How to play and win with VdW (from "Random Thoughts")

[atlantis]

111 111 - 3W 0L - wins 2-3-4; 1-3-5 or 3-4-5 ; 4-5-6
111 112 - 2W 1L - wins 2-3-4; 1-3-5; loses 2-4-6 or 4-5-6
111 121 - 2W 1L - wins 2-3-4; loses 1-3-5; wins 2-4-6
111 211 - 1L 1W - loses 2-3-4; wins 1-3-5   
111 122 - 1W 2L - wins 2-3-4, loses 3-4-5 and 2-4-6
111 212 - 1L 1W - loses 2-3-4; wins 1-3-5
111 221 - 3L - loses 2-3-4; 1-3-5 and 4-5-6
111 222 - 2L  1W - loses 2-3-4 and 1-3-5; wins 4-5-6

No I am right - 11w-11L

A.

[psimoes]

111 111 - 3W 0L - wins 2-3-4; 1-3-5 or 3-4-5 ; 4-5-6
111 112 - 2W 1L - wins 2-3-4; 1-3-5; loses 2-4-6 or 4-5-6
111 121 - 2W 1L - wins 2-3-4; loses 1-3-5; wins 2-4-6
111 211 - 1L 1W - loses 2-3-4; wins 1-3-5   
111 122 - 1W 2L - wins 2-3-4, loses 3-4-5 and 2-4-6
111 212 - 1L 1W - loses 2-3-4
111 221 - 1L 1L - loses 2-3-4 and 4-5-6
111 222 - 1L 1L  1W - loses 2-3-4 and 1-3-5; wins 4-5-6

So there are 4 occasions where you will start with a W
and 4 occasions where you will start with an L......

10w -10L

No advantage!?

A.

There is an advantage, since it´s a closed cycle and what matters is not how you start, but how you finish.

There´s one game called the Mounty-Hall. If it´s played the right way the more you play the more you win. Doesn´t matter if you lose in the first instances. There´s an edge of 2:1 which will easily be noticed after a few games played.

link:://:.grand-illusions.com/simulator/montysim.htm

[psimoes]

111 111 - 3W 0L - wins 2-3-4; 1-3-5 or 3-4-5 ; 4-5-6
111 112 - 2W 1L - wins 2-3-4; 1-3-5; loses 2-4-6 or 4-5-6
111 121 - 2W 1L - wins 2-3-4; loses 1-3-5; wins 2-4-6
111 211 - 1L 1W - loses 2-3-4; wins 1-3-5   
111 122 - 1W 2L - wins 2-3-4, loses 3-4-5 and 2-4-6
111 212 - 1L 1W - loses 2-3-4; wins 1-3-5
111 221 - 3L - loses 2-3-4; 1-3-5 and 4-5-6
111 222 - 2L  1W - loses 2-3-4 and 1-3-5; wins 4-5-6

No I am right - 11w-11L

A.

LOL yes you´re right. Thanks!

[psimoes]

(111) 111 - 3W - RRR - WWW
(111) 112 - 2W 1L   RRB WWL
(111) 121 - 2W 1L - RBR - Won on first R, lost on second, keep betting R and Win. - WLW - Skip the third bet. - WL - That´s it.
(discarded) 211 - 1W 1L - BRR - Lost first R, switch colours, bet B, and W. Wait for end of cycle with No Bets. - LW
122 - 1W 2L - RBR - Won on first R, lost on second, kept same colour and lost on third. - WLL - Skip the third bet. - Same as third outcome. Not relevant.
212 - 1W 1L - Lost on first R, switch colours and bet B and Win, Wait for cycle to finish and don´t bet. - Same as fourth outcome.  - Not relevant.
221 - 2L - Lost on first, switch and lost again. NMB till end of cycle. - LL
222 - 2 L - Don´t bother - Same as above. Not relevant.

At least two more outcomes appear scratcheable. The third, 121, and the fifth, 122 - On the third spin you either win or lose, so don´t make that third bet. Win the first, lose the second, skip the third. It´s break even for that cycle.

Net count: 7 WINS against 5 LOSSES. As the number of wins vs. losses gets reduced but the difference of 2 is maintained, the advantage gets relatively bigger. 7W vs 5L has a higher edge than 9 vs 7 and more so than 11 vs 9!

Sorry this is nonsense, don´t bother read it.

[falkor2k15]

Personally, I think the solution for this is the same as PHP:

VdW: RBRBR
Part of AP structure: R R R
Not part of structure: B B
Limit: 1 AP in 9 spins

PHP: RBR
Part of Repeat structure: R R
Not part of structure: B
Limit: 1 EC Repeat in 3 spins

Solution: add parallel stream = capture more wins OR increase spins for each part of the structures and look for a cheap investment = capture more spins.

It's claimed that variance can be reduced with Non-Random and a light progression added, but this remains to be properly demonstrated. I don't think Nick's test results were comprehensive enough over a large enough dataset.

Some people can hedge their way to a win: normal+opposite breaking even - AP or repeat winning.

[atlantis]

In May I tried it recording baccarat results into 2 columns. (max of 6 in each col)

I bet for VERTICAL vdw and stop if a win in each column or when max reached (6)

"-"  = no bet

PP
BB
PB
PB  - w   (won 2-3-4)
PB  w -   (won 3-4-5)   stop +2

BP 
PP 
BP  - w (won 1-2-3)
PB 
BB  w - (won 1-3-5) stop +2

BP 
BB 
PP  L - (lost 1-2-3)
BB 
PB  - L   (lost 1-3-5)
BP  w L  (won 2-4-6; lost 2-4-6 or 4-5-6)  stop -2

BP 
PP
PB  - L   (lost 1-2-3)
PB  w -   (won 2-3-4)
PB  -  w  (won 3-4-5)  stop +1

BB 
BP
BP  w -   (won 1-2-3)
BP  - w   (won 2-3-4)   stop +2 

BB 
PB
PB  - w  (won 1-2-3)
BP  L -   (lost 2-3-4)
BP
BB  w -  (won 4-5-6)  stop +1

===
+6
===

A.

[Rolletti]

Winkel did you try to combine non-random events link tracking VdW for ECs (maybe all three at the same time: RB, OE, HL) along with tracking for a crossing using your G.U.T. bet strategy?

If you find a playable crossing AND a bet option on RED at the same spin for example, you could bet the RED unhit numbers only instead of all unhit or all RED numbers. That would reduce the bet amount and increase the payout.

[winkel]

At all:

Can you imagine that this guy "rouletti" who has stolen my gut and sells it as an e-book publicy aks me to to help him to pimp up his e-book?

[Rolletti]

At Winkel:
I know your English is bad but my post was pretty easy to understand.

1. I'm not Randy Jones.
2. I did not ask for help, but I offered new ways of thinking towards two strategies you are in.
3. I did it already in my games and it showed nice results. But I don't have a statistically relevant number of games.

I can post also in German on the other forum if its too hard to understand.

[RouletteGhost]

Winkel did you try to combine non-random events link tracking VdW for ECs (maybe all three at the same time: RB, OE, HL) along with tracking for a crossing using your G.U.T. bet strategy?

If you find a playable crossing AND a bet option on RED at the same spin for example, you could bet the RED unhit numbers only instead of all unhit or all RED numbers. That would reduce the bet amount and increase the payout.

Good idea actually.

[winkel]

Good idea actually.

Randy Jones already shows this kind of bet on his videos. But just following a "trend" not with vdW

[maestro]

There is an advantage, since it´s a closed cycle and what matters is not how you start, but how you finish.

There´s one game called the Mounty-Hall. If it´s played the right way the more you play the more you win. Doesn´t matter if you lose in the first instances. There´s an edge of 2:1 which will easily be noticed after a few games played.

sounds good but just because you label something as <door>roulette should agree...in Monty presenter opens and discards one of the tree doors..roulette does not discard

[psimoes]

The point was not about comparing roulette to the monty hall game.
Atlantis noted some of the possible outcomes were early losers.
I thought there were more winning outcomes than losers (which was proven wrong).
You can start any game by losing, but if you got a true edge you'll eventually break even and will end up profiting.

[maestro]

The point was not about comparing roulette to the monty hall game.
Atlantis noted some of the possible outcomes were early losers.
I thought there were more winning outcomes than losers (which was proven wrong).
You can start any game by losing, but if you got a true edge you'll eventually break even and will end up profiting.

very true

[winkel]

Now that all calmed down I hope I can go on with the winning way of vdW.

It is just 1 step it is not the whole strategy (keep in mind please).

Now that this is still a 50:50 we have to use a progression (choose one of my suggestion or choose your own).
And we have to keep this progression winning in a few steps.

If you have played following the vdw-concept you will have noticed, that the changing from a row to chops (and vice versa) costs a lot of money.
How can we keep this winning?

Todays spins from Wiesbaden Table "Touchbet Raucher" or "TB1R" gives a nice example:
I use my PMG-progression

R
B
R

this is no bet following vdw. But we could imagine that this is going to be a chop-row which leads to vdw 1 3 5.
So we start betting on B
next R we lost result -1

this picture:
RBRR
this gives us the vdw 3 4 5 so we bet on R (3units)
next R and we win result +2

this picture:
RBRRR
still bet on R (1 unit)
R win +3

this picture:
RBRRRR still bet on R (1 unit)
next B loss result. +2

this picture:
RBRRRRB
either no bet or we go straight for the next chop:
bet on R (3 units)
next R win result +5
therefore next bet on B (1 unit)

next R again and a loss result +4
this picture: (cut)
:::::RBRR so bet on R (3 units)
next B and loss res +1

(expl. here stopped a RR we have BRRB we had no doubles so we expect a double following a double (our enemy)

So next bet on B (7 units)
next B and win res. +8
picture: BRRBB
so we have a mutual bet: either 1 2 3 on B or return to double BRRBBRRBBRR

(Sidestep:
- If we bet 123 and lose then we have BRRBBR next bet would be R for next double. If we bet immediately the double: we will lose when 123 appears)

so we bet for 123 (1 unit)
next B we win res. +9

now it is obvious that we bet B again (1 unit)
picture BBBx
next R we lose res. +8

now immediately back to Chop-betting:
picture BR next bet B (3units)
next B win +11
next bet R 1 unit.

here the perm
27 R
08 B
18 R
01 R
05 R
21 R
02 B
23 R
32 R
20 B
02 B
06 B
16 R
10 B EXAMPLE ENDS HERE TRY TO GUESS THE NEXT BETS
09 R
29 B
07 R
30 R
13 B
01 R
11 B
13 B