Author Topic: About Palestis' Single Dozen (secondary topic)  (Read 1957 times)

0 Members and 240 Guests are viewing this topic.

MrPerfect.

Re: About Palestis' Single Dozen (secondary topic)
« Reply #45 on: October 07, 2019, 06:46:51 PM »
Of course no need testing or math. You tested it, we belive it what you say, you can play it.
   For other people, even these who " defend" it hysterically on deep emotional level, it's not how we do things. Even Scepticus don't belive in it. That's a sign on its own.
  It will take probably 15 minutes with Excel and simple arithmetic to test it, but no one wanna bother. No one will do it, unless you will do it yourself. 
 Good luck.
 

palestis

Re: About Palestis' Single Dozen (secondary topic)
« Reply #46 on: October 08, 2019, 02:05:03 AM »
Scepticus is not the ultimate authority to judge if a system works or not. It's just his opinion and he is entitled to it.
15 minutes in excel to test it? really?
Don't you need real roulette numbers to type  them into the input column, so that excel can process the testing?
How do you type 100,00 numbers in 15 minutes? Is there a trick that I am not familiar with?
Some systems I find that it is a lot easier to test them manually. Simply by reading the numbers down.
As far as nobody wants to bother testing  how do you know?
Don't assume that something you wouldn't do every body else wouldn't do.

 

Ainz

Re: About Palestis' Single Dozen (secondary topic)
« Reply #47 on: October 08, 2019, 03:11:39 AM »
I can make a program to test it if someone can clarify some ambigutys with the red flags:

First red flag: "If the same dozen appears repeatedly immediately preceding the trigger. (it's a sign of anomaly that can affect the rest of the dozens)."
How much times is considered "repeatedly"?
How many spins can be between the "repeatedly" dozen and the trigger to be considered "immediately"?

Second red flag: "If the playable target dozen ( Y), has appeared more than 3+ times immediately prior to the trigger. (meaning it has appeared enough times already and runs the risk to disappear when you begin betting it  3 times after the trigger)."
I have same problem with "immediately".

Fourth red flag: "if there is more than one 0 in the numbers preceding the trigger. (0's tend to come in packs)."
"In the numbers preceding the trigger" seems the same as "immediately", right?
 
The following users thanked this post: kav, palestis

palestis

Re: About Palestis' Single Dozen (secondary topic)
« Reply #48 on: October 08, 2019, 12:07:40 PM »
1st flag: Like 3 times
2nd flag: directly above the trigger.
3rd flag: about 0's: Not exactly immediately right above the trigger. But if there are 2 or more 0's within 5 numbers above the trigger. Then skip a few numbers, like 5,  before you take the next trigger
 Ainz if it is easier to make a program to test the system without any of the red flags then you can do so.
The point is for the program to test now many long B2B losses will appear (like 4 or more) in several  thousand triggers. (XXY,XYX,YXX).
If 4+  B2B losses are still very rare without the triggers, then  observing those red flags will become even much more rarer.
Or if you are an advanced programmer. then certainly you can take the red flags into account.
 ( because they are the usual culprit that causes longer than usual B2B losses).
« Last Edit: October 08, 2019, 12:15:03 PM by palestis »
 

MickyP

Re: About Palestis' Single Dozen (secondary topic)
« Reply #49 on: October 08, 2019, 01:32:28 PM »
One important aspect is when to form the triggers. Is a trigger formed with new spins or are the last three bet spins from the previous trigger used to create a new trigger? If I recall correctly Harry played this way to have play continuity. If there was a win on spin one or two is a trigger formed that will overlap the previous trigger with either one or two numbers?
 

dobbelsteen

Re: About Palestis' Single Dozen (secondary topic)
« Reply #50 on: October 08, 2019, 03:54:09 PM »

Here the results of a250 spins sample. Samples with this large give always a loss.
You can follow the game step by step.
The sheet can be used as a note sheet for own trials.
It is flat betting.
Who has a better bet selection or a better wager system?

X is dozen 1; Y is dozen 2 and Z is dozen 3. YYZ the trigger is Z . Zero is dozen 1
 

Re: About Palestis' Single Dozen (secondary topic)
« Reply #51 on: October 08, 2019, 06:34:38 PM »
If there was a win on spin one or two is a trigger formed that will overlap the previous trigger with either one or two numbers?
You could avoid overlapping triggers if you switch from dozens to columns after each strike. That's the way I play it at the moment.
 
The following users thanked this post: kav, MickyP

MickyP

Re: About Palestis' Single Dozen (secondary topic)
« Reply #52 on: October 08, 2019, 07:14:36 PM »
Thanks, I asked the question with reference to the standard test parameters being set up. Each set of parameters will produce different results because use of numbers within the sequence will be different based on how the test is conducted with respect to trigger formations.
 

palestis

Re: About Palestis' Single Dozen (secondary topic)
« Reply #53 on: October 08, 2019, 09:55:22 PM »
Yes HARRYJ would use some of the numbers that have been spun if they happen to form a new trigger.
He didn't wait for a new trigger with brand new fresh numbers.
Actually this procedure will basically produce the same results. It has been tested that way and it makes no difference.
I posted it with fresh numbers because the picture I was showing involved a blue marker circling the trigger.
if I was using overlapping number and triggers, the blue circles around the triggers would overlap too, making it look very messy and mot understood.

 
« Last Edit: October 08, 2019, 09:57:35 PM by palestis »
 

palestis

Re: About Palestis' Single Dozen (secondary topic)
« Reply #54 on: October 08, 2019, 10:11:48 PM »
It is flat betting.
Who has a better bet selection or a better wager system?
Dobbelsteen this system cannot be played with flat bets. That's y it shows a loss with flat bets.
Only the first 2 bets produce a profit, if there is a hit.
The 3rd bet gives your money back if you hit. Otherwise you have to increase the bet to make a profit. And if you lose the trigger  (all 3 bets), the bets in the next  trigger have to be higher as well. Not flat, otherwise you will never recover unless you are lucky enough to hit every trigger consistently  within the first 2 bets. Which I find impossible.
The point is to get a hit before you lose too many triggers, that is y virtual losses are recommended.
    I understand that you use Martingale in your SSB system, otherwise how would you make a profit with flat EC bets?

 

dobbelsteen

Re: About Palestis' Single Dozen (secondary topic)
« Reply #55 on: October 09, 2019, 08:39:31 AM »
You misunderstand the betting. Flat bet does not mean ,you bet a unit on every spin. The program shows, you bet every playable trigger with one unit. In every system there are losing streaks. A system needs a recovering method for the losses. The recovering method is increasing the foregoing  bets. Increasing the bet is a negative progression. Which kind of increasing do you recommend.  I can program a recovering bet selection.

Martingale is the best recovering bet selection but unsuitable for the single dozen system. The trigger for SSB is very simple and SSB can be played without delay. After every hit a new trigger is available.

Flat ECs systems require different strategies with HIT and RUN.