How to play with a "labby"

[Fripper]

Hi guys.

I have had several requests from the time that I started the thread "beating roulette with math.." on how to play it. If I could explain it better in a new thread. I decided to do it becuase there has been some interest in the subject so I consider it fair to do so.


The main concept of this method is to take advantage of the fact that there will never be less than 65 reds or blacks in 200 spins. Ofcourse according to math this can happen but a fellow member at roulette30 forum checked 20 miljon spins or 100000 sessions of 200 spins and none of them had less than 65 reds or blacks. If you ever find one of those sessions under your lifetime you can consider yourself very lucky (or in this case extremely unlucky).

Here is the original thread:
link:://rouletteforum.cc/general-discussion/beating-roulette-with-math/


I have to say again, read this three threads and read Belgians posts:
link:://rouletteforum.x/index.php/topic,9.0.html
link:://rouletteforum.x/index.php/topic,8.0.html
link:://:.x/2010/06/labouchere-progression-in-depth.html


I will try to explain here how I play the "labby".


A labby is a very powerful progression, you can adjust it in many different ways for your own personal choice.


Attached is an example of 9 zero's and a one. This is very useful if you have excel (or similiar) and do it like this while your playing. Just have it under the roulette window or whatever you like.


Now to the rules that I use:
1 - Choose your preferable EC (Even chance bet) I usually bet on red. Remember to always bet red, don't switch every spins or something like that.


2- A pair is 2 outcomes. Like this for example:
RR or
BR or

BB


If you win the first bet in the pair, restart with a new pair.
If you lose 2 bets in a pair, start a new pair.


3 - What to bet?
Always bet the figure to the right and add the figure to the left.
So if you have your labby like this:
2,2,3,4,7,9    (total of 27 units)
Your bet would be 9+2= 11 units and if you lose your next bet would be 22 units.
If that 22 bet loses to, you add the lost units to the labby.
27 units before + 33 more units = 60 units
I usually split in 2 more figures. (You can do whatevery you prefer)
So before we had 6 figures, split 60 into 8 figures.
7,7,7,7,8,8,8,8


Now play a new pair. If win the first bet start another pair directly.


4 -  Always end your labby when you are playing. If you have 9 zero's and a one you shall play until you have no numbers left in the labby.
Now, as a sidenote to this. If you want to do longer sessions (I do) you just play as usual, always reset when you have a new high or break even or until you get 2 losses in a row. When you have 2 losses in a row you start with your labby and continue as usual.


5 - If you win your first bet in a figure, you take away the number to the right and also take away the number to the left in your labby. I play every spin. Only exception is when a serie of 4 appear, I then stop and wait for a win to come, then continue where you left off.


6 - We will always use a mini-marty in every figure. With that I mean that if I start to bet 1 and lose, you should bet 2 next bet in that figure.
Another example, if your first bet in the figure is 6 and you lose, your next bet is 12 units.


7 - 

So we have to find away to get rid of these long losing streaks, or at least make them last as short as possible according to the probability. How can we do that?


Answer: by changing the odds of 50:50 into 75:25 or even 87:13.


How can we do that?
Answer: to combine 2 or 3 chances in one figure!


75:25: RB RB BB RR
87:13: RRR RRB RBB BBB BRR BBR BRB RBR


So play 2 decisions (pairs)(75:25) and treat them as one for the Labby but replace by a lost 2 zero's because that is only 1 bet (1:2)

8 - If you lose 2 spins in a row (one figure) you shall take away 2 zero's from your labby. Say you lost you first two bets, that is 1 and then 2 units.
Your new labby looks like this:
0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1,1,2


9 -

If a series of 4 appear I stop betting till the series brakes. Then continue the betting. In this way I don't have any problem with 68% (theoretical appearance % of series of 1,2 and 3) of the charts in terms of losing a bet in the labby. When a series of 4 or longer appears, it means my labby contains 2 more figures. The dangerous chart is therefore the appearance of alternating series of 4 and longer. After occurrence of 2 alternating series of 4, I will transfer half of the figures to another even chance that is the most choppy to divide the risks.

So if you have a total of 28 units in you labby, you transfer half of those (14 units) to another Ec, like high and low. Then you continue play as usual on both your Ec:s. You choose the most choppy one, but this is your personal choice.




10 -

So, you have a lot of possibilities to stay low in the bets during bad streaks, without spreading the labby into more figures needed to stay within the 1:2 ration needed to close the Labby. The way I play with pairs it means you need only 1:3 wins to close it (actually 1:3 plus 1 bet). So for example when you play on Red then you need only in 50 spins 13 Red to close it. That is already very close to the worst expectations in terms of Ecards. (see the figures given by Muck) and without taken into account the many possibilities you have to keep the bets low.

11 - As you maybe have understood you have to divide the losses yourself. Like if you lose 3 units and next bet 6 units. You should add 4,5 to your labby.


12 - Now if your bets get larger you can divide your bets into 3 figures. Like this:
lost 17+34 = 51 units
51/3 = 17 units
Add 17,17,17 to your labby.


But keep in mind that the more figures you have the more wins you need to end the labby.




Belgians Example

example according aggressive version, 9 imaginary zero's and a one (that is what you suggest). we play on Red. For 75:25 we bet on pairs:


start Labby 0,1


R 1 unit win
B no bet (ending first pair) EOS


R 1 unit win
B no bet EOS


R 1 unit win
R no bet EOS


R 1 unit win
R no bet EOS


B 1 unit loss
B 2 unit loss (ending first pair) Labby now: 0,1,1,2


B 2 units loss
B 4 units loss (ending second pair) Labby now: 0,1,1,2,3,3 (4+2=6:2=3)


R 3 unit win Labby now: 1,1,2,3
R no bet (ending third pair)


B 4 unit loss
B 8 units loss (ending fourth pair) Labby now: 1,1,2,3,6,6


R win 7 units Labby now: 1,2,3,6
R no bet (ending fifth pair)


B 7 unit loss
R 14 units win (end of 6th pair) Labby now: 2,3


R 5 unit win
B no bet (ending seventh pair) all figures canceled in the Labby End of session.


Total session: +5 units.


if 9 imaginary zero's are replaced by figures, the next loss bet has to be divided between the figures 9starting from the lowest ones.

13 - Lately I've been using this technique and it works very well. You can use this or you can use your own numbers.
1 = 8 fig.
2= 12 fig.
3= 16 fig.
4=20 fig.
5= 24 fig. 


This means that if there have been 1 serie of 4 I split into 8 figures.
If there have been 4 series of 4 I split into 20 figures.
This is just to reduce the bets and the risk during a bad run.


As you saw in point 9 we said that you can split half your figures to another EC. But I've been using the above chart for a time now and it works very good. It's a personal choice.


My eplanation
See the attached excel file. This should help you alot. (Thanks aleks06)


Results
I have tested over 10000 spins manually and haven't lost a session with a 1500 unit bankroll.
I and aleks06 also tested the 11 horror sessions provided by Bayes and cleared all of them. These sessions were the worst in 700000 wiesbaden spins.


My view
As you can see I have quoted a lot from Belgian from roulette30forum. All thanks to him!


This wasn't easy to write and I understand that this isn't easy to understand but it is the same for me.
Pratice, practice and more practice!
That's the way I learned.
Ofcourse I shall try to answer your questions.


I hope that my attached sessions will help you understand better.


Hope this helped some to you guys.


When you have learned it you can develop your own strategy, as I said, there are many possibilities left.


I don't think that to many will understand the method in full, but you can try and do some research yourself and play more like you want it.


Cheers


Fripper

[Drazen]

Thanks fripper, good idea to re-write this. So if got this right you can call this method method "golden one"? When having 1500 units bank?
Regards
                  Drazen

[Fripper]

Thanks fripper, good idea to re-write this. So if got this right you can call this method method "golden one"? When having 1500 units bank?
Regards
                  Drazen

Well I don't call it the "golden one" but it is very strong and I haven't lost with it so far, like I have with every other method I have tested. However this will lose with a 1500 unit bankroll sometime but how often? Only testing will prove it.

Let me know if you need any help.

[monaco]

thanks for this Fripper
i notice some of the changes you were looking at in the other thread seem to have been dropped in the end, even though they looked quite promising - such as the 15 zero's.. was this because of the extra grind involved or just that it made no discernable difference in the end?
also, you go back to the original idea to go to another ec rather than maybe split the drawdown in 2 on the same ec.. was that again just experience of many games?
i can see how much work you & Aleks put in to this on the other thread.. much appreciated.

[Fripper]

Yes we tested alot of different things and there are some very good tweaks. However the best method so far I believe is the first one which I described here above. Experience have told me that after countless testing hours, but I'm am indeed testing new things as well. There are endless of possibilities to work with.


Thanks mate

[monaco]

Hi Fripper â€" I thought I’d have a look at first at 1 particular aspect which intrigued me about this system, namely the use of the zero.

It seemed to me that it was being used at the very beginning for 4 losing bets (the 9 zeros) but then not used again. But it seems that it could be used more regularly as an extra safety net.
It’s basic use is to act as a flatbet, so still using the ‘stop after a series of 4 losses & wait for a virtual win’, introduce the zero here again when we are about to re-commence betting, just to make sure we are out of the deep water.

Doing it this way on Bayes 200 spin Hell Session on evens/odds, you get the following result:

Biggest bet: 32u
Biggest drawdown: 140u
Total +11u
(see attachment)

I’ve not tried it yet using the mini-martingale suggested by Belgian, but will give that a go next.

Just wondered what you thought about that, or if you’re trying some other things at the minute?

Cheers

[aleks06]

Hi monaco,

nice work! the main problem with the labby is when you have only few figures left, for instance in your session just before your last profit your last figure is 12 if you face a bad run at this moment your bets will increase quite fast. Thats why ive never been a big supporter about using marty with the labby.

[aleks06]

Hi again,

I've done some tests on your session with few tweaks.

Profit : +15

Highest bet : 19 units


While testing I've noticed starting with "0" before the "1" was not really a good idea, i've missed some units.

You will see that after a loss I only bet the 2 lowest figures and after a win I bet the first and the last figure.

In order to increase profit I add +1 unit to the lowest figure of the labby after every 20 spins without profit but I think every 10 spins would be better.


Also, a safety break is required when we have 1 or 2 figures. let's say if we have 1 or 2 figures left and the bet is over 30 units we would need to divide these 2 figures into "x" figures (lower the bets).


I've set the maximum of figures to "15" it could be less.

I think the secret is to find the good balance between the length of the string ( win's required to end the labby ) and the size of the bets ( protect our bankroll ).

The goal is to get the perfect alchemy to be able to overcome any bad scenario.

[ludo8400]

Fripper

I have posted an excel file 1 for RED and 2 for black  RANDOM in the colums

In the yellow grill you see the results of 10 X 200 numbers. By each click you are passing 2000 spins.
I never passed the 65 below.
Try it yourself.


Ludo8400

[GLC]

Watching this thread with great interest again.

Ludo, can you give us more explanation re: your spreadsheet? 

Thanks

[Fripper]

But it seems that it could be used more regularly as an extra safety net.

I think the secret is to find the good balance between the length of the string ( win's required to end the labby ) and the size of the bets ( protect our bankroll ).

The goal is to get the perfect alchemy to be able to overcome any bad scenario.

Nice monaco and thanks for sharing. As I said "the possibilities are endless".


You are both right but the problem remains, how long are we willing to play to have it safe? We can make it a grinder and add more zero's or more figures but the wins to get back get more and more.


However, playing with a bot this wouldn't be a problem. Then all that matters is keeping the bets low as long as the bad run.

As you said Aleks, "balance between the length of the string ( win's required to end the labby ) and the size of the bets ( protect our bankroll )".

We have to test and test until we find a good balance.


But I like your concept monaco, keep it up and let us know how you do with the other "hell" sessions.

Fripper

I have posted an excel file 1 for RED and 2 for black  RANDOM in the columns

In the yellow grill you see the results of 10 X 200 numbers. By each click you are passing 2000 spins.
I never passed the 65 below.
Try it yourself.


Ludo8400

Thanks for sharing Ludo8400 and you confirm that we will probably never see less than 65 reds or blacks in 200 spins.


I use this tool provided by Bayes, it's excellent. You can check millions of spins in seconds. Check it out.
link:://rouletteforum.cc/math-reference/sequence-analyzer/

Cheers

[aleks06]

However, playing with a bot this wouldn't be a problem. Then all that matters is keeping the bets low as long as the bad run.

Cheers

We definitely need a programmer here.

[monaco]

Hi Aleks - a lot of ideas I’d never considered before such as adding to the target profit after so many spins// & I think you’re right about being left with a few big numbers â€" dangerous territory,

Am re-reading the old thread again â€" endless possibilities like you say Fripper, but I think the devil is in the detail.. looking at it small bit by small bit. I still think an element of flat-betting could be helpful.

I’m bearing in mind as well that we’re looking at the worst scenarios amongst millions of spins here, so trying not to be too hard on ourselves if we find a certain set of spins that maybe involves a bit of a grind every now & again..

Will post more results later today hopefully.

[monaco]

This may be a bit of an academic exercise, but I looked at Bayes 65 reds in 200 spins, the worst set of numbers in 55 million spins if I’m not mistaken,

In general, I think there’s 2 ways of approaching this whole thing â€" adopt a less defensive approach early on, win lots of fast units & face the storm when it comes the best you can (which is probably the most practical way),
or be fully prepared right from the off that the storm might just start hitting the next spin â€" to be able to overcome any set of spins, then I’m afraid you would need to adopt the 2^nd approach, thereby foregoing a lot of the ease you can normally pick up quick units.

So to be always prepared for a sample where there is only 65 reds, you have to be always set in an extremely defensive mode. This is the roulette equivalent of parking the bus in front of the goal from the 1^st minute, & aiming to win on penalties 

So here we’ve got 65 reds in 200 spins, betting red, maximum bet 70units, maximum drawdown 70u, total +1u. The basic premise, you begin with 65 numbers & cross 1 off everytime you win.

Notation-wise, 64(0) means 64 zeros. You will see that you flatbet 193 times (by beginning the line with a 0 & ending always with a 1, spreading the losses & changes to achieve this throughout the line), & the only time you wouldn’t is when you can clear the line with 1 spin, ie. 2 or 1 number left.

I think this all may be a bit academic, (I’ve not tried it on any other set of numbers as I feel pretty zonked out just finishing this one  ! I’ve double-checked it though, I don’t think there’s any mistakes but I might be wrong - please let me know if i've made some horrible mistake.....), possibly its not really applicable in any real sense, but I thought it might be interesting to show..

[Fripper]

Hi monaco. Keep the ideas coming, I will test your first approach next week, with the hell sessions at first.


I will have a little vacation now 


Cheers