A question to the experts

[Roulettebeater]

I would like to know your opinion on this:

for the simplicity.. consider that you get yourself a progressive system  (betting on 18 numbers with 10 steps-marti) and test it against 9704 spins...

The tests showed:


At which step of the 10 steps-marti a HIT occured?


Step     # Hits
------------------------
+1    |   4893
+2    |   2386
+3    |   1206
+4    |   601
+5    |   307
+6    |   154
+7    |   80
+8    |   43
+9    |   20
+10   |    4

>11   |   1


Last line of above table shows that the 10 steps progression failed only one time in 9704 spins.


Would you consider such a system a winner or loser?

Thx

[Roulettebeater]

 I would appreciate hearing your opinion on this

[Tinsoldiers]

As you can see the skew has happened only in the 10th and 11th step. Before that it is as per expectations. Considering this am likely to lean towards to say that this is likely to to go as per expectation and not going to be different from betting random 18 numbers. Another set will produce different results and you will not see consistency in your results.

[Herby]

Data Plot

[Roulettebeater]

Let's consider that every game consists of 10 rounds, we would have 970 games.
Out of 970 games we won 969 and we lost only one game.

[Herby]

Datafit

[Roulettebeater]

The Hit-rate at the first step is interesting...can be exploited as it looks promising

[Roulettebeater]

Ok- i believe +9000 spins are too much, nobody can play continuously all these spins.

I have taken a more realistic sample (500 spins):

Step     # Hits
------------------------
+1    |   233
+2    |   129
+3    |   64
+4    |   36
+5    |   18
+6    |   7
+7    |   4
+8    |   0
+9    |   0
+10  |   0

>11  |   0

[Taotie]

I'm confused by your data..

If step 1 hit 4893 times, isn't that 4893 spins accounted for?
If step 2 hit 2386 times, isn't that 4772 spins accounted for?

So together steps 1&2 have accounted for 9665 spins, and the whole test was only conducted over 9704 spins?

Where and how does the rest of the data fit in to the spin count?

[Proofreaders2000]

Would you consider such a system a winner or loser?

Hey RB the fact that it went past the 10th leg of the progression
should worry you.  It could wipe out 90% of your progress.

[Roulettebeater]

I'm confused by your data..

If step 1 hit 4893 times, isn't that 4893 spins accounted for?
If step 2 hit 2386 times, isn't that 4772 spins accounted for?

So together steps 1&2 have accounted for 9665 spins, and the whole test was only conducted over 9704 spins?

Where and how does the rest of the data fit in to the spin count?

Yup, you are right in ur consideration however there is a difference between step and spin...

To make it simple, you would play 9000 spins out of 18000 as a sort of trigger play...cheers

[Roulettebeater]

Would you consider such a system a winner or loser?

Hey RB the fact that it went past the 10th leg of the progression
should worry you.  It could wipe out 90% of your progress.

Well it's complicated !!!

Reason is that those spins are sparsed over a few days, I believe this system (in background) can overcome this game if tested against a consistent set of spins produced by only one dealer..


It's quite simple, there is a relation between last number and next number, the relation is cause&effect.

I hope you understand what I meant

Cheers

[Tinsoldiers]

I hope you understand what I meant

Crystal clear. No fire, no smoke. Or is it the other way round.

[Herby]

the relation is cause&effect.
I hope you understand what I meant

For better understanding: Do you need a factor 2/5 ?

[Roulettebeater]

For better understanding: Do you need a factor 2/5 ?

It's not the first time you come up with this 2/5 factor... Go on and tell me what is this 2/5 factor !?

Thx