***C0DE 20***

[Rolletti]

6th sense:
I covered Zero in the backtest with just enough to get even (dont lose) in case the Zero hits.

grayen:
Level stakes means flat bet means no progression bet in case of a loss.

mattymattz:

the reason why it works is that:
over a big number of games the hit - lose ratio should get close to the natural expected ratio of 2-3 as with all 2/3rd bets. In the 20 spin frame that should be around 13/7 or 14/6. So if you give the loser a lead of 2 spins in every game (flat bet excluses luck) you will have a slight edge over time and mannnny games.

[Robeenhuut]

6th sense:
I covered Zero in the backtest with just enough to get even (don't lose) in case the Zero hits.

grayen:
Level stakes means flat bet means no progression bet in case of a loss.

mattymattz:

the reason why it works is that:
over a big number of games the hit - lose ratio should get close to the natural expected ratio of 2-3 as with all 2/3rd bets. In the 20 spin frame that should be around 13/7 or 14/6. So if you give the loser a lead of 2 spins in every game (flat bet excluses luck) you will have a slight edge over time and mannnny games.

Hello Roletti

Can you explain why you think that you should be around 13/7 or 14/6 ?  You just play set number of games not large number of games. And i have more easy system 4 u.
Bet randomly either 2 DZ or CL. Wait 2 virtual loses and start flat betting 4 18 spins.  U r expected to get W 2 of 3 times right? and by having had already 2L you have edge n guaranteed winner
No need 4 any matrixes

Regards

[Bayes]

Rolletti,

Sorry but your analysis is just wrong. Do you really think it's possible to get an edge just by waiting for a couple of virtual losses? Roulette 101 - it's a game of independent trials.

[Rolletti]

Huut & Bayes.

code the sys and run it 100.000 + spins.
You will see it works the way I explained.

Huut you are right your simple system works the same way.

Bayes you are also right they are independent trials or games how ever u want to call it. But they are boxed in to 20 spins frames and what happens in this frame will over time approach the 2/3rd outcome. So we will have losing games and winning games cause of statistical deviation. How ever we will always lose 2 bets less since the losing side is 2 spins ahead when we start to bet FLAT.

And with the rule to stop at  +3units you have occasionally a winning game that may turn out as a losing one by the time the 20 spin frame is filled.

[Robeenhuut]

Huut & Bayes.

code the sys and run it 100.000 + spins.
You will see it works the way I explained.

Huut you are right your simple system works the same way.

Bayes you are also right they are independent trials or games how ever u want to call it. But they are boxed in to 20 spins frames and what happens in this frame will over time approach the 2/3rd outcome. So we will have losing games and winning games cause of statistical deviation. How ever we will always lose 2 bets less since the losing side is 2 spins ahead when we start to bet FLAT.

And with the rule to stop at  +3units you have occasionally a winning game that may turn out as a losing one by the time the 20 spin frame is filled.

Hello Roletti

My simple system was just a joke 2 make my point  I would never play something like this.
Why dont you make it Code 6 then?  2 virtual loses r the triggers and you just bet 6 spins. You expect 2 win 4 games and lose 2 on average right?  You already had 2L so now you expect 2 improve yr ratio  I just follow yr reasoning here.  But now seriously.
Code 20 flies into the face of everything what educated players know about roulette  except  basically one rule - quit while ahead. 
Betting against any pattern does not increase your chances - or roulette does not have memory.
D one quoted by Bayes about independent trails refers 2 your virtual loses fallacy. Actually it fails into regression toward the mean territory as well. It expects d results 2 gradually move towards expected strike rate - in our case 2/3. Unfortunately this is not d case. You mentioned in yr last post statistical deviation. I dont have a clue what you meant.  As to yr charts all they show is some minimal profit in large number of spins with some slight upward trend and  relatively big draw downs. I just tested 10 games and was ahead in 2 of them and 3 or 4 ended in a loss. Never had chance 2 quit while 3u ahead. But its irrelevant because there were only few games.
I know that everything here will be dismissed by JL as "math boys" negativity but u just can not ignore basic rules of d game n hope 2 come up with winning system. Some players will be  attracted 2 Code 20 because of low risk factor n its about only thing about it that i like.

Regards

[Rolletti]

Huut, what do u think about saliu's degree of certainty. He has a game for the 2/3 which I play successfully (Tracker on this forum). I think it has some value to combine with code20. The point is that we can expect more streaks of wins then losses and little single wins. e.g.  :wl:wlwwlllwl:l:w

[6th-sense]

huut just on extract of your post


Hello Sam I'm bit sceptical because all sector oriented systems failed.  Tracking is not d problem 4 me although its bit of boring.  I have done bit of testing on both - GUT n Gamlet and got mixed results. Definitely i would not discard them right away like most what's out there. As 2 logic behind it hehe just forget about it. If something works in d long run you don't question it.  What i noticed that in sessions you play your winning sessions give you higher profit than loses in your losing sessions if you play set number of spins.  Then it comes down 2 choosing yr stop-loss and win goal. I guess bit of luck would help 2   

As 2 logic behind it hehe just forget about it. If something works in d long run you don't question it.
??

[6th-sense]

Hello Juice When i look at your graph it tells me that you can win 1000u in aproximately 20k spins (0-20k)and lose 1000u in aproximately 20k spins (50k-70k). Yeah it does alright - 1400u in 200k spins which is about 0.14u average profit  in a game of 20 spins   So based on this type of testing what would be your prediction 4 real play conditions - lets say 10 games daily?  Do you consider this system playable? My point is that this type of testing involving large number of spins can only bury d system. Lots of them take a nosedive after 10k or 30k n never recover. Some of them behave like this one. There is no one that goes up steadily. Regards


another extract using graphs for imformation on stats? rolletti gave you graphs why disard his??? and use this if graphs don,t mean anything???

[Robeenhuut]

Huut, what do u think about saliu's degree of certainty. He has a game for the 2/3 which I play successfully (Tracker on this forum). I think it has some value to combine with code20. The point is that we can expect more streaks of wins then losses and little single wins. e.g.  :wl:wlwwlllwl:l:w

Hello Roletti

He advocated flat betting 2 DZ 4 100 spins n if u r not ahead 2 repeat it ..... because next time u r due 2 get better results.  I don't even want 2 comment on it  And his 32 or 34 number method  its just ridiculous. He makes more sense when he deals with probability issues but his systems do not work. But f it works 4 u then why not. 


Regards

[Robeenhuut]

Hello Juice When i look at your graph it tells me that you can win 1000u in aproximately 20k spins (0-20k)and lose 1000u in aproximately 20k spins (50k-70k). Yeah it does alright - 1400u in 200k spins which is about 0.14u average profit  in a game of 20 spins   So based on this type of testing what would be your prediction 4 real play conditions - lets say 10 games daily?  Do you consider this system playable? My point is that this type of testing involving large number of spins can only bury d system. Lots of them take a nosedive after 10k or 30k n never recover. Some of them behave like this one. There is no one that goes up steadily. Regards


another extract using graphs for imformation on stats? rolletti gave you graphs why disard his??? and use this if graphs don't mean anything???

Hello 6th

I did not discard them.  I just interpreted them in my way n u can agree or disagree with it.    As 2 yr previous post my point was that sometimes things work in roulette due 2 some unforeseen factors like wheel bias etc  but if they work in large enough number of spins i would not waste time questioning why? but take advantage of it.

Regards

[6th-sense]

ahhhh i see that clears that up then...also looking through your post why do you use lw registery yourself if it has no advantage?

[cofi]

This system have no logical explanation, math probability is very wrong.

I've played this for several hundred spins and there are too many loses, br goes down and down faster then it recovers.

Last couple of sessions 8/12 12/8 9/11 14/6 10/10 13/7 11/9 and the very last:

1b1c
1b1a
3c1b
1c1b
1a2b
1c2b 8/12

-- next session was 11/9

Randomness doesn't know probability nor maths, in the short terms at last.

[vile]

It is one great


CIRCUS

[StackBundles]

these are getting BORING! 40 units you might aswell trade football tennis nba.... least its not random and you can predict outcomes which you can also use past results to determine bets plus your not gambling your closing trades with profits get educated!

[amk]

Why put so much effort in discrediting a method? If people like the method and they want to play it let them. JL is not trying to waste anybodies time. He continually stresses to test anything before you play it. So, test 1000 games and see the result. If its good, hey it might be worth a try, if its bad then by all means come back and kindly inform everybody. Don't just say this is no good.