New Forum Address: ROULETTELIFE.COM
  Update your Bookmarks

Author Topic: Ten Days At Monte Carlo At The Bank's Expense.  (Read 2192 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

MrPerfect.

Re: Ten Days At Monte Carlo At The Bank's Expense.
« Reply #15 on: January 18, 2018, 02:51:50 AM »
 I tried and feil. Sry. Multiple zeroes on the row make logic annoying. 
 

Reyth

Re: Ten Days At Monte Carlo At The Bank's Expense.
« Reply #16 on: January 18, 2018, 04:56:30 AM »
1) I think the risk:bankroll balance is very good
1a) I think it can be improved?; i.e. I think more might be done once 150 is reached?  I think doubling the stake might work?

2) I think the recovery system is VERY strong.  I personally use this method and have found it VERY reliable.

3) I think the bet selection currently accomplishes its aim which is to always minimize the odds against us
3a) I think the bet selection can be improved with the following:

A) Identify the strongest of all EC's; i.e. compare all EC's for the GAP between its opposite.  Always bet the largest gap on the side of the dominant EC.
B) If you have just gained a win and can identify a different EC with a larger gap, switch


4) I can easily program this for 10,000 spins or any other number of spins (I will cap out at 16M but I have away around that to make it unlimited as well)

Thanks for this awesome post! :D
« Last Edit: January 18, 2018, 05:02:15 AM by Reyth »
 
The following users thanked this post: ahlidap, Special Black

The Bedsit Botter

Re: Ten Days At Monte Carlo At The Bank's Expense.
« Reply #17 on: January 18, 2018, 05:23:19 AM »
Thanks for your awesome reply too!

Whatever you can come with would be great your excellent postings are the reason I joined this forum in the first place.  :)

I guess though we should improve it even more by not bothering with Zero.

Then bot it and let it run for 24 hours at Bet Voyager daily until which time they decide to accept defeat and remove the no zero wheel from their site!

My logical brain just can't see how this can lose so I really need to see some graphs of at least 10,000 spins!
 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth

MrPerfect.

Re: Ten Days At Monte Carlo At The Bank's Expense.
« Reply #18 on: January 18, 2018, 07:17:33 PM »
I got an idea... maybe tonight l manage to code it.
  However result for this system will be not far from expected.
 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth, The Bedsit Botter

The Bedsit Botter

Re: Ten Days At Monte Carlo At The Bank's Expense.
« Reply #19 on: January 18, 2018, 10:41:30 PM »
Code it without the zero I may as well take advantage of Bet Voyager whilst I still have it and makes it easier to code I imagine.

If the staking plan really does always recover after x spins and as long as x is not too high then it could also be played on the  Baccarat tables and perhaps even at BlackJack too?

It's too boring to play live for me I am an action junkie so I have to play a strategy more adjusted to my style but this is the sort of stuff I want my bot to be playing for me whilst I am sleeping.

 

Reyth

Re: Ten Days At Monte Carlo At The Bank's Expense.
« Reply #20 on: January 19, 2018, 07:34:20 AM »
I would never (auto)bot anything (macros are OK).  It always breaks the T&C of every casino, not to mention any "multi-participant" server where competition is involved; this adds to the fact that it is objectively immoral because bandwidth is being consumed at a much higher and consistent rate than is possible for a human to accomplish (bandwidth theft).  Even if a casino would not detect this and close our account at empty(they will), I sincerely believe that life will "balance things out" and we will find our gains to be severely compromised in some "life changing" way.

Sorry to be a stick in the mud about this but I feel the need to express my opinion on it. :/
« Last Edit: January 19, 2018, 07:37:10 AM by Reyth »
 
The following users thanked this post: BlueAngel

The Bedsit Botter

Re: Ten Days At Monte Carlo At The Bank's Expense.
« Reply #21 on: January 19, 2018, 01:47:18 PM »
I don't consider a roulette bot to be unethical.
A poker bot could be considered unethical by the nature of the game but all a roulette bot does is replace the manual actions of a user no possible advantage can be gained.

I have used bots online for years and never once had an issue.

Anyway disregarding the bot side of it would you consider just running some tests on a simulation to discover what happens to this progression played for 10,000 spins or higher with no zero and then compare it to what happens if we factor in a zero but with la partage rules please?
 

The Bedsit Botter

Re: Ten Days At Monte Carlo At The Bank's Expense.
« Reply #22 on: September 26, 2018, 10:38:14 AM »
I have now paid a coder to make this method for an online bot.

It's currently playing live at William Hill on one of the la partage tables.

Would still be interested in the RX code if anyone reading knows how to do it  :D
 

Lee1307

  • New
  • **
  • Posts: 1
Re: Ten Days At Monte Carlo At The Bank's Expense.
« Reply #23 on: October 11, 2018, 04:56:03 PM »
Hi Bedsit Botter,

I came accros this method a while back and I am very interested in it but, as you say, it is a very boring system to play manually.

I'm just wondering how your bot is performing and if you would be willing to share it? I'd be happy to contribute some monetary value towards it.

Kind Regards,

Lee
 

Re: Ten Days At Monte Carlo At The Bank's Expense.
« Reply #24 on: October 12, 2018, 11:49:50 AM »


Hi everyone !! I often use the logic of this system as well. It serves to enter all the long series of intermittency and sequence. To do this I have always applied different uprights to those proposed by the Monte Carlo. This selection has a weakness: it has a contrary series which is as follows:  RR NN RR NN RR NN etc that I can assure you when it shows up 2 or 3 times within 50 Spin sends upright any upright
« Last Edit: October 12, 2018, 11:51:21 AM by Special Black »
 

Re: Ten Days At Monte Carlo At The Bank's Expense.
« Reply #25 on: October 12, 2018, 01:29:32 PM »


However, there are two solutions that greatly improve the selection proposed by Monte Carlo. First solution: bet on the figures from 1 but using the "Chances Changed". What does it mean ? Here is a scheme that better clarifies the idea

« Last Edit: October 12, 2018, 01:32:02 PM by Special Black »
 

Re: Ten Days At Monte Carlo At The Bank's Expense.
« Reply #26 on: October 12, 2018, 02:40:30 PM »


And now I present my selection of the shot with the same stay presented in the 2 pages of the book with my personal progression. The difference consists in having used 2 artificial chances: RRRRRRRRRR vs NNNNNNNNNN RNRNRNRNRN vs NRNRNRNRNR On each of these "chances" my personal progression is applied then with different episodes, different balances BUT IDENTICAL SELECTION OF THE SHOT In my system there is a suspension of bets to the sortie number ZERO (but this is my personal vision of the game).
 

scepticus

Re: Ten Days At Monte Carlo At The Bank's Expense.
« Reply #27 on: October 12, 2018, 03:03:11 PM »
Hi SBYou may find my 5 in 7 EC chart useful in choosing what to bet. I don't advise negative  progressions. I think we need to focus on Bet Selection. If you don't pick the winner in your selection then no progression . however ingenious,  will give you profit.
 
The following users thanked this post: Special Black

Re: Ten Days At Monte Carlo At The Bank's Expense.
« Reply #28 on: October 12, 2018, 03:14:18 PM »


I reinserted the whole stay. Here are the results ...
 

Re: Ten Days At Monte Carlo At The Bank's Expense.
« Reply #29 on: October 12, 2018, 03:24:16 PM »
Hi SBYou may find my 5 in 7 EC chart useful in choosing what to bet. I don't advise negative  progressions. I think we need to focus on Bet Selection. If you don't pick the winner in your selection then no progression . however ingenious,  will give you profit.

For some systems I am in agreement with you too. Will you give me the link please? For this post I simply indicated how to make the same selection but with 2 separate speakers. In this case the negative progression will be less negative when the opposite figure appears RR BB RR BB I do not speak English well and I use the Italian / English translator and vice versa