I now accuse RTG/Bodog of cheating!

[love2winalot]

Hiya: I never thought i would say it, but there yo go, i did. I thought it was just bad luck on my part, or bad timing, or coiencidence.

Pick 5 numbers out of 2000+. Now pick them in the order that they are drawn. The odds of this are what? Hell I don't know. Here is what happened to me, in 5 times in over 2000 sessions played.

Roulette.
Bet on numbers not hitting equally.
Bet the numbers that are hitting the most.
play 111 spins at a time. 37 numbers x 3 sessions = 111.
Record all results. what # hit, when, how many times ect.

Keep Records of the most anything has / has not happened.
If you are going to chase a betting sequence, make the game break an existing set record to beat you.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Record: The most spins in a row until a # will hit 5 times is?
Existing record going in after 9 years of playing almost daily was 65 spins.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

So, if i see that the game has gone over 55-60 spins, and there are a few numbers that have hit 4 times, "between 3-8 on average, but none of them have hit 5 times, i bet those numbers, using a progression that will take be 2 spins past the existing record.

This is what has happened at Bodog/RTG software. I have made this bet many times. I have only make this bet, using a progression 5 times, in over 2000 sessions. here are the results.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Record is 65 spins. First # to hit 5 times hits on spin 69. = bankroll lost
New Record is now 69 spins. first # to hit 5 times hits on spin 74. = lost
Record is now 74. Hits on spin 77= bankroll lost
Record is 77, hits on 80 = bankroll lost.
Record is 80. Today is went up to 85+ and bankroll lost.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

This is the 5 times it happened. It NEVER HAPPENED any other times. It only happened when i was repeating the bet, and using a progression. My bankroll was $1640, betting 7 numbers.

To put this in an easy perspective think about this. I will flip a penny 2000 times in a row. You bet $1 on each flip guessing heads or tails. Some where along the line, you will bet a progression that Heads will hit. You only get to make this bet, "Progression on Heads" , 5 times in the 2000 flips. You make the bet 5 times, and every time you make the bet, it hits Tails 10 or more times in a row, and increases the number in a row it hits Tails, each time.

Sorry, but that is so far away from varience, that something is just plain wrong. I e mailed them 3 times.
1st: I got the canned response.
2nd: They will not refund me, and did not actually read my complaint.
3rd: No Response.
I contacted the Wizardofodds thru e mail to help, as it was his banner i used to sign up with. Anyhoo, no more Bodog/RTG for me, unless they can convince me that i am cursed or something.

I do not know if this is something Casinomeister would look into or not. I am just very disappointed, and posting the results of what happened, just as i have always done since coming to this board. Off to find a new place to play i guess..........

 

[DarkMage]

Before the guppies come in and say "You need million's of spins to determine if it's rigged"...

I agree with you.....

I was once a very heavy player at Bodog.....Closed my account in disgust at their blackjack. The differences between the play and real mode were night and day....Bodog changed in a big way a few months ago.

But..hey...It's just variance right

Sticking to the brick and motor for anything over $500 nowadays, I don't trust RTG software in general.

 

[love2winalot]

Hiya: It is not millions of spins, but it is exactly 20,979 spins, i just counted them, , yea i need a life, Like i said i only pressed my bets 5 times in all those spins, and LOST each time, and the pattern that made me lose only came up in those exact 5 times i was betting larger than normal.

After a while you stop thinking, "This is what you get for being greedy, and trying to win more than a few $ at a time", and you start thinking/asking, "Why does this only happen when i press my bets"?

 

[TOC]

RTG

You might want to contact the following company before moving forward and see what their doing first.

 

[casinojack]

99% f the online casino software allows you to adjust decks in blackjack. Nothing in RTG has any type of setting re: roulette and pressing bets.

 

[Westland Bowl]

There is one thing I've wondered about the testing and certification of online casino games. It appears the testing only uses the flat bet method. I'm sure nearly all casino games are judged "fair" and "random" while flat-betting. But how about testing the randomness when a betting progression is used? For example, it appears to me that losing more than 7 blackjack hands in a row happen with a lot more frequency than normal blackjack statistics suggest during times when I use a betting progression.

 

[Pinababy69]

I read your post real quick last night Love2Win...and was hoping I'd come here today to a bunch of replies. I know we have alot of people here who are into probabilities, randomness and mathematical possibilities.

Your post is so far above me, that I don't have a clue. I also don't play roulette, never have.....but from your posts, it sure seems to me that you know your stuff when it comes to table games...similar to the way that Rusty knows his when it comes to slots. You also don't strike me as the type to start a thread like this just because you had a bad run.

I hope more posters weigh in on this one.

 

[Rusty]

Am I reading this right?

You are saying you spin away until you see a sequence that has several numbers (4,5,6 or 7 of them) that have hit Four times within 55 - 60 spins?
(That should be quite a rare event within itself I would think.)
You then bet progressively from that point on these numbers?

You then say that the record without hitting a number you were betting was 65 spins total from the sample block of results?
So for 9 Years you had only waited anything between 1 and 9 spins to hit One of your numbers until this session?

I will assume the answer is yes to all of those for now.

For the sake of argument let's say taking a rough average using your system you bet on average 5 numbers.
Also let's assume the RNG is not predictable or tampered with.
That would mean you have around a 1 in 7 chance of hitting one of your numbers or on average you would wait around 7 spins to hit a number.
I am deliberately ignoring previous results because if the game is fair it has no memory and each spin gives an equal chance of any number.

So looking at this on face value I would say the most remarkable statistic is that you never waited more than 9 spins in 9 Years of playing this system to hit one of your numbers. (That if correct, depending on how many times this occurred, may well suggest a problem with the RNG but this would not be deliberate as such patterns are very much to the Casinos disadvantage providing there is no adjustment of results by the software)

It is odd that the table crushed your system 5 times in a row each time with a longer streak of losses but it is also odd that your system never came unstuck for 9 Years previously.
They are both unlikely results but one was in your favour and the other certainly was not.
Your actual individual losing streaks are not as unlikely as you might imagine because you are essentially saying,
"I backed between 4 and 7 numbers numbers (usually 4) and went between 1 and 24 spins before I hit one."

Having 5 of these losing streaks together however and each one being progressively longer than the last - especially when you are adapting your betting style to account for each streak - is worthy of suspicion though.

If you had only ever watched for 9 Years and then made your bets and this streak occurred and someone else could repeat it then personally I would consider that as evidence of a rigged game but what you have here is Two anomalous sets of results, one that worked in your favour and one that did not so this in itself IMO is not proof of a rigged game or cheating.

That does not mean I am saying I am sure the game is 100% fair or that you were not somehow cheated as you claim - I really don't know as I don't play RTG roulette and I don't have all the stats - I am just giving you my neutral perspective on what you experienced.

 

[chuchu59]

I dont play roulette much but I play Baccarat. All lovers of this game know that the banker bet has a slight advantage over the player bet and that is why a commission of 5% is charged if you win on the banker bet. However, if you bet exclusively on banker like and many others, RTG is probably the only software where, after a large number of hands, your wins on banker are less than your losses. This is not possible, at least not for everyone given the banker has a built-in advantage. I recall Slotswizard (havent seen him in awhile) also had the same observation as me. The number of player wins exceed the banker wins and that is over thousands of hands and that is statistically not very possible. Anyone plays Baccarat like I do and what are your results?

 

[big_mac]

I'm not sure I understand this correctly either.
Only 65 spins was the previous longest until a number hits five times?

My quick simulation says that it is above 65 about 1 time in 4; so if this has never happened in 2000 sessions then something is seriously wrong. That something could be my code though!

 

[love2winalot]

Hiya: Pinababy is correct. I would not post just because of a bad run. As stated, i had 4 prior bad runs before this. But when the 5th one came, All within the last few months, and the very same betting method being used, and failing, then ??????

Despite the 5 losses, i am still way ahead, and the Casino reminded me of that in the 2nd e mail they sent me. They said, I have beaten the Odds so far, and have nothing to complain about.

I found a better, more shocking way to explain what i am complaining about. Even you slot players will be able to understand it,.....hehehe...maybe....hehe

Below is 190 numbers. These repersent the 111 spin sessions i have played.
Pick 5 of those numbers between 1 and 190. These will be the 5 times you will lose your $1000+ Bankroll. got your 5? Good for you,

1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10-11-12-13-14-15-16-17-18-19-20-21-22-23-24-25
26-27-28-29-30-31-32-33-34-35-36-37-38-39-40-41-42-43-44-45-46-47-48-49-50-51-52-53-54-55-56-57-58-59-60-61-62-63-64-65-66-67-68-69-70-71-72-73-74-75-76-77-78-79-80-81-82-83-84-85-86-87-88-89-90-91-92-93-94-95-96-97-98-99-100-101-102-103-104-105-106-107-108-109-110-111-112-113-114-115-116-117-118-119-120-121-122-123-124-125-126-127-128-129-130-131-132-133-134-135-136-137-138-139-140-141-142-143-144-145-146-147-148-149-150-151-152-153-154-155-156-157-158-159-160-161-162-163-164-165-166-167-168-169-170-171-172-173-174-175-176-177-178-179-180-181-182-183-184-185-186-187-188-189-190
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

your 5 numbers chosen as example.
28
100
149
184
190

Now, pick a starting point between 20 and 90, as 111 is the ending point. This will be the only times you will press your bets within those 190 sessions.

28, starting point is 87
100, starting point is 14
149 starting point is 60
184, starting point is 65
190, starting point is 71

Got it. Here we go. You will bet over 20,000 times. Most of your bets are flat $1 bets. Then there are times when you will use a 1-3 step progression betting between 7-14 numbers. The most money you can lose in any given betting sequence is around $60. If you lost that you stop, and go back to flat betting $1. This betting sequence will comprise about 19,925 of the 20,000 spins you will bet on. This leaves 75 spins unaccounted for.

The 5 numbers you chose above contain those 75 spins in them, somewhere between the 20th and 111th spin. that comes out to 15 spins each session on average. This is the 5 times, that you did not stop after 2-3 losses in a row. This is the 5 times, "AND THE ONLY 5 TIMES", that you decided to take a chance and bet a progression that would make you lose 15 or more bets in a row to go broke. You are betting between 5-8 numbers on average.

You only made this bet 5 times.
You were able to predict what 5 sets, out of the 190 sets that you would lose in.
You were also able to predict, what starting point, "they are all different", within those 5 sets, to lose 15 or more in a row, making larger bets.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is my $1000 challenge to anyone. I have chosen 5 sets out of the 190. Guess what 5 it is. "no, it is not the example i used above, silly...."
WOW, Your good. OK smart guy/gal, now choose the starting point in each of those 5 sets.
So, Choose 5 numbers between 1-190.
Then chose a starting point between 20-90.
Do this and the $1000 is yours.
What do you mean you can't do it? What do you mean it is impossible? You wussie.......I DID IT. What's so hard about it????/hehehe.

Like i said, and the reason for the post, is tell me the odds of being able to do this, or, in my case, have this happen to you. And if it did happen to "YOU", what, if anything would you try to do about it?

1. Ask for your original deposit, minus winnings, given back?
2. Ask for part of your money be given back?
3. Deposit more, and try it again, there is no way you can do it 6 times?
4. Shut up you big baby, and move on. hehehe.
I am more interested in some math person telling me/posting, apx. what the odds are of the above example happening, as i have no idea. Thanks. Off the Play downtown, and give the internet a break for a while.

 

[DaveG39]

There is one thing I've wondered about the testing and certification of online casino games. It appears the testing only uses the flat bet method. I'm sure nearly all casino games are judged "fair" and "random" while flat-betting. But how about testing the randomness when a betting progression is used? For example, it appears to me that losing more than 7 blackjack hands in a row happen with a lot more frequency than normal blackjack statistics suggest during times when I use a betting progression.

Flat betting is really all they should have to test on. I say this because, as Rusty points out, each roll/spin/deal is INDEPENDENT!! I used to think like you love2win, that a progression is the way to go, until somone pointed this out. Now I realize that, on any given spin/roll/deal, I'm equally likely to get whacked, whether I press or not. Frankly, like pinababy and big-mac, I'm not exactly sure what you're getting at here, and I play table games almost exclusively. FYI, picking 5 numbers, out of 190, correctly is about a 2 billion to 1 shot.

 

[big_mac]

I think the issue about testing on progressive strategies is that the casinos could (theoretically) be rigged to detect a progressive strategy and then cheat.
So testing on flat-bets wouldn't show this up.

These extra 'explanations' really aren't helping to make it clear what the complaint actually is. Somebody can work out what the probabilities are but they have to work out what the question is first, which is the problem that I am having!

 

[love2winalot]

Hiya: Here is a follow up to rusty, and others.
190 sets, of 111 spins each. "This is just at bodog, but it exactly the same on wizardofodds site, other casino's ect.
111 spins. 190 sets. Each # should hit 3 times. 37# X 3 = 111 spins.

At least 1 # will hit 6 or more times. 190 out of 190 sets.
At least 3 # will hit 5 or more times, avg being 7 #. 190 out of 190.
At least 3 # will not have hit at all, or only once. 190 out of 190
At least 11 # will hit 4 or more times. 190 out of 190.
At least 1 number that hit 5/5+ times in last set, will hit 4/4+ in next one. 190 out of 190
At least 1# that hit 5/5+ times in the last set, will hit 5 times in this one. 172 out of 190.

and so on. It is simply the unequal distribution of the 37 numbers. I have not played this method for 9 years, but rather have recorded results for 9 years to make this method. Even when it fails, "and it has" It does not fail enough to take away all the winnings. And, if i had not tried those 5 times to win a larger amount of money than normal, i would have an extra 5-8k in the bank.

 

[big_mac]

I'm sorry, but that doesn't really help me to understand what your question is.

Can you clarify where the numbers come from for the 'longest run without hitting a number 5 times'? They don't make much sense to me, 65 is way too short for 2,000 sessions - you should get more than that in the first handful of sessions.

If I have done it correctly, I simulated your tactic with those numbers; the chance of winning the first time (in 67 spins) is about 55% - this goes up to about 84% for 82 spins. (if you always give yourself at least 7 spins)
I make losing all five in a row as about a 1% chance.

The tactic that I programmed is:-
If more than 55 spins have passed, and no number has been hit 5 times, but 3,4,5,6,or 7 numbers have been hit 4 times then start betting on those numbers. Keeping betting until one hits (win) or the maximum number of spins is reached (lose). I assumed that you would also bet for at least 7 spins, even if you were closer to the 'record', but you didn't say if you used a minimum . I used the same maximum number of spins that you gave in your first post.

 

[AussieDave]

I'm totally lost...

Can someone please explain this is easy to understand English.

Preferable (least for me) so a 1/2 wit could comprehend it


Cheers
T

 

[love2winalot]

Hiya: Still no answer back from Bodog. To answer Big Mac. Here is the last 28 sessions, and they are pretty much the same for all 190 sessions. The first time a number will hit, for the 5th time is on spin #
59-57-59-64-51-53-55-59-69-55-39-74-58-64-35-32-43-60-48-44-26-77-52-51-62-56-64-84+

Each time the number increased, "ie the spin that a number will hit for the 5th time", to a bigger one, is when i was pressing my bets.

Sorry i am not good at explaining, and my bad english, but i went to school in America, Hehehehe, ah hahahaha.

 

[DiamondGeezer]

Maybe Kmiss will do a graph for you?

 

[DiamondGeezer]

Don't really understand it all but it sounds to me you are betting on very unlikely events not happening. But Black Swan moments do happen. Are you familiar with Black Swan theory? A Black Swan bought down Lehman Brothers last September.

Don't mix up your profit with a valid theory. If you gave 1000 monkeys $10K each a few would show profits even after a huge number of spins. Having a winning streak is not the same thing as having a mathamatical edge.

You can't defeat HA with number sequences. Even if they did work you could only reduce HA by a tiny amount with them. At the most you could only reduce 1.35 to 1.25 or 2.7 to 2.6%. I guess it would be more interesting if it was at Bet Voyager or Betfair Zero lounge. But I don't think Betfair allow very big bets in the Zero lounge.

 

[big_mac]

So, I'm guessing that there are 4 times in that list where the maximum increased (if it was 65 to start with), and you bet only on those 4.

The probability of just hitting those would be, I think, about 1 in 20,000. There is another one to add, which would take it up to more like 1 in 150,000 - but I don't know how many sessions earlier that was.

This is quite a small section; I still don't know what the 2,000 sessions, or even the 190 sessions refers to.

BTW, the average for those sessions is 55, which is about what I am getting also, so they look reasonable to me.

 

[DaveG39]

Hiya: Here is a follow up to rusty, and others.
190 sets, of 111 spins each. "This is just at bodog, but it exactly the same on wizardofodds site, other casino's ect.
111 spins. 190 sets. Each # should hit 3 times. 37# X 3 = 111 spins.

At least 1 # will hit 6 or more times. 190 out of 190 sets.
At least 3 # will hit 5 or more times, avg being 7 #. 190 out of 190.
At least 3 # will not have hit at all, or only once. 190 out of 190
At least 11 # will hit 4 or more times. 190 out of 190.
At least 1 number that hit 5/5+ times in last set, will hit 4/4+ in next one. 190 out of 190
At least 1# that hit 5/5+ times in the last set, will hit 5 times in this one. 172 out of 190.

and so on. It is simply the unequal distribution of the 37 numbers. I have not played this method for 9 years, but rather have recorded results for 9 years to make this method. Even when it fails, "and it has" It does not fail enough to take away all the winnings. And, if i had not tried those 5 times to win a larger amount of money than normal, i would have an extra 5-8k in the bank.

While I appreciate the time and effort it must have taken to accumulate this data, it is all emperical, except for the fact that, in 111 spins, each number should come up an average of 3 times. The ONLY way to mathematically PROVE a RNG is crooked is to take a sample of spins and run the appropriate statistical tests on it.

 

[Nifty29]

I must admit also to not being 100% on top of the meaning of all those stats, but then Im a slots/VP player and find table games very boring....but I guess thats the difference between playing entirely for profit or just for enjoyment

The part that I dont get is that IF every spin is INDEPENDENT of every other spin and each individual result is RANDOM (which you have to assume it is to even think about playing), then how can ANY 'system' such as number progressions etc etc overcome the house edge? Im fairly sure that over the years Bryan has stated as much in various threads about gambling 'systems' and that anyone that tries to sell you one is yanking your chain.

Its not anything personal against the OP at all, I just find it hard to accept that a human being can 'predict' the outcome of a completely random game, other than perhaps invoking the law of averages and betting that a certain result 'must come up eventually'. In the long run, where the casino is offering anything less than true odds, I just dont see how a player can win.

I find these threads interesting though, as I feel I learn something every time so thanks to everyone who has contributed

 

[nerv]

Hiya: Here is a follow up to rusty, and others.
190 sets, of 111 spins each. "This is just at bodog, but it exactly the same on wizardofodds site, other casino's ect.
111 spins. 190 sets. Each # should hit 3 times. 37# X 3 = 111 spins.

At least 1 # will hit 6 or more times. 190 out of 190 sets.
At least 3 # will hit 5 or more times, avg being 7 #. 190 out of 190.
At least 3 # will not have hit at all, or only once. 190 out of 190
At least 11 # will hit 4 or more times. 190 out of 190.
At least 1 number that hit 5/5+ times in last set, will hit 4/4+ in next one. 190 out of 190
At least 1# that hit 5/5+ times in the last set, will hit 5 times in this one. 172 out of 190.

and so on. It is simply the unequal distribution of the 37 numbers. I have not played this method for 9 years, but rather have recorded results for 9 years to make this method. Even when it fails, "and it has" It does not fail enough to take away all the winnings. And, if i had not tried those 5 times to win a larger amount of money than normal, i would have an extra 5-8k in the bank.

Hi love2winalot

Could you please tell me how you define set? Only by the number of spin or you include some other parameters like:
1. should be in a continuous play, not leaving the game
2. should be in some time constrains
..etc

If you use the number of spins in a row as the only parameter then:
You made almost 21,000 of spins which means you actually have sets that equals number of spins you made minus 110 spins.
So, you have about 20,600 sets. Check your theory against it.

Furthermore if you have no other parameters then your theory is pretty much loose one. Suppose you made 64 spins and none of numbers shown 5 times but few of the came up 4 times. By using this theory I can disconnect and connect next day or even in a month and be assured that one of these few will come up after first spin.

By the RN theory, only fact that can be concluded is (as mentioned above) that every single spin is independent. As online casinos have no other parameters to influence (croupier, table, mechanism) "where the ball will stop" or what number will RNG produce in that exact moment, and today's RNGs don't use minutes or hours for producing results but step of CPU which is practically true random for humans using nothing else but their fingers to click on spin button, you and any other prediction or system to beat it will produce nothing but disappointment.

Now, I understand that in theory there is no true RNG made by the human (even if it is observed on the level of electron orbiting around the core) and if I got you right you're trying to take advantage of this imperfection (which is perfectly ok by me as long as the T&C is honored)?
Is this is the case please answer me to above questions what exactly parameters you use and what RNGs you tested with it.

Considering your comments. If I got ti right you have about 2000 chances to prove your system and only 5 times it didn't work is those 5 time your forcing the bets? Interesting. If this is true that possibility to have this is like in lotto picking 5 number out of 2000 and getting jackpot. Phuh.

 

[love2winalot]

Hiya: Hey Nerv, you are getting on my nervs. hehe, ah hahahaha, sorry i couldent help it........

Session= 37 spins
Set= 111 spins
Every number should hit exactly 3 times. Nothing close to that ever happens.

There is no time limit, or need for continous play. All that is required is to finish the 111 spins, before starting over.
Bankroll= your staying power. No matter what the game is, the larger your bankroll, the more likely you are to Win, because you can get through those losing streaks, and still be at the table, or in the game. The only time that does not work, is when you, "Take a Chance". I am 0-5 in taking chances.

This brings me to my next point. "You are just getting Lucky". I give up counting how many times i have heard this. If i was Lucky, then i would be at least 3-5, instead of 0, zip, nada, none......?

The 190 sets being used here, are only from Bodog. I also played at clubworld, 3 dice, cherry red, and here in Vegas. Plus many other Casino's in the past when US players were allowed anywhere. All spins were recorded.

Where i am at right now. No response from Bodog. They did NOT give back the %10 of the deposit, if you lost it all, like they always did in the past. I can still log into my account. They know i complained to the Wizardofodds, and posted here. I am sure they are also waiting to see if i reverse the deposit into E wallet, from my Bank. I will not do that, as it just gets you banned from both e wallet, and the Casino, and maybe even other Casino's.

Where i am at in the Game. I have played 84 of the 111 spins. This leaves 27 spins left. No # has hit 6 or more times yet, one always does. No # has hit 5 times yet, and at least three always do. The table limit is $500, and a max of $200 straight up on any number.

11 numbers have hit exactly 3 times
7 numbers have hit exactly 4 times.
Combined, they have gone 16 spins in a row without hitting.
Starting out, after 3 different numbers had hit for the 4th time, and betting those 3 numbers, and the ones that get added later, "# 15 hits for the 4th time so i now have 4 numbers to bet, ect", they have gone 34 spins in a row without hitting.

My method of betting says to do the following.
Bet the 7 numbers that have hit 4 times, for 27 spins, or you get 3 different numbers to hit, what ever come first.
and....After each hit, bet the numbers that hit 5 times, until one of them hits for the 6th time. These both have happened for 190+"includes other Casino's also" sets in a row.

This means, i should get a Min total of 4 hits, in the next 27 spins. 3 hits on the numbers that hit 4 times, and 1 hit on the numbers that hit 5 times.
$1600 lost divided by 4 = 400. 7 Numbers, with $14 each on them gets a net profit of $406. These numbers go up each time a number that hits 3 times comes up, as i would now 8 numbers to cover instead of 7. However, it goes down, after the 3rd different number hit for the 5th time, as i now only have 3 numbers to cover, betting one to hit for the 6th time. and so on.

So my fellow board members, this begs the question?

Just how confident are you in your bet selection method/theroy/data??????
1. Let it go dude, and play someplace else, or call that 800#....
2. Just bet small, as you always won betting small, and get back what you lost in many sessions of play.
3. If you are sure it works, and you are ahead overall, then deposit BIG and win 4 bets , just like you listed above.
4. If you think they are cheating, then bet the other 29 numbers instead.

Right now i do not know what i want to do. Part of me, "maybe the smart part", says deposit $54, bet $2 per spin on anything for 27 spins, and see what happens. If you were right, to bad. But if this was an abnormality, and this is the one where it does not happen like in the past, all you lost is another $54.

The Gambler part says, "You little chicken stit sob. I am ashamed to be in your brain right now. Get some ..............and lets go already. This is no different that having a pair of 5's against the dealers up card of 6, DOUBLE DOWN. Just because the dealer made the 10 or so hands like this, does not mean you have to stop playing the way you know you should." Unless you are a little wussy?

No matter what i can not deposit anything until monday, so i have a few days to decide. Thanks for letting me vent, and give a lot of you a headach trying to figure out what i was talking about......

 

[big_mac]

If I got ti right you have about 2000 chances to prove your system and only 5 times it didn't work is those 5 time your forcing the bets? Interesting. If this is true that possibility to have this is like in lotto picking 5 number out of 2000 and getting jackpot. Phuh.

Yes, that would be very interesting - but I don't think that is what he is claiming; but it is very hard to actually tell, I am still trying to work it out.

I think that he showed a total of 28 chances, his system didn't work 4 times and those are the only ones he forced his bet. So, it's a bit like picking all 4 numbers out of 28. (I don't know when the 5th one happened)

Every number should hit exactly 3 times. Nothing close to that ever happens.

While, on average that is true, it would be extraordinarily unlikey to actually happen in a session.

This is no different that having a pair of 5's against the dealers up card of 6, DOUBLE DOWN. Just because the dealer made the 10 or so hands like this, does not mean you have to stop playing the way you know you should

It is very different! On a genuinely random game, your system doesn't work (because it can't). It seems to be based in a belief that the spins are non-random in some quite obscure way.
If you were to assume that the spins are not connected to each other in any way, then your system is as likely to fail next time as it did last time.

On the other hand, doubling-down a 10v6 really is a good probability, regardless of what the previous cards where (unless they are actually cheating!)

The thing with progressive systems is that they usually work - for a while! I would suggest giving up your system while you are still ahead, but who knows how it will go in the future.