Crypto Casino
Torrent Gear
How to understand that your strategy has stopped working
Sometimes the strategy "holds" for months, and then suddenly gives a series of bad batches. This can be dispersion noise - or it can be real degradation: changing the RTP version, changing the conditions of the action, incorrect calibration of limits. Below is a clear system of how to distinguish noise from shear and what to do.
1) What do you mean "stopped working"
The strategy stopped working if its key metrics steadily go beyond the previously observed corridor or lose statistical significance compared to the base.
Basic monitoring kit (for batches, for example, 1,000 spins):- EV batch (average result,% to the bank).
- The median total (Q50) and quantiles Q75/Q90 - the player "lives" in the median and tails.
- Max Drawdown (depth and duration).
- Target chance (complete batch ≥0%, ≥+20%).
- HF and intervals up to ≥×10/bonusa (median, 75th percentile).
- Risk of ruin per batch.
The corridor of the norm is fixed on the "healthy" period (baseline) and serves as a standard.
2) Degradation signals: rapid recognition rules
The signal is not one bad batch, but a pattern:1. Magnitude + robustness.
EV below base by ≥ X pp in 3 + batches in a row;
Drawdown Q90 above the base corridor 2 windows in a row;
a ≥0% chance fell ≥ Y pp in 3 of the last 4 windows.
2. Simultaneity. Several metrics "blush" together: EV↓, Q50↓, prosadka↑, chance tseley↓.
3. Shifting distribution shapes.
HF is almost unchanged, but ≥×10 intervals have lengthened → action has become less common;
tails became heavier (more often deep drawdowns with the previous EV) → worse risk profile.
4. Consistency by portfolio. The signal appears in multiple slots/scenarios (not local randomness).
3) Early detection tools (without complex mathematics)
A) Sliding windows
Support two windows: "short" (last 10-20 batches) and "long" (base). If the EV/median difference is outside the confidence band of the base, a signal candidate.
B) Shewhart control cards
For each metric, keep: the average of the base period ± k· σ.
Going out in 3 σ is severe anxiety.
2 out of 3 in a row for 2 σ one way - average anxiety.
7 points in a row on one side of the average - trend.
C) CUSUM
The cumulative sum of the deviations of a metric from its base average. A gradual "slide" down in CUSUM is often seen earlier than point outliers.
D) Change-point test (practical)
Compare "before" vs "now" by butch: bootstrap interval difference and permutation p-test. If 0 is outside the 95% CI and p <0. 05 - you have a formal shift.
4) False alarms: how not to confuse variance with failure
Minimum volume. Do not draw conclusions on <20 batches in the window for volatile slots.
Single simulation noise (CRN). If you are checking strategies in the model, compare on the same "noise."
Multiple checks. If there are many metrics, use the "double acknowledgement" rule: a signal is counted if two independent metrics or one + CUSUM metric is triggered.
Calendar factors. The end of the promotion/cashback, changing the limits, the new version of the provider - enter it in the journal so that the explainable shifts are not disguised as a "breakdown of the strategy."
5) Diagnosis of causes (checklist)
1. Has the RTP pool/game version changed?
2. Have external payments changed? (cashback, tournament points, missions)
3. Has the discipline changed? (violation of limits, the rate became a share of the bank instead of flat, another length of the batch)
4. Has portfolio volatility shifted? (more high-touch games)
5. Technical factors. (auto-spin rate, delays, logging failures)
6. Is the strategy "fitted" to the past? (symptom - degradation immediately after leaving the optimization period)
6) Boundary conditions (guardrails) - when to beat the bell
Set stop triggers in advance, after which the strategy is paused:- EV (sliding window of 20 batches)
base ≥ 20% - pause. - Risk of ruin> target (e.g. 10% per batch) two windows in a row - pause.
- The chance of finishing ≥0%
7) What to do if the signal is confirmed
Step 1. Pause the strategy. Reduce exposure: reduce the bank rate/share or temporarily stop.
Step 2. Retest in the demo. Recheck metrics on the same set of slots/rules in the demo/simulation.
Step 3. Isolation of factors. Return the previous conditions one at a time (RTP pool, rate, butch length, briefcase).
Step 4. Recalibration of limits. Perhaps the idea itself is alive, but other stop losses/teik profits and session length are required.
Step 5. Solution.
In production v2 (if the metrics recovered at retest and low exposure).
Archive (if degradation is confirmed and there are no explainable measures).
8) Mini monitoring procedure (can be inserted into the regulation)
1. Batch: 1,000 spins; report - every 10 batches (sliding window).
2. Metrics: EV, total Q50/Q90, drawdown Q90 (depth/duration), chance ≥0 %/ ≥+20%, HF, median of ≥×10 intervals.
3. Base: the first 60 batches of the "healthy period." We keep the average, σ and confidence bands.
4. Control: Shewhart (3 σ/2 σ), CUSUM, bootstrap comparison "before/now."
5. Change log: RTP versions, promotions, strategy edits.
6. Gardrails: pause triggers (from section 6).
7. Actions: pause → demo retest → factor return → solution.
9) "Strategy health passport" template
Period:...
Base (batches):...; current batches:...
EV (base/now): ... %/...% [Δ... pp]
Total Q50/Q90: ... %/...% →... %/...%
DD Q90 (depth/duration): .../... rates → .../...
Chance ≥0 %/ ≥+20%: .../... → .../...
HF/median ≥×10 interval: .../... spin → .../...
Signals: Shewhart (...); CUSUM (…); p-test (p =...); status: OK/WARNING/PAUSE
Environment changes:...
Solution: continue/reduce bid/pause and retest/archive.
10) Frequent errors in "diagnosis"
Fetish of a single number. Draw conclusions on EV without taking into account quantiles and drawdowns.
Short windows. Solutions for 5-10 batches on highly volatile slots are noise.
Lack of base. There is no reference - nothing to measure the shift.
Changing rules on the fly. "Adjusted" limits after bad batches - destroyed comparability.
Ignore context. Unreported promotions/RTP changes confuse the picture.
Bottom line: the strategy "stops working" not at the time of one unsuccessful batch, but when several independent metrics and control tests indicate a steady shift beyond the base corridor. Keep a base, sliding windows, control cards and clear gardrails - and you will distinguish the noise of dispersion from real degradation in time, reduce the risk and move on to meaningful actions: pause, retest, recalibration or archive.