System based purely in Maths

[Proofreaders2000]

Even bets, Grand Martingale 1,3,7,15: $26 drawdown.

As roulette is a trial of independent spins, the house has a automatic 53% on a European roulette wheel (without the zero covered), typical even money bet (Black/Red, Odd/Even, High/Low)

I'm looking at your numbers, 7% losing. That would be true, provided the Grand Martingale were continuous (past $15), there were no table limits and we have a very large bankroll.

Again 60% or better for a viable system, if we lose, we would have to win twice in a row to cover the loss.
What are the odds of winning an even bet progression twice in a row (every time)?

[winkel]

We could say that our stake is out bankroll and our payout is £4 (£1 for each spin)

So total payout = £30
Stake = £26

Given odds therefore equal 30/26 = 1.154

These given odds are better odds than the fair odds of 1.075 so over time we will have an advantage over the house. Ratio = 1.075 / 1.154 = 0.93.

Thoughts? , before I go on?

[highlight]Your not serious, are you?[/highlight]

In Germany we would say "Thats apples compared with bananas".
Your counting only works if you win in the fourth (always)
but how is your math if you lose and not only once but 3 times in a row.
pls see also my earlier question you didn´t answer.

regards
winkel

[gingermolloy]

True winkel but if you do the maths for the given odds when winning at an earlier stage the numbers actually look better.

looking for other question now!

ginger

[gingermolloy]

True winkel but if you do the maths for the given odds when winning at an earlier stage the numbers actually look better.

looking for other question now!

ginger

Whats the other question!?

[winkel]

This one

So you say the bet-selection has no effect and the outcome of the spins have no effect and what has come and what is going to come has no effect

then you can bet about 10 times using this progression and have lost 4083 units
so you have to win 4084 times in the first bet or
2042 times in the second bet
to equalize

How do you do this by a chance of 50:50??

br
winkel

[rouletteplay]

I am all for a mathematical approach and it sounds good in theory but I have just coded it into MMMX and it doesnt work - it loses quite a lot!

[trylobit]

gingermolly,

here are spins from todays joyland:
1
9
29
17
18
29
17
9
18
32
21
27
32
23
22
13
4
24
9
21
36
16
17
7
11
27
26
2
24
20
12
1
35
27
24
16
10
11
5
36
0
15
30
32
10
23
13
31
11
10
32
0
24
17

why won't you go this session and  show as how it works with your comments (decisions you make to bet or not to bet).

best regards.
tryl.

[TwoCatSam]

Im sure I do have a new twist.

People......

I think we are all agreed that the Grand Martingale, in pristine form, will never win.  Ginger said he had a twist to the system.  I am waiting for that twist.

Sam

[trylobit]

I agree with you Sam, that's my purpose of giving spins in the post.
Let's see what's special in this system.

br.
tryl.

[kompressor]

He's misterious....girls like it...

[lucky_strike]

If some one considering to play this way, then plz, use a line like 111, before you increase you bets.
Its just an illusion to think you have to win and gain a profit for every step using a progression.
You will find it more easy and lose less if you delay your bets.

I can show you that you can pass 500 000 trails and end with a profit if you delay.
If you use any thing like the post above mention with a Marty you will not last for 300 trails.

L 1
W 1
W 1 +1
L 1
L 1
W 1 +0
W 1
W 1
W 1
W 1 +4
L 1
L 1
L 1
W 2 +3
W 1 +4
L 1
L 1
W 1 +3
L 1
W 1
L 1
L 1
L 1
W 2 +2
W 1 +3
L 1
L 1
W 1 +2
L 1
W 1
W 1 +3
L 1
L 1
W 1 +2
W 1
W 1 +4
L 1
W 1
W 1 +5
L 1
L 1
W 1 +4
W 1
W 1
W 1 +7
L 1
W 1
L 1
W 1
L 1
W 1
L 1
W 1
W 1 +8
L 1
L 1
L 1
L 2
W 3 +6
W 1
W 1 +8
L 1
W 1
L 1
W 1
W 1
W 1 +10
L 1
W 1
W 1 +11
L 1
W 1
L 1
W 1
W 1 +12
L 1
L 1
W 1 +11
W 1
W 1 +13
L 1
L 1
W 1 +12
W 1
W 1
W 1 +15
L 1
L 1
L 1
W 2 +14
W 1 +15
L 1
L 1
L 1
L 2
W 3 +13
W 1
W 1 +15


Cheers LS

[gingermolloy]

been a pleasure guys, but this isn't the crowd for me clearly

Seya

Ginger

[WannaWin]

been a pleasure guys, but this isn't the crowd for me clearly

Seya

Ginger

This is a loss. We are all people, if we treat us badly or if we try the good, we welcome the good.

Colleagues, all that is needed is not to interrupt the person.

First to develop the system and then to leave the questions, the personal observations and the suggested improvements.

The solution is not in keeping all the topics closed, the solution lies in education and have the decency to leave people alone to develop its system.

Greetings
WannaWin

[Jakkalsdraai]

  Hey Gingermolloy,

these guys only mean well. TCS and Winkel both come over very strongly and sometimes one can take it the wrong way.I know that I did have a hickup with TCS way back about basically the same thing that is upsetting you.

Believe me though that u should be very happy that these guys are devoting time to your posts. TCS is definately the top tester of systems around here, and Winkel (although I still haven't got to GUT) definately one of the top if not the top system creator around. So u see, u are in the presence of some knowledgable gents. And I assure u that they WANT u to succeed or at least find something special in what u are doing cause if it's beneficial to us all well that is just great.

Please reconsider leaving and continue your posts. When TCS said he was waiting for the "twist" believe me he was waiting for the twist. Not meaning it sarcasitically. Even if your system comes to nothing maybe the twist is what some of us needs in developing other systems.

Chhers
Jakk

[VLSroulette]

maybe the twist is what some of us needs in developing other systems.

Exactly.

I too vouch for Ginger to reconsider leaving. We all know the house edge is there and we all know systems are accepted to fail when passed throught computerized long-term testing, but we still need to have this a sharing place where we learn form each other and listen first. Then after submitter has elaborated we submit our comments and personal views in a calmed and polite way.

Really, this is all about it!

We don't know who the top-contributors from the future are. First step is sharing their initial ideas, then elaborating on top of those ideas and then improving year to year.

I still want to know Winkel's take on advanced tracking based on GUT-like events, I still want to know what Mr. Chip has to say. I'm sure plenty of us want it. When a contributing member of the forum leaves, that is a loss to all of us as a roulette study community.

Remember: those bet selection or money management ideas some discard may be exactly what's missing to some others to complete the synergy to their own take at the game.

Hope Ginger is back again in the future when he calms down and hope all of us to be mature enough to do just one tiny little thing: Listening while a fellow elaborates! I don't think that's asking for too much

After he elaborates in peace we have all the time in the world to provide opinions, suggestions & verdicts... but if we cut the sharing prior the being complete, eventually what would be there be for us to debate?

Reflection time.

Best regards.
Your friend & concerned admin,
Victor

[VLSroulette]

-