Quote from: john gold
You can see nothing happened in the first column which would incorporate the traditional rules with the 'claudio3' system.

The second column is playing 'pocket distances'

So you can see a 15 came up twice. Then I would look to play the 14+16 pocket distances.
The 14 came up on the very first go and made a nice 34 unit gain.

The third column is playing using the numbers 0 to 36 in a clock like fashion.

So you see here that the 7 came up twice. Then I would look to play the 6+8. The 6 came up 5 spins later.

It is just another way of playing it giving you more opportunities.

Somebody playing the traditional way would still be waiting to see the first 'double' appear.
The 3 column player would already be in the bar spending his 60 unit profits.

Quote from: john gold
You can see nothing happened in the first column which would incorporate the traditional rules with the 'claudio3' system.

The second column is playing 'pocket distances'

So you can see a 15 came up twice. Then I would look to play the 14+16 pocket distances.
The 14 came up on the very first go and made a nice 34 unit gain.

The third column is playing using the numbers 0 to 36 in a clock like fashion.

So you see here that the 7 came up twice. Then I would look to play the 6+8. The 6 came up 5 spins later.

It is just another way of playing it giving you more opportunities.

Somebody playing the traditional way would still be waiting to see the first 'double' appear.
The 3 column player would already be in the bar spending his 60 unit profits.

Quote from: revolver
if a system win the most of the time, you only need to control how much you want to lose... I don't like progressions.. and that is a progression Mr JG...

Quote from: john gold
You are right revolver   

I looked at playing this using my '3 column approach' It seems interesting enough!

[attach=1]
(Click image to expand)

Quote from: john gold
Day 2.

108 spins +18.

Lightning kind of struck twice today. I was down about 30 units or so and needed to back 8 and 11 on spin 106.
Luckily the 11 came in and saved my bacon like it did on Day 1. I was down around 60 units at one point.

I am playing with a 72 unit bank. That means I might not make it to spin 108 sometimes. What I intend to do is the following....

Play 1 unit using a 72 unit bank. If I lose the whole 72 unit bank, play with 2 units on the next game. That can be flexible as well. When playing with 2 units, once I get into profit, revert back to 1 unit again. It's a bit like what 'gr8player' talks about. You never want to be betting 2 units or 3, 4 etc.... any more than you have to.

It is all just a bit of fun. I am only playing for small stakes. I like the idea behind it and I want to see how it holds up for a month in real play.

I did some more testing last night and I have not yet had 2 back to back losing sessions. I did hit one bad losing session in testing which lost 160 units. So that is only 2 bad sessions I have encountered.  A 230 loss and the 160 loss. The other sessions were mostly winners apart from a few ones which lost only a few units. This is why I like the idea of the 72 unit bank.

Is anybody else testing this or playing for real. It would be interesting to hear your results.

cheers.

Quote from: sniper
Hello Victor,

Thanks for the interesting system. I"play virtual" till 2 sets of losses and start to play real for 1 set. Win or loss stop and start tracking. I follow your good old method, after "L L" I bet for a "W".

The going is slow but I have been doing very well. No progression, only flat bet.

Regards
sniper

Quote from: revolver
interesting but i think that in real casinos with real dealers, we can track and see if repeat sectors or numbers, then we can play two in one systems.

Regards

Quote from: john gold
I spend a few hours in my local casino most afternoons. Since this is easy enough to track, I decided to play it for the 108 spins as the author suggests.

Day 1.

108 spins.  0 (broke even)   

I was down about 50 units at one point around spin 60. I was playing 4 numbers on the 108th spin and the number 11 which was one of the 4 came in. I got a very early winner and got excited hoping it would replicate some of my test results where a quick winner was normally a good indicator of a decent session. I will give it a good go and see where it ends up after a months results. A flat betting method such as this betting just a few numbers does have the potential to win for a very long time. I will update the results after each session.

cheers

Quote from: revolver
Thanks Mr JG! try tracking each session with new dealer comes, if he is gone, just end session, i think it will be more efficient.

Regards

Quote from: john gold
6th session. 200 spins -2 units.

7th session. 200 spins +191. (did reach 250 at one point)

8th session. 100 spins. +104.

That's enough testing for me.

2000 spins (not sure how many bets placed)  +527 units.

like I said, I did all the tests on random.org. It would be funny (or not so funny) if I go play on the physical wheel now and lose with this. It is a neat little method. There were one or two sticky sessions where I got the feeling it was going to be a case of treading water. The really good sessions always got away to a flying start. I think the trick, as the author suggested, is to just take the losses as they come and not try and force a win on the day. RWD (Roy Ward Dickson) advocated the same with his hot number method. Losing days suck, but maybe with this, the winning days will more than make up for it. Who knows.

cheers

Quote from: john gold
I like the simplicity behind this one and spent some time testing it today.

1st session. 500 spins +260 units.

2nd session. 300 spins -230 units.

3rd session. 300 spins +179 units.

4th session. 200 spins +84. (was at around +170)

5th session. 200 spins -59.

Total +234 after 1500 spins.

I have to say that I was using random.org for my testing. What strikes me is how at times, the RNG can mimic a live wheel pretty well in the sense that you see a lot of close numbers. (by that, I mean like 5,10 or 7,29 next to each other on the physical wheel) So it begs the question: Is something like 'dealers signature' a real phenomenon or not?
I am inclined to think people make too much of it and it is just our brains trying to look for a connection that is not there.

An example: Some RNG numbers.
5
4
10
21
23
19
5
19

If I looked at them without knowing they were RNG, my brain would be thinking along the lines of the croupier is alternating between the tier numbers and the right hand side of zero. But the thing is that's RNG. I see this all the time. Once you have crunched a few numbers and know the wheel inside out, you start to see the exact same things on RNG as you do on a live wheel.

Sorry to go off the beaten track but I thought I would mention it after testing this method on RNG. You could say it's not to be played on RNG because you are relying on the closeness of the numbers on a physical wheel. I got to say, I don't really think it makes a hell of a difference.

Quote from: esoito
I ask myself what  'forces' or 'influences' or whatever are at work "behind the scenes".

Surely there's a bit more than just random going on? 

Or is that simply some sort of gullible wishful-thinking on my part?

Quote from: esoito
"You start a series and as soon as the first numbers doubles (in average between the 8th and 10th spin) play its two neighbors, without betting the number which doubled..."

And what of the corollary to that?   ...as soon as the first number halves...

Quote from: VLS
Dear MadMax, when you see the "movement" of the hot zones on the wheel/disc you realize it "moves" from time to time as the game develops.

By not re-tracking you are changing with them and taking advantage of this natural "moment".

The Humble but real system profits from these zones where the hits clump, moving with the "zones" puts you in a better position to make it more profitable.

Vic

Quote from: MadMax
Just want to inform you about something I recogniced while playing on this system: it seems to work much better if you play it without retracking when you use my tracker. Can´t explain why, but without retracking my BR grows faster with less losing sessions. So I don´t recommend to use this feature!

Quote from: Green Lit
Hi,
I have played this for 223 spins and I'm up over 300 units.Thank you for the translation Victor and thank you for the tracker MadMax....strange how this works..

Quote from: MadMax
Thank you Victor for translating this system!
As I got 10 Euro ND bonus yesterday from William Hill, I thought, that seems to be good to give this  system a try.
So I started playing yesterday and today, maybe 4-5 hours and I´m up at 58 Euros now (live tables with 10 cent unitsize). Some losing sessions yet, but the winning ones are much more often.
I´m curious if it holds up so good!
And as I don´t want to come without a guest gift to your forum, I attached the tracker I have done for this system which I use by myself. If you start it, you will be asked if you want to retrack after a losing/winning session. This is a tweak I have implemented to get more betting opportunities and does the following: if you win or you have had a losing session, it retracks until the number, were the previous number would be a repeat. So you don´t get a betting signal immediately, but quicker than in the original rules. If you want to play the original rules, just click no on the question.

Download: [attachmini=1]

---

Quote from: revolver
where´s the tracker?

thanks

Quote from: MadMax
Hi revolver. It should directly be shown under my post (Humble but Real.rar)
I have attached the version 1.1 here. By playing the tracker, I noticed that it could be streesy if new numbers are qulified to bet if lets say 4 or 6 numbers are already betted, because it showed the numbers in a numerical way from 0 to 36.
Now I have changed it, so that the numbers are shown as they got qualified. It´s more easy to see which numbers are new to bet.
Cheers

Download: [attachmini=2]

QuoteI start off by having a good bet selection based on solid principles. These have been tested and tweaked for triggers and found to consistently win more than they lose.

Mechanical Triggers on their own are more likely losers!!

Be aware that the only loophole is to drop them when not showing and using them while they are showing. Why? Because the times you aren't betting a trigger (when it's not coming) the times you are saving losing the units as the casino accounts a continuous-play trigger bettor to lose at the rate expected. Instead of losing the units with the mechanical trigger that is not coming, you are making units with the trigger that is in place, which is currently delivering.

QuoteKnowing when to stop is essential to success. Whilst playing the game, money-management is the key to stop/loss. You recommend a positive progression on wins... and a maximum draw-down on losses. So we are not chasing our losses, but recouping a loss through future wins in other sessions.

Exactly. Never chase losses. A lost cycle shouldn't demolish your strategy. A concatenation of lost cycles should be faced with the very minimal unit after the first one, hence when you are losing "too close to each other" the casino can only take minimal units; but when you are winning consecutively, you take a larger chunk with an increased unit value from the compound. It makes a difference playing this way.

QuoteThe new maximum draw-down after winning +45 is now 45?
And therefore, no bet should make you go lower than 45?
And if it would, then it is time to exit, i.e. go home?

Right. End your session when next bet goes past your maximum draw-down.

QuoteIf you end the day winning... Do you continue the positive progression into the next day

You divide the wins 3-ways, and then rise your base unit according to what the reinvesting stack contributed to your first bank.
 
Example.

You use a 100-unit bank.

You made exactly +100 units (now there are 200 units in front of you)

You divide your +100 units 3-way:

- 33 units for reinvesting (increases first bankroll: 100 + 33 = 133 units now for first bank. Your session bankroll being 100 units, then you divide 133 / 100 = 1.33 as base unit for next session, and continue compounding as long as you are winning).

- 33 units for reserve (increases the "cushion" of minimal-unit banks between the casino and you; the more minimal unit banks you have in reserve, the better)

- 33 units for you. This is your prize for the won session; your NET WIN. As your unit increases the value this increases the actual amount of money you pull to your real-life pocket after each session!

QuoteIf I lose a session... I start over again with minimal unit value - the minimum BR being drawn from the reserve stack?

Exactly.

QuoteWhat percentage of the daily winnings should be reserved?

Parting 3-ways, it means 33% of total won in played session.

QuoteLanky once wrote that when he won a certain amount... instead of going home, he would continue to play (with those winnings only) ...and was able to build several reserved banks on the side.

This type of play is strict; once you reached your win goal, not a single more spin in the session.

Quote- Net wins. This is what we are all looking for...

Yes.

By compounding the unit size you make a better pocket. Over time.

QuoteThe ball in now in your court... opps, I mean wheel/disc... 

Oh! Talking about disc. Let me upload a printable disc/wheel.

Cheers!
Victor

QuoteYes, I'm slowly grasping everything Roulette-related... so much to learn!   

Let me see if I understand correctly so far...

I start off by having a good bet selection based on solid principles. These have been tested and tweaked for triggers and found to consistently win more than they lose. I use these in my strategy when "advancing into battle".

Knowing when to stop is essential to success. Whilst playing the game, money-management is the key to stop/loss. You recommend a positive progression on wins... and a maximum draw-down on losses. So we are not chasing our losses, but recouping a loss through future wins in other sessions.

Quote from: VLS- You must always apply the principle of "MAXIMUM draw-down". You must exit when your next bet makes you go lower than what you brought for a session bankroll. Example of a Max. draw-down scenario: you come to the table with 100 chips/units, are up +45 and have a total of 145 chips now and your maximum draw-down at this point is 145 - 100 = 45 locked chips/units. When working the averages this mandatory principle makes a big difference -HUGE in fact! As opposed to the gambler whose stop-loss is leaving up to the last unit/chip to the casino.

The new maximum draw-down after winning +45 is now 45?
And therefore, no bet should make you go lower than 45?
And if it would, then it is time to exit, i.e. go home?
If you end the day winning... Do you continue the positive progression into the next day?
 
- Reinvest stack. This includes the positive progression from the last winning game. If I lose a session... I start over again with minimal unit value - the minimum BR being drawn from the reserve stack?
- Reserve stack. What percentage of the daily winnings should be reserved? Lanky once wrote that when he won a certain amount... instead of going home, he would continue to play (with those winnings only) ...and was able to build several reserved banks on the side. I imagine for unlucky streaks? 
- Net wins. This is what we are all looking for... 

The ball in now in your court... opps, I mean wheel/disc...     

Laughter & Light,
Lady K

QuoteThank you Victor!

Disc-play is completely new to me, but I have noticed repeated patterns on the table that seem to vary, depending upon the particular bet one is playing.  Most systems/strategies are based on exploiting these patterns, and most (or is it all?) seem to have a positive and negative cycle.  Is there a rule of thumb that one could follow as to when these cycles "peak", in order to know when to stop? Or do these positive/negative cycles fluctuate randomly also?

Hugs,
Kathryn

Yes. Cycles can fluctuate.

Your only choice is to accommodate your unit to the lowest when losing and maximize it on concatenated wins.

It is a good idea to divide wins in 3 stacks:

- Reinvest stack.
- Reserve stack.
- Net wins.

Little by little I hope you are getting a good grasp of the "big picture".

Playing small, independent cycles, maximizing wins, minimizing losses. Compounding and keeping a reserve.

Over to you