Roulette Reading Randomness

Sorry, I'm late to this party.
6th-sense, can you clarify, are we reading top to bottom or bottom to top?

 

I took it as top to bottom but now I don't actually know.

 

This is too slow. I want to run one practice session each day using my own practice software where I can win or lose on my own merit. It shows what I bet on for each bet, if it won or lost. And it shows the amount won or lost as a running total as it goes. It proves absolutely nothing. It's just an example of how I guess. The software was never designed to cheat. It was designed to instruct and to practice. I'm going to just do it. Look at it. Try to learn from it. Hate it. I'm just going to do it. I built it to cause my mind to act exactly like I do in practice when I go to the casino. It's like practicing lead guitar. I must keep my chops up or I will suck. It actually works to prepare for a real gambling session.

 

Spike was the master of hinting. Why? Because he is working on 20 years of teasing. We know that all the system crash test dummies want to hide their wiz bang pow secrets because they actually believe that their magic progression is actually a freebie ATM machine. But that is just rank amateurism. There are actually a handful of real players that are thinking how to beat the odds. They have years of experience and if we were all allowed to we would probably all qualify to play Carnage Hall. Wouldn't that be a hoot. A real put up or shut up free for all. And of course I would expect you to be there.

 

Thanks to Jimske for sharing the Super Neural Strategy with it's stepped up & stepped down progression. I will be testing it the hard way both in my practice software and in B & M casinos. That is how much I like this progression. I have already proven to myself that I can flat bet at at least a 2 to 1 ratio from bet selection combined with virtual betting methods where a 1 to 1 win to loss ratio is considered the mathematical expectation. When I add my improved bet selection to this "Neural Strategy" stepping MM I think I will be able to play a more casual way of beating the casino. But testing and practice will tell the story soon enough.

Unlike the Neural Strategy's chartless rule based system I will still hunt for win streaks and strong repeating conditions. So when I publish practice sessions here in this thread they will now include this stepping MM system. This should go on long enough for me to draw a long run conclusion. I need to see if I can add a progression to my win / lose ratio. I have already had one session that I posted over at Jimske's thread on Neural Strategy. These are the seven steps: 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 10, and 15. My rules for bet selection are from Reading Randomness.

 

It can be, but the BIGGEST obstacle is the human element. I don't know what it is, it can be literally crazy trying to hit those last few units. People can post all they like, but once somebody is in the mode, they won't listen to others, or to themselves, forgetting everything they have read and written, common sense doesn't exist.

 

@Junket King

Why don't you just program a bot then and become a millionaire online?

 

Why don't you just fuck off?

 

My question is full of sense but you cannot just answer as usual, come on give us a beautiful screen shot...

 

You can't program a flexible subjective monetary approach, aspects of the bet selection are retro-fitted, why don't you come to the UK and we can say hello.

 

Cool, I tried to lose and I did it right off the bat. Same progression and steps:

Code:

 W | B  R | O  E | L  H | 0  6 | P | S |  --  SN  --  SP 
 nb|    X |    X | X    |    X | X | X |  --  01  --  12 
 nb| X    | X    |    X |    X | X | X |  --  02  --  31 
 nb| X    |    X |    X |    X |   | X |  --  03  --  22 
 nb| X    |    X | X    |    X |   |   |  --  04  --  08 
 nb|    X | X    | X    |    X |   |   |  --  05  --  07 
 nb|    X | X    |    X | X    | X |   |  --  06  --  27 
 nb| X    | X    |    X |    X |   | X |  --  07  --  33 
 nb|    X | X    |    X |    X |   |   |  --  08  --  19 
 nb| X    |    X |    X |    X |   | X |  --  09  --  20 
 nb|    X | X    | X    | X    | X |   |  --  10  --  01 
  -|    X |    X | X    | X    |   |   |  --  11  --  14 ( $ 0 ) Black
   | X    |    X |    X | X    | X |   |  --  12  --  28 ( $ -20 ) Not Primes
 X | X    |    X | X    | X    |   | X |  --  13  --  10 ( $ 12 ) Not Primes
   |    X | X    | X    | X    | X |   |  --  14  --  01 ( $ -6 ) Even
   |--------------------| X    | X | X |  --  15  --  38 ( $ -42 ) Even
   |    X | X    |    X | X    |   | X |  --  16  --  25 ( $ -78 ) Even
   | X    | X    |    X | X    |   | X |  --  17  --  35 ( $ -132 ) Even
   |--------------------| X    | X | X |  --  18  --  38 ( $ -222 ) Even
   |    X | X    | X    |    X |   |   |  --  19  --  07 ( $ -366 ) Even
   | X    | X    |    X |    X |   | X |  --  20  --  33 ( $ -546 ) Even
   | X    | X    | X    | X    |   | X |  --  21  --  13 ( $ -816 ) Even

Here is the pretty graph of death:

 

That's probably the first reason why it cannot be done, before human element...

Damn that would be the most useless trip ever, especially if it is to see you embarrassed after your dealer hit 5 instead 0

 

Today's practice session, stop at 25% up from 800 unit bankroll. Still using Super Neural Strategy 7 step progression. It sure allows me to be a little lazy. For anyone that notices chaos, and the absence of any definable trend characteristic then this progression is just outright fun.

Code:

 W | B  R | O  E | L  H | 0  6 | P | S |  --  SN  --  SP 
 nb| X    | X    | X    | X    |   | X |  --  01  --  13 
 nb| X    | X    |    X | X    |   | X |  --  02  --  35 
 nb|--------------------| X    | X | X |  --  03  --  38 
 nb|    X |    X |    X |    X |   |   |  --  04  --  34 
 nb| X    | X    | X    |    X | X |   |  --  05  --  17 
 nb|    X | X    | X    |    X | X |   |  --  06  --  03 
 nb|    X |    X | X    | X    |   |   |  --  07  --  14 
 nb| X    |    X |    X | X    |   |   |  --  08  --  24 
 nb| X    | X    | X    | X    |   | X |  --  09  --  13 
 nb| X    |    X | X    |    X | X |   |  --  10  --  06 
  -|--------------------| X    | X | X |  --  11  --  38 ( $ 0 ) Black
  -|    X | X    |    X | X    |   | X |  --  12  --  23 ( $ 0 ) Black
 X |    X |    X |    X | X    |   |   |  --  13  --  36 ( $ 18 ) Red
 X |    X | X    |    X | X    | X |   |  --  14  --  27 ( $ 36 ) Zeros
   | X    |    X | X    |    X | X |   |  --  15  --  04 ( $ 18 ) Zeros
 X |    X |    X | X    | X    |   |   |  --  16  --  14 ( $ 54 ) Zeros
   | X    |    X | X    |    X | X |   |  --  17  --  04 ( $ 36 ) Zeros
 X | X    |    X |    X | X    |   |   |  --  18  --  26 ( $ 68 ) Not Specials
   |    X | X    |    X | X    | X |   |  --  19  --  27 ( $ 50 ) Black
 X | X    | X    |    X | X    |   |   |  --  20  --  29 ( $ 86 ) Black
   | X    | X    |    X | X    |   |   |  --  21  --  29 ( $ 66 ) Not Primes
 X | X    |    X |    X |    X |   | X |  --  22  --  20 ( $ 98 ) Not Primes
   |    X | X    |    X | X    | X |   |  --  23  --  27 ( $ 80 ) Specials
   | X    | X    |    X | X    |   |   |  --  24  --  29 ( $ 44 ) Specials
 X |    X |    X |    X | X    |   | X |  --  25  --  30 ( $ 98 ) Specials
 X | X    |    X | X    |    X | X |   |  --  26  --  06 ( $ 130 ) Not Specials
 X |    X |    X | X    |    X |   |   |  --  27  --  16 ( $ 148 ) Red
 X |    X | X    | X    |    X | X | X |  --  28  --  05 ( $ 166 ) Odd
   |    X | X    | X    |    X | X | X |  --  29  --  05 ( $ 148 ) Zeros
 X | X    | X    | X    | X    |   | X |  --  30  --  13 ( $ 184 ) Zeros
 X |    X |    X |    X | X    |   | X |  --  31  --  30 ( $ 202 ) Red

...and the graph, this time to win on purpose.

 

I now know why my win ratio went way up. My reading randomness techniques produced a 4.66+ ratio at 3 net wins to every lost seven net loss session. Balance point is 2.33 wins for each lost session. All this is flat betting.

But this stepped up and stepped down method not only recovers on wins it goes past it in an ever upward track in the graphs. The only thing that can kill it is 7 lost steps all in a row. To do that to me it means that I must lose every first try after a loss and including the patience of testing for further losses using virtual guesses, (bets at $0). I would need to go on a monster losing streak in order to fail at this. The original rule based bet selection system must run straight into a killer sequence. It might not do that very often though. I don't want to waste my time searching for it's breaking point and long term averages. I want to find reading randomness' breaking points. I must now run really long practice sessions to see if I can break it and lose the bankroll. It's really interesting.

I wonder if others are testing the Super Neural Strategy? Even the fixed rule is worth testing. Heck, this thing is all over the internet. It must get killed off or it would be all over the place. Why is it not the HG?

 

Mark ,



Instead of Holy Grail it might be Seven steps to Hell .




ND

 

It could also be seven steps to missing the boat.

 

Table minimum $ 15 at step 7 a 34 unit bet resulting in a loss . Setting up the deck chairs on the Ship of Fools .



ND

 

ND, I can run this at a $5 minimum table using just the even chance outside bet locations. Example: $5, $8, $13, $20, $35, $50, and $75. Add it up, it's $206. I've been running tests that are all inside any Indian Casino here in the states. That is 18 to 20 numbers selected per bet at $1, $2, $3, $5, $8, $10, and $15. Added up it comes to less than $800. In either case I'm working at a 25% stop win point. So I need 4 won sessions for each lost session. I doubt that I will ever lose a session at -$800.

So why do you have a burr up your ass?

 

Mark,


That`s my MO. Not the daily fumbling ideas from the Baccarat forum .


I`ll stick to the transparency what a roulette wheel gas to offer .




ND

 

typo correction : wheel has to offer .