Author Topic: About Palestis' Single Dozen (secondary topic)  (Read 1985 times)

0 Members and 257 Guests are viewing this topic.

MrPerfect.

About Palestis' Single Dozen (secondary topic)
« on: September 23, 2019, 06:35:49 PM »
That's not a test at all . Look malucas.  He won 80 units in 3 weeks... around 2 unit per hour. When the loss will come, he will lose all what he won and more.
   If probability to hit not changed , then he has same chances to hit as if he wait for nothing. Only thing what virtual losses and triggers like that do is to make him play less spins.
   There are folks between system players here who can operate excel. Maybe you could convince one of them to make such a test to compare results of using trigger and betting randomly? So you will see yourself that trigger wich do not triggers nothing , it changes nothing as well.
  Who say that such tests can not be performed says also that this system has no rules ( algorithm ).  What does not make sense in computer language , doesn't make it in human language as well.
  In simple words , l can see that you do not know how to test systems and have no idea why system should be tested.
 
The following users thanked this post: Joe

MrPerfect.

Re: About Palestis' Single Dozen (secondary topic)
« Reply #1 on: September 23, 2019, 08:39:15 PM »
Joe, l login just to " like" your post.
   @Palestice,  you, as other system players , wanna show that system players and AP are same. In this case you should behave accordingly,  provide evidence that your system has a merit and you infact have a system. Because, l here do not want to be considered same as folks following gambling fallacy and who can not make a proper system that makes a sense.
   Think about it, if l am a system player, who are you then?
 

palestis

Re: About Palestis' Single Dozen (secondary topic)
« Reply #2 on: September 23, 2019, 11:05:26 PM »
@Palestice,  you, as other system players , wanna show that system players and AP are same. In this case you should behave accordingly,  provide evidence that your system has a merit and you infact have a system.
Sorry but the only evidence is at the casino where I and other players play.
Obviously I cannot record live play in  a casino.
But if you want to see some proof pick a date, and I will go to a site that publishes daily results and I will run the system for you to see.
I cannot guarantee it on an online casino RNG or studio live dealer.

 
The following users thanked this post: MickyP

MickyP

Re: About Palestis' Single Dozen (secondary topic)
« Reply #3 on: September 24, 2019, 12:05:20 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.

MrPerfect, I see you are making an attempt to try and understand the dynamics of this trigger based system but you of all people being a VB specialist should already know about the "personality of roulette wheels. I don't buy into your so called reasonable inquiry at all.

Palestis has given you very clear answers to your questions. I will suggest taking his advice and testing it for yourself. You may be surprised with the results you get. Do the work and come back with proof that it will fail any player who dares to make money from it. We can then look at your test data and show you where you went wrong.
 
The following users thanked this post: palestis

MickyP

Re: About Palestis' Single Dozen (secondary topic)
« Reply #4 on: September 24, 2019, 12:36:47 AM »
Sad MrPerfect, sad that until very recently I admired you. I am still grateful for your advice and for pointing me in the right direction with regard to focusing on the wheel. It helped to improve my game and allowed me to create new methods to exploit in the casinos. But hey, Real gave me the same advice, It's just that you and I had more detailed conversations. Anyway there is no love lost between us.

Please exercise some respect and stop polluting this thread any further. Thanks buddy.
 

palestis

Re: About Palestis' Single Dozen (secondary topic)
« Reply #5 on: September 24, 2019, 12:51:03 AM »
Mr perfect you have a way of evading the subject matter and turning it into cheap philosophical jargon. This avoidance does not go unnoticed by those who are interested about the specifics of this or any other system.
You asked for proof and  I offered to give it to you.
All you have to do is mention a date or a few dates and I will pull them out and test the system for those dates. It takes less than half a line of text to type out a date. or a few of them.
Yet you spend  a lot more time to write text that doesn't make any sense in relationship with the subject matter.
 

Joe

Re: About Palestis' Single Dozen (secondary topic)
« Reply #6 on: September 24, 2019, 07:39:52 AM »
@ Palestis, so what you're talking about is variance; you maintain that your system reduces the variance without necessarily reducing the probability? I guess that is theoretically possible but it will only generate profits if you use a progression. Even with reduced variance you will still lose flat betting because the ratio of wins to losses will be unchanged, but as long as the reduction in variance is sufficient to allow a progression which doesn't hit the house limits, then you could win consistently.

But I don't understand this :

Now to give data of lengthy tests is impossible. This system cannot be programmed.
Why not? the rules are clear and mechanical; there is no guessing involved, so I don't see why it can't be programmed.
 

Sputnik

Re: About Palestis' Single Dozen (secondary topic)
« Reply #7 on: September 26, 2019, 04:03:03 PM »

Quote
Who said that a system is only good if it wins with flat bets only?


I do, because then you can measuring the strenght behind the selection and if you reach 2.5 or 3.0 STDV after 1000 placed bets you have a strong selection worth playing.
If not you have a weak selection.

Picking selection and add a progression is a poor way to develop roulette methods, my opinion.

Cheers
 
The following users thanked this post: scepticus, fiben7

Astutillo

Re: About Palestis' Single Dozen (secondary topic)
« Reply #8 on: September 26, 2019, 06:22:30 PM »
STDV... what is it???
 

Joe

Re: About Palestis' Single Dozen (secondary topic)
« Reply #9 on: September 27, 2019, 12:50:03 PM »
Thanks for the suggestions.
 

kav

  • https://www.youtube.com/c/rouletteman
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2395
  • Thanked: 1345 times
  • Gender: Male
 
The following users thanked this post: Astutillo

GIAJJENNO

Re: About Palestis' Single Dozen (secondary topic)
« Reply #11 on: September 27, 2019, 11:11:06 PM »
 

Joe

Re: About Palestis' Single Dozen (secondary topic)
« Reply #12 on: September 28, 2019, 07:31:27 AM »
 

dobbelsteen

Re: About Palestis' Single Dozen (secondary topic)
« Reply #13 on: September 30, 2019, 07:36:23 AM »

To develop a strategy and bet selection , you need the knowledge about the features of the system. Very important are ste no-hit streaks. The streak is very seldom larger than 10 but there are variancies of more than 15.

My research Excel program is available. I can send it by email. PM your email adres and I tranfer the program.
 
The following users thanked this post: MrPerfect.

MrPerfect.

Re: About Palestis' Single Dozen (secondary topic)
« Reply #14 on: October 01, 2019, 07:10:40 AM »

To develop a strategy and bet selection , you need the knowledge about the features of the system. Very important are ste no-hit streaks. The streak is very seldom larger than 10 but there are variancies of more than 15.

My research Excel program is available. I can send it by email. PM your email adres and I tranfer the program.
Dobbelsteen,  looks like you are one of few here who knows using excel, forum needs it.
   Would you bother to make a simulator for this system? I can give you an excel formula to account skips.
  Idea is to test if virtual losses on trigger improve ( reduce) back to back losses in any way.
  It's easy to do  ( relatively).