### Author Topic: Looking for a book  (Read 3002 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

#### scepticus

• Hero Member
• Posts: 2401
• Thanked: 522 times
##### Re: Looking for a book
« Reply #15 on: July 11, 2017, 03:07:53 AM »

Don't buy the book (i have it) and i can give you complete copy of the method with nice and clear instructions.
PM me you email and i send you a copy from a known AP guy who use the method as selection method to hide is tracking for advantage play.

Cheers

Thanks Sputnik
Interesting but not Earth Shattering . Another Hot Number  number !

#### Bayes

• Veteran Member
• Posts: 688
• Thanked: 563 times
• roulettician.com
##### Re: Looking for a book
« Reply #16 on: July 11, 2017, 07:58:30 AM »
Scep, I also have the book. I bought it a few years ago from a second hand bookshop in Charing Cross road for £1.50. RWD claims that  after years developing and researching the system he used it in 566 sessions, during which the numbers qualified a total of 1,202 times. Of those strings played, there were 413 winners and 789 losses, which gives a win rate of about 34.3%.

The probability of getting at least one hit for a single number in 9 spins is about 22%, so either RWD was lying or the sample size was too small. I don't believe he deliberately set out to deceive or that he wrote the book to make money; he was already a highly successful man at the time the book was written so why would he need to?

IMO he was just lucky with the system he created. He didn't understand statistical theory so didn't know how to draw the correct conclusion from his results, and so thought he had created a winning system. Indeed, he is quite scathing of mathematicians in the book, calling them "eggheads".

So things haven't changed much since the 1960's.

Out of curiosity I did test the system and needless to say the results were negative. The probability of a win in the 9 spins following the trigger came out at the expected 22%

« Last Edit: July 11, 2017, 08:01:18 AM by Bayes »

#### Sputnik

• Veteran Member
• Posts: 608
• Thanked: 531 times
##### Re: Looking for a book
« Reply #17 on: July 11, 2017, 09:54:51 AM »

Scep everything change the game when Bayes teach me the following ...

Line hit within 4 attempts same as EC bet
Corner 6 attempts
Street 8 attempts
Split 12 attempts
Single number 25 attempts

I avoid the dozen position as i can't understand how Bayes come to the conclusion that dozen also have 4 attempts being equal a EC bet when a Line has that probability with six numbers and not twelve numbers.

Cheers

#### Bayes

• Veteran Member
• Posts: 688
• Thanked: 563 times
• roulettician.com
##### Re: Looking for a book
« Reply #18 on: July 11, 2017, 10:53:08 AM »
I avoid the dozen position as i can't understand how Bayes come to the conclusion that dozen also have 4 attempts being equal a EC bet when a Line has that probability with six numbers and not twelve numbers.

I guess that must have been a mistake or typo. For a dozen the chance of at least one hit is 54% in 2 spins.

Alternatively, the probability is 52% for at least two hits in 5 spins:

« Last Edit: July 11, 2017, 10:57:43 AM by Bayes »

The following users thanked this post: Reyth

#### Sputnik

• Veteran Member
• Posts: 608
• Thanked: 531 times
##### Re: Looking for a book
« Reply #19 on: July 11, 2017, 03:10:44 PM »

Thanks Bayes :-) for clearing that up ...

Cheers

#### scepticus

• Hero Member
• Posts: 2401
• Thanked: 522 times
##### Re: Looking for a book
« Reply #20 on: July 11, 2017, 03:58:36 PM »
Thanks Bayes and sputnik.
I  think it is an idea / ideas that leads to success . We need to consider the Probabilities but  I don’t think that they are  the Be-All - And End All in playing roulette .
Roulette is much harder than most other forms of gambling because it is forever changing .The Randomness of the wheel creates uncertainty and you just cannot calculate uncertainty.
I  cannot understand those in the forum who claim that they can beat uncertainty  .Whether AP, Mr.J or Thomas Clear I just don’t believe them . For them Probability Theory seems to be a foreign country.
The best we can do is make an Educated Guess but be aware that it is a guess .This may sound pessimistic to some but it isn’t .I am an Optimist ( aren’t all gamblers ? ) but I think we need to be realistic about the problem.
Binomial distributions are fine as far as they go but roulette has 37 numbers so the problem is largely multinomial  . Breaking the problem down to , say, dozens ,streets , corners etc.we can use binomial distribution but, even then, it does not produce certainties and we must be wary of this. No matter how or what we bet we must be constantly be aware that
“ We Take A Chance ! “ !!
I regard an 8/1 Double / Parlay as having the same odds as a corner . Bayes’ binomial calculator says I can expect a win in an average 6 spins. I was successful when betting the first 8bets with 1 unit  and 2 units on the 9th.. Noticing that I won quite often within 5 bets I bet only the first 5  -  and lost.  Betting only the first 6 would have also showed a loss  but by betting the 7th  and / or / 8th and /or 9th  more often than  not recovered the prior loss in that series.
The question that brings up is “ When to stop ? ” To be honest I still don’t know the answer to that but my preference is “  a short time at the table  ! ”
We can all hold different views but I think we all need to be realistic . Unfortunately,  some in the forum are not .
BTW I won't be using RWD's method .Ihave no need of it .

#### Bayes

• Veteran Member
• Posts: 688
• Thanked: 563 times
• roulettician.com
##### Re: Looking for a book
« Reply #21 on: July 12, 2017, 11:33:45 AM »
Breaking the problem down to , say, dozens ,streets , corners etc.we can use binomial distribution but, even then, it does not produce certainties and we must be wary of this.

The Binomial distribution makes certain assumptions: that outcomes are independent and the probabilities don't change between spins. Of course probability is not certainty, but if the assumptions hold then the outcomes will tend toward those binomial probabilities as the sample size increases.

If the sample size isn't adequate then results can be misleading. That's what happened in the case of RWD's system IMO; he didn't realise that the variance dominated over his sample but mistakenly concluded that his empirical result of 34% was the long-term average (probability).

You could do a hypothesis test on his results. How likely is it that he got the results he claimed by chance over that number of trials? If the p-value is tiny it would suggest that he either made mistakes or was just trying to sell books.

#### scepticus

• Hero Member
• Posts: 2401
• Thanked: 522 times
##### Re: Looking for a book
« Reply #22 on: July 12, 2017, 12:30:07 PM »
I have long argued that gambling requires  us to use assumptions and, of course , if our assumptions are correct then we can claim to have an Edge.
The main problem I see with sample size is that the size of the sample size is subjective. I have seen no generally accepted  sample size for roulette . I also say that each additional “ spin” multiplies by 37 (or3  or whatever ) so the problem is magnified exponentially .
I agree that RWD is mistaken in thinking that his small sample is repeatable . It seems though that he has used it as a cover for his AP strategy . Like other AP he think that makes him invisible to casino staff . If only it was  as simple as they make out !

#### Bayes

• Veteran Member
• Posts: 688
• Thanked: 563 times
• roulettician.com
##### Re: Looking for a book
« Reply #23 on: July 12, 2017, 03:23:18 PM »
It seems though that he has used it as a cover for his AP strategy .

I wouldn't call his strategy AP. It's a fairly typical hot number system based only on past spins.

What in your view defines AP?

#### Sputnik

• Veteran Member
• Posts: 608
• Thanked: 531 times
##### Re: Looking for a book
« Reply #24 on: July 12, 2017, 04:30:09 PM »

It seems though that he has used it as a cover for his AP strategy .

I wouldn't call his strategy AP. It's a fairly typical hot number system based only on past spins.

What in your view defines AP?

I mention for Scep that one AP guy who wrote the PDF i send him - has been using RWD with hes own tweak as cover bet when collecting data and charting different physical parameters. So no one say the method is a AP method.
Just wanted to clear that up.

Cheers

#### Bayes

• Veteran Member
• Posts: 688
• Thanked: 563 times
• roulettician.com
##### Re: Looking for a book
« Reply #25 on: July 12, 2017, 05:53:51 PM »
Ok, my mistake. Scep, ignore my last reply.

#### scepticus

• Hero Member
• Posts: 2401
• Thanked: 522 times
##### Re: Looking for a book
« Reply #26 on: July 12, 2017, 09:07:41 PM »
Bayes.
If I bet the dozens as a double / parlay over 2 spins what is the probability of a repeat in ? spins.
I think that it is 4.8 for a 95% chance. Within 5 bets .
What say you ?
1-1
1-2
1-3
2-1
2-2
2-3
3-1
3-2
3-3
And, over the 2 spins. I have a 5 in 9 chance of at least one winner . No matter which one I choose? .

#### Real

• Fighting the war on absurdity one foolish idea at a time.
• Hero Member
• Posts: 1668
• Thanked: 272 times
• Gender:
##### Re: Looking for a book
« Reply #27 on: July 12, 2017, 09:10:13 PM »
I need to clarify some things.

2. There are different types of advantage plays.
3. If you don't have the advantage over the casino... then your method can't win in the long run.  Claiming otherwise is a bit of an oxymoron.
3.  If you don't have the advantage over the casino... then your method can't win in the long run.  Claiming otherwise is a bit of an oxymoron.
4. The goal of most people on this forum is to find a long term winning method.
« Last Edit: July 12, 2017, 11:18:55 PM by Real »

#### scepticus

• Hero Member
• Posts: 2401
• Thanked: 522 times
##### Re: Looking for a book
« Reply #28 on: July 12, 2017, 11:14:38 PM »
Real
When will you realise that there is no Long Run ? There can only be the time that we actually spend  betting. I don't aim to find a long  term wining method . My aim is - Not To Lose but hope to profit oneachand every visit .
With your pessimistic attitude you are in the wrong forum. Strange as it may seem to you we gamblers KNOW that the odds are against us . You fail to realise that gambling is about " Taking a Chance "
Yours is a viewpoint- nothing more. Like parrots all you self- proclaimed AP  constantly repeat the same old- same old - You Cannot Beat The Odds .
Get a Life  !

#### Real

• Fighting the war on absurdity one foolish idea at a time.
• Hero Member
• Posts: 1668
• Thanked: 272 times
• Gender:
##### Re: Looking for a book
« Reply #29 on: July 12, 2017, 11:21:08 PM »
Scepticus,

In this case, I should have simply said, "overtime" or after "enough time has passed."

Here's why:  Every system will fail, long long before the long run ever truly sets in.  Once you reach the point where a four or five standard deviation fluctuation of variance is no longer enough to win, you're basically doomed.