Hello again, fellow roulette players. I have another system for you to try out. Probably been done to death before, but I find it interesting nonetheless. I was doing some thinking, what makes any EC bet so special? Or even any specific table bet, for that matter? Let's really think about this, RED consists of the numbers
1,3,5,7,9,12,14,16,18,19,21,23,25,27,30,32,34,36.
Other than the fact that Red and Black alternate on a real wheel, on RNG there really is no pattern. It's a mixture of even numbers and odd numbers, high and low as well. Yet, when you look at the results for 12 MILLION spins, every single EC wager is nearly identical (well, at least evenly distributed). Similar amounts of max repeats, max intervals, and spins.
Low 5937712 5938054.05 -0.20 1 22 1 1 25
High 5937473 5938054.05 -0.33 1 22 0 1 23
Red 5938269 5938054.05 0.12 1 22 0 1 23
Black 5936916 5938054.05 -0.65 1 21 2 1 29
Odd 5936299 5938054.05 -1.01 1 21 1 1 24
Even 5938886 5938054.05 0.48 1 23 0 1 23
^^not mine. taken from a roulette forum, don't know who to credit for that, sorry^^
Basically, you can see that the MAX repeat of any EC is 23 in a row, and the MAX interval is 29 (probably because a few zeros interfered). Then what's the difference between that and randomly picking out your own numbers to make a bet? Whether it be 18 random numbers to make an EC, or 12 for a Dozen, 6 for a Double Street, etc...
The System:
So I thought about spinning the wheel until I have 19 UNIQUE numbers, then I will bet on the opposing 18 numbers with a basic martingale progression. I'm letting random create my EC bet for me. Once you achieve a win, you need to retrack or even better, close your window (RNG) and start a fresh session. It's been working for me so far, and usually before the fourth level of the progression, no higher. Try it, and tell me what you think about it and post your results! Thanks everyone.
Real Example:
27
16
23
15
4
9
21
19
11
14
32
29
31
34
20
23
23
7
6
6
25
8
^^ Those are 19 unique numbers. It took 22 spins, due to repeats, to get there. ^^
So I then bet 1 unit each on the 18 leftover numbers. 0,1,2,3,5,10,12,13,17,18,22,24,26,28,30,33,35,36.
I hit the number 5 on the immediate spin afterwards for a WIN of 18 units...
Hi Iancloud2001
Thanks for sharing your system.
What you do when a new number coming up?
Just add to your progression or you just play with that 18 unique numbers?
Regards
J.Bravo
Great idea. How do you track the numbers?
@Bravo, he said he uses a marty. Otherwise there would be no profit. So I'm guessing:
18
36
72
144 (table limits?)
Also, we would need a 5 step marty to cover 23 unique numbers. So BR would have to be 558.
I think You are right Birdhands
Hey guys, thanks for taking interest in my system.
As far as new numbers are concerned, it's absolutely best to simply start a fresh session by closing the window, and starting over. If you don't want to do that, you should retrack by disregarding those past spins, including the spin that you won on, and start anew. So in my example, I would forget about everything I just saw, and freespin after that 5 I hit, until I have a new set of 19 unique numbers. And repeat the process.
Also, birdhands is 100% correct! That's exactly my theory. That's the progression.
Yeah, but how do you actually track the numbers? I mean, it's not all that easy to recognize when 19 numbers are unique just by looking at them. Maybe I'm just too wimpy.
Betvoyager autoplay is super fast; that would be a good way. The European wheel has big enough table limits, too. Eventually we could ask Madmax to make us a tracker.
Well, tracking is pretty easy. Just freespin the wheel 19 times, then start from the bottom, and count how many unique numbers there are. If there aren't 19 unique numbers, you will have to freespin until you have that amount. Try it, it's easy!
Playing marty on straight numbers? You gotta be kidding... RNG is not roulette. RNG is for suckers. And waiting 19 uniques in real play, well you would gave up after first attempt LOL
Regards
Drazen
Listen, we are not waiting for 19 uniques in a row, you just need 19 unique numbers to create your bet. You could get 19 uniques in 19 spins or in 30 spins. It doesn't matter, as long as you count 19.
Also, playing a "marty" on 18 straight numbers is exactly the same as betting a martingale on ANY EC bet. Only difference is that you must start with 18 units, instead if 1 unit. And if you really wanted to, you could bet at a casino with lower table limits, like .10 cents, so you can start off the progression with $1.80, then $3.60, etc.
By the way, drazen_cro, you can win and lose just about the same in live roulette as you can with RNG online. I think it's safe to say that after 12 Million spins, the results would be the same for RNG and Live roulette. So please don't bring up such tired subjects. It's getting old.
Quote from: iancloud2001 on Oct 04, 03:17 PM 2011
By the way, drazen_cro, you can win and lose just about the same in live roulette as you can with RNG online. I think it's safe to say that after 12 Million spins, the results would be the same for RNG and Live roulette. So please don't bring up such tired subjects. It's getting old.
Yes the results would be maybe similar but not the sum on your account. You don't know what you are talking about, nor obviously principals on which are working gambling RNG-s? They are programed to have wanted amount on the end of the month, not to produce PURE random. Now it is your luck if they will take most of your account funds to have wanted amount or only little of it ,or give you something. There are many players there, you know. And one day when you enter RNG casino, they will be waiting for you outside...Be sure about that.
Regards
Drazen
QuoteBy the way, drazen_cro, you can win and lose just about the same in live roulette as you can with RNG online. I think it's safe to say that after 12 Million spins, the results would be the same for RNG and Live roulette. So please don't bring up such tired subjects. It's getting old
Yup, I have to agree with you there, I have tested on all platforms and guess what, for chops of red/black LIVE wheel has had the most for me, Dublinbet, I posted about it a while ago I think there were about 19 RBRBRB....... and NO ZERO in between, atleast RNG has the decency to chuck a zero at you during a chop.
@ drazen, the only thing about your statement that I agree with is the use of marty, its not safe, very risky, but the rest, mate, it's a bit blunt.
Quote from: iancloud2001 on Oct 04, 03:17 PM 2011
Listen, we are not waiting for 19 uniques in a row, you just need 19 unique numbers to create your bet. You could get 19 uniques in 19 spins or in 30 spins. It doesn't matter, as long as you count 19.
I think they have to be in a row,; that's why I was saying it would be hard to track.
Quote from: birdhands on Oct 04, 03:33 PM 2011
I think they have to be in a row,; that's why I was saying it would be hard to track.
The guy that made the system said they dont have to be in a row. So then they dont have to
Hello iancloud2001,
I did a bit of testing along those lines and have attached 100 files of 49 spin sets from Wiesbaden casino ( I got the data from VLS roulette, as well as the program to process it, designed to test Winkel's G.U.T. )
On a first review, betting for one of the sleeping 18 numbers, most times they show up in the first few spins, but this set has 1x7 step, 2x8step, 1x9 step and 1x10step.
They look like this:
Sp Nm W/L =0 =1 >1 =2 >2 Adv bet = BRoll
- - 37 0 0 0 0 0
1 23 36 1
2 1 35 2
3 25 34 3
4 4 33 4
5 16 32 5
6 17 31 6
7 19 30 7
8 0 29 8
9 15 28 9
10 17 28 8 1 1
11 15 28 7 2 2
12 3 27 8 2 2
13 12 26 9 2 2
14 29 25 10 2 2
15 24 24 11 2 2
16 34 23 12 2 2
17 24 23 11 3 3
18 36 22 12 3 3
19 5 21 13 3 3
20 32 20 14 3 3
21 16 20 13 4 4
22 4 20 12 5 5
23 23 20 11 6 6
24 12 20 10 7 7
25 34 20 9 8 8 =1: 0 1 3 5 19 25 29 32 36 9 -9
26 32 W 20 8 9 9 +27
27 15 20 8 9 8 1 =1: 0 1 3 5 19 25 29 36 8 +19
28 22 L 19 9 9 8 1 =1: 0 1 3 5 19 22 25 29 36 9 +10
29 32 L 19 9 9 7 2 =1: 0 1 3 5 19 22 25 29 36 9 +1
30 18 L 18 10 9 7 2 =1: 0 1 3 5 18 19 22 25 29 36 10 -9
31 11 L 17 11 9 7 2 -9
32 15 17 11 9 7 2
33 24 17 11 9 6 3
34 31 16 12 9 6 3
35 32 16 12 9 6 3
36 26 15 13 9 6 3
37 1 15 12 10 7 3
38 28 14 13 10 7 3 =0: 2 6 7 8 9 10 13 14 20 21 27 30 33 35 14 -23
39 4 L 14 13 10 6 4 =0: 2 6 7 8 9 10 13 14 20 21 27 30 33 35 14 -37
40 26 L 14 12 11 7 4 =1: 0 3 5 11 18 19 22 25 28 29 31 36 12 -49
41 21 L 13 13 11 7 4 =0: 2 6 7 8 9 10 13 14 20 27 30 33 35 13 -62
42 1 L 13 13 11 6 5 =0: 2 6 7 8 9 10 13 14 20 27 30 33 35 13 -75
43 5 L 13 12 12 7 5 =0: 2 6 7 8 9 10 13 14 20 27 30 33 35 13 -88
44 4 L 13 12 12 7 5 =0: 2 6 7 8 9 10 13 14 20 27 30 33 35 13 -101
45 7 W 12 13 12 7 5 =1: 0 3 7 11 18 19 21 22 25 28 29 31 36 13 -78
46 8 L 11 14 12 7 5 -78
47 3 11 13 13 8 5 =1: 0 7 8 11 18 19 21 22 25 28 29 31 36 13 -91
48 22 W 11 12 14 9 5 -55
49 35 10 13 14 9 5 =0: 2 6 9 10 13 14 20 27 30 33 10 -65
50 31 L * End of Session -65
Only the rows and columns are tidier than this.
Jeromin
19 numbers doesn't have to be in a row? in that case you can always have your 19 numbers? My friend, i have explored this thing but not at the way you are saying. There is a law that affects on all numbers on the wheel.. Your progression is too dangerous.
Regards
Drazen
Quote from: Jeromin on Oct 04, 03:42 PM 2011
Hello iancloud2001,
I did a bit of testing along those lines and have attached 100 files of 49 spin sets from Wiesbaden casino ( I got the data from VLS roulette, as well as the program to process it, designed to test Winkel's G.U.T. )
On a first review, betting for one of the sleeping 18 numbers, most times they show up in the first few spins, but this set has 1x7 step, 2x8step, 1x9 step and 1x10step.
They look like this:
Sp Nm W/L =0 =1 >1 =2 >2 Adv bet = BRoll
- - 37 0 0 0 0 0
1 23 36 1
2 1 35 2
3 25 34 3
4 4 33 4
5 16 32 5
6 17 31 6
7 19 30 7
8 0 29 8
9 15 28 9
10 17 28 8 1 1
11 15 28 7 2 2
12 3 27 8 2 2
13 12 26 9 2 2
14 29 25 10 2 2
15 24 24 11 2 2
16 34 23 12 2 2
17 24 23 11 3 3
18 36 22 12 3 3
19 5 21 13 3 3
20 32 20 14 3 3
21 16 20 13 4 4
22 4 20 12 5 5
23 23 20 11 6 6
24 12 20 10 7 7
25 34 20 9 8 8 =1: 0 1 3 5 19 25 29 32 36 9 -9
26 32 W 20 8 9 9 +27
27 15 20 8 9 8 1 =1: 0 1 3 5 19 25 29 36 8 +19
28 22 L 19 9 9 8 1 =1: 0 1 3 5 19 22 25 29 36 9 +10
29 32 L 19 9 9 7 2 =1: 0 1 3 5 19 22 25 29 36 9 +1
30 18 L 18 10 9 7 2 =1: 0 1 3 5 18 19 22 25 29 36 10 -9
31 11 L 17 11 9 7 2 -9
32 15 17 11 9 7 2
33 24 17 11 9 6 3
34 31 16 12 9 6 3
35 32 16 12 9 6 3
36 26 15 13 9 6 3
37 1 15 12 10 7 3
38 28 14 13 10 7 3 =0: 2 6 7 8 9 10 13 14 20 21 27 30 33 35 14 -23
39 4 L 14 13 10 6 4 =0: 2 6 7 8 9 10 13 14 20 21 27 30 33 35 14 -37
40 26 L 14 12 11 7 4 =1: 0 3 5 11 18 19 22 25 28 29 31 36 12 -49
41 21 L 13 13 11 7 4 =0: 2 6 7 8 9 10 13 14 20 27 30 33 35 13 -62
42 1 L 13 13 11 6 5 =0: 2 6 7 8 9 10 13 14 20 27 30 33 35 13 -75
43 5 L 13 12 12 7 5 =0: 2 6 7 8 9 10 13 14 20 27 30 33 35 13 -88
44 4 L 13 12 12 7 5 =0: 2 6 7 8 9 10 13 14 20 27 30 33 35 13 -101
45 7 W 12 13 12 7 5 =1: 0 3 7 11 18 19 21 22 25 28 29 31 36 13 -78
46 8 L 11 14 12 7 5 -78
47 3 11 13 13 8 5 =1: 0 7 8 11 18 19 21 22 25 28 29 31 36 13 -91
48 22 W 11 12 14 9 5 -55
49 35 10 13 14 9 5 =0: 2 6 9 10 13 14 20 27 30 33 10 -65
50 31 L * End of Session -65
Only the rows and columns are tidier than this.
Jeromin
that's because they're not in a row.
Actually, they don't have to be in a row, but it is obviously better if it is. Either way, I still believe that we are constantly placing premium emphasis on the table layout that's given to us, instead of letting random show us the way. Seriously, what's the difference between Dozen 1, and the numbers (2,5,9,11,14,18,19,21,24,25,31,35)? That's also 12 numbers...
Hi, Jeromin, I don't understand any of what you showed me. Could you try the system yourself? Maybe on Roulette Xtreme?
Quote from: iancloud2001 on Oct 04, 03:55 PM 2011
Actually, they don't have to be in a row, but it is obviously better if it is. Either way, I still believe that we are constantly placing premium emphasis on the table layout that's given to us, instead of letting random show us the way. Seriously, what's the difference between Dozen 1, and the numbers (2,5,9,11,14,18,19,21,24,25,31,35)? That's also 12 numbers...
Hi, Jeromin, I don't understand any of what you showed me. Could you try the system yourself? Maybe on Roulette Xtreme?
Iancloud,
Exactly - no difference. I have coded that idea on bot (with 12 numbers or u could say virtual dozens) so it will be very easy to change it to 19 numbers. I will inform about test results tomorrow.
Just one question. What marty u suggest?
Thanks
DL
Ian,
Yes, there is no difference between dozen 1 and any 12 numbers; I agree. But those 12 million spins data tell us that there were not more than 23 EC's IN A ROW. That's our guarantee. Otherwise you're just betting 18 sleepers on a martingale. If we had a section in the 12 million data for the maximum number of sleepers SIMULTANEOUSLY, then we could base your bet on that. I think this distinction is crucial.
Quote from: iancloud2001 on Oct 04, 03:55 PM 2011
Actually, they don't have to be in a row, but it is obviously better if it is. Either way, I still believe that we are constantly placing premium emphasis on the table layout that's given to us, instead of letting random show us the way. Seriously, what's the difference between Dozen 1, and the numbers (2,5,9,11,14,18,19,21,24,25,31,35)? That's also 12 numbers...
Hi, Jeromin, I don't understand any of what you showed me. Could you try the system yourself? Maybe on Roulette Xtreme?
Why do u think that is better when 19 are in a row. You can catch repeats. I would say is much better when You have 19 unique numbers in last 25 spins. In this case you have passed 6 repeats.
Quote from: iancloud2001 on Oct 04, 03:55 PM 2011
Hi, Jeromin, I don't understand any of what you showed me. Could you try the system yourself? Maybe on Roulette Xtreme?
Ok, if you download and uzip the files, opening any file, the first column, labelled sp is the spin number, goes from 1 to 50; second column ( Nm) is the actual spins, as taken from a Wiesbaden file from 2003 to 2008; the W/L column you can ignore, it refers to the G.U.T. system; the fourth column (=0) is the number of numbers from 0 to 37 that are still sleeping in that set, starts with 37 before the first spin and goes down. So it does not go down when a number repeats. Number 18 in that column is the one we are looking for, how many times it repeats.
The remaining columns you can ignore, the refer to the numers of numbers that have appeared once, twice, etc. and to the profit lossess of the G.U.T. bets in each possition.
Jeromin
Quote from: Optimist on Oct 04, 04:29 PM 2011
Why do u think that is better when 19 are in a row. You can catch repeats. I would say is much better when You have 19 unique numbers in last 25 spins. In this case you have passed 6 repeats.
19 unique numbers in a row is very rare. Probably would not make for a practical system.
Jeromin
Optimist,
Actually, you are correct. 19 in 25 spins should be in our favor, no? I would really appreciate you testing this further with a bot. I was also thinking about doing something with the Dozens or even Double Streets using this method. Guilty Gear *D/C* and Guilty Gear *DS*. I like it!
As this is basically a Virtual EC betting strategy, a basic martingale should suffice. 18-36-72-144-288. Now, personally, I'm willing to go a few steps higher than that. Especially if it's with .01 or .10 cent units. But I need further testing to see just how far it may go. Just like how the 12 Million spins data gave me some huge insight...
birdhands,
Yes, I've thought of that, but you know, since that 12 Million spin table or RX don't have that section, that's all I have to go by at the moment. It's not even possible for any true EC (Red/Black etc) to have 23 UNIQUE numbers in a row.
23 unique numbers in a row has and will happen... Monte Carlo saw 43 e/c's on the trot ( I think) real wheel too, martingale NEVER wins, you can win for months and lose it all on one bad streak..
This is blowing my mind. Would you bet red because you found 19 reds in the last 30 spins?
birdhands,
No, not at all. However, If i saw 30 in a row? Sure I would bet on black, if only for 5 or 6 steps.
Quote from: Jeromin on Oct 04, 04:36 PM 2011
19 unique numbers in a row is very rare. Probably would not make for a practical system.
Jeromin
Perhaps 11/12/ or 13 EC's in a row would suffice?..............
Quote from: iancloud2001 on Oct 04, 05:08 PM 2011
birdhands,
No, not at all. However, If i saw 30 in a row? Sure I would bet on black, if only for 5 or 6 steps.
Now I'm really confused. Now you are talking about 30 in a row. I thought they didn't have to be in a row. That's what this whole discussion is about. This is my second huge communication breakdown today. Maybe it's me.
If I saw 30 reds in a row, I would bet on black. If I saw 20 reds in a row I would bet on black. If I saw 20 reds out of 30 spins I would not bet on anything. And if I saw 20 unique numbers out of 30 spins I would not bet on anything.
The more I think about this the more confused I get. Up until now I thought I was the voice of reason, but now I think it's all a little more complex than I originally thought.
So we know that in 12 million spins the longest run for an EC was 23.
We all agree that an EC is equivalent to any 18 numbers.
That run of 23 reds in the data could have only had 14 unique numbers and 9 repeats (for example).
Oh my, I get it now: so if there are 18 unique numbers out of 30 then the other 12 are repeats of the 18, so it's equivalent to an EC running 30 in a row.
Well now, I feel like an a**. You were right all along. My humblest apologies. How embarrassing.
birdhands,
Precisely! You are correct. Don't apologize! Your own curiosity allowed you to clear things up for anyone else that might not have understood this discussion. You explained some of my theory better than I could.
Now that we have things cleared up, I'd like to know just how long a grouping of 18 numbers can actually sleep. I know that a true EC can sleep for up to 29 spins in 12 million spins... how about a virtual EC? Honestly, I'm starting to think that we'll need 50 million spins to get a better picture. I should get started on that with RX soon... It could give us insight on a lot of things...
amk,
The problem with waiting for only 13 virtual ECs is that you can't know what to bet against. You need 19 unique numbers (on a single zero wheel) to get the opposing 18 numbers you're supposed to bet on.
This is a very exciting idea. I'll be testing it whenever I can.
Yes, we may need 50 million. So far this is easy to test. In 50 sessions I've already had 34 numbers with 19 uniques. Incredible. I had an idea like this last year involving dozens. I calculated how many groups of 12 it was possible to split 36 numbers into- the answer blew my mind- it was 500 million+ groups!
Yeah I know... There are so many combinations. As of now, I have the RX program running trying to get 50 million spins. It should be finished by tomorrow. I'll post the .rmd file for anyone interested. Have a good night everyone, and please do try this, or at least something similar to this. I feel like the only real way to beat roulette is to truly know what random is capable of...
Martigale ha ,18 unique numbers, inside numbers at bm casinos where i play max bet on1# 25$ you will get 5 bets in then you have reached the max ,sure you coul use the split bets but whats the max on that.
Hi,
I have coded and tested it on my RSS bot. With marty progression u will be killed. I have attached one of the spins files I have tested (this is playtech RNG file from real money session). I have seen 19 unique numbers in last 43 spins :o (its around spin 9190).
maybe another MM could help? Guetting?
I have tried short marty like 1,2,4 have tried various options. Sometimes I was in + after 10K spins - sometimes in -
Anyway - it is not playable manually (I think). The best results I had when marty is short and u bet trigger is 19 unique numbers in last 32-34 spins.
Regards
DL
dear iancloud
martingale with 18 unique numbers! your days are numbered! :question:
thanks
catalyst
N.B. your system is as old as our civilazation itself. ask forum members for a playable progression. ;D :twisted:
Quote from: Optimist on Oct 05, 05:05 AM 2011
Hi,
I have coded and tested it on my RSS bot. With marty progression u will be killed. I have attached one of the spins files I have tested (this is playtech RNG file from real money session). I have seen 19 unique numbers in last 43 spins :o (its around spin 9190).
maybe another MM could help? Guetting?
I have tried short marty like 1,2,4 have tried various options. Sometimes I was in + after 10K spins - sometimes in -
Anyway - it is not playable manually (I think). The best results I had when marty is short and u bet trigger is 19 unique numbers in last 32-34 spins.
Regards
DL
What about a fibo starting at 19 unique numbers in 36 spins? Or Hermes' leveller prog.: 1,2,4,4,4,4,4...until profit. In either case, I think the key is to set the trigger late enough.
Each spin of the wheel, when covering 18 numbers, has a 48.64% of hitting.
I don't care how many times in a row. Yes, you would think it is extremely rare for an even chance to hit 30 times in a row, but by your own discovery you see it happens all the time. Any string of 19 unique numbers just proved to you that 30 times in a row happens quite frequently. This type of thinking is based on gambler's fallacy that something is "due".
The previous 19 numbers have a better shot to show than the "sleeping" 18 numbers. You need to think the other way. Take advantage of streaks and repeats. You know there will be some of those.
I guess what I am trying to say is that on every spin there is an even chance bet that is hitting anywhere from 1 time in a row all the way up to 60 or more. (I am just guessing)
Why choose against an even chance selection that appeared 34 times in a row? It seems to me that it should be taken advantage of, not go against.
Ian, what were the results of your 50 million test?
birdhands,
Hi, I still have Roulette Xtreme running. It's at 30 Million spins at the moment, and still rising. Should be finished by the end of the day. And guess what?? I'm getting the EXACT same results as the 12 Million spin sample.
No ECs repeating for more than 23 spins.
No Dozens repeating for more than 15 spins.
No Single Numbers repeating for more than 5 spins.
Plus, I know for a fact that I have continuous spin data, unlike the 12 Million sample where I'm not really sure...
Honestly guys, I'm going to save the session at 50 Million spins, then I will continue letting it run for 500 MILLION spins! I need to see what roulette RNG is truly capable of...
Yes!
I've been testing a lot and I've seen it go to 43 spins myself.
What exactly have you seen go to 43 spins?
The set of 19 unique numbers has been 43 spins long. Not only that, but I saw it go from 32 to 40 without a new number one time. Optimist found the same thing (43). Amazing how on RX the actual ECs are still so short. What's the longest interval (you know, including the 0; the 12 million data set had a 29)?
I see the max sleeper being 28 intervals (on 1-18 Low), and only happened once in 30 Million spins. Which is undoubtedly due to a few zeros happening. Also, I'm starting to think that we should be looking at dozens or something. We can easily get 12 unique spins in a ROW, then bet against it for 4 steps (the dozens only repeat for 15 spins max).
Keep in mind that the 6 ECs you're testing only go for 29 spins, while the other 2 or 3 hundred million that we're testing manually have already gone to 43. It will be the same for the dozens: if the 3 standard ones go to 15, then the other 500,000,000 will go to 22 or higher.
You say there have been 43 sleepers? Were there 19 unique numbers in a row, and then they kept repeating for an additional 24 spins? I think therein lies our problem. We may need to be strict about having a certain amount of uniques in a row. However, finding 19 in a row is problematic, which is why I suggested betting against 12 unique numbers. That seems more feasible. What say you?
I don't see why they have to be in a row at all. I like your idea, though; why not double streets or even streets? It should be much simpler to track. I'll start testing.
Yeah, I've been looking at Streets and especially Double Streets. Problem with those is that you'll need a really high bank roll. But if you have it, I don't see why it wouldn't hurt, especially if it didn't lose.
It basically all comes down to repeats. In order for there to be 43 spins with only 19 unique numbers we need 24 repeats, which is highly unusual. The usual distribution would be 29 uniques and 14 repeats.
So now I just put the wheel on autospin and watch the marquis like a hawk. When I see a lot of repeats close together I stop the wheel and count. So for instance I just saw:
4
4
28
33
2
27
33
35
4
that's a double street hitting 9 times in a row, a good time to bet on the other 30 numbers.
You are correct. In my now 40 Million spin sample a double street has repeated for 12 spins in a row. But it only happened once and on Line [7-12]. It's usually 9 MAX. What were your results after that spin sample you just posted?
Wow I haven't seen more than 10 so far. That example would have been a win.
edit: ok, I just saw an 11.
OK, so i'm thinking that we will see custom patterns getting into the higher end of the results since there are literally 2.3 Million combinations of 6 numbers within a 37 number set. So there will always be the chance of the patterns going up to 12, maybe 13 in a row (with Double Streets).