New Forum Address: ROULETTELIFE.COM
  Update your Bookmarks

Author Topic: The "Playing few numbers" saga  (Read 3830 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Third

Re: The "Playing few numbers" saga
« Reply #30 on: November 21, 2018, 10:00:28 PM »
Have to know when to walk away and know when to run!
 

MickyP

Re: The "Playing few numbers" saga
« Reply #31 on: November 22, 2018, 08:01:35 AM »
My report is quite detailed.

However I didn't mean to say anything wrong about dozen drive.

While I was writing I was just talking to myself.

No offence taken. I wasn't defending the dozen drive; just curious about how you used it.

The dozen drive to me is a tool that is best used in conjunction with other tools. It has its weaknesses like all forms of "prediction".
In my opening post on the dozen drive I made it very clear that it is a tool.
Palestis Single Dozen System uses a different prediction method in the three trigger formations. Played straight as a method it has win/loss swings that would disappoint anyone playing it with 100% win expectation. Monitoring variance trends and using virtual play to increase wins almost becomes a must but even virtual play can not guarantee wins. 
« Last Edit: November 22, 2018, 08:04:00 AM by MickyP »
 

rimsky

Re: The "Playing few numbers" saga
« Reply #32 on: November 22, 2018, 11:33:10 AM »
Rimsky 

It is natural to  want toditch things that don't work but we need to be careful that we don't overreact to disappointment . Sh*t happens as they say.
Betting Dozens  CAN be profitable . It depends on how you bet  them. Choosing the winning number is not the only thing that is necessary. Money Management -Discipline etc. are also needed .
As for Hit and Run . This can also be profitable . It depends on the target . Those who oppose Hit and Run need to tell us WHEN and WHY they decide to leave the table .You can't stay at the table forever can you ?  If the odds remain the same no matter WHEN you bet it makes no difference when you leave the table does it ?
We need to accept that losses will occur and adopt the attitude  that "   He who turns and runs away lives to fight another day " rather than chase losses .
Scepticus,
I agree everything can work but nothing is an actual solution.About hit and run, or short sessions, what about those sessions where you go down and down from the very beginning. I think all of us have experience of those sessions wherein you lose very single bet in a row and you can't recoup because it would cost you too much and you are already far behind.
Yes everything can be profitable, but we have to consider how every play/system reacts towards a hellish sequence. Those who adopt a negative progression can't survive without a stop loss, and I'm not sure that a stop loss would be this great thing afterall.
Conversely, flat betting straight ups and adopting where you are far ahead a positive progression could work better, and do work better in my experience. However, here too we can't avoid long losing sequence, losing sessions, and we have to work out tweaks in order to limit the damage and hopefully recoup - here money management is essential.

 

rimsky

Re: The "Playing few numbers" saga
« Reply #33 on: November 22, 2018, 11:40:21 AM »
My report is quite detailed.

However I didn't mean to say anything wrong about dozen drive.

While I was writing I was just talking to myself.

No offence taken. I wasn't defending the dozen drive; just curious about how you used it.

The dozen drive to me is a tool that is best used in conjunction with other tools. It has its weaknesses like all forms of "prediction".
In my opening post on the dozen drive I made it very clear that it is a tool.
Palestis Single Dozen System uses a different prediction method in the three trigger formations. Played straight as a method it has win/loss swings that would disappoint anyone playing it with 100% win expectation. Monitoring variance trends and using virtual play to increase wins almost becomes a must but even virtual play can not guarantee wins.
What I appreciate most about yours and Palestis' point of view is to bet against the recurrence of bizarre sequences of the wheel, because they should not happen in back to back sequence. Again, this is a big point and a big merit. But unfortunately sometimes they happen, and when you lost two or three levels of the negative progression devised for the target dozen you lost lots of money. And another weak point of such a progression is when you are losing and you come to face W L L W L W L triggers which bring you even more down.
 

Mike

Re: The "Playing few numbers" saga
« Reply #34 on: November 22, 2018, 12:54:36 PM »
What I appreciate most about yours and Palestis' point of view is to bet against the recurrence of bizarre sequences of the wheel, because they should not happen in back to back sequence. Again, this is a big point and a big merit. But unfortunately sometimes they happen,
Yes, the number of CONSECUTIVE losses doesn't change at all, no matter what your bet selection. Stopping after X losses in a row and then starting again after a new trigger will result in as many consecutive losses as when you don't stop and wait for a new trigger. Triggers are a waste of time and don't affect the number of consecutive losses one iota. This is because future outcomes are independent of past outcomes.  ::)
« Last Edit: November 22, 2018, 01:34:19 PM by Mike »
 

thomasleor

Re: The "Playing few numbers" saga
« Reply #35 on: November 22, 2018, 03:17:46 PM »

You see, this and I presume other forums are filled with enough negative opinions (pollution) to convince players that roulette is a one way street to losing it all. But, if you think rationally/logically and apply yourself to a disciplined "learning" protocol then you may find some shiny gems hidden in the chaos of opinions.

One such opinion is "less is more"; playing a few numbers in a strategic manner makes all the difference at the end of the day. Learning the value of Risk vs Reward by concentrating on a few numbers is "value added" to your approach.



What a dramatic persona, you are, Mickyboy.  Trying to vivify the crowd with empty and quite useless suppositions about a subject you repeatedly have failed to explain according to its own precise mathematical & physical laws. Additionally to this  pitiable shortcoming, you presented in the OP (and many other similar posts), you have proven to hold quite immodest opinions about roulette congruent with your addled sessions on South African roulette tables, and above all, so implicitly impertinent towards those who not only know better,  but take time to patiently demonstrate it to you in so many ways within that thin intellectual spectra you have chosen to inhabit.

As you may have understood, I, for one, am not one of your fans here, much less one who pities this cognitive inability to observe and explain according to the basic tenets of game theory.

But I do become amused every time you contribute with a view that seems to accomplish wonders in your mind of muddled suppositions, and when put to test in the precise reality of any given roulette wheel,  harvests the smell of success so poorly.


You may take this post as an insult, but it is rather a cool reminder about current realities acting unimpeded,  where you try to sell fantasies of your own making.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2018, 03:31:56 PM by thomasleor »
 
The following users thanked this post: scepticus

MickyP

Re: The "Playing few numbers" saga
« Reply #36 on: November 22, 2018, 04:54:08 PM »
Hahaha..... No offence taken Tommy boy. I may have been offended if your dribble held any truth but all I see is another screwed up liberal fighting back at what, I don't know.

Nice post by the way, ;D
 

scepticus

Re: The "Playing few numbers" saga
« Reply #37 on: November 22, 2018, 05:50:38 PM »
 ThomasI agree with your opinion of Micky p.  I think his claim to be a roulette profesional js bogus  . I feel it is not worth responding to his jibes . Even if you are  a" liberal " this has nothing to do with the subject of the thread. Mere insult for the sake of insult .

Rimsky
My betting Hit and Run  is profitable . Like many here I operate a Stop Loss and my Stop is much lower than most and so is more profitable than those who operate a Long Stop Loss.  A short Stop loss is easier to recover than a Long Stop isn't it?  Unfortunately, all too few in this - and other - forums don't consider the Risk and Reward aspect of betting.

 

Mike

Re: The "Playing few numbers" saga
« Reply #38 on: November 22, 2018, 07:57:32 PM »
Stop losses, win goals and hit & run are also worthless. Seriously, what is the point of these if you have no edge?  :o And if you have an edge you bet when when the edge is present and don't bet when it isn't. Simple.

And as for the topic of the thread, you're better off playing few numbers for the following reason : In order for your bet to have any value the numbers you're betting on must have a positive expectation. Now, it's impossible that more than a few numbers can have a positive expectation because the sector within which the advantage lies is necessarily small (or if a bias exists, there cannot realistically be more than a few numbers which have it). Those numbers which do NOT have a positive expectation must necessarily have an expectation which is WORSE than the standard house edge (because probabilities must sum to 1), and therefore betting too many numbers will include some of these, thus eroding any edge from the positive numbers.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2018, 08:10:04 PM by Mike »
 

Mike

Re: The "Playing few numbers" saga
« Reply #39 on: November 22, 2018, 08:21:30 PM »
Have to know when to walk away and know when to run!
And how do you know that? In a random game, you can't.  ::)
 

Third

Re: The "Playing few numbers" saga
« Reply #40 on: November 22, 2018, 08:50:56 PM »
So AP players experience no variance and you win all your sessions because your numbers have the edge?  No need to ever leave the table then, right?
« Last Edit: November 22, 2018, 08:52:52 PM by Third »
 

scepticus

Re: The "Playing few numbers" saga
« Reply #41 on: November 22, 2018, 10:33:09 PM »
Once again Mike you reveal you are a One-Trick-Pony. The Edge -,The Edge - My Kingdom for The Edge  !

What is the better  Edge ? Your theoretical  “ Eventually “ Edge or my Edge based on my actual  Profits v Loss Edge  ?
In the Real World I think Reality beats your Theoretical repetition . I was prepared to show my “Pie in the Sky “ method against your so - called  Advantage Play but YOU declined .

Judged by your own posts here you do not actually play roulette so what are you doing  here - except -er-er Trolling ?

 

MickyP

Re: The "Playing few numbers" saga
« Reply #42 on: November 23, 2018, 03:37:01 AM »
ThomasI agree with your opinion of Micky p.  I think his claim to be a roulette profesional js bogus  . I feel it is not worth responding to his jibes . Even if you are  a" liberal " this has nothing to do with the subject of the thread. Mere insult for the sake of insult .

Rimsky
My betting Hit and Run  is profitable . Like many here I operate a Stop Loss and my Stop is much lower than most and so is more profitable than those who operate a Long Stop Loss.  A short Stop loss is easier to recover than a Long Stop isn't it?  Unfortunately, all too few in this - and other - forums don't consider the Risk and Reward aspect of betting.

I have never called myself a professional. Scepticus, you are a liar.
Why is being called a liberal an insult? Because you clan together to promote lies?
Risk vs Reward has been discussed in detail on this forum. Another lie Scepticus!

 

Third

Re: The "Playing few numbers" saga
« Reply #43 on: November 23, 2018, 04:26:54 AM »
Just an update.  Just fully recovered from the worst session from 2 days ago, with some extra profit to boot.  Sometimes negative variance becomes prolonged which is a symptom of the session.  Since prolonged negative variance is rare, obtaining a new session is very helpful.  This can be accomplished by finding a new wheel or if you like the wheel you are on, letting spins go by that will exhaust the negative variance.  There is simply no need to keep bashing one's head into a bad session and making things worse by trying to force variance to correct itself.  Roulette will eventually punish such behaviors with removal of all available funds and there is simply no need to risk that.
« Last Edit: November 23, 2018, 04:29:29 AM by Third »
 

MickyP

Re: The "Playing few numbers" saga
« Reply #44 on: November 23, 2018, 04:46:21 AM »
Good point you made Third.
Recovery from a bad session need not be immediate. If you have structured a loss recovery plan in your approach and stick to it then the battle is half won already.

You did mention that you make a living from roulette. How long have you been doing this?