TurboGenius Informational : What are your chances of winning ?

nope.....though it is to catch a repeat....not betting any unhits at all in this method....i,m sure it will fail...but will see....

after using my numbers and neighbours application you sort of begin to see a lot...lets say connection ....though people say past spins don,t matter those spin pockets intertwine at certain points....vaddi is a basic start point tbh....then you have turbos you can,t get a repeat without a unique....so basically its an observed method...

two points here though....the beginning of the chart was based on multiple hits to be in a staged overall win....lets say 4 hits....over a course of variable spins ....i did that basically ...drawdown was just the same as a dynamic bet tbh....so changed to that....not the best but would need someone to have a better idea of mm for multiple staged hits....

method is really simple though...usually no more than 24 to 26 spins to qualify..bet..and hit on a variable amount of numbers for a repeat..i really should have a stoploss at 500....but want to see what the most extreme case is...method is simple but i can see that an actual cycle phase if put in would maybe lower bankroll...when it fails i may just put the method up to see if a greater megamind would look at it

graphs always look good they do on my application for quite a few thousand spins so don,t be fooled

as it stands its at this point...nearly went beyond 500 units too..

 

Thanks for your elaborate answer! You know i’ve been working on something too thats still looks promising. Only the program takes a while to do the calculations in excel. Im working on my laptop which is not so powerful.

In about 2 weeks im getting my workstation back which is extremely powerful so i can complete the test by then. So fingers crossed

 

thats one thing i can,t do..is code....your doing better than me....was thinking of getting alessio to code it who did my application but its basically a methodology system...the application i had him build isn,t...its fully adjustable by user....
i don,t want to waste anyones time unless i put my own effort in to see if its worth doing....graphs can look good short term to anyone and thats the plain truth of it unless it has a lot of spins...this test isn,t a lot of spins as of yet...and boredom does kick in...with 10 unit basebet and a percieved 500 unit stoploss..its not many bankrolls to lose...but i,ll be going the whole hog to see max drawdown on this test...

my answer seems elaborate but its really not

 

Yes that is a pity hand testing is an absolute drag!!! Honestly it would drive me mad! Big respect for all those hand testers out there!!!

I know how graphs can be perceiving. Especially when progressions are involved. Thats why i always test flat.

I once had a graph that went up and up for more than 10000 spins. I thought i finally got it, until it started to tank. I was using a progression it failed miserably in the end. Thats always such a downer. :-(

 

Hi 6th,
what do you mean by "methodology system", why shouldn't this be programmable ?
Aren't all your systems programmable ? Why this ?

Your graph looks good.

 

its programmable herby ...methodology system...just a term i use when wheel dictates bets not yourself...had enough for today...if kids keep off my pc and not lose my stuff i,ll carry on tomorrow...

 

Measure the peak to valley drawdown. Divide profit against max drawdown. The minimum multiple is 20. The larger the more reliable.

The better way is to use fixed stop loss, this limit the max peak to valley drawdown.

 

Lucky, I don't get the significance of 20 .. & what if the stop-loss is abolished.?

 

I'm sorry but thats not going to work if the system in charge has a negative expectancy. You first need to have an edge to apply all of the above.

 

For example you might use an progression against an event that shows up within a 1000 spins on average. But due to random it might not show up in 10.000 spins but then in the next 10.000 spins in shows up more than you had wished for.

That's why I always advice for testing for 1000s of spins to see it was not just a fluke you just witnessed...

 

You can test for billions of spins, if you don't get this 20 multiple as I describe it's a sure loser.

 

Even if you code and test millions of spins to get a positive result.

If the minimum multiple is not at least 20, the millions of spins positive graph is still a loser.

Test it to billions or trillions of spins still require this 20multiple minimum.

 

What exactly do you mean by the 20 multiple?

 

Error : a progression AGAINST an event.
So you're telling me with a win/lose ratio of 2/3 vs 1/3 you can't make it win ? You're gonna have some sessions where random throws out more losses for sure...but you're gonna have much more sessions where random act as it should (or even better.) Use a solid mm and let's see how many winning vs losing sessions you'll get ....(session end with required br win or br loss )

 

With all respect Denzie. You also win 2 out of 3 with a random number. I just finished test 3 and there is no single difference with betting a random number! Not even slightly. I can email you the excel file so you can have a look.

The point of this thread was that there should be a difference between the 2. (random vs turbos idea) And there is none.

So what you are saying now is that the progression is there to get the edge???

 

But this alone does not confer an advantage.
when you win, on average you win 18 units. and when you lose, you lose 36 units.
There is not advantage.

Regards!!

 

Obviously you're missing something although it's correct what you say ..... are you telling me that you can't make this win ? Again...I can

 

So where to look?

Averages?

 

So again where lies the advantage not in the way to choose numbers.

 

They are the same. I checked every variation. Max / Gaps / Averages. zero difference…