Profit Trickler

[bleep24]

Hi Mogul,
Thanks for recording those numbers.  It must have been very difficult with a beer in one hand and a chick in the other.  Dread to think what you were using to write with!!...      Looking at the numbers I have to say that your recording/transposing skills do not warrant a 5* but I have sorted the wheat from the chaff (though not all of your recording) and I found no problems at all.  I only checked R/B & O/E partly but found both were good winners and max stake 3 units, so what is there not to like about that.

I used rows of 5.  2 same-bet for same        3/3+ same-bet for change same-      multiple wins/losses on same row    +1/-1       You also have the disadvantage of 00, but still came out ahead.

Incidentally, playing 2 same-bet different       3/3+ same-bet same worked just as well.

Good luck everyone (and to Mogul - back to college on Monday)
Brian   

[atlantis]

Bleep24 wrote:

It must have been very difficult with a beer in one hand and a chick in the other.  Dread to think what you were using to write with!!...   

      

[mogul397]

Hi Doctor S,

I also count and accept the 0 as a loss - and go to next step. I do not record the 0 on my sheet whether it occurs during betting or not; so I class it as a kind of "non-result". (That  *could* make a different outcome to mogul's decisions if he has included 0 in charting)
Again, I do not think I would play on more than 2 sides of an EC at the same time either.
Still, I'm a little unsure as the to the best progression required at this stage of trial and error testing. There's LOTS of them that can be tried... For instance gr8player, best of 5, guetting, parlay...etc.. etc...
(Playing for real test with low stakes + le partage rule)
Regards, A.

Atlantis.

I always just count zeros as a loss. If you look in my latest data, on the
last columb there are 4. Oddly enough I won on the 27 you see right after
the first 00.  But I also like to just look at zeros as background noise.

If you are playing a progression leveraged like the 1,3,9, then it's deadly.
But with this, you miss many/most of them, or they are insignificant.
Which leads to my usual argument about the fact that the "house edge"
is not what is making people lose. Certainly not the amounts that they
lose. WAY above the house edge.

So Atlantis, are you in agreement that there may be a new or different
progression to explore? I am asking the question, because I have asked directly
before with no response.

After dipping my toe in the water with the results I posted, and digested
it as it unfolds, for some reason I can't explain, the factor of only betting
for 3 losses and/or 1 win, seems to help. The whole "half unit" thing bothers me.

I was looking at an earlier post/test you made. I think it said your highest bet
was 5 units, which for .5 units, is 10 units.  Am I correct?  I now am
trying to digest the math part of this.

[mogul397]

Hi Mogul,
Thanks for recording those numbers.  It must have been very difficult with a beer in one hand and a chick in the other.  Dread to think what you were using to write with!!...      Looking at the numbers I have to say that your recording/transposing skills do not warrant a 5* but I have sorted the wheat from the chaff (though not all of your recording) and I found no problems at all.  I only checked R/B & O/E partly but found both were good winners and max stake 3 units, so what is there not to like about that.

I used rows of 5.  2 same-bet for same        3/3+ same-bet for change same-      multiple wins/losses on same row    +1/-1       You also have the disadvantage of 00, but still came out ahead.

Incidentally, playing 2 same-bet different       3/3+ same-bet same worked just as well.

Good luck everyone (and to Mogul - back to college on Monday)
Brian

Bleep, is your 3 units based on the .5 unit bet thing?  And can you
demonstrate how that unfolded using my data? Not all of it, just
where that happened?

[mogul397]

Bleep24 wrote:
      

You're all pricks!!

[ewarwoowar]

Hi guys I'm late to the party here, but never mind!

Thanks to Atlantis for the idea and thanks for everyone else for testing.

Is there a definitive way to play yet? Personally, I like Brian's H/l together with O/E.

I tested a little last night, 2 sessions. I used a 6 wide matrix H O H E L O type thing and I did a 1 1 2 stop progression as has been mentioned before. I started a bet after 2 matching verticals.

1st session gave me +6 after 54 spins and 2nd session gave me +5 after 19 spins, but I realised I was using multiple bets per line, instead of stopping at a W and just recording the rest of the line.

Do we treat each vertical bet separately or move horizontally across the line? By that, I mean if we lose in 1 column and there's another bet later along the line, do we raise the unit on that bet, or wait until the losing column comes around again before raising the bet?

I'll test some more and report back.

Cheers.

[bleep24]

Hi Mogul,
Not sure where this .5 thing is coming from.  I always talk in round numbers.    1 2 3 4 5 etc.


Brian

[bleep24]

Here is the E/O matrix.      Moguls data.   I do record zeroes but it probably does not matter if they are ignored in the great scheme of things.

                              This is the unit run through.     -1 +2 +1 -1 +2 -1 +2-1 -2 +3 +2 +1 -1 +2 -1 -2 +3 +2 +1 +1 -1 +2 +1 +1 +1 +1
                              Using +1/-1 prog.                    Bet all opps. on that row.   2 same - bet for 3rd.  3/3+ same - bet change
EOEOE                                                                    Where I come from that adds up to +17 units.  Check the bets if you like.
EEEEO
ZOEOE
EOOOO
OEOOE
EEEEE
OOOZO
EEOEE
EOOOO
EOOEO
EOOEE
OEEEO
EEEEO
EEEEO
EEE

Cheers,    Brian

[bleep24]

BTW.  Also checked first 38 spins Mogul`s R/B data.     +8 units  (only went to max betting 2 units)       Nice. 






Bleep 

[ewarwoowar]

Just had another session on French roulette at Betfair.
65 spins - after the first 2 lines. +7.5 units.
Playing 1 2 3 stop.

[bleep24]

Hi Ewarwoowar,

As usual in threads I would just read all the posts and make your own mind up.  Atlantis has proposed his version and I have proposed 2 of mine but I believe that all will work.   You will just have to suck it and see.  Sometimes we over complicate things and lose sight of where we are at. 

I do not know if you are English and familiar with the TV programme `Only fools and Horses`    In it Del Boy repeatedly says:  This time next year we`ll  all be millionaires.   Well I have faith in this and it needs some other members to do so too, and post their results.   It does not cost a fortune. Do what `cheap skate` Mogul does and just record the results without actually betting.  (In a readable format)

Sorry Mogul, I just like winding you up a bit.  No offence meant.   It is just my Geordieness having a laugh!!!!! (We all need a bit of fun in life)

Brian



   

[ewarwoowar]

Hi Brian, I'm from Burnley in the North West actually, so I understand you completely mate!

I'll carry on with what I'm doing for now and continue to report back.

Cheers.

[bleep24]

Hi Ewarwoowar again,

Just spotted your post.  Well done.  Were you using .5 units?     Did you go past 1 2 3 prog?    I am a great fan of +1/-1 prog. as you may have read in my posts.  It keeps you in the game without straining the heart and it does seem that with Profit Trickler there will not be many bad runs, but you can always set a stop loss if you are happier. As always there are several progs. that spring to mind for this, especially as you are only betting 1 position at a time.

Brian

[bleep24]

Hi Ewarwoowar,

War of the Roses here:   I live in North Yorkshire though originally a Geordie.  I have only lived down here for 38 years so still speak with a Geordie accent (it does take time to change!)

Was in Burnley last year but it was closed!

Brian

[ewarwoowar]

Hi Brian, I was using 1 unit size, but 0 hit a few times to give me half stake back as I was on the French roulette wheel, playing La Partage.

I had a complete 1 2 3 loss once. The very next spin in that column won, so my figures using +1/-1 would have been better.

Cheers.