Roulette Fascinating Stuff

The Legend Snowman wrote

Up as you lose progressions are a foolish endeavour.

You can’t win much with an up as you lose progression
because your first bet must be very low. It also doesn’t make
sense, mathematically, to risk your entire bankroll while chasing
just one unit!

A better method would be to bet a percentage of your bankroll at
each spin.
This would enable your first bet to be much larger, and if
you’re lucky, have a chance at a large win. As your bankroll
grows, so does your bet!

Searching for “just the right up as you lose progression” is like
trying to reach ZERO by dividing any number by TWO.
After a while, you’ll think that you’re getting really close but in reality,
you’ll never really quite get there because an infinite series still
exists between you and your goal.

Furthermore, watching on the sidelines for a string of rare
events is a waste of time. You’re simply delaying the
inevitable.

 

Absolutely inevitable. At least you made some profit, be thankful it didn't happen right away. Unless you think you're going to do it again and have to learn your lesson three or four times

 

Chingy 711

Hi Atlantis, Midnight Skulker, Houston, & The Gang!

Well I just got home from Empire City, wasn’t as crowded as
I thought it would be for the Fourth of July. It was a little
frustrating
starting over with the $10 base unit after playing the $30 base
unit.
It’s not as exciting especially after taking a sizable loss the other
day,
but in hindsight, I feel I had a very good run and honestly
didn’t expect
the run to be as long as it was. The bottom line is I’m still up
$7,800
playing the Ching-A-Ling.

Today went well, I picked up $260 for the few hours of play,
plus I won
$400 on one of the slot machines. The roulette wheels were
showing a
a good run of streaks, no really big runs but a lot of 3 or 4
consecutive
reds and blacks. It’s going to be a “grind” but my notes show
the
distribution of series is very close to 3/4 of all spins I’ve
charted.

In light of that fact, I still have good vibes with the strategy
and will
follow my own advice, “If it’s not broken, don’t fix it.” The
Ching-A-Ling
has produced more winners than losers so far and it’s clear
it’s due the
distribution of series compared to single even money
events. I’ll keep
at it and see how long of a run I can have before another
“lost” comes ago.

Even if I get half the run I did before the other day"s loss, I
would be delighted.
Atlantis, I find the 5/5 ANGLE interesting, but it’s not for me.
It’s a hard enough
grind with the Ching-A-Ling, but this would requirer wait to
much downtime for
me. Don’t get me wrong, I’m a “Grinder” in the truest sense,
but this is something
that would drive me crazy. Running all over the casino
checking the roulette display
boards looking for the “trigger.” Thanks for the thought, I’m
going to ride out

the Ching-A-Ling til I lose the $8,000 I’m up with it at this point
or just keep progressing
up the ladder ($10, 420, $30, $40, & $50 base unit)
every time the bankroll triples.

Where I’m at in profits right now I can incur 5 total posts at
the $10 base unit of all
4 levels of the strategy. I honestly don’t see that happening.
Thanks anyway, Atlantis!

Hi Midnight Skulker,
You’ve been a class act ever since I started posting here,
you’ve always have
read my post not sounding off on me with negativity. Yes we
have different views of
a few things, but you have always been considerate. Some
people here think I don’t
know about the odds or the house edge or standard
deviation but I’m well aware of
all the math, all that I question in my mind is what is truly
random? The Chaos Theory
and the Butterfly Effect is a truly interesting theory which
many scientists have given
serious thought to.

What drives me crazy is that one can do a
million trial and the
percentages always come close with little standard deviation.
that alone amazes me!
Random means something altogether different to me, there
shouldn’t ever be anything
that predictable and still be random. It’s not the independence
of the single event it’s
the group of the sampling as a whole always falls within that limited range of standard
deviation even in a trillion trails. Well, thanks for being a class
act no matter what are
differences are. My hat is off to you too!

Houston,
I agree most progressions are a foolish endeavour, but I feel
in this case with this
strategy it help me survive a little longer at the tables in the
hope of running into
the colour streak series. I’ve never once told anyone this
strategy they were going to
make big money with this. I told everyone it was a total
“Grind”, just like a job and
there were no guarantees of a paycheck. All I did was offer my
results and the theory behind
the strategy. It’s not a Martingale in the true sense of risking
everything to make 1 unit, it has limited levels with multiple steps. I clearly understand
the strength of betting
a percentage of bankroll for the potential of a much large win,
but with this strategy

I find it’s best the way I use the negative progression with this
strategy. The power of
my strategy isn’t in the progression it’s in the distribution of
even money appearances
of series. I’ve done testing of thousands of groups of 100
trials and its amazing
series account for 3/4 of all sample trial groups. That tells me
all I need to know, might
there be a better betting process, absolutely! This is the best I
could come up with and
have the results I’ve had. When I realize that Ching - A - Ling
is another losing system
“I’ll FIX IT”, by moving on to something new!

 

Personal Note

Up 10.000 Euro and Bust and still up 8500 Euro - nothing wrong with that.
Everyone who plays will lose, is part of the game.

Cheers

 

The Legend Snowman wrote

In time, you’ll realize that you can’t step outside of probability and that your series is simply reducing the number of spins on which your betting. They aren’t helping you. Conditional betting over 100k spins isn’t really testing a system over 100k spins.
You can only count the number of times that a bet has actually been placed in a simulation.

 

Chingy 711

In my original testing with RNG’s, I took handwritten notes
and you are correct there were only approximately 5,000 actual bets and
the results were well over (+) 230,000. In further testing after that, I
would say I have another 10,000 spins were actual betting.

I’m well aware that this is a very limited number.
My other testing involved hundred of thousands of spins just to see if the results would show
series account
for 3/4 of all trials.
Those testing results did confirm the statistics of the distribution of appearances of series.

My live play results don’t account for many “actual” bets,
The highest positive result was almost $11,000 and now $8,300 with a lost
in between.

I don’t have the time to get away as much as I like with having
a job that requires much of my time. But my friend Chris, who is using
my strategy is a professional poker player, has been playing almost
every day for a few hours and is over $43,000 ahead.

He plays a little different than I do and play only a $50 unit base.
He likes the math of the appearance of series, and he has even suffered 1 loss so far.

I know I need a lot more actual live play to get a truer picture but the numbers do seem to hold together.
You have to realize there have been days where I have reached my day's goal in a few hours of play and only
placed 50 to 100 actual bets.

There’s no stepping “outside” of probability, the thing is I’m trying to live within probability and avoid large standard deviation.
If the series can stay anywhere near that 3/4 percentage, mathematically
I have a great chance of winning consistently.
If I can control my lost limits a positive result is possible, even over time and maybe the law of large numbers!

 

Would this strategy work for baccarat?

 

I would not recommend this strategy until you find a selection that gives the same results by the Author Chingy 711.

Cheers

 

Hello this is my first post here. Thank you for this topic. I remember following this Ching a Ling system in the original forum it was posted in.

Do you know if the person who created this system still plays it?

I haven't properly used this system in the casino myself. I understand some of it but there's a few things I don't quite get

Level 1 - $5-$8-$11-$14-$17 = $55
Level 2 $8-$12-$16-$20-$24 = $80
Level 3 $15-$24-$33-$42-$51= $165 ——————————————————————- Total = $300

For the above £5 bet system, I know you increase the bet by £3 if you lose on level 1 but do you go down by £3 if you win?

And say for instance you have reached the end of level 1 and you bet £17 on red and you lose, will you then bet £8 on level 2?

And if you win this bet do you then go to the end of level 1 and bet £17 again? Or do you stay on level 2 until you win back all the money you lost?

Thank you to anyone who replies

 

True enough but I don't know how this helps. If one always bets for a repeat it still ends up 50-50 flat bet.

The drawback for this method is slow recoup. Let's say after losing $148.00 in 1st stage( or near enough because at times one will be close or go over that exact amount) start next stage at $15.00 ?? One is going to have to win 10 units in this stage to recover. Even with a 2 WIAR restart at $15.00 is a long haul. So, IMO, the progression is not robust enough. I think a better idea would be to drop back two steps on a WW. After that consider to drop back one step or two more depending on amount needed to recover. Yes, this will increase escalation and bankroll requirements but one will recoup much faster.

I never understood this. Sure, it's always nice to stop a session on a win. That's good for a guessing game. But if you have a winning method then what matters is proper bankroll and getting as much money on the table as the method allows. Moving from table to table has no measurable advantage. There's always the Black Swan because Risk of Ruin can never be 0%. But 5% is good enough to gamble with.

Cheers