I find this by a person who made a site about systems from old VIP ...
Street system by GiantChimpanzees'
The final version that I use is as follows -
last 12 spins for reference.
when 4 streets are no-shows, begin betting.
3 units per street on 4 streets (this is the same as 1 unit per number)
3 spins flat bet, win on the 1st or 2nd makes profit - win on the 3rd
breaks even (total spins to remember now is 15)
No win yet, increase the street bets by 3 units per spin
(this is the same as adding 1 unit per number) until a win / reset.
Why it works ?
Well, playing 4 streets is the same as playing 12 numbers.
This is the same as playing a dozen.
Qualification (12 spins) means that this "dozen" has failed to show
for 12 spins.
(Check to see how many times a dozen or column goes 12 spins
without a show....)
The 3 played spins flat betting bring us up to 15 spins.
Same as a dozen failing to show for 15 spins (not "rare" but not common)
So we have a good chance of at least breaking even with a win on the
15th spin (or profit on the 13th or 14th)
The progression is steep and a win after a lot of losing spins leaves us down a bit - seems to hold it's own though fine on a real table.
I'd suggest 100 unit profit (takes about 100 total spins) and give it a break.
Hope it helps, it's a nice slow money maker most of the time.
Modification...
I was looking some old posts searching for ideas and was intrigued by the one called 'another way to play turbo street system' posted on the 13 September 2004 by GiantChimpanzees.
I did some minor tweaks to suit my style and bankroll and here it is:
- track 12 spins until you get a cycle with exactly 4 sleeper streets (if it's more or less continue tracking spins on a rolling basis until last 12 spins are such that you have 4 sleeper streets)
- bet on each individual numbers from those streets as they wake up
- bet according to the following mild progression:
- start at 1 unit per number
- if balance hits -15, bet 2 units per number
- if balance hits -55, bet 3 units per number
- Stop and reset when
- balance is positive; or
- loss hits -150 units
I have been playing this method at my local casino for some time with the following results:
- 57 sessions played, 56 won and 1 lost
- Current balance: +£1,508 playing with £1 units
- Average win per session: 26.4 units
All I can say is thank you to the people who devised this method.
Not a bad idea
On that 1 loss how many spins did it take to eventually hit?
Can you give us your number of wins on step 1, step 2, etc...?
Quote from: soggett on Jun 19, 07:10 AM 2012
Not a bad idea
On that 1 loss how many spins did it take to eventually hit?
Can you give us your number of wins on step 1, step 2, etc...?
Well the twist sounds to be pretty good.
Can not answer any question as i only post/copy what i find at the site.
27 =9.
25 =9.
34 =12.
4 =2.
18 =6.
29 =10.
26 =9.
8 =3.
4 =2. Missing. 1,4,5,7,8.
4 =2. Missing. 1,4,5,7,8.
32 =11. Missing. 1,4,5,7,8.
21 = 7. Missing 1,4,5,8. Qualifies.
15 play 15.
9 -1.
18 -2.
23 play 23. -3.
5 -5.
22 play 22. -7.
32 -10.
9 -13.
9 -16.
29 -22.
9 -28.
23 win. +38.
Short test RNG 6 sessions using wheel layout ...
+24
+40
-32
+35
+37
+32
It is not so rare that you end up at stage 3 - but most of the time the method hits at stage 1 and 2.
The three numbers before the 27 were 28,31,31.
I like this idea. Too many systems and not enough time (or money) to try them all. ;D
What's funny is that you always win when testing new systems. I am starting to think that the JL theory of 'hit and run' may have some merit to it!! (only kidding)
9 =3.
24 =8.
34 =12.
3 =1.
16 =6.
11 =4.
19 =7.
19 =7.
19 =7.
28 =10.
36 =12.
20 =7. Missing 2,5,9,11. Qualifies.
29 =10.
24 =8.
26 =9. Play 26.
8 =3. -1.
5 =2. Play 5. -2.
15 =5. Play 15. -4.
34 =12. -7.
18 =6. -10.
30 =10. -13.
25 =9. -16. Play 25.
4 =2. Play 4. -24.
29 =10. -34.
15 =5. +28.
7
15
4
Well it is like a sloppy twist of RWD witch only aim for one number or should i say same overall raw principal.
I like the idea using number by hand and make some real observation.
Real sectors hitting - wheel layout
0 x
1
2 x
3 x
4 x
5 x
6
7
8 x
9
10 x
11 x
Numbers hitting
2
23
30
28
27
6
23
13
13
35
0
12
31
Slepping sectors/numbers
19 4 21
10 5 24
16 33 1
9 22 18
Distribution of hits
26
15
25
4
15
20
12
36
25
33
13
17
7
14
14
26
14
23
8
36
28
36
19
7
11
24
25
4 <<< HIT
2
32
9.
2
32
24 <<< HIT
31
32
12
5
3
11
33 <<< HIT
8
29
32
15
4 <<< HIT
6
26
28
24 <<< HIT
10
7
35
20
10 <<< HIT
11
18
23
28
0
26
32
20
32
30
12
29
11
ego
This is very much the same as wardblack's rolling dozen. You still have a rolling dozen, just done a different way. In black's idea, you identified sleepers. I opened it again under "wardblacks rolling dozen repreised". Something like that.
Maybe this is better.
Drunk chimps can do wonders some times.
Sam
35 =12.
28 =10.
11 =4.
1 =1.
13 =5.
13 =5.
10 =4.
35 =12.
9 =3.
28 =10.
22 =8.
32 =11. Missing 2,6,7,9. Qualifies.
6 =2. Play 6.
21 =7. Play 21. -1.
18 =6. Play 18. -3.
10 =4. -6.
5 =2. Play 5. -9.
5 Win. +23.
7 =3.
21 =7.
29 =10.
18 =6.
3 =1.
9 =3.
16 =6.
11 =4.
2 =1.
3 =1.
24 =8.
29 =10. Missing. 2,5,9,11,12.
1 =1.
23 =8. Missing. 2,5,7,9,11,12.
36 =12. Missing. 2,5,7,9,11.
23 =8.
11 =4.
20 =7. Missing. 2,3,5,9,11.
36 =12. Missing 2,3,5,6,9,11.
9 =3. Missing. 2,5,6,9,11.
29 =10.
26 =9. Missing. 2,5,6,11. Qualifies in 21 spins.
8 =3.
8 =3.
13 =5. Play 13.
4 =2. -1.
17 =6. Play 17. -3.
32 =11. Play 32. -5.
25 =9. -8.
26 =9. -11.
13 =5. +22.
0
32
32
23
8
26
What I like looking at the above examples is that they were winners just a few spins further down as well. The 32 appeared in the example above just 2 spins later.
Number 15 and number 4 both appeared several spins later in my second example.
23 was a winner on the first example and it came in again on the very next spin.
I am out of coffee and the casino do a lovely cappuchino. It would be rude not to!! :D
MODIFICATION MM
Option 1.
Lets assume you play air ball minimum bet size for straight up number at 1 Euro.
Then when you lose 150 you move to regular table and play minimum 2 Euro.
When back to regular balance move back to air ball minimum.
Option 2.
Play at regular table with minimum bet size for straight up number at 2 Euro.
When balance reach 150 you move down playing air ball minimum at 1 Euro.
Playing with winnings only.
If a loss at first stage you move up to table with 5 Euro minimum.
Option 3.
Develop you own staking plan with stages similar towards does above.
Has to be pretty good as long time solution using a good MM with the method above.
Quote from: ego on Jun 19, 07:04 AM 2012
I find this by a person who made a site about systems from old VIP ...
I think this is the site?
link:://starthere.mysteria.cz/ (link:://starthere.mysteria.cz/)
Wow, that's a blast from the past. :)
Thank you for bringing this back to life ego.
There were a few half decent methods kicking around at the time.
Another poster called 'zio-nini' (or something similar) also posted a street method which was pretty popular at the time.
The thing is a lot of us have a lot more knowledge and experience now. These methods may be able to be tweaked to make them more consistently profitable. You just never know.
Nice modification ego
link:://:.gamblersglen.com/cgi-bin/teemz/teemz.cgi?board=_master&action=opentopic&topic=2591&forum=Roulette_Archive (link:://:.gamblersglen.com/cgi-bin/teemz/teemz.cgi?board=_master&action=opentopic&topic=2591&forum=Roulette_Archive)
LOL look at The Old Roulette Contest
This method comes secound place hehehe
link:://starthere.mysteria.cz/VIPsystems/winalert_January18_2005.htm (link:://starthere.mysteria.cz/VIPsystems/winalert_January18_2005.htm)
Hi,
If Ego mentions a method to try then I listen.
Just quickly tested for 5 sessions and my results were
+20
+31
+28
+2
+33
Nice and simple and the last one even won with just one number out.
Thanks
My first session tested
Thanks ego
Cheers
Drazen
Did some more testing and came against this game.
13 =5.
34 =12.
19 =7.
19 =7.
15 =5.
34 =12.
7 =3.
1 =1.
26 =9.
12 =4.
11 =4.
11 =4. Missing 2,6,8,10,11.
29 =10. Missing 2,6,8,11.
3 =1.
35 =12.
1 =1.
1 =1.
36 =12.
34 =12.
27 =9.
26 =9.
10 =4.
17 =6. Play 17.
19 =7. -1.
28 =10. -2.
21 =7. -3.
5 =2. Play 5. -4.
9 =3. -6.
4 =2. Play 4. -8.
36 =12. -11.
18 =6. Play 18. -14.
21 =7. -18.
10 =4. -26.
35 =12. -34.
8 =3. -42.
15 =5. -50.
13 =5. -58.
30 =10. -70.
19 =7. -82.
20 =7. -94.
7 =3. -106.
36 =12. -118.
6 =2. Play 6. -130.
0 =0. -145.
35 =12. -160.
23 =8.
13 =5.
15 =5.
32 =11.
0 =0.
26 =9.
32 =11.
5 =2.
8 =3.
18 =6.
35 =12.
5 =2.
3 =1. Missing. 4,7,10.
10 =4. Missing 7,8,10.
29 =10. Missing 7,8.
10 =4. Missing 5,7,8.
24 =8. Missing 5,7.
8 =3. Missing 5,7,9.
6 =2. Missing 5,7,9,11.
22 =8.
20 =7. Play 20.
3 =1. -1.
23 =8. -2.
8 =3. -3.
26 =9. Play 26. -4.
18 =6. -6.
21 =7. Play 21. -8.
33 =11. Play 33. -11.
23 =8. -15.
4 =2. -23.
28 =10. -31.
27 =9. Play 27. -39.
11 =4. -49.
14 =5. -59.
29 =10. -74.
25 =9. Play 25. -89.
9 =3. -107.
1 =1. -125.
34 =12. -143.
17 =6. -161.
26 =9. Win. -71.
5
6
21
7
2
25
5
7
23
1
So not to put a dampener on things, but it did go to -161 on the very next game as well before hitting a win. A drawdown of 320 in 2 games back to back would be rare I suppose but I found them. I don't think waiting for a losing game before playing would be very productive either. Not really sure what to make of it now.
There has been some interesting methods posted over the last week from ego, vile and M_O_P. My personal opinion is that one of the reasons they can fail is because of the amount of spins involved in the games. You are allowing the variance to work against the method.
Experience and testing has shown me that you need to play quick games that last no more than a few spins. This then tends to keep variance at bay. It is possible to build into these mini-games characteristics that have a strong tendency to repeat themself over and over again. This then allows things not to get out of control like I have seen in the methods posted on here recently.
"""Experience and testing has shown me that you need to play quick games that last no more than a few spins. This then tends to keep variance at bay. It is possible to build into these mini-games characteristics that have a strong tendency to repeat themself over and over again. This then allows things not to get out of control like I have seen in the methods posted on here recently."""
In other words HIT and RUN.(don t be shame to write it)
As all hit and run tests and playing continiusly tests showed there is NO def between them.
If a system can lose it will lose either hit and run either by playing continiusly.The amount of the spins are adding up no matter the the way u will chose to play.
Find and read the topic in GG about it(huge test that being made by playing hit and run and continiusly) and once and for all get out of this fallacy.
Quote from: Master_of_pockets on Jun 19, 11:14 AM 2012
In other words HIT and RUN.(don't be shame to write it)
I never said HIT and RUN. You did!!
There is no sense in playing hit and run. Where are you running to and when is it safe to come back? ;D
I can play as many 'short' games in a day as I can handle but they are not hit and run. The characteristics you can build into short games allow the variance to stay low and things then have a habit of not getting out of hand as quickly. Think about it!!
Quote from: soggett on Jun 19, 07:10 AM 2012
On that 1 loss how many spins did it take to eventually hit?
Quote
I just needed 14 steps, and it can go more that is sure
Dozen can sleep over 30 spins
Cheers
"""The characteristics you can build into short games allow the variance to stay low"""
No it doesn t.....If the system can t win in long games then it can t win in short games either....because the short losing games will be added and u will still have the same....a long losing game!.... you said hit and run but u didn t realise it.
I know you for years and YES you have a solid knowledge in the game and I respect you. When u will realise what I just said you will be even superior.
So the summary of what i just said is :
'short' games will end up losing if the system can t recoup fast in a long situation game.
.
Quote from: flukey luke on Jun 19, 11:21 AM 2012
I never said HIT and RUN. You did!!
There is no sense in playing hit and run. Where are you running to and when is it safe to come back? ;D
I can play as many 'short' games in a day as I can handle but they are not hit and run. The characteristics you can build into short games allow the variance to stay low and things then have a habit of not getting out of hand as quickly. Think about it!!
Well said FL,--I run fo coffe or toilet after some plus,then come back...and so about 8-12
times throughout night.
I must say I like this idea and am playing around with a variation of it as we speak. I'll be sure to post if it shows any promise.
Thanks to the original poster (ego i think)
MM