Royal Panda roulette

Author Topic: A method with teeth  (Read 5975 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

mr j

A method with teeth
« on: September 05, 2010, 01:16:27 AM »
I know some will play this and I'll never hear a word from them, I accept that. Some might even rip the method AND still play it. lol This is flat betting. I use units of $15, $10 and $5 but use whatever fits your budget the best. I try and separate fact from opinion. A fact is, in 'X' number of spins, we will get a complete street hit, all 3 numbers.  I do have to thank Bayes ahead of time, he helped me a bit.

Ok, on to the method >> I keep track of the last *12* numbers hit. When the next number hits, cross off the latest number, we will always be looking at the LAST 12. Any street with TWO of the numbers hit, is what we are looking for. Example: the 14 and 15 are hit within the 12 recorded. We flat bet the 13 UNTIL either a win OR until either the 14 or 15 is NOT within the 12 recorded anymore. I have done lots of testing recording the last 11, 10, 13 and 14 spins, I have found that *12* works the best. Anytime all 3 (a win) are within the 12, no more betting on that number UNTIL it drops back to two within the street.

EXAMPLE: We were betting on the 13, it hits and we have a win. Lets say a couple spins later, the 14 drops from the last 12 recorded. We NOW have the 13 and 15 hit so we bet on the 14 until either a win OR until either the 13 or 15 is NOT within 12 recorded anymore. Don't make this tougher than it is. Sometimes I over explain stuff. lol Now, what about multiple bets going on? This is what I do in terms of betting. 1-2 bets: I bet $15 per number, 3 bets: I bet $10 per number, 4+ bets: I bet $5 per number. It is very rare to have 4+ within 12 but you MUST have a RULE for every situation.

My BR is 3K but use what you can afford. No progression here, that should make a few happy. Its VERY common for a street to hit within a short (12) period of time. What I like about this most, we are NOT betting on semi-cold streets. My win goal is 1K, then go home. Any questions, just ask.  Thanks for reading. Ken
 
The following users thanked this post: Jake007, Reyth, slpcorner, oaknshield, Olidammara

kav

Re: A method with teeth
« Reply #1 on: January 05, 2014, 10:22:31 PM »
Thanks for sharing Mr J!  :D
 
The following users thanked this post: Jake007

Reyth

Re: A method with teeth
« Reply #2 on: May 08, 2016, 08:42:48 PM »
A fact is, in 'X' number of spins, we will get a complete street hit, all 3 numbers.

Here I must agree and my quick test shows  that number is expected to be no more than 255 spins.

Code: [Select]
10 RANDOMIZE TIMER
20 r = INT(RND * 37): sp = sp + 1: LOCATE 1, 1: PRINT ms
30 IF r > 2 THEN 20
40 'one of 3 numbers has hit
50 IF r = 0 THEN st(1) = 1: GOTO 80 'hit numbers analysis
60 IF r = 1 THEN st(2) = 1: GOTO 80 'hit numbers analysis
70 st(3) = 1
80 ' hit numbers analysis
90 h = 0: FOR i = 1 TO 3: IF st(i) = 1 THEN h = h + 1
100 NEXT i
110 IF h < 2 THEN 20
120 '2 numbers have hit
130 IF ms < sp THEN ms = sp
140 sp = 0: st(1) = 0: st(2) = 0: st(3) = 0: GOTO 20

Quote
Its VERY common for a street to hit within a short (12) period of time.

Here I must disagree.  I do not find this common at all.  I think where the issue gets confused is that multiple bets are being placed which will bring results based on the increased numbers being bet.

I would think that a full betting cycle of 37 spins would be necessary to make full use of the Law of the Third and obtain the desired 66% chance of a repeat, which reminds me that a DUPLICATE hit here would count as success since we are betting.  So let's modify the code to include duplicates and see what the worst looks like...

Code: [Select]
10 RANDOMIZE TIMER
20 r = INT(RND * 37): sp = sp + 1: LOCATE 1, 1: PRINT ms
30 IF r > 2 THEN 20
40 'one of 3 numbers has hit
50 IF r = 0 THEN st(1) = st(1) + 1: GOTO 80 'hit numbers analysis
60 IF r = 1 THEN st(2) = st(2) + 1: GOTO 80 'hit numbers analysis
70 st(3) = st(3) + 1
80 ' hit numbers analysis
90 h = 0: FOR i = 1 TO 3: h = h + st(i): IF st(i) > 1 THEN h = 10
100 NEXT i
110 IF h < 2 THEN 20
120 '2 numbers have hit
130 IF ms < sp THEN ms = sp
140 sp = 0: st(1) = 0: st(2) = 0: st(3) = 0: GOTO 20

And the results come back with 199 spins.

I think a possible solution is to abandon the constraints of the street bet and work with 3 numbers straight up. 

The minimum appearance for any 3 numbers is once in once in 184 spins; i.e. any one of a group of three numbers will be expected to hit at least once within 184 spins.

« Last Edit: May 08, 2016, 09:11:00 PM by Reyth »
 
The following users thanked this post: december

mr j

Re: A method with teeth
« Reply #3 on: November 01, 2018, 09:46:06 PM »
I know some will play this and I'll never hear a word from them, I accept that. Some might even rip the method AND still play it. lol This is flat betting. I use units of $15, $10 and $5 but use whatever fits your budget the best. I try and separate fact from opinion. A fact is, in 'X' number of spins, we will get a complete street hit, all 3 numbers.  I do have to thank Bayes ahead of time, he helped me a bit.

Ok, on to the method >> I keep track of the last *12* numbers hit. When the next number hits, cross off the latest number, we will always be looking at the LAST 12. Any street with TWO of the numbers hit, is what we are looking for. Example: the 14 and 15 are hit within the 12 recorded. We flat bet the 13 UNTIL either a win OR until either the 14 or 15 is NOT within the 12 recorded anymore. I have done lots of testing recording the last 11, 10, 13 and 14 spins, I have found that *12* works the best. Anytime all 3 (a win) are within the 12, no more betting on that number UNTIL it drops back to two within the street.

EXAMPLE: We were betting on the 13, it hits and we have a win. Lets say a couple spins later, the 14 drops from the last 12 recorded. We NOW have the 13 and 15 hit so we bet on the 14 until either a win OR until either the 13 or 15 is NOT within 12 recorded anymore. Don't make this tougher than it is. Sometimes I over explain stuff. lol Now, what about multiple bets going on? This is what I do in terms of betting. 1-2 bets: I bet $15 per number, 3 bets: I bet $10 per number, 4+ bets: I bet $5 per number. It is very rare to have 4+ within 12 but you MUST have a RULE for every situation.

My BR is 3K but use what you can afford. No progression here, that should make a few happy. Its VERY common for a street to hit within a short (12) period of time. What I like about this most, we are NOT betting on semi-cold streets. My win goal is 1K, then go home. Any questions, just ask.  Thanks for reading. Ken

I'll even pick on myself and make a point at the same time. I think this was in 2010. I'm not EVEN CLOSE today in terms of methods or ideas like this. Why? You have to *LEARN* over the years. Most here REFUSE to do so. EVOLVE, advance your thinking !!!!
 
The following users thanked this post: Third

GambleOnlineRoulette

Re: A method with teeth
« Reply #4 on: December 25, 2018, 06:12:02 AM »
In reality RNG spins results and real roulette wheel spins results cannot be compared.
Random number generator is really random while real wheel is not so full 100% random so they both dont act same way. So many times many peoles try prove RNG numbers live wheel playing methods wrong.
 

GambleOnlineRoulette

Re: A method with teeth
« Reply #5 on: December 25, 2018, 01:50:07 PM »
This forum behaves strangely when responding to a thread even if put font size 12 still the answer comes in such a small font that it doesn't see read strange

In reality RNG spins results and real roulette wheel spins results cannot be compared.RNG Generator softwares are really random while real wheel is not
Random number generator  nearly 100% random so they both real wheel and some random number computer software programs dont act same way. So many times many peoples try prove RNG numbers result live wheel playing methods wrong.Although only results of the real roulette wheel spins mean something also automatic wheel results can be excluded off from the tests like RNG spins
« Last Edit: December 25, 2018, 01:56:51 PM by GambleOnlineRoulette »
 
The following users thanked this post: Third

Third

Re: A method with teeth
« Reply #6 on: December 26, 2018, 07:29:37 AM »
I think both RNG and physical wheel results model each other and there can be cheating on either side but it is certainly true that only physical wheels can have exploitable physical biases.  I believe we can win playing either as long as the results are fair.
 

Cristal2000

Re: A method with teeth
« Reply #7 on: December 30, 2018, 09:37:54 AM »

Hi everyone

I just joined the forum, and I thought about preparing a small program for this method



it is very configurable, you can change the cycle to be analyzed using this box



you can change the way to get back the last xxx numbers through these checks



progression available:
Manual (static or change manually)
cyclic (+1 unit every xxx) configurable



 
The following users thanked this post: GambleOnlineRoulette, vitorwally, Third

GambleOnlineRoulette

Re: A method with teeth
« Reply #8 on: December 30, 2018, 11:08:22 AM »
Nice software you made Cristal2000 i did some test it Dragonara Land-Based Casino Spins 101 spins Win some time but also loss all just depends how much money you start play are bets just flat bets or progression bets
 
The following users thanked this post: Third, Cristal2000

Cristal2000

Re: A method with teeth
« Reply #9 on: December 30, 2018, 05:09:03 PM »
Nice software you made Cristal2000 i did some test it Dragonara Land-Based Casino Spins 101 spins Win some time but also loss all just depends how much money you start play are bets just flat bets or progression bets

Excellent, thank you for testing the program  8)

we are here to improve things, if I have to change something I try to do it

we are also waiting for Mr. J. if he has any changes
 
The following users thanked this post: Third

mr j

Re: A method with teeth
« Reply #10 on: December 30, 2018, 05:15:43 PM »
"we are also waiting for Mr. J. if he has any changes" >> In 8 years? Ummmm, yeah.
 
The following users thanked this post: Third