System based on Law of the third-need comments

[Rolletti]

Played 10 games on PartyCasino RNG.
System works well, gives an average profit of 134 units per game.
Inconsitancies are:

1 time was just 1 sleeper left in 3rd dozen
1 time it took 27 spins until one of the 2 sleepers left in dozen 2 was hit
several times it took more than 24 spins until all dozens fulfilled the 2/3 hits of the sleepers.  maximum was 42 spins.

but still a money winner with enough reserve in bankroll and progression.

cheers and thanks again for your efforts Drazen. 

[Drazen]

Very thankful for testing. Interesting. Minor fluctuations expected. But still everything was covered by progression.

[kenio]

I would like to show my session and give some explanation for it. Maybe it will be helpful, for those who have some problems to understand it.
My session was based on the rules proposed by drazen.
Table limit $1-$25. When 2/3 sleepers in each dozen will be hit, I close my session or when I lose in the last step of progression.
I treat 0 as a number from the 1st dozen.
Spins are taken from Wiesbaden casino.
So lets  start the show...
After 37 spins I came up with my sleepers.

1st Dozen: 0,2,7,9,10
2nd Dozen: 14,22,23
3rd Dozen: 34,35,36

Based on the law of the third we expect 3 numbers will be hit from 1st dozen and 2 numbers from 2nd and 3rd one.
The progression we use for each dozen,
1st Dozen- 25 step progression
2nd Dozen- 44 step progression
3rd Dozen- 44 step progression

We start 3 progressions for all three dozens

Spin    No.

38.   9     +
---------------
hit sleeper in the 1st dozen +31. we are waiting for 2 more numbers to be hit (0,2,7,10)
We reset the progression on this dozen. Progression on 2nd and 3rd are still going.

39.   6
40.   30
41.   19
42.   31
43.   15
44.   32
45.   16
46.   27
47.   26
48.   8
49.   23    +
---------------
hit sleeper in 2nd dozen +33. waiting for one more number in this dozen (14,22)
we reset our progression on this dozen.

50.   21
51.   23    +
---------------
the same number from 2nd dozen is hit again. +30. still waiting for one of these numbers (14,22)
progression on this dozen is reset.

49.   36    +
---------------
third dozen is hit +15. it took 15 steps progression to complete it. waiting for one more number (34,35)
progression on dozen 3 is reset.

50.   19
51.   15
52.   34    +
---------------
our last expected number in 3rd dozen has been hit. +27. We no longer bet on 3rd dozen.
continue progression on dozen 1 and 2

53.   18
54.   32
55.   12
56.   34
57.   32
58.   36
59.   28
60.   20    -
--------------
we exceeded 25-the step of progression on 1st dozen. we are down -780. end of the session.

61.   16
62.   0
-------------
finally the number from the 1st dozen has been hit. But it happend on to late and table limits
wouldn't allow us to come in profit.
I still put the rest of numbers to show when one of the 2nd dozen numbers showed up.
51.   3
52.   26
53.   18
54.   0
55.   30
56.   9
------------
another 1st dozen numbers appeared. but at this point it didn't matter since we lost progression on this dozen.

57.   9
58.   7
59.   14
-----------
the last expected number from 2nd dozen appeared. It happend on 23rd step of progression for 2nd dozen,

To resume. Profit from each dozen
1st Dozen -749
2nd Dozen +63
3rd Dozen +42

Total Profit/Loss -644

2 more steps in progression for 1st dozen and we would have a pretty nice session.




Now what will happen if we remove the bet, every time when our sleeper is hit.
Looking at this session we see that our 1st dozen was hit right away in 38-the spin.
That means that starting from spin 39, we bet only 4 numbers (not 5-like original version)in 1st dozen.
How does it help us? Betting only 4 numbers at this point we can use 32 step progression and not 25
like it was with 5 numbers.
Using this our profit will looke like this.
1st Dozen +73
2nd Dozen +39
3rd Dozen +45

Total Profit/Loss +157

Removing bet from the number which has been hit, give us a chance to play the rest with longer progression.

I have another idea, which I will share with you guys tomorrow.
Appologize for the long post.

[GLC]

Kenio,

Nice clear presentation.  It always helps to have a second member present the system in a little different way.  Helps clarify parts that we didn't quite understand. 

Drazen or Kenio,
I have also been wondering why we don't set a certain profit target such as +75 and when we reach that target, we re-track.  Or a super safe method might be to end session after any plus.

We could be using the numbers that are spinning while we are betting for the next round of bets.

Or, maybe we could count back 37 spins from the spin we reached our win target on to cut down on a lot of tracking time.

Any thoughts on these ideas?

George

[Rolletti]

george,

you can do this of course when your table limits or bankroll does not allow the full game to finish.  this way you are safer from running out of progression steps.

[Drazen]

Kenio and Rolletti. Well done job, guys. You understood all and i hope you helped the others who doesnt, to understand. Kenio, this is very good example of testing with extremes for which honestly I prayed to be.  because i am focused on researching of extrems in system. When i was inventing this system, i wanted to understand his every part and his flow also. I came pretty far on that issue. But in every system, extrems happens. I think it is possible mathematicaly explain why and when they could happen, but as they dont happen often, i dont have enough of them to confirm my conclusions. So i would be grateful if you could in yours test, when extrem happens, tell me me when it happens, and for how many steps he overstepped progression until expected hit. That means that sometimes you will have to go to the 3rd 37 spin cycle to find them.
Again congrats to Kenio for his idea how to solve extrems at least until it is not possible to explain them. i came on that also, and for now that is the best mechanical solution for this  extrem in system. As he said, removing bet from the number which has been hit, give us a chance to play the rest with longer progression. He explained how that would solve extreme in his test. I have some other ideas also but i have to confirm them first.

Regards
                Drazen

[ewarwoowar]

guys, i fully take your point about removing hit numbers from the progession, but having repeating numbers in a 37 spin cycle is what this system is all about.
ie law of the third.
what i'm saying is that if you need 13, 14, 18, 19 and 22 from the second dozen and 18 hits, 18 has just as much chance of hitting next as the other numbers.
this system has come about because numbers do repeat.

[Drazen]

Guys, I fully take your point about removing hit numbers from the progession, but having repeating numbers in a 37 spin cycle is what this system is all about.
ie law of the third.
what i'm saying is that if you need 13, 14, 18, 19 and 22 from the second dozen and 18 hits, 18 has just as much chance of hitting next as the other numbers.
this system has come about because numbers do repeat.

I dont agree with you. And i think that you are saying about something diferent than this. I ll take your example. Ok, 2nd dozen, 5 sleepers as you said are 13, 14, 18, 19, 22 and that means that we are expecting 2/3 of hits and taht is 3 hits in this dozen in next 37 spins. Right? And how did you come to number of 18 hits? Because if we had lets say 18 sleepers(and that is very very rare, but anyway) we expect 2/3 of them to show in next 37 spins. Right? And that is 12 hits all together in 3 dozens. So on whole system our total average expectation is 7-10 hits in all 3 dozens total. You got it?

[Twisteruk]

I don't agree with you. And I think that you are saying about something diferent than this. I ll take your example. Ok, 2nd dozen, 5 sleepers as you said are 13, 14, 18, 19, 22 and that means that we are expecting 2/3 of hits and taht is 3 hits in this dozen in next 37 spins. Right? And how did you come to number of 18 hits? Because if we had lets say 18 sleepers(and that is very very rare, but anyway) we expect 2/3 of them to show in next 37 spins. Right? And that is 12 hits all together in 3 dozens. So on whole system our total average expectation is 7-10 hits in all 3 dozens total. You got it?

Hi, its a simple misunderstanding

He means the number 18 hittin, not 18 hits 

[Drazen]

I don't agree with you. And I think that you are saying about something diferent than this. I ll take your example. Ok, 2nd dozen, 5 sleepers as you said are 13, 14, 18, 19, 22 and that means that we are expecting 2/3 of hits and taht is 3 hits in this dozen in next 37 spins. Right? And how did you come to number of 18 hits? Because if we had lets say 18 sleepers(and that is very very rare, but anyway) we expect 2/3 of them to show in next 37 spins. Right? And that is 12 hits all together in 3 dozens. So on whole system our total average expectation is 7-10 hits in all 3 dozens total. You got it?

Yes you got it twist. misunderstanding. I apologize. Yes, in that case you have right at some point. Of course we know that some of these sleepers will may be repeated in these 37 spin cycle, but to satisfy law of the third 2/3 of them must show,  right? So 3 diferent numbers out of 5. That is why sometimes we have 2-3 more hits than we expected in dozen. Some of the numbers repeated.

[hanshuckebein]

hi guys,

in a german forum our member winkel wrote that for cycles of 36 spins the law of 1/3 (or the law of 2/3) actually only holds up in about 16% of all the cycles. I haven't tested it myself, still I trust winkel's statement.

but if so, wouldn't this mean that in 84% each roulette system that relies on these laws relies on false assumptions right from the begining?

please, don't get me wrong. I don't want to be a party pooper. this is just my 2cent question.

cheers

hans

p.s. maybe it would be a nice idea to try to find a system that plays against these laws?  

[Drazen]

Hi guys,

in a german forum our member winkel wrote that for cycles of 36 spins the law of 1/3 (or the law of 2/3) actually only holds up in about 16% of all the cycles. I haven't tested it myself, still I trust winkel's statement.

but if so, wouldn't this mean that in 84% each roulette system that relies on these laws relies on false assumptions right from the begining?

please, don't get me wrong. I don't want to be a party pooper. this is just my 2cent question.

cheers

hans

p.s. maybe it would be a nice idea to try to find a system that plays against these laws?  

Interesting one. I dont know, i think the time will show. When i do enough tests i will be able to say something more about that.  but maybe there is someone who can reffer to this?

[Rolletti]

I had some loosing games today.  so for my RNG game its necessary to implement some stop loss and starting criteria.

I will just play if  there are at least 13 sleeper better 14+ sleeper.
I only play a dozen if there are 3+ sleeper in it otherwise they tend to challenge the progression to much.

I will stop the game if my 2/3 are not satisfied within 28 spins.

[Gordonline]

Kenio,

Nice clear presentation.  It always helps to have a second member present the system in a little different way.  Helps clarify parts that we didn't quite understand. 

Drazen or Kenio,
I have also been wondering why we don't set a certain profit target such as +75 and when we reach that target, we re-track.  Or a super safe method might be to end session after any plus.

We could be using the numbers that are spinning while we are betting for the next round of bets.

Or, maybe we could count back 37 spins from the spin we reached our win target on to cut down on a lot of tracking time.

Any thoughts on these ideas?

George

Hi Drazen

Thank you for a clever strategy in the law of the thirds, I will also join in with the testing of this method and feed back to all how I get on

I have to agree with George that why not stop at a reasonable target, and then retrack so we don't get sucked into the extremes of roulette as greed is often our enemy.

Once again thanks for this method, I'm looking forward to testing,

Gordon

[Drazen]

Hi Drazen

Thank you for a clever strategy in the law of the thirds, I will also join in with the testing of this method and feed back to all how I get on

I have to agree with George that why not stop at a reasonable target, and then retrack so we don't get sucked into the extremes of roulette as greed is often our enemy.

Once again thanks for this method, I'm looking forward to testing,

Gordon

Thank you Gordon. As i said, there are so many possibilities in this system. As a newbie still, i dont know how all this should react in practice. I dont have experience in playing roulette. But i did my best to set up this is theory. I hoped you will tell me what i can do better in system and how can be improved. What are mistakes in system also. So together i think we can do something considering this theory.

Regards
              Drazen