• Welcome to #1 Roulette Forum & Message Board | www.RouletteForum.cc.

News:

Progression bets are nothing more than different size bets on different spins. You could get lucky and win big, or unlucky and lose even more.

Main Menu
Popular pages:

Roulette System

The Roulette Systems That Really Work

Roulette Computers

Hidden Electronics That Predict Spins

Roulette Strategy

Why Roulette Betting Strategies Lose

Roulette System

The Honest Live Online Roulette Casinos

Betting both ECs - positive progression

Started by huskerdu, Apr 05, 04:16 AM 2014

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

huskerdu

I'm working on betting simultaneously on  both ECs (Black and RED or ODD & EVEN or LOW&HIGH).
What I have to say so far is that:
PROGRESSION:
I've used  Reverse Labouchere, Reverse Fibonachi and Reverse D'Alembert.

BET SELECTION:
I've used
1. play simple EC (the one side plays RED and the other plays BLACK simultaneously)
2. play the last outcome
3. play the opposite of the last outcome
4. play the same before the  last
5. play the trend (when we have change continue with change, when we have same continue with same),
6. play same/opposite (when the  one side plays same / opposite / same opposite .... the other plays opposite/same, opposite/same....
The way of playing was, betting until having positive summary. 
AND THE WINNER IS>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, I cannot tell for sure who's the absolute winner, but so far :
Each progression   succeded or failed, depending on the kind of streaks or splits. 
The most balanced progression  so far was  Reverse Labouchere .
The kind of betting that gave me more positive results was suprizingly the same/opposite, mainly when there were streaks of 2. Also the ''follow the trend was good enough mainly when there were multi streaks and splits.
I continue testing

ausguy

huskerdu - I'll ask you these questions for the last time as you've never answered in previous threads of yours on SIM. betting ?

What happens to your bet money when zero hits ?

What's the logic of risking higher bet amounts by betting simultaneously when you can achieve the same results by only betting the difference between the higher amount & the lower amounts ? Thus the term DIFFERENTIAL BETTING. Betting higher amounts normally requires a larger Bankroll ?

The betting process still goes on as per your or anyones methods but instead of unneccesary bet outlays & a loss risk if zero hits (unless you make a zero insurance bet ?) a lot of the calculating is done on paper or your bet sheet.

One progession you haven't tried is a Marty with stop loss (SL) bets at a predetermined point along your progression line (PL). Around 40% - 50% along the PL is usually a good place to start.

It stops strings of losses but doesn't stop switch back losses. It does need two back to back wins to profit = a SL win & then a money bet win.

Same/Opposite betting should be worth testing but how do you apply it for the same EC set such as Red/Black or Odd/Even ? To me it would seem to function OK with 2 EC sets running together, like Red/Black & High/Low ?

Differential betting can be found in a SEARCH on here. I just checked & there's 63 links going back a year or two. VLS probably would have some too ?

Nothing much is new under the Roulette Sun HUSKERDU, much of what you're doing now has been tried, tested, played, lost (won ?) over the decades.

As it's only time not money that your spending you can do little harm to yourself (MM wise). Who knows you may crack a combo. that works ?

Good Luck to you if you do.

huskerdu

ausguy
1. About zero: your question regards not only me but every people in the world who uses EC systems.  My answer is: , play no-zero roulette, or when playing zero roulette, When betting 1 euro, you can bet also a 0,10 on zero.

3. I have stopped using Marti. It's the worst progression ever even with a loss stop, because it's difficult to gather your losts without a risky progression,  ebenthough the lost is from from 3 or 4 steps Marty. Think about,  a 4step marti you've already lost 16 units. How you will earn them again?

4. I'll explain you an example of same/opposite playing, on black - reds, using reverse labouchere :
   
   1st situation      2nd situation
B         
   bet same            play opposite
R   lost 2             win 2
   bet opposite         play same
R   lost 2            win 3
   bet same            play opposite
B   lost 2           win 4
   bet opposite      play same
B   lost 2            win 5
   bet same            play opposite
R   lost 2            win 6
   TOTAL -10      TOTAL +20

TOTAL + 10 units

and to make you feel happy naming it differential betting by only betting the difference between the higher amount & the lower amounts:
+1
+2
+3
+4
TOTAL +10

5. I'm sure that many things have been tought tried tested and played much before me. I've realised  when many times I came up with an idea, and then I found it on a roulette forum much later. But it doen't mean that we don't have the right to post our ideas here. I think that's the purpose of the forum. I know that noone has found the Holy grail, but we all trying to fight the beast and share our ideas. Because sharing our ideas shows that we re civilized and socialized.
Think about it: Who's better, the one who has found (or thinks that he has found) an idea of winning and share it, or the other who found it and keep it to himself? Maybe one day a novice player post here his first post that will be the Holly Grail and all of us having been 80 years old after decades of playing and testing think then: ''how didn't I thing of it, it was so simpe!!!!!''
regards

ddarko

Quote from: huskerdu on Apr 05, 09:00 AM 2014
I know that noone has found the Holy grail

And how do you know that for sure ?

Maybe one day a novice player post here his first post that will be the Holly Grail and all of us having been 80 years old after decades of playing and testing think then: ''how didn't I thing of it, it was so simpe!!!!!''

Exactly !!!!!


O0

ausguy

huskerdu - What No Zero casino or Zero/dbl Zero casino allows opposing EC bets ? If you can't play it then what's the point of working up a play method ?

As to differential betting (DB), I'm neither sad or happy about the term. DB was coined by someone XYZ years ago ? I use it as it continues the term used previously in forum discussions on here.

I'll quote part of what you stated in point 5. "I've realised when many times I came up with an idea, and then found it on a roulette forum much later".

What I was trying to get you to understand was that if you went on SEARCH & did your homework then maybe you wouldn't be REHASHING ideas that have already been extensively discussed. Then we might not get comments from some forum members like "same old, same old" or "not this boring cra* again"

Your point about the novice is most relevant here, as that's all about a new idea not recycled unsuccessful ones.
Although your Reverse Labby idea may be a new winning approach or it could be "Just another rearrangement of the deck chairs on the Titanic" ?

As to your ......" right to post ideas here". I never said anything about you not posting ? However as an open forum you present your ideas to be examined by one & all. Thumbs up, thumbs down & critique is all part of a forums heart beat.

As to Marty betting with stop losses I don't agree with your view at all but each to their own. The following comment is about stop losses regardless of the methods.  In your example set, 1st situation if you had a stop loss at L3 then you would have been -6 not -10. As the 2nd situation won all 5 bet lines then your net profit would have been +14 instead of +10.

Here's 20 spins you might like to demo. your reverse Labby from a bet sheet I have from last November. Played at Party casino live dealer @ 60+ spins/hr. If you could use Party's bet values it would then make it real World. The EC min. is 2 & max. is 2,000 in all 5 main currencies, so any is relevant.

36R,12R,11B,27R,Zero,26B,17B,32R,33B,3R,16R,2B,1R,25R,20B,32R,34R,20B,2B,13B. If you agree you may like to include a 3rd situation with a stop loss after any L3 loss, L4 etc. ?

huskerdu

ausguy: 
If I had stopped at L3 I'd have lost -6 and win +9 from the other side, so total win would be+3. Unless you say that I'd stop at L3 at the one side and continue with only  the second side, which is unacceptable and out of the system.
Anyway my example was not to show’’ how good’’ is  the system but to explain what I mean with Reverse Labouche progression &  same/opposite betting. There are many combinations of BLACK/RED that lead to a total loss. As your spins you wrote.

If I understand well you say that everyone who enters a forum, before he post his first post, should read all threads, posts, topics of the forum all years back in order not to REHASH ideas that have already been extensively discussed . Ok, I’ll do it for the next couple of weeks. 
Meanwhile I suggest you to try starting  a new post with a good idea â€" system or anything you think that is worth,  instead of ONLY criticize others posts. Because what I noticed is that your contribution to the forum is only critique and not brand new posts. I don’t know why. Maybe you cannot tolerate critique, because if  I can perceive a kind of aggressiveness in your critique, what about if you’ll be subject of a critique.  And entering this forum in no way should I expect any kind of aggressiveness. Maybe I’m completely wrong, if so, sorry.
But I say the above, Not because I don’t accept critique. As you said and I FULLY AGREE with you, we present our  ideas to be examined by one & all and  critique is all part of a forums heart beat.  But think about, if none post a new post, and everyone waiting the others to start a post and then start criticize them, but none started a post, there would be no posts and no forum at all.
So as I have realized you are an experienced roulette player (no irony) I’m waiting patiently your FIRST post in this forum after years of critique.
REGARDS.

ausguy

huskerdo - You are 100% correct in that I haven't posted a thread on a workable idea since joining this forum in Dec. 2011. @ 343 posts and a weekly average of a little less than 3 per week. That's hardly setting the forum on fire from where I sit.

A workable idea for me is one that is pretested, then played successfully with winning more than losing over a lot of sessions over a longer period of time, say 6 months +. I haven't found one or "manufactured one" so I don't bother wasting forum members time & mine. The reality is that I only reply to a minority of posts & many replies are positive or neutral in content. A relative small % number may contain some critique, that is criticism with reasoned argument.

I would like to think that most of my posts are quality over quantity. I do put a lot of time & thought into most of my posts. A lot of posters like to just "hit & run" with their 1 or 2 liner posts as they rush from forum to forum. As always in a democratic enviroment, it's freedom of choice.

Also not all that I discuss is revealed on the open forum here (as do a vast number of other forum members). Many bet ideas/methods/systems still are & have been " mulled over" via the PM facility with other interested members.

I also suggest that you re read my last post. I'm still left wondering what casinos you can play your methods ? B & M ? Live dealer, RNG ? On line ? & particularly no zero. How many of those N.Z's are available around the world ?

Going off your original 1st post on here it promotes a variety of testing ? As to your stopping at L3 part, it's only stopping the bet loss bleeding via "V" bets (virtual bets) on paper. I don't see why that has to be "out of the system" ?

Then there's my last part of my last post "inviting" you to demonstrate your reverse Labby play ?

Oh well such is life. I'm going to grab a chair now & go outside to sit & watch my grass grow, life can be exciting at times.






GLC

I also would appreciate an example of you reverse labby unless you just play the original format in which case it's available for everyone  in previous posts.

I have had numerous people tell me that the only progression they use is the reverse labby with the stop loss addition by Mr. Oops.

I think I'll look into it again. 

The reason I show any interest is because I've tested it many times with paultry results.  One of the proponents of it told me that you have to have a "lot of bullets" to enter the battle.  Also, you have to play long enough to get a really good series that will recover all past losses and put you in the plus.  He intimates that this plus has no limit.

Mr. Oops' addition to the traditional reverse labby takes some study to fully comprehend, but according to some, it's worth the effort.

I make this comment without hesitation.  Mr. Bayes is no slouch when it comes to roulette and mathematics.  If he shows interest in something, it's probably well worth some study.

I'll play around with it some and report back if I have anything worth saying, which, the longer I play roulette, the less there is to say about it except that being a professional roulette player is as difficult as starting a new business.  Most new business starts fail.  When I started my business, I can tell you there were risks.  A lot of them.  It took much more hard work than I anticipated to make it go.  Had I known how much, I probably wouldn't have attempted it.  It's like marriage.  Most of us wouldn't get married if we could see how much work it takes to have a successful one.  In the end the hard work is worth it.

Sorry for the bloviating.

GLC

Here's a link that will eventually take you to Mr. Oops' analysis of the Reverse Labby.

link:://rouletteforum.cc/money-management/mr-oops'-'reversed-labouchere-slh'/msg26450/#msg26450
In my case it doesn't matter.  I'm both!

huskerdu

GLC
Thanks for your post,  Mr Oops’  article was really brilliant !
It also triggered me to start up an idea.
I’ve always hated the "One Loss Crosses Out Two Winnings" problem of Reverse Labouchere. 
So, a modification to Reverse Labouchere to elimiinate this problem, might be the opposite of what Mr Oops suggests.
Instead of splitting the win amount, we write it as the normal Reverse  Labouchere, but in case of loss,   we modify the loss in the below  way:
Instead of crossing out  the first and the last  we cross out the last figure  and from the line which has left we decrease the new last figure  by the amount of the first figure.
Here’s an example (many contiguous  wins and losses are to help elaborating  to the system):
We start our line
1111
win
11112
win
111123
win
1111234
lose
we cross out the last figure -4-  the line is now 111123 and then
we decrease the new last figure (3) at the amount of the first unit (1), so the line is now 111122
111122
win
1111223
win
11112234
lose
(cross out the last figure -4- and then we subtract the -3- by -1- which is the first figure)
1111222
lose
111121
lose
11111
lose
111
win
1112
win
11123
win
111234
lose
11122
lose
1111
So with 8 wins and 7 loses we have kept our initial  bankroll. If we played the original Labouchere our B/R we’d  would have been would have been by the 10th step (5 wins and 5 loses).
What to you think?

huskerdu

another example, lets take the classic strake
1234
win
12345
lose
1233
win
12334
lose
1232
win
12323
lose
1231
win
12312
lose
123
win
1234

with 5 wins and 4 alternative loses we keep our initial B/R.
with classic Reverse Labouchere the strake would be like :
1234
win
12345
lose
234
win
2346
lose
34
win
347
lose
4
win
44
lose
0
with 4 wins and 4 loses the B/R is zero.


huskerdu

As in positive progressions we want to keep as long as our initial B/R till we to fall and ride on a winning strake, another example with alternative lose/win starting with lose, where the original ends up the B/R after 5 spins and the modified after 11.

ORIGINAL    MODIFIED
1234              1234
              LOSE                
122   23
               WIN   
1223               235
             LOSE   
121   3
              WIN   
1212                36
LOSE   
12                        0
              WIN   
123   
             LOSE   
11   
              WIN   
112   
              LOSE   
1   
               WIN   
11   
              LOSE   
0   

The disadvantage of this modification is that in a row of wins our B/R increases only by only one unit each time because the left figure (1) is been kept till the end. But with the oroginal Rev/Lab maybe after some loses/wins the strake would be something like th example

ORIGINAL    MODIFIED
1234             1234
             LOSE   
122                        23
              WIN   
1223                235
             WIN   
12234              2357
             WIN   
122345             23579

(+7 units)           (+16 units)

huskerdu

in the previus post the modified is on the left and the original is on the right, sorry I write them again

MODIFIED      ORIGINAL
1234              1234
              LOSE               
122   23
               WIN   
1223               235
             LOSE   
121   3
              WIN   
1212                36
LOSE   
12                        0
              WIN   
123   
             LOSE   
11   
              WIN   
112   
              LOSE   
1   
               WIN   
11   
              LOSE   
0   


MODIFIED      ORIGINAL
1234             1234
             LOSE   
122                        23
              WIN   
1223                235
             WIN   
12234              2357
             WIN   
122345             23579

(+7 units)           (+16 units)

GLC

It's always interesting to try different methods to take some of the sting out of the reverse labby.  By sting I mean having a few losses in a row wipe out all gains.  It's actually suppose to happen all the time.  It's a good thing there's deviation in results.

I have tried the midas touch method for the reverse labby.  Our first bet is only 1 number.  As long as we lose, we continue to bet 1 number.  On a win, we then bet 2 numbers in hopes that we're beginning a win streak.  Minimal testing so far.  Nothing exciting to report.  Yet!

GLC

In my case it doesn't matter.  I'm both!

huskerdu

When I started playing roulette I used several negative systems. And I think every people who has started roulette has used negative progressions because nothing is more logical than trying to recover your loss by rising the bet units. I think our nature, the way our mind works lead us to such progressions. After years of playing having tried most of negative progresions noone of them worked on the long run.
The only way I had a ''kind of long run'' success was a slow progression rising at 1 unit after 5 or 10 or 15 or 20 looses until I'd be with +1. Something like a post of you, called ''tendency'' April 3.
Another way that I had good results using negative progression was a modification of HP Johnson system which I made and I'll post some day here.
Having heavily injured by the negative progressions, nowdays i'm experimenting with positive progressions. I'm trying very hard because every time I try to get deep to them, my mind has the reverse momentum pushing me towards the other side. Sometimes positive progressions seem to me so weird !!!! It's not in pure mind's logic. It's so extreme kind of playing that every time I try to get closer to them a magic hand pulling me towards the negatives.
Think about it, lets say you play a session with positive progression  and after a string of winning  spins you 're up + $500. If you keep betting for the next spin and you win you'll be + $1000, but if you lose you'll have nothing.  How many of us would bet? Eventhough the previous night we had lost $1000 and we wanted today  to recover, many of us we would'n continue betting. We would say, ok, for today 500 is ok, my loses are from 1000 now 500 and continue tomorrow.
Positive progressions need guts (and a kind of positive craziness as well).
But think about, how much easy we play negative progrs, when we play and lose we rise our bets,  until we lose  our bankroll. And that's seems to be for us more normal!!!!
Another theme I want to explore is a mixure of negative - positive. Searching the posts I saw something like what I'm trying, a very interesting post of you, called ''1-2-3-5 Positive Progression In A Negative Progression''on July 16, 2012.
I think it's very interesting those kind of mixing I have some raw ideas and I'm going to look into this next days. 


GLC

I like your insight into how our brains work.  Seems to fit my experience anyway.  Yes, negative progressions are a mirage in the long run.  I just wish I weren't so thirsty all the time.

It reminds me of a friend  who's a recovering heroine addict.  He said that when he was over the initial rush of a hit, all he could think about was how much he hated his addiction and that he needed to get off of heroine.  But, not long after coming down, all he could think about was getting high again.  He lived on this roller coaster for about 8 years.  Been clean for about 3 years but still has to fight the cravings when life gets too intense.

I've been trying something less intense than heroine lately.  It's playing the aggressive mongoose trot but hanging it on the full TrioPlay skeleton.  With the mongoose, you either lose 1 unit or win 5 units.  Therefore, I set 5 units batches equal to 1 unit in TrioPlay.  So, every time I lose 1 unit in mongoose I write down a 1.  Five of these is equivalent to 1 unit in TrioPlay.  Every time I win 5 units in mongoose, I cross off 5 the lowest 5 numbers in my TrioPlay line.

I say the lowest 5 numbers because after losing 5 times in mongoose, I start writing down a 2 for each loss up to 5 times, then a 3 for each loss up to 5 times, etc...  If I lose 12 times in a row playing mongoose (it's never happened, just for illustration) my TrioPlay line will look like this: 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 3.  If I haven't won a 5 unit attack with mongoose during this time, all 12 numbers represent 1 unit losses.  I always start my mongoose attack at the lowest number in my TrioPlay line.  Let's say that after my 12th loss in a row, I win a mongoose attack.  I cross off the 1st 5 numbers and now I'm starting my mongoose attack at 2 units instead of 1 unit.  If I win a 2 unit mongoose start, I will have in fact have won 10 units.  In this case, I'm ahead by 3 units overall.  That's because I only lost 1 unit per number which is 12 numbers but I won 5 units plus 10 units.  I actually stop before completing a mongoose attack if I reach a new high bank along the way.

I know it should eventually find the Streak From He!!, but not yet.

GLC
In my case it doesn't matter.  I'm both!

-