Royal Panda roulette

Author Topic: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN  (Read 198127 times)

mikew and 23 Guests are viewing this topic.

MickyP

Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #1320 on: September 21, 2019, 01:21:58 AM »
Hi I'm sure Palestis will answer your question as well but I will share my thoughts with you.

A very good question indeed. The fact that you have chosen to only play the YXX trigger and include two virtual spins before you bet on the following four spins changes the dynamics of the system considerably. You can almost look at it as a new system. From the target dozen (Y)in the trigger you have 8 spins for that dozen to come up and you only bet the last 4 spins. If the Y dozen appears in the virtual spins, do you abandon that game? my guess would be yes.

I suggest testing your approach to get a clear picture of the hit rate. It should be high but the virtual spins will reduce the amount of playable triggers. It is not a train smash if you play like Palestis and move around the tables looking for play opportunities.

In your data on tests you have conducted it will interesting to see how often you find a playable trigger and also the hit rate of played triggers. I think the red flag will be different for your approach but can't say for sure because I haven't looked at your approach in any detail.
 
The following users thanked this post: kav, palestis, malucas

malucas

Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #1321 on: September 21, 2019, 01:46:18 AM »
Hi MickyP,
Thanks for the message.

You are correct; playing only the YXX trigger with 2 x VL leads to a lot of abandoned triggers where the Y is hit in the VL spins.
When I hit in the VL I abandon and wait for fresh numbers.

This can lead to a lot of down time, but I play on Rapid Roulette at BM so can get 2 spins per minute.
But like palestis has mentioned , I don't mind spending the time if it leads to a higher win ratio - I play $50 units so even with minimal triggers the unit value builds up well with minimal B2B losses due to having an 8 spin sequence.

I'll go back through some of my testing data to see if having XX in the VL and first 2 spins leads to any abnormalities.
Thanks again.
 
The following users thanked this post: kav, MickyP

palestis

Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #1322 on: September 21, 2019, 01:37:29 PM »
One of your red flags mentions abandoning a trigger if the XX from the trigger is the first two betting spins after the trigger, but I’m wondering how you would handle this if the XX came out in the VL spins after the trigger?
 Would you commence betting or abandon the trigger?
Hi Malucas.
When the system was first reported, the red flags were universal for all 3 triggers (YXX,XYX,XXY) without any VL's. ( betting steps VL's or entire trigger VL's).
By betting only after the YXX trigger (which has been found to be the strongest of all 3), you really don't need to abandon the trigger if the first 2 VL steps are XX.
In addition,  you bet another 4 steps.
I personally bet 3 steps to avoid high progressions, and use entire trigger VL's, to squeeze out  most possibilities of a loss.
But since you only use the YXX trigger and then bet 4 steps,  you don't need to observe any red flags.
Many times 4 steps make the difference, if the B/R can handle the steeper progression involved in 4 steps.
Nevertheless, since you play this system your way, you should be able to come up with better statistical results as you go along.
If the 2 VL steps are XX and the 4 steps that you play have a high number of losses, then you can abandon the trigger under these circumstances.
If not, then you can use this trigger.

 
The following users thanked this post: MickyP

dobbelsteen

Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #1323 on: September 22, 2019, 11:48:45 AM »
What  I miss is the performance of this system. Nobody publishes his real experience. Players play normally small sessions of about 100 spins. It is so easy to make a full description of a real game. My Excel reports give always the performance  of the whole game spin by spin.
The strategy of the single dozen is very difficult to program. A handmade table of a 100 spins sample is childish simple
 
The following users thanked this post: Rich

palestis

Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #1324 on: September 22, 2019, 11:39:10 PM »
Mr. Perfect there is no system in existence (math system or AP-VB), nor it will ever be,  that works immediately at first try after a trigger.
Most of the time it takes several tries to get a hit.
Problem is if you lose the initial tries, the B/R to continue might not be sufficient.
Therefore you cannot continue to bet all required tries, either because the B/R runs out, or simply for fear that that you will lose too much if the  record breaks all previous statistical results observed during testing.
A good system is a system that requires the least amount of bets until you get a hit.
And that is determined by extensive testing.
But even if a system is found, that requires the least number of bets, still it can be harmful to a player if he doesn't have enough money to support the entire range of bets. Or because of fear that he will run into a new record.
Therefore "virtual losses" is a way to avoid actual losses during the first steps of the betting range.
The money saved can be used to  carry the remainder of the  betting range that has been found to produce a certain hit. That's all there is to it in regards to virtual losses.

 
The following users thanked this post: MickyP

MrPerfect.

Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #1325 on: September 23, 2019, 12:31:25 AM »
I do not know what l like more, see my posts that are absolutely reasonable to be deleted , or see nonsense posted to answer my absolutely reasonable post.
   Anyone bother to provide any reasonable trigger or to prove that any combination of virtual losses and these unreasonable triggers does change expectations on these bets in any way?
   Only reasonable "virtual loss" is a loss of the time needed to read 89 pages of nonsense.  I didn't read. In my case time required to read it all was lost virtually.  Do you see, " virtual losses " do work for me, however they do not work for you guys.
 

palestis

Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #1326 on: September 23, 2019, 01:45:47 AM »
You are not the ultimate judge that decides what is reasonable and sensible vs. unreasonable and nonsense.
You took the liberty to install yourself as the judging authority in the forum.
Let the other members /players see for themselves what works for them and what doesn't.
Here we discuss systems and ways to tweak them to provide consistent wins.
It may seem that virtual losses is a waste time for your way of thinking, but for many players that I know it's a lifesaver.
All members are free to report how this or any other system works for them.
I am sure they already know, and trying to judge them without being there while they play, that is nonsense.
« Last Edit: September 23, 2019, 01:47:48 AM by palestis »
 

malucas

Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #1327 on: September 23, 2019, 05:03:01 AM »
Hi everyone,
I’ve begun using an amended version of this system in B/M over the past 3 weeks, and have had some initial success using one particular version.
I posted earlier about my initial version, which I have made some minor tweaks to as follows:
My sequence is now essentially a 10 spins sequence involving 6 VL spins to bet Y for 4 spins
6 Spin sequence including trigger: Z\X, Y, X, X, Z/X, Z/X
Betting sequence of 4 spins after trigger:

1, 1, 1.5, 2
2, 2, 3, 4
4, 4, 6, 8
8, 8, 12, 16
16, 16, 24, 32

  I only bet the YXX trigger, betting on Y
  • Only Z or X can come before the trigger; example YYXX would not be played
  • After Z/X, Y, X, X trigger, I play a further 2 VL spins before betting commences
  • If my target dozen Y appears in the 2 VL spins, trigger is abandoned
  • I abandon play on discussed red flags including multiple dozens before trigger
  • Trigger is always made from fresh numbers
  • If XX comes out on first 2 bets I abandon and move to next progression level on next trigger
  • If XX comes out on VL spins I continue to play trigger
I’ve played this particular version for the past 2 weeks with a decent amount of success so far.
I play with $50.00 units, so the waiting for triggers is worthwhile – it also makes up for the number of triggers which are abandoned due to coming up during VL spins.
I normally aim to play a maximum of 3 hours, which on Rapid Roulette gets approximately 90 spins per hour
I’ve uploaded my most recent game data from my B/M visit based on this system if anyone is interested, and then included what the results would have been using other versions of the system; eg changing the VL amounts or spin numbers etc.

I’m still trying to get my head around VL triggers rather than VL spins with this type of system to see if this would make a difference to my results, but I’ll keep testing a researching.
It’s only a small sample of actual game data over 270 spins, but it gives you an idea of how I play it.
Thanks again everyone, if found this forum to be really helpful.
 
The following users thanked this post: MrPerfect.

MrPerfect.

Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #1328 on: September 23, 2019, 07:42:43 AM »
Malucas,  could you by any chance, be so kind to register all game results from now on ? So, in 1- 2 years we can have stats of its performance?  I think, Palestice will produce an excel to prove that his system work... if he can, or hire someone to do it for him.
 

MrPerfect.

Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #1329 on: September 23, 2019, 08:29:45 AM »
 Palestice,  lm genuinely interested that your system worked. If such thing will be determined,  it will teach me something very valuable.
     What l want from it is an acid test. Nothing more. I want to see beyond a doubt that trigger ,wich l consider random , does something useful in fact... that virtual loses do in fact change probability of events, ...that waiting for such loses decrease expectation of back to back loses...ets.
   Do you see, l do not need to consider possible benefit of such events in order to make money and l program only what l need. Hate programming.
  It's your system, you originated it, so please, provide evidence of it doing something. 
 

malucas

Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #1330 on: September 23, 2019, 09:16:13 AM »
I can try keep records of each days play - it can be challenging playing Rapid Roulette at BM to keep notes and track the game at the same time but I'll give it a shot over the next couple of weeks and report each game to put up every few weeks.

Out of interest, I don't have spin/game stats from my last 3 week's since I began using this amended version, but I do track my overall +/- daily.
So far after 12 BM visits over 3 weeks at approximately 3 hours per visit I'm +86 units playing $50 units.
 

palestis

Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #1331 on: September 23, 2019, 05:39:34 PM »
What l want from it is an acid test. Nothing more. I want to see beyond a doubt that trigger ,wich l consider random , does something useful in fact... that virtual loses do in fact change probability of events, ...that waiting for such loses decrease expectation of back to back loses...ets.
 
Mr. Perfect there is no  better acid test other than playing the system for real  in a casino.
And I don't know of any acid test that can be performed thru programming, for this particular system.
I mentioned many times, that the system is best played by  observing many roulettes to find the maximum possible number of VL's, before you can proceed with actual bets.
It can be entire trigger VL's or step VL's within a trigger or a combination of both.
That is up to the individual player how he prefers to play it. It has a lot to do with his available B/R  and the starting min. chip.
                                              Nobody said that the virtual losses change the probability of a random event
A dozen has 1/3 probability to appear. It can never be changed to 50% or 75% or any other probability other than 1/3.
However, we very frequently witness a dozen missing for many spins , that can go as high as 30 spins in extremely rare occasions.
That is a far cry from its 33.3% probability assigned to it.
       Whether you call it a variance, or standard deviation, or weird science, or UFO phenomenon, the fact remains that it happens.
And it happens quite frequently.
             The primary purpose of Virtual Losses is to ascertain that whatever you bet on, it will appear within its probability assigned to it, when you start the actual betting.

Lengthy tests prove that triggers and virtual losses ensure a higher certainty, (not a higher probability) that the outcome will be within its probability value, assigned to it.
That's all we want and that's all we are looking for.
For those who believe that betting randomly on a dozen without any triggers and without any VL's, will yield the same results, I have this to say.
What do you do when you run into a dozen that you bet on and it disappears for 10 spins?  Or 15. Or 20. ( and it will happen much sooner than you think).
You lose your B/R. Or you lose anyway because you abandon the betting for fear that you will lose your B/R. or the rest of your money in the ATM. (actually that's the most common reason players stop betting).
                So when tests show that by using triggers and virtual losses you get much closer to a hit within the assigned probability, as compared to random betting without triggers and VL's, how can you ignore such a fact?
Think of triggers and virtual losses as a method to bypass strange and unusual phenomena cost free.
Because these phenomena do happen in roulette very often, and the average player cannot afford to lose his money while these phenomena are in effect.

 

Joe

Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #1332 on: September 23, 2019, 07:17:30 PM »
Nobody said that the virtual losses change the probability of a random event
A dozen has 1/3 probability to appear. It can never be changed to 50% or 75% or any other probability other than 1/3.
However, we very frequently witness a dozen missing for many spins , that can go as high as 30 spins in extremely rare occasions.
That is a far cry from its 33.3% probability assigned to it.
       Whether you call it a variance, or standard deviation, or weird science, or UFO phenomenon, the fact remains that it happens.
And it happens quite frequently.
             The primary purpose of Virtual Losses is to ascertain that whatever you bet on, it will appear within its probability assigned to it, when you start the actual betting.

Lengthy tests prove that triggers and virtual losses ensure a higher certainty, (not a higher probability) that the outcome will be within its probability value, assigned to it.
That's all we want and that's all we are looking for.
Hi Palestis, you're trying to make a case that "probability" and "certainty" are different things, but you're not doing a very good job IMO. Can you give us some data from your lengthy tests which prove that triggers and virtual losses ensure a higher certainty? Cheers.
 
The following users thanked this post: MrPerfect.

palestis

Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #1333 on: September 23, 2019, 10:57:23 PM »
Hi Palestis, you're trying to make a case that "probability" and "certainty" are different things, but you're not doing a very good job IMO. Can you give us some data from your lengthy tests which prove that triggers and virtual losses ensure a higher certainty? Cheers.
No Joe.  That's not the case I'm trying to make.
When I said there is more "certainty" I clearly meant that there is more certainty that the probability will honor its value (1/3 for a dozen).
One might say that this certainty is built in and is the same as probability.
That is correct, but history has proven that picking a random event in roulette, does not guarantee that what you are betting will appear within its probability range. ( Like a dozen in one of 3 spins, an EC in one of the next 2 spins, or  a DS in one of the next 6 spins etc.etc.).
In fact it is extremely common for an event's probability to run away from its value, rather than sticking to its value.
We see it in casinos every day, and it is the main cause players lose. 
If probability was true to its value, every single player in the world would win each and every time and the roulette tables would be out of business.
                          However, it's been proven time after time, that under qualified conditions (trigger), and virtual losses (to avoid wasted funds), the probability of an event seems to stick to its assigned value much more often than when the event is chosen randomly.
And that's what I meant.
Now to give data of lengthy tests is impossible. This system cannot be programmed.
I go to a site like Wiesbaden casino (where they publish spin results daily), and print out the numbers for the day.
Then I simply read down to locate the trigger, and then read further down to see what happened after it.
In about 5 -10 minutes I got thru an entire day's s results of about 300+ numbers.
In  a few hours I go thru well over 10,000 numbers.
I don't write the results down BECAUSE I don't see extreme results that would cause concern and require making a note of it. .
Very very  rarely I see 3 B2B triggers lose, and after maybe over 200,000 numbers I see 4 B2b losses.
There is no need to write anything down, to prove a point to others. They can do it themselves if they are really interested in this or any other system.
By the way to give you an example of what I am talking about look a the picture that was posted the first day this system was introduced.
The blue circles are the triggers.  (XXY, XYX, YXX)
Then I mark with a blue check mark the dozen that won.
The 3 red X's mark the 3 bets that lost after a trigger.
However the next trigger won and made up for this temporary loss.
And just to prove my point about "certainty", look at what happened after 24,3 starting from the top of the left column.
The 1st dozen disappeared for 12 spins.
If that was the dozen a player chose randomly to bet on, he would've lost his shirt. 
There was another case where the 3rd dozen disappeared for another 1 2spins, and many many cases of a dozen disappearing from 6-8 spins. Most players would've abandoned betting for fear that the dozen they bet on, will disappear for many more spins, because they have seen it too often.
 Y DOES THAT HAPPEN TOO OFTEN, and after a trigger it doesn't?

« Last Edit: September 23, 2019, 11:10:36 PM by palestis »
 
The following users thanked this post: kav, MickyP

palestis

Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #1334 on: September 24, 2019, 01:02:51 PM »
Yes I mentioned that it is the so called variance that causes most problems.
Virtual losses eliminate or reduce variance if it becomes active at the beginning of the betting cycle.
If not then you lose winning opportunities.
However if you start betting from the beginning and you run into a nasty variance, after you start betting, then you will lose for sure.
I never said that  this procedure changes the probability. What it does is it makes certain that the probability is what is supposed to be WITHOUT the effects of variance. It can also handle a mini variance if it happens after you start betting. That is y you need progression.
Who said that a system is only good if it wins with flat bets only?
It can be programmed if you specify the exact virtual losses before you start betting for real.
But in a B+M casino,  I don't have an exact number of virtual losses that I am looking for.
Whatever I run into , as long as they exceed a minimum number of virtual losses.
I guess that can be programmed too. But I am not a programmer
It's very simple.
You start betting randomly from the beginning on a dozen, and you run into 8,10, 15 or more negative results ( when you are supposed to win in 1 out of 3 tries). It happens too often and it is the main cause of losses for most players.
You wait for virtual losses (cost free), and after that you expect to win in 1 out of 3 tries. Even if a new smaller variance appears you still win with enough B/R and progression.
Where betting from the beginning you can't if you run into a big variance right away.

« Last Edit: September 24, 2019, 01:22:11 PM by palestis »
 
The following users thanked this post: kav