RANDOM VERSUS RANDOM--WINNING WAYS

[Boo_Ray]

well..example: if there is a bet 2units on red and 5 on black I only put 3 units on black...
More examples:
BET: 5 on RED/ 6 on BLACK.. I Bet 1 on BLACK
BET: 4 on RED/ 2 on BLACK.. I Bet 2 on RED
BET: 3 on RED/ 3 on BLACK.. I skip the bet

I bet on 1 collor only...
It should be better... Because profit on bets is the same just less volatile on zeros..

Tracking and progression is the same..

[keel44]

Well..example: if there is a bet 2units on red and 5 on black I only put 3 units on black...
More examples:
BET: 5 on RED/ 6 on BLACK.. I Bet 1 on BLACK
BET: 4 on RED/ 2 on BLACK.. I Bet 2 on RED
BET: 3 on RED/ 3 on BLACK.. I skip the bet

I bet on 1 collor only...
It should be better... Because profit on bets is the same just less volatile on zeros..

Tracking and progression is the same..

Well, that is what you are supposed to do Boo Ray.  

Your results indicate you didn't reset all 3 bet selections back to 1...1...1 when your balance reaches a new high point.  If you did reset, I can't imagine that high of a profit from only 100 spins.



KEEL

[Bayes]

Number Six has done some testing.

[Boo_Ray]

test 3
+4 at spin 100... It did recovered to a new high(+36) at spin 119

@keel
I did reset on a new high...

[Bayes]

the only possibility of losing 100 un is;RRBBRRBBRRBBRRBBRRBBRR
/color]

If this were the ONLY way you could lose 100 it would happen less often than once every 4 - 5 sessions. The problem is when you get a longer sequence with double chops, not necessarily consecutive, and this happens more often.

[F_LAT_INO]

Well..example: if there is a bet 2units on red and 5 on black I only put 3 units on black...
More examples:
BET: 5 on RED/ 6 on BLACK.. I Bet 1 on BLACK
BET: 4 on RED/ 2 on BLACK.. I Bet 2 on RED
BET: 3 on RED/ 3 on BLACK.. I skip the bet

I bet on 1 collor only...
It should be better... Because profit on bets is the same just less volatile on zeros..

Tracking and progression is the same..

Yes I have thought so,as am working on something similar to addopt to this bet...but when the time comes.Thanks,BR

[F_LAT_INO]

Number Six has done some testing.

Number six sessions are of approximately 157 spins,and am sure the
results would be quite different if it was tested as I suggested 350-400 spins
real night session.Also have stated you can stop play in any state of the game when some in plus....as he stated this method is almost in every session about 20 un. in plus....and what I also stated player with experience almost can predict coming of a bad flaw.
Its up to the individual.

[F_LAT_INO]

If this were the ONLY way you could lose 100 it would happen less often than once every 4 - 5 sessions. The problem is when you get a longer sequence with double chops, not necessarily consecutive, and this happens more often.

Oh no it is not the only way/it was literally expression/--double chops
not consecutive also can hurt you,but here you just relie on randomness and expectation it will turn your way.No Houdini stuff,only follow the certain patterns/which are painted
on your spreadsheet/knowing when to escape from these negative trends.
It is very easy and readable.

[Jordan]

Did u see that No6 tested this system and it tanked?

[F_LAT_INO]

Did you see that No6 tested this system and it tanked?

And did you read my post above about that?
This method DO NOT TANK......but you better test it personally as I suggested to you,
then tell me if it still works or not.
Ppl.should find out for themselfes,not relai on other informations,as such informations could be purposely missleading.Hopping that you got what I mean.

[Bayes]

F_LAT_INO,

Someone on the other forum said you have tested 46 sessions with 9 losses (of 100 units). Were the session lengths all between 350 - 400 spins?

Do you have any record of the largest stake placed from all those sessions?

Thanks.

p.s. maybe "medo" is you, I don't know. 

[F_LAT_INO]

F_LAT_INO,

Someone on the other forum said you have tested 46 sessions with 9 losses (of 100 units). Were the session lengths all between 350 - 400 spins?

Do you have any record of the largest stake placed from all those sessions?

Thanks.

p.s. maybe "medo" is you, I don't know.  

True.Never ever posted any method without throughouly testing it.
Sessions between 237 to 512 spins--14.....7......4-----25 on all 3 bets,
and in all 9 losing sessions the actual los was between 104 t0 118 ujnits.

[Boo_Ray]

test4: +28 at spin 100... highest peak +30.. maximum drawdown: 27units
at spin 101 ballance was +35
+20 @spin 78

very good so far
actualy in none of these sessions I wasn't even near of busting 100unit bank... I was never down more than 40units...

[F_LAT_INO]

good on you,Boo_ Ray,
Think we really get somewhere here.

[keel44]

Yet again in these forums, people do NOT know how to interpret the testing results.  I have looked over "number 6" test results.  The results are actually very good.  Knowing when to quit is critical.  Any mechanical system will fail long term tests......its in the Maths.  It Does not mean this system "tanked"

Play it one spin at a time like in the real world.  You will find out for sure what to expect.

(like Boo Ray)




KEEL