aDgVYF <a href="hxxp: pvssfpjmgoaf. com/">pvssfpjmgoaf</a>, vfqpgblwgqth, [link=hxxp: dsrwanbnrbkl. com/]dsrwanbnrbkl[/link], hxxp: inkzltjdkbap. com/
A brief screenshot of a play. Within 5 spins, a profit was made of 13 euroes.
[attachimg=#]
What 36 ? spins or betting units reached? Explain better the cycles? Are 3x36 3 cycles? If you hit a number do you bet the same number further? Best way to understand is to make a sample of about 30 spins with actual betting.
Thanks, Hermes
Quote from: hermes on October 23, 2008, 12:38:07 AM
What 36 ? spins or betting units reached? Explain better the cycles? Are 3x36 3 cycles? If you hit a number do you bet the same number further? Best way to understand is to make a sample of about 30 spins with actual betting.
Thanks, Hermes
You bet 1 unit for each number that appears, untill you have a total of bet of 36 on the table.
Bet scheme: 1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1 etc, till 36 is bet in total.
In regards of rounds of the total amount that was bet its quite simple.
at spin 1 you have 1 unit on the table
at spin 2 you would have spent 1 unit plus 1 unit equaling 2 units
at spin 3 you would have spent 1+1 +the unit you just betted.
in other words you have the following "expenses"
round bet total
1 1 1
2 1 2
3 1 3
4 1 4
5 1 5
6 1 6
7 1 7
8 1 8
9 1 9
10 1 10
You still only spin 36 rounds which equals a cycle
You still only bet 1 unit per number
But your total bet will increase accordingly since you repeat the bets from the other rounds and the math would look like this in the end :
1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9+10+11+12+13+14+15+16+17+18+19+20+21+22+23+24+25+26+27+28+29+30+31+32+33+34+35+36
Beginning cycle 2 means you repeat the steps from above, but increase betsize to two units, so you will pick up from where you left with a table that has x numbers covered with bets, since they have spun, and x numbers remaining that arent spun.
Still betting the numbers that appears in cycle 2, you continue to play the cycle untill a profit shows.
Example,
you are 3 spins along in cycle 2, the numbers 3, 9, 11 showed.
If 3 has hit before, the you will get the amount that was bet on 3 before - minus the 2 units just betted.
Hope it clears out things.
//Codegenic
Hello Code,
Some numbers from bet365
12 bet 1 nos
15 bet 2 nos
6 bet 3 nos
30 bet 4 nos
34 bet 5 nos
19 bet 6 nos
22 bet 7 nos
36 bet 8 nos
21 bet 9 nos
7 bet 10 nos
20 bet 11 nos
20 win Do we stop here and restart here or go on to 27 as above until all 36 nos all done?maybe you may wanna explain further
27
1
19
28
6
27
22
11
33
8
26
21
30
1
5
2
11
21
6
11
27
1
36
20
0
10
1
34
25
27
20
25
13
30
1
35
20
7
19
1
23
22
20
15
24
27
30
13
24
9
32
35
14
21
22
13
15
7
4
0
7
20
23
20
10
31
36
16
29
32
29
12
34
7
16
4
5
19
13
25
35
0
24
5
0
You lost big.
12 Lose -1x1= -1
15 Lose -2x2= -4
6 Lose -3x3= -9
30 Lose -4x4= -16
34 Lose -5x5= -25
19 Lose -6x6= -36
22 Lose -7x7= -49
36 Lose -8x8= -64
21 Lose -9x9= -81
7 Lose -10x10= -100
20 Lose -11x11= -121
20 win -12x11 + 35x12 = -132 + 420 = 288
+288-121-100-81-64-49-36-25-16-9-4-1= -218
Quote from: JHM on October 23, 2008, 09:12:20 AM
You lost big.
12 Lose -1x1= -1
15 Lose -2x2= -4
6 Lose -3x3= -9
30 Lose -4x4= -16
34 Lose -5x5= -25
19 Lose -6x6= -36
22 Lose -7x7= -49
36 Lose -8x8= -64
21 Lose -9x9= -81
7 Lose -10x10= -100
20 Lose -11x11= -121
20 win -12x11 + 35x12 = -132 + 420 = 288
+288-121-100-81-64-49-36-25-16-9-4-1= -218
Did you play it right?
I didn't play. I made the calculation win/loss based on the numbers above my post, but yes I calculated with a progression. My bad, again with flat bets.
When flat betted:
12 Lose -1x1= -1
15 Lose -2x1= -2
6 Lose -3x1= -3
30 Lose -4x1= -4
34 Lose -5x1= -5
19 Lose -6x1= -6
22 Lose -7x1= -7
36 Lose -8x1= -8
21 Lose -9x1= -9
7 Lose -10x1= -10
20 Lose -11x1= -11
20 win -11x1 + 35x1 = -11 + 35 = 24
24-11-10-9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1= -42
Hi code,
thanks for sharing!
A cycle is 36 numbers or 36 bankroll units?
When you win and you're in profit, do you reset all or keep on playing (1,1,2)?
Thanks
Ice
Quote from: JHM on October 23, 2008, 10:07:14 AM
I didn't play. I made the calculation win/loss based on the numbers above my post, but yes I calculated with a progression. My bad, again with flat bets.
When flat betted:
12 Lose -1x1= -1
15 Lose -2x1= -2
6 Lose -3x1= -3
30 Lose -4x1= -4
34 Lose -5x1= -5
19 Lose -6x1= -6
22 Lose -7x1= -7
36 Lose -8x1= -8
21 Lose -9x1= -9
7 Lose -10x1= -10
20 Lose -11x1= -11
20 win -11x1 + 35x1 = -11 + 35 = 24
24-11-10-9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1= -42
You would still need to play out the cycle in order to calculate the long term validity, not only based on less than 36 spins.
Quote from: iceberg1912 on October 23, 2008, 10:09:24 AM
Hi code,
thanks for sharing!
A cycle is 36 numbers or 36 bankroll units?
When you win and you're in profit, do you reset all or keep on playing (1,1,2)?
Thanks
Ice
36 numbers or in other words, 36 spins.
I stop when the BR is in profit or at break even
playing on rx-rng
500 spins
conclusion: there are some big ups and big downs :) it depends on luck
[attachimg=#]
Boo, mate,
what does it mean "there's some big ups and big downs"?
Which system has only ups?
Of course 500 spins is a poor test but the final result seems promising....
Bye
Ice
Did I calculate right?
Nr. 12 - bet 12
Nr. 35 - bet 12 & 35
Nr. 19 - bet 12, 35 & 19
Nr. 35 - Win, bet 12, 35, 19
Nr. 17 - bet 12, 35, 19 and 17
Etc. etc?
Lets check i have this right.
cycle 1 is for max 36 spins.
spin1 = x number. place 1u on it. spin 2 =y number. repeat bets from prior spin and add 1u to y number.
continue until profit.
If after 36u you have a loss, then you just continue exactly as before. so first bet of cycle 2 = 37u allotted based on last 37 numbers out.
If after you bet 72u on a spin you are still in a loss, then continue betting but the 73u bet has a u size of 2 rather than 1. so you are betting 146u.
thiss basically relys on hot numbers and should win nicely.
presumably you stop on a plus?
*edit, bad example
Quote from: JHM on October 23, 2008, 11:24:22 AM
When you play a full game of 36 spins. You need a 666 bankroll. To break even at the end you need 666 / 35 = 19,02 double's / wins. That's a lot in 36 spins.
Do you think its possible?That will be numbers that repeat twice and thrice
666 is not a good example, that would be if all nr's hit once :). But offcourse it's possible. Just had 3 doubles in 13 spins @ dublinbet. I think you will loose more sessions than win. Only one way to find out, test it.
Maybe somebody can test this?
Real spins can be downloaded from nolinks://nolinks.spielbank-wiesbaden.de/EN/622/PermanenzenArchiv.php (nolinks://nolinks.spielbank-wiesbaden.de/EN/622/PermanenzenArchiv.php)
It loses on all but one session that I've recorded at my favourite casino.
Quote from: see_jerek on October 23, 2008, 12:20:39 PM
Quote from: JHM on October 23, 2008, 11:24:22 AM
When you play a full game of 36 spins. You need a 666 bankroll. To break even at the end you need 666 / 35 = 19,02 double's / wins. That's a lot in 36 spins.
Do you think its possible?That will be numbers that repeat twice and thrice
see_jerek, i often see a number repeating 3, 4 or even 5 times in 13 spins.
Quote from: MXkid77 on October 23, 2008, 05:59:55 PM
Quote from: see_jerek on October 23, 2008, 12:20:39 PM
Quote from: JHM on October 23, 2008, 11:24:22 AM
When you play a full game of 36 spins. You need a 666 bankroll. To break even at the end you need 666 / 35 = 19,02 double's / wins. That's a lot in 36 spins.
Do you think its possible?That will be numbers that repeat twice and thrice
see_jerek, I often see a number repeating 3, 4 or even 5 times in 13 spins.
Hey Dean,me too!
Thats why I think it will work but some just don't agree
If it works for you, than you should play it. At least test it. I like G.U.T. more, others don't believe in it.
Quote from: hoper35 on October 23, 2008, 03:13:43 PM
It loses on all but one session that I've recorded at my favourite casino.
I am sorry to hear about your losses, however I suspect that certain aspects of the game arent completely in order.
From what I know, and what I have tested, the results are showing a pattern we cant disregard.
I am sensing some of the players trying this strategy arent following the cycles through, or in some other way withheld information during the testing. Cycle 2 is there for a reson. Betting 2 units following the same pattern as cycle 1 will inevitably lead to a breakeven by spin 18 the latest. Its pure math, not stories about glory days. There is a reason why we have this result, and its due to the fact that, what some people consider an anomaly, actually occurs sometimes. I am thinking of the fact that the first 36 spins are genuinely unique nd no repeaters show.
BUT, even IF this highly unlikely situation occurs, then you would mathematically break even by the 18th spin in cycle 2, since at least 1 repeater has shown, giving you the payout of twice the x36 wager times 2.
I am not sure how you test the spins, and if its played by the book. I mean, we have all been tempted to play further than breakevens and restartpoints, so I am not surprised if this is the case. However I do state my sympathy with you and your exeperience, should you have lost betting this scheme.
Codegenic
I have tried reaching cycle 2 in vain now for 6 runs in a row.
The following gifs contains the screenshots of actual games. Each time I made a profit I stopped and restarted.
Two differen bankrolls used.
I am sorry guys, maybe I am just extremely lucky, by which standards I will never end up in a relationship, but never the less, I am not trying to rip anyone off. The sessions played speak for themselves. One of the games were lucky, I hit a repeater at third spin.
//Codegenic
i would play this system like this. check the numbers that have played. you sl
hould get about nine numbers without a repeat. start playing these nine numbers and add on the numbers that are being spun. let me know if you think this is a good idea. good luck
Quote from: codegenic on October 23, 2008, 08:07:08 PM
Quote from: hoper35 on October 23, 2008, 03:13:43 PM
It loses on all but one session that I've recorded at my favourite casino.
I am sorry to hear about your losses, however I suspect that certain aspects of the game arent completely in order.
From what I know, and what I have tested, the results are showing a pattern we cant disregard.
I am sensing some of the players trying this strategy arent following the cycles through, or in some other way withheld information during the testing. Cycle 2 is there for a reson. Betting 2 units following the same pattern as cycle 1 will inevitably lead to a breakeven by spin 18 the latest. Its pure math, not stories about glory days. There is a reason why we have this result, and its due to the fact that, what some people consider an anomaly, actually occurs sometimes. I am thinking of the fact that the first 36 spins are genuinely unique nd no repeaters show.
BUT, even IF this highly unlikely situation occurs, then you would mathematically break even by the 18th spin in cycle 2, since at least 1 repeater has shown, giving you the payout of twice the x36 wager times 2.
I am not sure how you test the spins, and if its played by the book. I mean, we have all been tempted to play further than breakevens and restartpoints, so I am not surprised if this is the case. However I do state my sympathy with you and your exeperience, should you have lost betting this scheme.
Codegenic
But from your first post, you aren't betting 2 units until cycle 3.
I only tested the first two cycles (1, 1; instead of 1, 1, 2) since I usually don't record enough numbers for 3 complete cycles of 36.
Ron.
Quote from: hoper35 on October 23, 2008, 11:32:43 PM
Quote from: codegenic on October 23, 2008, 08:07:08 PM
Quote from: hoper35 on October 23, 2008, 03:13:43 PM
It loses on all but one session that I've recorded at my favourite casino.
I am sorry to hear about your losses, however I suspect that certain aspects of the game arent completely in order.
From what I know, and what I have tested, the results are showing a pattern we cant disregard.
I am sensing some of the players trying this strategy arent following the cycles through, or in some other way withheld information during the testing. Cycle 2 is there for a reson. Betting 2 units following the same pattern as cycle 1 will inevitably lead to a breakeven by spin 18 the latest. Its pure math, not stories about glory days. There is a reason why we have this result, and its due to the fact that, what some people consider an anomaly, actually occurs sometimes. I am thinking of the fact that the first 36 spins are genuinely unique nd no repeaters show.
BUT, even IF this highly unlikely situation occurs, then you would mathematically break even by the 18th spin in cycle 2, since at least 1 repeater has shown, giving you the payout of twice the x36 wager times 2.
I am not sure how you test the spins, and if its played by the book. I mean, we have all been tempted to play further than breakevens and restartpoints, so I am not surprised if this is the case. However I do state my sympathy with you and your exeperience, should you have lost betting this scheme.
Codegenic
But from your first post, you aren't betting 2 units until cycle 3.
I only tested the first two cycles (1, 1; instead of 1, 1, 2) since I usually don't record enough numbers for 3 complete cycles of 36.
Ron.
Its all a question of interpretation I can understand. When betting 1,1,2 you are correct. However, when you add the 1 unit to numbers in cycle two, you would have a total bet of 2 units on many of the numbers. Thats what I meant.
As a response to many pm's I can only concur to this. Yes it can be played in different ways, as with many other systems. One variant of this, is to let the spins get you far enough to have at least 20 numbers shown, repeaters not counted in, but 20 unique numbers.
Happy gaming.
Codegenic, thanks for sharing. This one is very similar to the way I played times ago, but cycles was 12 spins and I doubled up after the first one (from 13th spin). However, cycles of 36 make more sense.
However, I'm not sure to understand this:
Quote from: codegenic on October 23, 2008, 08:07:08 PM
Betting 2 units following the same pattern as cycle 1 will inevitably lead to a breakeven by spin 18 the latest. Its pure math, not stories about glory days. There is a reason why we have this result, and its due to the fact that, what some people consider an anomaly, actually occurs sometimes. I am thinking of the fact that the first 36 spins are genuinely unique nd no repeaters show.
BUT, even IF this highly unlikely situation occurs, then you would mathematically break even by the 18th spin in cycle 2, since at least 1 repeater has shown, giving you the payout of twice the x36 wager times 2.
If we have no repeaters after 36 spins, we have a loss of 666 units. How could we break even? We need no less than 9-10 numbers hit twice in the first 18 spins of 2nd cycle, probably something more. I'm sorry, probably I'm missing something due to my bad english :(
I'm testing it with fun money and I like it, but a couple of times I need to go on until the end of 3rd cycle and can't recover the loss.
hi, obviously hitting no repeaters in 36 spins is a possibilty and a big loss, but you play 100 sessions of 36 and i would pretty much guarantee you wont see that happen, youre saying that youre going to see 36 different numbers in 36 spins straight off the mark, i personally cant see that happening, if it did i would put it down too extremely bad luck
Hi Ryan,
yes, I agree it's almost impossible to have 36 spins without repeaters ;) I just take the same example Codegenic made.
Codegenic said it's pure math that also in the worst situation, we will break even on the 18th spin of the 2nd cycle, but I can't understand this part.
its because if you do get 36 unique numbers in 36 spins, in the next 18 spins at least 17 of those spins have to be a repeat and by magic you break even, i havent worked the maths out but codegenic knows her stuff and will have done her research and what she says will be reliable information, if your unsure how it will work i can only suggest you will have to work it out for yourself,
hope this helps
ryan
Kore
You're killing me!! A pic of a roof for your avatar. You must explain. Welcome!
Sam
Quote from: Kore on November 01, 2008, 06:13:44 PM
Hi Ryan,
yes, I agree it's almost impossible to have 36 spins without repeaters ;) I just take the same example Codegenic made.
Codegenic said it's pure math that also in the worst situation, we will break even on the 18th spin of the 2nd cycle, but I can't understand this part.
Hey Kore,
thank you and all for the interest in this system. The math behind this is quite simple. As with all bets, outside aswell as direct bets ( even bets excluded ). Take sixlines for example. They pay 6, so betting 1 sixline at a time while repeating last bets before you need to increase bets would be 1 +2 +3 = 3 times, if no hit then you raise bets. The same principal applies to betting streets, paying 12, so 1+2+3+4 = 4 times, before you need to increase, though you are 2 from betting 12 total. Now take direct bets.
1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8 = 8 bets. So in theory you would need a hit within 8 bets, hoping for a repeater. This happens more than ofte, but lets say it doesnt. Cycle to begins. 1+2+3+4+5+6+8 = 8 bets on 8 new numbers while betting the same previous numbers will give you the following: 8 bets first cycle, 8 bets + 8 bets 2 cycle, total numbers bet 24. The absence of repeaters in 16 spins, betting 16 numers, by which 8 of them are covered twice, is the dividend of 24/16 = 1.5. That is our success factor and the multiplyer by which we play to gain profit or break even if failed by cycle 2, or in other words, the difference between the numbers hit and played without the missing ones. 3rd cycle is the break or make round. If you have been unlucky and 16 unique numbers have spun this round will make up for it, by setting a 2 win need. I will post a system soon that I spent nearly 6 months on. Its a private system that is a mix and sofar has been scrutinised with over 40.000 thousand ( forty ) spins, 20.000 ( twenty ) of them in real live play. Its somewhat based on this system, but nothing like it, since it involves a mix of bets and is controlled by math calcs for each spin. Each spin will be a new event thus requirerin a new strategy and bet size, but easy enough to figure out in the end. So far its flawed if played with a BR of less than 100 units, but if not, it has held up with profit.
Quote from: codegenic on November 01, 2008, 07:05:14 PM
Quote from: Kore on November 01, 2008, 06:13:44 PM
Hi Ryan,
yes, I agree it's almost impossible to have 36 spins without repeaters ;) I just take the same example Codegenic made.
Codegenic said it's pure math that also in the worst situation, we will break even on the 18th spin of the 2nd cycle, but I can't understand this part.
Hey Kore,
thank you and all for the interest in this system. The math behind this is quite simple. As with all bets, outside aswell as direct bets ( even bets excluded ). Take sixlines for example. They pay 6, so betting 1 sixline at a time while repeating last bets before you need to increase bets would be 1 +2 +3 = 3 times, if no hit then you raise bets. The same principal applies to betting streets, paying 12, so 1+2+3+4 = 4 times, before you need to increase, though you are 2 from betting 12 total. Now take direct bets.
1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8 = 8 bets. So in theory you would need a hit within 8 bets, hoping for a repeater. This happens more than ofte, but lets say it doesnt. Cycle to begins. 1+2+3+4+5+6+8 = 8 bets on 8 new numbers while betting the same previous numbers will give you the following: 8 bets first cycle, 8 bets + 8 bets 2 cycle, total numbers bet 24. The absence of repeaters in 16 spins, betting 16 numers, by which 8 of them are covered twice, is the dividend of 24/16 = 1.5. That is our success factor and the multiplyer by which we play to gain profit or break even if failed by cycle 2, or in other words, the difference between the numbers hit and played without the missing ones. 3rd cycle is the break or make round. If you have been unlucky and 16 unique numbers have spun this round will make up for it, by setting a 2 win need. I will post a system soon that I spent nearly 6 months on. Its a private system that is a mix and sofar has been scrutinised with over 40.000 thousand ( forty ) spins, 20.000 ( twenty ) of them in real live play. Its somewhat based on this system, but nothing like it, since it involves a mix of bets and is controlled by math calcs for each spin. Each spin will be a new event thus requirerin a new strategy and bet size, but easy enough to figure out in the end. So far its flawed if played with a BR of less than 100 units, but if not, it has held up with profit.
Really when will we see it? ;D
Hi Codegenic,
maybe I'm starting to understand something more... or maybe not: after 8th spin, do you double up the wager on the 8 numbers spun and go on wagering one unit on the next numbers as they hit, and so on and so on every 8 spins? You said after 16 spins without repeaters you have 24 bets, i.e. 16 number wich 8 of them covered twice.That's what I understand from your example, and if it's so, well I think this is the part I missed. I thought a number should be covered twice only after it hits for the second time.
Even if you don't do this after 8 spins, but it is how the system works on cycles of 36, doubling the wager after the 1st cycle is not the same than place a second unit if and only if a number shows for the 2nd time.
Uhmm, I'm confused. I think I need to reread all from the beginning. And sorry again for my bad english, I'm afraid all of you will have a bad headache after reading my posts.
Sam, I'd like a good analyst explains me why I've choose this avatar ;)
I have toyed with this on play money and it has only led to VERY big losses.... Im not sure that I'm doing it right...
Cycle 1 bet in 1 unit increments on each number that appears until you reach profit or 36 units....
Cycle 2 same as level 1 except 2 unit bets? Do we keep the bets from round 1 on the table?
Cycle 3 same as level 1 except 4 unit bets? Do we keep bets from round 1 and round two on the table?
I have tried it both ways (leaving the money on from last cycle and starting over from scratch on new cycle) and they both lead to extreme losses..... easily munched up a 2k unit bank on fun money....
are you serious?
I just don't get it..... especially the claim you make about being mathematically in profit after the 18th bet on the second cycle.... surely there is no need for a third cycle then....
I think a proper example of your play is in order here...
I'm probably not the only person who seems to be missing the point here...
Kore
Have you ever had the shingles?
Sam
Hi Tok2Dahand,
as I said before this system usually wins for me, but sometimes not. I'm confused too.
From what I get from Codegenic's explication, cycle 1 ends when you have a total bet of 36 units on the table, not when you are in profit of 36 units. And you double the wager in cycle 3 not in cycle 2 - am I wrong?
However... sorry, maybe I'm dumb but I still can't understand why we should eventually break even on 18th spin of cycle 2 :-\ When you start cycle 2, you start with 36 units on the table and many numbers are covered, but note that only numbers covered with 2 or more units give you a real profit. When a number covered with 1 unit hits, your profit is 36 minus the total wager, that is more than 36 in cycle 2. I see no guarantee to break even and I can't understand the thing of "pure math"... and yes I do the math. Where am I wrong? I'm missing something I suppose, maybe some mistake in the progression?
The way I'm playing it, I win much more sessions than I lose, but sometimes I can't recover the loss on the 18th spin of 2nd cycle nor at the end the 3rd one. It's not frequent but it happens sometime.
Sam: no, I never had the shingles, so there must be another explication for my avatar! And I had to ask to uncle Google to understand what the shingles are. I told my english is very bad, didn't I?
......... Codegenic, for Double streets 3 times repeater bett then you equalize. That is, play DS which has come up, play this again and the following DS that has spun and play these plus the 3th DS.
Carlitos 8)
Kore
Shingles are a disease of the skin. Horrible!
I will continue to rack my brain for the logic behind your avatar!
Sam
Correction Sam. I'm a physician. It is a virus that manifests itself in painful lesions on the skin.
cd
cd
I stand corrected.
Sam
I see. I'll have to change my avatar now, I think to herpes zoster every time I look at it!
Code,
I'm really interested in this approach. Have only just starting testing but looks promising to me.
Look forward to chatting with you about it.
Cheers,
Matt
Hey gang,
just finished my first short test of this idea, although I have no idea if I'm doing/playing it a'la Code. But nonetheless, it show's promise. After 500 spins, am up 800+units, with only 1 tough spot (drawdown of 590ish units). The graph show's it all really. In the table below I show my total BR and the spin I was on after a new high OR the end of the cycle. I am restarting after reaching a new high.
[table=,]
BR,spin,cycle/notes
500,0,starting BR
508,8,
538,11,
568,14,
568,22,
585,32,
615,35,
648,37,
678,40,
704,44,
712,51,
745,53,
771,57,
645,93,36units on the board - starting cycle 2
735,132,72units on board - starting cycle 3
813,136,reset back to cycle 1
822,154,
843,159,
873,162,
881,169,
914,171,
716,206,36units on board - start cycle 2
956,231,reset back to cycle 1
964,238,
979,244,
987,251,
1022,252,
1025,282,
1033,298,
799,334,36units on board - start cycle 2
709,369,72units on board - start cycle 3
1129,409,reset to cycle 1 (I got up to 150units on the board. probably not correct style of play)
1155,413,
1217,441,
1243,445,
1249,456,
1249,464,
1255,475,
1288,477,
1321,479,
1329,486,
1344,492,
1397,505,
[/table]
Graph is below:
[attachimg=#1]
Just a little update,
same session, now at 860 spins. Took a huge dive though between spins 654 to 860, in which I was laying 408 units at the end.
see the graph. Have thought of a few tweeks though.
[attach=#1]
I'm liking this system alot so far - thanks codegenic for sharing.
I think Turbo has a similar system but off memory you add a unit to each number each spin - the payoffs are big but the drawdowns get a bit hairy (it's all relative of course)
I'm up 260 units in about 150 spins (Dublinbet playmoney) and 19 units in one short real money session. For real money I'm taking the "win 10% of bankroll" kind of approach. I think this method will profit each time so for mine I'm looking at aiming for around 50+/- units per session - take the money and run! Sometimes there's more on offer but I prefer the "easy" money this way.
@Matty - why test so many spins consecutively mate? It wouldn't be practical to play that many continuous or are you testing in separate sessions and adding them on? I like that you have an interest in this method too - it definitely means there's something in it and btw really enjoyed your post on money management - I think it could be well suited to this.
Roules
Hey roules,
your right, I wouldn't play this for such a long stretch in real play. But I like to test like so to give me an idea of "worse case senario". You see, had a started around spin 650, I would have had a really crappy session. This gives me a bigger picture.
Cheers,
Matt
PS - Yes, I believe the MM system I use would be great for this.
the best way to test is to play as many spins in one session as possible and play multiple sessions, this will give you a better idea of how often a loss will appear, also it will give you more confidence to be able to join a table at any part of the day without having to worry about hitting a loss straight away
for the G.U.T. tester ;
how many spin before the first number in the column 1 ?
it shouldnt pass 20-24 spin....what if you start playing after the first 10 spin without a repeater and with a more agressive progression
to show profits on the first win?
kompressor
Don't know if I'm the G.U.T. tester you are referring to, but if you are asking me these questions, please ask them on the "Testing" thread where I have been known to post.
If you're not speaking to me, I'm confused!
Sam
Hi there, I haven't been a member here for very long,
but done a few trials (although nothing extensive) and have returned good results
I started writing the Rx code? (but it's frustrating)
I'll keep testing
How do I post my bankroll balance trend graph from my Roulette Xtreme? I've tried all ways without luck. Any tips would be appreciated. Can you help please, Mattymattz?
I think I've worked it out - hopefully. I'll find out when I post this thread........
;D YESSSSS!!!!!!!!!
Nice work Gaza. Thanks for sharing. Again like Mattymatz test there's a big drop along the way - at least it's recovering well.
After a bad session 2 days ago I'm thinking of just resetting on a profit since this always seems to happen. It might not be much but so far it's almost likely to be guaranteed (of course anything can happen :))
...... perhaps one can extend the original run of 8 numbers of being played by playing the numbers with 1 spin delay. So lett's say if number 25 is being spun then start playing this number. Then 4 comes, skip 1 spin and then 12 comes and start playing number 4 etc.... had some good results playing this way.
Carlitos 8)
I had a play with this took a big dip at the start but recovered well
Hi there
Just another update [smiley=3D-gros-anim/36_2_18.gif]
At spin 880 I went to stage 4 (meaning 3 chips for another 36 spins)
At spin 916 I went to stage 5 (meaning 4 chips for another 36 spins)
And at spin 950 I was up and stopped
At the very end I was playing with £333 per spin!!
Big drowning but it came good (Then went to change my under wear)
Yes i know there isn't a stage 4/5 but just had to carry on to see if it would come good!
Just another 6000 spins to go
All numbers are from super casino.com/liveroulette. 7200numbers recorded constantly
Exactly two weeks worth
Will keep posting [smiley=3D-gros-anim/36_2_25.gif]
DOES IT AFFECT VERY MUCH TO PLAY THIS SYSTEM ON AN AMERICAN WHEEL...CAUSE I HAVE A TOUCHBET
WITH SPIN EVERY MINUTE AT MY LOCAL CASINO....500 SPINS/60 SPINS HOUR = 8 HOURS
i would imagine it affects the probability of winning the same as any other system, theres only one way to find out, test
Had another barry with this - the 16 number method is treating me much better ;)
Sorry I dont have formal test results at hand but this gets too out of control for my liking at times although I admit it does have it's moments. The progression/bankroll required to sustain long strings of losses is more than I feel needs to be risked.
Just my 5c :)
Roules
there'S 95% of chance that we will hit 2 or more repeaters before the 24th spin.....anybody have a clue on an agressive progression to win on the first two repeaters and then start over....to keep bet at an acceptable level