Time moves fast in my research lab and I can report I played 4 more small winning sessions using short bursts, and then encountered a very difficult sequence. This was in the cycle format 7- 1-2- 7 -2-9 -2- 3-2-3 -4-4 . Just could not get traction to dig out so called Stop Loss. To encounter such so soon after starting testing shows this is not a recommended bet, at least not for me, to be played in this format - way too vulnerable to disaster/ stress. However I have further links to test. The account is currently around +13,000 units and had peaked at 15,000 at one stage, and then the stop loss cut in in the really bad corrective cycle. Of course flat staking does not work here because even though zero is insulated , there is no consistent winning edge.
MB dug himself out of many holes and probably, as I have encountered in this interesting test, some 50% of the time he could sail along without going into deeper waters. However recall his is a bet without an edge , although it will have short winning sequences but longer and more challenging corrective phases. The only way MB was able to deal with the difficult and demanding stuff was through a managed progression and to any player who has tried his calculations and formulas live in the casino, it is stressful. He sometimes lost a bank, and that was the safety valve - a 1000 unit bank. Without using a measured progression, and just trying short exit strategies I have demonstrated the bank would often be lost. He tried to template certain other 16 number configurations with particular Dealers but in my view this is very subjective, rather superstitious, as I see the generation of spin outcomes emerging from Nature, not from a Dealer.
So it was merely a topic I wanted to briefly cover but if you are interested or innocent you could read his literature. It is full of complexities and even some errors that were never corrected, so tread carefully. I always love to read his work because he loves the game of roulette and is so passionate about it. He was an expert and later played with an assistant at his side to speed and prepare the templates he knew. However much of that work was done, and his original pattern making play was most active before computers became really powerful and fast, so his research was very time consuming. He trod carefully through the minefields and dodged the bullets, occasionally losing a bank - but more often than not he was a winner.
What really interested me was that he chose 16 numbers to target - that was the point of this short research test.
It is not a winning bet in this format although his strategy often but not always dug him out of trouble - he was a professional applied mathematician for goodness sake.
What I propose to do now and test, is to overlay the MB bet with the WF selection for a permanent moving window of 16 qualifying targets. Now that is exciting and although still a dynamic cyclic package/ envelope, it is skewed more to operate more often than not in winning edge mode. The task here is to see if we can engineer a winning methodology, flat staking where possible. The format will be in streets, corners, splits and straight up bets.
Further, it may be also an exercise to overlap the 16 targets with the private bet predictive methodology so that where private bet targets overlap/ mesh with the MB corner bets they are activated. I can visualise a sort of 3D clustering and colour coding in operation - very dynamic.
Also I had a twilight semi-dream idea about targeting the last 16 numbers spun in a moving matrix, and parallel with that retaining in the matrix repeaters in order to hold onto warming and some eventual hot numbers which will really drive consistent and regular wins.
Of course there may be better more efficient ways to do this, and perhaps a small core of say 4-8-12 repeater targets might be better. We shall investigate.
I will set out some initial results in the next post.