Code this and you're a bloody genius > The Texas Sharpshooter

[Skakus]

The Texas Sharpshooter.

I have several versions of play for this system, here is the first.

List the number array from 1 to 0, or 0 to 36 (your preference).

Track spins.

When any number repeats, put a mark on that number and 1 number either side of it. So if 17 repeats you mark 16.17.18. If 0 repeats you mark 1.0.36. If 4 repeats you mark 3.4.5, etc.

After a number repeats rule off the tracked numbers and start a fresh track from that point forward. Continue to track and rule off every time a number repeats (this is the Texas Sharpshooter element).

Continue to track and rule off until at least one number in the first array has been marked at least 3 times. Betting can now commence.

While continuing to track the spins, flat bet any number that has 3 or more marks against it, as well as one number either side, for a possible 12 spins, stopping on a win (a win being when any 1 of the 3 numbers bet in any group hits). If all bet combinations win within 12 spins stop betting and continue to track until the next repeat before updating the arrays and betting again. After the next repeat start betting again on any number with 3 or more marks along with 1 number either side. If any bet combinations lose after 12 spins immediately commence betting again on any qualifying combinations.

Any combination that loses is crossed off from the betting for the remainder of the session while that array is used. It can be reinstated as a bet if it regains 3 marks or more in the next array.

A maximum of 2 arrays are used at any one time. An array becomes useable once any number has 3 or more marks against it. A new array is set up each time the previous array reaches the desired 3 marks on any number. You continue to mark numbers in the first array until the third array reaches the 3 marks on any number then it is abandoned.

In any qualified array a number with 4 marks against it eliminates the betting on any numbers with 3 marks against it. A number with 5 marks against it eliminates the betting on any numbers with 4 or 3 marks against it, etc.

A maximum of 18 units can bet outlayed at any 1 time (6x3 number combinations). Any more than that and you don’t bet. Continue tracking until the next betting opportunity with 18 or less units outlay.

Betting combinations from the most recent array are included into the betting before considering the previous array.

Some numbers can have more than 1 unit bet on them. Example, numbers 4 and 5 both have 3 marks. The bet will be 1 unit on 3.4.5, and 1 unit on 4.5.6. A total of 6 units bet, 1 unit on 3 & 6, and 2 units on 4 & 5. Another example, number 4.5.6 each have 3 marks. The bet will be 1 unit on 3.4.5 and 1 unit on 4.5.6 and 1 unit on 5.6.7. A total of 9 units bet, 1 unit on 3 & 7, and 2 units on 4 & 6, and 3 units on 5.

This variant is set up to play continuously for ever and ever if you want. I have other variants that play a more enclosed style with a hit and run approach, but for the purposes of a mega-long rx or bot test this variant is a good start.

There you go boatran8, if you can rx code this I will pay you an agreed amount.
Give it a go, ask any questions, and when you get it right let me know and I will send you some spins for testing. If using those spins both our results match I will pay you and then you can post the .dgt file for everyone to explore in creative ways.

No need for confidentiality ‘cause I just posted the system anyway. Oh, and if you can code this then you’re a bloody genius.

Offer is for superman to make a bot too.

I’m good for the cash if you guys can do it.

[eureka]

Hello,

Can you give us an example with spins and WL...

Thanks

[Skakus]

 
Sure, but it will take a while so I'll do it tomorrow when time allows.

[eureka]

Ok. Will wait then.

[GameBreaker]

Interesting concept.  One thing I would ask is that why would you use the layout to determine the numbers and their connectors and not the actual wheel?

In other words, why not use the number that hits  and the numbers on either side on the actual wheel?  Maybe makes no difference, but I would think that if there is any table bias present that using the actual wheel layout instead of the felt would be more effective?  And if there is not a table bias or dealer bias than using the wheel as opposed to the layout should not hurt you at all?

Am I off base?

[Skakus]

Hi GameBreaker,

You're on the ball, very good questions!

Yes you can use the wheel order in exactly the same way! in fact that is another variant that I use. But believe it or not, it makes very little difference to the results.

Ideally you could have a bot playing both at the same time each with an 18 unit bet limit, though this could be troublesome when using bigger chips as you could tip over the table limit with converging bets > maybe later.

The reason I use a numerical oreder and not the wheel order is because there is little difference in the results, and the numerical order is infinitely easier to visually navigate when playing manually. It is also much easier and quicker for the player to place bets when the time comes.

For me, the practical advantages outweigh any possible bias advantages that might exist in the wheel/wheel order.

[Skakus]

 
Also the numerical order can be used for RNG where there is no actual wheel anyway. 

[vile]

And what when you have a situation like this;
16,19,22,13,24,18.....what and how now,
or similar situations,26,29,32,23,34,28,

[Skakus]

And what when you have a situation like this;
16,19,22,13,24,18.....what and how now,
or similar situations,26,29,32,23,34,28,

Hello vile.

Sorry, I'm not understanding your question?

Are these numbers that have hit or are they numbers that have repeated?

16,19,22,13,24,18 > if these numbers have repeated then you would mark the array like this,

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12  I
13  I
14  I
15  I
16  I
17  II
18  II
19  II
20  I
21  I
22  I
23  II
24  I
25  I
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
0

No bets yet, but 17.18.19.23 are getting close with 2 marks. Notice 17 & 23 have been marked twice each yet neither number has repeated.

If you added in your second group of repeats (26,29,32,23 > AFTER 23 BETTING COMMENSES ON 22,23,24 FOR UP TO 12 SPINS STOP ON A WIN. CONTINUE TRACKING WITH TWO ARRAYS NOW > 34,28,) the 1st array would be marked like this, and the 2nd array would have a mark on numbers 33.34.35.27.28.29.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12  I
13  I
14  I
15  I
16  I
17  II
18  II
19  II
20  I
21  I
22  II
23  III
24  II
25  II
26  I
27  II    27  I
28  II    28  I
29  II    29  I
30  I
31  I
32  I
33  II    33  I
34  I     34  I
35  I     35  I
36
0

[Skakus]

Let's say you bet on 22.23.24 for the next 12 spins and lost, and there were also no repeats.
The 1st array would now look like this,

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12  I
13  I
14  I
15  I
16  I
17  II
18  II
19  II
20  I
21  I
22  II
23  IIIX
24  II
25  II
26  I
27  II   
28  II   
29  II   
30  I
31  I
32  I
33  II     
34  I     
35  I     
36
0

23 is now blocked and no further marks can be added to it in this array. If say 22 repeated then you would put a mark against 21.22 only. That would give 22 three marks so you would then bet on 21.22.23 for 12 spins max.

[GARNabby]

O! Ska-kus you see, by the dawn's early light...

What's the working logic to any of the "quickies"?  Because it's one thing to say that the most rather play $50 here and there at a casino, but another that they should to a programmer, who ought to know better by the way,  to have those "computerized" and played ad nauseam.  I mean, the most pretty-much already realize that there is no Santa Clause in any respect.  Even universally-degreed experts, from Einstein to Thorpe, have simply proposed the negative.  Do any of you guys really suspect, or want to pretend, that Einstein for one, who was fully immersed in a lifetime of all the real sciences on which roulette can possibly be based,  didn't completely take into consideration something like VB?  Google Brownian motions, for one ex.

Generally, it "sucks" to be someone who perpetuates addictions only to "solve" those for a fee.  Worst of the worst, they who would have your money, or other support, before you even get to the casinos, debtors, et al.  Best to get to the bottom of those; and thusly educate the silly to properly eradicate their "leeches".

[amk]

Hello GARNabby,

I do think that it is possible to travel faster than the speed of light. This does not mean that roulette can be won over the longterm but it does give it a chance....

[Skakus]

O! Ska-kus you see, by the dawn's early light...

What's the working logic to any of the "quickies"?  Because it's one thing to say that the most rather play $50 here and there at a casino, but another that they should to a programmer, who ought to know better by the way,  to have those "computerized" and played ad nauseam.  I mean, the most pretty-much already realize that there is no Santa Clause in any respect.  Even universally-degreed experts, from Einstein to Thorpe, have simply proposed the negative.  Do any of you guys really suspect, or want to pretend, that Einstein for one, who was fully immersed in a lifetime of all the real sciences on which roulette can possibly be based,  didn't completely take into consideration something like VB?  Google Brownian motions, for one ex.

Generally, it "sucks" to be someone who perpetuates addictions only to "solve" those for a fee.  Worst of the worst, they who would have your money, or other support, before you even get to the casinos, debtors, et al.  Best to get to the bottom of those; and thusly educate the silly to properly eradicate their "leeches".

Money makes the world go round.

New discoveries abound daily within the scientific community, and who do you think gets paid to consolidate these discoveries? Researchers and lab technicians. Hoards of footsoldier researchers and lab technicians.

Would you begrudge them the ability to provide for their families with an income earned through their services?

[GARNabby]

I do think that it is possible to travel faster than the speed of light.

Absolutely, everything must be filled in, and accounted for, in some way.  That's like saying that where the math can go, so also the physics; and versa.  (Another thing Einstein couldn't accept, because also that went against some of his theories.)

[GARNabby]

Would you begrudge them the ability to provide for their families with an income earned through their services?

No, but i would like to see them do better.  In this case, you're really going to have put some casinos out of business... like they try, and usually do, to the players.  That's the sort of end-game involved, realistically.

Otherwise, you're going to do 100 X's the work for each cent on the dollar's pay, to find what the (other) experts have overlooked.