not much different than playing aginst  any set of filters/patterns.
You'd win all these by just playing aginst the current pattern directly afterwards.

Taotie's numbers would've won all triggers that way.
I could write a quick test comparing the two over a much bigger test, but i doubt any of them would survive very long.

I usually backtest aginst a set of 8h roulette sessions saved from live wheels.
These have shown that a particular method could do fantastic wins 8h straight, but then empty your bankroll for days.

[RouletteGhost]

That's why I don't stick around long

I take my few wins and leave

Less exposure.

To prevent "emptying your bankroll for days" that's where responsibility, will power, and a stop loss comes in handy.

[RouletteGhost]

Just to add

Most people play some sessions here and there

So multiple 8h tests back to back where there's a loss at some point doesn't apply

It's just not realistic for real life play

[Taotie]

I disagree.

It absolutely does apply to real life play.

Lots of little sessions will ALWAYS add up to one long session. There is no escaping that fact.

While your at it, when you get a 3 single dozen occurrence you could just "pretend" they came on the first 3 spins then rule off and bet immediately.

The net result will be the the same, and you will save lots of time and so be able to play even shorter sessions.

[boyd30]

I don't know if you can compare live spins with other random bets. I did my test on live spins. I think It's too early tö say that this system does not work. I'm tempted to do more tests, even if it takes time. Looking för the grail is like looking för the needle in a haystack, and I don't know if a grail exist even though a few people claim to have it. Ignatus för example have some good systems that may work. It"s also to look into. You can stumble into losses but what I hope for is that the wins overcome the losses. Like a jo-jo.

[RouletteGhost]

You can stumble into losses but what I hope for is that the wins overcome the losses.

Losses are always expected

When I test something and I'm still in profit after a loss that's what I look for

[Suecia]

Most people play some sessions here and there

So multiple 8h tests back to back where there's a loss at some point doesn't apply

It's just not realistic for real life play

Of course most of us play short sessions.

But it matters if you imagine that starting at any given point during a 8h period is probably a loss.

A stop-loss is absoloutely necessary for surviving.
But if you only test aginst small sessions you won't see the flaws of your system.

[RouletteGhost]

Fair enough

Thanks for testing

So far so good on my end

[sturrock]

There are so many people here with "Half Empty Glasses"