Moglizu.you are arrogant and not smart.
Your explanation is ridicolous, confused and not clear at all

When are you sure that you are facing a bad shuffling?
During the shoe?During the shuffling itself?
It's depends on the permanence or on the lazy croupier?

Albalaha,you are right as far as a martingale of several terms is concerned.
According with my experience a three terms martingale is acceptable,also for recovery

I have been playing for long period B after PB(looking for double B) or B after BP (looking for single P),that are the two more frequent decisions.
Bad results!
I didn't find any difference between these two attacks and playing B all the time.
Why a difference should exist?

Asym,you have already given almost all the answers in an old thread,you posted 2 or 3 years ago.
Very useful "numbers" or %,but not enough for beating sistemacally Bac.
Only useful for creating a few strategies,not strong enough

I agree about "large picture",about instinct and about small wins and big fluctuations even with EV+.
I'm not convinced about your theory ,illustrated also in some old your messages ,concerning stop playing if at the beginning of a shoe you have some negative decisions with respect to your attack.
You mentioned  3P+ at the beginning, as very bad also for the rest of the shoe,if you are looking for agglomeration 1 and/or 2 P .
No statistical or mathematical evidence of this theory and my test don't confirm it too.
Also about  agglomeration of BB I'm not of your opinion.
Several BB agglomerated,even a run of four time BB very frequent....

Last week,Montecarlo casino:26 hands without 2 WIAR playing B.

31 B or P in a row is "almost" impossible,but a gap W/L of 31 is frequent.
Mathematically, in 992 hands (31.31 + 31) a gap W/L of 31 has more than 50% probability to occur ,without never reaching the equilibrium W/L in the meantime.