This is something I was messing with today and was getting all excited about. The results speak for themselves.
I was tracking Black and Red but any EC would be ok.
Here's how to play it.
Wait for a run of 3 repeats
B
B
B
Then bet 3 times for a Black to return.
I am using marty for this part, so any win at this level and you're up 1 unit.
If no hit and you get 3 of the opposite
R
R
R
Then wait and retrack for 3 more repeats and then go again same again...
this time in my tests I was using 2,4,8 incurring a -5 loss in this second level.
I didn't get to the third level once in over 2500 spins, but would use 8,16,32.
Now an important part is the zero in all this. If it wasn't covered then I would have got to the third level on one occasion.
It also benefitted a few times to have it covered with a small amount, say a tenth of a unit.
Its really that simple....try it....I will post my results shortly, but I was surprised with how often the hits came in in the first step.
Let me know how you get on
Buffalo
Each session between 80-150 spins:
Session 1 +7
Session 2 +9
Session 3 +10
Session 4 +4
Session 5 +8
Session 6 +2
Session 7 +4
Session 8 -5
Session 9 Level
Session 10 -2
Session 11 +6
Session 12 +9
Session 13 +6
Session 14 +12
Session 15 +5
Session 16 -3
Session 17 Level
Session 18 +15
Session 19 +4
Session 20 -1
Session 21 +13
You may not be winning hundreds of units but that's not the point here...I'm testing it's consistency and so far, so good I hope you agree.
It is also very quick and easy to check through numbers and check this
BW
Just in case, here's a quick example...
13
31
33 3 blacks so bet for another black within next 3 spins
27
29 Win on the second +1
12
9
1 3 reds
13
15
1 +2
16
27
26
20
19
28
36
6
29
36
13
8
20 3 blacks
8 +3
8
4
32
4
3
36
1
7 +4
4
33
28
25
20 +5
BW
:thumbsup:buffalowizzard,
I ve made a short test with my real spins of the last 3 days ( Onlinecasino ) with RED /BLACK.
Did very good on High Low it wasn t as good as R/B, there were 2 times bursting the progression H-H-H play... L-L-L. ( loose 1-2-4)
So I thought perhaps it would work with a D`Alembert progression (will produce slower winnings, but will not go as high as a Marty), but one should have a stoploss.
Perhaps there would be another progression which will work better.
Best regards
kawa4711
I want to show you how a tough session looks, because I don't want to only cover it in glory, but it's interesting how it keeps pushing out of the muck, even when a loss hits you.
By the way, when a zero hits during a betting sequence, I have kept the units the same, as my maths can't work out if it would be a profit or loss. My thinking is it would even out over time.
10
22
17
16
5
27 loss
25
16
33
23
13
29
23
6
25
1
17
31
24
5
33 Win on 2nd step -5
2
3
13
1
30
29
9
2
16
1
15
5
10
24
21
20
8
23
34
17
32
21
25
15
25 -4
2
9
23
25
23 -3
18
21
7
34 -2
28
4
10
33 -1
32
7
12
4
26
16 0
8
35
4
1
23
22 +1
31
11
1
27
5
4
16 +2
21
26
29
2
21
0 win on zero
23
19
13
26
7
12
33
27
31
2
8
34
32
7 loss
1
8
2
20
31 -3
8
22
23
36
27
12 -2
15
32
3
15
1
36
6
28
31
14
35 -1
15
0
27
13
20
0
32
4
32
13
29
3
9
19
6
1 0
19
12
20
31
16
26
6
17
1
19
0 win on zero
20
22
23
12
21
34 +1
6
18
29
21
11
23
22
6
13
36
2 +2
25
35
11
11
30 loss
23
14
2
35
24
26 -3
18
28
11
33
18
20 -2
31
13
4
22 -1
30
2
1
2
15
15
35 0
8
29
10
32
2 +1
28
15
35
5
7
31 +2
33
30
11
33
5
35
13
21
24
1
26
34
30
19
9 +3
I just looked at 10 randomly selected shoes of mine to make a quick check on this idea. It looked pretty good but I would like to add a slight modification.
If you've just had a Red-Red-Red (or whatever EC you're playing) come up and you hit on the first wager, continue to flat bet it until it loses and then go back to the system play.
You'd hate to lose out on a run of 14 EC bets by only playing the first one.
Thanks for the idea with a slight change!
AD
Quote from: kawa4711 on Jan 28, 05:35 PM 2011
:thumbsup:buffalowizzard,
I ve made a short test with my real spins of the last 3 days ( Onlinecasino ) with RED /BLACK.
Did very good on High Low it wasn t as good as R/B, there were 2 times bursting the progression H-H-H play... L-L-L. ( lose 1-2-4)
So I thought perhaps it would work with a D`Alembert progression (will produce slower winnings, but will not go as high as a Marty), but one should have a stoploss.
Perhaps there would be another progression which will work better.
Best regards
kawa4711
Hi kawa,
Thanks for looking at it. Yes, I would say just over half of those 21 sessions had a loss on the first step, so I progressed to 2,4,8 for the next stage and took the -5 loss..
The thing with this is, that you've got to expect the odd 1,2,4 loss, in fact its quite likely. It's that quite often, the wins eliminate this small loss, so it bodes well.
Anyway, I'm all for a change in progression, it's all open mate.
BW
Quote from: ADulay on Jan 28, 05:43 PM 2011
I just looked at 10 randomly selected shoes of mine to make a quick check on this idea. It looked pretty good but I would like to add a slight modification.
If you've just had a Red-Red-Red (or whatever EC you're playing) come up and you hit on the first wager, continue to flat bet it until it loses and then go back to the system play.
You'd hate to lose out on a run of 14 EC bets by only playing the first one.
Thanks for the idea with a slight change!
AD
Yeah that's a real good idea Adulay, riding the streak . Definately something worth incorporating into this.
Thanks, hope you have luck!
BW
Thought I would run it through some numbers offered to me by a member:
Again, I'll play Black and Red
11
24
26
7
12
1
23 +1
18
20
1
26
34
5
25
15
4
26 1st step loss
1
18
22
22
8
23
1
36 2nd step loss
36
5
30
30 -12
8
25
25
15
16 -11
19
30
15
6
30
3
24
28
21
18
5
21 -10
15
35
5
14
4
22
36
25
8
14
19
16
5 -9
18
6
4
11
20 -8
18
6
17
17
9
29 -7
7
3
31
25
34
13
25
35
20
11 -6
5
24
26
2
24 -5
8
12
24
24
20
20 -4
4
18
31
34
31
28
34
7
32
3 -3
36
31
27
21
17
15
17
1
12
31 -2
35
10
34
2
13
8
0
32
6 -1
17
20
22
32
3
6 0
36
31
33
20
16
32
11 +1
33
21
34
33
20
32
36
33
3
32
29
28
34
22
6
32
34
27
35
14 +2
29
6
17
9
32
15 +3
10
24
8
33 +4
0
31
33
22
18
18
16 1st level loss
9
1
20
30
29
6
0
27
16
23
2
19 -1
2
16
26
28
1
7
32
29
23 0
16
14
9
30 +1
34
13
5
20
34
15
30
15
1
13
1
24
21
14
33
32
11
4
10
30
9
24 +2
11
11
19
30
31
10
25
21
10
7
12
1
19 +3
1
3
2
8
35
26 +4
36
26
36
28
16
26
2
29
10 +5
22
29
6
20 +6
1
33
8
28
20 +7
6
4
16
1
36
17
26
30 +8
7
3
2
31
31
22 +9
1
14
1
13
14 +10
18
14
10
21
24
6
22
25
23
29 +11
22
20
0
20
8
8
0 win on zero
21
33
33
27
19
32
15
36 +12
15
30
25
9
24
26
15 loss on 1st step
28
33
24
2 +7
32
7
19
25 +8
21
18
27
33
1 +9
1
31
2
25
26
28
13
4 +10
A hard fought session indeed...including a double loss at the beginning, which I'm hoping is a rarity, but thankfully even this couldn't prevent it ending in the plus again.
You can get dream sessions without a single loss, but it's also more rewarding to come out of a session on top after being knocked about a bit.
BW
Nice play BW. like it. :thumbsup:
Cheers Chris!
Hope you find it simple yet effective.
I'm still not sure about the second level of progression because it is quite common to reach that point.
How does the d'alembert progression go anyone?
Thanks
BW
Quick wiesbaden run
Ending +7
Though you see what I mean about the annoying losses which keep putting you back -5
I think 2 losses in a row are rare enough to warrant perhaps a more aggressive progression, it's certainly one to test anyway
17
17
34
0
25
10
3
9
33
27
23
8
7
14
12
18 +1
32
16
25
-- -- --
22
31
16 +2
0
24
21
29
15
1
7
26
25
7
12
-- -- --
36 +3
22
16
24
17
6
20 +4
2
28
0
-- -- --
20
34
0
17
9
36
3
11
5 +5
29
3
-- -- --
5
7
15
26
31 loss
25
30
17
-- -- --
19
12
5
23 0
3
8
20
21
12
23
30 +1
5
10
-- -- --
16
0
36
18
10
29
34
9
6
20
5
31
31
1
34
4
29
16
32
36
-- -- --
23 +2
30
1
24
36
5
1
9 +3
28
5
36
36
4
17
-- -- --
10 loss
16
23
35
22
19
24
25
3
18
14 -2
32
28
-- -- --
28
35
2 -1
34
21
36
3 0
3
10
-- -- --
10
16
18
19
13
19 +1
1
12
10
14
36
8
17
-- -- --
12
23
15
3
15
19
5
27
18 +2
-- -- --
17
20
36
13
7
20
0
9
27
19
-- -- --
35
25 +3
14
9
1
23 +4
20
5
14
12
25 +5
-- -- --
3
4
11
12
29
19
33
1
-- -- --
34
35
7
0
6
3
14
4
30
34
2
-- -- --
18
13
12
9
2
6
34
35
2
6
26 +6
35
-- -- --
5
15
33
29
24 +7
4
19
31
20
1
22
15
32
6
29
5
9
A different day at wiesbaden +1
This is one for the real grind-merchants! Hope your liking it
13
4
21
35
18
16
14
17
29
24 loss
4
15
12
32
13
34
1
4
20
32
2
16
25
14
9 -5
2
36
-- -- --
36
10
35
26
32
35 -4
18
35
25
36
33
16
19
-- -- --
23
32 -3
11
16
8
17
7
26
34
14
11
17
17
28 -2
3
11
35
20
23
3
-- -- --
16 loss
6
27
25
26
29
27
13
19
12
9
25 -7
27
12
4
29
7
35
8
22
20 -6
3
-- -- --
32
30
25 -5
15
32
30
35
17
28
6 -4
29
9
4
21
11
5
-- -- --
26
0
32
35
16
11
11
12
5
18
30 -3
33
10
24
29 -2
32
24
-- -- --
31
21
8
23
16
24
16
31
12
2
36
0
23
36
32
3 -1
20
7
13
34
-- -- --
35
16
34
29
17
3
31
0
4
10
1
13
35
5
36
11
7
22
5
11
10
10
12
19
31 0
25
-- -- --
21
6
3
21
19
10
19 +1
35
34
18
35
22
26
15 +2
18
22
27
26
10
22
32
30
-- -- --
17 +3
33
35
25
3
16
7 +4
32
36
21
8
4
2 loss
27
2
15
27
0
24
34
12
11
23
-- -- --
34
22
6
16
20
13
1
31
17
2
30
24 -1
24
22
17
15 0
8
4
34
16
16
12 +1
-- -- --
6
BW,
Nice one.
One of my favorite systems is to wait for 4 in a row and then bet a 5 step marty that it won't go for 5 more of the same color.
I also use a step-up marty progression. 1-2-4-8-16, 2-4-8-16-32, 3-6-12-24-48, 4-8-16-32-64. If I lose the 1st level, I play the 2nd level until I recover the 31 units lost at the 1st level and then drop back down. I use each step up to recover the units lost in the previous level. If I lose at 4-8-16-32-64, I take the loss. So far it's never happened.
If you lost from 1st bet 20 in a row it would be 310 units. It'll never happen, but you can eventually lose. Although, you will have won something along the way to off-set the -310 units.
I also play this using a grand martingale which wins at a phenomenal rate. My thinking is, if it wins with regular marty, it will win more with a grand marty. The grand will lose and win at the same places as a regular marty so as long as your well under the table limits, I don't see the reason for a regular marty.
I play all three even chances at the same time that way I don't have to wait so long for an opportunity to bet.
I also watch when I finish a bet sequence, because another bet may have been forming and I can immediately begin betting on it. This is sweet when you have like 4 Reds and then 2 Blacks hit while you were playing on say odd/even and you can start betting for a Red to hit and you got 2 free losses without risking anything.
As you can see with yours, it is sometimes a real grind. I think I'm going to test mine method with the way you do yours, that is playing for the color to continue or at least hit again in the next 5 spins. I also like the idea of being able to keep winning as long as the color keeps repeating.
(P.S. I tried this continuing to bet for longer streaks and didn't have such good luck.)
Thanks for this post. It has given me 2 or 3 excellent ideas and it looks like the way you play it is an excellent way also.
This is a good reason to always post a new idea no matter how simple it may look because it might just trigger a new thought somewhere you never dreamed of.
Cheers, :thumbsup:
George
Cant belive this another system using the martingale.Give it up guys :(
Quote from: moles40 on Jan 28, 11:13 PM 2011
Can't belive this another system using the martingale.Give it up guys :(
A limited martingale is not better or worse than any other mechanical betting method. They will all have losing runs where you either have to take a loss or reach the house limit. This one is limited to how much you can lose.
Consider this, if I play a 1-2-4 marty all that means is that I'm playing a 7 unit flat bet, but I'm giving myself 3 shots at winning a little piece of the 7 units instead of winning all or nothing. It's not like I'm going to reach the table limit with this bet. If it were a 15 step martingale, I might have to agree with you unless you had the discipline to grow your bankroll with your wins so you would have won money to give back when you finally have the losing run.
Those are my thoughts on the martingale. I could be wrong, but I'll never admit it. ;D
Just kidding.
George
Okay, since Moles doesn't like martingales, here's another one he won't like either. Sorry Moles.
I've been testing the single parlay bet system, or as some like to call it the let-it-ride method.
Progression 1-1-1-2-2-3-4-5-7-9-12. That's -47 units if you get unlucky.
The way you play is to wait for 3 in a row and the begin betting for a repeat for 3 spins starting with the 1st 1 unit bet. If it wins you're not through, you let it ride meaning you bet 2 units the one you won plus your 1 unit bet. If you win again, you are ahead 3 units. Start over.
If you win your 1 unit bet and lose the let-it-ride bet, you have lost your 1st unit so go to the 2nd 1 unit bet. If you lose your 1st 1 unit bet then go to the 2nd 1 unit bet.
Keep moving to the right on every loss and on every win, you let it ride and the 1st time you win 2 in a row, you will be at a new high so start over at the 1st 1 unit bet.
if you lose all 11 bets on either the 1st or the let-it-ride bet, you will lose 47 units. Sounds like a good time to take a break.
The hit rate seems to be good enough to catch 20 or so units, then take a break.
George
Quote from: GLC on Jan 29, 12:52 AM 2011
Okay, since Moles doesn't like martingales, here's another one he won't like either. Sorry Moles.
I've been testing the single parlay bet system, or as some like to call it the let-it-ride method.
Progression 1-1-1-2-2-3-4-5-7-9-12. That's -47 units if you get unlucky.
The way you play is to wait for 3 in a row and the begin betting for a repeat for 3 spins starting with the 1st 1 unit bet. If it wins you're not through, you let it ride meaning you bet 2 units the one you won plus your 1 unit bet. If you win again, you are ahead 3 units. Start over.
If you win your 1 unit bet and lose the let-it-ride bet, you have lost your 1st unit so go to the 2nd 1 unit bet. If you lose your 1st 1 unit bet then go to the 2nd 1 unit bet.
Keep moving to the right on every loss and on every win, you let it ride and the 1st time you win 2 in a row, you will be at a new high so start over at the 1st 1 unit bet.
if you lose all 11 bets on either the 1st or the let-it-ride bet, you will lose 47 units. Sounds like a good time to take a break.
The hit rate seems to be good enough to catch 20 or so units, then take a break.
George
Hi George,
Thanks for thinking about new ways of approaching this. It's helpful that you already have experience of bet placement this way, albeit waiting for 4 in a row. It's interesting to know how well it can be implemented with all 3 EC's...and I expect you could be quite busy playing this way.
I have felt that the progression is a little off...it's the second and third levels that aren't quite right, so I will give your let-it-ride technique a go.
Just to clarify, if you win on the first 2 bet, then you carry on with the 2 units you won and also the second 2 units, so 4 units altogether? Is there any chance you could post a short string of numbers as an example?
I think a stop/loss of 20 units would be fine for this, so that is what I will be testing for.
Thanks
BW
hi..i was discussing this idea in chat a few nghts ago.the way i,ve tested it was wait for a colour to appear 4 times in a row then bet only once the oppisite colour.if lose then wait untill another run 4 colours then bet again the oppisite colour using martingale.
ideally each seperate colour should have its own progression so to minimize the run of misses.
also have been playing about with this adaption on it with very good results.its as follows and remember treat each colour in its own right...and this formula is for both colours maybe all ec,s but not tested it on them this is what i was going to ask superman to put in rx...
1st bet wait for 4 colours in a row bet oppisite colour ,if lose go to next bet
2nd bet wait for 3 colours in a row bet oppisite colour if lose go to next bet
3rd bet wait for 4 colours in a row bet same colour if lose go to next bet
4th bet wait for 3 colours in a row bet same colour if lose goback to the very 1st bet then replay
although the very 1st bet is slow in its own right i have never gone bust with testing it.the rest is an adaptation or add on after testing it further .like to hear what you think and if superman coul rx it
Quote from: 6th-sense on Jan 29, 03:50 AM 2011
Hi..i was discussing this idea in chat a few nghts ago.the way I've tested it was wait for a colour to appear 4 times in a row then bet only once the oppisite colour.if lose then wait until another run 4 colours then bet again the oppisite colour using martingale.
ideally each separate colour should have its own progression so to minimize the run of misses.
also have been playing about with this adaption on it with very good results.its as follows and remember treat each colour in its own right...and this formula is for both colours maybe all ec,s but not tested it on them this is what I was going to ask superman to put in rx...
1st bet wait for 4 colours in a row bet oppisite colour ,if lose go to next bet
2nd bet wait for 3 colours in a row bet oppisite colour if lose go to next bet
3rd bet wait for 4 colours in a row bet same colour if lose go to next bet
4th bet wait for 3 colours in a row bet same colour if lose goback to the very 1st bet then replay
although the very 1st bet is slow in its own right I have never gone bust with testing it.the rest is an adaptation or add on after testing it further .like to hear what you think and if superman coul rx it
Hi 6th Sense,
It seems lots of people are onto the same ideas and this is good because together hopefully we can find the best way to play this.
I like the idea of betting once each stage...I'm sure playing all EC's it wouldn't take too long for a 4 in a row happening.
Unfortunately I don't have much time on my hands at the moment but there is lots to look into and test, so you're right...superman, come to our rescue!!
BW
QuoteI was going to ask superman to put in rx
I dont use rx anymore, I just run the bot on the tables
Quote1st bet wait for 4 colours in a row bet oppisite colour ,if lose go to next bet
2nd bet wait for 3 colours in a row bet oppisite colour if lose go to next bet
3rd bet wait for 4 colours in a row bet same colour if lose go to next bet
4th bet wait for 3 colours in a row bet same colour if lose goback to the very 1st bet then replay
Is that the full system? if win on any stage, do what, start from step 1 again?
yep if you could...each colour treated on its own....also if you could just do the step 1 on its own so 2 programs in rx ,,1 for the step 1 only and another for the 4 steps....after a win on that particular colour reset it back to start
Quote4th bet wait for 3 colours in a row bet same colour if lose goback to the very 1st bet then replay
At this point do you set your progression back to 1?
ok without resetting progression after level/bet 4 is reached, theres too many losses with that bet selection, see file for results.
Quote from: buffalowizard on Jan 29, 02:52 AM 2011
Hi George,
Thanks for thinking about new ways of approaching this. It's helpful that you already have experience of bet placement this way, albeit waiting for 4 in a row. It's interesting to know how well it can be implemented with all 3 EC's...and I expect you could be quite busy playing this way.
I have felt that the progression is a little off...it's the second and third levels that aren't quite right, so I will give your let-it-ride technique a go.
Just to clarify, if you win on the first 2 bet, then you carry on with the 2 units you won and also the second 2 units, so 4 units altogether? Is there any chance you could post a short string of numbers as an example?
I think a stop/loss of 20 units would be fine for this, so that is what I will be testing for.
Thanks
BW
Another way to explain this bet is to call it the Boffins Bet. The Boffins bet was tweaked by Jordan on a system from quite a few months ago if my memory serves me right.
In the boffins bet you bet 1-2-3-4-5-6-7. If you lose you go to the right 1 step. If you win, you parlay for 1 more bet and if you win you will be ahead so start over at 1 unit. If you lose the parlay bet, it's the same as losing the 1st bet at that level so you must move 1 bet to the right. In order to win, we must hit 2 wins in a row otherwise we will lose 28 units.
1st bet 1unit - lose -1
2nd bet 2 units - lose -3
3rd bet 3 units - win 0 Anytime we win 1st bet we parlay
4th bet 6 units - win +6 3rd bet leaves 6 units on table for next bet. If win = +6
5th bet 1 unit - win +1 Won our 1st bet at 1 unit
6th bet 2 units - win + 3 Won our parlay bet of 2 units = +4 - 1 original unit bet = +3.
I tweaked this so that it doesn't climb so quickly. The units won at each level is less, but the chances to win before having to take a series loss are more in number.
1-1-1-2-2-3-4-5-7-9-11. At win at any stage ends in profit. With my series we have to lose 11 times for -47 verses 7 times for -28 units with the original Boffins bet.
This is just less volatile than the marty.
The quick way to calculate this let-it-ride once parlay is 2 units X4 = 8 - 2 = +6
2 units wins 2 = 4 for parlay bet. 4 wins 4 = 8 units minus the 2 we bet originally leaves a 6 unit win.
Nuff said?? ???
how did the test for the bet oppisite 5 in a row go superman?
Okay gals and gents,
This is going to be almost impossible for me to explain so that you understand it right away. Not because you are lacking in intelligence, but because I'm way too wordy in my explanations. Here goes.
BW is betting a three step marty that a color will repeat within 3 spins after has hit 3 in a row.
What if we used a 3 step marty on each of the 3 bets for the re-hit?
Here's what I mean. RRR now we will bet 3 times the Red will hit again. Let's take each of those 3 bets as isolated marties.
Let's name our 3 bets A B C
Example: RRR 3 in a row
A bet = 1 lose (level 1 on A marty) A marty = -1
B bet = 1 lose (level 1 on B marty) B marty = -1
C bet = 1 win (level 1 on C marty) C marty = +1
BBB 3 in a row
A bet = 2 lose (level 2 on A marty) A marty = -3
B bet = 2 lose (level 2 on B marty) B marty = -3
C bet = 1 win (level 1 on C marty) C marty = +1
BBB 3 in a row
A bet = 4 win (level 3 on A marty) A marty = +1
B bet = No bet
C bet = No bet
RRR 3 in a row
A bet = 1 lose (level 1 on A marty) A marty = -1
B bet = 4 win (level 3 on B marty) B marty = +1
C bet = No bet
BBB 3 in a row
A bet = 2 lose (level 2 on A marty) A marty = -3
B bet = 1 lose (level 1 on B marty) B marty = -1
C bet = 1 lose (level 1 on C marty) C marty = -1
RRR 3 in a row
A bet = 4 lose (level 3 on A marty) A marty =-7
B bet = 2 win (level 2 on B marty) B marty =+1
C bet = No bet
Total: A marty = +1 & -7 = -6
B marty = +1 & +1 = +2
C marty = +1
total at this stage of betting = +3 -6 = -3
As you can see, each step is a marty horizontally instead of vertically. You can go for more than 3 step. Or if you lose 3 in a row, you can go to the next level of 2-4-8 to recover lost units at the previous level. Even to 4-8-16 and maybe 8-16-32 to recover losses at 4-8-16. You can go to as many 3 bet levels as you are comfortable with recognizing that there is always the possibility that you may have the streak from hell that results in you taking some kind of loss so as not to continue going deeper and deeper into the hole.
I hope this is clear. I don't know if it's worth the extra effort to keep track of each marty separately. And I don't know if it gives any advantage over the original method.
It's just an idea I thought I would throw out there just in case someone can get some benefit from it and share with the rest of us.
G
G L C that is a very well put explanation.you can,t get better than that thanks. bearing g l c,s progression superman...now this is where i,ve hand tested this in rx with very good results is wait for 4 colours then bet once the oppisite. if lose wait for next 3 colours to show then bet the oppisite.repeat when lose or win but reset with a hit
i was using marty to test this out as seperate bets for each colour....maybe glc ,s could work maybe not....if i could use or program a bot which i can,t i could have a field day just tweaking here and there its very frustrating...and again glc thankyou for the explanation
@GLC
Hi George, I hope Ur well, U have been posting up some great stuff of late- brill to see/read.
On this latest example of Ur's how would the "Routine" (I'll call it a Routine for now)
cope with this outcome from the wheel/marquee:-
[attachimg=#]
Looks like it would fair well me thinks?
Chris
Quote from: chrisbis on Jan 29, 02:36 PM 2011
On this latest example of Ur's how would the "Routine" (I'll call it a Routine for now)
cope with this outcome from the wheel/marquee:-
Looks like it would fair well me thinks?
Chris
Gentlemen,
Just to inject a bit of casino advice here.....
If whatever system you're playing, both now and in the future, has trouble with the above displayed graphic, you're on the wrong track.
Eleven in a row of anything "should" produce a profit of some type, unless you're way off the mark.
I do believe that the current system up for review in this thread does handle this string nicely.
If "yours" didn't, you may want to rethink your attack of the wheel.
AD
George,
That's a good shout...individual marty's for each step.
Takes a bit of time to get my head round it...but I like it! I think it could work actually. I know everyone isn't a fan of the marty but for this method, I tend to think it is the best way.
The fact that it isn't a prolonged marty gives it more weight. A three stage (9 individual steps) loss would be very rare, so I am inclined to stick with it and give your cunning version a test.
Perhaps if I post up 50 spins or so, we could go through it?
BW
Correctamundo AD.
Chris, with BW's system, we wait for 3 in a row and then we bet for 3 more times if needed that his color will hit again. With your 11 reds, we win on the 1st bet which would be the 4th red. At that point, if we keep betting that the reds would continue, we'd catch 7 more wins and be smiling all the way to the bank.
Cheers,
G
Quote from: buffalowizard on Jan 29, 03:37 PM 2011
George,
That's a good shout...individual marty's for each step.
Takes a bit of time to get my head round it...but I like it! I think it could work actually. I know everyone isn't a fan of the marty but for this method, I tend to think it is the best way.
The fact that it isn't a prolonged marty gives it more weight. A three stage (9 individual steps) loss would be very rare, so I am inclined to stick with it and give your cunning version a test.
Perhaps if I post up 50 spins or so, we could go through it?
BW
OK BW,
It is just a thought. I haven't tested it at all. Let's see what happens with your spins.
G
Would it go something like this?
I wonder if you could work out the profit/loss from this small sample?
4
31
30
15
16
26
29
8
0 win on zero 1st
23
23
6
14
12
13
33
8
29 win on 1st
15
14
14
-- -- --
25
3 win on 1st
21
23
1
23 win on 1st
31
7
34
27
35
0 win on zero 2nd
4
10
7
23
26
10
21
36
23
-- -- --
0 win on zero 1st
3
19
13
6
30
15
4
1
32
5
34 win on 1st
16
18
32
35
13
-- -- --
20 1st round loss on A B C
25
36
7
32 Win on A
7
16
27
10
33
24 1st round loss on A B C
7
3
3
20
11
19 Win on C
4
Quote from: buffalowizard on Jan 29, 04:48 PM 2011
Would it go something like this?
I wonder if you could work out the profit/loss from this small sample?
4
31
30
15
16
26
29
8
0 win on zero 1st I don't know what you bet on zero
23
23
6
14
12
13
33
8
29 win on 1st A Marty = +1
15
14
14
-- -- --
25
3 win on 1st B Marty = +1
21
23
1
23 win on 1st C Marty = +1
31
7
34
27
35 A Marty = -1
0 win on zero 2nd ??
4
10
7
23
26
10
21
36
23
-- -- --
0 win on zero 1st ??
3
19
13
6
30
15
4
1
32
5
34 win on 1st B Marty +1
16
18
32
35 C Marty -1
13 A Marty -2
-- -- --
20 1st round loss on A B C B Marty -1
25
36
7
32 C Marty +2
7
16
27
10 A Marty -4 (-1-2-4=-7)
33 B Marty -2
24 C Marty -1
7
3
3
20 A Marty -2 (1st bet of 2nd level 2-4-8)
11 B Marty -4
19 C Marty +2
4
It looks like A marty ended at -8 (+1-1-2-4-2=-8)
B Marty ended at -5 (+1+1-1-2-4=-5)
C Marty ended at +3 (+1-1+2-1+2=+3)
As we can see from this, the problem we have is that the martys are at different levels of completion and it's hard to find a good stopping place. From this sequence, I'm not sure this method is a good idea.
Maybe we could tweak it to make it better. Or we could end each Marty at a plus and not start it when getting to a point where we want to quit.
I don't know.
George
I still have faith in this method and will probably do some more testing of this and report back the findings. I'm thinking of using a less aggressive progression, like
1 1 2
3 4 8
12, 20, 40
BW