Hi theLaw and Albalaha,
Similar to your 2 dozen bet idea - this is kinda the opposite from one of Gizmotron posts:
Well theLaw, if u think is good then I wonder how THIS would pan out using your Labby idea??
Regards,
A.
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.
