Author Topic: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN  (Read 4934 times)

palestis

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 553
  • Thanked: 288 times
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #120 on: March 20, 2017, 12:50:11 AM »
I tested 5 games so far (manually). It was doing awesome, until my 5th game. The last game I played, I lost 7 progressions in a row (at the 64-64-128 level). I was playing Dozens and Columns at the same time, and the Columns category is the one that lost (the Dozens did a profit).

With your strategy, it should not matter whether we play Dozens or Columns, right?
When you say you lost 7 progressions do you mean you lost 7 back to back triggers (3 bets per trigger which brings the total to 21 bets) or 7 progressions by themselves, which mean 2.33 triggers?  (7:3=2.33). That is about a little more than2 back to back losses,  but still under 3.
When you play dozens and columns simultaneously the dynamics of the system change. Plus you have to observe the rules for both doz. and col. at the same time. Which can be a bit confusing.
One or the other should do just fine.
And last but not least do you play it in an RNG online casino ( or online live out of a studio), or is it a B+M casino? Because in that case it becomes a question of trust.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2017, 01:03:36 AM by palestis »
 
The following users thanked this post: kav

Reyth

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3014
  • Thanked: 798 times
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #121 on: March 20, 2017, 01:12:22 AM »
Sure programs can output to a file ONLY the spin history associated with X back to back hits, where you may specify whatever X is and it can even be multiple choices within X and it will do this over an unlimited amount of trials AND it can even do this with B&M spins like the ones we have on this site.
 

palestis

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 553
  • Thanked: 288 times
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #122 on: March 20, 2017, 02:13:22 AM »
I agree that number of back to back losses is the overriding factor when using a progression.

[quote}
But if using a full martingale progression the limit would be more like 4 back to back losses. If 8 occurred it would take you well over the house limit.

4 losses x 3 spins per attack = a progression of 12.

A full marty is 1,1,2,3,4,6,9,13,20,30,45,68, and continuing on the stakes really start to get silly.
I don't know how many progressions will go over the limit.
In most European casinos, progressions are only allowed in multiples of the minimum. If it's $5 it has to be 5-10-15 -20 etc.
In American casinos once you satisfy the minimum you can progress in subdivisions of the minimum,
If it is $5 you can bet $6, $7 $8 etc. on a dozen outside. ( but not 50 cent subdivisions).
Also after you bet the maximum outside, you can bet the dozen numbers inside plus the dozen numbers splits, its DS's, streets, and quads. So you have room to increase the bets before hitting the limit. 

A maximum of 4 back to back losses seems remarkable, it corresponds to a max losing streak of 12, when we know that for a dozen it can go to 30+. The trouble is that these high variance outcomes don't tend to show up until you've tested many thousands of spins. I'm assuming that the variance of the bet is no lower than a random bet, which may not be the case - in fact it can't be so if the max losing streak is only 12.
It is remarkable indeed. But again that can only happen (4 back to back), after total disregard to the rules. In effect it should never happen in actual play. Or it may only happen after hundreds and hundreds of wins, which will have no catastrophic results to the bottom line. ( especially when you use a smoother progression). So in effect all you have to worry about are the rare cases of 3 back to back losses that defied the rules. And being rare it's not terribly bad if you encounter this situation once in a great while. A healthy B/R should neutralize it very easily.
I guess a possible explanation is the law of the thirds. An XXY triggers shows a complete cycle of 36 spins. The 12 numbers absent in a full cycle would be dozen Z.
In the next cycle you  most likely expect to see YZZ or YYZ. ( X probably exhausted its turn, otherwise its persistent reappearance will fall under the rules of exception or "no bet".
Therefore you'd anticipate to see more appearances of dozen Z or the target dozen Y.
If  Y shows up one time even if it is in between Z's you win, if it is a persistent Z again, it rings the alarm bells. And you stop betting, waiting for a new situation. It is rare and doubtful that the next trigger will create another anomaly.
Whatever the reason is, I would take the long term test results for granted.

 
« Last Edit: March 20, 2017, 02:18:57 AM by palestis »
 

TERMINATOR

  • New
  • **
  • Posts: 94
  • Thanked: 106 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #123 on: March 20, 2017, 05:56:47 AM »
When you say you lost 7 progressions do you mean you lost 7 back to back triggers (3 bets per trigger which brings the total to 21 bets)

Yes, 21 bet in a row. I have attached my game below. It is the COLUMNS that took the loss, not the Dozens.

When you play dozens and columns simultaneously the dynamics of the system change.

Hmmm. I did not realize this. In what way does it change?

This is what I did, just FYI. I copy and pasted over 200 roulette spins, then I played the DOZENS (with splits) first. When I finished, I went back to the beginning of the Spins and played the same game again, but with the COLUMNS (and Splits).

To me, this would be no different than if 2 people approached the same game at the same time, and one played Dozens while the other played Columns. I was thinking of doing this with my brother the next time we go to a casino. We want to be at the same table to keep each other company, using this strategy. I figured we could use it at the same time, without getting in each others way, if one of us uses the columns instead of the dozens.

Plus you have to observe the rules for both doz. and col. at the same time. Which can be a bit confusing.
Yes, I did observe the rules for both. It WOULD be confusing if I played them both at the same time, but as explained above, I did them separately in the same game. This is for TESTING purposes only, I like comparing different ways of doing things to the same spins. PLUS it makes testing go faster when I can play the same numbers twice.

And last but not least do you play it in an RNG online casino ( or online live out of a studio), or is it a B+M casino? Because in that case it becomes a question of trust.

I downloaded millions of real roulette spins from real casino's (I do not trust RNG roulette on gambling sites). I copy and paste 200 spins at a time from those files and paste them into excel to test them.

I still like your system a lot, palestis. I will try it with a less aggressive progression. I like Bayes suggestion about the Holloway also. It's less aggressive and will last longer in the case of a bad run.
 

TERMINATOR

  • New
  • **
  • Posts: 94
  • Thanked: 106 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #124 on: March 20, 2017, 07:39:51 AM »
*UPDATE*

I played the same game AGAIN (game #5), playing only the Columns (I lost 499 units that game), except this time I used the Holloway Progression as suggested by Bayes. I still used ALL the rules that Palestis gave.

When I got to the SAME spot where I was down 499 last game, I was only down 113 units this game! BUT, since I did not hit my table max yet, I continued playing the game (planning on stopping once I hit 200 spins).

I RESOLVED all bets and was in the positive once I hit the 8th progression level ! But then a strange thing happened. After I won on the 8th progression level and I dropped back down to the first level, I LOST 7 progression levels again, in the same game! WTF. (I did win once on level 5, but I was still down, so I repeated level 5 and lost until level eight).

The Holloway progression brought me out of it AGAIN, for the 2nd time, and I ended up 18 units up!!! Much better than 499 units down using the original progression.

My game is attached here. I did not make this up, it is real roulette spins from a real casino (I downloaded to my computer).

This progression does seem like a really good one to use. It takes a little longer to recoup losses than the original, but it will BUST less frequently! Thanks for suggesting this, Bayes! I think this is a good improvement to your strategy, Palestis. For those who prefer a safer progression, I mean.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2017, 07:49:50 AM by TERMINATOR »
 
The following users thanked this post: Bayes, Reyth

Bayes

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 577
  • Thanked: 434 times
  • roulettician.com
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #125 on: March 20, 2017, 09:08:46 AM »
Hi Terminator, glad you like the progression. It's actually a sort of "universal" progression in that it can be used for other bets, not just 2-1. According to Holloway in his book, "Full Time Gambler", there are two ways to use it:

1. The "rise and fall" way. This is as I described it earlier, but you can also use it with odds other than 2-1. After a win you move back as many places as the odds to 1. e.g. if using it with a double street (5-1), after a win you would move back 5 steps. When you get back to step one you will be in profit.

2. The "no retreat" way. In this case you continue to move up the progression until you have a new high (regardless of whether the prior result was a win or loss), then reset to one.

I didn't post the full progression, which is actually this:

1,1,1,1,1,2,2,2,2,3,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,14,16,18,20,22,25,28,30,32,35,40,45,50,55,60,70,80,90,100,110,120,135,150

It's based on a fixed percentage scale, so successive steps are generated by multiplying the current value by a fixed % and then rounding (the above uses about 10%). So you could generate your own progressions using different percentages. e.g. if using 20% you proceed like this:

1. 1

next step is 1.2 x 1 = 1.2 (1, rounded)

2. 1

next step is 1.2 x 1.2 = 1.44 (1, rounded)

3. 1

next step is 1.2 x 1.44 = 1.728 (2, rounded)

4. 2

next step is 1.2 x 1.728 = 2.074 (2, rounded)

5. 2

and so on. Get the idea?
« Last Edit: March 20, 2017, 06:57:17 PM by Bayes »
 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth

TERMINATOR

  • New
  • **
  • Posts: 94
  • Thanked: 106 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #126 on: March 20, 2017, 05:31:12 PM »
Thank you for expanding on the Holloway, Bayes. Yes, I understand. It does make sense. I like how it's adjustable.

When I played it in my game #5, I used Palestis's rule of staying at the same level until it's resolved.

I will now try it the 2 other ways you mentioned. Dropping down 2 level after each win, and going UP after a win until it's resolved. Interesting.

Thanks again for sharing!
 

petespin

  • Mature Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 235
  • Thanked: 48 times
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #127 on: March 20, 2017, 06:51:08 PM »
odd dozen bet its a very good bet selection  when its played in hit and run fashion WITHOUT progressions , like jim does , moving from table to table and watching at scorebords to find a good bet oppurtunity , from the other hand its fine to increase the size of your unit after 2 lost rtiggers when u already ve seen virtual lost triggers , its asure thing that if look at scorebords u ll find a couple of virtual lost triggers , seems boring, but its safer imo .
 

Bayes

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 577
  • Thanked: 434 times
  • roulettician.com
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #128 on: March 20, 2017, 06:56:30 PM »
I will now try it the 2 other ways you mentioned. Dropping down 2 level after each win, and going UP after a win until it's resolved. Interesting.

Thanks again for sharing!

Term, I should have been clearer in my post regarding the 2nd way (I've amended the post). You continue to move up the progression regardless of a prior win or loss (more risky). But by all means try going up after only after a win (instead of a loss), it'll be interesting to see the results.  :D

Actually, Holloway does mention several "wagering improvements" which include what he calls the delayed climb, which is like Oscars grind; you raise bets after wins and then keep at the same level until the next win, then raise again.

There is leveling off : stay at a certain level such as 5 or 10 units until you recover, and also slump-breaking : action stops after a certain number of losses and then resumed when the winners start coming in.

He adds: "In all these attempts at improving the situation one frequently meets with frustration; the very next play after you stopped may the needed winner. In time you will get to where the frustrations do not bother you, they are part of the game. If you are following definite rules, you must know from research that the new pattern of winners and losers that you are creating is an improvement even though it has its rough spots."
 
« Last Edit: March 20, 2017, 07:11:26 PM by Bayes »
 

petespin

  • Mature Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 235
  • Thanked: 48 times
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #129 on: March 20, 2017, 06:57:00 PM »
u ll never forget that u only need 1 sequence from hell to lose all your br, and this is what progressions do.....
 

petespin

  • Mature Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 235
  • Thanked: 48 times
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #130 on: March 20, 2017, 07:02:55 PM »
and the real problem is when u start to calculate from 5e your steps even from 2,5e which is the lowest limit in my country s casinos !
 

TERMINATOR

  • New
  • **
  • Posts: 94
  • Thanked: 106 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #131 on: March 20, 2017, 07:20:52 PM »
Bayes, you were clear, I understood when you said to move up after a win or a loss. That's how I replayed my game #5.

Anyway, here are the results of all 4 ways I played.
to Recap:
- I am risking no more than a 500 unit loss.
- There were TWO 21 losses in a row during same game.
- The first one was a continuous 21 losses.
- The second one had 1 win during the 21 losses (but was still severely in debt)

1st - Palesis's Progression: 1-1-2, 2-2-4, etc. (when win, stay at same level until resolved. Move up if lose)
BUST! 499 unit loss
(Did NOT make it passed the first 21 losses)

2nd - Holloway's Progression, using Palesis's rule for HIS progression above (when win, stay at same level until resolved. Move up if lose)
18 units up
(made it passed BOTH 21 losses)

3rd - Holloway's Progression, using rule 1 (move back 2 steps after each win)
BUST! 448 unit loss
(Did NOT make it passed the first 21 losses)

4th - Holloway's Progression, using rule 2 (continue to move up the progression regardless of a prior win or loss)
!!! 72 units up !!!
(made it passed BOTH 21 losses, and made a HUGE profit after each loss was resolved!)

I really did not expect the 4th progression to do well during this game from hell.

« Last Edit: March 21, 2017, 04:10:53 PM by TERMINATOR »
 
The following users thanked this post: Bayes, Reyth

palestis

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 553
  • Thanked: 288 times
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #132 on: March 20, 2017, 09:15:01 PM »
------------------ATTENTION                 ATTENTION----------------------------
@ TERMINATOR

I copied all your numbers from your Excel sheet and tried to process the columns.
But as I was doing it,  I noticed that you had the same numbers repeated as shown in the pic. below.
Am I missing something?
The numbers I copied coincided side by side and as you can see they are the same groups of numbers repeated.
Can you check your data? I hope I'm not missing something.
Thanks
PS: They are the same numbers you used for the dozen system.
Let's hope you made an omission and your disappointment from the results was unnecessary.
 

« Last Edit: March 20, 2017, 09:25:56 PM by palestis »
 

Reyth

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3014
  • Thanked: 798 times
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #133 on: March 20, 2017, 09:18:45 PM »
LOL the session from heck indeed!  Deja Vu Roulette!!! XD
 

TERMINATOR

  • New
  • **
  • Posts: 94
  • Thanked: 106 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #134 on: March 20, 2017, 09:27:38 PM »
Yes, I see. There is a small section where I repeated the numbers. I must have hit "CTRL+V" twice in a row without knowing it (I don't copy all 200 numbers at once, but do them in sections). I will re-do this game with the repeats taken out.

However, it IS still good to know that of all the progressions, if there is a session from hell like this, the Holloway does good in TWO cases. I prefer the one with YOUR rules, where, at a win, we STAY at the same level until it's resolved. And only go up again at a loss. It is a safer progression than going up regardless of a win or loss.

I will post the new results when I finish all 4 progressions again.

Sorry about the error.
 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth