TCS i alredy mention that he could add physical paramters towards it.
Like raping a wheel into parmeters that show cause and effect.
You can take release, crossovers and rotor and final drop - works with tilted and level wheels.

-

All i can say and being honest, that is one very tight LW-Registry.
That is why i get back to your first post to see what its all about.

1. I can see that you use the wheel layout (the number ring) that is a good sign.

Now i have a Huxley wheel at home and will try this with some spins to see if i can get the same    results.

2. I am not so sure i understand the bet selection do.
I see 12 then bet 3 for three attempts or any other combination using the previos two.
Is that correct.

Quote from: ignatus on January 25, 2013, 11:46:28 PM
Are you playing this Live or RNG?


his is a wheel-dozen pattern, not ordinary dozens.




"One dozen can sleep for 32 times in a row" Yes, (that's an extreme case). Losses happens. But patterns do not appear all the time, and when they appear they hit. Normal winrate is 75% never less than 60%

I did not understand what you mean by that "wheel-dozen pattern"
I know that the numbers on the wheel is not in the same order as the table.
Are you saying you use the number rings layout and not the table layout.

Not sure i get your drift correct ...

It looks like this where each sequential cycle has three shows based upon i wrote.

WLWLWLWWLLWW


2
3
1 W
2 W
3 W
1 W
3 L
2 W
1 W
2 L
2 L
1 L
3
3 L
2 W
3 L
3 L
2 L
3
3
3
2
3
2
3
1
3 L
2 W
3 L
2 L
2 L
3
3
1
3 L
2 W
2 L
2 L
3 L
2
3
1
2 W
3 W
1 W
3 L
3 L
1 L
2
1 L
1 L
3 W
2 W
3 L
2 L
3 L
3
3
3
1
2 W
1 L
1 L
3 W
3 L
2 W
2 L
1 W
1 L
2 L
1 L
1
2
1
2
3
2
2
1
2
2


 
I test two similiar ways toward this one.

First one is based upon that you follow the first hit dozen until six loses.
Then you follow the last hit dozen until a win or six loses.

This make dozen hit in pairs for six times with no show twice with one particular dozen.
Sometimes you can pass 300 trails making 1K and sometimes it just fail/tank.

Now you could use that strategy based upon the same principal as your method with the same random element as above.

Now lest say dozen 1 and 2 hit and you play three attempts that dozen 3 should show.
It does not, then you wait until dozen 3 show and take the previos dozen befor it and next play the missing dozen for three attempts.

There is many ways to twist this kind of games with dozen.
This one you mention can get very long losing runs.
One dozen can sleep for 32 times in a row.

But i am sure that if you clustering the selection towards other random elements like random against random, then you can blaim lady luck when you lose it all.
The nice thing with the strategy is that you can build a pretty solid staking plain into many different levels, where the ending levels is pure recovery mood winning back 10 20 30 40 50 % of your bankroll.

So you could have a lot of action and fun with this kind of play.

-

Nice LW-Registry ...

Is it a book about math (probability) or roulette ?

No online casino is honest.
They can limited you or ban you at any time they like.
Stop payment when ever they feel like to do so.

There is nothing you can do about it.

That is why i only deal with sport-betting when i play online.
I pick sites where player play against other players.
The site only take a small commission and that is why there not exist any reason to limited or ban any members or stop any payment.

Quote from: Bally6354 on January 23, 2013, 11:07:41 PM

That is what I was alluding to regarding the holyman threads!

The majority of threads on that site are not worth investigating.

I don't mind admitting I have probably trawled through every roulette message board throughout the years just looking for bits and pieces of info that I could work with.

My personal opinion is numerology and the matrix stuff don't work.

cheers

I know one way how to deal with numbers that i find being optimal.
You catch a slight bias wheel and reduce the house edge or you ride out all does hot number due towards random fluctuation.  know one way how

Reason i don't post it is that others would only regard it as one roulette system among others.
Even if the method use physical parameters.

QuoteI remember there were death threats over that ripping off!

True.

I google on holyman plus roulette ...
I only find woody matrix ...

Sorry i don't believe in that ...

I remember some of the old names, this bobbybobby guy scam SeeJerek in the past with Kimo Li strategy and there was money involved.

It is based upon a charting method that was used before computers entering the world.
The two state the document describe is very similar towards singles contra larger series of events.

Its still a experiment and will update this later after more testing.

Chasing for events or regression/correction towards the mean.
I took Bayes document into the observation and calculations with Marigny's principals.

One state is when there is not happening to much with the distribution.
Singles and series of two chop for tiny, medium and long periods of time.
Then we have tiny, medium and long periods of time when larger series show.
In between does we have series of three.

I use one March to catch the regression/correction of larger series to show after singles and series of two chop.
And i use one March chasing to catch does dominant singles and series of two chops.

This is the results with today's random org file ...

Catch the regression/correction (larger series) during 300 trails.

LWWWWWLW
LLL
LLWWWWWWWLWLLWLWLWLWLWWLLWWW
LLL
LWLW
LLL
LW
LLL
LWWLLWLLWWLLW
LLL
LLWLLWWLLWLWLLWLWWLLWWWWLLWWWLWWWWWLWWLLW
LLL
LWLWWWLLWLLWLLWW

This one is the March chasing to catch the singles and series of two's.

LLL
WLWLWLLWWLLWLLWLWLW
LLL
WWW
LLL
WLWLWWWLWLWWW
LLL
WLWW
LLL
WWWLWLWLWW

The first option seams more tight overall, it also show that the strike ratio is much higher then the last option.

So sure there is a difference how you play or base you game upon, selection.
It should be the same, but in this case i am pretty sure it is not.

As the first option is sooner or later due to hit series of six, seven, eight, nine and so on during 300 trails and will produce strings with high strike ratio.
When you pick the last option, then the cycles of does chop has to hit very frequent if you are going to get the same strike ratio as option one.

We could also put it like this, if i was going to play Oscar Grind, then i would pick the first option.
As i would know before i start to play that i would sooner or later would hit larger series if they did not show in the beginning as i have never seen 300 trails with out them.
And if i was to play up as i go, positive progression i would also pick option 1.

Just took a look and want to say, nice topic ...

Cheers

Quote from: MarignyGrilleau on January 17, 2013, 07:59:21 PM
I like to flat bet my way through and i use fibbo when in the minus zone. After i win some i do play a regression letting ride my wins. It is pretty effective  , even with a very standard bet selection like FTL after a win that comes after a series of losses (LLW).


EXAMPLE:

[attachimg=1]

LOL i like your name as i am expert regarding his work.
I can see that you run numbers with notpad and by hand do some testing, cool.
It looks like you running Mac or Linux.

I also do allot of hand testing, but most regarding different even money bet selections.

Quote from: Bally6354 on January 17, 2013, 07:03:13 PM
Hello Sputnik

The only mention of the fibo in this particular book (beat the casino) is on page 76.

It just looks like a plain 12 step fibo to me...

1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 89 144 233 (risk 608)

He did go on to mention that he thought this method would be ideal for team play.

"one could use it eight hours per day for a solid week with reasonable expectation of winning about $20 per hour and having not a single series loss. A husband and wife team betting opposites could anticipate $40 per hour profit"

He went on to say....

"If one were to use this method for three to five hours at single zero roulette, the odds that he'd never lose his bet series would be enormous - surely better than 5/1"

Well, I don't call 5/1 odds enormous myself. He does seem to enthuse more about this method compared to the others he talks about.

cheers 

Thanks for the input ...
The fibo i been experimenting with in the past looks like this 1 1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55  89

I am not a progression freak, but i notice that you don't have to win every bet with the progression it self as winnings chop and produce tight streaks ...

What kind of bet selection for even money bets does he suggest in his book, curios.