Straightforward method, single dozen/column bet:

Track the dozens/columns in 3-spin cycles.

1) Wait until one has been spun for three (3) consecutive cycles (enabling point).

2) Bet on it until it has missed two consecutive cycles (disabling point)

3) Go back to step one.

---

123
-xx
xxx
xx- <- Spun 3 consecutive cycles = Enabling point for Dozen #2
-xx
xx-
-x-
x-x
xx-
xxx
-xx
xxx
x--
-xx
-x-
xx-
x--
--x <- Missed 2 cycles = Disabling point for dozen #2
xxx
x-x <- Spun 3 consecutive cycles = Enabling point for Dozen #3
xx-
-xx

It doesn't beat the house edge flat betting, but can go very even:

[attachimg=1]

(Which if you know a bit of money management, would have caught your attention  )

 
Nice work Victor ...

Quote from: VLS on January 26, 2014, 09:57:27 PM
-x-
xx-
x--
--x <- Missed 2 cycles = Disabling point for dozen #2
xxx
x-x
xx-
-xx

How do you mean misses 2 cycles?

Since each line represents a 3-spin cycle, two misses equal six (6) consecutive spins without showing for the active location to be disabled.

Ok got it thanks.

So it is basically a reduction of volatility.

Quote from: TwoCatSam on January 27, 2014, 03:22:41 AM
So it is basically a reduction of volatility.

That's the main goal, yes 

There can be long chained "vertical strings" of enabled cycles with this methodology. The trick then goes more in line of not using progressions that lay all eggs in a single progression line, but those that rise smoothly. Bearing in mind that once the hit is obtained, the location is not bet for the rest for the cycle.

(By the way, ZERO is ignored, as in not accounted for in the 3-spins for the cycle. i.e. we take the loss if laying a bet but not count that zero as part of the three spins for the cycle)

One last thing. It's up to each person's money management to decide when it's time to disable a dozen/column on a "holed" patch:


X
-
X
-
X
-
X


Some money management schemes might surf that without a problem, but for those who don't it's not carved in stone to be stubborn and keep the active one to the end of the "pierced" episode, especially when there's a more consistent one raking it, in this (current) or another timeline (if being tracked).

Victor,
       I taught this idea two years back here: http://albalaha.lefora.com/topic/4332355/How-to-fight-with-the-worst-enemy-of-gamblingVariance#.UuXpYtK6bIU
     and it was you who first appreciated that.

Yes I talked about it here too: http://betselection.cc/meta-selection-105/steady-locations-concept/

It's worthy to note the "many timelines" at once concept hasn't been discussed, and it's quite an interesting one as you see it realized with this steady locations approach.

Actually,
              if we analyse any bet in any large enough data, we can see that 95% of times, a win comes during this span and playing above this is a sure way of going bust, sooner or later. Extreme Variance Management is the first requisite of pro gambling apart from keeping patience and trying to earn in a reasonable timeframe, not in a single spin.

 
I made a short test and notice that you sometimes can get two dozen to qualify three times in a row.
Do you skip does triggers or just pick random one of does two dozen ?

I also notice you can flat betting using this methodology if you use skips ...

Cheers

Just musing....
What merit is there in looking for a new enabling point on a new high. Using the disabling point to stoploss where there wasn't a new high

Quote from: Sputnik on January 27, 2014, 02:52:47 PMI made a short test and notice that you sometimes can get two dozen to qualify three times in a row.
Do you skip does triggers or just pick random one of does two dozen ?

"Look back" in the spins for the current strongest one to resolve it. Since the whole point is we're following a certain path in the stream I don't recommend "just random". Better to wait for some more cycles, until a stronger one (even if by only one cycle) is bound to show.

Obviously not every session is a winner, but it does tend to go down somewhat smoother than blind betting, at least in my own tests. Remember this is more in line with a "betting principle".

It is also worth that the worst times are clearly spotted in this methodology, in order to make informed decision, when in-game.