Author Topic: Betting against a sequence of spins  (Read 10610 times)

december

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 375
  • Thanked: 39 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: Betting against a sequence of spins
« Reply #30 on: January 15, 2016, 09:49:51 AM »
@palestis

Is it not dark night over there?
 

palestis

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 611
  • Thanked: 401 times
Re: Betting against a sequence of spins
« Reply #31 on: January 15, 2016, 10:01:02 AM »
@palestis

Is it not dark night over there?
Yes it is very dark in this country, but the great roulette minds should work all hours on their beloved subject.
 

december

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 375
  • Thanked: 39 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: Betting against a sequence of spins
« Reply #32 on: January 15, 2016, 10:24:54 AM »
"...with patience of a rock from the bottom of the ocean..."
 

Rourke

  • New
  • **
  • Posts: 101
  • Thanked: 17 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: Betting against a sequence of spins
« Reply #33 on: January 15, 2016, 10:26:20 AM »
You are right Palestis and it's actually the same approach BlueAngel made in his Possible Holy Grail post.

I've followed the recommendations on betting against a 8 sequence EC pattern using the Labouchere progression and so far I haven't experienced a loss within a 1.000 spins.
 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth

Sputnik

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 450
  • Thanked: 366 times
Re: Betting against a sequence of spins
« Reply #34 on: January 15, 2016, 07:11:25 PM »

Rourke if you find a progression that can recover 35 singles or 35 loseas and 4 series or 4 wins, then you can win during your life time playing the game, that is 4.96 SD which has happens once during several million of simulations.That is the worst and extreme when you talk about the zig zag pattern.
If you would face 4.96 SD - then it would be the same thing as winning the lottery.

Cheers
 

Reyth

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3318
  • Thanked: 979 times
Re: Betting against a sequence of spins
« Reply #35 on: January 15, 2016, 07:56:26 PM »
I'm a newb when it comes to SD but I am showing 5 SD, as represented by 367 successive misses on a single number as: 0.9999585723876953 which is 1 in 24,138?

Am I correct?
 

Rourke

  • New
  • **
  • Posts: 101
  • Thanked: 17 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: Betting against a sequence of spins
« Reply #36 on: January 15, 2016, 09:18:06 PM »
I'm sorry Sputnik, but I don't know what you mean? If you could explain it to me differently I'm sure I'll find a solution and then we'll make the world a better place ;-)
 

Harryj

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 359
  • Thanked: 164 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: Betting against a sequence of spins
« Reply #37 on: January 20, 2016, 12:49:21 PM »
You are right Palestis and it's actually the same approach BlueAngel made in his Possible Holy Grail post.

I've followed the recommendations on betting against a 8 sequence EC pattern using the Labouchere progression and so far I haven't experienced a loss within a 1.000 spins.

     Hi Rouke,
                   Are you still going strong with your labby? When you say you have had no losses I assume you mean the Labby hasn't gone out of control ? How far do you intend to take it, do you have a stop loss ?

     I am going to suggest that you take a look at the 'Johnson" that I posted.  It may look a little complex but is really quite simple. It is more controllable than a straight Labby.

      Good luck,
                          Harry
 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth

Rourke

  • New
  • **
  • Posts: 101
  • Thanked: 17 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: Betting against a sequence of spins
« Reply #38 on: January 20, 2016, 10:01:32 PM »
Hi Harry

I'm afraid I wasn't that successful with just betting against a sequence of 4-5 spins. So I tried betting against a series of 8 with the Labouchere progression, but I ended up with some pretty high bets that exceeded my stop/loss, so I dropped this approach.

I'm now working on something a bit different. It also involves a pattern approach, but I'll have to see if it sticks even remotely, before posting anything :-)

Thanks - James
 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth

palestis

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 611
  • Thanked: 401 times
Re: Betting against a sequence of spins
« Reply #39 on: January 21, 2016, 03:14:33 AM »
Hi Harry

I'm afraid I wasn't that successful with just betting against a sequence of 4-5 spins. So I tried betting against a series of 8 with the Labouchere progression, but I ended up with some pretty high bets that exceeded my stop/loss, so I dropped this approach.

I'm now working on something a bit different. It also involves a pattern approach, but I'll have to see if it sticks even remotely, before posting anything :-)

Thanks - James
Did you bet against the series of 8 with 8 opposite EC bets, or did you let the first few bets lose virtually and bet the rest? (like you were doing with the series of 4).
In tests, betting 8 EC progression bets may look attractive as it wins the majority of the time, but  in real life after a few lost steps, the bet amount becomes too high to justify winning a very small amount. All it is really doing is getting the lost money back.
A loss of this kind is not only financially devastating, it is psychologically damaging as well.
When you test this type of system, you have to determine the most frequent range, within which the opposite bet breaks the pattern. If for example you find that this happens  between bet 2-5, then you only bet that range which is 4 bets.
Unfortunately, with patters breakers you have to bet a lot of numbers. In dozen/column pattern breaker you have to bet 24 numbers. The problem is, the progression will have to stop before its tested steps mandate, due to the threat of a large loss.
To bet lesser numbers, the pattern repeater is a better choice. 1 dozen, 1 Ds, 1 or 2 Quads, etc.
But the dynamics are different. Extensive testing will reveal the facts.
Is someone is gifted with extreme patience, betting fewer number is the way to go.

« Last Edit: January 21, 2016, 03:57:41 AM by palestis »
 

Rourke

  • New
  • **
  • Posts: 101
  • Thanked: 17 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: Betting against a sequence of spins
« Reply #40 on: January 21, 2016, 09:42:36 AM »
I actually bet against the whole series of 8 with opposite EC bets. I like your idea about finding the range where you'll get the most frequent hits (2-5) and then place virtual bets until you reach that range.

So perhaps a good strategy would be virtually bet against the first 3 in a sequence of 8 and then start betting using Labouchere. When winning, you stop betting on that sequence and start a new one.

I agree, that one has to be patient when betting against a pattern. But you could track serveral different patterns... Like RED/BLACK, ODD/EVEN, DOZENS etc...
 

Real

  • Fighting the war on absurdity one foolish idea at a time.
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1220
  • Thanked: 137 times
  • Gender: Female
Re: Betting against a sequence of spins
« Reply #41 on: January 21, 2016, 07:55:18 PM »
Hmm....exactly how does the previous sequence reach forward in time and change the number of pockets that remain on the wheel again?

If the number of pockets on the wheel remain the same from one spin to the next ...then how do the odds change when you bet the opposite of the last sequence or spin?

Logic...it's always in the way.

-Real
 

Reyth

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3318
  • Thanked: 979 times
Re: Betting against a sequence of spins
« Reply #42 on: January 21, 2016, 08:20:55 PM »
How does repeating the same thing over and over change what we think again?  REALITY CHECK.

Besides how does the number of appearances in a streak drop off (practically speaking) to none with each successive appearance again?  Yes you say there is no connection with the "odds" but unfortunately you cannot prove that whereas the numbers speak for themselves.  I will believe what I can see rather than your theory thanks.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2016, 08:23:21 PM by Reyth »
 

Real

  • Fighting the war on absurdity one foolish idea at a time.
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1220
  • Thanked: 137 times
  • Gender: Female
Re: Betting against a sequence of spins
« Reply #43 on: January 21, 2016, 08:23:41 PM »
I've handily proven my point.

Again...logic, it's always in the way.
 

Reyth

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3318
  • Thanked: 979 times
Re: Betting against a sequence of spins
« Reply #44 on: January 21, 2016, 08:25:33 PM »
So have I.  Your logic is impractical at best.  Good luck convincing anyone that knows how to play roulette.