BetOnline

Author Topic: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN  (Read 35421 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

palestis

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 668
  • Thanked: 500 times
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #210 on: March 27, 2017, 12:18:44 PM »
Example-1:    12,10, 5, 22,23,35.
Yes in this case we can play after the very first trigger 22,23,35, even if it followed  the LLL streak.
Because neither 22,23 were part of the LLL streak, and neither the target H dozen was part of the streak.

Sorry to muddy the waters, but according to rule #1 in your first post in the thread, this should be avoided:

Quote
1. If the same dozen appears repeatedly immediately preceding the trigger. (it's a sign of anomaly that can affect the rest of the dozens).

When Reyth asked what "repeatedly" means, you said 3+ times. Rule #2 is the one which says you should skip a trigger if it contains an outcome which was in the preceding streak. This is what prompted me to suggest that rules #1 and #2 amount to the same thing, namely "skip a trigger if there is a streak of 3+ prior to it", because whether the streak has an outcome in the trigger or not, you skip the trigger.

Anyway, this is how my tracker is coded, but probably best to wait until you've done some tests with it before recommending any changes.
I guess the word  "preceding" caused all the confusion.
In the sequence 12,10,5, 22,23,35,  technically the first trigger is 10,5,22 , but it doesn't fit the premises of "preceding".
Rather,  it should be worded the first trigger, "inclusive " 2 numbers in the trigger that were part of the streak.
But If we separate the entire streak from the very next trigger and avoid using it, then  ( as you suggested), it can become one and the same rule. I realize that now.
That is avoiding the first trigger immediately following a streak, whether the target  dozen is the one that was in the streak or not. That is avoiding trigger 22,23,35.
If the tracker is based on this premise that's fine.
I still expect the system to perform much better than the lengthy test results where no rules were observed. That is avoiding most 3 back to back losses and certainly 4+. ( not that 3 level losses were frequent enough to cause an alarm).
In fact HARRYJ has tested and plays this system without any attention to the rules.
And he has no problems with it whatsoever.
He likes playing seated in one roulette, and  he doesn't have the option to move from one roulette to another.
Therefore he has to use every betting opportunity to make his session worthwhile.

« Last Edit: March 27, 2017, 12:31:42 PM by palestis »
 
The following users thanked this post: Bayes, pip29, Reyth, jekhb76

Reyth

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3974
  • Thanked: 1280 times
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #211 on: March 27, 2017, 12:36:24 PM »
Awesome coding Bayes!
 
The following users thanked this post: palestis, Bayes, jekhb76

TERMINATOR

  • Search YouTube for MANDELA EFFECT
  • Mature Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 263
  • Thanked: 321 times
  • Gender: Male
  • MANDELA EFFECT
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #212 on: March 27, 2017, 01:08:36 PM »
@ Bayes

I love the look of your tracker. Not only are the 3 options for Dozens, Columns and DS awesome, but to be able to choose different progressions as well is REALLY helpful for testing purposes. Great work, Bayes!
 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth, jekhb76

TERMINATOR

  • Search YouTube for MANDELA EFFECT
  • Mature Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 263
  • Thanked: 321 times
  • Gender: Male
  • MANDELA EFFECT
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #213 on: March 27, 2017, 01:18:58 PM »
@ jekhb76

Eddy, thanks for sharing your method and advice in your Posts #194 and 200, it was sound and very helpful.

However, regarding post #204, I’m a little confused. Maybe it’s me? But it appears you use the word “trigger” to describe only ONE specific Dozen.  For example, when you said:

Quote
10 L  First Trigger)
05 L  Second Trigger)

You seem to be referring to the SINGLE NUMBER 10 as the 1st trigger, and #5 as the 2nd trigger. And not as a set of 3 numbers.

Palestis defined a “Trigger” as a set of THREE numbers, not as 1 number, when he said:.

Quote
The trigger is in the form of XXY. (XX are 2 numbers in the same dozen and Y is another dozen).

Can you clarify your use of the word “trigger” so I can follow your betting pattern in Post #204? Thank you.
 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth, jekhb76

ShadowBlue

  • New
  • **
  • Posts: 17
  • Thanked: 34 times
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #214 on: March 27, 2017, 01:24:28 PM »
I have been playing this system lately. I did play YXX and XXY with a 1-1-2 , 2-2-4 , 4-4-8 progression.

But i was not happy with the results. So i now only play the tweak suggested by Reyth only YXX.

I play it at 3 online tables at the same time. So no need to wait long for triggers. So far it looks good.

Playing it for 10 points profit hit and run style with the above progression it really looks good.

Thanks Palestis for this system...  ;D
 
The following users thanked this post: palestis, Reyth, jekhb76

palestis

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 668
  • Thanked: 500 times
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #215 on: March 27, 2017, 01:41:11 PM »
@Shadowblue.
This system was meant to be for live roulette in a B+M casino.
I cannot guarantee it for online playing. Especially the RNG type.
There is still a controversy whether or not the online casinos can be trusted.
And it has been the subject of extensive postings in many forums. With conflicting conclusions.
So I can't say with certainty if it will work in an online setting.
But sure YXX is a much stronger trigger that XYX or XXY for obvious reasons.
Because Y did not appear for 2 spins in the YXX form, and it still has 3 spins to go.
So you always have 5 chances for a 33.3% odds.
If I was betting with $50 or $100 starting chips chips then certainly I would only consider YXX for trigger.

« Last Edit: March 27, 2017, 01:49:02 PM by palestis »
 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth

jekhb76

  • Mature Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 292
  • Thanked: 343 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #216 on: March 27, 2017, 01:41:49 PM »
@Terminator

Sorry to cause some confusion, i just note the way i look at the triggers, maybe not the way it suposed to.

when i use the term trigger, it is because a dozen is the first part of three.
let me explain.

When we have the following dozenz,

L
L
M

I bet of M. for me the first L is trigger 1 and the secons L is trigger 2. I need to triggers before i can bet. So when i have to triggers i look for the next dozen to match.
if the 3rd dozen is not M i wait for a L.  then my first trigger is L and my second trigger is L and i bet on M. o know it sounds confusing but to me it is clear. maybe i shouldn't have used the term triggers in the first place, only the term Betting.
 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth

palestis

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 668
  • Thanked: 500 times
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #217 on: March 27, 2017, 01:58:42 PM »
Jekhb76
Could you mean that in an LLM sequence , L is the first trigger, then L again is the second trigger and then M is the target dozen?
( 3rd trigger for your betting purposes).
I think you break up an entire trigger in the form XXY,  into sub-triggers.
Which is fine as long as you understand it your way.
But for this system we mean the entire LLM sequence as a single trigger where the target of betting is M.
Or maybe you mean that in an LLM sequence the second L is your first trigger (because it completed the XX ) Then M is the second trigger ( and the dozen to bet on) because it completed the XXY we are looking for.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2017, 02:06:48 PM by palestis »
 
The following users thanked this post: pip29, Reyth, jekhb76

TERMINATOR

  • Search YouTube for MANDELA EFFECT
  • Mature Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 263
  • Thanked: 321 times
  • Gender: Male
  • MANDELA EFFECT
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #218 on: March 27, 2017, 02:30:00 PM »
@ Palestis

Thanks again for addressing my concerns. Regarding your Post #206, for the most part you have made it more clear, yes. Out of the 5 Examples you gave, I understand clearly Examples #2,3, and 5. No problem. Example #1, I THINK I understand. And #4 I need some clarification.

I’d like to comment on Examples #1 and #4 please.

Quote
Example-1:    12,10, 5, 22,23,35.
Yes in this case we can play after the very first trigger 22,23,35, even if it followed  the LLL streak.
Because neither 22,23 were part of the LLL streak, and neither the target H dozen was part of the streak.

Because of what you recently posted to Bayes in Post #210, my understanding now is that we can play this first trigger EITHER WAY, correct? Whether we play it or skip it really makes no difference.

I’m assuming this is why, in an earlier post, you said we SKIP the following trigger:

Quote
If there is a sequence of numbers like 25-30-27-32-10-8-21 you avoid betting the 10-8-21 trigger

So, in the above case, we CAN bet the 10-8-21 trigger, because none of the numbers in 10-8-21 were part of the Dozen that repeated. Correct? This is up to the discretion of the user. We can either bet it or skip it, correct?

As for your example #4:

Quote
Example-4:   12,10,5,30,22,7, 32,35,. The very first trigger after the LLL is 7- 32- 35,
In this case we bet the 1ST TRIGGER. No need to skip it and look for the 2nd trigger.
Because after the LLL the new numbers broke the streak and things are back to normal.

I DO understand why 7- 32- 35 is the first trigger. But when you said, “the new numbers broke the streak and things are back to normal” were you referring to the #30 and 22? And the fact that there were TWO XYZ's AFTER the streak of LLL?

Palestis, to help me understand more clearly, let me ask this. What if the number 30 was not spun? For example, after the LLL, instead of 30-22-7-32-35, we had the following:

22-7-32-35

The 22-7-32 is XYZ (does that break the LLL pattern also? Or do you need BOTH an H and M number to break the LLL streak?)

Would you still bet the 7-32-35 trigger next in the above example? Or would you skip the 1st trigger in this case?

Thanks again for your help, Palestis.

« Last Edit: March 27, 2017, 03:03:38 PM by TERMINATOR »
 
The following users thanked this post: kav, Reyth, jekhb76

Harryj

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 359
  • Thanked: 171 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOMENICO
« Reply #219 on: March 27, 2017, 04:17:21 PM »
@ Terminator,
             Sorry for the slow response. You question re my progression.
     3..3 is the 2 bets on the DS
       6 is the total bet
       6 is the total progression bet
      18 is the payout for a win
      12 is the profit

 4....4 is the 2 DS bets
       8 is the total bet
      14 is the total progression bet
      24 is the payout
      10 is the profit.
      As can be seen this progression is designed to balance profit with expected hit rate. Established by the range statistics. The 2 extra bets are insurance, to increase safety and the W/L rate. As Pal pointed out. I play the flow at a single table, with no option of checking other signboards.
      While Pal said I ignore the red flags this is not quite true.eg. LLL 3 dozens the same. I restart the count. ie. I wait for 3 spins to form another trigger. LMH 3 dozens present. I restart the count. Wait another 3 spins. Zero appears during count. As I said to Bayes. This is a maybe. Long term testing doesn't show that simply ignoring zero makes much difference. I consider the last 3 spins from the win eg. HLL/bet H....LHwin. The last 3 spins are LLH/ bet H.......MMLHwin.. Last 3 spins MLH/no bet . This allows me to take advantage of favourable flows. It is not unusual to get 4 or 5 quick wins.
        Those are the fixed rules. No fixed red flags, but I watch for obvious anomolies. The above rules tend to take care of most, but if the flow looks wrong, wait a few spins for it to normalise.
        Playing from a small B/R I do not increase my bet after a loss. I rely on the excellent W/L ratio to recover. With a large B/R obviously an increase will take ad advantage of the rare back to back losses.
      Harry
.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2017, 04:24:59 PM by Harryj »
 
The following users thanked this post: kav, pip29, Reyth, jekhb76, TERMINATOR

Lemon

  • New
  • **
  • Posts: 2
  • Thanked: 6 times
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #220 on: March 27, 2017, 09:07:06 PM »

Hello,

I've been lurking this forum and this thread for a while now and have been playing around with this system for the last week or so.    My observation so far is that the  XYY trigger is so much better than the other options (as noted also by other players).  Why not only play on XYY and ignore the others?

Cheers
 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth, jekhb76

palestis

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 668
  • Thanked: 500 times
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #221 on: March 27, 2017, 09:31:05 PM »
Yes I agree and also said, that the YXX trigger ( you changed it to XYY but you mean the same thing),  is stronger that the others. And if you have the patience to ignore all others and play that one only, then by all means do so. it is highly recommended for high stake bets.
But for very low bets,  as it is usually the case,  then you speed up the game and your visit to the casino by playing all forms of the trigger.
The system was designed a certain way and it performed well that way.
If you can make a tweak that makes it even more bulletproof,  I can't be more agreeable.
 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth, jekhb76

palestis

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 668
  • Thanked: 500 times
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #222 on: March 27, 2017, 09:54:42 PM »

Quote
Example-1:    12,10, 5, 22,23,35.
Yes in this case we can play after the very first trigger 22,23,35, even if it followed  the LLL streak.
Because neither 22,23 were part of the LLL streak, and neither the target H dozen was part of the streak.

Because of what you recently posted to Bayes in Post #210, my understanding now is that we can play this first trigger EITHER WAY, correct? Whether we play it or skip it really makes no difference.

I’m assuming this is why, in an earlier post, you said we SKIP the following trigger:

Quote
If there is a sequence of numbers like 25-30-27-32-10-8-21 you avoid betting the 10-8-21 trigger

So, in the above case, we CAN bet the 10-8-21 trigger, because none of the numbers in 10-8-21 were part of the Dozen that repeated. Correct? This is up to the discretion of the user. We can either bet it or skip it, correct?

In the example-1 it is clear that after the LLL the new numbers 22, 23, 35 are unrelated to the LLL streak. Therefore you may want to play this trigger. Though it contradicts a previous statement, where I said you skip it. But the final verdict is that whether you play it on not it doesn't make any difference for  the system .
The argument for playing it is that the danger has passed (streak of one dozen),  and you got new numbers and a target dozen unrelated to the streak.
The argument for skipping it, is mostly for the sake of following standard procedure.  Instead of pausing and examining the numbers to see if there is a conflict between the numbers in the  streak and the new numbers after it. Which consumes some brain as you try to figure out what to do.
Also skipping helps Bayes's tracker, as is it much easier to work with if there is only one course of action after a streak. Instead of trying to make distinctions all the time. 
But for playing it live in a casino, if you play that trigger  is fine, and if you skip it is fine too.
Either action will not affect the system in a damaging way.

As for your example #4:

Quote
Example-4:   12,10,5,30,22,7, 32,35,. The very first trigger after the LLL is 7- 32- 35,
In this case we bet the 1ST TRIGGER. No need to skip it and look for the 2nd trigger.
Because after the LLL the new numbers broke the streak and things are back to normal.

I DO understand why 7- 32- 35 is the first trigger. But when you said, “the new numbers broke the streak and things are back to normal” were you referring to the #30 and 22? And the fact that there were TWO XYZ's AFTER the streak of LLL?

Palestis, to help me understand more clearly, let me ask this. What if the number 30 was not spun? For example, after the LLL, instead of 30-22-7-32-35, we had the following:

22-7-32-35

The 22-7-32 is XYZ (does that break the LLL pattern also? Or do you need BOTH an H and M number to break the LLL streak?)

Would you still bet the 7-32-35 trigger next in the above example? Or would you skip the 1st trigger in this case?
Yes that's correct. 30 and 22 are the 2 numbers  that broke the streak. And the fact that there were 2 XYZ adds to that logic of thought
Now if 30 was not spun and only 27 came, then you have only one number that broke the streak.
 That's a little more risky than having 2 numbers break the streak.  In addition the L dozen becomes the target. That's the risky part.
So because it was the L dozen that was in the streak , and then it becomes the target after only 1 number break , just to be safe we skip this trigger. 
In general,  when you come to the point where you feel puzzled as to what to do,
the best thing is to let some spins go by idle and free your self from thinking too much.
Like Sheridan said, if things look too screwy, get away from them by letting spins pass by or move on to another roulette.
It is much easier to do that in actual play at a casino, than in- home testing, where you need to have some standard procedures.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2017, 10:00:45 PM by palestis »
 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth, TERMINATOR

TERMINATOR

  • Search YouTube for MANDELA EFFECT
  • Mature Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 263
  • Thanked: 321 times
  • Gender: Male
  • MANDELA EFFECT
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #223 on: March 28, 2017, 01:00:58 AM »
@ Harryj

Thank you for clarifying your progression. It seems very interesting, and safe. I like your idea of 2 extra bets for "insurance."

I also like your idea of considering the last 3 spins from the win, to take advantage of favorable flows. What I like MOST about that idea is there is a LOT LESS waiting time between triggers. Ingenious. I'm going to incorporate that into my play as well.

Just curious, do you find it more profitable (or is there less variance) playing the DS rather than the dozens? Or is it just a personal preference for you?

Thanks again for sharing this awesome method with everyone! You and Palestis have done such a wonderful job creating this.

 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth

TERMINATOR

  • Search YouTube for MANDELA EFFECT
  • Mature Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 263
  • Thanked: 321 times
  • Gender: Male
  • MANDELA EFFECT
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #224 on: March 28, 2017, 01:03:57 AM »
@ Palestis

Okay, I understand much better now. Thank you. Explaining the advantages and disadvantages of both your examples helped a lot. You're awesome!
 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth