John Legend i understand you and i agree with you.

Cheers

 You missing one thing with my methodology - i am the first one who introduce this to public forum boards - series of three and higher counts as same.
So you have the odds 1 in 3 in the short term - if you run varians for the long run you will give the old common stats.

Should also mention that when 1s and 2s overlap with 1s and 3s you can win and strike for very long periods.
And the bias is clear and prove strong imbalance with all common shoes.
We talk about two events hitting 5 10 15 20 25 times in a row, because the odds is 1 in 3.

And i agree with you that catching the bias take some knowledge and advance decision making - what you do is more difficult then flatbetting as i understand you use positiv progression.

Cheers

Welcome back John Legend - it make me really happy to read about your succés ...

Cheers

nothing beats roulette extreme from ux software - you can download real results from real casinos and play using the software and look at statisitics
no one should become a gambler with out a copy of roulette extreme - it make you lose less money as you will in a fast quick way see what works and what does not work

Cheers

I don't understand why you would test 1000 spins - for me it does not make sense
A test should be done in a realistic way and with conditions you have in real casino

Cheers

Flat betting has been done with la partage rule and end up with positiv result after 60.000 placed bets - that should be the blue print for everyone who try to develop a flat betting system
I will just show some simple observations - one is how the variance go back to back 83% of times - we use the name reversal for such event and happens after a negativ result
One other experiment is to start when you have a negativ result and reverse the end result into the positiv - assume you have -2 units and your expectation is 83% to break even - now if you start playing from -2 units your expectation change to +2 units - i am using +1 unit with my example
The average peak for 60.000 placed bets is +6 units and the average drawdown is -8 units

The first test: if you gain +2 units or more you stop at positiv result - if a negativ result you aim for one reversal
The second test: if you get a negativ result you play for one reversal to end with at least +1 unit

Quote from: Bally6354 on September 21, 2017, 04:20:47 PM
Nobody should ever really expect to read about a sure-fire winning method on a forum....just isn't happening, period! My conclusion is that you slowly learn what doesn't / can't work despite all the hype and even good intentions from the author. I must have given loads of bad advice down the years. It wasn't intentional, it was based on my thoughts / experiences at that particular moment in time. So the reality for any reader is that forums are a minefield if you aren't personally prepared to do a lot of hard work and think for yourself with a critical mind.

I like that statment so much so i will quote you at another forum ...

Cheers

Quote from: Kimo Li on September 05, 2017, 01:35:43 PM
I am surprise to see that someone is interested in the Corner Matrix. In answer to your question, if the middle number of  quad comes in, 5, 14, 23, or 32, then anywhere these numbers are on the matrix is considered a hit and can be 'crossed out'.

Investigate the Corner Matrix and you will find treasures, like the vertical numbers in the matrix belong to 4 layout quads and double streets. The horizontal numbers are column (row) numbers.

Essentially you can track 1, 4, 6, 8, 9, 12, 16, 18 and more numbers with the Corner Matrix. It is considered the Swiss knife of all the matrices. To learn more, just open your eyes and mind.

Hello Kimo Li - thank you for giving me your expert comments - lets see if i understand - i can cross out the middle number - but then four corners are cross out at once - is that right ...
I have not solve how to play the corners and how to deal with the middle numbers - do you have some more suggestions or hints ...

Many thanks

Kimo Li and all - how do you deal with the middle number when it hits, do you regard it as a Tie.
I understand we have four sections with four corners each, a total of 16.

So when the middle number that belong to all corners in the section hit, how to chart and tracking the corners when it happens.
I can not see any other solution at the moment then chart and tracking the middle number as a Tie bet.

Do you agree or have other solution?

Cheers

 Nice to see read your writing about Regression Up & Pull and Positiv Progression.

The way i test to catch two dominate dozen was to bet the first dozen that hit to repeat, if not then i have two dozen hits in front of me and would bet both and then i would catch domination where two dozen hit within three attempts. Now if we don't follow the first dozen to repeat, then we don't know what combination we get or we get two dozen to hit, so being part of the domination you need to follow the first one to catch any combination with domination within a cycle of three.

Same with even money bets - assume singles are dozen 1 and series of two is dozen 2 and series of three and higher is dozen 3.
Then when you see a single you bet it to repeat, if not then you will have a single and a serie of two or you will have a single and a serie of three or higher.
If you get two of them to hit within three attempts - one cycle - you have bias or domination with two events hitting three time.
When you lose all three bets is when all three events show once each, same for dozen and even money bets.

I test this selection method and could not get it to work flat betting or with regression up & pull ...

What is amazing with Sputnik's March is that two events as i describe above sometimes hit for 20 times in a row and that is a winning bet or a break even bet no matter what combination they events that is bias or strike as domination - i have seen 34 singles and series of two once - that is the same thing as dozen 1 and dozen 2 hitting 34 times in a row with same probability - but this time it was me playing even money bets.

Cheers

I understand this process and would like to ask a question, when you decide to play one straight number and enter the game placing bets, then was is it based upon?
Do you search for a value, like a median value and the number will hit within that median value, is that the process you talking about.

With other words to describe it more clear you define the length of the strike ratio that is different for each number and based upon that process you know what number will hit within certain length or attempts, is that the process?

Cheers

If you look around at the description of the book you will find Stephen's email where you can drop him a line.
He will then reply and letting you know when his 3.0 book will come and when he will open his gambling forum board.

Cheers

There is nothing wrong with Stephen book - but edition 2.1 did not include all the material for the selection process - very sloppy.
Did not buy Silver Bullet as i think is a repeating book of edition 2.1 with some additional tweaks and that is not worth 100 Euro - my personal opinion.

When 3.0 comes out i will buy a copy as that is new fresh material.

Now the selection process to aim for singles and series of two is pretty good and solid method, but i think there is better ways to avoid series of three and higher - my personal opinion.
But i have to give him credit for posting a full working system, most book sellers only ramble about the game with no solid strategy and that is really a waste of money ...

Cheers

On what location on the table do you use the progression for, EC, Dozen, Line, Corner, Street, Split, Single number.
I would like to know so i can test the binomial probability calculation for your progression to see how strong or weak it is.
Also check if the table limits are realistic.

Cheers

Quote from: AsymBacGuy on July 29, 2017, 01:02:15 AM
Yeah. This is one of the simplest way to play dozens.

We target the last two different dozens appeared then bet them hoping that the third will be silent as long as possible.

Of course it's like choosing to bet randomly two dozens out of three without assessing the silent one.

But acting in this way we have a general picture of what it's going to happen and by a decent bet selection and by a careful money management we might get good short-intermediate term results.

Say we put in our chart a minus sign (-) after a loss and a plus sign (+) after a win (zero/zeroes not included)

Most likely we'll get sequences as ++-+-++--+-+++++---++-++++-++++--+....

We can be sure as hell that itlr consecutive + will be double placed than single + and the same is  true about - signs, this time by an opposite fashion. same about ++ vs longer ++ sequences and so on.

If we pnly bet one time whenever any single + (preceded by one or more minus sign registered)  or whenever a single -  (preceded by one or more + sign registered) had come out we are going to reduce variance.
We are not altering the W/L percentages, but we'll have the same results than wagering every hand (yet paying a minor vig).

Easy to notice that sequences as -+- or +-- will be losers and -++ or +-+ will be winners.
Of course itlr the winners will be double placed than losers.

If we choose to simultenously wager those two features by a 1-3 progression (1-1 and 3-3 bets) we know we'll lose whenever every -+-- sequence will come out. Every other situation will be a winning one.

Notice that sequences as ++------ or +-+----------- (terrible ones for a continuos play) are winning ones. Because we are respectively get our win on the first spot in the first sequence and on the second one on the second sequence.

Again the only losing sequences by adopting the 1-3 progression are -+--

After having tested many many real spins I can assure you that the probability to get consecutive patterns not winning just one spot is very low.
I mean that -+-- consecutive patterns don't come out quite often. More realistically I'd say you need a lot of spins to encounter a situation where you'll find two consecutive losing patterns.

For that matter looking at three consecutive losing patterns in a row is a sort of a "lottery" finding.

Actually the theorical probability odds to get three losses in a row are 1:729  (zero discounted) but in the real world the overall losing probability is well lower as an homogeneous world is just an utopia.
Wonder if we choose to wait and wait and wait the appearance of one or better two such fictional situations. We can only raise our probability of success. 
Or trying to take advantage of many other possible profitable situations we should assess before betting.

Definetely the game is EV-, but only whether we consider any outcome equally probable anytime, everywhere and anyhow.

That's nonsense.

as. 

One thing that i test with random bits is one stream by it self, for example singles versus series using red and black by them self, the distribution is the same and you don't mix red and black together.
You more i test and you more i get used to use black for it self  and red by it self playing even money, i also start to feel that mix them together give more erratic results and more chaos.

Le me explain - as red by it self as random stream is a victim for the law of series and same for black, then what happens when you mix them together, well my opinion is that there is a tendency difference. For example is i count singles versus hit of series of three and higher, then if i reach 2.5 SD with 12 black singles and 2 series of two blacks, then there is a strong dominance at the red side - imbalance, even worse if i get more singles before regression towards the mean.

This does not occur when you mix them both together as you get perfect balance between zig zag distribution and only aim to encounter larger series to hit - so in one way you have singles versus larger series using both red and black together - but using only black you get both tendency of strong side imbalance and the expectation of larger series to unfold.

In one way is the same way using clockwise direction and anti clockwise direction for advantage players - but this solution is for system players.
I would say same theory apply using two dozen, why not pick only dozen 2 & 3 as your strong side against dozen 1.

CHeers