avatar: trizero
youroul.com

80
690

Inspired by the irritation to 1 - 2 - 3 Labouchère,
I developed a step-tree-generator which can calculate the processes for "nonlinear" roulette strategies.

First of all, I could see that the 1-2 Labby includes the 1-2-3 Labby and many others as a subset.
So it is quite sufficient to test the basic shape 1-2 Labby to draw conclusions about the overall concept.

Since the Labby always appends the sum of the first and last number in case of loss,
in almost every stage arises a new branch in the step-tree, the resulting step-tree is very large.

The finite 1-2 Labby strategy treated here, is over 15 decision-making levels,
that means that from the 1st stage follow 15 Labby-steps and then jump back in the 1st step.
For this 1,001 steps are necessary.
In the published 1 - 2 - 3 Labouchère, there are 5 levels with 26 steps.

1,001 steps

The step tree with 1,001 steps as small thumbnail:

Click the image to open the original, but be careful, it is very large and could overtax your device! [354KB]

Of course, the roulette strategy was then tested in 300 Standard Tests:

Also, the continuous strategy test over 1 million spins yielded the same result:

Return: -1.42% ⌀ -1.47%, Balance: -106,548, Bet Volume: 7,511,920, Bets: 1,000,000, Spins: 1,000,000

Unfortunately, this strategy is simply too extensive to publish it in the traditional way here,
the risk of crashes on many computers and other devices such as smartphones or tablets is just too high!
(... the simulator itself was not affected by the scope)

Have fun with the 1-2-Labby strategy for roulette,
trizero

Beitrag melden

That's awesome, trizero!
Good job!
SolomonK

Beitrag melden
avatar: banksy
12
39

While rummaging through the flowcharts, I became aware of the 1-2-3 Labouchère
and came to this topic here. I find the concept of this roulette strategy quite interesting,
but the elaboration here is really the best.
Damn good work!

Beitrag melden
avatar: Gerald
7
65

banksy:

Damn good work!

Why have I overlooked this great topic here so far?
Could not something like that be better emphasized so that you find it better?
Damn good work! Thank you!

Beitrag melden