Thanks Jim, it was a typo.
Now, it would appear to me that if you had two columns or rows that were opposites through the first 4 hands you could bet the same as the first column as opposed to betting the opposite on the last 3 hands.
Where x=B, y=B and z=P if necessary.
You could do I suppose, but that is a different game from having 128 balls in a bag and not pulling out the same one in x amount of trials. Granted, I appreciate the opposite of the last ball should be as equally less likely as the current 128/1 ball. Might be worth considering if your in dire need of a reason to bet.
Having said that.
For sure, "betting the opposite" or " the same as" the prior column are different strategies. I will confess if I see an entire column the 'same as' or 'opposite of' it's prior column, I will bet whichever won't continue into the 3rd column. But I stress, this occurs so infrequently, that it is not even worth tracking, like maybe once per 300 shoes. When it does occur, you still have to bet the table minimum for the first few bets regardless of the situation of your bankroll, because you are risking 7 bets to win 1. But it comes up so infrequently, in all honesty not worth considering.