Author Topic: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN  (Read 16246 times)

palestis

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 596
  • Thanked: 384 times
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #135 on: March 20, 2017, 09:37:41 PM »
Don't worry.  You are not going to find 7 back to back losses in the next one million years.
Think of your honest mistake as a bad dream.
And don't worry about the progression. As long as back to back losses stay under 4, any progression method should result in profit. It then becomes a matter of personal preference.
 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth

Reyth

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3318
  • Thanked: 979 times
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #136 on: March 20, 2017, 09:45:31 PM »
Just to make sure the air is clear about this, I seriously would need more than one post to detail all the mistakes I have made in programming and playing roulette; before I got done, you would be certain I was 8 years old!
 

palestis

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 596
  • Thanked: 384 times
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #137 on: March 20, 2017, 10:38:57 PM »
No problem at all.
Some of us got very worried, about Terminator's test results. Now that it has been established that it was a programming oversight, we can all  get a good night's sleep. The system still works, and that's reassuring. 
 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth

TERMINATOR

  • Mature Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 231
  • Thanked: 294 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #138 on: March 20, 2017, 11:31:09 PM »
Don't worry.  You are not going to find 7 back to back losses in the next one million years.
Think of your honest mistake as a bad dream.
And don't worry about the progression. As long as back to back losses stay under 4, any progression method should result in profit. It then becomes a matter of personal preference.

That's cool. I thought it was very bizarre that there were 7 losses in a row. I'm glad you found my error.

I'm still going to compare these 4 different progressions, side by side, to see which one is more profitable over many different games. I agree it's a personal preference. For those who are interested, I'll post a summery of my results after I play through a set amount of games. And I'll only play DOZENS (without columns or split bets).

Again, sorry for the scare.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2017, 05:48:39 AM by TERMINATOR »
 
The following users thanked this post: Bayes, Reyth

Bayes

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 653
  • Thanked: 536 times
  • roulettician.com
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #139 on: March 21, 2017, 11:05:04 AM »
Nice work Term. Even though the run from hell was due to duplicated data it's nice to know that the Holloway progression pulled through, just in case the unthinkable does happen.  :-X

I will be adding it to the tracker.
 
 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth, TERMINATOR

TERMINATOR

  • Mature Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 231
  • Thanked: 294 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #140 on: March 22, 2017, 07:22:15 PM »
For those who are interested, I played 6 more games, comparing the 3 Progressions side by side, and these are my results.

The 2 Holloway Progressions below are:
1) on a win, bet the same as previous bet, on a lose increase, until a new high.
2) regardless of win or lose, go up in the progression until a new high.

(These are the 2 progressions that survived the "Deja Vu Game from Hell" mistake I did).

                  Original Strategy    Holloway Same      Holloway Up

Game #1:                   31            15            20
Game #2:                 53            26            36
Game #3:                 44            23            22
Game #4:                 82            32            26
Game #5:                 36            25            23
Game #6:                  21            10              13

Totals Units:                267        131           140

In games that go "normally", it seems Palestis's original progression is definitely the BEST. But, the Holloway is good to survive any unexpected games from hell, at a sacrifice of profits from normal games. But, since Palestis said that losing 21 bets in a row is a once in a lifetime event, I'd say that his 1-1-2, 2-2-4, etc. progression definitely works the best for this game!

BTW, I was also comparing the original Holloway in which on every win, you move back 2. But that did so much worse than the others, sometimes getting a LOSS for the game, that I dropped it.

Anyway, thanks again for sharing your strategy and progression Palesis! I really like playing this of all the methods I tried already. And thank you for sharing the Holloway, Bayes, because if a game is going extremely bad, maybe we can temporarily switch to the Holloway until it turns around.

Oh, and here's 2 other stats during those 6 games:

                                      Original Progression     Holloway Same       Holloway Up
Highest Bet Made:                      32                            35                          28
Average Highest Bet Made:       20                            13                           12

(Note. "Average Highest Bet Made" is derived by taking the highest bet made for each individual game. Then adding all 6 of those highs together, and dividing by 6).

« Last Edit: March 22, 2017, 08:54:14 PM by TERMINATOR »
 
The following users thanked this post: kav, palestis, Bayes, Reyth

palestis

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 596
  • Thanked: 384 times
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #141 on: March 22, 2017, 09:10:06 PM »
What were the highest consecutive trigger losses? (@ 3 bets each).
Hopefully not 7.
 

TERMINATOR

  • Mature Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 231
  • Thanked: 294 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #142 on: March 22, 2017, 11:28:54 PM »
Well, I avoided mentioning this, because I was afraid you'd think I screwed up again. Anyway, I'll start by saying EVERY game (but that one) went VERY smoothly, I did not get above a level 3.

But in the worst game, I reached level 6 TWICE in the same game. I know what you're thinking. But I DOUBLE CHECKED to make sure there were no repeats like last time. It was a bad run from the very first bet.

I've attached the game here for your inspection.

I followed all your Red Flags to the best of my knowledge.

On a POSITIVE note, even though this was the WORST game for levels, it's actually my most PROFITABLE GAME EVER. I made 82 units profit, which is 2 to 3 times more than my average game at 200 spins.

If you have time to play through it, and you do not reach the 6th level, I'd like to understand why, and what I may be doing wrong, or what I can change, to avoid going so high in the progression.

Thanks Palestis!
« Last Edit: March 23, 2017, 05:24:07 AM by TERMINATOR »
 
The following users thanked this post: palestis, Bayes, Reyth

palestis

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 596
  • Thanked: 384 times
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #143 on: March 23, 2017, 10:04:13 AM »
Yes I will check it.
But as  a first observation,  from the excel sheet, where the trigger was  12-7-34, the target dozen  (H) has appeared multiple times previously , including a 0 in between. In a live setting that would've raised  my attention. And most likely I would've avoided betting in that roulette.  Not to mention that at the very beginning after the first trigger the dozens were repeating very frequently.
Indicating that this roulette was on a roll.
Actually there are no exact rules as to how many spins you have to skip after the presence of a red flag until you encounter a more normal situation. In real life it would mean move on to another roulette. Instead of waiting for the same roulette to become normal.
But I will examine it in depth later.
But I can't stress enough the value of a live play using many roulettes. Not only red flags appear clearly in front of you, examining previous spins in the score board can also indicate extended anomalies for a particular roulette. At the same time the next table might be perfectly suited for this system's purposes.
« Last Edit: March 23, 2017, 10:17:57 AM by palestis »
 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth, TERMINATOR

Bayes

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 653
  • Thanked: 536 times
  • roulettician.com
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #144 on: March 23, 2017, 10:05:56 AM »
I haven't yet seen a losing streak of more than 4, but then I probably haven't tested over as many spins as Terminator. However, consecutive losses aren't the only danger. I just had a session which included this w/L sequence:

w
L
w
L
w
L
W
L
L
L
W
W
L
L
W

Using the standard progression of 1 1 2 2 2 4 4 4 8 ... and sticking at the same level after a win can escalate the stakes quickly with a sequence like the above.
 

kav

  • www.Roulette30.com
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1654
  • Thanked: 698 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #145 on: March 23, 2017, 12:06:58 PM »
Btw,

I would like to mention that what TERM is doing, comparing how different progressions produce different results when attacking the same spins, is one of the deepest form of roulette research. It is a very useful part of developing any roulette strategy and can teach us alot about the different effects of different wagering plans (progressions).
 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth, TERMINATOR

TERMINATOR

  • Mature Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 231
  • Thanked: 294 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #146 on: March 23, 2017, 12:46:18 PM »
Thanks for taking the time to look at it, Palestis. I look forward to your detailed review later. I'm sure others will benefit as well.

where the trigger was  12-7-34, the target dozen  (H) has appeared multiple times previously , including a 0 in between.

Okay. I thought I had played that specific section correctly. If I may break down my thought process for this section:

29   H
28   H
34   H
0         (3 appearances of H, and 1 zero, means I skip the next trigger)
3   L
34   H
21   M
31   H  (This HMH is the first trigger. I skip this)
12   L
7   L
34   H (This LLH is the 2nd trigger. So I bet for H next spin).
20   M

Quote
In a live setting that would've raised  my attention. And most likely I would've avoided betting in that roulette.

Really? Let me see if I understand. So, because there was a combination of an "HHH" and a "0" together, maybe we should skip two triggers instead of 1? Whereas an "HHH" by itself would only require skipping 1 trigger?

Quote
Not to mention that at the very beginning after the first trigger the dozens were repeating very frequently. Indicating that this roulette was on a roll.

Yes, this was bizarre. My first bet was on the 4th spin of the game. During those repeats I waited and waited, and it was not until around 30 spins later I placed my 2nd bet. I thought I was very patient and correctly waited for this weird streak to be over.

Quote
Actually there are no exact rules as to how many spins you have to skip after the presence of a red flag until you encounter a more normal situation. In real life it would mean move on to another roulette. Instead of waiting for the same roulette to become normal.

Okay, but assuming only 1 roulette wheel is available (like is often the case with live roulette dealer games online), it would be good to know how many "triggers" to skip in a situation like this.

Up to the "12-7-34" trigger (mentioned previously), there were FIVE streaks of 3 repeats, and ONE streak of 5 repeats. And NO WINS during that period. Maybe a rule can be added along the lines of, "For every streak of repeating numbers, skip 1 trigger." So, in this case, there were a total of 6 streaks, so we would have to skip 6 triggers? Something like that?

Quote
But I can't stress enough the value of a live play using many roulettes. Not only red flags appear clearly in front of you, examining previous spins in the score board can also indicate extended anomalies for a particular roulette. At the same time the next table might be perfectly suited for this system's purposes.

That is a very good idea, Palestis. To examine several score boards before choosing the table to play at. I like that. Or, to change to another table that's more favorable, if possible. But, if not possible (because other table are full, or not available), it would suck to not play at all after making a long trip to a casino. So, it seems if there was some kind of "in case rule" to help when the roulette wheel is on a roll, that would help us play better with your Single Dozens.

Since you have played so many more games than I have, and have been so good at spotting the Red Flags you explained already, it seems a rule to avoid escalating a progression too far would be good. Like "For every 1 streak, skip 1 trigger" or something. Waiting a little longer to play would be better than losing, or not playing at all.

Thanks for your input!
« Last Edit: March 23, 2017, 01:42:42 PM by TERMINATOR »
 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth

TERMINATOR

  • Mature Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 231
  • Thanked: 294 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #147 on: March 23, 2017, 01:03:44 PM »

Using the standard progression of 1 1 2 2 2 4 4 4 8 ... and sticking at the same level after a win can escalate the stakes quickly with a sequence like the above.

Yes, which is what happened in my particular game. I did not have many losses in a row. Just the contrary, I had many wins! And yet, it kept getting deeper and deeper into the progression. Scary.

The 1-1-2, 2-2-4 progression definitely has the biggest debt while getting deeper into the progressions (which means it is more likely to bust quicker on a bad wheel), but it is also the most profitable in normal games. This fact may make up for the occasional "bust", if there ever is one.

Btw,

I would like to mention that what TERM is doing, comparing how different progressions produce different results when attacking the same spins, is one of the deepest form of roulette research. It is a very useful part of developing any roulette strategy and can teach us alot about the different effects of different wagering plans (progressions).

Thank you, Kav. I have compared many other progression also that I have not shared (because they failed miserably). But I am just trying to find the BEST one for all of us to use. So far, Palestis's Original progression, and the aggressive Holloway Progressions, are the very best 2 so far.

Maybe we can add a rule, such as, "If there's more than 2 or 3  streaks of repeating dozens in a row, switch to a Holloway Progression until the table normalizes." Or something to that effect? For unusual situations.
 
The following users thanked this post: Bayes, Reyth

palestis

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 596
  • Thanked: 384 times
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #148 on: March 23, 2017, 11:31:21 PM »
I did the test, but I didn't start from the very 1st trigger. (Since I had no info as to what numbers came before the 20-5-23 trigger).
And just as well. Because after that,  there was a tsunami of dozen repetitions including a very strange sequence  of 17-19-15-16-18 which I found very bizarre. Also not just frequent repetitions of the same dozen, but the same DS the dozen belong to, or even same street
In general this was not an ideal roulette session. I found these numbers to be very strange. Frequent repetitions of numbers in a short cycle, such 35-35-20-35-20 and many other things.
These are sequences you usually find in air ball machines.
But I guess anything can happen in roulette.
Anyway I didn't find anything unusual regarding many back to back losses except 4 cases of 2 back to back losses. Which is unusual compared to the lengthy test results I have done over time.
Considering that to play roulette the right way,  you need a very large B/R compared to the min. chip value. 
With $100 it is pointless to play with $10 or even $5 chips. Unless you proceed with the expectation that good luck will be on your side.
If I was to play this session or any session with $10 staring chip value, I would make sure I have $2,000 in my pocket. In that case the 2 back to back losses would've been wiped out easily even with an aggressive  progression.
Which means after 2 back to back losses, the 3rd trigger that won, would've recovered the previous losses and showed a profit too. That's the power of the large B/R to min. chip value ratio.
It's just when the consecutive losses are long and relatively frequent,  that render any size B/R useless.
 In this particular system long back to back losses, don't seem to happen. And it has  been tested for a long time by quite a few people. And nobody reports any problem regarding the length of consecutive losses.
@TERM.
I understand that sometimes you don't have choices of many roulettes, but in a B+M casino you should be able to have several choices any time.
By the way I wouldn't play this system or any system in an online studio live casino.
DUBLINBET is live with actual players playing the same roulette you play online , but once you establish a winning consistency, disconnections and switching to RNG does happen. Usually when you are at a loss during a progression.
The bottom line is that when you play the system long enough, or test it long enough you will begin to see things that are not obvious when you are new to this system.
The strongest red flag is when a repetitive dozen becomes the target dozen immediately following the repetitive sequence.
But there is nothing wrong with adding  your own tweaks, even if that restricts the number of betting opportunities.
Certainty comes first.

« Last Edit: March 23, 2017, 11:51:33 PM by palestis »
 
The following users thanked this post: kav, december, Reyth, Sheridan44, TERMINATOR

palestis

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 596
  • Thanked: 384 times
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #149 on: March 23, 2017, 11:47:35 PM »
@Bayes:
Yes a sequence like the one you mentioned
( W L W L W L W L L  L  W  W  L  L  W)
can be a little problematic.  For those that have a limited B/R, and can't risk larger bets.
 But again with a large B/R there is nothing that could happen to you in the above situation that would cause you to lose your shirt. As a matter of fact that would've been a piece of cake if you run into the above situation.
It is the limitation of available B/R, and the fear of many back to back losses involving betting too many numbers, that gave rise to many conservative progression schemes.
I think when testing a system, it is the maximum consecutive losses that has to be the main focus of the testing. And how frequently they may appear.
There is a close correlation of winning frequency and streaks of back to back losses.
You may win easily $500 playing 2 dozens with $25 chips,
But all it takes is 2 back to back losses to lose $200. ($25-25,  75-75).
Then you are faced with a dilemma:
Bet $225, $225 and recover and make a $25 profit, or lose and suffer a $650 loss. All it takes is  just 3 consecutive losses  to erase a hard earned profit plus $150 out of pocket. . Which by the way it happens very often in two dozen bets.
If the situation you described above looked like W L L L L L W LLL W LLLLL W LLL, and it was happening often, then you would really have a problem, and the system should be immediately rejected. 
That is y testing hundreds of thousands of spins is mandatory, to determine the possible consecutive loss that you may run into and how often as well. And that applies to every system.

« Last Edit: March 24, 2017, 12:43:46 AM by palestis »
 
The following users thanked this post: Bayes, Reyth, TERMINATOR