EC Pacience

[vladir]

This is a system I have been thinking for a long time. It's only playable online I guess and we would need at least a trecker for it (ideally a bot would be nice ).  I only have the main idea, it will be dynamic and it's not finished yet (it's not finished because it can be improved). It will be somewhat complex to track, and sometimes, it may make us play a lot of bet's before reaching a new high (but it will allow us to do a progression for hundres or even thousands of spins). Eventually, it may fail like all systems, but it would require an extreme repetition of really bad conditions to happen... and I guess that would not be random if it happened...


I'm thinking of this only to EC's for now, because it can be played in real live wheels with la partage rule, wich would help to reduce the losses when the 0 hits(altough it is not very important in the way I tough of this system).


First of all, we need to track last 100 spins. Then, this spins must be analyzed for each EC and each EC variant (variants are REPETITION OF LAST HIT, REPETITION OF PREVIOUS OF LAST HIT, OPOSITE LAST HIT,OPOSITE OF PREVIOUS LAST HIT - add more if you know of any).


As we know, in the long run, all this events happen aproximatly 49% of the time (2% for 0). This means there there will be oscilations in this percentages in the short term, sometimes it can be 25%, others it can be 75% and all the values in between.


So, we are going to choose the EC or EC variant wich has happened less in the previous 100 spins and play it for the next 100 spins OR until we are in a new high, FLAT BETTING 1 unit. If we hit  a new high before reaching 100 spins, session ends and we analyze again last 100 spins and make a new choice to play.

If after 100 spins, we have not reached a new high, it's time to increase our bet for the next batch of 100 spins. How much? Initially I tougth of martingale, but... I think I figured out a better way...

- 1 Calculate total loss in the current session (this includes all the previous batches of 100 spins, since our last "new high"). Total loss is the total staked - total won. For example, if in 100 spins, we got 70 wrong and 30 correct betting 1 unit,  total loss is (100 x 1) - (30x2x1) = -40.

- 2 The bet for the each of the next 100 spins will be  (1+ TotalLoss/50) always rounded up.  So following the last example, we will play in each bet (1+ 40/50) = 1,8 = 2 . (Why /50? because we are aimming to a good session, one with more then 50% hits). This can and should be object of further analysis. 50% may not be the best value to consider when calculating the next bet, but it will do for now I guess.


We also check to see if there is another EC or EC variant that has happened less in the last 100 spins - probably it will be the same we where already playing. We figure out the EC or EC variant to play and then we go for another batch of 100 spins, now flat betting 2 units until we reach a new high for the session to end.


We only need 1 good batch of 100 spins (or less sometimes) to finish a session... and the staking plan I suggest, that is adapted to the losses, will allow for severall batch's of 100, more then pure martingale.


Now, lets think a bit... on the long run, we ALWAYS get near the balance of 50/50 (or 49/49 + 2% for 0).

The way I suggest this to be played, we can (I think) survive for enough spins withouth raising our bets too high, even when things go very wrong, they can't go wrong forever,in order to balance in, lets say, 1000 games. In 1000 games, you will very hardly see less then 45% for an EC event. In other words, you can have bad sessions of 25% to 45%, but eventually there will have to be one session (or part of it) where it will be far more then 50%, in order to balance and make an average between 45%-55% after, let's say, 1000 spins. Since we are updating our bets after each 100 session, we will ride it and profit from it, hopefully recovering to our previous high and making a litle profit. At the same time, we won't bet too much too fast, avoiding the trap of severall bad short cycles.

By periodically checking the EC's with less spins and changing our betting plan accordingly is also a good thing in my opinion.

I think most of the time, things could go well and we can get to new highs in a couple of spins if we are lucky. When we are not lucky, the system comes into play. Problem is, it can take WAY TOO LONG for a human to recover (maybe not for a bot )  and it gives some work to track and calculate. Thats why I called it  EC PATIENCE.


I have some more tweaks that could improve the eficiency of this kind of system. If someone is interested or has any more ideas about this, go ahead and participate or PM me.


I'm sharing this for free, and if you think this has any value, I will share the rest of the ideas I have for free too, if someone is willing to make a tracker/calculater or a bot for the community, also for free of course.

[mr.ore]

I have been there, watching several ECs and choosing one. It did not work well, because even  chance can be hitting less than expected for several thousands spins, then hit some time just normally  and then continue to hit less. If something like that had to work, the rules should be much more complicated than just "gambler's fallacy". I will try your system, progression will be simple...

[superman]

Good concept, the theory has been tested before, Fripper was chasing the balance of EC with his labby progression, so the numbers are on here somewhere, however, I just set the bot to run 400 spins measuring balance between each half of each EC, heres the figures


 
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   

Each 100 segment	100	200	300	400
Red	53	52	47	51
Black	46	46	51+3	49
High	42	50+6	49	46
Low	57	48	49	54
Odd	58	47	46	46+0
Even	41	51+8	52	54
Zero	1	2	2	None!!!

In red is what I thought may be possible EC's to follow, the next column shows what we would have been up flat betting, +18 in 400 spins is quick will do some more when I get a gap.

[vladir]

The progression I sugested is not good... (1+ TotalLoss/50) -> not good. It needs to be improved.


Guys, I appreciate that you are testing, but you also need to track what I call the variances of the EC's -> follow the last, oposite the last, follow previous of the last, oposite of previous of the last

For Black/Red, Odd/Even, High/Low

[vladir]

I have been there, watching several ECs and choosing one. It did not work well, because even  chance can be hitting less than expected for several thousands spins, then hit some time just normally  and then continue to hit less. If something like that had to work, the rules should be much more complicated than just "gambler's fallacy". I will try your system, progression will be simple...

We just need to make sure we "are there" when it hits "normally" or "sligthly above normaly", in order to make a proffit of 1 unit in the overall. That's the reason my progression is not the best...

[mr.ore]

Ignoring zero (no zero roulette), the main problem with this can be described in this way:

Probability that after x spins balance would be +y is same as probabilty that balance would be -y. So even chances in global view acts like even chance in local view.

For example there is absolutely no difference between waiting to win either 50 units or lose 50 units, chances are same.

So there is no difference between bet selection on R/B like FLTL and so on, or "global" bet selection like bet anything that moved Z units positive. If you see that betting on red would increase bankroll by +10 units and then start betting red until you win another 10 units or lose them, then it is absolutely no different from betting 10 units on red - chances are same.

So if the method would work in big, then it would have it's counterpart in small. As top, as bottom. Because no working bet selection was found, there might not be working bet selection even for big view. Of course you can get lucky, and selection can win for several thousands of spins (or have steady hit ratio with zero), but such runs are produced even by EC themselves.

[Optimist]

Hi Vladir,

I had such idea and tested it.
What I can say... There is no chance on zero table. Zero kills.
You can have success on no zero table. In my tests ( i have used all BV NZ spins could find and tried with "normal" spins removing zeros) I could achieve profit in long run when I tracked 280 spins and bet  only then when one EC were dominant in (every) last 7x40 spins ( I mean 7 steps with 40 spins each). I bet flat against dominant EC and in last 280 spins and only against dominant EC in global tracking (like 1000 spins).  Sorry for my bad english in advance.
In this case I had success but I think it is not playable. You have BV NZ which is slow. You can win only in LONG run and you can loose easily in short run (like 2-10 thousands spins). I was planing to use project 202 for betting (thats why i used 40 spins steps) but flat showed small profit so I decided not to code pr 202 option and do not see future for this idea.

regards

DL

[LuckoftheIrish]

I have tested this idea but "supersized" on single zero spins, baccarat decisions, and no zero spin outcomes.

I have tested dozens of bet selections, (simply red or black, same as last, same as two spins ago, same as three spins ago...up to same as 50 spins ago).  I then wait for the worst bet selection and bet for it to "even out".

Even with no zero outcomes, there is no guarantee it will ever catch up.  Imspirit has tested coin flips and found that sometimes heads or tails, is ahead and stays ahead for BILLIONS of continuous outcomes.  And that is a game with no negative player advantage.

[vladir]

I'm not sure you understood me completly, or if I understood you completly, but... I think there is a small detail here you didn't noticed.


I know one EC can go on having 45%-48% on the big scale, always being behind for many runs.
But you will have oscillations while you "ride" it. Most of the time it will stay between 45%-48%, but some times it will go down, up to 30%, and sometimes it will go up to 70%.  Of coure if we flat bet, one small session of 70% may not be enough on the "big scale", for we still be on the 45%-48%, and this would not work, I know.



But what I sugested, it is not to always flat bet one EC until its in profit. Instead, it's flat bet for 100 spins.  After those spins, we recalculate the required flat bet for the next 100 spins, so that if in the next 100 spins we get a better session (something like 55% correct or more), we break even and recover losses. Always recalculate the required ammount to bet after 100 spins.


I just want to be sure you understood the "recalculation" of the bet. I think this could make a difference, but I may be wrong...

[mr.ore]

It did not work well because of zero...