Collision, When Worlds Collide
This is variance gone wild. If you have a genuine skill for making good double dozen bets and good double column bets then you can place bets on the inside that only cover 16 numbers per bet.
If you have a collision of sleeping dozens with a sleeping column you have the perfect storm. You can use it to execute a multiple pull-off grouping of staggered positive progressions. If you don't know what that is just ask.
The version I like is five units per number. I let one progression ride one spin and take it off, with its winnings. I let the other four units ride with their respective winnings. After the second win I pull off one of the four that has now won two in a row. Of course I takes those winnings off too. That leaves step three, four, and five with their respective winnings for each step.
You don't have to have a collision of variance to try this. You just need to be good at guessing the flow of current conditions. That's not difficult if you are experienced in this area of dozens and columns. If you get the collisions right you only need 16 numbers to cover it.
Wow does this work fantastic. If you have any capacity to guess effectively, at times, with any of the EC's, then you can attempt to win high payoff bets by colliding them with double sets of dozens or columns. You can collide with custom sets also. When two dozens collide with two columns you are betting 16 numbers. When you combine any two dozens with any single even chance you bet 12 numbers. If you combine two even chances you bet 9 numbers. It's advisable to mix and match these kind of bets. It's almost impossible to not go on a win streak with these type of bets used in a sequence. All you need is skill.
My best advice is to not try. This kind of skill is far too difficult for common players to learn. There's nobody to motivate you. Even though everything you need to learn it has been provided, human nature has already proven that most people don't have the personal motivation or conviction
Thank you for describing your playing style more Gizmotron.
Could you show 2 dozens colliding with 2 columns and 2 dozens colliding with an EC?
It's very simple. Try to see if you can see or envision a sleeping dozen. If you don't know what that is then try another game. If you do then check any sequence of spins that has a sleeping dozen. Now while this is occurring check to see if there is also a sleeping column.
NOW USE YOUR VAST INTELLIGENCE TO FIGURE OUT THE NUMBERS THAT WOULD PAY OFF AS WINNERS. If you can't do that then try another game.
Quote from: Gizmotron on December 23, 2012, 08:58:27 PM
It's almost impossible to not go on a win streak with these type of bets used in a sequence.
That's right! There are win streaks running most of the time in one form or another. The wheel can't help itself and you don't need to worry about the dealer because they can't see it happening right in front of them.
Thank you for your patience with me Gizmotron : )
Can't blame me for asking questions, efficiency is the name of the game.
I see what your talking about Bally.
Thanks!
Here is a 100 spins showing you the very furthest back column or dozen in ( )
Sometimes you get both a dozen and column as the equal furthest back. They can both stay missing for a while!
[reveal]
26 3B
26 3B
17 2B
2 1B
3 1C (A)
26 3B (A)
18 2C (A)
36 3C (A)
32 3B (A)
20 2B (A)
7 1A (C)
11 1B (C)
20 2B (C)
30 3C (A)
17 2B (A)
35 3B (A)
6 1C (A)
4 1A (2)
1 1A (2)
14 2B (3)
29 3B (C)
15 2C (1A)
23 2B (1A)
30 3C (1A)
16 2A (1)
13 2A (1)
21 2C (1)
35 3B (1)
35 3B (1)
31 3A (1)
11 1B (2C)
28 3A (2C)
34 3A (2C)
9 1C (2)
36 3C (2)
21 2C (B)
13 2A (B)
36 3C (B)
9 1C (B)
5 1B (2A)
13 2A (3)
9 1C (3)
23 2B (3)
30 3C (A)
4 1A (2B)
16 2A (B)
11 1B (3C)
6 1C (3)
10 1A (3)
29 3B (2)
20 2B (C)
31 3A (C)
10 1A (C)
20 2B (C)
33 3C (1A)
32 3B (1A)
20 2B (1A)
14 2B (1A)
3 1C (C)
12 1C (A)
26 3B (A)
35 3B (A)
6 1C (A)
23 2B (A)
7 1A (3)
14 2B (3)
26 3B (C)
19 2A (C)
29 3B (C)
28 3A (C)
23 2B (C)
33 3C (1)
20 2B (1)
19 2A (1)
1 1A (3C)
21 2C (2)
14 2B (3)
23 2B (3)
19 2A (3)
28 3A (1)
7 1A (C)
4 1A (C)
9 1C (B)
34 3A (B)
23 2B (1C)
6 1C (3A)
31 3A (2B)
3 1C (2B)
2 1B (2)
35 3B (2)
8 1B (2)
6 1C (2)
28 3A (2)
27 3C (2)
2 1B (2)
27 3C (2)
1 1A (2)
15 2C (B)
27 3C (B)
17 2B (1A)
[/reveal]
Thanks Bally!
May I ask how you gathered those stats so quickly? : )
Did you have them on another thread before?
Hello AMK.
These are from my files. I just pasted this batch.
I am a big fan of this sort of play.
cheers
I might see something now G
Its at least an explanation for 16 numbers to bet
When two dozens and two columns go missing (collide?) you could bet the 16 numbers not hit?
1A
1A
.... bet 16 numbers not hit
Gizmo
I never really looked at it with the B/R, E/O, H/L angle before.
That opens up more than a few possibilities. Thanks.
Something might need to be cleared up. If you have a sleeping dozen then that means that the two active dozens are what you bet on to win. Now if you have a sleeping column you don't need to waste bets on the sleeping columns part of the two active dozens. Same thing goes for the even chance bets.
Suppose the high dozen 25-36 is sleeping that means that the 1-24 is not sleeping. Now suppose at the same time there's a streak of red numbers only occurring. So the bet is on all red numbers from 1 to 24. That's the collision of dozens and colors.
Quote from: AMK on December 23, 2012, 10:47:35 PM
I might see something now G
Its at least an explanation for 16 numbers to bet
When two dozens and two columns go missing (collide?) you could bet the 16 numbers not hit?
1A
1A
.... bet 16 numbers not hit
Gizmotron:
"So the bet is on all red numbers from 1 to 24. That's the collision of dozens and colors."
I was thinking in this direction. I was confident that that it was a red or black decision within 2 dozens.
I didn't know how this determination was made.
It will still take a lot of understanding but I have a sense now of where to look.
I have actually followed your threads from time to time but could never decipher specific targets : )
You can see everything clearly in my charts. You can see them in less than a second. My practice software is right here. It's free to download it. You can't do this without these necessary charts.
Look at your example AMK
XX,XX,XX
XX,XX,XX
XX,XX,XX
XX,XX,XX
-- -- --
XX,14,15
XX,17,18
XX,20,21
XX,23,24
-- -- --
XX,26,27
XX,29,30
XX,32,33
XX,35,36
You had 1A, 1A. (assuming these are missing)
So I have crossed them out. That leaves 16 numbers you can cover with 8 splits.
Now let's look at it again and also assume RED is cold.
XX,XX,XX
XX,XX,XX
XX,XX,XX
XX,XX,XX
-- -- --
XX,XX,15
XX,17,XX
XX,20,XX
XX,XX,24
-- -- --
XX,26,XX
XX,29,XX
XX,XX,33
XX,35,XX
You now have 8 numbers left. 15, 17, 20, 24, 26, 29, 33, 35.
Of course this is just one example and the possibilities are endless of the type of bets you could look for.
This IMO is one of the areas where we should be looking to win at the game of roulette.
Your pattern description helps a lot Bally.
Didn't even see the splits! Right there in front of me!
Many thanks
Gizmotron,
How long are your sessions?
What would your win loss hits look like?
WWWLLWLLLWWWWWLWLW perhaps?
I was just playing around with your software Gizmo loading some numbers from some of my files. The even chances added to the dozens and columns can give some nice wins for a low outlay. I had a situation where the 1A RED +EVEN were missing. That just leaves 15, 17, 29, 33, 35. A nice win streak ensued. What I particularly like about this is the opportunity to use some kind of positive progression. You can afford to go up a level after every winning bet and still retain a lot of the profit.
My sessions are typical 150 to 300 spins. But in the past few years I consider a session beyond 200 spins a a difficult session.
The collissions of two dozens with two columns is 16 numbers. This is great for playing a side bet on two extra hot numbers. Some times the 0/00 are the hot numbers. For those that track if the zeros are sleeping this can be very good. This is vastly becoming my new method. I'm also using strong streaks of dozen or columns collided with strong streaks in any of the even chance bets.
The absence of a trend characteristic is information too. When you add that information to the list of continuing characteristics then you can reduce the possibilities to when things change only. The only time bet selection fails is because change occurs. Now that I think about this, the occurrence of change is almost directly linked to the effectiveness track. I think I can use this. I've never considered the possibility for tracking the global effect in the effectiveness track. But I should. It occurs to me to track it in the change track. There must be a wicked way to take notice of the changes in the characteristics. This is great. I've discovered a simple way to include all states of randomness. Bingo!
Quote from: Gizmotron on January 04, 2013, 08:57:34 PM
The only time bet selection fails is because change occurs.
I will throw a spanner in the works and say that's correct as long as you are not involving some kind of trigger as well.
I know a lot of guys have moved away from triggers but it's not impossible that they may be a few decent ones lurking about under the surface. Don't discount anything. You never know what might turn up!
Ok, let's say that I'm using triggers. The problem is each trigger is attached to its own barrel. There happens to be at least 100 barrels with triggers. Now only a few are aiming at the target at each shooting. In the end you only get to pick one at a time. Even though several not selected will change, the one you selected might experience a change or it might not. So in my opinion it's not trigger based but sync based. So people will need to wrap their heads around synchronization.
Quote from: Gizmotron on January 04, 2013, 09:45:34 PM
So in my opinion it's not trigger based but sync based. So people will need to wrap their heads around synchronization.
That's a good way of putting it. Things are in sync or not for sure!
Gizmo,
What made a number of ex- GG experts to withdraw from posting ? Hm?
N.D.
Quote from: NathanDetroit on January 04, 2013, 10:26:02 PM
Gizmo,
What made a number of ex- GG experts to withdraw from posting ? Hm?
N.D.
Good question. Why don't you give us a sense of why you think it is, since you saw it first, a kind of 2cents.
Can`t find an answer either that`s why the question . My only guess is that many of them have become such proficient roulette players among other reasons that they are staying away from all forum activities.
N.D..
That's probably it.
Quote from: NathanDetroit on January 04, 2013, 11:29:05 PM
My only guess is that many of them have become such proficient roulette players among other reasoms that they are staying away from all forum activities.
N.D..
You only need to win 1 unit a day and you can take weekends off.
Maybe they felt like someone had hit them over the head with a brick and vowed never to return to the forums again. :))
It ain't rocket science we are dealing with!