Roulette Ideas

I will share a short note.
27 groups 3 losing groups and 2 attempts.
27 blue and 3 black - cycle 2

1:s are singles and one event
2:s are one event
3:s and above is one event

Probability 1 in 3

111 ll
112 lw
113 lw
121 w
122 w
123 w
131 w
132 w
133 w

222 w
223 w
221 w
232 w
231 w
233 w
212 lw
211 ll
213 lw

333 w
332 w
331 w
322 w
321 w
323 w
313 lw
312 lw
311 ll

RNG with one win or two loses
There exist marches with fictive wins and wait-out losing sequences.
212 lw
331 w
321 w
112 lw
123 w
322 w
111 ll
213 lw
222 w
231 w
131 w
111 ll
232 w
113 lw
231 w
121 w
233 w
311 ll
112 lw
332 w
132 w
132 w
131 w
113 lw
333 w
113 lw
211 ll
333 w
312 lw
133 w
112 lw
113 lw
221 w
312 lw
131 w
112 lw
323 w
312 lw
332 w
212 lw
121 w
121 w
231 w
121 w
321 w
311 ll
112 lw
131 w
311 ll
222 w
112 lw
111 ll
321 w
311 ll
112 lw
321 w
132 w
221 w
133 w
221 w
333 w
122 w
121 w
212 lw
112 lw
322 w
111 ll
111 ll
312 lw
321 w
122 w
111 ll
131 w
312 lw
322 w
123 w
231 w
113 lw
132 w
213 lw
231 w
VLS AVERAGE DOSEN WITH SIX ATTEMPTS OR CATCH ONE DOZEN
CONVERTED TO EC WITH TWO WINS IN A ROW
212 lw
331 wl lww
321 wl
112 lw
123 ww wllww
322 ww ww
111 ll
213 lw
222 ww lllww
231  wl
131 wl
111 ll
232 ww wlwlllww
113 lw
231 wl lww
121 wl
233 ww wlww
311 ll
112 lw
332 w lllww
132 w
132 w ww
131 w
113 lw
333 w wlww
113 lw
211 ll
333 w
312 lw
133 w lwllwlww
112 lw
113 lw
221 w lwlww
312 lw
131 w lww

In sport when scalping you want a hight and stable strike ratio over time to explore.
A blue print that is stable and predictable.
That is what you achieve with this methodology.

Cheers

Hello dear Patrik, welcome back! 🤗

Quote from: Patrik on Feb 02, 2025, 07:57 PMThen Victor can give them separate space and location.

Yes, we can gladly provide separate sections for remarkable community members. 👍

(Exactly as needed)

Cheers!

I have saved articles by him.
Post or add them into this topic.
Then Victor can give them separate space and location.

Those calculations were way off. The bet sequence is

5, 6, 12, 24, 48, 96, 192 on each dozen.

On a win, rebet and if that wins then reset. You are looking for a double win.

The idea is to play the progression until you win twice in a row playing two dozens.

On a loss, move to the next step,
on a win rebet the same amount staying on the same step.

Step 0 shows 2(1+1) means bet 1 on each dozen.
Step 4 shows 12(6+6) means bet 6 on each dozen.

It is better than playing the martingale, and covers more numbers,
plus the profit goes up as it is played.

I see where you are coming from, nice insight!

I've claimed in yester years that the best selection for EC is to follow the last result.
This way you will win by streaks which are the foundation of standard deviations.
Whether a deviation is going to decrease or increase you will gain.
Of course there are chops but those don't last for long and personally I prefer to stop betting after every loss till I witness what would be a won bet.

But all that is just me, there are some "gurus" who prefer to bet against the face of reason..."wait for 5 virtual losses and then bet for 5 more times", anything before the 5 virtual losses is a waste of time and everything after is a waste of money, so as you see some self proclaimed betting gurus don't understand that even if you bet against a 17 streak it could become even longer!
When they win is just a temporary luck, but in their mind think that they are smart, how naive and foolish and fortunately for the casinos there will never be a shortage of them!

If some people would like to realize what I'm and you are "TwoUp" are talking about they would theirselves a favor, me and you have nothing to gain from their losses.

I provided a table of optimal stopping which is relevant here.

Also relevant is the arcsine law and things like zero crossings of random walks of a coin flip / even chance outcome.

The reality is that your particular path or history of outcomes on a random walk will be mostly biased on one side or the other with extremely few crossing where outcomes even up. Playing until even is not practical as house edge will erode your bankroll.

The math says that if you flipped a coin 1 million times you will on average see the counts of head and tails being equal less than 6 times! Of course not every 1 million flips will have less than 6, some will have a lot and some will have none, but the point is we can expect an EC to even up less than 6 times in 1 million spins ignoring zero.


However math also shows that you can optimise your expected value by stopping at optimal points on that random walk and you can refer to my post for that which was computed by simulation as published research.

It might sound like Voodoo but it's based on a simple argument. If you win the first coin flip then stop, if you don't then keep flipping until heads and tails is break even to get the "average" which is 1/2. Your expected return is 1/2 + 1/4 = 3/4 because half the time you win the first time and of the half you lose you keep flipping (potentially forever) until you get the average which is 1/2 and 1/2 of 1/2 is 1/4 and adding those two expected values is 3/4 which is better than 50/50 or 1/2.

Playing forever is not practical, so my table provides the rules for achieving positive EV by stopping in a truncated/practical version.

Roulette 36RB
To run the generator, you must manually enter the last 17 games starting from the end of history.

Let's suppose that House Edge is an insignificant issue, merely a taxation on our profits, thus the major obstacle we have to overcome is variance.
So how could we deal with variance?

For the example's sake I'm going to present you with a hypothesis on which we are gambling in a 50/50 game, such as even chances on Roulette, "banker" VS "player" on Baccarat, "pass" VS "don't pass"...etc.

When there's positive variance we have to do nothing because we are winners, but when we have negative variance we have to wait until variance undone its own manifestation...in other words, if we were trailing by 10 losses more than wins, we would be unable to overcome the negative deficit simply because we can never be 100% sure about when exactly a win is going to occur, with any kind of progression/MM.
Yes. we are going to win eventually, but since we don't know exactly when it's useless, or even harmful to attempt to raise the bets when negative variance still in action.

So by making an assumption that negative variance will eventually anule,offset,negate its own negative with a positive variance the only thing which we would have to be concerned with is the HE in regards with the duration since the negative variance begun till the time negative variance will end.

Let me become more specific;
I've found myself 10 losses in the hole, I kept flat betting for the whole duration till after 3 cycles of 37 spins/bets the positive variance made me win 10 times more, effectively offsetting the negative variance before, but since there were 111 bets I'm still -3 units overall thanks to the House Edge, at exactly this point in time, when there's not any losses left from negative variance, we are going to bet just enough to surpass the negative balance coming from the HE exclusively!
On the specific example 4 units bet in order to come on top with only a single win in the positive side (ours).
In case that eventful moment wouldn't come with a win, then wait again until the losses will become equal to the wins, then bet again to overcome the HE deficit plus any lost units from previous, failed attempts.

I want to be 100% clear, I'm not advocating such betting method, like I said before it's merely based on the assumption that only variance could "beat" itself.
Let's assume that this hypothesis is true, but how long before setting the record straight???
Hours? Day? Weeks?

I would really appreciate your colaboration, I want to know about what do you really think, could be such an approach viable, effective and practical?