 | Bovada is the only Internet casino endorsed by the Wizard. Here are my reasons why and my promise of support. |
Winning in the short-term....for a working life?!!!
| January 2nd, 2012 at 1:10:59 PM permalink | |
| 7craps Member since: Jan 23, 2010 Threads: 10 Posts: 326 | First off for WoA... 1. You the same guy that tries to pass off a Roulette method by Ion Saliu as his own? Some jokers in Austrailia have pirated Ion Saliu's work recently and claimed it as their own. I hope you are not. So continue reading. You also use the term "DC" (degree of certainty) a lot as does Ion Saliu in his "FFG tables". Interesting. We all agree that there are lots of scum in this world. 2. I made my table matrix width from 5 to 50 in different worksheets and can easily come up with simple math formulas to explain the results. I find it very interesting that your "friend" only uses the next 10 spins in his group size or set size. Why? Because he has 10 fingers? The median starts out at 25 spins for a group size that dramatically reduces the risk of ruin for any session bankroll. I guess you want to see all of my work in Excel!? Not today... 3. Now WoA, when there are more than one row (my data would be in columns) to start wagering a progression on and another row goes 8 groups of 10 spins without a repeat do you now have 2 progressions going at the same time? Or do you wait until the first progression ends? One can see this happens in my photo and actually can over run a $3500 bankroll if 3 or more progressions are bet at the same time.
Sounds like 98steps challenge all over again. Can WoA explain with simple English and examples how the so-called "friends" Roulette system works? I do not think he can. Looks like he is struggling to give simple explanations with examples. I will begin with a snapshot of my Excel, I used the Wizard of Odds single zero RNG spins. (not from the first spin)  Yuck. This needs to be explained much simpler. I Do not know if I can succeed in doing it. Here is my take. I am watching the many US football bowl games today, so I have some time to waste on this. (I was successful in understanding and programming 98 steps system so I give it my 2 cents worth try.) First, I am not interested in programming this in Roulette Xtreme as my time is very valuable to me, it still looks very easy to accomplish once you learn the programming language - I understand that many "gamblers" just want or demand answers, without any effort on their part, from the "experts" so they can "look over the data themselves. Nice try. I have taken MY time to set this up in Excel 2007, AS I UNDERSTAND "WoA" freind's method (now it is someone's friend, a "poker player"... great). My matrix of spins is different from WoA, each row contains 10 spins, this takes advantage of using over 1.4 million rows in Excel 2007 or newer. The way I understand it is take the very first spin. From the pic above it was a "0" Now look (track) the next 10 spins looking for another "0" to repeat. The very next 10 spins (1,1 to 1,10 and 2,1 in the "set/roll table") does not show another "0" so an "x" goes next to the 5, the 11th spin. (I used a separate table for this instead of 0x5x as WoA method.) The 2nd table - the one with all xs and 1s - shows 1,1 = x ( x= no repeat for 1 st # of group, 1 = at least 1 repeat) Now the 11th spin #5 is the NEW first spin in the next group of 10 spins. We look for #5 to repeat at least 1 time in the next 10 spins...NOT "0". And the next 10 spins do not show a #5. So "table 2" 2,1 = x (WoA places an x next to #11, the 21st spin) The FIRST betting "trigger" looks to start at spin #86. One would bet for #3 (in column 6) to repeat in the next 10 spins. It does on spin #90, requiring 4 wagers of the progression to be made. Very easy to write a few IF statements in Excel and let Excel do all the counting. No reason for me to continue showing or explaining until WoA verifies that I do understand his method. Then I can show more data and my results. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IMO... WoA confuses everyone by saying to wait for 80 losing spins then start betting. This is not how to explain the method. It is waiting for 8 consecutive groups of 10 spins each where the first number that starts the group does not repeat in the next 10 spins. The math is quite simple after this is understood. It is all about groups of 10 spins taken at a time. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FY!: Probability that the very 1st number of the group of 10 does not repeat in the next 10 spins is (36/37)^10 = ~0.760339875 Now WoA says to WAIT for 8 consecutive groups of 10 spins, each group starting with a new number, spin#1,#11,#21,#31 etc to repeat. So, .760339875^8 = 0.111702305 for the very next 8 groups of 10 Spins or 80 spins total not to show a repeat of the starting group number. Now we start getting into the math of streaks when N is greater than 8. I am not here for any advanced teaching on this so everyone is on their own for this. The fact is... As N (number of spins) increases so does the probability of a streak of 8 groups being an "x" (that is not having a repeat of the very first number that starts the group of 10 spins.) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe someone else can do a better job than me on explaining. Let us see if WoA says I have the method correct. Now WoA has to understand my table of data. I think it is easier to work with. I outlined the groups of 8 or more in the photo and highlighted in yellow the groups of 10 spins that were wagered on. (other columns were used for this) Life in the Key of F#...a.crap=(gambling) - (math) b.math=(crap) / (gambling) c.gambling=(crap) / (math) |
| January 2nd, 2012 at 2:12:33 PM permalink | |
| guido111 Member since: Sep 16, 2010 Threads: 5 Posts: 476 | ShuffleMaster owns Vegas Star. I think they were bought out a few years ago. They are here in some CA Indian casinos. Vegas Star Roulette If you and your mate can beat this game in the short run, keep going. I am sure ShuffleMaster will not put up with your method of play and will just lower the max bet on straight up bets. Case closed. Good Luck! |
| January 2nd, 2012 at 2:23:48 PM permalink | |
| WizardofAus Member since: Dec 26, 2011 Threads: 2 Posts: 59 |
No I'm not - I'm trully new to any online forum sites - it's a whole new world to me.
Not sure why 10. That's great to know - might advise my friend of that. Would love to see your work...one day.
You would play only two maximum at a time. it's physically not possible to keep track of the amounts you should be betting, what number you are betting it and then actually placing those bets within the 15 second window that they give you. It's interesting to see so many cross-overs - the most I've seen in my 10 hours of play has been 3 numbers going at once.
Sorry :)
YES!!! This is exactly what it is! Thanks 7C. Wow looks scary to already show a 250 odd streak there. I would love to see the full results. I'm extremely appreciative of your time and effort in doing this. ALL - from this point in time - I will not make statements about the maths or about how an RNG works again on this forum - I will just ask questions if I don't understand. I may or may not ever believe in the Gambler's Fallacy (because I'm a gambler) but I know that you guys WILL ALWAYS believe in it. The results mick and 7C has shown - purely proves that in the long-run or even within a few thousand spins - any system will break down. As a gambler who uses a lot of systems - I'll just create a deck of cards - each card with a system that gives me a higher probability of not breaking down - and then pulling one out and using it for one progression only and then doing the same thing 10 times a day with ten different cards, every day. I now understand that this does not give me any different advantage at all - but it only allows me to play a smaller proportion the infinity pool for each progression. Hopefully I don't lose on the very first go. 7C - like I said - I really appreciate everything you've done and explained above - the Excel skills required for the above is well above what mine can do - I have no programming skills so Xtreme is a no go - unless I start reading it from scratch. |
| January 2nd, 2012 at 2:29:15 PM permalink | |
| EvenBob Member since: Jul 18, 2010 Threads: 231 Posts: 6361 |
I'm sorry, but this is a completely useless and meaningless thing to do. All spins are independent of the last spin, so why would doing this make a difference? Please don't say 'I don't know why, it just does.' Because it doesn't, you just think it does. One casino owner to another: "It would be so much easier if we could just hit them over the head, steal their money, and throw their bodies in the creek." Al Swearengen, Deadwood |
| January 2nd, 2012 at 2:33:51 PM permalink | |
| WizardofAus Member since: Dec 26, 2011 Threads: 2 Posts: 59 |
I don't think it would be Shuffle Master's decision to do that - it would be the casino operators. But the maths is starting to show that even though winning sessions is a high probability - even at a $100+ hourly - the losses do actually happen. Even though I've played about 10 hours and not experienced one to even go past 150 sequence loss (extremely lucky!) - my mate has now gone past about 130 hours - his full progression that I presented - the most he has seen was like 170 or so. He's seen well over 13,000 spins with no loss yet, with a net profit of $13K - assuming $40 on average - that's 325 betting progressions without a loss - he's doing well compared to the 60 to 1 odds he is getting to go bust. |
| January 2nd, 2012 at 2:48:50 PM permalink | |
| guido111 Member since: Sep 16, 2010 Threads: 5 Posts: 476 | I got to agree that the OP needs to slowly and precisely explain every step, with clear examples, at what he is trying to get across. Roulette Xtreme, IMO, still has a learning curve in its programming language that most non-programmers will find as a major stumbling block. I go with 7Craps method using Excel or another spreadsheet program for your simulations. This way you can see the formulas and know they are correct for your method at hand. I think I have figured it out. Much confusion by OP saying he bets 150 spins but does not really show that the number he bets on always changes every 10 spins. This does not change the math of the distribution in any way (waiting for 8 groups of 10 spins each). My Q for the OP is do you only bet one progression at a time? To me, to lower the risk of busting a bankroll you should only wager on one at a time. Now, By the photo 7Craps supplied in his thread, one can see 4 different progressions being bet on at the same time and one of them went quite long... starting at set 16, column 6. Looks like 175 wagers in the progression while 3 more came on its heels. Looks like this sequence of Roulette spins broke the bank just betting for 1 progression. Good Luck and Enjoy the ride! |
| January 2nd, 2012 at 2:56:03 PM permalink | |
| EvenBob Member since: Jul 18, 2010 Threads: 231 Posts: 6361 |
Not untypical. Some systems win on paper for years, then they stop winning and never do again. You haven't tested long enough yet. You're thinking, heck, I'll just win for years, then stop playing when I stop winning. It never works out that way. One casino owner to another: "It would be so much easier if we could just hit them over the head, steal their money, and throw their bodies in the creek." Al Swearengen, Deadwood |
| January 2nd, 2012 at 3:06:22 PM permalink | |
| WizardofAus Member since: Dec 26, 2011 Threads: 2 Posts: 59 |
My experiences 10 years ago! I lived off some roulette methods whilst at uni until I went broke numerous times - picked up poker and never looked at another roulette method/system again until this one. I've told people you can't beat roulette in the long-run - but when my mate told me about his system and these new machines with quick spins - It's re-energised my taste buds - mathematically not a good thing. But maybe my deck of cards will allow me to skip a lot of unwanted progressions in my lifetime - mathematically it's unlikely. |
| January 2nd, 2012 at 3:13:02 PM permalink | |
| EvenBob Member since: Jul 18, 2010 Threads: 231 Posts: 6361 |
I fail to see how they could make a difference. They just let you win faster or lose faster, they don't change the game. If you want your system to play faster, cut down the number of spins required. Instead of using sets of 10, use sets of 5. There's nothing magical about 10 spins. One casino owner to another: "It would be so much easier if we could just hit them over the head, steal their money, and throw their bodies in the creek." Al Swearengen, Deadwood |
| January 2nd, 2012 at 3:20:33 PM permalink | |
| WizardofAus Member since: Dec 26, 2011 Threads: 2 Posts: 59 |
But for us system players who "rely" on previous results - it allows us to wait for a shorter period of time. Just like this system - say we were to adjust the wait to 150 waits instead of 80 waits then start a progression betting system of 150 spins - the 150 spins that your waiting could take you 5 hours on a traditional wheel and may only take you 2 hours on these wheels. But that's using the Gambler's Fallacy for us non-believers. It's kinda like waiting for a 20 streak of blacks/reds and using a martingale - bad example :) There might be nothing magical about 10 or even 5 but 7craps brings up the mean at 24 - interesting... |
| Bovada is the only Internet casino endorsed by the Wizard. Here are my reasons why and my promise of support. |