QuoteThe method is simple to play and uses a 1-2 bet , In the description it is like this, if you see a Player then you bet 1 unit player if win keep betting 1 unit player. If you lose to a Banker then you look at PB and now bet 2 units on Banker.
If this wins you stop bets and wait for another player.

So you will win on a PP and if you lose then win it will be PBB using a 1-2 bet.

Now if it goes PBP then you lose the 1-2 bet and return to 1 unit on P next time Player occurs.

If it wins you continue with 1 unit for player, and if win then another 1 unit on player until banker causes the player bet to lose.

The win goal is 4 units and buy in is 10 units.

This seems like a simple strategy and after playing a shoe I recorded last weekend won my 4 units.

It also says this can be played on the colors of roulette; It seem like such a low bet structure and low buy in. I was wondering if anyone took time to test the method out? If so what was the % shoes won with 4 units verses the loss of 10 units.

Example of  this strategy applied on single zero roulette:
Example 50 random results played on roulette. Same r/b results used for both outcomes (triggers in bold)
Betting stopped if a 0 occurs during betting until next trigger.

Target = +4

If Playing RED Side:
============
b
b
b
0
r
r w+1              +1
b L-1               +0
b w+2              +2
b
r
r w+1              +3
r w+1              +4
r w+1              +5
r w+1              +6
b L-1               +5
b w+2             +7
b
r
r w+1              +8
r w+1              +9
r w+1              +10
b L-1               +9
r L-2                +7
b
r
b L-1               +6
0 L-2               +4
b
b
r                   
r w+1              +5
b L-1               +4
b w+2              +6
b   
b
b
b
r
b L-1                +5
b w+2               +7
b
r
b L-1               +6
r L-2                +4
b
r
r w+1              +5
b L-1               +4
r L-2                +2
r

End of 50 spins.

w = +18
L = -16
Profit = +2
High = +10


If Playing BLACK side:
=============
b
b  w+1      +1
b  w+1      +2
0  L-1       +1
r
r
b
b  w+1      +2
b  w+1      +3
r   L-1       +2
r  w+2       +4
r
r
r
b
b w+1        +5
b w+1        +6
r  L-1         +5
r  w+2        +7
r
r
b
r  L-1         +6
b L-2         +4
r
b
0 L-1          +3
b
b w+1         +4
r L-1           +3                     
r w+2          +5
b
b  w+1        +6
b  w+1        +7
b  w+1        +8
b  w+1        +9
b  w+1        +10
r  L-1          +9
b  L-2         +7       
b
b  w+1        +8
r  L-1          +7
b  L-2         +5
r
b
r  L-1          +4
r  w+2         +6
b
r  L-1          +5
r w+2         +7

End of 50 spins.

w = +23u
L = -16u
Profit = +7
High = +10

A.

PBBBB PPPPB PBPPP PPBPP  (1st 20 hands)                 = +1
BPBPB BBPBB BBPBB PPBBB  (2nd 20 hands)              = +1
PPPPB PBPBB BPPPP B   (final 16 hands)                        = +3
Played as 3 separate individual sessions.

If played as continuous session:
PBBBB PPPPB PBPPP PPBPP  BPBPB BBPBB BBPBB PPBBB PPPPB PBPBB BPPPP B  = +5

A.

Just sharing something found this on LTW forum:

Quote
The method is simple to play and uses a 1-2 bet , In the description it is like this, if you see a Player then you bet 1 unit player if win keep betting 1 unit player. If you lose to a Banker then you look at PB and now bet 2 units on Banker if this wins you stop bets and wait for another player So you will win on a PP and if you lose then win it will be PBB using a 1-2 bet. Now if it goes  PBP then you lose the 1-2 bet and return to 1 unit on next to be Player if it wins you continue with 1 unit for player, and if win then another 1 unit on player until banker causes the player bet to lose. The win goal is 4 units and buy in is 10 units. This seems like a simple strategy and after playing a shoe I recorded last weekend won my 4 units.  It also says this can be played on the colors of roulette, It seem like such a low bet structure and low buy in, I was wondering if anyone took time to test the method out? If so what was the % shoes won with 4 units verses the loss of 10 units.

A.

Hi wannawin,

I agree. I think ignatus is on to something here! 

A.

I am also interested to know if the way pockets played was correct or not?

A.

Hi theLaw and Albalaha,

Similar to your 2 dozen bet idea - this is kinda the opposite from one of Gizmotron posts:

Quote
Here is my Very Rare to Kill Progression
=========================
It was inspired by reverse engineering the crackpot Charles Scammer Hampshire's spoof of an idea he called the Zone.  His only problem was he actually had something a real player could make use of.  He didn't even know it.  So I thought about it for fifteen minutes and turned his lame idea upside down and inside out.  Guess what? It really works.  After thousands of spin tests it has held up as a winner.  It does this because the pattern or sequence it takes to kill it is so very rare that it tends to work.  Charles Scammer never noticed that feature even in his own spoof of a Holy Grail he has been harassing forums with.

It uses 4 steps.  It avoids the zeros.  It's completely rule based.  It has a few wait points that usually resolve in just a few spins.

The point is to bet on the two dozens or columns that did not hit last.  It's almost that simple.  The other point is to wait for the next single to occur in the dozens after the last repeat.
 
So if d1 (dozen 1, 1 to 12) hits you bet on d2 and d3 for the next spin.

If d1 hits again then you lose.  You now wait for d1 to stop hitting.  As soon as d2 or d3 hits you have a single in series.  So then you start step two of the four step progression.  It takes a perfect set of repeats and singles to kill this progression.
The progression is 1,1 - 3,3 - 9,9 - 27,27.
You place a bet on each of the dozens that did not hit last.

The cost is 80 units if you lose.  You win everything back plus 1 unit on any win inside the four steps.

The thing that makes it work is that you never place bets on any repeats after the first repeat is discovered.  So runs of repeats don't take out your progressions.  Only the exact sequence of repeats after singles, four directly in a row has the power to break this progression.

For the sake of clarity here are step by step instructions.

d1 hits on spin 1.  Bet 1 on d2 and 1 on d3 for spin 2.
d1 hits on spin 2.  Don't bet on spin 3.
d1 hits on spin 3  Don't bet on spin 4.
d3 hits on spin 4  Bet 3 on d2 and 3 on d1 for spin 5.
d1 hits on spin 5  Bet 1 on d2 and 1 on d3 for spin 6.
d2 hits on spin 6  Bet 1 on d1 and 1 on d3 for spin 7. 
d3 hits on spin 7  Bet 1 on d1 and 1 on d2 for spin 8.

I generally lose one time in 300 spins betting both dozens and columns independently for each spin.  That's typical too.  Once in a while you get two losses.  And once in a while you get no losses.  With both progressions going on at the same time you tend to win about 20 units for every 30 spins.

If this is a holy grail system then three or more losses must take place most of the time for it not to be, in 300 spins that is.

On a five dollar minimum table this should cost $400 for each loss.  So a $1200 bankroll would be considered minimal to try it.
There are some refinements not mentioned regarding the zeros.  I just did not want to cloud the explanation at this time.  I'd hate to be blamed for changing this after the fact.  That's what Charles Scammer does.  He's a liar.  Some how he gets his jollies for leading people on.  I just don't want to be in his low class.  So there it is, now go change the world forever.  Just remember I thought this up.  To all those that think it won't change things just watch this gold rush.

Q's
==
1. when the 0 appears, do we track 2 new numbers b4 continuing our bet? at the next progression level? Or do we actually use the number that appeared b4 0 and the number that appeared after it?
2. You did mention something about avoiding betting if the 0's are active. What would this conditions be like in your opinion???
3. How long would you recommend one session to be? and possible w/l targets??I'm assuming that the min br would be 240 units. 20-30 unit target per session??

A's
===
1.) I wait two spins after each zero, to see if a new single appears.

2.) When zeros start hitting within ten spins of each other or when they repeat.

3.) I run 300 spin tests. But I would end with 25 to 30 units. as a good goal. A loss is 80 units. Maybe winning 80 is a good idea.

Well theLaw, if u think is good then I wonder how THIS would pan out using your Labby idea??

Regards,
A.

Hi Luckyfella,

Nice result and I understand about the LLLL and LLLW triggers...
Thanks for reporting on your findings as well. What I'm struggling with or should I say slightly confused with is working out WHY the bets are made when they are..? The X O thing I find a little puzzling to say the least...
Should I be reading the results vertically or horizontally and looking for matches or non-matches of the patterns?
In any case I would probably apply it to roulette eg: red black or high low - that is if I could totally understand the rules!


[smiley]aes/money.png[/smiley]
A.

Hi sputnik,
It is interesting. Look forward to your pdf explanation.
A.

Another loser yesterday as Lorient lose 3-1...
That's 6 Losers out of the last 9.
A.

French team Istres was a winning tip for them yesterday 1-0
Today they pick in French Ligue team Lorient to WIN.
A.

Another loser today as Olympiakos were selected to win but it was a DRAW 1-1.
A.

The tip came unstuck as Layton Orient lost 3-1 
Another Loser.
A.

I have bet their tip today as well.
A.

OFI Crete win 1-0
The tip is successful! 
A.

Well they were right with Inter winning last night 1-0.
Unfortunately the tip was with -1.5 goal so their advised bet was marked on their site as a LOSER.
Again, luckily I did not bet. 
Today they give OFI Crete to win and I have followed their advice and taken 10/11 odds.
Fingers crossed.
A.