steps # | Nb $ by bet | running lost | profit |
| | | |
1 | 1 | -2 | 34 |
2 | 1 | -4 | 32 |
3 | 1 | -6 | 30 |
4 | 1 | -8 | 28 |
5 | 1 | -10 | 26 |
6 | 1 | -12 | 24 |
7 | 1 | -14 | 22 |
8 | 1 | -16 | 20 |
9 | 1 | -18 | 18 |
10 | 1 | -20 | 16 |
11 | 1 | -22 | 14 |
12 | 1 | -24 | 12 |
13 | 1 | -26 | 10 |
14 | 1 | -28 | 8 |
15 | 1 | -30 | 6 |
16 | 1 | -32 | 4 |
17 | 1 | -34 | 2 |
18 | 2 | -38 | 34 |
19 | 2 | -42 | 30 |
20 | 2 | -46 | 26 |
21 | 2 | -50 | 22 |
22 | 2 | -54 | 18 |
23 | 2 | -58 | 14 |
24 | 2 | -62 | 10 |
25 | 2 | -66 | 6 |
26 | 2 | -70 | 2 |
27 | 3 | -76 | 32 |
28 | 3 | -82 | 26 |
29 | 3 | -88 | 20 |
30 | 3 | -94 | 14 |
31 | 3 | -100 | 8 |
32 | 3 | -106 | 2 |
33 | 4 | -114 | 30 |
34 | 4 | -122 | 22 |
35 | 4 | -130 | 14 |
36 | 4 | -138 | 6 |
37 | 5 | -148 | 32 |
38 | 5 | -158 | 22 |
39 | 5 | -168 | 12 |
40 | 5 | -178 | 2 |
41 | 6 | -190 | 26 |
42 | 6 | -202 | 14 |
43 | 6 | -214 | 2 |
44 | 7 | -228 | 24 |
45 | 7 | -242 | 10 |
46 | 8 | -258 | 30 |
47 | 8 | -274 | 14 |
48 | 9 | -292 | 32 |
49 | 9 | -310 | 14 |
50 | 10 | -330 | 30 |
51 | 10 | -350 | 10 |
Use as you please!
Been playing with a progression like this but letting it stretch up to 170 steps or so playing single numbers. It failed on me once (Loss of approx. 4000 units).
Even though 51 steps or spins with only 350 units sounds amazing I want to warn those who aren't in to maths and those who try every progression they spot. On a double-zero wheel your chance to hit is 1 to 19. Divide 51 with 19 and you get ~2. 68. This means that the chance of success is about the same as in a 5-step martingale (which is ~2. 38) which in this case would use a progression that looked something like this:
10, 20, 40, 80, 160
When I speak of CoS (chance of success) and say something like 2. 38 (as above) it means that if all numbers always showed up in order you would hit 2. 38 times.
Best Regards
Marcus