Okay Guys, this is a fun way to play and has all the earmarks of a winning system. And guess what, there's no need to change how you think regarding roulette.
Divide the table into 6 corner bets and the 3rd column.
The corner bets are:
1-2-4-5
7-8-10-11
13-14-16-17
19-20-22-23
25-26-28-29
31-32-34-35
Begin by tracking until you have 2 corners showing. May be as little as 2 spins before you can bet.
Bet 1 unit each on the last 2 different corners and 2 units on the 3rd column.
If you hit a corner, you win +5 units.
If you hit the 3rd dozen, you win +2 units.
Always bet the last 2 different corners that aren't in the 3rd column.
Of course there are 17 numbers counting the zero that cause you to lose.
On a loss, add 1 unit to each of the corners. And, always bet 1 more unit on the 3rd column than on a corner to insure a win if it hits.
If you hit a corner on bets 1-1 & 2 thru 4-4 & 5 you will be in profit, so start over at 1-1 &2.
If you hit a corner betting more than 4-4&5, go back 3 levels and continue playing. If you have hit the 3rd column a number of times, you can adjust how many levels you go back. If you hit it enough, you might be able to just start over at 1-1-&2.
Variations: If you like you can pick the 6 corners in the 2nd & 3rd columns and bet 2 of them in conjunction with the 1st column.
You can also bet 3 corners instead of "2 and the column" for more wins but less won on each win.
You can use a less aggressive progression like betting each level 2 times before going on to the next level.
You can also bet the same amount of units on the 3rd column as the corners and use it as a break even bet.
Test it. It's easy to play and can generate some quick profits.
Good Luck,
George
Some additional thoughts:
Instead of betting for hot corners, you could bet for sleepers.
How you pick the corners or how many you bet on or whatever progression you like is entirely your choice. The best is yet to be determined.
This will continue to win steadily until the corners you have selected miss for an extended sequence. That's the way with all roulette systems. The hope is that the 3rd column will hit often enough between corner hits to keep us from going too deep into the hole.
I have played a few sessions with good results. Detailing a session is time consuming, but I will show one just so you can see exactly how it's played and what you're missing if you don't give a go.
Cheers,
G
Here is a short session.
I'll be betting for a repeat of one of the last 2 corners and also playing the 3rd column.
Corners are identified by the number in the upper right hand corner. Ie. 1= 1,2,4,5; 7= 7,8,10,11; 13= 13,14,16,17 etc...
#spun 1 cor/bet 2 cor/bet col/bet Total
R27
B28
0
B10
B33 7 @ 1 unit l 25 @ 1 unit l 2 unit w +2 Re-set
R36 7 @ 1 unit l 25 @ 1 unit l 2 u nit w +4 Re-set
R34 7 @ 1 unit l 25 @ 1 unit l 2 unit l 0
R1 7 @ 2 unit l 31 @ 2 unit l 3 u nit l -7
B8 31 @ 3 unit l 1 @ 3 unit l 4 unit l -17
R21 1 @ 4 unit l 7 @ 4 unit l 5 unit w -15
B2 1 @ 4 unit W 7 @ 4 unit l 5 unit l +8 Re-set
R18 1 @ 1 unit l 7 @ 1 unit l 2 u nit w +10 Re-set
R3 1 @ 1 unit l 7 @ 1 unit l 2 u nit w +12 Re-set
R3 1 @ 1 unit l 7 @ 1 unit l 2 unit w +14 Re-set
R32 1 @ 1 unit l 7 @ 1 unit l 2 unit l +10
R21 31 @ 2 unit l 1 @ 2 unit l 2 unit W +12
B2 31 @ 2 unit l 1 @ 2 unit w 2 unit l +23 Re-set
Please not that the l & w after unit indicates whether we won or lost that part of the bet.
On the 4th spin I finally have 2 different corners, (7)8,9,10 and (25)26,28,29.
I bet 1 unit on the 7 & 25 corners and 2 units on the 3rd col (hereafter designated as col)
B33 Hits in our col for a win of 4 units minus the 2 units bet on corners nets us +2 units.
Since this is a new high, we re-set back to 1-1&2.
R36 hits in our col for another net win of +2 units.
No new corners have spun, so we are still betting 7 & 25.
R34 is a total miss, so we lose -4 units.
Increase our bets to 2 units on each corner and 3 on our col.
R1 is a total miss, so we lose -7 units. Increase bets by 1 unit.
B8 is a total miss, so we lose -10 units. Increase bets by 1 unit.
R21 is a hit in our col for a net win of +2. Leave bets at 4,4&5.
B2 hits our 1 corner bet at 4 units for +36 -13 units bet -15 =+8 a new high so re-set.
R18 hits our col, +2
R3 hits our col, +2
R3 hits our col, +2
R32 is a total miss -4, increase our bets by 1 unit on all three.
We're now betting on corners 1 & 31 plus our col.
R21 hits our col, +2. Not a new high so no re-set.
B2 hits our 1 corner for a net win of 18-7=+11 +12 = new high, re-set
etc...
Okay, this was a very good run, but no 'cooking the books' here, they are actual numbers from betvoyager single zero roulette.
As you can see, when the col is hitting regularly, it can really help add up the chips.
If you bet the same amount on the col as you do on the corners, there would be no win (break even only) when the col hits, but when the corners hit you would net more.
Enough for now,
G
P.S. Sorry, but my columns never line up quite right on these posts. With a little effort you can see what the chart should look like. LoL
Thanks for sharing your method dear GLC :thumbsup:
Me likes :)
I did a test on 100 past numbers from a live american wheel. However, I did play it a bit different (my fault, I didn't read all the instructions).
Net profit: 150 units
Highest bet: 10 units
Drawdown: 87 units
Longest losing streak: 9 spins
I always used the Column that hit last
I bet on last 2 different corners (not belonging to a same dozen)
I bet 1u. on the Col, and 1u. on each ot the two corners
I used this progression:1-1-1-2-2-3-4-6-8-10 (it's a bit too agressive, I feel)
See attachment
Carsh,
Thanks for testing and posting results.
I chose the 3rd column to produce a win anytime there was a hit and because the corners were from the 1st and 2nd columns.
In the long run I don't think it matters.
From my perspective, your progression is just fine. It may be better than the one I suggested. Probably depends on playing style.
Nine losses in a row probably isn't that unusual, although, to hit one on your first test is a bit unlucky. The best thing about it is that it hi-lights what to expect.
It did recover with a nice win for a relatively short session.
Thanks again,
George
George, the reason I feel the progression is a bit agressive is because the systems seems to yield very good results. Well, in this case I believe the risks can be minimized by adjusting the progression. I'd be happy with a system that can yield in average 30 units (and sometimes less) per 100 spins. I'll be testing more and let you know.
And yes, after reading your rules, I realized the reason you chose the 3rd column. But I guess it can be a good thing sometimes to not always pay attention to the rules. LoL
Thanks for posting your system. :)
Quote from: Carsch on Sep 26, 07:11 PM 2010
George, the reason I feel the progression is a bit aggressive is because the systems seems to yield very good results. Well, in this case I believe the risks can be minimized by adjusting the progression. I'd be happy with a system that can yield in average 30 units (and sometimes less) per 100 spins. I'll be testing more and let you know.
And yes, after reading your rules, I realized the reason you chose the 3rd column. But I guess it can be a good thing sometimes to not always pay attention to the rules. LoL
Thanks for posting your system. :)
I agree that the progression can be tweaked to have less volatility. I'm just not sure that tweaking a progression always makes that much difference.
Why, is that if you win on a sequence of spins with a moderate betting system, you'll probably win with an aggressive one as well. You'll just go deeper in the hole but win more units in the end which will compensate for the larger bankroll needed. A less aggressive system will keep you from going so deep in the hole, but in the end will usually win fewer units, but with a smaller bankroll.
Now I could be off base to lump all bet systems together because the new bet progression suggested by Katilla and tweaked by Atlantis and Warrior is something a bit different.
In the end, it will probably follow these same tendencies. We'll see.
Thanks for your interest in this system. I hope it proves profitable for you.
I'm going to continue testing it along with my experiment with Random vs Random.
G
Quote from: GLC on Sep 26, 08:45 PM 2010
Why, is that if you win on a sequence of spins with a moderate betting system, you'll probably win with an aggressive one as well. You'll just go deeper in the hole but win more units in the end which will compensate for the larger bankroll needed. A less aggressive system will keep you from going so deep in the hole, but in the end will usually win fewer units, but with a smaller bankroll.
You could be right. Hmmm, maybe a stop-loss or something could help. Well, i'll see what i'll come up with.
Anyway, I just tested another 100 spins from the same files. This time the profit is much lower because I went deep in the hole for a while, but still I was able to recoup real quick.
Net profit: + 84
Highest bet: 14 units
Drawdown: -114
Longest losing streak: 10 spins
See attachment
Carsch,
Just did another short test.
+28 units in 18 spins.
Largest bet was 5-5 &6.
Largest drawdown -29.
Quick hit and run for this one.
I think that betting on other than the 3rd column could occasionally give you a very good win if you hit a column and corner together. It may not be such a bad idea, although, I do like the fact that when you hit the column it results in a free spin and a couple of units to boot.
I have hit as many as 4 3rd columns in a row. Those would have been losses but as it turned out because of the 8 units won, I was able to reset back to 1-1 &2.
G
The idea seems to be real unique and has some merits but I think a stop loss point should be added to make it a complete system. Further, playing current numbers are always better than playing sleepers because sleepers can sleep for any long. I will test this method in live spins and with some genuine RNGs and report back. By the way, George, why not we try it on no zero roulette because zero cuts the games dramatically.
The inevitable happened. I did more tests and ran into a 15-spin losing streak, and right after that I ran into a 12-spin losing streak. That would be too much.
However, I tried something else. I stopped my bets at every loss and waited till there was a virtual win and then continued on the next spin till I hit another loss. For a total of 281 spins, I came out ahead +115 units. Highest bet was 3 units.
Slow, but that's not bad at all. That's an average of 40 units per 100 spins. I'm happy with that.
I'll do more tests this way.
Quote from: albalaha on Sep 27, 12:34 AM 2010
Further, playing current numbers are always better than playing sleepers because sleepers can sleep for any long.
I thought of that when playing the corners (same with columns), and I agree, of course.
That is why I suggest that keep a stop loss at 8 spins maximum because losses will come eventually in every system. Since we are leaving 4 corners unbet, I think 8 failed attempts are more than sufficient to stop the game that moment. I think, we can even raise the numbers of corners to three to make it better. What do you feel George and Carcth?
Quote from: albalaha on Sep 27, 12:53 AM 2010
I think, we can even raise the numbers of corners to three to make it better. What do you feel George and Carcth?
That's something to think about. Let's see what George thinks.
This is definitely a work-in-progress.
All your suggestions make sense to me.
A stop loss is a must in any roulette strategy. Some people like a high stop loss and some like a lower stop loss. I think it has to fit your pocketbook.
I too like playing current numbers.
I'm not sure it's a good idea to move the column bet around since it's kind of an insurance bet covering the 3rd column so we can concentrate on fewer corners to bet.
No zero roulette is preferable for any roulette game. Two problems: 1. For those of us who live in the US, on-line gambling is still illegal unless you live in a couple of places. 2. Non-zero roulette usually has a much higher minimum bet since the house is reducing their chance of winning. But, if it's available to you and you can afford it, by all means play non-zero.
40 units per hundred is a very respectable win in my opinion. The problem I see is that there are always going to be losing sessions. How big a loss and how often is what will bring the 40 units per 100 spins down quite a bit.
I have a tendency to like to have larger stop loss numbers because we reach our stop loss less often. The problem is that when you are playing for long periods under your stop loss, you feel like you're doing great, but 1 or 2 times hitting your stop loss kind of takes the wind out of your sails.
I suppose that the best way to design a system is to set it up with smaller bets and a lower stop loss. In this way you have a better feel for how profitable the system is on a steady basis. The highs and lows will be smaller and more frequent.
At the end of the day, we will probably end up with the same numbers of units won with either system.
I think the more corners we bet, the less fluctuations we'll see, but that is compensated by the fact that each win is less.
It mirrors the higher stop loss concept in that you will have shorter intervals between hits, but when you do hit you will receive a smaller payoff.
As we all know, in the end it's the same odds.
Thanks for all the input. Anything published on this forum belongs to all of us, so we're in this together.
Cheers,
George
Dear George,
what is your take on progression and if we take 3 quarter bets instead of two?
Quote from: albalaha on Sep 27, 02:05 PM 2010
Dear George,
what is your take on progression and if we take 3 quarter bets instead of two?
The progression I have proposed is relatively aggressive. I tend to like to bet aggressively. I have even considered increasing our bets proportionately. That means, 1-1&2; 2-2&4; 3-3&6; 4-4&8; etc...
I think that betting $1 units, with a $1000 bank, this system could stay in the positive for a lot of sessions.
As with any system, if you start with losses, you can also go into the hole quite a bit. A little luck is necessary in any gambling.
As for betting 3 corners instead of 2 corners, I don't think it will make a lot of difference long-term. It will mean more hits of smaller wins. Fewer losses of larger loss. Kind of balances itself out in my opinion.
I have even thought of going to 4 corners for longer streaks of wins, but then even bigger units lost on a loss.
Maybe using Victor's LW's would give us a sense of when to bet. Such as begin betting after any W and stop after a L. Slows things down a bit, but is usually a lot safer.
What do you guys think?
George
Ok, i'm giving up on this one. I did another test betting only after a win, and I ran into another long losing streak (15 consecutive losses). I didn't try the method exactly as described by George..................but.............well.
As for 3 corners, I started testing last night..............hmmmmm, I don't know. I could continue the test some other time..............if I don't get side tracked with other ideas. ;)
Quote from: Carsch on Sep 27, 10:42 PM 2010
Ok, i'm giving up on this one. I did another test betting only after a win, and I ran into another long losing streak (15 consecutive losses). I didn't try the method exactly as described by George..................but.............well.
As for 3 corners, I started testing last night..............hmmmmm, I don't know. I could continue the test some other time..............if I don't get side tracked with other ideas. ;)
:-\
Carsch,
I understand completely. This was just an idea I had. I tested it a few times with very good results so I thought I would post it and see if it had any legs. Had I tested it and had the bad luck you've had, I would have never given it a second thought. That's the way roulette systems work.
I fully expect you to get side-tracked with other ideas. There are plenty of them out there right now.
I, myself, am getting side-tracked with other ideas.
Good Luck to ya,
George
Dear George and Carsch,
I think this system is very sound one but need tweaks. Carsch, never get blind with any system or method. If you keep betting endlessly, you are bound to lose whatever you earned so far. I suggest these tweaks:
1.shifting from 3rd column and 1st column in every bet
2. Leave only those corners whose all four numbers did not hit for long, like numbers from 2nd dozen is not appearing, then 2 corners left could be from there. Pick another to leave seeing its non-appearance. Leaving 3 corner bets will give best results because 12 numbers can become sleeper for any point of time.
3.Try this method on Betvoyager no zero roulette because RNG generates numbers and has nothing to do with sectors etc., hence any method of betting on table works better with RNG while betting upon the layout of the wheel(call bets et) works better with Live casino. This is my personal experience.
4. Keep the 6 step non-progression game and see the profit or loss within that time strictly because any event which is due should averagely happen once within its break-even point and if it goes double above it, it is called "STREAK" and if it does not occur within two break-even points, it can well be termed as "SLEEPERS".Here, since we are leaving 12 numbers unbet, its break-even point is 3, i.e. it should come once in 3 times to be regular numbers, if it appears more, it is streak and if none amongst them appear for 6 times, the group is sleeper for that moment. We are using this bet selection considering those numbers as sleepers, but if they appear more frequently, we should not bet more than 6 times.
5. Place 3 chips on the column and 1 each on three corner bets, total initial bet =6 units;
if we win on any of our selected bets, we will be 3 units ahead. In case, none hits then a loss of 6 units. This way, I think, the game will go better than betting on two dozens or columns and can be done by flat betting also. Since, upon every bet we are leaving only sleepers, we should have better odds than playing two dozens or columns.
6. This method will work only when a particular group of numbers shows sleeper trends, hence the betting should be started after seeing sleeper trends.
AL,
That was quite a meaty post.
I will have to take some time to digest it thoroughly.
I think you made some excellent points.
Thanks for your encouragement.
George
George,
Can't we team up to create something great? I keep doing research work on various styles of progressions,bet selections, triggers, stop losses and loss recovery. I think you are in USA. Can you join me on skype? my skype name is :Sumiteshwar.
Quote from: GLC on Sep 27, 10:55 PM 2010
:-\
Carsch,
I understand completely. This was just an idea I had. I tested it a few times with very good results so I thought I would post it and see if it had any legs. Had I tested it and had the bad luck you've had, I would have never given it a second thought. That's the way roulette systems work.
Oh i understand, George. After all, all we're doing is sharing our ideas on this board whether or not they really work. And who knows, with your original idea another person could have improved it or come up with something else..............well, this is what it's all about.
I'm glad you shared, for that's the idea. :)
Al, i'll do some tests with your ideas. Give me sometime. I'll let you know.
Quote from: albalaha on Sep 28, 01:12 AM 2010
George,
Can't we team up to create something great? I keep doing research work on various styles of progressions,bet selections, triggers, stop losses and loss recovery. I think you are in USA. Can you join me on Skype? my Skype name is :Sumiteshwar.
Al,
Thanks for the interest.
I don't do Skype.
I don't join teams.
Everything I do is straight up and for everybody's benefit.
Like I said, as I get a chance, I will do some testing on your ideas to see if they make a real difference.
I like Atlantis' method of system development, where all who are interested can see all the suggestions, tweaks, etc... and can input their own ideas. If we come up with a winner, great. It's there and available for all to benefit from.
Not a bad way to do it if you ask me.
George
Ok. so far I have tried 3 testers but it seems they just want to know the magical formula. They started commenting upon my methods like a pro without even bothering to test it. If you can test my methods seriously, with applying your own tweaks and without sharing till it finalises, email me.
Al, mind if i ask; what is the difference in you testing your systems and someone else testing them? Well, unless the other person has a better way to do it. Personally, i do everything by hand.
Cheers
Ok, i did a quit test with (50 spins) the way you suggested, Al. Quite impressive.
I was only flatbetting and within 50 spins i was ahead 37 units. I was ahead 40 units by the 40th spin.
I wasn't sure whether you wanted to follow with a progression. I'll finish the test tomorrow and i'll post it here.
Quote from: GLC on Sep 28, 08:09 PM 2010
Al,
Thanks for the interest.
I don't do Skype.
I don't join teams.
Everything I do is straight up and for everybody's benefit.
Like I said, as I get a chance, I will do some testing on your ideas to see if they make a real difference.
I like Atlantis' method of system development, where all who are interested can see all the suggestions, tweaks, etc... and can input their own ideas. If we come up with a winner, great. It's there and available for all to benefit from.
Not a bad way to do it if you ask me.
George
Good on you George,
Same approach here.
Al, i realize i wasn't following your no.6 instruction (bet only after there has been a trend of sleepers).
However, i did use only the Corners belonging to the last two Dozens to hit. That should pretty much catch most active Corners.
I did a test to find out which method would maximize the hits on the Columns.
This one method worked best for me:
Bet same Column as last. If it hits, keep betting on 'Same as Last'.
If it loses, switch to 'B4 Last' (whether or not this column is the same as last column).
Switch back again if a loss.
The profits can go high real quick just as they can drop deep down (this seems more like a hit and run type of system).
I'm trying to work on a progression for this method of play (not that easy)
QuoteOk, I did a quit test with (50 spins) the way you suggested, Al. Quite impressive.
I was only flatbetting and within 50 spins I was ahead 37 units. I was ahead 40 units by the 40th spin.
I wasn't sure whether you wanted to follow with a progression. I'll finish the test tomorrow and i'll post it here
Great Carsch. I always think differently. Always betting on recent numbers keeps you ahead. Always avoid sleepers. George's original idea inspired me to work out these tweaks and this should work better. Follow my all 6 tweaks and get the best results
Quote from: albalaha on Sep 29, 12:48 AM 2010
Ok. so far I have tried 3 testers but it seems they just want to know the magical formula. They started commenting upon my methods like a pro without even bothering to test it. If you can test my methods seriously, with applying your own tweaks and without sharing till it finalises, email me.
I did test one of your systems and then I wanted to know if I did it right because I lost it all right away. After that I havn't got an answer, as usual. It seems that you ignore me sometimes..
Here's another tweak on betting this system.
Bet 1 unit on 1-2-4-5 corner and 1 unit on the 3rd column.
Bet 1 unit on 1-2-4-5 & 7-8-10-11 and 2 units on the 3rd column.
Bet 3 units on 1-2-4-5 & 7-8-10-11 & 13-14-16-17 and 8 units on the 3rd column.
Bet 4 units on above 3 corners plus 19-20-22-23 and 10 units on the 3rd column.
Anytime you are at even or new high, start over.
If you have a hit and are still behind, rebet that bet again.
Adjust consciously so you only come out ahead 1-3 units to keep bet sizes down.
Hit N Run strategy.
You can use any method you wish to determine which corners to bet on. And you can switch between 3rd and 1st columns if you think it helps. But remember the corners must not be a part of the column.
Cheers,
George
George
Update:
After F_LAT_INO presented his new system called Flatbet-GLC Nightmare Idea, it gave me an idea about how to make this system much more profitable.
We are going to bet 1 unit on the most recent 6 lines to show and we are going to bet 3 units on the middle column.
All this does is split our corner bet with the middle column, but it gives us a better way to win.
If we hit one of our lines but not the middle column, we win 3 units.
If we hit one of our lines and also the middle column, we win 12 units.
If we miss our 6 lines but hit the middle column, we break even.
If we miss our 6 lines and the middle column, we lose 9 units.
This is a little harder to play because we have to track the lines as they hit so we know which 6 we want to bet. But, this is very easy to do so don't let it hold you back.
Flatino recommends a flatbet on his system and I don't know why a flatbet wouldn't work here as well.
But, if a flet bet doesn't work, amild progression may make the difference between a loss and a small win.
I'm thinking of something like if you get behind your high point by18 or more units, go to 2 units on each line and 6 units on the middle column. If you get behind by 36 or more, go to 3 and 9. If you get behind 54 or more go to 4 and 12. I don't think I would go any higher than 4 and 12. Maybe stay at this level until you hit your stop loss or reach a new high level.
A lot like Hermes' leveller bet method.
But I wouldn't use a progression unless you have tried flatbetting and don't like it.
Good Luck,
George
Dear George,
Either I am missing something or the use of the word "line" is wrong. how can we bet 6 lines every time. Line bet means a set of 6 numbers like 1-6. Betting 6 lines means betting on all numbers excluding zero. Are you referring to street bet like 1-2-3 and not line bets? Please clarify.
Quote from: albalaha on Dec 25, 10:45 PM 2010
Dear George,
Either I am missing something or the use of the word "line" is wrong. how can we bet 6 lines every time. Line bet means a set of 6 numbers like 1-6. Betting 6 lines means betting on all numbers excluding zero. Are you referring to street bet like 1-2-3 and not line bets? Please clarify.
Sorry Al,
You're right. I sometimes get line, street, single street, double street messed up.
I mean a 3 number street or a single street. Maybe I should refer to our list of roulette terms and their meanings so we are always on the same page.
I have tested this way of betting and I don't think it's any better than some of the other multiple location bets. Such as 3 units on Red and 2 units on the middle column, etc...
It does well most of the time, but the bad streaks are just as frustrating as in any of the other systems.
G
Quote from: GLC on Dec 26, 11:15 AM 2010
Sorry Al,
You're right. I sometimes get line, street, single street, double street messed up.
I mean a 3 number street or a single street. Maybe I should refer to our list of roulette terms and their meanings so we are always on the same page.
I have tested this way of betting and I don't think it's any better than some of the other multiple location bets. Such as 3 units on Red and 2 units on the middle column, etc...
It does well most of the time, but the bad streaks are just as frustrating as in any of the other systems.
G
--Flat betting 6 streets,either recents or furthest,you will hardly
get more then 6 in the row of the same,and it is one of the most evenly balanced E/C
bet which is recom. to play 1up-1down on L/W basis.