Thank you for the corrections Bayes.

To be honest, I thought the figure of 80% was too high. With only a 4% margin, I would rather play a single chip at a time and try and capture an early win.

I gave my Asterix* strategy a runout at the casino tonight and I hit a few numbers and had a few near misses which was entertaining. I used 8 as the cut-off point for the running count.

Thank you XXVV for a very interesting post. You always raise so many good points.

I don't worry so much nowadays about any charts/books that I take into the casino. I am there to win and like to play my own game with the payouts at the game of roulette giving me the best opportunity to get in and get out with a decent return.

There are a lot of good reviews on the Holloway book. I never expect to find a miracle system in a book. I am satisfied if it can just spark an idea or two which I haven't previously thought about. My best idea for roulette actually came from reading a book on Baccarat.

I first discovered the idea of close repeats whilst reading RWD's book on Hot Numbers. His idea was along the lines that if you got 3 in 20 after an absence of 30......attack for 9 spins with an extra chip on spins 7,8,9. So I suppose that also has an element of RTM about it. However many times 3 hits would not go to 4 in my testing and live play of his concept. Also there are times when 2 going to 3 can be a stretch as well. That's where I think the 4 streams idea can bridge the gap a little because we are getting more bang for our buck. Obviously one of the most important aspects is knowing when to stop chasing and hopefully observing the 'running count' in my Asterix* idea will help a little.

The idea of a playing partner is a good one. Unfortunately most of my friends who like a bet are more interested in Horseracing than Roulette. Still, never say never.

Thanks again. 

For anybody not sure about the 4 streams.

The first one is the numbers as they appear.

The second one is the wheel layout.

The Third+Fourth ones are manufactured.

I have always found this idea intriguing because you will get hot numbers just the same in streams 2, 3 or 4 as in stream 1. People go on about dealer's signature and croupiers hitting sections.....you will see exactly the same action going on in streams 2-4 like a run of numbers hitting 15,32,0,12,32,4 etc...(voisins) It's all an illusion a lot of times IMO and I don't think dealer's signature exists to the degree a lot of people seem to think it does. Anyway, that's all a different story. The point is working with 4 streams also means you wouldn't need to be sitting around all day if you were wanting to play something like RTM. You will get more opportunities across the 4 streams than just playing 1 alone.

The hard part comes from calculating the bets you need to place for streams 2-4 because they are not coventional. If you need to bet number 8 from stream 4 according to my chart/book, that does not correspond with number 8 on the physical wheel. But I can go down to number 8 in the chart/book and look across to stream 4 and it will tell me the corresponding number that I need to play. You couldn't physically work it all out in your head. (I don't even think rainman was that good, lol)

I will do some more testing of the Asterix* Strategy and see how it goes.

Here is a picture of a page in my 4 stream book. It covers from 0-36.

The left hand side is where I write down the results on my roulette card and the right hand side is where I work out my bets for the next spin. You can imagine it gets some funny looks in the casino.[smiley]aes/confused.png[/smiley]

The theory is that one of the 4 streams should produce a run at some point where you are getting frequent repeats within a small frame of numbers.

Of course the 4 streams can also cover 12 dozens, 12 columns, 24 diferent e/c's and 24 lines.

Just to add to that...

The possibilty for 5 consecutive numbers with at least one duplicate is 24%. So that's roughly a 1/4 shot. Many times I see things with a 1/4 probability go missing for 14+ times and then bunch up when they do start hitting. I think that's what wipes a lot of players out at the table because they are using a static bunch of numbers...then a small group of numbers (ie. 4, 5 or 6) start hitting like crazy which they are not on and the player then assumes they surely can't hit again! Guess what ? They do! I see that a lot. 

I have sent away for L G Holloway's book and am looking forward to reading his take on gaps.

I do have some ideas for this. I sometimes like to work in multiple streams of numbers (a bit similar to Wendell I suppose) Working in 4 streams is my limit and I think it could be a good way to check for a kind of RTM effect (return to mean) when the unique numbers have thrown up some long sequences and then return to shorter sequences.

 If I see a marquee with 6 unique numbers at the top, the probability is 55% that there will be no 7 consecutive numbers. I will play the last 6 numbers, expecting a repeat number with a probability of 55%. I lose that bet. Now, the probability to see an 8th unique number is: 64%. If I play the last 8 roulette numbers, I expect a repeat roulette number with a 64% probability. Still lost? If I play the last 9 roulette numbers, I expect a repeat-number with a 73% probability. By now, I should have won almost every time. If not, if I play the last 10 roulette numbers, I expect a repeat-number with an 80% probability.

Let's figure out a cost: 6+7+8+9 units = 30 numbers. Keep in mind that a martingale is possible after this point (a bad-case scenario). I have an 80% probability to win 36 units. If I randomly play one roulette number for 38 spins, my winning probability is 65%. If you randomly play one roulette number for 30 spins, the winning probability is 55%.

Playing 6+7+8+9 units = 30 numbers leads to an 80% winning probability. Think about it next time you are at a roulette table. You can afford to play exactly 30 roulette bets. You are cautious and you play one number at a time for the next 30 roulette spins. The probability that you will lose all your money in 30 spins is: 45%. That is, the chance (degree of certainty, actually) is 45% that you will NOT win a single time. Playing 4 (four) wheel spins 6+7+8+9 units = 30 numbers: Your chance to lose all your money is: 20%. Your degree of hope is twice higher than in the first case scenario. You be the judge!

Here is the basic mongoose straight from the horses mouth.

(excuse the hand in the second pic, lol)


There are a variety of different ways to play the mongoose as explained in the book.

They range from 'basic' to 'short cycle' to the 'aggressive'.

There are 7 different progressions in the 'progression chapter' in this book.

1)The perfect unit.
2)The pit bull.
3)The bricklayers wall.
4)The boxer.
5)The mongoose.
6)The hammer.
7)The t-square.

They range from the most passive and conservative (perfect unit) to the most aggressive (the hammer)

One day, I will get around to reviewing them.

Hello Tomla,

GLC (George) on the Rouletteforum cc had the best explanation for the mongoose that I have read on the net.

I will post that up here for anybody that's interested...........

Mongoose bet sequence has 7 possible bets
The first two are a parlay
Three and four are a capped martingale
Five and six is a flatbet
Seven is to recover a lost 5 and 6 flatbet.

The 7 steps are in 3 sets.  If you lose any set, you start over.
Set #1 is the parlay.
If you lose either of these bets you  will be -1, start over.
If you win them both you are +3 so move to set 2.

Set #2 is the 2 step martingale starting with 1 unit or whatever your unit level is for this attack.
If you lose both of these bets you will be even having won 3 units in set 1 and having lost the 3 units in this set.  Start over.
If you win either of these bets you will be at +4 (+3 from set #1; +1 from set #2).
If you win either of these bets move to set 3.

Set #3 starts with a 1 unit bet.  If you win bet #5, you will be at +5 which is our goal.  Start over.
If you lose bet #5, bet #6 is a flatbet equal to #5.  If you win bet #6 you will be even for set 3 so rebet #5.
If you lost bet #5 and #6, you go to bet #7.
Bet #7 has 2 options:
1) bet 2 units.  A win breaks you even for set #3 so you can rebet #5.  A loss brings us to even so we start over.
2) bet 3 units.  A win nets us +1 unit for set 3 which gives us our 5 unit win for the mongoose sequence.  Start over.  A loss of 3 units places us at -1 for the sequence and we start over.
That's how you play the mongoose.  It gives you a pretty good chance of winning.  Each win recovers 5 losses.  I'm not saying it changes the odds to our favor, but it does give us more time for a little luck to help us.

Here's another way of expaining it:
(1) Bet 1 and 2 which are a Parley – Bet 1 is 1 unit and if it wins then bet 2 units
If either 1 or 2 loses then you go to the next figure in the Progression.  If both bets win, next:

(2) Bet 3 is 1 unit and if this wins then go to (3), but if it loses then multiply
the bet x 2 and try to win bet 4. If either bet 3 or 4 wins then go to (3).
If bets 3 and 4 lose then you go back to (1) and the next figure in the
Progression. However, because you have already won +3 units from (1) you
don't actually lose.

(3) Bet 5 is 1 unit and if it wins then you are finished (in profit with +5) .
If bet 5 of 1 unit loses, you bet bet 6 which is 1 unit also and if bet 6 then wins, you go back and try bet 5 of 1 unit again.
If bet 5 of 1 unit loses and then bet 6 of 1 unit also loses,  you bet bet 7 of 3 units.
Win 7 and the game finishes (in profit of +5)
Lose bet 7 and you are -1 for this attack.  Go back to (1) and the next figure in the Progression.

...................Of course, that's for the E/C's.

I slightly modified it for the double dozens.

There is still a parlay bet for the first stage (much easier to accomplish regularly when playing the double dozens or columns)

The second stage still gives you a second bite at the cherry with the martingale component for the second bet of this stage. (One difference however is that you don't get to keep your starting stake in this version like you do with the original playing the E/C's if you lose both bets in stage two)

The slight difference to the original is in my stage three where it is just a carbon copy of stage two (I must have lost inspiration at this point, lol) The original on the E/C's can have three steps to this stage and possibly more.

Working out the staking is a little bit more complicated as well with my version using the double dozens.

The casino I regularly visit has a £5 minimum on the dozens/columns. But I need to start with 2 x £10 bets. Then I can reduce it to £7.50 for the first part of stage 2 and first part of stage 3 if all goes well.

I played this last night on the dozens/columns as outlined above and won +15 units fairly quickly and skedaddled. It's easier to track than my pairs ideas across the three E/C's if I am honest.

cheers.

Another example similar to above and this time it's the 'terrible two's' out in force!

[attachimg=1]

The EO and OE pairs have went missing for 13 consecutive pairs (26 spins).

So that means either EE or OO are going to be showing.

So the rule is....

If the 2 (EO) and the 4 (OE) are both absent. Bet the same as the first result on the second result of the pair.

This run produced a streak of 10 wins. My record in actual live play is 15.

Positive progressions are the way to go when you are trying to ride streaks. One of the reasons why I particularly love the mongoose with the parlay as the first step.

This pairs bet is one of my favourites and probably just about comes up more than anything else as a trigger.

[attachimg=1]

The HL and LL pairs have went missing together for 6 consecutive pairs (12 spins).

I will wait until I see them go missing for 3 consecutive times and then attack.

So obviously I am betting for HIGH to appear as the second result of the pair.

Quote from: Tomla on March 15, 2015, 11:36:22 PM
bally you still use this?

yep...still going strong with this and my pairs betting.

It is easy to play (and profitable most times) when I can't be bothered to bring out the heavy armoury.

I love the mongoose. My favourite progression of all time.

cheers

R-W, Those side-bets look appealing at first glance. But the waiting time and variance unless you play in a team makes them just another slog IMO. A single player tracking for the tie 7 with the  your-Way Egalite side-bet (which should theoretically offer the lowest variance) can average around 2 units per shoe. The casino's where I play also force you to play on either the Banker or Player and the maximum bet for the side-bet is low.

The  your Way Egalite is the best side-bet.

your Way Egalite

    Extremely vulnerable to card counting.
    Ten different wagers, tie on each point total.
    Different card counting system for each.
    Different trigger, EV, frequency , units per shoe for each.
    Team of 3 counters can earn 17.80 units per shoe.
    Team of 3 counters can earn 21.90 units per 100 hands.

I will stick to the wheel thanks.

There is one simple reason for picking roulette over other casino games at least.

A single hit pays 35/1!

You can make a lot of money in a short space of time with roulette. The other games are all a bit of a grind. Horesracing and sports betting can offer some nice payouts as well if you are into betting in multiples....BUT....I don't like the human element involved in that sphere where corruption is rife.

Roulette is just you against the wheel.

Thank you klw for your kind comments.

I am going to remove any unneccesary comments from this thread and lock it. I am not here to get into a childish slanging match with people. I think Koetsch did some good work here by asking the right kind of questions.

Quote from: ADulay on March 09, 2015, 01:44:31 AM
All,

  Really guys.   Is your ego so weak that the mere mention of a comment or remark that "you" don't like causes you to blow up and start deleting individual messages?

Maybe it's your ego that's so weak ADulay, that even though you got outvoted on the topic, that you still feel the need to go on about it. Do you feel it diminishes your authority that people can be responsible for their own threads?

If someone just wants to make snide remarks in a thread without really making the effort to give any constructive criticism, then I feel it's warranted for the author of that thread to delete the post.