dozen thing I noticed

[Juiced91]

I just don't see any advantage. Do another 100k spins and you will be down more than 3000...
And if you covered 0 then do d math 

Just did another 100K and was actually up 3374 units . And yes reset to 1 on any win

[iggiv]

make tests on different wheels. what happens on one wheel is not an indicator. and even what happens on a few wheels does not mean u will win on a long run.

[Juiced91]

Its RNG how would i use another wheel?

[iggiv]

use another RNG then.

try also this

link:://:.random.org/

u can use in "actuals" section the stuff i posted.
lots of spins, some of them in hundreds of thousands.
This particular RNG u r testing may have this kind of "temp bias", but it won't last forever

[Tomla021]

See it may be worth testing a bit........not saying its anything but 200,000 spins is something....might be worth looking further....

[Tomla021]

Thanks for testing Juiced!

[Juiced91]

Thanks for testing Juiced!

Anytime dude. Did another 500K and it ended at 1966. And thats with a nonsense progression.

[Tomla021]

Did it hold at 34% thats the key I think--it should be  33.3%

[Juiced91]

To be honest i did not check

[Tomla021]

too bad that could be important, but thanks----the whole point I guess is that maybe by picking the right length of a matrix and the right bet you can beat the game....to me the matrixes just change the normal flow of a straight game---would be interesting to see more testing

[GLC]

Juiced,  Interesting results.  Your bet progression is interesting also.  Would you mind running the system through your spins using the following progression:
1-1-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2 etc...
+1 on a loss and reset to 1 on a win.  After a loss on the 2nd 2 you're just going in the hole more if you increase your bet size.  If there's not stop loss, then you just play till you have a win then reset to 1.  The most you should ever have to bet is about 32 times, and you may never live long enough to have a dozen sleep that long.
Even betting 1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1 etc... might show some strange results.

Thanks,
GLC

[Robeenhuut]

too bad that could be important, but thanks----the whole point I guess is that maybe by picking the right length of a matrix and the right bet you can beat the game....to me the matrixes just change the normal flow of a straight game---would be interesting to see more testing

That would mean that roulette behaves not randomly in certain patterns or sequences 
Of course there are some fluctuations but they happen randomly. If you are lucky and choose right
pattern you profit but it wont last.

[GLC]

The most you should ever have to bet is about 32 times, and you may never live long enough to have a dozen sleep that long. (I got carried away with this statement because, of course, we're not just betting on the dozen that hit furthest back)

GLC

[Juiced91]

Juiced,  Interesting results.  Your bet progression is interesting also.  Would you mind running the system through your spins using the following progression:
1-1-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2 etc...
+1 on a loss and reset to 1 on a win.  After a loss on the 2nd 2 you're just going in the hole more if you increase your bet size.  If there's not stop-loss, then you just play till you have a win then reset to 1.  The most you should ever have to bet is about 32 times, and you may never live long enough to have a dozen sleep that long.
Even betting 1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1 etc... might show some strange results.

Thanks,
GLC

so its 1-1-2-2-2-2-2-2-2 till i win never going more than 2?

[GLC]

so its 1-1-2-2-2-2-2-2-2 till i win never going more than 2?

I'm just noticing that if you bet +1 on a loss, reset to 1 on a win, after betting 5 units you just start going negative even on a win.

You could use 1-2-3-4-5-5-5-5-5-5-5-5-5-5-5-5-5.   That would give you all the winning spins in the beginning, but you wouldn't lose so much if it goes past the 6th bet before you win.

Example:

If lose        Bet             If win
-1                1                +2
-3                2                +3
-6                3                +3
-10              4                +2
-15              5                  0
-21              6                 -3   From here on you keep going in the hole whether you win or lose.  If you keep increasing the size of your bet by 1 unit, it hurts you because it just increases the amount you will lose when you finally have a win.

-28              7                 -7
-36              8                 -12   See what I mean.

Compare:

-1                1                 +2
-3                2                 +3
-5                2                 +1
-7                2                  -1
-9                2                  -3
-11              2                  -5
-13              2                  -7
-15              2                  -9   We're now at the same place as bet 8 above but we're only going to lose -9 units instead of -12 units when we win and the difference keeps escalating from here so if we don't win until the 15th bet we forfeit a really large amount compared to this method.

You could use 1-1-2-3-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4 to maximize the units won before going flat bet.  There's and idea balance here to maximize wins in the long run.

What do you think, or am I confused?

GLC