1. Welcome to the #1 Gambling Community with the best minds across the entire gambling spectrum. REGISTER NOW!
  2. Join our $5,000 Cash Giveaway!

    Win Cash by Posting and Inviting New Members!
  3. Have a gambling question?

    Post it here and our gambling experts will answer it!
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Dismiss Notice

Roulette Using sets to Create an HG

Discussion in 'Roulette Forum' started by delectus, Feb 5, 2019.

  1. delectus

    delectus Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2018
    Likes:
    18
    Location:
    uk
    Jerome, briefly I mentioned previously in the thread "Want an HG? Here's One"
    that using 90 sets would be ideal in creating an HG. At this stage I am not
    suggesting it's an absolute certainty, but if carefully worked out it could well
    continue for thousands of continuous spins and show a profit at the end of
    an agreed target.

    You mentioned the possibility of 40,000 spins, that's for 4 numbers flat bets.
    It's difficult because as I said the bets are in two parts. When two or more
    sets are equal then flat betting will take place at 10c for each of the 4
    numbers in a set, a 40c bet every spin. As soon as a set takes the lead
    from the other 89 sets then, the bets change to $1 bets. There will be a
    progression applied to each of the four numbers, but I have yet to work
    it all out, that is one of the difficult parts of this project.

    I am slowly working through a thousand spins, which will hopefully
    resolve any problems, especially the betting process. I very much like
    the idea the $1 and 40c process, which I think will be a big advantage.

    The large number of sets should also be advantageous, as 2 or more sets
    should always be close to the leading set and therefore close to taking
    the lead when the leading run ends.

    I will provide more details having worked through the 1000 spins
     
  2. Jerome

    Jerome Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2018
    Likes:
    31
    Occupation:
    Self-Employed
    Location:
    England
    delectus, in the other thread I wrote :
    This isn't quite right as I discovered when I wrote a simulation. It's not that the theory is wrong but I made a mistake with the degree of certainty, which is not 99% but more like 96%. This means that the threshold should be higher than 40,000 bets if you want to be more certain that your result couldn't have occurred by chance. Anyway I've attached the simulation program here so you can play around with it. It's not restricted to 4 numbers (you can input any number of numbers). It runs from a windows command prompt, just input the number of numbers and the session length, press ENTER and it will simulate 100 sessions each of the specified length, betting numbers picked randomly. The output lists the final bank for each of the 100 sessions and tells you how many of them ended in profit (marked with a "P"). eg -

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    You can do the same thing multiple times without having to re-run the program. Try increasing the length of a session beyond 40,000 until there are no sessions in profit; this will be the threshold beyond which it's almost impossible that a bet selection without an edge will win.

    Incidentally, running the program a few times using different amounts of numbers and session lengths will demonstrate that for a random selection (or one without an edge), betting few numbers will always give you a much higher percentage of winning sessions compared to betting many numbers (theory tells you this will happen but it's nice to see an actual demo of it). For example if you're betting 30 numbers with a session length of only 5000, there will likely be NO sessions in profit, but betting 2 numbers over a much longer session (say 20,000) will result in about 15 profitable sessions.

    Something else you can learn from the program is how easy it can be to jump to the conclusion that because you've tested your system over many spins and it shows a profit, it must be a winner. The simulation shows that even with a completely random bet selection (and not even a progression), a significant number of sessions will result in profit, especially if you're only betting on a few numbers.

    Regarding your system based on sets, probably better if I don't comment until I know more about how it works. ;)
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Feb 6, 2019
  3. delectus

    delectus Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2018
    Likes:
    18
    Location:
    uk
    Jerome, thanks very much for the simulation program, will get round to it soon.

    My early assumption of what's required for this project were only partially
    correct. I assumed incorrectly, that a leading set would appear soon after
    a previous hit! The fact is that it could take 200 to 250 spins between hits.
    Ordinarily this would be disastrous, but the 10c bets reduces substantially
    the need to apply the $1 bets.

    At present I am using the same progression I use for the ' A Date with
    Probability' thread. At one point there was a step 96, that's a $8 bet,
    profit $7. The largest so far steps 119, that's a $16 bet, profit $22. As
    I write the progression shows steps 82:88:02:01 for the four numbers
    of a set. I am at spin 329, so just about a third of the way to 1000
    spins.,

    The 90 sets produces what I call 'clusters' (borrowed from eggs :))
    of hits, example set 06:07:26:32 = 07,26,32,06,06,07,06. If this is
    a theme of the 90 sets, that would be great.

    I am also considering using just one number for the 10c bet and will
    work out how the number will be chosen. As you have shown it is
    possible to make winning sessions with just one number.

    Most probably I will have to work through the 1000 spins 2 or 3 times,
    to be absolutely certain, that I can't make any further improvements.

    The biggest concern is the progression, perhaps I will think of
    something as I work through the spins.
     
  4. Sharptracker

    Sharptracker Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2018
    Likes:
    118
    Location:
    Belgium
    @Jerome

    As i told you i don't have your skills about Mathematics but i had asked a similar test from a german forum, long time ago, where some people had real skills also in mathematics and the fork i had differ from yours...

    Actually it's a bit like i ask what is the extreme right position possible limit of the Gauss curve and it concerns only spins played of course (no observed spins), in order to claim that we got something with "x" system. (i don't have the numbers in my head, i just remember)

    6 numbers = 60k spins flat bet (i have a doubt about that one, but i'm pretty sure that i remember correctly about the two others)
    3 numbers = 120K spins flat bet
    1 number = 250K spins flat bet

    Could it possible that it differs from the fact that you play all consecutives spins randomly & with nothing built to play a certain % of spins?
     
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2019
  5. Jerome

    Jerome Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2018
    Likes:
    31
    Occupation:
    Self-Employed
    Location:
    England
    Sharp, if you're betting randomly skipping spins shouldn't make any difference, and I would argue that a specific bet selection makes no difference either (others here would disagree though. :D).

    Regarding the limits you posted, I guess it depends on what your criteria is. The standard is usually 5% but 1% gives you more certainty, meaning that on average 99 sessions out of 100 will finish losers. I ran the simulation with your numbers and 60k seems too high for 6 numbers (should be more like 40,000), but the others seem about right (assuming 99%). Download the program for yourself and give it a try. ;)
     
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2019
  6. Sharptracker

    Sharptracker Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2018
    Likes:
    118
    Location:
    Belgium
    Hopefully :), i just wanted to make it sure that my memory failed to remember the number for 6 spins.

    Thanks for the program, this is beast knowledge you got imo!... I'm curious about progressions, how can you determine it? do you have to build it progression by progressions? I'm curious also about the numbers of spins!
     
  7. delectus

    delectus Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2018
    Likes:
    18
    Location:
    uk
    I'm at spin 375 and the step progression for the four set numbers stands
    at steps 10:01:03:35. Number 11 hit at step 106, $11 bet, profit $17.
    Number 19 hit at step 122, $17 bet, profit $8.

    Previously I mentioned about clusters of hits (got the eggs wrong last
    time that's clutches not clusters oh the English language :confused:) and the
    last two sets produced 29,29,32,29 and 11,26,19. The last set
    11,19,26,36 is currently 54 numbers long. 12,14,27,34 is only 28
    numbers long. Unlikely to become a leading set any time soon.

    I'm hoping that the above hits will be a repeat cycle maximum of
    300 to 400 spins.

    I will work at the 10c spin over the weekend.
     
  8. Jerome

    Jerome Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2018
    Likes:
    31
    Occupation:
    Self-Employed
    Location:
    England
    Not sure what you mean? There's no progression used in the sim; flat bets only. Actually it would be interesting to put one in and see how much difference it makes to the number of winning sessions.
     
  9. Sharptracker

    Sharptracker Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2018
    Likes:
    118
    Location:
    Belgium
    Yeah, i have seen that you were running it flat bet. But i was wondering if some progressions could perform better than others and could put the limit further or if them are also all equal. Also it would be very interesting to see how long you could resist also than if you were flatbetting.

    Thanks!
     
  10. Sharptracker

    Sharptracker Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2018
    Likes:
    118
    Location:
    Belgium
    @Jerome

    Up, in case you haven't seen it. (If you need me to reformulate, don't hesitate) I really would like to know (curious) about that.
     
  11. Jerome

    Jerome Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2018
    Likes:
    31
    Occupation:
    Self-Employed
    Location:
    England
    I'm working on it and will post in another thread so as not to derail this one.
     
  12. Sharptracker

    Sharptracker Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2018
    Likes:
    118
    Location:
    Belgium
    Great! Thanks Jerome
     
  13. delectus

    delectus Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2018
    Likes:
    18
    Location:
    uk
    Progress on this project is slow but sure. I got to nearly 400 spins
    and decide the way I presented it on my work sheets was
    unsatisfactory so back to spin 1. The good thing is I am able to
    correct mistakes, which is easy to do, having so many rows of
    numbers.

    I have decided on the way to place a 10c bet, when 2,3 or 4 sets
    are equal and will explain at spin 1000 to make sure it works
    satisfactorily.

    I have never created such long sets before, so I am finding it
    very interesting.
     

Share This Page