blockdamofo

Author Topic: Tentative new single dozen idea  (Read 1642 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Viking64

Tentative new single dozen idea
« on: June 30, 2018, 05:13:45 PM »
Fiddling about with my spread sheet the other day, looking at Palestis' single dozen, I tried a wacky thing that I call the mirror.

It goes like this...

Track three spins and record the dozens
If there are not three identical dozens, this is the trigger to bet those three outcomes in reverse
So...1,2,3 - bet 3,2,1
2,2,3 - bet 3,2,2
1,3,1 - bet 1,3,1
And so on. (See the mirror?)
I've tried doing this using overlapping tracking (mainly to take the timing out of the equation) and the percentage wins I'm getting over 10,000 spins (from Bayes's 1m spins download) are similar to the Palestis single dozen - around 69pc win.

In the overlapping version, you can get quite a few back to back losses (LLL), but if when you hit one, you revert to non overlapping (ie do not use any of the six in the mirror as part of the next set) and wait for the next trigger, you can 'walk between the raindrops' and cut the number of Ls.

Anyone want to code this, or try it out or, even better, come up with a brilliant progression.

I am thinking of some kind of up as you win, revert to base if you lose, system - Guetting type thing?

Looking forward to your thoughts...

 

palestis

Re: Tentative new single dozen idea
« Reply #1 on: July 02, 2018, 02:59:15 AM »
initial tests reveal that this system is not vulnerable to too many back to back losses.
Maybe 4 back to back losses max. but in extremely rare occasions.
By employing virtual trigger losses in a B+M casino where you have many roulettes choices, it should be easy to locate virtual losses.
That way, with a little patience, you don't have to have your heart pounding every time you are at a high progression level.
All you have to do is count back 6 numbers to see if there is a single trigger loss or count back 9 numbers to see if there are 2 trigger losses back to back.
In the pic the green circle is the trigger and the green checkmark is a hit. The 3 red X's indicate the losses after the trigger
« Last Edit: July 02, 2018, 03:04:15 AM by palestis »
 
The following users thanked this post: Viking64

Viking64

Re: Tentative new single dozen idea
« Reply #2 on: July 02, 2018, 08:39:48 AM »
That's great, Palestis
Thanks for checking this out for me.
I was wondering in the middle of the night (sad, I know), what would happen if we combined my single doz and yours

3,1,1 - your system says play for 3,3,3
Mine says play for the mirror 1,1,3

So third spin will definitely be a 3, right?!

Probably not, but it made me smile to think of it!  :)

Palestis - any thoughts on a sensible progression?
« Last Edit: July 02, 2018, 08:47:42 AM by Viking64 »
 

palestis

Re: Tentative new single dozen idea
« Reply #3 on: July 02, 2018, 11:40:44 PM »
As I mentioned many times "progression" is the least of my concerns.
The main concern is to have an extremely high hit rate.
And that only  happens if you forgo one of more bets thru the virtual loss process, ( despite some lost winning opportunities). But the increased certainty of a hit, without going deep into a progression,  is well worth it.
It's very important to know (thru extensive testing), the number of back to back losses that a system can suffer. Knowing that, you can juggle the virtual losses, so that the actual bets will result in a hit early, without risking an expensive progression.
If for example you happen to run into 4 back to back losses, and the starting chip is $10, the 4 triggers (@ 3 bets each), will be very high for those who have limited B/R. Then the 5th trigger will be even higher.
Therefore 2 virtually lost triggers, will save you a 6 step progression, and you only have to worry about 3 triggers. That is much more manageable than a progression going for a 5th trigger from step-1.
As far as progression, you can use the standard single dozen progression 1-1-2 or 1-1-1.5.
Then maybe 3-4-5. or less if you opt for recovery , rather than a hit with a profit.
 

Viking64

Re: Tentative new single dozen idea
« Reply #4 on: July 03, 2018, 06:07:09 AM »
Yes. That sits well with how I've thought about it. If you progress too much in hope of more gain, you get nadgered if you hit a double loss and vice versa. I guess moderation in the key (as Granny always said).

It's the part of my spread sheet I haven't managed to work out ie although I can see many wins vs losses, how to check profitability with different progressions. I will have another go today with my 10,000 spins table and hope to get clarity.

Thanks for your thoughts, Palestis.
 

Viking64

Re: Tentative new single dozen idea
« Reply #5 on: July 04, 2018, 10:18:46 AM »
Just because I'm a bit of a spread sheet nerd, I ran another test over 10,000 spins and worked out the following:

Longest winning streak 15, longest losing streak 4.
Average win run - 3
Average losing run - 1

This is excluding non triggers

Best wishes...
 
The following users thanked this post: palestis, Paule2512

Mako

Re: Tentative new single dozen idea
« Reply #6 on: July 12, 2018, 07:35:41 PM »
Nice thread Viking and palestis, thought-provoking after seeing the 10k spin data...how often did losing streaks of 3 occur?