Roulette Forum

Roulette Forum => Roulette Systems => Topic started by: palestis on February 13, 2017, 07:43:04 PM

Title: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on February 13, 2017, 07:43:04 PM
I have been working on this system for a long time now (partly the reason I have been inactive in the forum), and I am happy to announce that it works extremely well, and if some defenses are incorporated into this system it's bulletproof from losing.
             It's extremely simple and triggers come fast. It also an extension of the law of 2/3s.
The system has been tested on paper with real spins from Wiesbaden and also in a real casino, and I can't get it to lose.
The trigger is in the form of XXY. (XX are 2 numbers in the same dozen and Y is another dozen).
 Needless to say that XYX and YXX is the same thing as far as the trigger is concerned.
When we see this trigger in the last 3 numbers spun we simply bet the single dozen (Y), for 3 bets
  However 4 bets is fine too if the minimum is low enough.
Examples:
22,17,35. We bet the 3rd dozen
4,11,13. We bet the 2nd dozen.
25,3,31. We bet the 1st dozen.
I tested it by betting only 3 times. If  it fails, in all 3 bets in the cycle, I wait for a new trigger. Betting 4 times is not wrong. it's a personal choice
  The progression in units can be 1-1-1.5 or 1-1-2 if you like.
If the entire 3 bet cycle fails, you start the new trigger with a slightly higher chip. ( No need to go Martingale for obvious reasons).

Situations where you avoid betting, and wait for things to become more normal
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).
2. If the playable target dozen ( Y), has appeared more than 3+ times immediately prior to the trigger. (meaning it has appeared enough times already and runs the risk to disappear when you begin betting it  3 times after the trigger).
3. If the first 2 bets after the trigger result in XX (same dozen as the majority dozen in the trigger, you stop and only lose 2 bets). Easily recoverable in the next trigger
4. if there is more than one 0 in the numbers preceding the trigger. (0's tend to come in packs).

I have made a special point to pay attention to consecutive (back to back ), trigger losses and they simply don't happen.
Sometimes you will get 2 back to back trigger losses, but it's rare.
3 back to back trigger losses is extremely rare, and I have not seen 4 + consecutive trigger losses yet.
And I have tested many numbers.
In the picture I have a sample test:
I circle the trigger (XXY) with blue, and when it wins within the 3 playable spins I put a check mark on the number that won.
When it losses,  I put 3 red X's indicating that the 3 spins lost.
As you can see it won 25 times and lost 5 times for 3 spins each time.
But provided that the next trigger after a lost trigger has won, it's obvious that the loss was recovered and if the progression is higher you end up with a profit too. Which means the entire session was a win
The only way you could lose would be if many back to back triggers fail. Like 4+ and if they happen frequently.
But this is not happening in this system. A good B/R can handle a trigger loss here and there, or even 2-3 back to back trigger losses. Which are of course rare.
Any player can handle a 3 steps cycle loss of a single dozen , as it compares to playing 18 and 24 numbers. 

This system can be played "hit and run" style, as you can observe several roulettes for a trigger.
By the way the system applies to COLUMNS too.
And sometimes if you combine dozen and column trigger simultaneously, you can bet the 4 numbers that belong to the same dozen and column at the  same time

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Jake007 on February 13, 2017, 08:29:35 PM
Im trying it out for the past 15 minutes... I go up $10, down $10, up $10, down $10. Seems pretty even to me. I am betting 1, then 1, then 2. Then start over if I dont hit. Are you increasing your bet on the next set?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on February 13, 2017, 08:36:46 PM
Very nice!

Have you noticed a difference between triggers:

1) YXX
2) XYX
3) XXY

I would expect that trigger #1 would perform the best, followed by 2 and with 3 performing the worst.

The statistical differences as far as streaks are concerned are:

1) 85.92% (2 buffer + 3 bets = 5 streak)
2) 79.16% (1 buffer + 3 bets = 4 streak)
3) 69.16% (0 buffer + 3 bets = 3 streak)

This is a 16.76% difference between trigger 1 and trigger 3! :o

Your betting conditions are very interesting.  I am studying these...

Quote from: The Pale Rider
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).

By repeatedly, is this 3 or more?
 

Quote from: The Pale One
3. If the first 2 bets after the trigger result in XX (same dozen as the majority dozen in the trigger, you stop and only lose 2 bets). Easily recoverable in the next trigger

Most ingenious!  This is of course referencing the Z which as not come in at all!

Quote from: His Paleness
4. if there is more than one 0 in the numbers preceding the trigger. (0's tend to come in packs).

Why preceding?  I would consider preceding to be favorable. 

What about during?  In other words, I would say that if a zero appears DURING our progression we immediately stop betting.

If I see a zero before betting I rejoice and heck more than one and I am ecstatic!

Have you considered any advantageous ways to include Z in your patterns?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on February 13, 2017, 10:58:01 PM
Im trying it out for the past 15 minutes... I go up $10, down $10, up $10, down $10. Seems pretty even to me. I am betting 1, then 1, then 2. Then start over if I dont hit. Are you increasing your bet on the next set?
That's good. At least is shows that it doesn't have the tendency to lose.
Yes after a lost set , you increase the starting chip in the next set.
What's  most important,  is that you don't want to encounter many consecutive set losses.
If the losing sets alternate among several wins, then a good B/R should overcome any set loss, provided the losing sets don't  repeat many times back to back, which doesn't happen. Otherwise I would not have bothered with this system.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Jake007 on February 13, 2017, 11:12:01 PM
So after a lost set, do I increase to 2, 2, 4? Then again to 4, 4, 8? Or is that too much?

Im trying it out for the past 15 minutes... I go up $10, down $10, up $10, down $10. Seems pretty even to me. I am betting 1, then 1, then 2. Then start over if I dont hit. Are you increasing your bet on the next set?
That's good. At least is shows that it doesn't have the tendency to lose.
Yes after a lost set , you increase the starting chip in the next set.
What's  most important,  is that you don't want to encounter many consecutive set losses.
If the losing sets alternate among several wins, then a good B/R should overcome any set loss, provided the losing sets don't  repeat many times back to back, which doesn't happen. Otherwise I would not have bothered with this system.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on February 13, 2017, 11:21:36 PM
Very nice!

Have you noticed a difference between triggers:

1) YXX
2) XYX
3) XXY

I would expect that trigger #1 would perform the best, followed by 2 and with 3 performing the worst.

The statistical differences as far as streaks are concerned are:

1) 85.92% (2 buffer + 3 bets = 5 streak)
2) 79.16% (1 buffer + 3 bets = 4 streak)
3) 69.16% (0 buffer + 3 bets = 3 streak)

This is a 16.76% difference between trigger 1 and trigger 3! :o

Your betting conditions are very interesting.  I am studying these...

Quote from: The Pale Rider
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).

By repeatedly, is this 3 or more?

Quote from: The Pale One
3. If the first 2 bets after the trigger result in XX (same dozen as the majority dozen in the trigger, you stop and only lose 2 bets). Easily recoverable in the next trigger

Most ingenious!  This is of course referencing the Z which as not come in at all!

Quote from: His Paleness
4. if there is more than one 0 in the numbers preceding the trigger. (0's tend to come in packs).

Why preceding?  I would consider preceding to be favorable. 

What about during?  In other words, I would say that if a zero appears DURING our progression we immediately stop betting.

If I see a zero before betting I rejoice and heck more than one and I am ecstatic!

Have you considered any advantageous ways to include Z in your patterns?
No I haven't made a point to examine the way the trigger forms and how it affects the results.  But looking at the picture I posted initially with the system, I noticed that almost all lost triggers,  came from a trigger that was NOT IN THE FORM YXX. Good point, that might be yet another powerful  tweak.
The only problem is that it narrows the availability of triggers, making the system slow.
But if you bet with $100 chips, then it's worth the wait, if the certainty increases many-fold.
     Yes 3+ repeats preceding the trigger, is a cause of concern.
All you have to do is wait idle a few more spins, to break the streak.
      No if the 0 appears in one of the steps we play, we don't stop. It's just a losing bet.
I usually avoid a trigger formed after the presence of at least 2 Z's in the prior spins close to the trigger. because it might repeat during the playable steps. But this is not a major tweak. At the same time waiting a few spins takes no time at all, to get back to normal distribution of the dozens.
But I will make a point to examine the YXX trigger specifically to see if it wins the majority of the time.
But my testing purpose was to process as many numbers as possible, to determine if I get many back to back trigger losses. But for any NON YXX trigger that loses, there are several triggers that win.
The point is to make sure that back to back losses do not happen. And they don't
Any system that doesn't produce BACK TO BACK trigger losses can be made a winner.
That's the purpose of a healthy  B/R compared to the minimum chip required.
   
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on February 13, 2017, 11:28:55 PM
So after a lost set, do I increase to 2, 2, 4? Then again to 4, 4, 8? Or is that too much?

Im trying it out for the past 15 minutes... I go up $10, down $10, up $10, down $10. Seems pretty even to me. I am betting 1, then 1, then 2. Then start over if I dont hit. Are you increasing your bet on the next set?
That's good. At least is shows that it doesn't have the tendency to lose.
Yes after a lost set , you increase the starting chip in the next set.
What's  most important,  is that you don't want to encounter many consecutive set losses.
If the losing sets alternate among several wins, then a good B/R should overcome any set loss, provided the losing sets don't  repeat many times back to back, which doesn't happen. Otherwise I would not have bothered with this system.
If you are testing it without actually playing it with real money then you can increase the chips  just the way you mentioned. But you shouldn't be getting  many back to back losses, except 2 and that's once in a while. If from 1-1-2 you jump to 2-2-4 you should be close to recovery of the previous loss under 1-1-2. Then you can continue the next 2 triggers with 2-2-4 and not only recover completely , but show a profit too. When that happens you revert back to 1-1-2.
In the casino I play this system I use $10-$10-$15. which translates to 1-1-1.5
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Geoffrey on February 14, 2017, 01:13:21 AM
this sounds like a pretty good defensive system.

One question. naturally this can be done on colomns too. so what if the trigger indicated that it's worth the gamble to combine both. Lets say second dozen + third colomn.

in this scenario do you play the 15-18-21-24 als single bets instead?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: juice on February 14, 2017, 03:07:22 AM
pales, thanks so much for such a great explanation, and the graphics and sharing your hard work! any data on a double zero wheel?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on February 14, 2017, 11:02:04 AM
this sounds like a pretty good defensive system.

One question. naturally this can be done on colomns too. so what if the trigger indicated that it's worth the gamble to combine both. Lets say second dozen + third colomn.

in this scenario do you play the 15-18-21-24 als single bets instead?
Yes it can be narrowed down to just 4 numbers, common to the dozen and column.
It doesn't happen often, but when it does, the pay off is much bigger because it's only 4 numbers.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on February 14, 2017, 11:09:47 AM
pales, thanks so much for such a great explanation, and the graphics and sharing your hard work! any data on a double zero wheel?
For testing purposes on paper, I use single zero wheel data easily found in various sites.
For 00 wheels I use random.org and add #37 for 00.
But when I actually play it, I play it in 00 wheel because I have no other choice. Usually at the Twin River casino in R.I. The system works equally well on the 00 wheel. The Win/Loss ratio is so high, things are not much different on the 00 wheel. Especially if you employ the defenses I mentioned in the first post.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: sonnywalters on February 14, 2017, 05:17:35 PM
Limited testing, but results are promising.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Sputnik on February 17, 2017, 08:03:52 AM
palestis nice work ...

I am known for clustering dozen probability into EC positions and solve this puzzel.
You can play the EC and win two in a row when one dozen is missing using the same triggers as you mention above as the EC waves only have three property states.
Now you know how the missing state looks like and is the reason you can win two bets in a row as you capture the hole formation of that property or state.

I get very good result using this method and will keep it as one of my favorites when i travel around Europé. But i have one test left Before it is a green light and it has to pass my personal benchmark for being long term winner.
Will try this one with Holloways progression.

Cheers
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: juice on February 17, 2017, 05:11:07 PM
Hi Sputnik , I know you have posted extensively on this topic, but I have never had the nerve to express my confusion, because many others have done that for me. I was wondering if we could maybe take this as a great opportunity for a quick sample play by yourself, for all of us to review. Just a quickie, maybe one play cross referencing each tactic. Believe me I am well aware you have done so enumerous times, but with this topic, maybe the cross reference will gel for us who can't seem to get it. I play ec's and math based, and for the rent, so I am frustrated by my own non ability to see it.

Sample like this........

12, 34, 26.......go

Here, it is clear the play is dozen 1, as long as all trigger rules are adhered to .
Now..., what say you?

Thanks you for your patience!   With Respect, The juice

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: kav on February 17, 2017, 08:50:20 PM
Thanks for sharing your work Palestis. Very easy system to understand.

Quote
3. If the first 2 bets after the trigger result in XX (same dozen as the majority dozen in the trigger, you stop and only lose 2 bets). Easily recoverable in the next trigger

You don't use this condition in your example. In fact if you used this condition in the example sequence, then you would miss 3 hits (!) and would not have avoided any losses.

So maybe this condition is not such a good idea.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on February 17, 2017, 10:28:21 PM
Thanks for sharing your work Palestis. Very easy system to understand.

Quote
3. If the first 2 bets after the trigger result in XX (same dozen as the majority dozen in the trigger, you stop and only lose 2 bets). Easily recoverable in the next trigger

You don't use this condition in your example. In fact if you used this condition in the example sequence, then you would miss 3 hits (!) and would not have avoided any losses.

So maybe this condition is not such a good idea.
Yes
For testing purposes, I didn't use this condition as well as the other preventive situations that I mentioned above. The reason is I wanted to test as many numbers as possible  without wasting time  to incorporate red flags. So even betting with the presence of red flags, the system performed extremely well.
Once I established the huge Win to Loss ratio being a fact, I examined the situations where a lost cycle ( trigger) occurred. And most losses occurred after those red flags were present. Including the one you are inquiring about. Some losses were unrelated to those red flag conditions. Including the ones in the testing example that I posted. But the overall average of thousands and thousands of test spins, indicated that a major portion of lost cycles  were due to these red flags.
Ignoring them, the system still wins overwhelmingly.

But my attitude towards the casino is not to give them the slightest chance to win a round here and there.
Ideally if I place 100 bets I would like to win 99 and lose only one. I don't want the  casino to win even one time during my session. That is y I am looking for trigger restrictions that render a system bulletproof.  Patience and time is a must when you want to win all the time.
Lost winning opportunities and wasted time do not concern me. The end result is what I aim at.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Rinad on February 19, 2017, 12:51:25 AM


I can see that playing this single dozen system, the wins come easier then if you were to just picking any dozen randomly. avoiding losing series is what it is all about.
playing the dozen with a column can give me a way out of having to raise a bet sometime. even flat betting with a double bet when you first begin your session can help me not having to raise my bet later on. by regressing to a single unit after winning the double.
like in poker the more outs you have out of one hand, the better. another out could be to place 2 split bets where the dozen and the column crisscross  and help the situation in times of need, covering those 4 numbers.
 good job with the method.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Geoffrey on February 19, 2017, 02:41:10 AM
when palestis comes with a system on dozens i always read it with interest. this one seems good to, as always. i've expected nothing less from you :)
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: scepticus on February 19, 2017, 03:04:26 AM
Thanks for sharing your work Palestis. Very easy system to understand.

Quote
3. If the first 2 bets after the trigger result in XX (same dozen as the majority dozen in the trigger, you stop and only lose 2 bets). Easily recoverable in the next trigger

You don't use this condition in your example. In fact if you used this condition in the example sequence, then you would miss 3 hits (!) and would not have avoided any losses.

So maybe this condition is not such a good idea.
Yes
For testing purposes, I didn't use this condition as well as the other preventive situations that I mentioned above. The reason is I wanted to test as many numbers as possible  without wasting time  to incorporate red flags. So even betting with the presence of red flags, the system performed extremely well.
Once I established the huge Win to Loss ratio being a fact, I examined the situations where a lost cycle ( trigger) occurred. And most losses occurred after those red flags were present. Including the one you are inquiring about. Some losses were unrelated to those red flag conditions. Including the ones in the testing example that I posted. But the overall average of thousands and thousands of test spins, indicated that a major portion of lost cycles  were due to these red flags.
Ignoring them, the system still wins overwhelmingly.

But my attitude towards the casino is not to give them the slightest chance to win a round here and there.
Ideally if I place 100 bets I would like to win 99 and lose only one. I don't want the  casino to win even one time during my session. That is y I am looking for trigger restrictions that render a system bulletproof.  Patience and time is a must when you want to win all the time.
Lost winning opportunities and wasted time do not concern me. The end result is what I aim at.

True. Palestis. The end result is what to aim at .
" To succeed you must first learn to survive "
Warren Buffet  ?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on February 20, 2017, 12:46:10 AM

I can see that playing this single dozen system, the wins come easier then if you were to just picking any dozen randomly. avoiding losing series is what it is all about.
playing the dozen with a column can give me a way out of having to raise a bet sometime. even flat betting with a double bet when you first begin your session can help me not having to raise my bet later on. by regressing to a single unit after winning the double.
like in poker the more outs you have out of one hand, the better. another out could be to place 2 split bets where the dozen and the column crisscross  and help the situation in times of need, covering those 4 numbers.
 good job with the method.
When a system is being  tested, the  most important merit is to verify that losses after a trigger don't occur back to back. Or having  frequent back to back losses, following a single win. That is the root of most system failures.  Especially if progression is used.
Any system with rare back to back losses followed by frequent consecutive wins can very well be a winning system.
It's reassuring to know that after a trigger loss, the next cycle will be a winner. Aside statistical observations and Win /Loss ratio computations,  the idea of back to back losses should be an inherent part of any system testing. If this premise is ignored, a head on collision with the black swan will sooner or later happen.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: mogul397 on February 27, 2017, 07:08:07 PM
I'm doing some testing, and this seems to look good.

After a week is everyone else on board? I love single dozen methods.
So much more playable.

What other single dozen methods have you worked out?
I'd love to hear.

Thanks!!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: mogul397 on March 01, 2017, 08:47:35 PM
I've been testing this and it has been great.

Trying to figure out why everyone abandoned it like
rats on a sinking ship.?????
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Jake007 on March 01, 2017, 09:10:46 PM
I like the ease of play. Its easy to recall in your mind, however for me I was just going up and down, up and down.

I've been testing this and it has been great.

Trying to figure out why everyone abandoned it like
rats on a sinking ship. ??? ??
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: mogul397 on March 02, 2017, 12:04:41 PM
Jake, I remember you saying that. My testing has worked better for me.

For one thing, I can't think of a better starting place for a method. One
that goes steady as she goes.

I am trying to determine the best way of betting. What I was thinking
of was 1-1-2-3-4-5. That is 16 units bank and 2 groups of 3, in consideration
of this play. That lets you win a unit or so each time, I believe, and gives
you reasonable exposure each trigger, with a stop loss.

Perhaps you played a flatter betting progression and that is why you didn't
profit????  Cause I have good luck getting a hit within 2 triggers.

Feedback?  There is no value in trying good methods and just walking away from them.
And good bet selection is key.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Fedda on March 02, 2017, 01:14:06 PM
Mogul, i get back to back losses every so often. But with your progression i have done better. Seems to be easier to recover. Are you stopping and look for another dozen to bet after two losses?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Fedda on March 02, 2017, 01:39:21 PM
Here are the first 208 spins using the progression with -16 units stop loss. +50 units.

Lost two back to back in the session, but popped right back up.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Fedda on March 02, 2017, 02:00:07 PM
Next round for 300 spins and only +9 units. Lots of back to back losses.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Fedda on March 02, 2017, 03:42:38 PM
When reread the post again, i realised that i haven't playing it correctly, because when i got a trigger i played it until a loss or win, and then wait for the next trigger to begin. I didn't stop betting according to the rules as if xyxx showed up i just bet the 1-1-2 prog until a win or loss.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: petespin on March 07, 2017, 01:07:39 PM
hello  everybody , i ve discusssed a lot about this system with jim , and all i can say is that is an amazing and so simple system , easy to recover , and even at your bad day wont lose your bankroll , i vw worked in  a kind of variation make it more solid , i ll perhaps post it at time , cheers pete
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: petespin on March 07, 2017, 01:39:07 PM
hey guys theoritically  its so easy to beat roulette ... but  for real .. its so hard , never forget that thing ! ;)
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: juice on March 07, 2017, 10:29:55 PM
Palestis, This kicked ass today! Played with blacks and on real wheel live dealer rapid roulette. Started with quarters, and hit the first three on the first shot . I then switched to single and double virtual bets and kept separate score sheets for each. I used a 1,1,1.5 level one and a 1, 2, 2.5 level two. I have a deeper progression but did not need it. I have tweaked the method a bit to suit myself and my own philosophie on repeating trends, but the core still remains.
+18 black units and never a troubled session, the virtual losses are key when playing larger units. They allow you to work up and down your progression, within multiple session attempts, not getting bit by variance. I have seen THREE losing back to back to back sessions, but the virtuals cleaned that up nicely with no angst. This topic is way over looked.
I am a flat bet guy and this is almost the same, with the 2/1 pay out in the 1 hole. Almost as frequent as an even money parlay! You the MAN!           Kind Regards! The juice
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 08, 2017, 10:41:55 AM

I have seen some very rare 3 back to back losses during the long tests that I did.
However, going back on my notes to pinpoint possible reasons for that, I saw that almost always
it involved a situation where there was an anomaly in the numbers preceding the trigger.
Something that I was not taking into account during testing, because I wanted to test as many numbers as possible, and didn't want to slow down by watching for red flags.
 That is,  one dozen has appeared consecutively. Like 2,7,1,11, 10,32. Though the obvious trigger is 11,10,32, I would let that trigger go without betting. Instead wait for a more normal sequence involving a normal mix of dozens.  Waiting for a few more spins won't kill you.
Also if I see a sequence like 2,7,1,11,10, 32,36, 8 I would definitely void the 32,36,8 trigger, because the target dozen (1st dozen), has already appeared 5 times just before the trigger was formed. Therefore chasing a dozen that has already appeared enough times can be a little risky. Let that go and wait till things turn to normal.
Also,  if after a trigger XXY, the first 2 spins are XX ( the same majority dozen in the trigger), I would stop at 2 lost spins.
When I went back on my notes after taking those red flags into account, the 3 back to back losses disappeared, and 2 back to back losses became rare.
And  If you add an entire virtual lost trigger in all its 3 steps, then losing becomes impossible. Or 2 virtually lost steps in  the trigger and another 3 betting steps after that.
 Especially applicable when betting with high value chips like black.
  Every tweak adds to certainty, at the expense of time. But who cares about time, when the rewards are high?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: jekhb76 on March 08, 2017, 09:16:12 PM

Awesome Palestis,
1.5 hour test. Online Live Wheel (Real Money) And I guess, I didn't even play it very well by the rules.

31 SESSIONS: PLAYED
24 SESSIONS: WON
2  SESSIONS: EVEN
5  SESSIONS: LOST
HIGHEST PROGRESSION 4-4-8
HIGHEST BACK TO BACK LOST SESSIONS: 2
TOTAL SPINS PLAYED: 204
TOTAL PLAYING TIME: 1:45 MIN. INCLUDING BRAKE

16
11 (-
10 (-
7
33
14 W
__________________________ 0
10
26
15
35
15
31
8
30
24
11 (-
13 (-
24 W
__________________________ +2
33 (-
34 (-
5
26
30
11 W
__________________________ +2
5
25
24 (-
21 (-
24
33 W
__________________________ +1
18 (-
13 (-
25
23
12
31 W
__________________________ +2
11 (-
10 (-
32
26 W
__________________________ +2
3
15
10
20 (-
18 (-
20
35
5 W
__________________________ +2
18
28 (-
32 (-
19 W
__________________________ +2
9
26 (-
31 (-
1 W
__________________________ +2
19
0
4
21 (-
18 (-
0
16
11 W
__________________________ +2
32 (-
27 (-
21
23 W
__________________________ +2
34
9
7
26
21 (-
21 (-
13
0
25 W
__________________________ +2
1
22
32 (-
34 (-
1
8
0 L
__________________________ -4
33
20 (-
22 (-
2
15
18 L
__________________________ -8 (2-2-4)
21
19 (-
24 (-
31
35 W
__________________________ +8 (4-4-8)
17
4
32 (-
26 (-
15
34
12 W
__________________________ +8 (2-2-4)
36
14
34 (-
36 (-
17 W
__________________________ +2
19
29
20
33
17
4
26
19
12 (-
11 (-
1
33
7 L
___________________________ -4
8
23 (-
20 (-
12 W
___________________________ +4 (2-2-4)
24
1
14
4
32
19 (-
16 (-
6
29 W
___________________________ +2
2
17
0
30 (-
35 (-
7 W
___________________________ +2
1
36 (-
27 (-
12 W
___________________________ +2
4
36 (-
28 (-
9 W
___________________________ +2
33
24 (-
18 (-
32 W
___________________________ +2
6 (-
3 (-
14
2
4
16 W
___________________________ +2
0
7 (-
8 (-
22
32
27
7 L
___________________________ -4
22
0
20
31 (-
36 (-
3
31
0 L
___________________________ -8 (2-2-4)
24
29
0
15
4
30
3
21
27
3 (-
6 (-
11
0
25 W
___________________________ +8 (4-4-8)
11 (-
4  (-
21
3
16 W
___________________________ 0 (4-4-8)
11
16
33
16
8
18 (-
13 (-
4 W
___________________________ +4 (2-2-4)
8 (-
2 (-
31
0
25 W
___________________________ +1
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 08, 2017, 10:43:44 PM

Awesome Palestis,
1.5 hour test. Online Live Wheel (Real Money) And I guess, I didn't even play it very well by the rules.

31 SESSIONS: PLAYED
24 SESSIONS: WON
2  SESSIONS: EVEN
5  SESSIONS: LOST
HIGHEST PROGRESSION 4-4-8
HIGHEST BACK TO BACK LOST SESSIONS: 2
TOTAL SPINS PLAYED: 204
TOTAL PLAYING TIME: 1:45 MIN. INCLUDING BRAKE

I think by session we mean an entire day's play. Or one sitting before leaving and coming back later or next day.
I guess you meant you played 31 triggers. Because they were all in one sitting with continuous play.
I noticed that you skipped some triggers that were present, like the one I post in the picture.
If you lost 5 triggers (single), it's not really a loss because with some progression you recouped in the next trigger. Like if I bet B and RRB comes. I lost twice to RR and won the 3rd time.
At  $5-10 -20 progression it was not a loss because in the 3rd spin you won B and recovered the 2 lost RR's. The end result is win. Likewise with the dozen. A winning trigger following a lost one, should recoup the loss and/or end up with a profit depending on progression.
But your Win/Loss ratio sounds about right. With attention paid and avoiding the red flags,  the W/L ratio is about 6:1 or 7:1.
But as long as lost triggers don't occur in succession (back to back), there should be no problem whatsoever. With $1000 B/R and $10 minimum starting chip there in no way you can lose $1000, even if you run into 5 back to back losses. Which of course never happens.
The whole idea of a successful system is to make sure that in tests many back to back losses don't happen. That's what kills most systems.
A single trigger loss or a double can be easily recovered with progression.
And even 3 if the B/R is sufficient.
It's when you run into 4 + back to back losses (and frequently),  that the system will suffer.
In that case the system itself is not worth playing it.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 09, 2017, 12:32:36 AM
Palestis, This kicked ass today! Played with blacks and on real wheel live dealer rapid roulette. Started with quarters, and hit the first three on the first shot . I then switched to single and double virtual bets and kept separate score sheets for each. I used a 1,1,1.5 level one and a 1, 2, 2.5 level two. I have a deeper progression but did not need it. I have tweaked the method a bit to suit myself and my own philosophie on repeating trends, but the core still remains.
+18 black units and never a troubled session, the virtual losses are key when playing larger units. They allow you to work up and down your progression, within multiple session attempts, not getting bit by variance. I have seen THREE losing back to back to back sessions, but the virtuals cleaned that up nicely with no angst. This topic is way over looked.
I am a flat bet guy and this is almost the same, with the 2/1 pay out in the 1 hole. Almost as frequent as an even money parlay! You the MAN!           Kind Regards! The juice
I am glad someone acknowledges  the tremendous value  of VIRTUAL LOSSES especially when high value chips are involved. It is the key to increased certainty.
Because there are 2 ways to challenge the game of roulette.
One to follow its flow and trying to guess what the roulette will do.
The other and most successful, is to make your own flow by starting and stopping whenever you see fit. And using virtual losses to adjust your own flow to the variable conditions, plus to counter the variance whenever it decides to appear.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 09, 2017, 01:05:52 AM
I'm doing some testing, and this seems to look good.

After a week is everyone else on board? I love single dozen methods.
So much more playable.

What other single dozen methods have you worked out?
I'd love to hear.

Thanks!!
I have worked on another single dozen system but not as hard as the one in this post.
As opposed to the  "dozen breaker" which requires to play 2 dozens , this one is called the "dozen repeater". and you only play one dozen, trying to match the pattern,  in one of the 3 positions.
A few examples are better to give you the idea, rather than just describing it.
1.  When you have 22,7,31 the dozen pattern is 213. Then you play in succession the 2nd, then the 1st then the 3rd dozen. If 20 comes next you win in the first spin. If 2 comes next you win in the second spin. If 36 comes next then you win in the 3rd spin.

2. We have 10-8-30. The pattern is 113. We play the 1st, then the 1st again, then the 3rd dozen.
    Trying to match one of the 3 dozens in the  pattern. Then we stop and start over.
All you  have to do is read down on a score card and see how things turn out.
Of course you avoid a pattern that involves the same dozen like 1-4-11, or 15-19-22 etc.
If you read enough score cards I am sure an experienced player will discover the best way to play this system.  This is just a hint. 
The nice thing about it is that this system can be adapted to a single DS. Double street pattern repeater.
     
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: jekhb76 on March 09, 2017, 06:02:56 AM
Hi Palestis, can you please give some examples in numbers when we avoid betting etc? it is still not clear to me. thanks. eddy
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: jekhb76 on March 09, 2017, 10:42:54 AM
Never mind my last post Palatis, found it, you did explain it. thnx.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: jekhb76 on March 09, 2017, 11:03:33 AM
What we need to do know is to try and push this system to it's extreme. if we somehow can handle that, we have a long term winner!

First thing we should do, is to find out what the most back to back losses are when we ignore the red flags in this system. And just start betting everytime we see YXX / XYX / XXY no matter what hit before our trigger.

Next thing we should find out is what the longest progression is we can make for the extrem back to back losses.

For now, when using the system as pointed out and the max back to back losses calculated is when we multiply our base bet by 1000 as a bankroll we're safe.
This way we can do a progression of 8 steps (back to back losses).
1) 1-1-2
2) 2-2-4
3) 4-4-8
4) 8-8-16
5) 16-16-32
6) 32-32-64
7) 64-64-128

Total bankroll needed for this progression is 508 units
8) 128-128-256

This with in our mind that the table limit is 500 units. so 1000 units we'll never be in trouble, well at least for the original system.
but now we need to put things to the extreme. hope some can help.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 09, 2017, 11:05:38 AM
Hi Palestis, can you please give some examples in numbers when we avoid betting etc? it is still not clear to me. thanks. eddy
1. If there is sequence of numbers like 25-30-27-32-10-8-21 you avoid betting the 10-8-21 trigger,
    (too many numbers in the 3rd dozen  preceding  the trigger). Indicating a streak that might continue in a dozen that is not the target.
2.   12-9-8 30-25-2. You avoid, because the target dozen in the trigger already came at least 3 times in a row.  Then it becomes a little risky to bet that the same dozen will show up again.  (just a legitimate precaution).
3. if you have 15-22-30 and 21-17 comes you stop at 2 bets. (the majority dozen came twice again).
4. If there is a 0 or more 0's close to above the trigger , then it's best to avoid because 0's sometimes come in packs.
Also someone in the forum contributed the idea in a PM of letting a few numbers go before you pick up another trigger. (flow interruption). I found that to be a good idea in any system.

Also the progression you mentioned above you don't really have to climb up so abruptly.
After a trigger loss or 2 back to back losses, you can start the new trigger with a slightly higher chip.
And keep it for the next few triggers, until you recovered completely and/or made a profit. Then you revert back to the usual starting chip.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: jekhb76 on March 09, 2017, 11:15:49 AM
Thanks, it makes more sense now. now up testing the extreme.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: ice789 on March 09, 2017, 12:59:34 PM
rx code ? pls share
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: petespin on March 09, 2017, 01:07:24 PM
look guys , jim, imo the best way to play this system is ... when u win at the first spin some times in a row is to play the exact opposite thus , to bet the other 2  dozens ,and not that one that the trigger shows , for instace if u won 3 times in a row then u have to bet the trigger to lose becoz this is what s happening at least most of the time i ve tested a lot so iam in position to confirm all these things ..
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: jekhb76 on March 09, 2017, 01:10:40 PM
Hi Juice,

Can you please do a sample play of a session, so that we can understand what your tweak is and also your deep progression limit.
Thanx
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: juice on March 09, 2017, 08:32:36 PM
Casinò: Berlin
Data: 18/02/2011
actual data from a section of 264 consecutive spins.

27 30 23 33 8 28 4 10 (14 20 20 22 15) 25 36 (9 10 2 5 5) 15 25 36 (9 10 2 5 5) 17 (5 10 2 2 1) 28 12 15 (5 9 6 7) 23 6 0 2 2 23 26 32 (12 5 3 10) 23 20 0 1 20 11 14 30 16 18 36 6 31 18 7 23 36 6 20 (11 12 1) 33 1 (27 26 33) 1 14 34 (19 24 15) 27 31 (11 1 6 4) 36 14 9 27 1 13 17 18 35 9 24 17 9 13 34 20 30 16 4 18 5 35 (1 12 7 6 11) 18 (25 27 29) 16 11 21 35 

Eddy, for me to post anything is a stretch as far as visual play, but the above is to illustrate what I like to look for.
Player preference of TREND VS. ANTI-TREND.
Before I give my opinion, this is just a tweak and all due respect to Pales.
His way is CHAMPION!!, but I personally find strength in clusters to repeat / reappear. I try to catch the tail end of a trend and try to make it my trigger objective number with the application of repeating single numbers or law of the thirds. It ( the cluster) can be 10 numbers back from the current play that I enter. It takes a lot more patience and deeper observation, but I feel better applying that rule. So in reality it breaks RULE #2, but played correctly and far enough back but no too far is the key.
It is very difficult to explain the dynamic in a post. 
Along with a score sheet, I separate each individual position played(attempts), into three columns, with there own divisor if needed.
So you have 3 columns, for 3 separate plays, and 3 different divisors.     
I play a best of 5 series per position and then apply the divisor. The divisor is simple and is usually 1/2 of the debt. for example, if the debt in position 2 = 5units, then the divisor is 2.5.
The beauty of the 3 separate conditions is that you are always playing into the 2/1 payout.
As hard as most people want to argue the logic, I also play with two complete score sheets, one for trend and one for anti-trend. When you have a hit rate as frequent as this bet,(any way you play it) it seems a shame not to hedge. I do the same on even money bets too. It takes some getting use to but, I feel that a proper score sheet is a work of art. Actually, mine belong in the LOUVRE.
So You can have two score sheets, each with three conditions, one played text book Pales rules #'s 1,2,3., and then use my little tweaks on a separate sheet. I do not play with blacks when I do this, quarters only, and YOU MUST, get into the mind set that your BANK is just that. It will have draw downs and surplus cash at any given time, so the score sheet is the bible and you just pick up where you left off session after session. Playing this way will bring you an easy 8- 12 units an hour, with little pressure. The 2/1 pay out is key in the one hole. I liken it to a parlay on the e.c.'s, and keeping each event separate, they all get a chance to taste the flavor of money marinating at 2/1.

                                                                            Good Skill~  The juice 

ps. I always use 100 times my unit size for session bank roll.

ie, 25$ units = 2500$ bank roll
     100$ = 10,000

Edit note....I just tried this with three levels of banking units, 10, 25, 50, and did not use a divisor and it did well.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on March 10, 2017, 02:16:03 PM
Hi Palestis, thought I'd give your system a try but it was tough going. I got 3 back to back losses straight away.  :o The hit rate picked up eventually but it was a tough stretch. Results in csv format (L,M,H = Low, Middle, High dozens)-

OUTCOME, W/L
M
M
H
M
M
M,L
M
L
H
H
M
M
H,L
L
L
L,L
H
M
L
L
L
M,w
H
H
H,L
L
L,w
M
M
L,L
H
M
L,w
M
M
M
L,w
L
L
L
M
L
L
L
L
M
H
H
H
L
H,L
M
L
M
H
M
H,L
M,w
M
H
M
M
L,L
M
H
M,L
H,w
H
L
M,w
M
M
M
M,L
L
M
H
H
L
H
L,L
L
H,w
H,w
L
H
M
L
L
M
M,w
L,w

I admit I wasn't strictly following all the rules about when to not bet though.

If making 3 bets at a time, the probability of at least one win is 70%, which is pretty high, but when you compare this to the probability of winning a double-dozen bet (~65%), it isn't that much higher. And a double dozen bet can lose 12 times in a row.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on March 10, 2017, 02:22:59 PM
12 times meaning (3 times)*4 but actually I can simulate 16 losses on a double dozen (3 times)*5.

The chances of 12 losses on a DZ+DZ bet is 99.9996334, meaning 0.000003656 or 1 in 273,523. 

I think we can be pretty confident in the 3 back to back loss limit (quite the testimony to Pales' bet construction & analysis skills) but should have a bankroll to accomodate that 4th loss, just in case?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 11, 2017, 12:00:18 AM
Hi Palestis, thought I'd give your system a try but it was tough going. I got 3 back to back losses straight away.  :o The hit rate picked up eventually but it was a tough stretch. Results in csv format (L,M,H = Low, Middle, High dozens)-

I admit I wasn't strictly following all the rules about when to not bet though.

If making 3 bets at a time, the probability of at least one win is 70%, which is pretty high, but when you compare this to the probability of winning a double-dozen bet (~65%), it isn't that much higher. And a double dozen bet can lose 12 times in a row.
I took a look at your results, and I made notes on the cases where back to back losses occurred.
A single 3 bet loss is not a problem. And also 2 back to back losses are not a problem either.
Wherever you had 2 back to back, losses and the single 3 back to back loss you encountered , it was a clear case where  betting would not have taken place.  Because either the trigger followed a 3+ number sequence  of the same dozen or 1 or more numbers in a trigger that came from a previous cycle. And these are red flags that indicate to pause and wait for new numbers.
We are supposed to use fresh numbers, after we finish betting the 3 spins after a trigger.
Even better we let some spins go idle. So we can enter a new cycle.
This system is closely related to the law of 2/3. But you don't want to follow a continuous flow. Because you stay in the same cycle where the law of 2/3 operates.
And if the cycle expires you will have problems following an expired cycle. (A dozen is 12 numbers).
That is y you need to keep getting into new cycles all the time.
By skipping streaks and avoiding use of previous numbers, you create a brand new cycle for the law of 2/3 to do its job.
The system was passed on to a friend overseas, and out of 41 sessions in a live roulette he won all 41.
( I can have Kav call him, if he doesn't mind, and he can verify that. He is close to where Kav resides). 
But he's playing it a little differently.
After a trigger is located, he waits for it to lose the 3 bets (virtually). Then he bets the next trigger.
It takes more time, but the results are solid. 
Also some other people I passed to system on, report great results.
But we have to follow the rules.
I understand your comments about the statistics.
But if the EC's appeared 50% of the time, the dozens 33.3% of the time  etc etc. we would not have any problem winning all the time. Unfortunately things don't happen that way.
A powerful trigger is supposed to make sure that what we are betting will show up within its statistical range.
The more frequently the system achieves that, the better the system.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on March 11, 2017, 12:12:41 AM
But if the EC's appeared 50% of the time, the dozens 33.3% of the time  etc etc. we would not have any problem winning all the time. Unfortunately things don't happen that way.A powerful trigger is supposed to make sure that what we are betting will show up within its statistical range. The more frequently the system achieves that, the better the system.

(http://i63.tinypic.com/2aes6jd.jpg)
(http://[font=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]http://i63.tinypic.com/2aes6jd.jpg[/font])

This system reminds me of Occam's Razor:

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor

His principle would seem to apply to roulette quite well!

Dang I kind of feel a bit guilty here because I came up with my own set of triggers based on "my own roulette heart"; 4 triggers for each dozen.

I think your principle of separating spins works very well.  After a win or loss the next spin starts fresh any trigger patterns.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: juice on March 11, 2017, 03:29:49 AM
Reyth, this play could be the final piece of the Talos mystery. It sure wins a lot . Just saying.
I actually like the testing of this with one press after a win. If you play perpetual and break every rule of waiting for fresh numbers to re enter a new play you will find that yes, you can lose more often, but, NOT THAT OFTEN.
Consider this....
2-2-1 / dozen 1=w, no waiting and play dozen 2 / =w, play 2 again= w, play dozen 1/ =w and so on. When the pattern finally  exstiguishes itself, when dozen 3 drops or the dominant side of the trigger runs, the damage by the player has already been done. This pattern and other winning perpetual patterns are very prevalent and will win in bursts of 3 to 5 at a time. Now if you do the simple math and consider that the single parlay attempt, after a 2/1 initial payoff , on a successful bet you are at NET 8 (eight), that's right, a NET 8 units. This is where the JUICE, is certainly worth the SQUEEZE!
Try it out you will see the power, and if you play the bet positions as a separate event as I mentioned in my last post, and play best of 5 series, it absolutely will not lose. QUITE THE OPPOSITE.
I see the play as a title fight, you have got to take a few on the chin so you can get inside and work the body and the head will eventually fall. IT IS A ONE UNIT BET THAT PAYS NET 8 UNITS, With a very high success rate! BOOM~
This might not be Talos choice of play...... But it should be, it don't get much flatter than this bet, for such a big payoff.

                                                Good Luck, juice.

Ps In this case variance is your friend .........

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Jake007 on March 11, 2017, 05:40:15 AM
Can someone please walk me through the progression on this?

1-1-2 and then 2-2-4

and thats it? No further progression?

I was doing great until I ended up betting 32-32-64 and thats not going to recoup all those previous bets.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: jekhb76 on March 11, 2017, 06:26:00 AM
Good morning Jake,
Let me try to explain what i do and i'm still riding the dozen wave quite well.

for this system to demolisch your bankroll you will need a very very bad session of more then 4 loses of 3 sets in a row or more. 3 set loses back to back doesn't hurt in the end, it's the 4+ loses that hurt, when you get a few of those in a short time, but that doesn't happen if you follow the rules.

I I use the same betting progression as you and i never needed to bed 32-32-64 units. i never had 4 back to back loses in a row with this system and i played 61 triggers up till now.

I use the following progression:

1-1-2
2-2-4
4-4-8
8-8-16
16-16-32
32-32-64
64-64-128
128-128-256

That's a 8 step progression and if you play it by the rules you only need a 3rd step max 4 if you're really unlucky.

What I do when i loses a session, i stay on the same progression level, that way I recoup right a way when i win the next round.

when it happens that i lose 3 sessions in a row, let's say the first is 1-1-2 then 2-2-4 and the n 4-4-8 i would have bet 28 units from the previous 3 losing rounds. I now need to bed 8-8-16 when i win i stay on the same level of 8-8-16 now when i win again, i'm even and i can start over with 1-1-2.

This is the furthest i got in all those hours of play. but i do not ignore the red flags, i just skip a trigger. it does take longer, but you will not be in trouble. if you adjust your bankroll to the following, and you play by the rules, you will never loses.

if you take your base bet of let's say 1u and you multiplay it by 100, ( bankroll 100u for 1u base bet) you will never reach the 100 bankroll.
5u - bankroll of 500u you're safe
10u - bankroll of 1000u you're safe

try it and let me know how it went Jake.
all the best. -Eddy
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on March 11, 2017, 08:46:46 AM
Thanks Palestis,

But if the EC's appeared 50% of the time, the dozens 33.3% of the time  etc etc. we would not have any problem winning all the time.

Yeah but actually I only gave those stats as an indicator of how bad things could potentially get, according to probabilities. If we take a negative 5 standard deviation event as the "limit" then a bet with win probability of 70% will at some point suffer 11 consecutive losses, which would take a 2-1 martingale type progression way beyond the house limits. Of course this ignores your advice about the skips and warning signs, but then probabilities in this game never take account of them anyway.

It was just a rough patch and I did make a profit eventually. I've found that tracking both dozens and columns and switching randomly between them seems to smooth the path somewhat, so far anyway. 
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 11, 2017, 03:51:43 PM

Well,  that is the idea of testing as many spins as possible and never stop testing.
If theoretically 11 consecutive losses can occur, I would assume that 3 and 4 back to back losses should appear somewhat more frequently. That's 1/3 to half the way to a catastrophe.  But after thousands and thousands of test spins it doesn't happen.
And if it  looks like it is going to happen, after you have 2 back to back losses, it always gives the warning signals. So you can stop on time, until the dozen appearance mix seems more balanced.
Also the starting progression doesn't have to be 1-1-2. It could be 1-1-1.5. Like $10-10- 15.
Instead of 10-10-20. Also after 2 back to back losses, you don't have to jump into  a Martingale type progression, where any hit at any point in the progression will recover all previous losses plus make a profit.
As triggers form very fast , you can scale back the progression and restart with a small increase in the next trigger, instead of a Martingale increase. In  the next 1-2  triggers recovery should be reached. Something that's more appropriate when using high value chips like $25's, and $100,s.
When you play with small chips like in an online casino, then even with Martingale you still can't suffer a material loss even if you run into 5 or more back to back losses.
It's a matter of session B/R to minimum chip ratio.
And yes involving columns in the system, is another good idea, to diversify the play.
And whenever the target dozen dissects the target column, you can play the 4 numbers common to both. But that requires a separate research. 

As you diversify, it would take  many things to go wrong simultaneously to end up losing.
That's y they say, don't put your eggs in one basket. There must be some true to it.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Jake007 on March 11, 2017, 05:23:23 PM

I am doing pretty good sticking with a 1-1-2, then 2-2-4 progression. If it fails beyond that its easily recoverable.

I need help on clarification of the "avoid betting" rules...

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).

Isnt this open to interpretation? I have to go with my gut feeling here. If I see X dozen appearing approx 5 or more times in the last 10 spins I will flush it out with more spins.
------------------------------------------

Quote
2. If the playable target dozen ( Y), has appeared more than 3+ times immediately prior to the trigger. (meaning it has appeared enough times already and runs the risk to disappear when you begin betting it  3 times after the trigger).

Also open to interpretation? If I see Y dozen has appeared even 2 times prior to trigger I flush it out with more spins.
------------------------------------------

Quote
3. If the first 2 bets after the trigger result in XX (same dozen as the majority dozen in the trigger, you stop and only lose 2 bets). Easily recoverable in the next trigger

This one I just dont understand.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Jake007 on March 11, 2017, 05:29:27 PM
I guess I am also confused on the progression.

As I understand it, if I lose the round of three bets using 1-1-2, my next round would be 2-2-4. Is that correct?

OR...

If I win during the 1-1-2 progression, my next round is 2-2-4? Then 4-4-8? and so on until I lose?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: jekhb76 on March 11, 2017, 06:46:53 PM
No Jake, let me try to explain the progression part.

When you have a trigger, let's say XXY D1 D1 D3
then your progression starts right away, becaue you arw placing bets from the beginning.
In this example you place 1 unit on the D3.
if you lose that bet, let's say D2 shows then you're next bet is also 1 unit. If you lose the 3e round, let's say 3rd spin is also D2 then you're 3rd bet is then 1.5 or 2 units. by then you have bet 1 round of 3 bets. 1-1-2 (1.5) then you start again waiting for the next trigger shows up. when you now start betting then you're first bet is 2. so you just follow the sequence 1-1-2 (1.5) 2-2-4  etc. So to make things clear, the first bet you make is the first bet in the progression. Hope this helps.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Jake007 on March 11, 2017, 07:39:55 PM
OK Thank You for explaining! I have been doing it all wrong. When an X appeared I would do the next 3 bets on X or less if it hit. I would then spin to find the next X to bet on using 2-2-4.

It worked pretty good actually :) capping two sets of progressions.

Your explanation will take longer, but looks far safer. Thanks again for guiding.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Rinad on March 12, 2017, 02:05:41 AM


 this single dz is great because of the selection,triggers,new batch of numbers each time.

I played it yesturday on a air ball roulette combined with the one number system and had fun with.
because that small edge of not losing a dz as often as if one was to just pick one randomly it can bring a lot of $$$ in your pockets. but you have to be patient and not be too quick to make-up for losing a couple of triggers.
this could be anyone'worst enemy.
you begin playing, wins often, get a superman complex, and then all of a sudden start losing. so instead of being picky like you were before about your triggers, you start to "compromise a little" because the pain of losing what you had just won is right here. so beware of that.

I lost 3 back to back once yesturday. I was debating aboucriss[/size][size=78%]t let in it go,take a loss, or go for the "jugular" and do a 4th level. I decided to go for it, but this time I would wait for ultimate timing.[/size]
I would wait for a colum and a dz to "-cross at the same time" adding value to my selection before making a biger bet. in other words I would need 2 triggers instead of just 1.
I did and won the bet at the first spin.

I  also added 2 split bets where the colum and dozen crossroad.
in other words covered those 4 numbers. adding inside numbers to your dozen that you play is also a way to play a progression without having to raise the dozen bet too high. be creating, you can play the whole system flat bet and just go up on inside numbers,quads,splits,ect... the sky is the limit.
just something to consider if betting big bets is not your cup of tea. it is not mine, but somehow adding inside bets seem easier on the blood pressure . great sharing on this forum, you are all great.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 12, 2017, 02:09:44 AM
Jake,

Yes the 1-1-2 or 1-1-1.5 (both  legitimate progressions for dozens, and it is a personal choice)  are the beginning of the bets. As long as you win in one of those 3 spins, you still start with 1-1-2 again. You only go to 2-2-4 if you lost the 1-1-2. But you always come back to the basic bet 1-1-2 as long as you win or you just recovered from a loss
That is your base bet. You only go to the next progression increase if you lose the 3 bets round.

About the "avoiding bets" issue:
 Yes it is open to interpretation. I said if there is a consecutive predominant dozen just before the trigger is best to avoid betting after the trigger.
But as  you said if one dozen has appeared 5 more times in the last 10 spins (prior to the trigger), then  by all means avoid betting. It doesn't have to follow the rules exactly as I mentioned it.
You can certainly add your own ideas. If something looks unusual, before the trigger the rule of thumb is to avoid betting. Triggers form very fast. So by waiting for a few more spins to bypass an unusual event, won't take much of your time. But it can make a big difference in certainty.

About the XX that you don't understand here is an example:
 We have 22-24-5. The XXY is 221. The target dozen is the first dozen.
But after you bet the first dozen 2 times  and 16-20 came up, you stop right there. Because now you have the 2nd dozen that appeared 4 times in 5 spins. Which brings you back to the first rule.
The only thing you can't avoid is the fact that  you lost the 2 spins.
This rule saves you from possibly losing the 3rd spin. Which is the most damaging out of the 3 spins.
You can use the units saved towards the next trigger.
Another:  you have 1-15-8. You play the 2nd dozen 3 bets. If in the first 2 bets 4-9 shows up you stop and only lost 2 units. No need to risk 2 more units.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on March 12, 2017, 02:11:07 AM
Wow, great idea Rinad about adding inside numbers to reduce cost!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Rinad on March 12, 2017, 02:44:50 AM


  thanks Reyth and playing inside bets can be done as well with outside bets on any systems. maybe Mr Talos does it also with his method in order to reduce high bets. I thinks creating "more opportunities" to win when coming up with a great system is adding value. like playing video poker, holding the 2 cards that gives you more outs.

I even like to play a dozen/ds combo, placing less units on the ds then on a dozen, even less on a quad,ect... sure you give up returns on your big dozen bet if none of the inside bets dont hit, but they sure act like "super heroes coming to your rescue" in time of desparate times. creating opportunity bets can be your "whistle when the titanic is sinking".
thanks for sharing all your hard work with every one. truly enjoy.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Jake007 on March 12, 2017, 03:59:56 AM
palestis it makes perfect sense now regarding the XX, thank you!

Your whole system is adaptable. I was playing entirely different at first and did quite well.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 12, 2017, 07:01:31 AM
Hello everyone. I created an Excel Document to keep track of the Dozens for palestis's Single Dozen Strategy (Single Dozen Tracker), and it adds the units won or lost at the end. Feel free to use it. Just copy and paste roulette spins (or enter them manually) under the SPIN category. And the Dozen Category will automatically be displayed to the right of each number (LG, MG and HG). Under the W/L category, enter how much you won or lost from each bet, and it will automatically be totaled as you progress.

The Second Document (Game #1) is my first game playing this strategy, copying actual spins from a real casino. I do not know if I am playing this correctly, because I reached a 4th stage progression...TWICE! Ouch! I still ended up with a profit of 18 units, though.

I would appreciate it if palestis (or anyone else) can take a look at it and give me feedback. I wrote down all my decision each step of the way, to make it easier to follow what I did and why.

The asterisks (*) under the "Bet" column indicates which Dozen from the trigger I bet on.

Thanks for sharing this great Strategy, palestis.  And if anyone wants to improve the Excel document I created, feel free to do so. I am just learning Excel and did the best I could.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on March 12, 2017, 11:53:25 AM
By coincidence, I also made a little tracker for Palestis' system. Actually it's more of a generic tracker for 2-1 bets, because I don't like to make software too system specific. It doesn't update the bankroll like Terminator's excel sheet but you can add wins and losses for Doz/Col by clicking the relevant buttons given separately under the respective marquees. Two csv files are generated (one for Doz and one for Col) so you can import the results into a spreadsheet after a session and inspect them.

(http://i68.tinypic.com/2zhp4ki.png)

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 12, 2017, 12:49:03 PM
Nice Tracker, Bayes. I wanted to add a "Column" to each number in my tracker also, (so we could know when they criss-crossed to place bets on 2 Splits), but my programming skills are not that good, and I could not figure out how to do that. I like how yours is able to tell us when a Dozen and Column intersect.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 12, 2017, 03:19:10 PM
Terminator.
That was good work
I took the numbers you had in the EXCELL sheet and processed them manually (I used to be in the computer hardware business, but when it comes to programming I am dumb)
Though these numbers in the sample seem, (wherever they came from),  more like numbers from hell,  nevertheless I went ahead and processed them.
I found a case of 2 back to back losses, 1 case of 4 back to back losses and 1 case of 3 back to back losses.
When I test I ignore the red flags, so that I can test as many numbers as possible.
Then I go back and examine the situations where many back to back losses occurred and try to figure out what went wrong.
In the 2 back to back case it is obvious that it would've been avoided. You will see 6,3,6,6, Not only the 1st dozen was repeated 4 times in a row, it also involved 6,6,6 in 4 spins. You can't miss this red flag.
Then in the 4 back to back case, after the first trigger loss we see, 22,24,14,22, then further down we see 17,21,21,17,14. Again the 2nd dozen repeated, and the same numbers of the same dozen repeated. You can't miss such a weird sequence.
And in the case of the 3 back to back losses, again it is very obvious that something looks weird. 35,32,26,2,9,8,6. Again an obvious red flag that would avoid any betting.
I understand that some of the winning triggers came after the presence of the red flags and still won.
Where in actual play they would've been missed opportunities.
But I'd rather miss some winning opportunities than risk a devastating loss coming from repeated back to back losses.
I long term tests I found that by avoiding those red flags, you get solid results even if you inadvertently miss some winning opportunities.
I can't come up with an explanation, other the fact that you take advantage of the law of the 2/3rds,
by making sure you are almost always in a new cycle where most likely the law of the 2/3rds will always be active.
This law has been discussed in a post in the past, but the problem is it's difficult to pinpoint a specific cycle. 
Rather than trying to follow the cycle the roulette gives you, in this system you construct your own cycle. By avoiding and jumping and interrupting the roulette's flow.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 12, 2017, 04:51:11 PM
Thank you for taking the time to check my game, palestis. I went through your analysis and learned a lot.

Our triggers in both our games did not line up, however. For example, if we look at your attached sheet, the very first 3 numbers (23,35,23) you have as a trigger. However, I avoided this trigger because the PREVIOUS betting round had a #23 in it.

But I ALSO avoided the trigger immediately BEFORE the "23,35,23" trigger, because THAT trigger (5,19,11) had the #19 from the previous betting sequence, which was "11,19,23."

To Clarify, if there is a betting sequence, and the next trigger repeats a number from the last betting sequence, we skip that trigger and go onto the next trigger. I understand that. But if that SECOND trigger also repeats a number from the last betting sequence, do we skip that trigger also? Or do we just skip the first trigger?

Anyway, I still learned a lot from your detailed analysis. Thank you so much for helping me out.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 13, 2017, 02:02:43 AM
Oh I see.
 Somehow I missed a few numbers from the beginning of your sheet.  Accidentally I probably scrolled down a little
Actually a single number,  whether it was used as part of a previous trigger, or was a part of the betting sequence, is not much of a risk situation as long as all other conditions are fine.
It is the consecutive appearance of one dozen, or otherwise its heavy presence in the previous spins, preceding the trigger that causes most of the problems, leading to back to back losses.
When you encounter 3+ back to back losses, this situation is always the culprit.
But it is easily recognized and therefore avoided.
Many other  systems do not offer such obvious warning signals, until it's too late.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 13, 2017, 03:25:37 AM
Thanks for clearing that up, palestis. It makes playing your system much easier, and I get to make more frequent bets, without having to worry about looking at individual numbers. For some reason, I feel comfortable playing your system, whereas most other systems I've tried can be tense and stressful at times.

Thanks again for sharing!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 13, 2017, 03:30:19 AM
Oh, and can anyone clarify what a "virtual lost trigger" means, as discussed in this thread? My understanding is that after a valid trigger, we DO NOT BET during the next betting sequence. We WAIT for a LOSS (without risking real money). THEN, after that loss, we DO bet for real after the next trigger.

Is this correct?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 13, 2017, 02:15:00 PM
Yes that's what it is.
If we have 15-21-4,  we are supposed to bet the 1st dozen.
But if we wait until something like 32,14,25 shows up, it's a loss. (but only virtual).
Then the very next time you see 4-10-22 for example, you bet the 2nd dozen with actual chips.
It takes a little time,  but the certainty increases. (recommended for high value chip bets).
A second type of virtual losses is within the same trigger.
If we see 15-21-4 we can wait to lose the first or two steps virtually, then bet 3 steps after that actually.
The 3 step progression becomes a 5 step progression, but only at the cost of 3 steps. because the first 2 steps were lost virtually.
Example. 15-21-4. Then 32-14-25-5. The 32 and 14 is a virtual loss. if we actually bet after that we hit the 5 with the second bet.
The virtual loss concept can be adapted to each player's individual playing style. It doesn't have to follow exact standards.  The more patience you are willing to endure, the more the certainty turns on your side. It's that simple.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 13, 2017, 08:41:26 PM
Thank you, this seems like a valuable tool, especially if the progressions are getting high because of bad spins. It's a good way to wait for the bad streak to do less harm.

I really like the idea of the virtual losses in the SAME TRIGGER. Less waiting time. Smart!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: kav on March 13, 2017, 10:13:51 PM
With all due respect Palestis,
The problem in waiting for a losing attack that you might miss many winning attacks in between. Sometimes the attacks you miss would produce more profits that the losses of the lost attack.
Roulette is so perfectly balanced at its heart that you can't trick it like that. All the benefit of an extreme event will be countered by the missed opportunities for wins.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 14, 2017, 03:23:40 AM
Yes I am very well aware of the concept of "missed winning opportunities".
 And took it into account, before I opted for the virtual loss strategy as a must for every system.
It's not the ROULETTE ODDS that concerns me, it is my own odds of winning vs. losing as an individual in every betting attempt. .
The roulette is nothing more than a tool that stimulates and contests my own odds.
It's not really a matter of guessing the roulette's spins. It a matter of being aware of my own frequency of successful hits within a range of intended bets. And that frequency has been worked out and it is a known variable, after extensive and long term tests. Every player can find his own odds. depending on his system.
And that range depends on the system, or better the quantity of numbers involved in the betting.
And it can be computed with remarkably great accuracy. Long range testing is the way to do it.
Though winning opportunities are very welcome when they happen, however you have to be willing to take a much bigger risk going thru an extended progression with possible catastrophic consequences.
And the fact that  that most roulette players eventually lose, it is because they are trying to take advantage of every opportunity they can get their hands on.
Virtual losses bypass actual losses at the beginning of the betting range, leaving more certain winning opportunities in a much shorter betting range, and with a much lesser financial risk. 
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: kav on March 14, 2017, 03:28:31 AM
Thanks for your reply, but the question is simple and it is specific to this system:
If while waiting for your loss you lose 6 winning opportunities, is it still a good idea?
How do you know that you wont lose 6 winning opportunities while waiting for a loss?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 14, 2017, 04:16:00 AM
That's the thing.
You don't know in advance if you missed several winning opportunities, while waiting for the virtual loss.
But what you also don't know, is if by betting perpetually to seize those winning opportunities,
you might lose a long series of bets, with increased progression, where recovery from it will be almost impossible or at least a huge task in itself.  The psychological let down supersedes the financial loss.
To make my point more understood, when I test a system, I compare results of betting all the progression steps, to the results of betting selective shorter spans of the progression.
And the results vary widely in favor of certainty. 
You can't compromise CERTAINTY for the sake of missed opportunity.
One might say that you bet lesser times compared to perpetual betting. And that eventually equal number of selective bets will have the same results with equal numbers of perpetual bets.
That is definitely not true.
Those selective bets are backed by a higher degree of certainty.
How can they have the same results with endless betting?

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: kav on March 14, 2017, 04:29:52 AM
Let's say that while betting virtually you see (many) 12 winning opportunities go by and then you see a virtual loss.
The problem with the many missed wins is not only financial. Now that you saw so many good virtual spins it is even more possible to have a loss back to back, because the spins before the virtual loss were so favorable. So still, you can't be sure the next attack will be a win.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 14, 2017, 05:56:39 AM
Well Kav we have to be realistic when dealing with systems.
12 missed opportunities strengthens your argument, for the argument's sake, but it highly unlikely that this will ever happen. At least in this particular system.
Sure if you see something like this happen, it's very likely that  when you start betting you will run into a long overdue loss.
 But this scenario is outside any realistic presumptions.
When you test a system, the results will show how many back to back wins are possible. As well as how many back to back losses. This is a vital part of  testing a system.
In this particular system the usual average of consecutive wins is about 3. Never 12 and rarely 6.
Then it is interrupted by a single loss and more rarely by 2 back to back losses.  Not a serious problem.
But if you have a system that requires betting 30 numbers, most likely you will have 10 and 15 consecutive wins very frequently. But all it takes is 3 losses to make up for a large number of wins.
There is a very close relationship of the number of virtual losses that you can employ to the number of
the average consecutive wins observed during testing as well as the number of possible consecutive losses. All you have to do is try to balance everything so that the risk is minimum.
If in this system frequent 12 consecutive wins were possible, and consecutive losses  limited to 3, then this could very well be the holly grail.
Realistically speaking the average winning opps. you have to forgo is about 3. That's the average for this system. So the most winning opps. you will miss is 3 on average.
A virtual loss almost guarantees that the in one of the next 2 triggers you will have hit.
On the other hand if you have $5000 B/R and play with $5 chip minimum, by all means there is no need to wait for anything. You can bet perpetually without fear of losing. There are no back to back losses that can happen to deplete such a high B/R.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on March 14, 2017, 08:58:52 AM
The problem with the many missed wins is not only financial. Now that you saw so many good virtual spins it is even more possible to have a loss back to back, because the spins before the virtual loss were so favorable.

Since deviations (positive and negative) very often come in clumps the danger of using virtual losses is that in a way you're seeking out losing streaks. Every long losing streak begins with a shorter one. I do sometimes wait for a VL or two but just because it mixes things up a bit (there's no evidence that it increases the certainty of a win). The VL's amount to a different bet selection, and if you stick rigidly with one selection it's inevitable that  you'll enounter its extremes of variance. "Diversification" reduces variance.

Palestis, you mentioned that the system is based on the law of the third. Could you explain how? Thanks.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on March 14, 2017, 11:17:31 AM
Palestis, regarding the no-bet situations:

Quote
Situations where you avoid betting, and wait for things to become more normal
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).
2. If the playable target dozen ( Y), has appeared more than 3+ times immediately prior to the trigger. (meaning it has appeared enough times already and runs the risk to disappear when you begin betting it  3 times after the trigger).
3. If the first 2 bets after the trigger result in XX (same dozen as the majority dozen in the trigger, you stop and only lose 2 bets). Easily recoverable in the next trigger
4. if there is more than one 0 in the numbers preceding the trigger. (0's tend to come in packs).

Don't rules 1 & 2 collapse into one? namely : "Don't bet if any dozen appears more than 3+ times prior to the trigger".

The same dozen could be the playable target dozen (rule 2), or not. In either case, it signals a no-bet. Also could you be more precise regarding rule 4? For how many spins do we look back for 0's?

I need this information because I'm planning to add more code to the tracker which automatically adds the w/L registry and signals a no-bet if any of the above rules apply, so I need definite numbers. Currently it's a bit of a headache keeping track of both Doz/Col and adding the w/L. Also I'm planning to add another bet for the sector dozens, so there will be 3 bet selections to keep track of.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on March 14, 2017, 01:54:51 PM
On the other hand if you have $5000 B/R and play with $5 chip minimum, by all means there is no need to wait for anything. You can bet perpetually without fear of losing. There are no back to back losses that can happen to deplete such a high B/R.

LOL.  I can go in with WHEYMOAR than only 1000 units!  How is 20000?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Jesper on March 14, 2017, 02:06:41 PM
1000 times the bank to bet unit is never sure. Every with 10 Euro in the pocket could never lose?

I got a real run from hell, start with 1 cent and dive down 40000 units until I got a win at 20000 units.
Playing cents do not say small bets but lasting!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Rinad on March 14, 2017, 02:27:48 PM


  just my 2 cents,

 the less exposure to the HE,  the better off. dont stay longer in the "shark infested water" then you have to.
 play a higher unit, limited spins, and GET OUT!!!!.
  plus your hourly wage is so much greater. the casino knows that with extended period of plays they could hurt you.
 dont give them that chance.  now if you have 20.000 $ BR, by all means play black chips and take 5 of them out of the casino each day and go enjoy life.  after all it is why a good system was created. but again, you need to walk around with at least 2k in your poket to play at that level. (if not more).

Palesti's system is working by not continiously playing all the spins that roulette is throwing at you.
and it does make a difference in your overhall "spin history" because you play on your terms, not theirs.
you dont even have to play the mini series all on one table. it does not matter. the reason why you win is because you have a greater chance to "hitting" that dz that you picked then the ODDS dictate.
that is precisely why you have less back to back losses.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on March 14, 2017, 03:13:43 PM
My tests ultimately now agree with Bayes.  Hit and run cannot avoid the black swan because the ratio of amount won:spins is always the same. 

I however agree that it "breaks things up" and Pales' separation of triggers to me makes a great deal of sense; at least if the black swan is going to get me, it will have to do it on 14 separate & successive occasions because otherwise I will coup large.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Rinad on March 14, 2017, 05:07:13 PM


 see Reyth, the black swan can follow you, and can even get into the water following you. the HE is more like a shark.  so if you get out of the water soon enough he will have to bite the other guy. and after it does,you can go back into the water until his digestion is over. ;)
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on March 14, 2017, 05:16:20 PM

TRIVIA TIME!

(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/41/9f/61/419f61f113820d4408c57093a448337f.jpg)

(http://i65.tinypic.com/2cs7xms.jpg)

Psssst, there is more than one shark!

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: petespin on March 14, 2017, 07:33:59 PM
i ll try to direct u at the right side with this system , after a lot of testing i conclude that.. the most important thing is in which spin [1,2,3] u won , when u win of course , after all i also count the lost triggers and exploit these scenarios ,i ll give an example as how i bet , lets say i ve won 3 triggers in a row at the very first spin , ... guess what am doing next ... i bet the other 2 dozens instead of that the trigger shows! that way minimize the odds to have a lost trigger , i do the same with all scenarios like.. counting how many triggers have won at 2nd spin,or at third spin etc...  the most basic factor is to choose the scorebord that trigger-s already lose and then start betting . 
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: scepticus on March 14, 2017, 08:17:04 PM

I think it is clear that what Palestis proposes is to limit his losses to an acceptable amount.If he  has deduced that a particular dozen will win within , say , ten spins then if he waits for ,say, 6 spins  and it has not won then it is reasonable for him to think it will win within the next 4 spins and so starts betting it.
He is not concerned if he misses wins while waiting because he has not lost any money . He merely moves to another table and waits for an opportunity - or has  tracked a few tables waiting for an opportunity at any of them.
By virtual betting he has also avoided  the number of EXPECTED zeros.
Due to the variability of winning  dozens  it can be argued that his winning opportunities has not lessened because of prior wins. Clumps do happen . If we only knew WHEN  !
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Rinad on March 14, 2017, 11:08:42 PM
i ll try to direct u at the right side with this system , after a lot of testing i conclude that.. the most important thing is in which spin [1,2,3] u won , when u win of course , after all i also count the lost triggers and exploit these scenarios ,i ll give an example as how i bet , lets say i ve won 3 triggers in a row at the very first spin , ... guess what am doing next ... i bet the other 2 dozens instead of that the trigger shows! that way minimize the odds to have a lost trigger , i do the same with all scenarios like.. counting how many triggers have won at 2nd spin,or at third spin etc...  the most basic factor is to choose the scorebord that trigger-s already lose and then start betting .
I think what you are saying is close to what I experimented with. you are keeping track of every wins and losses in colums of 3, then you see which leg of the progression you have won or lost ?
If you could explain it a little more so it is clear, maybe with a example?  thx.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on March 15, 2017, 12:28:25 AM
Here is my version.  Its the only way that makes sense to me:

XYZ
XXY/XYX ==>Z
XXZ/XZX ==>Y
YYX/YXY ==>Z
YYZ/YZY ==>X
ZZX/ZXZ ==>Y
ZZY/ZYZ ==>X

XYZ,XZY,YXZ,YZX,ZXY,ZYX all equal NO BET.

Because I am always betting the missing Dozen thats at least 4 back, I don't have to worry about my triggers getting "messed up" by close repeats.

XXX,YYY and ZZZ are great setups that are kind of like "narrow sideways channels" in trading.  We just wait for the break and bet the missing Dozen.  The longer the streak, the greater the chances of us getting a hit.  Anything over 3 and I would even advocate betting extra during those times (x1.5 or x2).

The only thing that I think messes us up is if a 0 hits while we are betting.  I think its most wise to immediately stop betting, take the loss and make it up on the next trigger.  The reason is because the 0 has already taken a full 33% of our odds away from us by showing up during a bet sequence. 

Conversely however, if a zero shows up while we are awaiting a trigger, this makes our bet selection even stronger and I would even advocate betting extra (x1.5 or x2) in those occasions:

XZ0Z <=== now Y has even MORE chance to hit for us in a sequence of 7.

Gosh I feel like a traitor for posting this but I am sorry its just how I feel. :'(

(http://cdn.quotesgram.com/small/33/16/181129749-a-traitor-among-us.jpg)

I just made a quick 50 units betting the following progression:

1 1 2
2 2 4
4 4 8
etc

Stay on the same level if not at profit and back to level 1 when at par/profit.  You can also drop down or up  a level as you gain hits if necessary.

I just received the following sequence and doubled my bet for Z:

YYYYYYX

My bet hit (YYYYYYXZ) and profit is now +116.

I'll try to keep everything in this one post but I can move this to my own thread if you guys like. :D

+152
+218
+269



Real money 1400 unit bankroll.

https://youtu.be/exDUc20h078

+100
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 15, 2017, 02:22:24 AM
Palestis, regarding the no-bet situations:

Quote
Situations where you avoid betting, and wait for things to become more normal
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).
2. If the playable target dozen ( Y), has appeared more than 3+ times immediately prior to the trigger. (meaning it has appeared enough times already and runs the risk to disappear when you begin betting it  3 times after the trigger).
3. If the first 2 bets after the trigger result in XX (same dozen as the majority dozen in the trigger, you stop and only lose 2 bets). Easily recoverable in the next trigger
4. if there is more than one 0 in the numbers preceding the trigger. (0's tend to come in packs).

Don't rules 1 & 2 collapse into one? namely : "Don't bet if any dozen appears more than 3+ times prior to the trigger".

The same dozen could be the playable target dozen (rule 2), or not. In either case, it signals a no-bet. Also could you be more precise regarding rule 4? For how many spins do we look back for 0's?

I need this information because I'm planning to add more code to the tracker which automatically adds the w/L registry and signals a no-bet if any of the above rules apply, so I need definite numbers. Currently it's a bit of a headache keeping track of both Doz/Col and adding the w/L. Also I'm planning to add another bet for the sector dozens, so there will be 3 bet selections to keep track of.
Maybe an example will show what I mean. A. 15-20-17-25-31-8. The XXY is 331. I would rather avoid betting because there is 222 just before the trigger.
B. 4-8-11-13-5    or  4-8-11-25- 32-7. In both situations the target dozen is the 1st.
But it already appeared enough times already. Best to skip this trigger
So I guess you are right. Both rules collapse into one. It's just that in the B case it is a much stronger reason to avoid any bets.
As far as the presence of any 0 or 0's prior to the trigger, I would say up to about 2-3 numbers up.
Like 25-0-5-9-14. We don't have to go up the numbers very far.
In general if prior to the trigger things look unusually strange or imbalanced wait for a few more spins or move on to another roulette.
I understand that to code the system for computerized testing, you have to have predetermined instructions.
In actual play in a live casino, you have the opportunity to see in front of you the whole picture before you make a decision to bet.
So even if the situation doesn't fall exactly under these rules, if for some reason you feel uncomfortable with what you are seeing, it doesn't hurt to wait a few more minutes.
With many roulettes around and triggers forming very fast, you have the luxury to pick and chose when  you want to play. 
The best and easiest way to test it, is the way I do it manually.
I test ignoring any rules. Betting every trigger that forms.
Then I go back and examine all the situations where 3 or more back to back losses occurred. And investigate if the results were due to the violations of the rules.
And I also examine results where there are shorter back to back losses like 2, interrupted by a single win. LL-W-LL-W-LL-W-LL-W  is just as bad as a longer consecutive  loss situation. But I find that to be far more rare than a longer consecutive loss appearing between longer intervals.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 15, 2017, 07:35:41 AM
Reyth, that is an interesting modification. Hmmm. Palestis, what do you make of that? It does seem more likely that a Z dozen would have a better chance of appearing after an XXY appear just before it. Hmmm. I'll see how it compares to my other recorded results, by playing Reyth's suggestion next to the original version.

And don't feel like a traitor, Reyth, we are here to share ideas and make possible improvements. I'm sure Palestis won't mind, if it helps us win more!

Speaking of which, I have made a change in the way I play also. (Oh no, another traitor!) I've been able to Quadruple my profits compared to your original strategy, Palestis, in your first post, playing within the SAME amount of spins! It's a lot more involved, and you might need to keep track on a piece of paper or the computer, but it is worth it!

This is what I added. I've been playing the Dozens, just as you suggest. And every time the "Columns" crisscross, I always put a 1 unit chip on 1 Split, and another unit on the other Split (4 numbers total). This was sort of suggested in this thread, but I do it in ADDITION to the regular bets. I always keep it at 1 unit chips all the time on the splits (no matter the stage of the progression).

But what I have ALSO been doing is the following. I've been playing the COLUMNS at the same time I play the DOZENS, using your same rules for the Single Dozen. AND I have also been placing one chip each on the 2 splits every time the Dozens intersect with the Columns.

This eliminates a lot of the waiting time when going through triggers. When the Dozens and Columns ARE played at the same time, AND they intersect,  STILL only lay 2 chips on the Splits (I do not increase those bets).

Oh, and I have IMPROVED the Excel sheet I created earlier. It will keep track of both the Dozens and Columns (to make it easier to know when to place those split bets, OR play Dozens and Columns at the same time). It will also keep a running total win/loss on the Dozens, Columns and Split Bets.

I also included an example of my most recent game using this document, to illustrate how to use it. Hopefully it's self explanatory. But if you have any questions on how to use it, just ask!

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on March 15, 2017, 09:58:31 AM
Yo Term, don't forget Bayes is hard at work at the WHEEL DOZENS as well!

They are:

32-15-19-4-21-2-25-17-34-6-27-13
36-11-30-8-23-10-5-24-16-33-1-20
14-13-9-22-18-29-7-28-12-35-3-26

And so like if we ONLY bet:

1) Dozens intersect
2) Columns intersect
3) Wheel intersect

Hopefully we get a higher hit rate?

Or maybe we can bet any combination of 2 from the 1,2,3 set...

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: dobbelsteen on March 15, 2017, 10:17:57 AM
random sequence of the dozens  :  1-3-3-2-1-3
Now I bet one unit on dozen 2 and 3 . After a no-hit I bet 3 units on3 dozen 1 and 2. The risk is a loss on 3^8 spins. These events occur very often. The same strategy can also played on the columns. Playing 4 tables on my MR the waiting time is very short. Sometime it happens on more than one table.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: petespin on March 15, 2017, 11:32:58 AM
all i can say is jim is a real nice guy that he posted this system , now if u smart enough u can play and bet succesfully if not......u cant be milionaire overnight  but u ll be ahead for long term thats a sure thing guys.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on March 15, 2017, 12:45:36 PM
Yo Term, don't forget Bales is hard at work at the WHEEL DOZENS as well!

Who is Bales?  :P

I'm having second thoughts about adding the wheel dozens because it means having to place 12 chips and I want to keep things fairly simple. I suppose I could use a dozen made up of 2 DS, which would require only 2 chips. If we number the DS from 1-6 the possibilities are 12 (leaving aside the standard dozens (1,2), (3,4), (5,6)) :

(1,3), (1,4), (1,5), (1,6)
(2,3), (2,4), (2,5), (2,6)
(3,5), (3,6)
(4,5), (4,6)

We need 3 pairs to make a set of 3 dozens, and it's better to make these pairs mutually exclusive (no DS repeated in the set). I'll figure out which they are and report back.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 15, 2017, 04:04:30 PM
The original system XXY was based on the fact that usually a single dozen has the tendency to disappear for a few spins like 2 or 3 spins. Then you bet that the Y dozen is most likely to appear a second time in between. (The X dozen already appeared twice).
That's the basic assumption.
Now that doesn't  mean that this system cannot be modified.
HARRYJ plays the same system, but uses 2 DS's instead of dozens. I hope he comes in and reports.
(He is currently away from S. Africa and on visit in Northampton  UK).
The good thing is that whatever modification takes place, the results can be confirmed, with testing.
I always welcome changes and modifications as long as the results slightly improve.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 15, 2017, 04:32:07 PM
Yes, I like to test variations and compare them to the original, that is how we improve! Thanks for explaining the reason why you developed this strategy, Jim.

BTW, Reyth, I noticed in your modifications that you have no "YXX, XZZ," etc. Do you skip or play those triggers? I'm playing your variation now, to see how it compares to the previous games I played. And I AM playing the triggers "ZYY, etc."
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on March 15, 2017, 04:39:05 PM
Yes, I alike to test variations and compare them to the original, that is how we improve! Thanks for explaining the reason why you developed this strategy, Jim.

BTW, Reyth, I noticed in your modifications that you have no "YXX, XZZ," etc. Do you skip or play those triggers? I'm playing your variation now, to see how it compares to the previous games I played. And I AM playing the triggers "ZYY, etc."

Sorry for the omission. 

Ya the bet selection is easy.  Bet the missing Dozen from the last 3 spins, if there is no missing Dozen then spin until there is -- if you get a zero, spin through as if it wasn't there but just know your odds of the missing Dozen hitting has just increased.  After every hit, start the spin history from nothing. 

There is actually no need to list the combinations.  I did it to help me conceptualize what I wanted to create.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 15, 2017, 06:09:08 PM
Well, I just finished comparing Reyth's modification to my last game played. I thought I'd share it (I hope that's okay?). The results are NOT what I expected. I thought it would do better. My previous game is in reply #92 (above), and Reyth's strategy is attached below (if you want to see the details).

This is really like 2 games (since I play both Dozens and Columns at the same time). I know it's a small sample, but I play everything manually, by hand, and it takes me a while. Reyth, are you able to compare these 2 strategies side by side with lots of spins through your programing? It will probably be more accurate than this test size.

Anyway, here are the results (200+ spin game):

Original Strategy:
Dozens - 29 units won
Columns = 39 units won
Splits - 76 units won
TOTAL = 144 units won

Highest progression reached = 4th.

Reyth's Strategy:
Dozens - 20 units won
Columns = 30 units won
Splits - 36 units lost
TOTAL = 14 units won

Highest progression reached = 5th.

The difference on the Split Bets was a shocker to me.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on March 15, 2017, 06:23:20 PM
Wow nice work. :D
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on March 16, 2017, 08:06:37 PM
@ palestis, a query.  After a win or an "abort" by rule 3 (stop if the first 2 bets after the trigger result in XX ) in your view is it better to collect spins until you are 3 spins "clear" of the trigger before looking for the new trigger?

Here's a case where it doesn't make sense to take the trigger from the last 3 spins:

L
H
L
M
M
H -- trigger, bet H
M
M -- rule 3 (abort), but new trigger, bet H!

Looking back 3 spins you now have a new trigger, but it requires betting on H which is what you have just abandoned because of rule 3. Of course you could just continue collecting spins in these situations until you get XXY. Do you have a preference? (just thinking about it from the POV of programming).

Also, how many spins (bets) did you use to test the system before posting it here? Thanks.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on March 16, 2017, 08:11:24 PM
(http://www.animatedimages.org/data/media/431/animated-cheerleader-image-0030.gif)

GO BALES GO!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on March 16, 2017, 08:15:33 PM
Will do, RELTH.  :D
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: scepticus on March 16, 2017, 09:53:30 PM
Nice one Bayes  !
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 16, 2017, 09:58:26 PM
@ palestis, a query.  After a win or an "abort" by rule 3 (stop if the first 2 bets after the trigger result in XX ) in your view is it better to collect spins until you are 3 spins "clear" of the trigger before looking for the new trigger?
@ Bayes
When you encounter a situations like this, you have to stop and think for a moment to figure the previous situation,  if it is worth it to continue based on numbers that have already been accounted for.
Since there is no shortage of triggers, the best thing to do is leave everything behind and start fresh.
Very soon you will find a new trigger. You are not missing anything. It also gives you the chance to get away from questionable conditions.
I have tested about 30,000 numbers from various score cards and another person that also checks it about 40,000 numbers.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on March 17, 2017, 09:12:04 AM
Since there is no shortage of triggers, the best thing to do is leave everything behind and start fresh.

Ok palestis, thanks. I'll code the tracker to only look for a new trigger 3 spins after the old one, that way there won't be any ambiguity. There will be no shortage of triggers if I include some double streets.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Harryj on March 17, 2017, 03:50:31 PM
Kkav I am extremely pissed off. Twice I have written long posts only to be told J do not have the right to post. I am away from home and working with an old tablet that was rejected as obsolete by my primary school granddaughter. Hours wasted !!

       I will keep this shorter. Bayes raised the question of using DS . This system was designed around the use of DS. In collaboration with Pal it was adapted to work with his intermitant style.
        As Bayes pointed out there are 15 possible DS dozens. SSO there isenty of choice. If we exclude the natural dozens 12,34,56. I prefercto combine DS 1,2,3. with DS 3,4,5.In this way each dozen with include 6 R&B. O&E. H&L. Research has shown that this distribution improves slightly on the performs CE of the natural dozens.
          I use "Flow" as WL as the "Rule of Thirds" this means that I try to flow trends by using the last 3 numbers spun as a possible trigger. This often results in a string of single spin wins.
           I use a 5 step progression which is an "Insured Martingale", designed to tailor the payback to the expectancy. This greatly reduces the number of progression losses, and improves the W/L ratio. So I do not increase my basic bet after a loss. I let the W/L ratio take care of recovery. This keeps the B/R required small.
        I was recently asked if I knew anything better. Frankly I don't. I may sacrifice a few wins to recover a loss, but there are plenty of triggers and wins out there.
                 Harry

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on March 17, 2017, 04:24:08 PM
Wow.  Alot of people will like the flat betting for the recovery.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 17, 2017, 06:50:27 PM
Harryj, I'd like to read more about how you play your strategy. Can you get more specific? Thanks.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on March 19, 2017, 10:47:10 AM
I did another short test using the tracker. 198 spins and 34 units profit. The worst stretch was 3 consecutive losses.

@ Palestis, do you have any stats on the percentage of wins over all your tests? If the system has any flat bet advantage it should return a winning percentage of more than 69% on a single zero wheel assuming each "attack" after a trigger is 3 spins long.

You mentioned that you tested over 30,000 spins. Is that spins or actual bets? What was the longest run of consecutive losses? Thanks.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on March 19, 2017, 12:50:54 PM
The Holloway progression works quite nicely with 2-1 bets and is quite conservative:

1,1,1,1,1,2,2,2,2,3,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,7,8,9,10,12,14,16,18,20,22,25,28

Reset on a new high, or go back 2 steps on a win.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 19, 2017, 01:08:35 PM
@Bayes.
I can't think of any flat bet advantage because I haven't tested it that way.
Actually I don't even test it with the final win /loss amount of chips in mind.
My main concern is how many BACK TO BACK losses I encounter. That is y, testing as many spins as  possible is extremely important.
Because I know if 3 back to back losses are the rare maximum, then it is obvious that you can never lose. (provided you have a sufficient B/R and the guts to go with it). 
3 back to back losses for a single dozen (9 spins), is not nearly as bad as 3 back to back losses for EC (at 3 bets per EC). (not to mention 24+ numbers).
I encountered 4 back to back losses once, and the 3 back to back losses were extremely rare (with many wins in between.
But in the case of 4 back to back losses they were well within the exception rules, as well as well the majority of 3 back to back losses.
In fact I have the record of the 4 back2back losses that I encountered, and as you can see it is clear that in actual plat it would've been prevented.
The red flags are very obvious.
I think the trigger ( XXY), that makes this possible, must be very powerful , because of the way dozens behave.
Once the maximum back 2back losses are established, the progression is a personal matter. 
Can you really think of a situation where someone with $5000 B/R and $5 minimum starting chip, can lose? Not even with 8 back to back losses and  Martingale style progression for a single dozen.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on March 19, 2017, 01:52:08 PM
I agree that number of back to back losses is the overriding factor when using a progression.

Can you really think of a situation where someone with $5000 B/R and $5 minimum starting chip, can lose? Not even with 8 back to back losses and  Martingale style progression for a single dozen.

But if using a full martingale progression the limit would be more like 4 back to back losses. If 8 occurred it would take you well over the house limit.

4 losses x 3 spins per attack = a progression of 12.

A full marty is 1,1,2,3,4,6,9,13,20,30,45,68, and continuing on the stakes really start to get silly.

Not that I would ever use one though...
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on March 19, 2017, 02:09:17 PM
A maximum of 4 back to back losses seems remarkable, it corresponds to a max losing streak of 12, when we know that for a dozen it can go to 30+. The trouble is that these high variance outcomes don't tend to show up until you've tested many thousands of spins. I'm assuming that the variance of the bet is no lower than a random bet, which may not be the case - in fact it can't be so if the max losing streak is only 12.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on March 19, 2017, 02:11:41 PM
You need millions for the worst but of course when we have an event that is ###,###  (not the worst) and we double our bankroll in events that are in the ###, the very statistically rare events don't matter, as long as we are willing to surrender a bank without a further escalating fight about it.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 19, 2017, 05:28:32 PM
I tested 5 games so far (manually). It was doing awesome, until my 5th game. The last game I played, I lost 7 progressions in a row (at the 64-64-128 level). I was playing Dozens and Columns at the same time, and the Columns category is the one that lost (the Dozens did a profit).

With your strategy, it should not matter whether we play Dozens or Columns, right?

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: kav on March 19, 2017, 11:55:24 PM
1,1,1,1,1,2,2,2,2,3,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,7,8,9,10,12,14,16,18,20,22,25,28
Reset on a new high, or go back 2 steps on a win.
I agree that this is an amazing progression for a Dozen.
However I find unbelievable that Palestis managed to turn the max unhit limit of 12 numbers from well over 20 spins to only 12.
I understand that the rules are a bit complex so it can't be easily programmed for a 50K test.
Therefore I'd like to ask Palestis, if we ignore the exception rules, what would be the maximum of back to back losses? 5?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 20, 2017, 12:35:45 AM
@ Kav.
As a matter of fact I always ignore the rules, but only  for testing purposes.
(Paying attention to the rules will significantly slow down the testing, as I do it manually).
Then,  whenever I see 3 or more  back to back losses I circle them and go back later to see if the violation of the rules was the culprit. And sure enough it was in the 4 back to back case and I would say 80% of all 3 back to back losses, and quite a few cases of 2 back to back losses.
So you have ample warning before you decide to bet. 
So far I have only seen one case of 4 back to back which I posted in the picture a few posts above.
And that was while ignoring the rules. Never seen 5. Again without compliance with the rules.
Computerized testing summarizes the back to back losses, but I am not sure if it pinpoints where they happened, so you can go back to that spot investigate it.
In actual play you have full view of the previously spun numbers, and whenever they fall under the "no bet" rules, it is obvious, and therefore easy to avoid by skipping spins.
I guess the great advantage of this system is that it warns you ahead of time of an impending bad situation.
Many systems do not provide the advantage of early warning signals. So you basically proceed blindfolded.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 20, 2017, 12:50:11 AM
I tested 5 games so far (manually). It was doing awesome, until my 5th game. The last game I played, I lost 7 progressions in a row (at the 64-64-128 level). I was playing Dozens and Columns at the same time, and the Columns category is the one that lost (the Dozens did a profit).

With your strategy, it should not matter whether we play Dozens or Columns, right?
When you say you lost 7 progressions do you mean you lost 7 back to back triggers (3 bets per trigger which brings the total to 21 bets) or 7 progressions by themselves, which mean 2.33 triggers?  (7:3=2.33). That is about a little more than2 back to back losses,  but still under 3.
When you play dozens and columns simultaneously the dynamics of the system change. Plus you have to observe the rules for both doz. and col. at the same time. Which can be a bit confusing.
One or the other should do just fine.
And last but not least do you play it in an RNG online casino ( or online live out of a studio), or is it a B+M casino? Because in that case it becomes a question of trust.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on March 20, 2017, 01:12:22 AM
Sure programs can output to a file ONLY the spin history associated with X back to back hits, where you may specify whatever X is and it can even be multiple choices within X and it will do this over an unlimited amount of trials AND it can even do this with B&M spins like the ones we have on this site.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 20, 2017, 02:13:22 AM
I agree that number of back to back losses is the overriding factor when using a progression.

[quote}
But if using a full martingale progression the limit would be more like 4 back to back losses. If 8 occurred it would take you well over the house limit.

4 losses x 3 spins per attack = a progression of 12.

A full marty is 1,1,2,3,4,6,9,13,20,30,45,68, and continuing on the stakes really start to get silly.
I don't know how many progressions will go over the limit.
In most European casinos, progressions are only allowed in multiples of the minimum. If it's $5 it has to be 5-10-15 -20 etc.
In American casinos once you satisfy the minimum you can progress in subdivisions of the minimum,
If it is $5 you can bet $6, $7 $8 etc. on a dozen outside. ( but not 50 cent subdivisions).
Also after you bet the maximum outside, you can bet the dozen numbers inside plus the dozen numbers splits, its DS's, streets, and quads. So you have room to increase the bets before hitting the limit. 

A maximum of 4 back to back losses seems remarkable, it corresponds to a max losing streak of 12, when we know that for a dozen it can go to 30+. The trouble is that these high variance outcomes don't tend to show up until you've tested many thousands of spins. I'm assuming that the variance of the bet is no lower than a random bet, which may not be the case - in fact it can't be so if the max losing streak is only 12.
It is remarkable indeed. But again that can only happen (4 back to back), after total disregard to the rules. In effect it should never happen in actual play. Or it may only happen after hundreds and hundreds of wins, which will have no catastrophic results to the bottom line. ( especially when you use a smoother progression). So in effect all you have to worry about are the rare cases of 3 back to back losses that defied the rules. And being rare it's not terribly bad if you encounter this situation once in a great while. A healthy B/R should neutralize it very easily.
I guess a possible explanation is the law of the thirds. An XXY triggers shows a complete cycle of 36 spins. The 12 numbers absent in a full cycle would be dozen Z.
In the next cycle you  most likely expect to see YZZ or YYZ. ( X probably exhausted its turn, otherwise its persistent reappearance will fall under the rules of exception or "no bet".
Therefore you'd anticipate to see more appearances of dozen Z or the target dozen Y.
If  Y shows up one time even if it is in between Z's you win, if it is a persistent Z again, it rings the alarm bells. And you stop betting, waiting for a new situation. It is rare and doubtful that the next trigger will create another anomaly.
Whatever the reason is, I would take the long term test results for granted.

 
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 20, 2017, 05:56:47 AM
When you say you lost 7 progressions do you mean you lost 7 back to back triggers (3 bets per trigger which brings the total to 21 bets)

Yes, 21 bet in a row. I have attached my game below. It is the COLUMNS that took the loss, not the Dozens.

When you play dozens and columns simultaneously the dynamics of the system change.

Hmmm. I did not realize this. In what way does it change?

This is what I did, just FYI. I copy and pasted over 200 roulette spins, then I played the DOZENS (with splits) first. When I finished, I went back to the beginning of the Spins and played the same game again, but with the COLUMNS (and Splits).

To me, this would be no different than if 2 people approached the same game at the same time, and one played Dozens while the other played Columns. I was thinking of doing this with my brother the next time we go to a casino. We want to be at the same table to keep each other company, using this strategy. I figured we could use it at the same time, without getting in each others way, if one of us uses the columns instead of the dozens.

Plus you have to observe the rules for both doz. and col. at the same time. Which can be a bit confusing.
Yes, I did observe the rules for both. It WOULD be confusing if I played them both at the same time, but as explained above, I did them separately in the same game. This is for TESTING purposes only, I like comparing different ways of doing things to the same spins. PLUS it makes testing go faster when I can play the same numbers twice.

And last but not least do you play it in an RNG online casino ( or online live out of a studio), or is it a B+M casino? Because in that case it becomes a question of trust.

I downloaded millions of real roulette spins from real casino's (I do not trust RNG roulette on gambling sites). I copy and paste 200 spins at a time from those files and paste them into excel to test them.

I still like your system a lot, palestis. I will try it with a less aggressive progression. I like Bayes suggestion about the Holloway also. It's less aggressive and will last longer in the case of a bad run.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 20, 2017, 07:39:51 AM
*UPDATE*

I played the same game AGAIN (game #5), playing only the Columns (I lost 499 units that game), except this time I used the Holloway Progression as suggested by Bayes. I still used ALL the rules that Palestis gave.

When I got to the SAME spot where I was down 499 last game, I was only down 113 units this game! BUT, since I did not hit my table max yet, I continued playing the game (planning on stopping once I hit 200 spins).

I RESOLVED all bets and was in the positive once I hit the 8th progression level ! But then a strange thing happened. After I won on the 8th progression level and I dropped back down to the first level, I LOST 7 progression levels again, in the same game! WTF. (I did win once on level 5, but I was still down, so I repeated level 5 and lost until level eight).

The Holloway progression brought me out of it AGAIN, for the 2nd time, and I ended up 18 units up!!! Much better than 499 units down using the original progression.

My game is attached here. I did not make this up, it is real roulette spins from a real casino (I downloaded to my computer).

This progression does seem like a really good one to use. It takes a little longer to recoup losses than the original, but it will BUST less frequently! Thanks for suggesting this, Bayes! I think this is a good improvement to your strategy, Palestis. For those who prefer a safer progression, I mean.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on March 20, 2017, 09:08:46 AM
Hi Terminator, glad you like the progression. It's actually a sort of "universal" progression in that it can be used for other bets, not just 2-1. According to Holloway in his book, "Full Time Gambler", there are two ways to use it:

1. The "rise and fall" way. This is as I described it earlier, but you can also use it with odds other than 2-1. After a win you move back as many places as the odds to 1. e.g. if using it with a double street (5-1), after a win you would move back 5 steps. When you get back to step one you will be in profit.

2. The "no retreat" way. In this case you continue to move up the progression until you have a new high (regardless of whether the prior result was a win or loss), then reset to one.

I didn't post the full progression, which is actually this:

1,1,1,1,1,2,2,2,2,3,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,14,16,18,20,22,25,28,30,32,35,40,45,50,55,60,70,80,90,100,110,120,135,150

It's based on a fixed percentage scale, so successive steps are generated by multiplying the current value by a fixed % and then rounding (the above uses about 10%). So you could generate your own progressions using different percentages. e.g. if using 20% you proceed like this:

1. 1

next step is 1.2 x 1 = 1.2 (1, rounded)

2. 1

next step is 1.2 x 1.2 = 1.44 (1, rounded)

3. 1

next step is 1.2 x 1.44 = 1.728 (2, rounded)

4. 2

next step is 1.2 x 1.728 = 2.074 (2, rounded)

5. 2

and so on. Get the idea?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 20, 2017, 05:31:12 PM
Thank you for expanding on the Holloway, Bayes. Yes, I understand. It does make sense. I like how it's adjustable.

When I played it in my game #5, I used Palestis's rule of staying at the same level until it's resolved.

I will now try it the 2 other ways you mentioned. Dropping down 2 level after each win, and going UP after a win until it's resolved. Interesting.

Thanks again for sharing!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: petespin on March 20, 2017, 06:51:08 PM
odd dozen bet its a very good bet selection  when its played in hit and run fashion WITHOUT progressions , like jim does , moving from table to table and watching at scorebords to find a good bet oppurtunity , from the other hand its fine to increase the size of your unit after 2 lost rtiggers when u already ve seen virtual lost triggers , its asure thing that if look at scorebords u ll find a couple of virtual lost triggers , seems boring, but its safer imo .
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on March 20, 2017, 06:56:30 PM
I will now try it the 2 other ways you mentioned. Dropping down 2 level after each win, and going UP after a win until it's resolved. Interesting.

Thanks again for sharing!

Term, I should have been clearer in my post regarding the 2nd way (I've amended the post). You continue to move up the progression regardless of a prior win or loss (more risky). But by all means try going up after only after a win (instead of a loss), it'll be interesting to see the results.  :D

Actually, Holloway does mention several "wagering improvements" which include what he calls the delayed climb, which is like Oscars grind; you raise bets after wins and then keep at the same level until the next win, then raise again.

There is leveling off : stay at a certain level such as 5 or 10 units until you recover, and also slump-breaking : action stops after a certain number of losses and then resumed when the winners start coming in.

He adds: "In all these attempts at improving the situation one frequently meets with frustration; the very next play after you stopped may the needed winner. In time you will get to where the frustrations do not bother you, they are part of the game. If you are following definite rules, you must know from research that the new pattern of winners and losers that you are creating is an improvement even though it has its rough spots."
 
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: petespin on March 20, 2017, 06:57:00 PM
u ll never forget that u only need 1 sequence from hell to lose all your br, and this is what progressions do.....
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: petespin on March 20, 2017, 07:02:55 PM
and the real problem is when u start to calculate from 5e your steps even from 2,5e which is the lowest limit in my country s casinos !
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 20, 2017, 07:20:52 PM
Bayes, you were clear, I understood when you said to move up after a win or a loss. That's how I replayed my game #5.

Anyway, here are the results of all 4 ways I played.
to Recap:
- I am risking no more than a 500 unit loss.
- There were TWO 21 losses in a row during same game.
- The first one was a continuous 21 losses.
- The second one had 1 win during the 21 losses (but was still severely in debt)

1st - Palesis's Progression: 1-1-2, 2-2-4, etc. (when win, stay at same level until resolved. Move up if lose)
BUST! 499 unit loss
(Did NOT make it passed the first 21 losses)

2nd - Holloway's Progression, using Palesis's rule for HIS progression above (when win, stay at same level until resolved. Move up if lose)
18 units up
(made it passed BOTH 21 losses)

3rd - Holloway's Progression, using rule 1 (move back 2 steps after each win)
BUST! 448 unit loss
(Did NOT make it passed the first 21 losses)

4th - Holloway's Progression, using rule 2 (continue to move up the progression regardless of a prior win or loss)
!!! 72 units up !!!
(made it passed BOTH 21 losses, and made a HUGE profit after each loss was resolved!)

I really did not expect the 4th progression to do well during this game from hell.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 20, 2017, 09:15:01 PM
------------------ATTENTION                 ATTENTION----------------------------
@ TERMINATOR

I copied all your numbers from your Excel sheet and tried to process the columns.
But as I was doing it,  I noticed that you had the same numbers repeated as shown in the pic. below.
Am I missing something?
The numbers I copied coincided side by side and as you can see they are the same groups of numbers repeated.
Can you check your data? I hope I'm not missing something.
Thanks
PS: They are the same numbers you used for the dozen system.
Let's hope you made an omission and your disappointment from the results was unnecessary.
 

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on March 20, 2017, 09:18:45 PM
LOL the session from heck indeed!  Deja Vu Roulette!!! XD
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 20, 2017, 09:27:38 PM
Yes, I see. There is a small section where I repeated the numbers. I must have hit "CTRL+V" twice in a row without knowing it (I don't copy all 200 numbers at once, but do them in sections). I will re-do this game with the repeats taken out.

However, it IS still good to know that of all the progressions, if there is a session from hell like this, the Holloway does good in TWO cases. I prefer the one with YOUR rules, where, at a win, we STAY at the same level until it's resolved. And only go up again at a loss. It is a safer progression than going up regardless of a win or loss.

I will post the new results when I finish all 4 progressions again.

Sorry about the error.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 20, 2017, 09:37:41 PM
Don't worry.  You are not going to find 7 back to back losses in the next one million years.
Think of your honest mistake as a bad dream.
And don't worry about the progression. As long as back to back losses stay under 4, any progression method should result in profit. It then becomes a matter of personal preference.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on March 20, 2017, 09:45:31 PM
Just to make sure the air is clear about this, I seriously would need more than one post to detail all the mistakes I have made in programming and playing roulette; before I got done, you would be certain I was 8 years old!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 20, 2017, 10:38:57 PM
No problem at all.
Some of us got very worried, about Terminator's test results. Now that it has been established that it was a programming oversight, we can all  get a good night's sleep. The system still works, and that's reassuring. 
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 20, 2017, 11:31:09 PM
Don't worry.  You are not going to find 7 back to back losses in the next one million years.
Think of your honest mistake as a bad dream.
And don't worry about the progression. As long as back to back losses stay under 4, any progression method should result in profit. It then becomes a matter of personal preference.

That's cool. I thought it was very bizarre that there were 7 losses in a row. I'm glad you found my error.

I'm still going to compare these 4 different progressions, side by side, to see which one is more profitable over many different games. I agree it's a personal preference. For those who are interested, I'll post a summery of my results after I play through a set amount of games. And I'll only play DOZENS (without columns or split bets).

Again, sorry for the scare.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on March 21, 2017, 11:05:04 AM
Nice work Term. Even though the run from hell was due to duplicated data it's nice to know that the Holloway progression pulled through, just in case the unthinkable does happen.  :-X

I will be adding it to the tracker.
 
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 22, 2017, 07:22:15 PM
For those who are interested, I played 6 more games, comparing the 3 Progressions side by side, and these are my results.

The 2 Holloway Progressions below are:
1) on a win, bet the same as previous bet, on a lose increase, until a new high.
2) regardless of win or lose, go up in the progression until a new high.

(These are the 2 progressions that survived the "Deja Vu Game from Hell" mistake I did).

                  Original Strategy    Holloway Same      Holloway Up

Game #1:                   31            15            20
Game #2:                 53            26            36
Game #3:                 44            23            22
Game #4:                 82            32            26
Game #5:                 36            25            23
Game #6:                  21            10              13

Totals Units:                267        131           140

In games that go "normally", it seems Palestis's original progression is definitely the BEST. But, the Holloway is good to survive any unexpected games from hell, at a sacrifice of profits from normal games. But, since Palestis said that losing 21 bets in a row is a once in a lifetime event, I'd say that his 1-1-2, 2-2-4, etc. progression definitely works the best for this game!

BTW, I was also comparing the original Holloway in which on every win, you move back 2. But that did so much worse than the others, sometimes getting a LOSS for the game, that I dropped it.

Anyway, thanks again for sharing your strategy and progression Palesis! I really like playing this of all the methods I tried already. And thank you for sharing the Holloway, Bayes, because if a game is going extremely bad, maybe we can temporarily switch to the Holloway until it turns around.

Oh, and here's 2 other stats during those 6 games:

                                      Original Progression     Holloway Same       Holloway Up
Highest Bet Made:                      32                            35                          28
Average Highest Bet Made:       20                            13                           12

(Note. "Average Highest Bet Made" is derived by taking the highest bet made for each individual game. Then adding all 6 of those highs together, and dividing by 6).

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 22, 2017, 09:10:06 PM
What were the highest consecutive trigger losses? (@ 3 bets each).
Hopefully not 7.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 22, 2017, 11:28:54 PM
Well, I avoided mentioning this, because I was afraid you'd think I screwed up again. Anyway, I'll start by saying EVERY game (but that one) went VERY smoothly, I did not get above a level 3.

But in the worst game, I reached level 6 TWICE in the same game. I know what you're thinking. But I DOUBLE CHECKED to make sure there were no repeats like last time. It was a bad run from the very first bet.

I've attached the game here for your inspection.

I followed all your Red Flags to the best of my knowledge.

On a POSITIVE note, even though this was the WORST game for levels, it's actually my most PROFITABLE GAME EVER. I made 82 units profit, which is 2 to 3 times more than my average game at 200 spins.

If you have time to play through it, and you do not reach the 6th level, I'd like to understand why, and what I may be doing wrong, or what I can change, to avoid going so high in the progression.

Thanks Palestis!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 23, 2017, 10:04:13 AM
Yes I will check it.
But as  a first observation,  from the excel sheet, where the trigger was  12-7-34, the target dozen  (H) has appeared multiple times previously , including a 0 in between. In a live setting that would've raised  my attention. And most likely I would've avoided betting in that roulette.  Not to mention that at the very beginning after the first trigger the dozens were repeating very frequently.
Indicating that this roulette was on a roll.
Actually there are no exact rules as to how many spins you have to skip after the presence of a red flag until you encounter a more normal situation. In real life it would mean move on to another roulette. Instead of waiting for the same roulette to become normal.
But I will examine it in depth later.
But I can't stress enough the value of a live play using many roulettes. Not only red flags appear clearly in front of you, examining previous spins in the score board can also indicate extended anomalies for a particular roulette. At the same time the next table might be perfectly suited for this system's purposes.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on March 23, 2017, 10:05:56 AM
I haven't yet seen a losing streak of more than 4, but then I probably haven't tested over as many spins as Terminator. However, consecutive losses aren't the only danger. I just had a session which included this w/L sequence:

w
L
w
L
w
L
W
L
L
L
W
W
L
L
W

Using the standard progression of 1 1 2 2 2 4 4 4 8 ... and sticking at the same level after a win can escalate the stakes quickly with a sequence like the above.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: kav on March 23, 2017, 12:06:58 PM
Btw,

I would like to mention that what TERM is doing, comparing how different progressions produce different results when attacking the same spins, is one of the deepest form of roulette research. It is a very useful part of developing any roulette strategy and can teach us alot about the different effects of different wagering plans (progressions).
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 23, 2017, 12:46:18 PM
Thanks for taking the time to look at it, Palestis. I look forward to your detailed review later. I'm sure others will benefit as well.

where the trigger was  12-7-34, the target dozen  (H) has appeared multiple times previously , including a 0 in between.

Okay. I thought I had played that specific section correctly. If I may break down my thought process for this section:

29   H
28   H
34   H
0         (3 appearances of H, and 1 zero, means I skip the next trigger)
3   L
34   H
21   M
31   H  (This HMH is the first trigger. I skip this)
12   L
7   L
34   H (This LLH is the 2nd trigger. So I bet for H next spin).
20   M

Quote
In a live setting that would've raised  my attention. And most likely I would've avoided betting in that roulette.

Really? Let me see if I understand. So, because there was a combination of an "HHH" and a "0" together, maybe we should skip two triggers instead of 1? Whereas an "HHH" by itself would only require skipping 1 trigger?

Quote
Not to mention that at the very beginning after the first trigger the dozens were repeating very frequently. Indicating that this roulette was on a roll.

Yes, this was bizarre. My first bet was on the 4th spin of the game. During those repeats I waited and waited, and it was not until around 30 spins later I placed my 2nd bet. I thought I was very patient and correctly waited for this weird streak to be over.

Quote
Actually there are no exact rules as to how many spins you have to skip after the presence of a red flag until you encounter a more normal situation. In real life it would mean move on to another roulette. Instead of waiting for the same roulette to become normal.

Okay, but assuming only 1 roulette wheel is available (like is often the case with live roulette dealer games online), it would be good to know how many "triggers" to skip in a situation like this.

Up to the "12-7-34" trigger (mentioned previously), there were FIVE streaks of 3 repeats, and ONE streak of 5 repeats. And NO WINS during that period. Maybe a rule can be added along the lines of, "For every streak of repeating numbers, skip 1 trigger." So, in this case, there were a total of 6 streaks, so we would have to skip 6 triggers? Something like that?

Quote
But I can't stress enough the value of a live play using many roulettes. Not only red flags appear clearly in front of you, examining previous spins in the score board can also indicate extended anomalies for a particular roulette. At the same time the next table might be perfectly suited for this system's purposes.

That is a very good idea, Palestis. To examine several score boards before choosing the table to play at. I like that. Or, to change to another table that's more favorable, if possible. But, if not possible (because other table are full, or not available), it would suck to not play at all after making a long trip to a casino. So, it seems if there was some kind of "in case rule" to help when the roulette wheel is on a roll, that would help us play better with your Single Dozens.

Since you have played so many more games than I have, and have been so good at spotting the Red Flags you explained already, it seems a rule to avoid escalating a progression too far would be good. Like "For every 1 streak, skip 1 trigger" or something. Waiting a little longer to play would be better than losing, or not playing at all.

Thanks for your input!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 23, 2017, 01:03:44 PM

Using the standard progression of 1 1 2 2 2 4 4 4 8 ... and sticking at the same level after a win can escalate the stakes quickly with a sequence like the above.

Yes, which is what happened in my particular game. I did not have many losses in a row. Just the contrary, I had many wins! And yet, it kept getting deeper and deeper into the progression. Scary.

The 1-1-2, 2-2-4 progression definitely has the biggest debt while getting deeper into the progressions (which means it is more likely to bust quicker on a bad wheel), but it is also the most profitable in normal games. This fact may make up for the occasional "bust", if there ever is one.

Btw,

I would like to mention that what TERM is doing, comparing how different progressions produce different results when attacking the same spins, is one of the deepest form of roulette research. It is a very useful part of developing any roulette strategy and can teach us alot about the different effects of different wagering plans (progressions).

Thank you, Kav. I have compared many other progression also that I have not shared (because they failed miserably). But I am just trying to find the BEST one for all of us to use. So far, Palestis's Original progression, and the aggressive Holloway Progressions, are the very best 2 so far.

Maybe we can add a rule, such as, "If there's more than 2 or 3  streaks of repeating dozens in a row, switch to a Holloway Progression until the table normalizes." Or something to that effect? For unusual situations.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 23, 2017, 11:31:21 PM
I did the test, but I didn't start from the very 1st trigger. (Since I had no info as to what numbers came before the 20-5-23 trigger).
And just as well. Because after that,  there was a tsunami of dozen repetitions including a very strange sequence  of 17-19-15-16-18 which I found very bizarre. Also not just frequent repetitions of the same dozen, but the same DS the dozen belong to, or even same street
In general this was not an ideal roulette session. I found these numbers to be very strange. Frequent repetitions of numbers in a short cycle, such 35-35-20-35-20 and many other things.
These are sequences you usually find in air ball machines.
But I guess anything can happen in roulette.
Anyway I didn't find anything unusual regarding many back to back losses except 4 cases of 2 back to back losses. Which is unusual compared to the lengthy test results I have done over time.
Considering that to play roulette the right way,  you need a very large B/R compared to the min. chip value. 
With $100 it is pointless to play with $10 or even $5 chips. Unless you proceed with the expectation that good luck will be on your side.
If I was to play this session or any session with $10 staring chip value, I would make sure I have $2,000 in my pocket. In that case the 2 back to back losses would've been wiped out easily even with an aggressive  progression.
Which means after 2 back to back losses, the 3rd trigger that won, would've recovered the previous losses and showed a profit too. That's the power of the large B/R to min. chip value ratio.
It's just when the consecutive losses are long and relatively frequent,  that render any size B/R useless.
 In this particular system long back to back losses, don't seem to happen. And it has  been tested for a long time by quite a few people. And nobody reports any problem regarding the length of consecutive losses.
@TERM.
I understand that sometimes you don't have choices of many roulettes, but in a B+M casino you should be able to have several choices any time.
By the way I wouldn't play this system or any system in an online studio live casino.
DUBLINBET is live with actual players playing the same roulette you play online , but once you establish a winning consistency, disconnections and switching to RNG does happen. Usually when you are at a loss during a progression.
The bottom line is that when you play the system long enough, or test it long enough you will begin to see things that are not obvious when you are new to this system.
The strongest red flag is when a repetitive dozen becomes the target dozen immediately following the repetitive sequence.
But there is nothing wrong with adding  your own tweaks, even if that restricts the number of betting opportunities.
Certainty comes first.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 23, 2017, 11:47:35 PM
@Bayes:
Yes a sequence like the one you mentioned
( W L W L W L W L L  L  W  W  L  L  W)
can be a little problematic.  For those that have a limited B/R, and can't risk larger bets.
 But again with a large B/R there is nothing that could happen to you in the above situation that would cause you to lose your shirt. As a matter of fact that would've been a piece of cake if you run into the above situation.
It is the limitation of available B/R, and the fear of many back to back losses involving betting too many numbers, that gave rise to many conservative progression schemes.
I think when testing a system, it is the maximum consecutive losses that has to be the main focus of the testing. And how frequently they may appear.
There is a close correlation of winning frequency and streaks of back to back losses.
You may win easily $500 playing 2 dozens with $25 chips,
But all it takes is 2 back to back losses to lose $200. ($25-25,  75-75).
Then you are faced with a dilemma:
Bet $225, $225 and recover and make a $25 profit, or lose and suffer a $650 loss. All it takes is  just 3 consecutive losses  to erase a hard earned profit plus $150 out of pocket. . Which by the way it happens very often in two dozen bets.
If the situation you described above looked like W L L L L L W LLL W LLLLL W LLL, and it was happening often, then you would really have a problem, and the system should be immediately rejected. 
That is y testing hundreds of thousands of spins is mandatory, to determine the possible consecutive loss that you may run into and how often as well. And that applies to every system.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: dobbelsteen on March 24, 2017, 09:02:08 AM
It is not so difficult to program the single dozen system with different bet selections in Excel.
Important is that you must first determine the average DTOP for a 6 number bet.  The DTOP determine  the largeness of the trial or session. Is the sample too small the result is not reliable
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: jekhb76 on March 24, 2017, 01:47:08 PM
One of the most important things to understand and you should always keep that in mind
Is that your bankroll needs to be always 100 times your base bet.

01$ Chip - 0100$ Bankroll
05$ Chip - 0500$ Bankroll
10$ Chip - 1000$ Bankroll

etc etc.
If you always keep this as your starting point, nothing really can't go wrong
Or you must be the most unlucky person om this planet.

Also, don't raise your bets to drastic, better to increase 1 chip highet after a loss and to stay on that level until a win, then to marti.

this is a very safe system to play roulette, but you must aply to these rules and be patient, even when things go wrong you will recover, ot only takes time. Not bein' patient is one of the Gamblers greatest sins - Eddy

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: jekhb76 on March 24, 2017, 01:50:20 PM
The last two weeks I've played 10 evenings at the casino (3 hours) and the target was €50
As soon as i reached this, I went home!
This was/is played with a bankroll of 100 euro and 1 units base bet. I'm now almost over 500 euro in profit.
Not lost my bankroll on time, or came close to it.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 24, 2017, 05:10:55 PM
Thanks for taking the time to replay this session, Palestis. Here’s my replies:

With $100 it is pointless to play with $10 or even $5 chips. Unless you proceed with the expectation that good luck will be on your side.

Are you under the impression I was doing this? I was not. I had a 500 unit bankroll for each individual game I tested so far. So, at a $10 table, I am risking $5,000, just for that ONE session. And this is what I risked in that one game in question.

Quote
I did the test, but I didn't start from the very 1st trigger. (Since I had no info as to what numbers came before the 20-5-23 trigger).

I always start each of my tests as if the roulette table just opened for the first time. So, if the first 3 spins meet your criteria for a trigger, then I start betting on the 4th spin. However, the spins that came earlier for THIS test are the last spins from the PREVIOUS test. And I would have started at the same place because there was nothing unusual prior to the first 3 spins.

QUESTION #1: When you tested your system, Palestis, did you do all the tests by hand? Or did you also run a computer simulation?

Quote
Anyway I didn't find anything unusual regarding many back to back losses except 4 cases of 2 back to back losses.

I examined your game, and I have a question as to WHY you started this game where you did. I would have started ONE spin LATER, which changes the entire game. Here is my explanation as to what I would do, according to your Red Flags. Please show me where you believe the error is:

(I am starting 8 spins previous to your FIRST trigger)

17   M   
19   M   
15   M   
16   M   
18   M   (All of these are ignored, and we SKIP the first trigger)
12   L   
18   M   
32   H   (It seems you used LMH as the first trigger, Palestis?)
17   M   (MHM is the FIRST trigger. We skip this because of MMMMM)
33   H   
19   M   
29   H   (HMH is the SECOND trigger. So, we bet for “M”  on next spin.
28   H   (This is where I placed my bet, but you placed your first bet on the spin above for H)

QUESTION #2: Can you verify which starting position is correct? Thanks, Palestis.

PS: if this turns out to be your error, palestis, may I suggest something for this game, to save time? Instead of re-doing the entire game, let's just take a section at a time, to make sure we're on the same page. Then progress to the next part in stages. This way, if either one of us made a mistake, we will not have wasted time re-doing the entire game at once.

I'm just trying to be helpful and save time. I really want to make sure I am playing this correctly, because the results in my games have been getting up pretty high in progression. I am in the middle of doing a new "10 games test", and I have reached level 6 a couple of times, and level 8 recently. I have not had any losing sessions yet, which is great. But since I am going so much higher in the progression than your tests, this is a major concern for me.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 24, 2017, 05:30:13 PM
It is not so difficult to program the single dozen system with different bet selections in Excel.
Important is that you must first determine the average DTOP for a 6 number bet.  The DTOP determine  the largeness of the trial or session. Is the sample too small the result is not reliable

Hi dobbelsteen, I am not that proficient in Excel. Would it be too much trouble to ask if you can create an Excel document for Palestis's method? It sure would save a lot of TIME, and prevent HUMAN ERRORS.

What is a DTOP? Thanks!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: jekhb76 on March 24, 2017, 09:45:07 PM
Tonight 2 hours spend at my local B&M casino (Holland Casino) with our single dozen system. brought 100 euro with me and left my wallet at home. I just can't get it to loose. biggest progression used was 4-4-8
you only need to be very patient, because in Holland Casino, they spin in around 1.30 min.

+42 units.

If i still can't get it to loose in 3 months or so, o will quit my job, and go pro. by then i have saved enough from my daily sessions to make 100-200 euro a day. then i don't need to work anymore.
5 evenings a week (3 hours work per day) 200 euro is €4000 in a month. I know i have the dicipline and the patients to pull this off. i only need the start capital to do so. this is my goal as a roulette player. I know it is not the holly grail, well i all depends on you mean with that. to me a holly grail is a steady income in a safe way. well when you have around 4 to 5k and you play with 10€ chips. 100-200 euro will not be a problem and you won't be in trouble if you keep your head clean and don't do crazy bettings. you need to see it as your job. when you mess things up at work you will also get fired. so see it as you business. then you will have a good income without a hard days work. will keep you all posted if and when i go for this.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 24, 2017, 10:56:24 PM
Congradulations jekhb76! That's what I'm hoping to do also. Palestis's method is very promising.

Can I ask you a favor? Since you seem to have a good grasp of using Palestis's strategy, would you be able to look at a game I played and see if I'm doing anything wrong? Or, maybe you can just play through this game, so that I can compare results and find out if I'm doing something wrong?

I've attached the following game, in which I reached level 8! However, I ended up with 131 units profit in 200 spins, so I am happy about that. But I need to figure out why I am going so high in this progression when nobody else seems to have this problem!

I'd ask Palestis, but he and I are already going over a different game. Thank you!
Title: 10 New tests
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 24, 2017, 11:12:13 PM
I Just finished 10 more tests, comparing Palestis's Strategy with the best Holloway Progression. In short, Palestis's Progression did AWESOME! No busts! Whereas the Holloway progression busted once.

Here are the details:

Total Units Won:
Game Number   Original Strategy    Holloway
11                                     16                    28
12                                     24                    18
13                                     30                    15
14                                     26                    23
15                                     35                    29
16                                     28                    41
17                                     30                   -469 (BUST)
18                                     131                    24 (Actual game is attached to previous post above)
19                                     37                    -1
20                                     56                    25

Total:                      413 units profit   267 unit loss

-
-
-

Highest Level Reached for Original Progression (Holloway has no levels compared to Palestis's)
Game Number   Original Strategy
11                                 5                 
12                                 3
13                                 5
14                                 3
15                                 1
16                                 2
17                                 5
18                                 8 (Actual game is attached to previous post above)
19                                 6
20                                 5

Average:           Level 4.3

Profit is awesome! LEVELS suck for me.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 24, 2017, 11:24:59 PM
@Terminator.
I was not under the impression that you were playing with a B/ R that was short of what a professional player is supposed to have.
It was just a general statement for every one to see. You will be surprised how many players go to the casino with 500 and they want to win 2000. As Jekhb76 says, about 100 times the min. starting chip is about right for this system. It can handle every possible negative scenario.
You mentioned that I started the trigger with LMH. If you look at the picture (which I repeated to make it easy)
My first trigger was 17-33-19. Half circle at the 2 bottom numbers in the first column and one number on top of the 2nd column. I didn't use 12-18-32 which corresponds to the LMH in question.
(black circle around  3 numbers is the trigger,  a red dash is a losing spin and a green checkmark is a win)
That should answer the 2nd question.
For your 1st question YES all my tests were done manually.
But don't think that I waste time writing every number down and then circle triggers and then see what happens in the next 3 bets. ( I only do that for posting purposes).
In this particular system I can just read the numbers down from a score card, and when  a trigger comes up I pay attention reading the 3 results. As long as only one or 2 back to back triggers fail, I keep on reading. Because the B/R can handle those easily. When I see 3+ back to back failures, I pause and look at the conditionss very carefully.
You will be susrpised that I go thru testing thousands of spins in a short period of time.
Sometimes I use numbers form the Wisdbaden casino, sometimes from my own cards that I have like the one in the pic. from 2006.
But as I said I have done thousands of tests and the only serious failure was 4 back to back. One or 2 times only.
Never seen 5 or more. And that was without paying attention to the red flags.
I only came up with the red flag cautions after examining the cases of 3 or 4 back to back failures.
I think to make it simple to test we should only use 2 red flags.
For example if you see 5,2,4,15,20,8 the trigger makes the 1st dozen the target. But since that 1st dozen appeared already 3+ times you simply avoid betting.
And the second red flag is when you have a trigger like 25,30, 7, and the first 2 spins that we play are 28,32 we stop at 2 lost spins. (repetition of the majority dozen in the trigger).
The other red flags are not as important. Ignoring them will not change the outcome of the system.
They were  merely added, to put some friends of mine at ease, as they don't have the heart to proceed for more than 2 losing progressions.
But by all means feel free to make whateverr tweaks or changes that you thing might improve the game.
I and HARRYJ made a simple assumption, and after a long time testing proved to have to have great potential.
Other than that I don't feel that I am smarter than you or anybody else in the forum.
So I am sure you can make your own contribution or changes if necessary.
But one thing is for sure, I never run into many back to back losses whether I paid attention to the red flags or not.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 24, 2017, 11:46:59 PM
Hi Palestis, thanks for your detailed reply. I am taking in all you are saying, and I appreciate it. I'm just trying to fix my "leak", that's all. I love your system.

Quote
My first trigger was 17-33-19. Half circle at the 2 bottom numbers in the first column and one number on top of the 2nd column. I didn't use 12-18-32 which corresponds to the LMH in question.


Okay, I still need clarification as to why you started at the 17-33-19 trigger. Can you walk me through the steps below? I inserted some questions to help understand. Thanks!

17   M   
19   M   
15   M   
16   M   
18   M   (All of these M's are ignored, and we SKIP the first trigger after these M's, Correct?)
12   L   (12-18-32 below is not a trigger, Correct? So we try for another trigger starting with #18, correct?)
18   M   
32   H   
17   M   (Isn't this 18-32-17 the FIRST TRIGGER after MMMMM? And we skip this, correct?)
33   H   
19   M   
29   H   (Isn't this 33-19-29 the SECOND trigger. So, we bet for “M”  on the next spin?)
28   H   (This is where I placed my bet, but you placed your first bet on the spin above for H)

Can you please explain your thought process as to why you bet after 17-33-29? What was the reason for skipping the numbers up to that point if my above explanations are in error?

Thanks for helping me understand, Palestis.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 24, 2017, 11:51:01 PM

@Jekhb76
That's certainly great news.
Coincidentally a friend of mine In Europe  has played this system 45 times and won all 45 times. So I am not surprised you are reporting similar results.
But I think you have the right attitude. Large B/R for a relatively small profit.  100- 200 euros a day  is not small at all.  Many people invest 100,000 to open a coffee shop or clothing store hoping that they will clear 200 a day after all expenses. And with a 2000 to 3000 B/R investment, a 100-200 profit is a business miracle.
But I am sure you are always on alert, you are never in a hurry to catch every trigger you see, and that you make frequent pauses, to gather yourself so that you don't get carried away. You probably play in different roulettes, and you probably wait for a few spins to go by after every win. 
1.5 min. per spin is not slow. The casino  near me takes 10-15 min. per spin a the $10 roulette.
(they have no machines to stack up the chips and the dealer does it himself).
Therefore I am not playing the system. Unfortunately. The other casinos are 3 hours drive each way.
By the time I get there the head is spinning and that's not a good thing when you risk money.
I reserve my play for when I will go to Europe.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 25, 2017, 01:11:42 AM

Okay, I still need clarification as to why you started at the 17-33-19 trigger. Can you walk me through the steps below? I inserted some questions to help understand. Thanks!

17   M   
19   M   
15   M   
16   M   
18   M   (All of these M's are ignored, and we SKIP the first trigger after these M's, Correct?)
12   L   (12-18-32 below is not a trigger, Correct? So we try for another trigger starting with #18, correct?)
18   M   
32   H   
17   M   (Isn't this 18-32-17 the FIRST TRIGGER after MMMMM? And we skip this, correct?)
33   H   
19   M   
29   H   (Isn't this 33-19-29 the SECOND trigger. So, we bet for “M”  on the next spin?)
28   H   (This is where I placed my bet, but you placed your first bet on the spin above for H)

Can you please explain your thought process as to why you bet after 17-33-29? What was the reason for skipping the numbers up to that point if my above explanations are in error?

Thanks for helping me understand, Palestis.
I know that we should avoid quoting, but in this case is necessary:
Ok Term.
The sequence M was 17-19-15-16-18. Yes we skip the first trigger (18-32-17). Technically the 33-19-29 is the 2nd trigger. But 32 broke the monotony of the M tsunami. So the very next trigger is 17-33-19. Even though 17 was part of the 1st trigger that we skipped, it doesn't mean we can't use it for the very next trigger, if it suited to be part of a trigger.  Because the target dozen is not the M, it is the H. So we don't chase after the dozen that was recently predominant. The target dozen is now H.
( When I said we don't use numbers that were already accounted for , I meant that to be NUMBERS THAT WERE USED AS THE RESULT OF A BET. 17 was not a number that came after  we made a bet. It just happened to be part of the 1st skipped trigger. But it's ok to use it for the next trigger as long as the target dozen is not the M. In this case it is the H. Which is perfectly fine.
But we don't need to be exact and critical in following a sequence.
Even if we took 33-19-29 as a trigger, ( as you suggested), we would've lost 2 spins: 28-34.
WE STOP AT 2 SPINS because these were numbers that were the same dozen as the MAJORITY DOZEN in the trigger.
The next trigger is 34-21-31 which is the one I circled. And that lost 3 spins. So we have 2 back to back losses, except the first loss is only 2 spins.
The reason I waited to go all the way down to 17-33-19 and skipped everything from the beginning (20-5-23.........)is  because it was obvious that something was not right with all previous numbers.
All dozens were taking turns in repeating themselves. Especially  the M and H
I understand that to perform computer simulation, your actions have to be exact within a framework.
That is y I test manually. To imitate actual betting conditions in a casino.
If you have to go to the bathroom or go get a cup of coffee, or saw a friend and you want to talk to him, naturally you have to interrupt your game.
That doesn't mean that you will be punished if you set the system aside for a few minutes.

Let me know if you understand my reasoning.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 25, 2017, 05:41:24 AM
Wow, I am so glad you are taking the time to explain this. Yes, I THINK I understand you more clearly now. But I guess I've been playing your system wrong this whole time!!! No wonder I keep getting as high as the 8th progression!

Firstly, I was not aware that, after a streak of 3 or more (such as HHH), we do NOT bet on that Dozen (H) on the following bet. Only on the other 2 (M & L). I've been doing this since the beginning, if the trigger was legitimate. (If you mentioned this in an earlier post, I must have misunderstood you).

Secondly, I was not aware that we could use numbers from a trigger that we just skipped! To me, to skip a trigger means to skip ALL 3 numbers in that trigger.

Anyway, just 3 more questions to clarify that I understand?

Question #1: Is this how we "Skip" all triggers? For example, lets' say we bet and win. The next three numbers are "LLL." Now, we skip the next trigger, and play the second one. Here's the first trigger"

15 M
35 H
14 M

I would usually skip all 3 numbers. BUT, let's say the next number is 20 M. We get:

15 M
35 H
14 M
20 M

NOW, I can use the 35-14-20 as my SECOND trigger, since I will not be betting on the "L" which repeated previously. Am I understanding you correctly? If so, I LOVE this because it means we can place bets more FREQUENTLY, rather than waiting for so long before placing our next bets.

Question #2: You mentioned previously that if 2 zeros appear close to each other, to skip the first trigger. In this case, would you skip all 3 numbers after the second 0 appeared? How do you deal with skipping a trigger after 2 zeros?

Question #3: I have a question about ONE zero. This is how I've been playing 1 zero. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

There has been no streaks lately. And NO zeros. And these are the spins:

3 L
36 H
0
34H

I would bet "L" next. Is this correct? I just ignore this zero? Or should I proceed a little further away from Zero, like waiting for 3 new numbers passed 0 or something?

Anyway, I am glad you took the time to clear those important items up for me in your previous post, and thank you for clarifying your thought process, Palestis.

After you answer these last questions, I will experiment with another 10 games, using just your progression, to see if this has fixed the "leak" in my game. Just by thinking of my previous games, I think this will help a lot!

Thanks again!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: jekhb76 on March 25, 2017, 06:05:51 AM
@Palestis
The way I see Roulette, like I explained is I'm approuching it as a new job.
You need to work hard to get promotion. In Real life you don't get a promotion over night also.
I've played you system long enough to see every rare event (red flags) on the scoreboard to know what to do.I also use my instinct. whenever i see something that's not right I let the trigger go and let it go idle and wait to things get back to normal again. sure i miss a few trigger here and there, but i'm a patient man, no need to get rich over night. i've been there and burned my hands many time to know that playing roulette is all about patients, not to be creedy and concetration. if you can't handle these things, you will get burned.
I've made myself a business plan, that i stick with.I play 5 nights a week, 2 to three hours an evening. I play with 1€ chips and my win target is €25 euro per night. when i have reached that target i will go home. when i'm tired i'm not goin' at all. i've now played the first level (1€) for the past 20 days. not lost one session. biggest progression so far is 4-4-8. i'm not looking at 500 euro profit. I don't spend any of that. i keep it for my next bank. next week i now can safely start my next lvl of play. (2€) with a bank of 500 euro and a session target now of 50€. this will be my daily focus for the next 2 weeks.

so this is how my business model looks like.

20 days - 1€ chip  for a session target of 25€
after twenty days i have a bank of €500

10 days - 2€ chip for a session target of 50€
after 10 days i have a bank of €1000

10 days - 3€ chip for a session target of 75€
after 10 days i have a bank of €1750

10 days - 4€ chip for a session target of 100€
after 10 days i have a bank of €2750

10 days - 5€ chip for a session target of €150
after 10 days i have a bank of €4250

10 days - 10€ chip for a session target of €200
after 10 days i have a bank of €6250

So to sum up things.
in a bout 2.5 months i will be able to play safely
for a win target of €200 a day with enough bank behind me to back me up at all times.
at this point i will quit my job. and will be playing professional roulette for the next years to come.

as you can see, i've done allot of thinking about this. as i have set plenty target goals.
when i play at my casino i take a break every 30 minutes. when i think i can't reach my daily target i quit and return the next day. i can and will pull this of. because this isn't chasing a dream, this is a new job and i'm ready to make things better for me and my family. (wife and 6 kids) :) i will be at home all day, and at night daddy has to work for 3 hours. before i go and play at thr casino, i make sure i have rested and have eaten on forehand.I always leave my wallet at home. only my bank with me. nothing more, nothing less.
have a great day friends. i 'll keep you all updated of course. stay safe. - Eddy
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on March 25, 2017, 12:35:45 PM
17   M   
19   M   
15   M   
16   M   
18   M   (All of these M's are ignored, and we SKIP the first trigger after these M's, Correct?)
12   L   (12-18-32 below is not a trigger, Correct? So we try for another trigger starting with #18, correct?)
18   M   
32   H   
17   M   (Isn't this 18-32-17 the FIRST TRIGGER after MMMMM? And we skip this, correct?)

I don't understand why we should skip this last trigger (M H M). The 3 spins prior to it (L M M) are not all the same dozen so why don't we bet?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 25, 2017, 01:02:31 PM
Bayes, the 3 spins prior to MHM is LMH (not LMM). If it was LMM, then yes, that would be the first trigger. (LMH is not defined as a trigger).

I believe Palestis says to skip the first trigger, regardless of what dozen would be bet on (even if it WERE NOT the same Dozen as the Dozen that was just repeated), as a safeguard against variance.

So, assuming the spin WAS LMM, the first trigger would normally be bet on "L" on the next spin. BUT we skip that and proceed to the NEXT trigger. If the SECOND trigger tells us to bet on L or H, then we make our bet. HOWEVER, if the SECOND trigger tells us we must bet on M, then we SKIP THAT SECOND TRIGGER and go for a third trigger (or 4th, 5th, etc.) until we bet on either L or H.

Palestis says it's better to wait for the roulette wheel to "normalize,", which is why we would skip the first legitimate trigger(s).

Hope this helps, Bayes. Correct me if I'm wrong, Palestis!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: juice on March 25, 2017, 01:15:56 PM
Eddy, I wish you all the luck and skill the world has to offer! Just some friendly advise, you can take it or ignore it.....
Before you attempt this journey, you need a much larger bankroll then what you have stated. I think many here will back me up on this. If you do not have a years worth of personal expenses saved, I would urge you to wait until you do. With 6 kids and a wife, I think their future should be more insured before you quit your job. I am sure you will develope the skill necessary to succeed, but it is a whole different thing when playing for survival, I know because I do it myself.
I had a very successful business for decades prior to making the transition, and many years of practical business experience in manufacturing and managing client and employee expectations as well as running a proper business, to help me with the many mental thing that are needed to stay focused on the goal. I also learned how to lose money, large amounts, fast and furious, and I had it to lose.
I do not know your experience level, and I think you are very serious about your quest, but as an onlooker, I think your enthusiasm has you a bit scattered all over the map with your many styles of play. This game is a funny thing, it can give you so much joy, as you are studying all the possibilities, and leave you SATURATED in too much knowledge at the wrong moment! This particular bet in this post, is a very sound stratagy, and I would encourage you to stick with it, compared to some other plays that I have seen you studying lately. But no matter how much you work your way up from smaller units to the larger ones, nothing quite prepares you for the inevitable downward session when the only way out to recovery is to use your skill combined with a much larger BANK.
I know that all players here on this site would be happy to help you in anyway they can to keep you on the winning path, but in the end, just like when we die, we do it all alone.
Much luck to you in the current and near future, and be very careful, your family is counting on you! If you do not have the confidence that Dr Talos has with the fool proof method to back it up, you might want to pump the breaks and save some more scratch before you start!     With all respect,  The juice
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on March 25, 2017, 01:19:12 PM
TERM, there seems to be some ambiguity here, let me explain how my tracker is coded (it indicates MHM as a trigger).
At each spin it looks back 3 spins and if the pattern is XXY AND the 3 spins prior to that are NOT all the same, there is a bet.

So applied to the sequence:

17   M   
19   M   
15   M   
16   M   
18   M   
12   L   The trigger is LMM  but the 3 spins prior to it are all the same (M). No bet
18   M   The trigger is MLM but the 3 spins prior to it are all the same (M). Not bet
32   H   There is no trigger because the last 3 spins are not of the form XXY
17   M   The trigger is MHM and the 3 spins prior to it are LMM (i.e, not all the same) so there is a bet (on H).
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on March 25, 2017, 01:41:49 PM
I believe Palestis says to skip the first trigger, regardless of what dozen would be bet on (even if it WERE NOT the same Dozen as the Dozen that was just repeated), as a safeguard against variance.

Hmm... I don't recall seeing that rule anywhere in the thread. The tracker is currently coded so that if you win on the first or second bet after a trigger then it signals a "no bet" until the trigger is "completed", e.g. only after 3 spins is a new trigger looked for.

      M
      M
      H  trigger (H)
(1) H (win)
(2) L  no bet (even though it would have been L)
(3) L  no bet (even though it would have been H)
      M  (only now look for a new trigger, which is M)

Palestis approved this, but maybe there should be some clarification of the red flag rule:

Quote
2. If the playable target dozen ( Y), has appeared more than 3+ times immediately prior to the trigger. (meaning it has appeared enough times already and runs the risk to disappear when you begin betting it  3 times after the trigger).

Actually, this also applies to the non target dozen, as palestis confirmed when I suggested that both rules 1 & 2 amount to one rule "if any dozen has appeared more than 3+ times immediately prior to the trigger".

I assumed that 3+ times immediately prior to the trigger meant consecutively, i.e. 3+ times in 3+ spins. But if it has appeared 3 times in 4 spins does that also count as a red flag? Seems that it does.

Apologies if this seems like nit-picking, but computers have no initiative whatsoever, they have to be told exactly what to do at all times.  ;D
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: iar000 on March 25, 2017, 02:05:32 PM
hi Jek what method or system do you use
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 25, 2017, 02:19:16 PM
Hmm. I never looked at it this way before, Bayes. Maybe it's different when you make a program?


So applied to the sequence:

17   M   
19   M   
15   M   
16   M   
18   M   
12   L   The trigger is LMM  but the 3 spins prior to it are all the same (M). No bet
18   M   The trigger is MLM but the 3 spins prior to it are all the same (M). Not bet
32   H   There is no trigger because the last 3 spins are not of the form XXY
17   M   The trigger is MHM and the 3 spins prior to it are LMM (i.e, not all the same) so there is a bet (on H).

To me, the first appearance of MMMMM is ignored completely. The very next spin (12 L) is going to be the first number of a possible trigger, so we wait for those 3 spins first:

12 L
18 M
32 H

And this would be the first consideration for a trigger. Since LMH is not a trigger, we look at the very next spin after the #12: We get the following:

18
32
17

THAT is the first trigger. The other "triggers" you mentioned included the string from MMMMM, and I believe this is never included as part of a trigger.

Palestis also confirmed this was the first trigger when he said:

"The sequence M was 17-19-15-16-18. Yes we skip the first trigger (18-32-17)." in his reply #161.

I believe Palestis says to skip the first trigger, regardless of what dozen would be bet on (even if it WERE NOT the same Dozen as the Dozen that was just repeated), as a safeguard against variance.

Hmm... I don't recall seeing that rule anywhere in the thread.

I believe this is his quote from an earlier post:

Quote
"If there is a sequence of numbers like 25-30-27-32-10-8-21 you avoid betting the 10-8-21 trigger (too many numbers in the 3rd dozen  preceding  the trigger). Indicating a streak that might continue in a dozen that is not the target."

So, the above spins would look like:

25 H
30 H
27 H
32 H
(All the above spins are IGNORED for the next trigger, because they repeated 3+ times)
10 L
8 L
21 M
(This is the first trigger. Even though "M" would be bet, and not H, we still skip this first trigger and proceed to the SECOND trigger).

If the SECOND trigger tells us to bet on M or L, then we bet. If it tells us to bet on H, we wait for the next trigger.

At least, this is my understanding.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 25, 2017, 02:45:24 PM
Bayes wrote:
Quote
I assumed that 3+ times immediately prior to the trigger meant consecutively, i.e. 3+ times in 3+ spins. But if it has appeared 3 times in 4 spins does that also count as a red flag? Seems that it does.

Hmm, I don't believe it counts. I think it must appear 3 times or more in a row.

Here's another quote from an earlier post:

Quote
12-9-8 30-25-2. You avoid, because the target dozen in the trigger already came at least 3 times in a row.  Then it becomes a little risky to bet that the same dozen will show up again.  (just a legitimate precaution).

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on March 25, 2017, 02:51:39 PM
TERM, probably best if I send palestis the tracker and let him see where it's going wrong, if indeed it is. I'm just getting more confused.  :'(

In any case, the system as coded in the tracker is producing excellent results, and palestis did say that minor variations are ok. :D
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 25, 2017, 03:19:24 PM
That's a good idea. Maybe I'll work on a better explanation of this system, point by point, once Palestis clarifies our concerns.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Harryj on March 25, 2017, 04:12:51 PM
For the 3rd time today. I'll try again.
        The main difference between my play and Pals is that I use DS to form "unatural" dozens, and I use a 5 spin progression. I also restart after MMM.LLL.HHH. or MHL or zero.eg. MMM/restart. MML/this is a trigger, but can we trust it ? MLM/another trigger ? After 6 M's in 7 spins we should see some H's & L's. It's a maybe. LMH/ no bet. MLM/ again those M's clearly we are in the n midst of a large variance.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: jekhb76 on March 25, 2017, 04:16:12 PM
i forgot to add something.

1. it's not a must that you need to reach target everyday.
sometimes it doesn't go the way you had hoped for.
example; i've had a few session where my daily target was 25 units, but somehow it just didn't reached it. some back to back losses, a power problem :) etc. at some point i was only 10 units in profit, but spend almost 2 hours trying to reach the 25 unit mark. i was tired and i had two options. try to make it and risk to be in debt because of something i hadn't control about or because i would make mistakes because j was tired. or quit and take the 10 units home. i would always choose the 2nd option. so what' Rome wasn't also build in on day. i never chase a target if i can't reach it, because there is always another day.

2. what i also would recomend is to have a safety bank prepaired.
Let's say you are betting with 1 unit chips, then your bank is 100x times your base bet. in this case 100 units.
but what i would recomed when you are playing with high value chips is to have a safety bank with you also.
So from 5 unit base bet. 500 unit bank and 500 unit safety bank.
if something happens to your bank, you will always have a backup. this is how it will play ot from now on. i will never go 1 lvl higher untill i have 2 times my bank.
Recomend for high betting.

5€ BB (€500 B + €500 SB) €1000 to play this bet.

10BB (€1000 B + €1000 SB) 2000 to play this bet

3. Don't drink Alcohol while playing!
😊
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Harryj on March 25, 2017, 04:33:51 PM
OK that one mafe it.
         I am strongly against the type of progression that Bayes suggested. I believe that type of progression works best with "sleeper" triggers. My choice is definitely a Marty, but my definition of a Marty may not be the same as your's. To me a marty is any progression that ENDS with a single win. EVEN IF THE OVERALL RESULT IS A LOSS. eg. 1,2,4,8/15 is a 4step Marty costing 1 u. 1,2,3,5/11a 4 step Marty costing 11u. Steps 1 & 2 win 1u step 3 breaks even and 4 loses 1 u. As roulette is essentially an even game the difference between the total loss of 4 units and the loss of 1u on bet 4 represents a bottom line gain. Even if the break even at bet 3 is considered we still have a substantial gain. Even more important 75% of our 1st 2 bets can be expected to win. An even bigger gain.
         Bayes seems to understand "insurance" betting. Perhaps he can explain it better than I.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on March 25, 2017, 04:58:09 PM
https://youtu.be/CCISSevvGpA

OOPS looks like the post got eaten!  But did it actually!??

3) Hit Ctrl-V

Hey Harry J!  Here is a post that I guarantee won't get eaten by even the worst forum variance!

sdflkjsd;fkljsd;kjfsdf

sdfklhsdfkjhsdfc

sdfkljsdfkjhsdfkhsdf

sdfkjhsdfkhsdfkhsdf

[tip the forum]

ok finally done.

Now:

1) HIT CTRL-A
2) HIT CTRL-C
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 25, 2017, 10:49:11 PM
@Terminator:
The problem is that I am not familiar with computerized testing. So I have to ask you how do you test it?
Do you plug the numbers to the program and push a button and the program does the rest?
And then you get a summary on excel like the one you usually post?
If that's the case then I understand that you have to have all instructions predetermined. Like trigger choice, red flag avoidance, exact skipping of numbers, various types of progression etc.
The program cannot use a 6th sense, like an actual player does from time to time.
             Or is it that you plug the numbers in the program and then you process it number  by number as if you were actually playing in a live situation? 
If it is totally computerized, it's best to use only 2 red flags. To avoid confusion, not only to the player but to the program too.
One is to avoid a trigger where the target dozen in the chosen trigger,  appeared several times before the trigger.
And the other is to stop at 2 lost bets, if after trigger XXY you get XX again.
The other precautions are not as important.
They are rather useful for resilient players like "Jekhb76" and some people I know, that they rather not give the casino the chance to win even one spin. (not that it is always possible).
As far as the 0 it's best to skip it and start a trigger after that.
But if you see for example 13-0-20- 32,   and use 13-20-32 as trigger it's not a big deal.
I have done that way and came up with basically the same results.
         In other words the extra precautions will not make the difference between winning and losing.
The system results will be basically the same. -
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 25, 2017, 11:35:57 PM
Hi Palestis, I have been testing your method manually though Excel. I copy and paste real spins from real casinos into excel, then I play them as I would live, spin by spin.

Thank you for answering my questions. I think I have a good understanding of your method now.

While waiting for your response, I did a REDO on my TWO WORST GAMES (as far as highest levels reached are concerned), based on the clarifications you gave me. HERE ARE THE RESULTS!!!!

                       Highest Level Reached   Highest Bet Made

Old Game #8:             6 (twice)         32 units
New Game #8:            3                       8 units

Old Game #18:             8 (YIKES!)         128 units (DOUBLE YIKES!)
New Game #18:            3                       4 units (WTF? WTF! WTF!?!?!?)

WOW, what a difference! I think you fixed the leak in my game, Palestsis! Thank you.

If I may ask one more question. In a situation like this:

MMMLLLHHH

I would SKIP the first trigger, but after the SECOND trigger I would NOT bet on "H" correct? I would be looking to bet on either M or L. Yes? (Even though both L and H had a streak, but they are older than the M streak).

Thanks again! I am so excited. Even though I have NEVER had a losing session when I was playing WRONG, I can only imagine how much better it will be now!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 26, 2017, 12:03:38 AM
Bayes, I feel confident I have a strong handle on Palestis's Method now. If you still need clarification for the programming your doing on your tracker, feel free to PM or E-mail me if your concerns are not being cleared up on this thread. I'll be happy to help clear the air.

This was very confusing for me too, but I understand now. Thanks again Palestis!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 26, 2017, 12:08:06 AM
If I may ask one more question. In a situation like this:

MMMLLLHHH

I would SKIP the first trigger, but after the SECOND trigger I would NOT bet on "H" correct? I would be looking to bet on either M or L. Yes? (Even though both L and H had a streak, but they are older than the M streak).

Thanks again! I am so excited. Even though I have NEVER had a losing session when I was playing WRONG, I can only imagine how much better it will be now!
From the sequence you gave me the first trigger is MML. (correct?)  (which by the way won in the first bet as L came).
The second trigger is LLH (correct?). Which it also won in the first bet, with the second H.
As you can see both triggers have a target as the  dozen that it was not predominant in the previous spins. Technically you can bet both triggers. But just to be on the safe side you can skip the whole sequence and wait for a few more numbers to break this repetitive sequence.
Since you said that after importing the numbers in the excel sheet, you process it manually, you can easily skip spins when the sequence looks pepetitive.
You mentioned that in the sequence MMMLLLHHH the L and H steak was older than the M streak.
Can you confirm that, because to me it look like the M streak is older.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 26, 2017, 12:21:33 AM
@ Terminator.
Is this the 32 units that you bet on game 8?
Where does the start  of betting occur on the excel sheet? And do you underline the trigger?
Is it where you have the l,h,m
I'd like to understand how you use the sheet.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 26, 2017, 12:40:14 AM
Hi Palestis, on the Excel Sheet, I will use spin #84 to explain my actions.

Under the "BET" column, I placed an "L". This means that at spin #84, I will start betting for "L" for no more than 3 spins. The 3 spins immediately PRIOR to spin #84 is the trigger I am betting on (in this case, LMM).

The ORIG column are the bets I lose and won. "-32" means I bet 32 units and lost (being the 6th level reached). At spin #85, I won, so the number 64 is colored green (profit from a 32 unit bet).

The "$O" column is a running count of the HIGH I reached for the game as it progresses. Which is why I only enter a number here on each win. I get this number automatically from the running total on the top right of this document.

I hope this clarifies it? If not, I'll be happy to explain more.

I have an updated Excel sheet, which is basically the same but easier to use. It ONLY focuses on the Dozens, and ONLY on your progression. And your progression is listed in an easy to see manner. And the "Highest Level, Bet, and Debt" is available as well. I have attached a blank document here for your use.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 26, 2017, 12:48:57 AM
?!?!?!?!?!?!?       ?!?!?!?!?!?!?

Palestis, I thought I had a grip on your method. I have a clarification question concerning the MMMLLLHHH question.

I was under the impression that if a series of 3+ appears, then we IGNORE that "streak of 3" for a trigger. In other words, the first MMM we would ignore, and not use any of those M's for a trigger.

The reason I say this is because of your statement in REPLY #161. Please clarify.

This is what I asked:

Quote
17   M   
19   M   
15   M   
16   M   
18   M   (All of these M's are ignored, and we SKIP the first trigger after these M's, Correct?)
12   L   (12-18-32 below is not a trigger, Correct? So we try for another trigger starting with #18, correct?)
18   M   
32   H   
17   M

And you replied:

Quote
The sequence M was 17-19-15-16-18. Yes we skip the first trigger 18-32-17).


So, in this example, we both ignored MMMMM as far as the trigger is concerned. And we only look at possible triggers AFTER the MMM sequence ends. Otherwise, you would have said:

(M)
(M)
(M)
16 M
18 M
12 L


Is the first trigger. But you skipped all the M's, and agreed that "18-32-17" was the first trigger.

Which is why I am now confused about your MMMLLLHHH response.

QUESTION: Why are you using "MML" as the first trigger in the MMMLLLHHH sequence? But in reply #161, you did NOT use:

16 M
18 M
12 L

as the first trigger in the MMMMML sequence???

Please clarify this. This is where Bayes and I are at an impasse. Thank you.

PS. Yes, I made a typo. The M and L  streaks are older than the H streak in the MMMLLLHHH example I gave. My bad.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 26, 2017, 01:40:48 AM
@Terminator.
I will study your questions and will post back.
But I want to say something very important.
The only reason I came up with the so called red flags is because during my lengthy tests I only run into one or maybe 2  4 back to back losses. 3 were rare as well.
Your  game #18, I processed it without paying attention to any red flags. 
Straight thru without looking what came before the trigger.
And as you can see from the picture,  it came out just fine. Only a couple level 2 losses and just a few single level losses.
I find it strange that in this game you observed 8 level losses.
Study  my results and compare them to the way you tested it.
I very  much doubt that the precautions you were observing caused the level 8 loss.
I really find it very strange that you came up with a level 8 loss.
Here is the thing.
If you can handle an occasional, yet rare,   level 3 loss and in extremely rare occasions a level 4 loss, then you don't need to watch out for any red flags.
As I said the only reason I stipulated them is to avoid running into a level 4 loss even if that happens in extremely rare occasions.
You seemed to have handled level 6 losses and level 8 losses well  and you still prevailed.
Rest assured that ignoring any red flags you will never see anything above level 4. And that will take long time to see it.
Look at the picture and you will see that I circled every trigger I run into. Regardless of what came before the trigger. Game #18 would've been a complete success had it been played in a real casino.
Let me know
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 26, 2017, 02:07:36 AM
Thank you, I'll study your game. At a cursory glance, it looks pretty close to the REDO game I already did on this. But I will study it closely.

Again, the reason my games were getting high on the progression was because I was having trouble understanding some of your methods. (For example, when there was a streak of M's, I would still bet on "M" after the next trigger. I had no idea I was NOT supposed to do this).

Anyway, Bayes and I look forward to your reply to my previous post. Thanks for attaching this game for me to study!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 26, 2017, 02:43:42 AM
?!?!?!?!?!?!?       ?!?!?!?!?!?!?

QUESTION: Why are you using "MML" as the first trigger in the MMMLLLHHH sequence? But in reply #161, you did NOT use:

16 M
18 M
12 L

as the first trigger in the MMMMML sequence???

Please clarify this. This is where Bayes and I are at an impasse. Thank you.

Your attention to detail is remarkable and that's one of the best virtues in roulette.
In the sequence you gave me MMMLLLHHH I didn't really say that  I was going to use MML as the first trigger. I simply meant that this would've been the 1st trigger if everything was to be ignored. (which coincidentally won). I also said that the 2nd trigger would've been the LLH (again if we ignored  any red flags). And I said afterwards  that I would skip the entire series until  a more normal sequence showed up that complied with the rules. I guess I tried to make the distinction between pointing out a trigger, as opposed to pointing it out and using it.
As far as my #161 post where I didn't use the 16-18-12 trigger which contradicts  my statement in the MMMLLLHHH example  (  if I actually used MML), maybe it was an oversight. Or simply I wanted to get away from the M streak. If I used 16-18-12 in that test the result would've been 2 back to back losses. Then back to normal after that.
As I said before skipping a trigger by mistake or using a trigger that was supposed to be avoided, should not penalize the system, by causing it to crash. It's not an accounting balance sheet where one mistake will screw up an entire financial statement.  A good system should easily overcome  an interruption from a continuous flow.  Otherwise it's not a good system. 
And a witness to this fact is the Game#18 which I processed and displayed it in the previous post.
I ignored all red flags and still came out a champion. 
You need to study it carefully and see what you did differently to come up with the  level 8 loss.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 26, 2017, 03:22:30 AM
@Terminator
I also processed the Game# 18 again, but this time with attention paid to the red flags.
As you can see the results were equally good, with the added bonus a second level 2 loss did not happen. (which happened in the previous all inclusive test).
However there were lesser betting and winning opportunities, compared to the first test posted above. But in real life with many roulettes under observation the betting opportunities would increase.  If you see a strange sequence, rather than waiting and wondering what to do, you move on to another table where things are normal.
And that's what the red flags are all about. To avoid back to back level 3 losses, Because level 4 is extremely rare. Level 5 I have yet to see it.

 
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 26, 2017, 06:18:26 AM
Hi Palestis, I just got home and am about to go over your notes to Games #18. After I study it, I'll get back to you.

In the meantime, let me tell you specifically what I ORIGINALLY did in Game #18 (actually, the first 20 games I played), to arrive at the 8th level, in case you were really wondering. I know exactly what I did (and I mentioned this already in a previous post). There were 3 main reasons.

FIRST: When there was any streak of 3+ (i.e., MMM), I would skip the entire streak, and I would not use ANY of those numbers for my first trigger. I would only use the FOLLOWING three spins for a possible trigger.

I now realize that you CAN use the M's from this streak for the next trigger, depending. (i.e., MMML). Actually, I'm not so sure now...waiting on your clarification.

SECOND: If a Trigger had to be skipped (i.e., 5, 17, 15), I would SKIP ALL 3 NUMBERS, and wait for the NEXT 3 spins to see if that triggered.

I now realize I can use numbers from that SKIPPED trigger, and use those as part of my NEXT trigger (i.e., 5, 17, 15, 36). Isn't this correct, Palestis?

THIRD: When there was a streak (i.e, MMM), I did not know I was NOT supposed to bet on that dominant Dozen.

I now realize I AVOID betting on that dominant dozen the next time I make a bet.

Quite a few of my games got pretty high in the progression by doing this. If you look at the bets I made, you will see this is how I got to the 8th level. Anyway, I'll get back to you when I finish looking at your work on Game #18
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 26, 2017, 06:47:17 AM
Palestis, your reply #187 is VERY confusing to me. There must be some kind of mis-communication. I am not receiving a clear answer from you. Both Bayes and I are confused.

Please allow me to ask my question in a different way.  I THINK I know the answers, just need verification. I hope you can simply tell me what YOU would do in this situation, so that we may take advantage of the RED FLAGS you gave us. Okay? (I'll give you my answers at end of post)

All spins prior to this example were normal, and no zeros were spun:

12 L
10 L
5 L
16 M
18 M
36 H
20 M
1 L
2 L

Now, there is a STREAK of 3 L's.

QUESTION 1: Can you simply tell me SPECIFICALLY what the FIRST trigger is when taking into account your Red Flags?

QUESTION #2: Can you tell me what the SECOND trigger is?

QUESTION #3: Which trigger do we bet on in the above example?

That's all for now. Thank you.

My Answers FOLLOW:

Answer #1: 1st trigger:
16 M
18 M
36 H

Answer #2: 2nd trigger:
For the passed few weeks, I thought it would be:

20 M
1 L
2 L

But now, from your prior replies, I think the answer might be:

18 M
36 H
20 M

Answer #3:which trigger do we bet?
Well, if the SECOND trigger is MHM, we bet the SECOND trigger for "M.
BUT if the SECOND trigger is "MLL" We SKIP this second trigger, because we cannot bet "L" because of the streak of L's. So, we find a THIRD trigger, and bet for M or H.

I have a question about the game #18 you played, but I'll wait for your reply to this first, Palestis. Thanks!

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on March 26, 2017, 07:05:25 AM
         I am strongly against the type of progression that Bayes suggested. I believe that type of progression works best with "sleeper" triggers. My choice is definitely a Marty, but my definition of a Marty may not be the same as your's. To me a marty is any progression that ENDS with a single win. EVEN IF THE OVERALL RESULT IS A LOSS. eg. 1,2,4,8/15 is a 4step Marty costing 1 u. 1,2,3,5/11a 4 step Marty costing 11u. Steps 1 & 2 win 1u step 3 breaks even and 4 loses 1 u. As roulette is essentially an even game the difference between the total loss of 4 units and the loss of 1u on bet 4 represents a bottom line gain. Even if the break even at bet 3 is considered we still have a substantial gain. Even more important 75% of our 1st 2 bets can be expected to win. An even bigger gain.
Bayes seems to understand "insurance" betting. Perhaps he can explain it better than I.

I can add a "custom progression" option on the tracker. This will be defined in separate text files (one for each doz/col/DS). This would give a lot of flexibility; you could even include initial zero stakes in the progression which would simulate "virtual" bets. The default progression is currently the standard 1,1,2,2,2,4,4... increasing after a loss and remaining fixed after a win assuming you're not at new high balance. However, you can override this behaviour by clicking on any value in the progression list which will set the next stake to the currently selected value.

BTW, I need a name for the tracker, and since the system itself doesn't have one and it seems to have been designed jointly by Palestis and Harry, how about "Palestis harry Dozen" system - the PhD System, or "Dr. Dozen".  ;D
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 26, 2017, 07:09:24 AM
I choose the PhD SYSTEM, because I'm going to need to visit one soon if I don't figure this damn thing out!  :o
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 26, 2017, 07:23:15 AM
        The main difference between my play and Pals is that I use DS to form "unatural" dozens, and I use a 5 spin progression.

Hi Harry. I'm just curious what your 5 spin progression looks like. Can you share it? I love experimenting with different progressions. Thanks!

Quote
I also restart after MMM.LLL.HHH. or MHL or zero.eg. MMM/restart.

Very smart. This is the way I've been playing too (except I ignore single zeros).
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: jekhb76 on March 26, 2017, 10:48:30 AM
Good morning friends,

I have read the previous posts with much care and i have to say that you make it all to confusing.
And when your mind is not clear you are gonna make mistakes sooner ot later.

You don't need to play every trigger you see. I know that you don't play every trigger but if you have the patients, please only play normal sequence triggers. By this i mean. LMH are your last dozens, then followed by M (play H) or H (play M) Everytime when one or more of the same dozens are prior the trigger, i just skip it and wait for the next oppertunity to come. it takes more time and the profits are less by the end of the evening, but it is al about leaving the casino as a winner. Also when i see a zero in i let it go idle and wait until he is out for 6-10 mumbers.
Zero's mostly come in packs, so it's best to let it go for a few spins and not use any trigger that come in the next 6 spins or so. mostly when i see a zero, i'm gonna go and take a break and drink some coffee :) and then come back after 10 minutes or so. So the way i've been playing this system for the last few weeks, almost every day, and i never reached lvl 6 bet (32) highest bet i needed to make to regain profit is when i had 3 back to back losses and needed to play 8-8-16 but won on the first 8. always bet with different dozens previous your trigger and leave the zero's out. i takes allot more time. but I only needed 25 euro profit every night, usualy takes about 2 hours before reached by playing my method. but i never lost one session in the last 3 weeks. i have a stop loss of +25 / -50 with a bank of 100-150 and base bet of 1 unit. i know it is not a very pleasand playstyle and the profits are not high, but trust me, it gives a great feeling when you go home with a few bucks in your pocket. tonight i start my 10 days trial at lvl 2 (2u Base bet) stop loss at +50 /-100 with a bank of 200-250
try it the way i said and come back on this. have a great sunday friends. - Eddy
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Harryj on March 26, 2017, 11:39:44 AM
@ Bayes,
            The single zero seems to be a balanced situation. I started playing g that way, but as data built up I found it could be ignored.
     Obviously the starting bet depends on how the minimum bet is structured. At my casino the inside bets can be made up of 5 x1u bets to make a table minimum of 5u. Therefore the basic bet is 3u on each DS
BET  = TOTAL..PAYOUT..PROFIT/LOSS.

(1)3...3....6....6....18....12
(2)4...4....8...14...24....10
(3)5...5...10..24...30.....6
(4)6...6...12..36...36.....0
(5) 9...9..18..54...54.....0 or (5)8...8...16..52...48...-4

   This type of bet can be juggled endlessly. Depending on results obtained by research and the W/L ratio achieved. In the current case the bulk of the wins occur within 3 spins. The added bets merely improve the W/L ratio and make back to back losses less likely.This enables me to play without an6 increase to my basic bet, after a loss. While even a small increase recovers very quickly.
     While this trigger was invented to take advantage of the "flow"
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Harryj on March 26, 2017, 11:47:35 AM
While this method was invented to take advantage of the "flow". On a professional level it works best with intermitant play as advised by Pal and jekd76. That way it is easier to pick out the maybe triggers and increase certainty.
            The original name I gave to this trigger was the "ODD DOZEN" . I don't suppose it matters what you call it. As long as you win.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on March 26, 2017, 12:59:46 PM
tonight i start my 10 days trial at lvl 2 (2u Base bet) stop loss at +50 /-100 with a bank of 200-250
try it the way i said and come back on this. have a great sunday friends. - Eddy

ABSOLUTELY GRATS DEWD!

(http://www.gifmania.co.uk/Messages-Animated-Gifs/Animated-Congratulations/Congratulations-Applause-84496.gif)
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 26, 2017, 01:32:04 PM
Palestis, your reply #187 is VERY confusing to me. There must be some kind of mis-communication. I am not receiving a clear answer from you. Both Bayes and I are confused.

Please allow me to ask my question in a different way.  I THINK I know the answers, just need verification. I hope you can simply tell me what YOU would do in this situation, so that we may take advantage of the RED FLAGS you gave us. Okay? (I'll give you my answers at end of post)

All spins prior to this example were normal, and no zeros were spun:

12 L
10 L
5 L
16 M
18 M
36 H
20 M
1 L
2 L

Now, there is a STREAK of 3 L's.

QUESTION 1: Can you simply tell me SPECIFICALLY what the FIRST trigger is when taking into account your Red Flags?

QUESTION #2: Can you tell me what the SECOND trigger is?

QUESTION #3: Which trigger do we bet on in the above example?

Ok . Here is what I would do:
The first trigger to bet would be 16-18-36. Betting 3 spins targeting H,  brings 20-1-2.
(level-1 loss).
Then there is no 2nd trigger to use. I have to wait for new fresh numbers, because 20-1-2 were already used as the result of  actual bets. (therefore 20-1-2 cannot be a trigger).
The reason I used 16-18-36 ( despite LLL above it), was because the XX (16-18) was unrelated to the LLL. In  addition, the Y ( target dozen) was also unrelated to the LLL. 
Don't worry, eventually the confusion will be cleared.
As Jekhb76 has mentioned, he only run into  level-3  losses, and I am sure that it doesn't happen very often to him. Which coincides with my long term tests.
Also, I have to  mention that a friend of mine plays the same system with a twist,
But what he does is, he lets the 3 bets lose VIRTUALLY in the first trigger he encounters.
Then he bets the very next trigger he encounters. 
It takes more time to play that way, but it  increases his certainty.
So there is plenty of flexibility in playing this system.

PS: I think a have an idea where the confusion comes from.
As you pick the 1st trigger don't forget that this trigger  requires 3 bets. So don't go back and pick another trigger involving prior numbers especially those who were used as the result of the 3 bets.
We start with fresh numbers by waiting for the roulette to spin them.
Or better yet, we move to another roulette table

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 26, 2017, 02:57:20 PM
Help. I need Clarification

Quote
The first trigger to bet would be 16-18-36. Betting 3 spins targeting H,  brings 20-1-2.
(level-1 loss).
Then there is no 2nd trigger to use. I have to wait for new fresh numbers, because 20-1-2 were already used as the result of  actual bets. (therefore 20-1-2 cannot be a trigger).
The reason I used 16-18-36 ( despite LLL above it), was because the XX (16-18) was unrelated to the LLL. In  addition, the Y ( target dozen) was also unrelated to the LLL. 

Okay. Palestis, did you change your method since you first began posting on this thread? Your answer above is totally different than what you told us to do at the beginning of this thread. This is why I am so confused. I have been using your method as you described it in the beginning.

I am going to quote 2 of your earlier posts (because this is how I've been playing). Then I will return to your answer above.

Both of the following quotes relate to your RULE #1 of your Red Flags, which states:

RULE #1: "If the same dozen appears more than 3+ times immediately preceding the trigger (it's a sign of anomaly that can affect the rest of the dozens)."

First Quote:
Palestis Reply #5

Quote
Yes 3+ repeats preceding the trigger, is a cause of concern. All you have to do is wait idle a few more spins, to break the streak.

My Interpretation:
This tells me, after a sequence such as:

12 L
10 L
5 L

Then, we WAIT 3 more spins BEFORE choosing our first trigger. So, if the following 3 spins AFTER the LLL streak were a VALID TRIGGER (no matter if it had an L in it or not), then we SKIP the first trigger and proceed to the SECOND trigger.

Confirmation of this is in the following post:

Second Quote:
Palestis Reply #39   

Quote
If there is a sequence of numbers like 25-30-27-32-10-8-21 you avoid betting the 10-8-21 trigger (too many numbers in the 3rd dozen  preceding  the trigger). Indicating a streak that might continue in a dozen that is not the target.

So, the above spins, from your example, would look like:

25 H
30 H
27 H
32 H
(All the above spins are a streak of 3+, which means we skip the first trigger)
10 L
8 L
21 M


This is the first trigger (in red). Even though "M" would be bet, and not H (the streak of dominant dozens), we still skip this first trigger and proceed to the SECOND trigger.

This is what you told us earlier, Palestis. And this is how I've been playing all my games for the passed few weeks.

NOW, if we compare your above posts with your recent answer to my example of the following scenario:

12 L
10 L
5 L
16 M
18 M
36 H
20 M
1 L
2 L

According to your above 2 posts, we are supposed to SKIP the first trigger (in red) even if it does NOT have the dominant dozen within it.

But instead, you are now telling me the opposite:

Quote
The first trigger to bet would be 16-18-36. Betting 3 spins targeting H, The reason I used 16-18-36 ( despite LLL above it), was because the XX (16-18) was unrelated to the LLL.

This seems to contradict your quotes from your posts # 5 and #39, where you SKIPPED the FIRST trigger, whether they were related to the Streak of Dominant Dozens or not.

Can you please clarify this? Thank you. If you changed your strategy, that's fine. I just want to understand the basics of WHAT the first trigger IS after a sequence of 3+.

Quote
I think a have an idea where the confusion comes from. As you pick the 1st trigger don't forget that this trigger  requires 3 bets.

Yes, I am aware of that, Palestis. And if the first 2 bets are a repeat of the dominant dozen, then we only make 2 bets instead of 3. RULE #2 from your Red Flags, yes?

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: jekhb76 on March 26, 2017, 03:12:12 PM
Yes that is what i do also. I never use a dozen for a trigger from a previous bet. i always start with a fresh set of three numbers. When a zero is part of those new numbers, i let that go by also and wait again for a fresh new bet.
It takes indeed more time, but it will benefit at the end.

Regarding my business plan i mentioned earlier; Because i'm trying to be a professional roulette player and try to make my living out of it (no i don't need the money for my family to survive) we can live from my wife's income.
But i want to make sure i rule everything out as much as i can and i have now the starting capital to do so.
I'm changing tactics.

The last weeks i won in total over 1100 euro with roulette and 90% with this system.

I have calculated that a 7 back to back loss would come once in a lifetime, but i don't want (when it does happen)
to ruin my investment.

As i told before, I have a business plan. well from now on i want to be able to cover that once in a lifetime event.

so i recommend the following (you don't need to do it this way, it's just my safety net)

This is what i've changed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
I play 1 level every 2 months:

Level 1: €1 Base Bet.
Target €25  Bank €260     Safety Bank €260 TB €520   x 50 Days  €1250,- Profit. Max B/B losses Possible: 7

Level 2: €2 Base Bet.
Target €50  Bank €520     Safety Bank €520 TB €1040 x 50 Days  €2500,- Profit. Max B/B losses Possible: 7

Level 3: €3 Base Bet.
Target €75  Bank €780     Safety Bank €780  TB €1560 x 50 Days  €3750,- Profit. Max B/B losses Possible: 7

Level 4: €4 Base Bet.
Target €100 Bank €1040  Safety Bank €1040 TB €2080 x 50 Days €5000,- Profit. Max B/B losses Possible 7

After 8 months I earn around 100 euro a day. 2000 euro a month and I'm prepared for that once in a lifetime event of 7 back to back losses.

I may change this over time to make it even better, but for now i'm ready.
Tonight I start my lvl 2 for the next 2 months. Keep you all posted. Eddy

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 26, 2017, 03:29:36 PM
@ Bayes,
(1)3...3....6....6....18....12
(2)4...4....8...14...24....10

Hi Harry, thanks for sharing your 5 step progression. But I'm not sure I understand what all the figures mean. I think I may be a little slow. Can you clarify the following?

(1) 3...3....6....6....18....12

My understanding is that this is spin #1, and you bet 3 units on each of the 2 Dozens (that the 3...3 in the above line).

I'm unclear as to the following numbers, though..."6....6....18....12." Can you clarify?

And I am assuming for spin Number 2, you increase your bets to 4 units each if spin #1 lost?

(2)4...4....

Thank you for clarifying this.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Sheridan44 on March 26, 2017, 05:14:53 PM
The way I'm treating the "red flag" stuff is not too technical. I could drive myself crazy with it.
I've got a pretty good handle on what to watch out for.....so I basically scan the immediate prior results for anything that looks "screwy". I like the dozens to flow nice and somewhat blase' (a "normal" XXY/XYX/XYY type pattern - if you will). I move on past zeroes, packs of same dozens, clusters, and other anomalies. I want to get to the point to where I can glance at a certain number of results and decide whether it's a go, or a no-go.
Title: OPEN QUESTION
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 26, 2017, 07:23:33 PM
OPEN QUESTION TO ALL . . . Please help clarify the TRIGGERS

Hi Sheridan44, thanks for your reply. I have a good idea as to what to look out for also. And BEFORE we place a BET, we look for a TRIGGER. Correct? This whole method is based upon the TRIGGERS. Now, I know WHAT a trigger is. That's no problem.

My problem comes down to this: I cannot get a straight answer as to where the triggers are. That's all! I get a difference answer every time I ask! Maybe it's my autism preventing me from understanding, I don't know.

Can I post an OPEN question to everyone? Everyone in this thread, can you PLEASE tell me what you would do in the following situation? Give me your thoughts? Please help clarify this for me?

HERE is the situation UP TO THIS POINT in the roulette spins:

All spins prior to this example were normal, and no zeros were spun. Everything has been going great! Our last spin we WON. Then, we get the following spins:

12 L
10 L
5 L
16 M
18 M
36 H
20 M
1 L
2 L

QUESTION #1: Where SPECIFICALLY is the FIRST trigger? (i.e., MMH?)

QUESTION #2: Where SPECIFICALLY is the SECOND trigger? (i.e., MHM or MLL?)

QUESTION #3: Which trigger do we use to place our bet? (1st, 2nd, or wait for another?)

Feel free to expand on your replies. I already gave my answers in REPLY #190 (at bottom of post). Thank you for giving me yours, and for helping me understand.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: jekhb76 on March 26, 2017, 08:23:27 PM
@Terminator

12 L
10 L  First Trigger)
05 L  Second Trigger)
16 M  This is your first bet - Bet 1 unit)
18 M  WON on your first spin +2 units)

36 H  No bet, because first M and second M is also from previous bet

20 M  This is your bet - bet 1 unit (there were also 2 M's from a previous bet, but i didn't had any problem betting like this in the last few thousand spins. as long as there are not more then 2 of the same dozen prior, there shouldn't be any problem.

01 L  First Trigger
02 L  First Trigger (at this point you now know that your last M will be the betting dozen.
Now you bet 1 unit on M

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: funtomas76 on March 26, 2017, 10:03:55 PM
@Eddy

Did I miss something?

Where is the single dozen at 12-10-5 ?

I hope you are succesfull with your strategy!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 26, 2017, 11:52:16 PM
Help. I need Clarification

I am going to quote 2 of your earlier posts (because this is how I've been playing). Then I will return to your answer above.

Both of the following quotes relate to your RULE #1 of your Red Flags, which states:

RULE #1: "If the same dozen appears more than 3+ times immediately preceding the trigger (it's a sign of anomaly that can affect the rest of the dozens)."

First Quote:
Palestis Reply #5

Quote
Yes 3+ repeats preceding the trigger, is a cause of concern. All you have to do is wait idle a few more spins, to break the streak.

My Interpretation:
This tells me, after a sequence such as:

12 L
10 L
5 L

Then, we WAIT 3 more spins BEFORE choosing our first trigger. So, if the following 3 spins AFTER the LLL streak were a VALID TRIGGER (no matter if it had an L in it or not), then we SKIP the first trigger and proceed to the SECOND trigger.

Hi:
I understand that attention to detail and exactness of action, is important to you, and that's good.
Yes you are right. I said in  past posts that if there is a sequence of the same dozen for 3+ spins in a row, we skip the very first trigger that comes along. But I specified ( or at least what I meant),  a trigger  immediately following  the streak without new numbers interruptions . Which happen to be the very first 3 numbers that  formed a trigger exactly after the streak.
BUT if a few numbers passed by, after the streak, WITHOUT FORMING A TRIGGER, then you don't have to skip the first trigger you encounter further down,  and wait for the second. The exception is if the 3 numbers immediately after the streak form a trigger XXY where X and Y were not numbers that belonged in the streak.
In this case we can bet the first trigger even if it follows immediately after the streak.
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.

Example-2:    12,10,5,31,32,4. In this case WE SKIP THE FIRST TRIGGER. 31-32-4.
Because the target dozen is the L. (and that was the dozen that was in the streak. That's the most important rule). it makes sense not to chase something that was already in a streak by itself.

Example-3:    12,10, 5, 30, 4,8. The trigger is 30,4,8 and the target is the H. But since 4,and 8 were numbers from the streak we skip this trigger. (this is not a rule as strong as the rule in example -2.
But I would skip it. If another player wanted to proceed with this trigger it's ok and  up to his discretion. It's not a strong departure from the rule because the target dozen is not the dozen that was in  the streak).

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.

Example-5:   Trigger is 31,32,20. if after the first 2 bets we get 33,34 we stop and only lose 2 spins. Because after an XXY if the first 2 spins are again XX it indicates some type of anomaly. So better save the money that was going to go to the 3rd spin (which is the most expensive out of the 3 progressive bets).
I think I made it a little more clear now.
If in my tests I didn't follow this exact procedure, take it as a mistake.
I may not pay too much attention, simply because no matter how you do it,  there should never be too many back 2 back losses. Like more than the already rare 3.
Let me know if it is more clear now.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on March 27, 2017, 07:27:06 AM
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.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: dobbelsteen on March 27, 2017, 08:27:45 AM
After 12-10-5 I play 6 units on High, 2  units on DS 13/18 ,1unit on street 7/9, 1 unit on street 1/3.
If the zero has not fallen in the past 50 spins and the unit  is 10 euro, I place also one 0,1 unit on the zero

After 5-16-18 , 6 units High, 1 unit street 1/3 and7/9, 22 units on DS 10/15. Both wagers have a profit of 20% .

A repeater in a DS is a same trigger. The difference you can start the wager with 5 units in stead of 10 units.

After a no hit on a DS trigger I double the bet.

The goal is to win 5 units per hour playing on 4 tables. The no hits decrease the profit %%.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on March 27, 2017, 12:04:43 PM
(http://i63.tinypic.com/2v1uctw.png)

Just doing a bit more testing prior to sending the tracker to Palestis for beta testing. The system continues to perform strongly, and it's nice to have 3 options to choose from. The yellow labels at the top of each bet show the current balance for that selection.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis 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.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on March 27, 2017, 12:36:24 PM
Awesome coding Bayes!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR 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!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR 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.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: ShadowBlue 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
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis 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.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: jekhb76 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.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis 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.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR 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.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOMENICO
Post by: Harryj 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
.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Lemon 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
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis 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.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis 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.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR 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.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR 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!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: jekhb76 on March 28, 2017, 04:39:31 AM
Sorry to interupt, but now i'm confused.  :-\
Harry posted a new betting method for the target dozen. He is playing 2 DS in that dozen.
As understand it, he is not using a progression.
He oa betting the following (please correct me if i'm wrong).

DS 1     DS 2 (in target dozen)

3           3  (6 TB) (18 Return) (12 Profit)
4           4  (14TB) (24 Return) (10 Profit)

And he is using no progression, he is goin' with the flow of the W/L ratio?

but when we have a 3 back to back loss, and we use no progression, we are never gonna recoup om our losses. plus we need a bigger bankroll to play it that way. How is this and insurence while playing? And is better to only bet when you habe to play the 1e dozen, YXX (so only bet when we have L M M (bet on L) and when we have L H H (bet on L) and skip the othr betting oppertunities????

Can Harry on Terminator do a playthrough session, so we can understand this? thanks.
i'm confused.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 28, 2017, 06:05:31 AM
Eddy, I've never played with Double Streets yet, so Harry would be better qualified to give an example.

He does use a 5 step progression. He bets 3 units on each DS. If they both lose, he goes to step 2, which is 4 units on each DS. Etc. He explains this in an earlier post.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: jekhb76 on March 28, 2017, 11:45:57 AM

How to play alternate dozen system.
Wait till you have 2 number that are not more then 3 spins apart and not more then 3 numbers apart from eachother.
Example spin;
12
7 *
9 *
15
21
1 Win.

Number 7 and 9 are your triggers, now start betting dozen 1 until hit using Palestis progression. 112 224 448 8816
when you have a hit but not at a new high proceed with next trigger at step 2 from the progression. When you encounter a zero while searching for a trigger, skip until the zero isn't part of the trigger zone anymore. When you have 2 triggers and you start to bet, a zero comes along before you have a hit, take the loss and start over by searching for a new trigger.

it show good results but more testing is needed. it's an alternetive from the original single dozen gameplay, so you cam switch now and then. it shows that it is also a save method till now. let me know what you think - Eddy

22 x win after 1 spin
12 x win after 2 spins
14 x win after 3 spins
06 x win after 4 spins
01 x win after 5 spins
01 x win after 6 spins
01 x win after 7 spins
01 x win after 8 spins
00 x win after 9 spins
02 x win after 10 spins

Total rounds played: 60

29
35
9
----------
16 *
3
16 *
17 W
---------- 1 spin
21 *
5
19 *
4
13 W
---------- 2 spin
6
13
1
14
0
9
7
0
10
34
----------
7 *
12
4 *
17
12 W
---------- 2 spin
34 *
34 *
36 W
---------- 1 spin
36
----------
15 *
10
16 *
8
2
17 W
---------- 3 spin
14 *
14 *
5
32
29
30
29
1
36
27
36
21 W
---------- 10 spin
18
13
31
1 *
10
1 *
26
34
8 W
---------- 3 spin
0
35 *
8
34 *
34 W
--------- 1 spin
17
0
18
13
1 *
28
11 *
14
17
6 W
---------- 3 spin
18
25
8
22  *
13
23 *
5
9
14 W
---------- 3 spin
15
10 *
9 *
27
25
4 w
---------- 3 spin
9 *
12 *
29
23
26
35
34
9 W
---------- 6 spin
14 *
0
16 *
5
15 W
---------- 2 spin
29 *
21
27 *
16
3
15
26 W
---------- 4 spin
8 *
3
8 *
13
14
10 W
---------- 3 spin
0
4
29
16
0
3 *
31
1 *
4 W
---------- 1 spin
14 *
14 *
11
9
0
5
8
12
14 W
---------- 7 spin
11 *
11 *
28
1 W
---------- 2 spin
8
33 *
36 *
34 W
---------- 1 spin
12
0
22
32
11 *
13
10 *
16
5 W
---------- 2 spin
17
13
28 *
1
31
27 *
3
4
10
29 W
---------- 4 spin
35
27
21 *
23 *
19
22 W
---------- 2 spin
22
16
26
4
9
13
33 *
22
29
34 *
11
18
34 W
---------- 3 spin
15
7
26 *
31
25 *
23
9
31 W
---------- 3 spin
26
19 *
19 *
14 W
---------- 1 spin
29 *
27 *
27 W
---------- 1 spin
22
17 *
35
9
17 *
18 W
---------- 1 spin
19 *
2
18 *
1
22 W
---------- 2 spin
26
7
15 *
13 *
30
15 W
---------- 2 spin
32 *
8
17
32 *
34 W
---------- 1 spin
31
35 *
36 *
11
11
17
32 W
---------- 4 spin
25
21
36
15
10
3
34
26
17
1
6 *
4 *
5 W
---------- 1 spin
7 *
20
8 *
36
8 W
---------- 2 spin
35
27
31
8 *
10 *
33
15
34
5 W
---------- 4 spin
16 *
13 *
18 W
---------- 1 spin
22
31
27
1 *
3 *
33
30
2 W
---------- 3 spin
33
14
23 *
22 *
6
13 W
---------- 2 spin
13
20
7 *
10 *
2 W
---------- 1 spin
3
12
8
36
27
18 *
13
3
19 *
34
36
8
35
34
12
2
0
10
23 W
---------- 10 spin
27
32
18
6
27 *
0
11
26 *
0
30 W
---------- 2 spin
16
11
20
5
28 *
30 *
24
20
10
12
16
16
7
27 W
---------- 8 spin
8
30
16 *
17 *
16 W
---------- 1 spin
25
11
15
6
34
11 *
29
8 *
25
2 W
---------- 2 spin
26
20 *
10
34
21 *
2
3
24 W
---------- 3 spin
11
33 *
30 *
2
19
33 W
---------- 3 spin
5
0
6
2
0
31 *
25
29 *
5
3
29 W
---------- 3 spin
21 *
23 *
15 W
---------- 1 spin
33
14 *
15 *
34
1
11
20 W
---------- 4 spin
24
29
11
16 *
1
16 *
31
26
34
14 W
---------- 4 spin
19
14
29 *
30 *
26 W
---------- 1 spin
30 *
33 *
13
16
32 W
---------- 3 spin
36
4
20 *
19 *
16 W
---------- 1 spin
11
16
0
0
18
12
14 *
7
2
14 *
17 W
---------- 1 spin
25
21
33
4 *
7 *
10 W
---------- 1 spin
6
13
36
25
19
30
2
7
26
19
13
36
2
29
11
20 *
18 *
22 W
---------- 1 spin
7 *
7 *
27
14
10 W
---------- 3 spin
28 *
31 *
29 W
---------- 1 spin
19
10
27
3
16
35 *
8
36 *
27 W
---------- 1 spin
30
16
25
24 *
21 *
26
30
0
3
22 W
---------- 5 spin
29
4 *
7 *
11 W
---------- 1 spin
10

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Lemon on March 28, 2017, 12:40:18 PM

Going back to Palestis's original system.  I haven't played this system long enough to make any firm conclusions.  However, I have noticed that I have had excellent results when I get the duel trigger of 3 unique dozens in a row in any order (XYZ, etc.)  followed by a YXX.   It is a strong enough trigger that I raise my stakes when this occurs.  I will post example of my play when I get enough data.

Cheers
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 28, 2017, 02:30:59 PM
@ Lemon
Sounds very much like my style of play.
A YXX trigger following an XYZ sequence acts as a reset, from a possible presence of a variance.
I don't mind waiting for hours for things to line in a way, where winning is almost certain.
I have plenty of patience when it comes to certainty in winning. And I care less for the adrenaline of playing, and the disappointment of some lost winning opportunities. 
The core system has performed very well under the standard way I have posted.
But for those who don't have the heart to go thru the cycles of winning, losing some levels, and then recovering, before continuing, the way you suggested is a surefire way to win.  But without the heartaches of some temporary losses on the way to victory.
Any system can be customized  to the player's personality. But the core system has to be a good system to begin with.
The way you suggested is highly recommended for high stakes play, where the end result matters and not how you get there.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: jekhb76 on March 28, 2017, 03:14:22 PM

Just did another session with my alternate play, these are the results with 1u base bet.
162 spins result in € +40

32
16
28 *
22
30 *
26 W
---------- +2 units
6  *
21
6  *
11 W
---------- +2 units
24 *
1
21 *
21 W
---------- +2 units
23 *
22 *
5
34
22 W
---------- +2 units
28
34 *
22
31 *
29 W
---------- +2 units
4
36
18
10 *
12 *
14
26
5  W
----------- +2 units
13 *
31
6
15 *
28
17 W
----------- +1 unit
6  *
9  *
25
12 W
----------- +1 unit
31 *
19
27
33 *
17
31 W
----------- +1 unit
18
35
7  *
5  *
13
15
4  W
------------ +2 units
3
21 *
29
24 *
13 W
------------ +2 units
3  *
3  *
16
33
22
5  W
------------ 0
23
26 *
27 *
35 W
------------ +2 units
16
36 *
36 *
1
2
12
33 W
------------- 0
11 *
9  *
35
9  W
------------- +1 unit
12
30 *
17
31 *
5
22
31 W
-------------- +2 units
33 *
23
25
31 *
0   no betting
-------------
14
22
6  *
8  *
7  W
------------- +2 units
9
13
24
28
0
24 *
26
30
21 *
18 W
------------ +2 units
10
3
23 *
24 *
21 W
----------- +2 units
33
13
23
8
30
18 *
16 *
20 W
----------- +2 units
18
12
32
9  *
16
6  *
24
25
5  W
------------ +2 units
29
3
9  *
25
6  *
27
21
35
11 W
--------------- 0
21 *
30
21 *
15 W
--------------- +2 units
33 *
4
30 *
15
26 W
-------------- +1 unit
16
1
6
24
32 *
34 *
23
7
35 W
------------- +2 unit
35
4  *
6  *
13
11 W
------------- +1 unit
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Harryj on March 28, 2017, 03:38:53 PM
Terminator has voiced a concern I often get. How do I handle the DS play.1st let me state that I began playing DS about 40years ago. The casino introduced the concept of inside and outside numbers. With different, and less favourable, rules for the outside numbers. It was aimed at curtailing system play. Which concentrated on outside numbers.
        I studied the layout and wheel and decided that DS's looked like the best alternative. I soon four d that DS were much more versatile. I have not bet an outside number since, and will never do so again !!

    How are DS better ? CHOICE ! In the case of dozens I have12 possible dozens instead of 3. With EC's 8 have 20 possibilities instead of 6.
    How is this better ? Many years ago I embarked on research to find the best arrangements of bets around he wheel. EC's alternate, which looked lime a good arrangement. At no time would you miss by more than 1 pocket. Yet I found that 3DS usually performed better. I won't bore you with the painstaking research that followed. Even if I HD the skills. Computers weren't available.

    Mi found wheel sectors were more reliable. Divide the wheel into halves, thirds, quarters, or sixths, ninths or twelves and the results were likely to be better than EC's, dozens, 3 streets, DS, quads or streets. Tohe problem was tracking and betting these sectors was laborious. There had to be an easier way on the layout. So I judged the DS until the results showed a consistent improvement.

     So I don't bet dozens(DS 12,34,56) I bet DS pairs that include 1low DS and 1high DS. That gives me dozens(12numbers)that include an equal number of R.B.O.E. and H.L. I then loomed at the pattern of bets around the wheel. Alternating groups of 1 or 2 wasn't the answer. That was featured on the 2 wheels. If it were bad for them the casinos would have changed it. I found that a group of 4 and 3 with a minimum of single numbers spread randomly around the wheel gave best results. That is the reasoning behind my DS play. It is highly likely that similar results would work for for other bets. You will have to do thàt research yourself.

      So for an EC bet I use 3 DS. For dozens I use 2.

       Terminator you got the betting right. The 2 extra safety (insured) bets seem to pay their way.   
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on March 28, 2017, 04:31:02 PM
        I studied the layout and wheel and decided that DS's looked like the best alternative. I soon four d that DS were much more versatile. I have not bet an outside number since, and will never do so again !!

    How are DS better ? CHOICE ! In the case of dozens I have12 possible dozens instead of 3. With EC's 8 have 20 possibilities instead of 6.   

I have also discovered a deeper dimension to this versatality/flexibility. 

The ability to choose exactly which numbers we bet with smaller selections, can offer a statistical advantage that is not offered with the "pre-made" & larger bet selections which simply must be bet as an entire whole or not at all.

In other words, the more we are able split up a bet selection, the more we are able to tailor the specific numbers we bet to the statistics that are manifested by the random flow.

This is a hidden advantage that can only be discovered through direct research.  It may be that we are talking about the same thing, even though you are using a wheel based approach & I am using a felt based approach. 
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Harryj on March 28, 2017, 06:23:39 PM
Jekb76, congratulations !!   You misunderstood the original system and managed to create a viable alternative. WELL DONE.
         The W/L ratio seems good. It may be better with a slightly more aggressive progression. The fact that you have been steadily winning indicates thatvit will stand up to long term testing.

@ Reyth, we bet on the felt. So any bet that works on the wheel must also work on the felt. Any bet I make on the felt must also balance on the wheel. The AP players shouldn't be the only ones to consider the wheel.
     Regards,
                      Harry
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 28, 2017, 08:10:51 PM
@ HarryJ

Thanks for sharing the research you did to determine that betting on the Double Streets is more profitable. That was an interesting read!

Quote
So for an EC bet I use 3 DS. For dozens I use 2.

May I ask which 3 DS's you use for EC, and which 2 DS's you use for the Single Dozen Strategy? How do you determine which DS to bet on?

For example, when we are using the Single Dozens Strategy, we are dealing with XYZ triggers to determine which Dozen to bet. In your case, would "X" be something like #1-6 (First DS) and #19-24 (second DS). And this will always be "X" for you?

Thanks for clarifying!

PS. I wonder if the 2 extra safety (insured) bets would also work in Palestis's progression? We'd have to adjust the numbers, but if it works in your progression, it might also be helpful in Palestis's progression.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Cone1986 on March 29, 2017, 09:34:43 AM
Morning all,

As a long time lurker I felt compelled to add my experience and advice of using this excellent system. It has proved to be a valuable tool when used in conjunction with my own methods. I'm a great believer in using multiple systems to come out of a roulette session with a profit, especially when using outside bets.

However, I did try using this system on it's own for 150 spins and it worked great as the highest progression level that I got to was three (although I'm sure this would of been higher the longer I played).

My own system experiences a double loss coming in approximately once every 30-40 spins. I have a double & triple loss recovery method that has not failed me in over 12,000 spins - however it can prove to be very laborious (and time consuming) to complete. This single dozen method has proved its worth to me as a fast recovery intermediate method for when things don't go to plan. The beauty of it is that because I'm not using it systematically, I'm not encountering (touch wood) more than a level 2 progression so far. And that's exactly how I would recommend this method is used, as a compliment to a method with a higher hit rate.

I'll keep playing it for the forseable future and I'm willing to take it to a level 9 progression -  which according to my simulated results is highly unlikely.

I'm not one to utilise new methods in my tried and tested system but this method really has helped me out, so thanks Palestis.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: kav on March 29, 2017, 11:00:25 AM
Cone and Lemon,
Welcome to the forum!

Harry,
Would you like to explain how does combining 2 DS would produce sector bets in the wheel layout? (if this is what you mean)
IMO one needs 3 DS to create sector bets on the wheel. Could you give us example(s)?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 29, 2017, 02:59:04 PM
@ Cone1986

Thanks for sharing. I'd be interested in hearing about your method. The safer we can make any method, the better! If it's not appropriate to post your method in this thread, maybe you can start a new one and post the link here? Thanks!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: jekhb76 on March 29, 2017, 08:28:09 PM
To HarryJ,

What about this progression for my alternate dozen method?

Progression line is:  1-1-2-3-4-5-6-9-12-17-25-34 with these 12 bet levels you either win 1 time and are at a new high, or if you're not at a new high you drop back 4 steps and bet that number and if you get those 2 wins you will be at a new high.  The nice thing about this way of winning 2 in a row is if you win and aren't at a new high and then lose the 2nd bet, you are at least 4 levels back from where you would have been.The progression continues: 37-44-54-73-95-123.  Okay that's 18 bets.  These last 6 levels require 3 wins in a row to reach a new high.  After each win we drop back only 3 bets.  As above, 1 or 2 wins followed by a loss will not totally recover, but you will be a lot farther back down the line and with a good bet selection we won't get to these later numbers too often.  This progression represents over 500 units if you lose all 18 levels without a win of any kind.  Highly unlikely.This progression is much less aggressive than the straight martingale for a single dozen which starts out the same way for the first 5 levels but then doesn't escalate as rapidly as a regular martingale.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Cone1986 on March 30, 2017, 08:57:23 AM
@ Cone1986

Thanks for sharing. I'd be interested in hearing about your method. The safer we can make any method, the better! If it's not appropriate to post your method in this thread, maybe you can start a new one and post the link here? Thanks!

Hi Terminator. I intend on putting a complete post together to show how I've managed to sustain my bank roll through multiple methods at some point. The underlying philosophy behind what I do is centred around utilising time, patience, a high BR and random methods with extreme triggers for dealing with losses.

I use a divisor based method for overcoming a pattern for most large losses. Once I get time I will put a worked example together as I think thats the best way to show it. Basically, I break down a loss into managable parts and tackle them individually. The pattern part is the clever part, but I'll save that for my own post.

I've been using the single dozen method again last night and so far so good, reached a level 3 loss this time but continued fine. I only aim to make 100 units a day on average from a 10,000 U BR as I'm too busy at work to do any more.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: jekhb76 on March 30, 2017, 04:04:59 PM
Just had a Brain Click  ::)

I found out that a D' alembert progression also works very well with Palestis and my alternate system.

after every loss raise 1 unit - after a win step 3 back.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 also max 7x3 spin session.
this seems like alot, but i take adventage of the fact that 1 out of 4 triggers i have a win on the first spin.and only needs 221 units to play. this is best used for rng. yes i know what you are thinking, but because the sessions can take quite some time to full recovery, it is not sutable with live play. and because the rng computer hasn't a slice idea what you are doin', it is a real winner for now. i just made over 200 euro profit over 4 hour play today with real money.
the first 4 spins (1 2 3 4) are always profit and on the 5th spin you are playing even. and to take in calculation that most sessions end within 5 spins, it works very well. when you have a hit on the 6th level or above, you then search for a new trigger and start that session on step 3. etc etc. always 3 steps back after a win until in profit. 1 step forwars after a loss spin. this js a good profit system with a recovery method build inside.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Rinad on March 30, 2017, 04:31:41 PM


  up 1 down 2 is a good idea, as long as you are making a profit at the end.  are you playing your alternate system only now ? just curious about goal you had set if you are still pursuing it.
Rinad
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: jekhb76 on March 30, 2017, 05:14:32 PM
hi rinad,

i still playing for my daily goals and still at level 2. not had one loss in the past 3 weeks. so everything is goin' very well up till now. now making 40 bucks a day. if everything stays the same i'm on to lvl 3 (60 euro a day) by the end of next week. I still use Palestis system but i was searching for a combine method because otherwise you are bored very quick. so i switch systems now. palestis system and my alternate together. and hadn't had any problems. (My alternate system stands now over 15000 spin test, so i can use that safely as an alternate to Palestis system) never went past 4 back to back losses. always a hit before spin 12. but when you use the d' alembert system with these two you have a good recovery inside. let's say you have your first hit on spin 9, then you are down 45 chips. with the 9 spin win you are bein' given 27 chips back, wich leaves a debt of -18.
now you go back 2 levels. level 7 is now your first
when hit on the next spin you will recive 21 chips, next up you go another 2 step back to lvl 5 when a hit comes in the next spin you are back in profit again. and you can restart from level 1 again. it doesn't really matter how far you are into the recovery, you always have a change to be in plus again. i've been at a place where was betting 15 chips but recoverd always. it may take a while but you will. try it out and see for your self. i have a 1 spin hit 1/3 of the time around 22 out of 60 sessions. 17 - 2 spin hits
8 - 3 spin hits, 4 - 4 spin hits 3 - 5 spin hits.
2 - 6 spin hits. 1 - 7 spin hits 1 - 8 spin hits 0 - 9 spin hits and only 2 - 10 spin hits
never above 10. but i'm sure that will happen at some point.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on March 30, 2017, 06:36:49 PM
Just had a Brain Click  ::)

I found out that a D' alembert progression also works very well with Palestis and my alternate system.

after every loss raise 1 unit - after a win step 3 back.

Wow grats!  I am a huge fan!!  This is the approach of the IDG.  I have had some significant success using this approach with a single Dozen (12x7 system).  I think my problem there rose from being too aggressive on recovery in the face of successive drawdowns.

Do you think it can be improved by shortening the progression? 

Sorry if you are repeating yourself, but what happens if you miss on the last step, being down slightly over 220 units again?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Rinad on March 30, 2017, 06:52:02 PM


  good job Eddy

your determination is what you have going for yourself.
word of caution; careful not to slowly deviate to uncharted territory and then wonder what the heck happen to my bankroll. (ahah).  been doing just that in the past. your zeal can sometime make you magnetize to play something different and you fall into a quicksand type situation that you cant get out off.
keep on your good work, you are doing great.
Rinad
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 30, 2017, 07:47:40 PM
??? What went wrong? I reached the 10th Level ???

I know, I know. Not again! (Why does this seem to only happen to me)?

Hello everybody, in order to help everyone (including myself), I am currently writing a step by step demonstration on how to play Palestis’ Method, since there has been so much confusion in this thread. I thought the best way to demonstrate it is by playing through a few games, and explaining my reasons for each decision I made. So that the reader can follow along in a clear and precise way.

I do not want to say anything in this demonstration that may be wrong.

Palestis, you mentioned basically TWO methods of play. Both depend on what happens AFTER a streak of dozens.

1) The safer way, where we ALWAYS skip the first trigger after a streak, and play the second trigger.

2) The bold way, where we always PLAY the first trigger after a streak, PROVIDING the dominant streak does not appear in the first trigger.

I was in the process of doing a walk through using both methods. The first 2 games went very well. However, this 3rd game requires a closer examination. I play the SAME EXACT SPINS for BOTH methods, and compare the results. I am playing a very unbiased game, and I am not looking forward for whether or not I would win or lose. I play the same way throughout each game. (i.e., after a zero, I restart the count, then I ALWAYS do this for every zero in the same game.)

Keep in mind, I have a stop-loss of 500 units. Each game goes for 200 spins.

To give you a summery of this 3rd game:

FIRST METHOD:
Always SKIPPING the first trigger after a streak:

Highest Level Reached = 4th level
Highest Bet Made = 8 units
Largest Debt = -14 units


There were a lot of weird spins in this game, but the conservative method did very well. The highest bet at risk was only 8 units! And I was never more than 14 units in the hole at any point.

Now, compare this SAME, EXACT game to this one:

SECOND METHOD:
Always PLAYING the first trigger after a streak, providing the dominant dozen not not appear in the first trigger.

Highest Level Reached = 10th level
Highest Bet Made = 528 units
Largest Debt = -2538 units


This seems IMPOSSIBLE. I have detailed notes as to my important decisions. (I intentionally IGNORED my 500 unit max loss in this 1 game to see how far this would go up the progression before going back to level 1).

I played BOTH games according to my current understanding of Palestis’s Posts. I have examined Paelstis's attached games of his play-thru also, and I think I am doing this correctly. IF I made some kind of mistake in the SECOND METHOD, can someone please point it out? I’ve gone over it several times, and I cannot see where I made my mistake.

BOTH games are attached below.

I use Excel. Since I have my explanation next to most decisons, can someone please add THEIR thoughts to my notes in Excel next to my decisions? Or maybe post them in this thread as to how my thinking process was in error?

FOR CLARIFICATION, this game requires an understanding of Palestis’s Progression (which is displayed in the top left of each document). I don’t comment on the amount I bet, only WHERE I chose to place my bets.

The “BET” column is the TARGET dozen that will be bet for THAT spin.
The “DOZ” column is how much lost or won for each bet placed.
The “$D” is a tally of the current amount won or lost after each WIN, as the game progresses.

Thank you for your help.

PS. Sorry to be the only one who is posting these losses, but so far, every time I've done it something came out of it that benefitted everyone.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on March 30, 2017, 08:01:23 PM
I don't think any of us will mind negative results posted, great job!

I think one question will be, "how likely is it to get similar results from the SKIP method and how does that compare to the likelihood of the NON-SKIP method?".

Excellent work Term!!  Your skills are most valuable!!!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: kav on March 30, 2017, 09:15:05 PM
Excellent work Term, kudos!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: jekhb76 on March 30, 2017, 09:22:55 PM

Just 1 session with real money on Online RNG table.

I wanted to show you all the D' alembert recovery method, but i can't get my alternate system to loose  :-[

* = Triggers
W = Win
Bankroll 500 units
Session Target: 25 units / +26 units Won.
Playing Time: 22:52 - 23:19

Spin 001   5
Spin 002   21
Spin 003   29
Spin 004   34
Spin 005   5  *   Trigger 1   
Spin 006   6  *   Trigger 2   500.00
Spin 007   1  W   -1   +3     502.00
----------------------------------------------
Spin 008   1
Spin 009   30
Spin 010   36
Spin 011   13
Spin 012   12 *   Trigger 1
Spin 013   29
Spin 014   10 *   Trigger 2   502.00
Spin 015   22   -1                 501.00
Spin 016   20   -2                 499.00
Spin 017   35   -3                 496.00
Spin 018   8   -4   +12          504.00
----------------------------------------------
Spin 019   31
Spin 020   14 *   Trigger 1
Spin 021   35
Spin 022   11
Spin 023   16 *   Trigger 2   504.00
Spin 024   16 W   -1   +3     506.00
----------------------------------------------
Spin 025   27 *   Trigger 1
Spin 026   27 *   Trigger 2   506.00
Spin 027   28 W   -1   +3     508.00
----------------------------------------------
Spin 028   7
Spin 029   27
Spin 030   18
Spin 031   3
Spin 032   8
Spin 033   32 *   Trigger 1
Spin 034   23
Spin 035   3
Spin 036   32 *   Trigger 2   508.00
Spin 037   31 W   -1   +3     510.00
----------------------------------------------
Spin 038   30
Spin 039   7
Spin 040   20
Spin 041   16 *   Trigger 1
Spin 042   11
Spin 043   24
Spin 044   17 *   Trigger 2   510.00
Spin 045   7   -1                   509.00
Spin 046   27   -2                 507.00
Spin 047   34   -3                 504.00
Spin 048   14 W   -4   +12   512.00
----------------------------------------------
Spin 049   12
Spin 050   36
Spin 051   17
Spin 052   7
Spin 053   26
Spin 054   21 *   Trigger 1
Spin 055   21 *   Trigger 2   512.00
Spin 056   22 W   -1   +3     514.00
----------------------------------------------
Spin 057   26
Spin 058   9
Spin 059   5
Spin 060   31
Spin 061   20
Spin 062   27 *   Trigger 1
Spin 063   7
Spin 064   25 *   Trigger 2   514.00
Spin 065   13   -1                 513.00
Spin 066   11   -2                 511.00
Spin 067   34 W   -3   +9     517.00
----------------------------------------------
Spin 068   12
Spin 069   23
Spin 070   2  *   Trigger 1
Spin 071   2  *   Trigger 2   517.00
Spin 072   11 W   -1   +3    519.00
----------------------------------------------
Spin 073   34
Spin 074   28
Spin 075   13
Spin 076   20 *   Trigger 1
Spin 077   20 *   Trigger 2   519.00
Spin 078   4   -1                   518.00
Spin 079   13 W   -2   +6     522.00
----------------------------------------------
Spin 080   19
Spin 081   15 *   Trigger 1
Spin 082   25
Spin 083   14 *   Trigger 2   522.00
Spin 084   9   -1                   521.00
Spin 085   5   -2                   519.00
Spin 086   31   -3                 516.00
Spin 087   21 W   -4   +12   524.00
----------------------------------------------
Spin 088   3  *   Trigger 1
Spin 089   33
Spin 090   2  *   Trigger 2   524.00
Spin 091   11 W   -1   +3    526.00
---------------------------------------------- +26 units Won - End of Session!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: jekhb76 on March 30, 2017, 09:49:06 PM
To Reyth:

Your question was; what will happen when we lost the last step (Step 21)?
Well for one, i don't think i will ever see a session that hasn't had a hit before reaching step 21!
That's the same as 7 back to back losses, a one in a lifetime event. Of course it can happen, it's roulette we are talking about, but the odds of it, are one in a few million spins.
But when we have our first hit on step 21, we have bet 231 chips. but we get a return of 63 chips. we are then down at 168 chips. We then move 3 steps backward and start our new trigger bet at step 18. assume we hit the first spin we are then at -132 chips we continue again at step 15. etc etc etc. it will be along run, and can take a few hours before we are back in profit again, but with 1/3 1 spin hits, it is possible. But again, it's highly unlikly that you reach step 21 without a hit. i've tested and played with real money my alternate system for over 10.000 spin now all together and never reached step 12 without a hit (4 back to back losses) step 10 is the highest up till now, and never lost a session.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 31, 2017, 12:51:54 AM
??? What went wrong? I reached the 10th Level ???

I know, I know. Not again! (Why does this seem to only happen to me)?

TERMINATOR
You gonna put me back to work, but I don't mind.
I can only process the numbers manually. I don't know how to import them from excel and make a neat list of the numbers like the one I did by hand in a single sheet. Anyway it doesn't matter.
To be honest this session is the worst session I have ever seen.
But not 10 levels lost. ( that would be 10x3=30 lost spins in a row).
I picked the 1srt trigger that came after a streak with the exception of the trigger that had as target the majority dozen in the streak above it.
I only found 2 level -3 losses and 2 level-2 losses, and another 1    1-2/3 level where the first 2 results were repeats of the dominant dozen in the trigger.
But it was clear from the beginning that those numbers were weird.
If I was in that roulette, using my personal judgment, I would've run as far away from that roulette as I could.
But for testing purposes we can't run away.
Nevertheless it wasn't anywhere near as bad as you found it to be. Certainly a far cry from 10 back to back losses.
At the end, after this madness with those numbers from hell  ( for this system anyway),
there were 7 consecutive hits. To make up for the mess.
Anyway if that's the worst session I will run into,  it's not all that bad. It's certainly better than running into 5 consecutive lost EC bets with Martingale, ( which happens quite often), where recovery would be almost impossible.
The second level-3 loss you see 14-14-34-19-17-33-15 you notice 34 separating 4 M dozens, then 17,15, becomes part of the trigger.  Though you can't make a list of all red flags,( because it will be more confusing than helpful),  some situations require basic common sense.
 Yes we are watching out for consecutive  dozens, but when there are plenty of them separated by one different dozen it rings some bells. We have to be able to observe quite a few XYZ dozens , but in this case they seem to have been rare.  That was the overall summarizing red flag.
In general when you notice things like that you get away from that roulette.
Easy to spot it in a live roulette, not as easy in testing or online.
The bottom line is that I didn't see a level -10 loss (that would be 30 spins lost in a row. Right?)

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 31, 2017, 01:35:58 AM
Quote
I don't know how to import them from excel and make a neat list of the numbers like the one I did by hand in a single sheet.

Well, you just start at the FIRST number in the column. Place the mouse pointer at the first number, then left click the mouse, and hold it pressed. DRAG the mouse pointer all the way to the last number. This will HIGHLIGHT all the spin numbers. then let the mouse button go. Then you just right-click anywhere in the highlighted column, and choose "COPY." then paste it into  your document.

You can also highlight the NEXT column at the same time, so you can easily see which dozen they are in.

Quote
The bottom line is that I didn't see a level -10 loss (that would be 30 spins lost in a row. Right?)

No, not 30 spins in a row. Did you not look at my game and all my notes? I was hoping you could comment on what I did wrong after looking at my notes. Because everything I did was according to your instructions.

But, to answer your question, during that level 10 loss, I had 3 wins, then a 4th win to bring me back to level 1.

When I have time later, I will look at your game you played. Maybe I will post both of our games side by side, in an actual POST, with my explanations of why I did what I did. And you can clarify why you did the moves that you did?

I will ask any questions I have in that post. Okay? Thanks.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 31, 2017, 03:34:22 AM
@ Terminator:
I always considered  that each level is the 3 spins played after the trigger. So when you say a 10 level loss I take it as 30 spins.
And you confirmed that a while ago when you said that you encountered a 7 level loss, and I asked you if that was 21 spins. And you said Yes.
Evidently when you say 10 level loss you mean 10 lost spins in succession. Is that correct?
So that we mean the same thing when we talk about  "levels" Traditionally a level is considered to be the number of spins  you play after a trigger.  If in a sysetm a level is 5 spins after a trigger, 2 levels are 10 spins.
I frequently  have said that the max. losses I encountered so far, are 3 back to back trigger  losses.  or 9 spins. Though  it's rare.
 If you worry about  the 10 level loss and you mean 10 spins, we are not too far apart. I have found 9. ( that is 3 back to back trigger losses).
I didn't study your excel sheet, because you include the progression and I get  a little confused when too many things are together.  But it's not your fault.  Indeed, it looks very professional. But I am inclined  to keep things simple.
My long time testings don't include any progression.
All I am  testing for is to find out the max. number of back to back losses.
As long as they stay 3 levels and under ( that is 9 spins),  any progression can be handled with my B/R. With no risk whatsoever.
It's when I start seeing 4+ back to back losses ( 12 + consecutive spins),  and on a relatively frequent basis,  I will worry about the progression. But in that case,  I would probably throw the system in the garbage.
But so far I haven't seen 4 back to back losses. And that alone keeps me going.
 
As soon as you confirm that a 10 level loss is just 10 spins, the confusion is finally resolved.
PS:
I think I know what led to the confusion aside the word "level"
If you lose 3 back to back triggers, ( 9 spins), and on the next rigger you win on the 3rd spin. I don't see it as an 11 level loss (9 already lost plus the first 2 spins on the next trigger).
Because I take each trigger as a separate entity. Even if it wins on the 3rd spin I consider the entire trigger as a total win. Therefore the first 2 lost spins don't count towards any previous consecutive trigger losses.
Does that clear the confusion?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 31, 2017, 04:26:16 AM
Quote
I always considered  that each level is the 3 spins played after the trigger. So when you say a 10 level loss I take it as 30 spins.

Hi Palestis. I never said I had a 10 level loss. I said I reached the 10th level. The 10th level being: 528-528-1056. I am using the definition of "levels" that you defined earlier in your posts:

LEVEL 1: 1-1-2
LEVEL 2: 2-2-4
LEVEL 3: 4-4-8      
LEVEL 4: 8-8-16   

To Clarify, using the example above, if I lose 8 bets in a row, and WIN on the 9th bet, that would mean the 8 unit bet on level 3 was WON. However, I cannot drop back down to level 1 yet, because I am still at a loss. So you said to repeat level 3 in this case. So, I would make a 4-4-8 bet (level 3), and if I lose all 3 of those bets, move up to level 4. And if I win a bet in level 4, I keep repeating level 4 until a tie or a win, then drop back down to level 1 when I reach that goal.

So, for the above, I would say I reached the 4th level, even though I had a win(s) while climbing to the 4th level.

If you look at the Excel sheet for Game #3 that I played, the 10 level loss began on spin 94 (it's actually spin 90, but in Excel, under the spin column, it's 94). There were 17 losses in a row. Then a win at level 6 (spin 132). Then 13 more losses in a row. Then 3 wins in a row, each at over 1000 units each. Which put me in profit and I dropped back to level 1.

I looked at the game you did, GAME #3, and the first 2 triggers you used do not line up with what you taught me in previous posts. I will address your first 2 triggers in my next post, and explain where my first trigger was. I guess we can start there.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: jekhb76 on March 31, 2017, 05:13:38 AM
to Terminator,

17 and 13 spin losses in a row!
Are you sure about the 17 losses? that means that you are in level 6 and just lost 5 back to back losses !!!!!! I can't look at your excel sheet right now because i'm on my phone, but when i have the time i will look into it. a 4 back to back loss os also very rare if you take all the red flags into consideration. there must have been something very wrong. i will try and help.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 31, 2017, 05:22:10 AM
@ Palestis.

Hey there. I will start with the first of 2 triggers you did in Game #3.

TRIGGER #1:

You used the first 3 spins of this game (6-21-1) for the first trigger:

6
21
1

30
14

And you won with this trigger with the #14.

However, shouldn’t you have skipped the first 6 spins, like you’ve been doing in the other games you replayed for me?

When I asked you to look at one of my earlier games (Game #8, I believe), I used the first 3 spins as my first trigger also. But when you posted your play of this same game, you SKIPPED the first trigger. You explained to me that you did not know the spins that came before the first 3 spins, so you delayed the first trigger for a while before choosing the first trigger.

And in another recent game you replayed, my game #18-b, you waited for 6 spins to pass. Then, you chose spin #7-9 as your first trigger.

So, I played our current Game #3 in the way that you have been playing these games, to be consistent. So I skipped the first 6 spins. Can we agree to start this Game #3 by skipping the first 6 spins, like you have been doing with my other losses?

TRIGGER #2

I have a question as to why you picked this trigger the way you played it.

The spins immediately following the above 5 spins are:

19 M
19 M
17 M

Then you used this as a trigger:

12 L
12 L
16 M

According to your recent post, we CANNOT play this trigger and must skip it, because the Target Dozen (16 M) is the same as the dominant Dozen streak that preceded it (MMM). (At least this is how I understood what you said, and this is how I played this entire game).

So, even though this trigger won for you, again, weren't we supposed to skip this trigger as well? Not only for this reason, but because if we skipped the first 6 spins of this game, this trigger would have been skipped as well.

I explain in my Excel Game #3 where my first trigger was (Excel spin #18, which was 22 M), and the reason WHY. HOWEVER, if I may make a suggestion, how about we play this game starting from the START of what caused me to climb to the 10th level? This will save a lot of time.

The TRIGGER which begins this bizarre climb starts at spin Excel Spin #91 (#87 for real) You can double check how I got to this point in the Excedl document, just to make sure we are on the same page.

For clarification, the spins start here, as follows (spin #91 in Excel):

11 L
26 H
31 H (This is the trigger - LHH)
36 H (bet for L)
26 H (bet for L)
16 M (stop betting, because the first 2 bets are the same as the dominant dozen in the trigger)

etc.

And the above is starting at the first level (1-1-2). It ended up at the 10th level for me (528-528-.
1056), even though I never had to make a 1056 bet, only a 528 unit bet.

I’d like to see how you play this game starting from here, Palestis. Since your first 2 triggers are different than what they should be, the rest of this Game #3 is thrown off by the time you come to this point in the game.

So, if we can focus starting at this point in the game, I could see how you played this sequence  and compare it to my play, to see where the confusion is.

Thanks Palestis!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 31, 2017, 05:29:16 AM
Thank you jekhb76. I very much appreciate all the help I can get.

Like I said, the same game I played where I always played the SECOND trigger after a streak was FINE. I just don't understand how playing the FIRST trigger instead could have such drastic results from the other game.

I'm thinking I misinterpreted one of Palestis's posts again. At least, I HOPE this is the reason. And I just played it wrong.  ::)
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: jekhb76 on March 31, 2017, 07:45:15 AM
@terminator,

hey man, i've just replayed your session, but i have to say, the most spin loss is 7, that's 2 back to back losses. everything else gives me a win before spin 7. it is maybe the way i play palestis version, but i never had a single loss past spin 10 in more then 3 weeks now! like i said before. i included your session below again. these are my betting. take a look. i ignore some flags, but that's just the way i play it. and you know what they say, never change a winning team :)  as you can see i don't believe in virtual losses. when i arive at a table i must be able to play right away. what came before my betting is irelivant.
this may not be true all the way regarding palestis version, but i think i have also some say in this. almost 3 weeks in and not a single lost session. so i must do something right :)

L   
M   Bet
L   
H   
M   Win
---------------
M   
M   
M   
L   
L   
M   Bet
L   
H   
M   Win
-------------------
L   Bet
M   
M   
H   
0
H   
L   Win
--------------------
L   
H   Bet
L   
H   Win
------------------
H   Bet
M   
M   
L   
M   
M   
M   
L   
H   Win
------------------
L   
L   
M   Bet
M   Win
------------------
L   
L   
M   Bet
H   
H   
H   
H   
H   
M   Win
--------------------
L   Bet
H   
H   
M   
L   Win
------------------
H   
M   
L   Bet
M   
L   Win
------------------
H   
H   
H   
M   Bet
H   
M   Win
------------------
H   
H   
H   
H   
M   Bet
M   Win
----------------------
M   
M   
L   Bet
H   
M   
M   
H   
H   
H   
L   Win
------------------
M   
H   Bet
M   
M   
M   
L   
H   Win
-----------------
L   Bet
H   
H   
H   
H   
M   
L   Win
-----------------
L   
L   
H   Bet
H   Win
-----------------
M   
H   Bet
M   
M   
M   
M   
H   Win
-------------------
H   Bet
M   
M   
L   
M   
L   
H   Win
--------------------
M   Bet
L   
L   
H   
H   
H   
M   Win
--------------------
M   
L   Bet
M   
H   
M   
L   Win
-----------------
L   
M   
H   Bet
M   
H   Win
-----------------
M   
L   Bet
H   
H   
H   
H   
L   Win
-----------------
H   
M   
L   Bet
M   
M   
H   
M   
M   
H   
M   
L   Win
---------------
M   
L   Bet
H   
H   
H   
L   Win
---------------
H   
M   
L   Bet
M   
H   
M   
M   
L   Win
----------------
H   
L   
M   Bet
L   
H   
H   
L   
M   Win
----------------
H   
L   Bet
H   
L   Win
---------------
H   Bet
M   
M   
H   Win
------------
L   
M   
H   Bet

M   
H   Win
--------------
L   
L   
M   Bet
H   
H   
M   Win
-----------------
M   
L   Bet
M   
L   Win
-----------------
M   
L   Bet
M   
M   
H   
L   Win
----------------
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on March 31, 2017, 08:18:15 AM
Guys, unless we're all on the same page with regard to the system rules then there are always going to be sequences which are disastrous for one way of playing but work out great for another. It's no use saying after the fact that "I would have played this or that way", same for reverse engineering.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Harryj on March 31, 2017, 09:27:53 AM
Sorry about the delay. I was a little under the weather and couldn't face the effort of touch screen typing. I don't even lime a laptop. Give me a nice big keyboard with chunky mechanical keys.

       First let's look at the DS.  I posted my philosophy, but it seems you want more. If we choose 1high & 1 low DS in each pair, that seems to give the best results on the European wheel. We have 9 possible pairs.
 14..15..16..
 24..25..26..
 34..35..36.
  Obviously we need to cover the whole wheel(except zero), so each DS can only be used once. Ideally the pair we select should be fairly evenly, but, randomly spaced about the wheel. So that no matter where the ball lands it is never far away from our choice. That gives us the best chance of a hit in a random game.
       The pattern I have found best is at least 1 sector of 3 or 4 pockets, with a minimum of isolated pockets.Let's look at the obvious choice chosen by Bayes.
DS 1,4..19.4.21.2./6./23./5.24./1.20./22./3.
DS 2,5.. 25./27./11.30.8./10./9./29.7.28.12./26.
DS 3,6.. 32.15./17.34./13.36./16.33./14.3./18./35.
       As can be seen not perfect but close. Wherevever the ball lands it won't be far from the chosen dozen. Kav you can see there are a couple of sectors of 3 & 4 pockets there. .we can use this to demo actual play.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: dobbelsteen on March 31, 2017, 09:45:28 AM

 I have tried to past my Excel program. That is impossible. This reply is limited to 20000 characters and an Excel program exceed very fast this limit.
 Here a small image of the start of the program.
I am willing to send the program by email.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Harryj on March 31, 2017, 10:48:07 AM
As Bayes has just pointed out. If the tabl3 is f8ghting back and your permanence is going o hell. There is no reason why you should go with it !! Take a break, wait for things to cool down. Th casino will still be there tomorrow.

       Now let's look at progressions. The biggest mistake is to assume the progression is to overpower the casino, and for e a win.WRONG!! the progression is to help you to reduce losses. The object is NOT TO LOSE!! if you can achieve that you are a winner !
    If you can't win in a few spins. Pick another target. Why chase a rainbow that doesn't have a crock of gold but just a driedup carrot. No offence Terminator, but having spent several thousand units working your way up to a bet of 558. How much profit were you g9ing to make ?? I'll ask a similar question of jekb76. Having reached a high and having gone back a few levels a few times before you clear tbe line. What is your profit on the series ? Have you considered just accepting a small loss, and restarting? Chances are that at the end of the day you will be in the same place. Having taken far less risk, with a smaller B/R..

      Having said that, let's get down to the nitty gritty. My posted progression looks quite strong. In fact it is only 9 units, as the base bet is 6u not 1u. So it compares with 1.1.2.2.3./9. I feel that the extra 2 bets gives me 2 levels of safety. I find that I get many fewer 2x back to back losses and 3 is really rare. For intermittent play,  where each trigger is isolated, 3 step level is best. If you are following the flow, and back counting. The 5. Step level seems to work better.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on March 31, 2017, 11:58:05 AM
Harry, I agree that progressions should be used to help you not lose. That's why I think it's madness to use an aggressive progression like 1,1,2 2,2,4 4,4,8... up to 100 units and beyond. My absolute max stake would be no more than 20 units.

If you find you have to exceed this, it just tells you that your bet selection isn't working.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on March 31, 2017, 01:50:46 PM
I base my progressions on % chances of hitting.  I agree that there is no need to raise so massively for a sliver of a single percent increase in chances to hit.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 31, 2017, 02:40:02 PM
# jekhb76

Thank you for playing this game through. I appreciate that, but I agree with Bayes. We need to agree and be consistent with the rules. I have played this game with another method and won also, but the point of me showing this is to test Palestis's System of playing the first trigger.

To he honest, I do not understand your way of playing yet. It is confusing to me. It is too different from the way Palestis is showing us. I am just focusing on Palestis's method as he reveals in this thread.

I will be happy to look at your version at a later time, though.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Harryj on March 31, 2017, 03:14:32 PM
Bayes I firmly agree.
    I now inte d to play through Terminator's permanence from hell.1st using standard dozens. Then DS”dozens" using the same 14,25,36. Pairing you used in your tracker.

1
2
1 target d2
3
2w.  +1. Last 3 numbers 1,3,2. No bet.
2
2
2 nb
1
1
2 target 2
1
3
2w +2. nb all 3 dozens showing.
1
2
2 t1
3
0
3
1w +0 restart count from 0
1t3
3w + 2.  t3
1
3w  +1.  t1
3
2
2
1w. +0. T1
2
2
2
1w.  +0. t1wn2 eg
3
1 w.  +1  t3
1
2
2
1
1L -9. t2.     Win to date +7 = -2,
 The basic outline should now be understandable I intend skipping over the numbers to speed things up.

 t2 w in 1 +2 overall total 0.
t2 w n 2. +1
t3 w n 1. +2
t2 w n 3  +2
t2 w n 4. +0
t2 w n 3. +2
Nb
1
2
1
G
T2 w n 4  +0
T2 w n 2  +1
T3 w n 1. +2
T2 w n 4. +0
T2 w n 1. +2
T3 w n 4  +0
Nb223
T3 w n 1. +2
T2 w n 3. +2
Nb 322
T3 w n 3  +2
Nb133
T1 w n 4. +0
Nb113
T3 w n 1. +2
T1L. +20-9=11
Nb233
T2 w n 1. +2
T2 w n 1. +2
T3 w n 4. +0
Nb211
T2 w n 4. +0
T2 w n 1. +2
T3 w n 3. +2
Nb211
T2 w n 1. +2
T2 w n 2  +1
T3 w n 1. +2
T2 w n 1. +2
T3 w n 2  +1
Nb333
Nb132
Nb122 This long string of Nb is a red flag. We have won a further 16 units to add to the 11 = +27. A good time to head for home. Ourgreastest drawdown is -2. Against a 9 unit bank. However I winll play on. It will need 3 quick losses to break me now.
122
T1 L   -9 27-9=18
T3 w n 4. +0
Nb331
T1 w n 3  +2
Nb232
T2 w n 3. +2
Nb121
T2 w n 4  +0
Nb313
T1 w n 1  +2
T3 w n 1  +2
T1 w n 4. +0
Nb230231 restart from zero.
Nb123
Nb322
T3 L   -9.  18+8-9=17
T2 w n 1. +2
T1 w n 3. +2.  17+4=21 units.

      The flow after that long string of Nb clearly never really recovered.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 31, 2017, 03:28:24 PM
@ HarryJ

Glad you’re feeling better.

I’m going to apologize in advance. I have autism and maybe this is preventing me from understanding some of the things you are saying, Harry. I’m trying to understand what you said in Reply #259, but it was Greek to me. Maybe you can point me to an earlier post if you already explained these things there? So you don’t have to repeat yourself here. Thanks.

When you say “DS”, do you mean “Double Street?” For example, the numbers 1-6 is one DS on the felt?

Quote
If we choose 1high & 1 low DS in each pair,

I lost you. In each pair of what?

Quote
We have 9 possible pairs.
 14..15..16..
 24..25..26..
 34..35..36.

I don’t understand what you mean by 9 possible pairs.

Quote
The pattern I have found best is at least 1 sector of 3 or 4 pockets, with a minimum of isolated pockets.Let's look at the obvious choice chosen by Bayes.
DS 1,4..19.4.21.2./6./23./5.24./1.20./22./3.
DS 2,5.. 25./27./11.30.8./10./9./29.7.28.12./26.
DS 3,6.. 32.15./17.34./13.36./16.33./14.3./18./35.

Did I miss something in this thread? I can’t follow how the above are Double Streets. Sorry.

I reread the posts that Bayes and You posted, when Bayes said, in REPLY #96:

Quote
If we number the DS from 1-6 the possibilities are 12 (leaving aside the standard dozens (1,2), (3,4), (5,6)) :

(1,3), (1,4), (1,5), (1,6)
(2,3), (2,4), (2,5), (2,6)
(3,5), (3,6)
(4,5), (4,6)

I did NOT understand it before, but I think I understand these just now, as I placed it in my reply here. Correct me if I’m wrong but taking the first number (1,3):

Does #1 above refers to DS #1-6 on the felt?
Does #3 above refer to #7-12 on the felt?

And Harry, when you  said, in post #108:

Quote
I prefercto combine DS 1,2,3. with DS 3,4,5.In this way each dozen with include 6 R&B. O&E. H&L.

Would DS 5 be defined as #25-30 (being the 5th Double Street on the felt)? I hope I’m following you correctly?

Quote
       Now let's look at progressions. The biggest mistake is to assume the progression is to overpower the casino, and for e a win.WRONG!! the progression is to help you to reduce losses. The object is NOT TO LOSE!! if you can achieve that you are a winner !

Yes, I agree. But Palestis has said that by following his method and Red Flags, we will never reach certain levels (once in a lifetime event). Or that reaching certain levels, like level 4, is rare. But I am finding that I am reaching these levels quite often in my testing, by following his methods as I understand them.

So, I figured I must be doing something wrong, or I am misunderstanding something .

Quote
    If you can't win in a few spins. Pick another target. Why chase a rainbow that doesn't have a crock of gold but just a driedup carrot. No offence Terminator, but having spent several thousand units working your way up to a bet of 558. How much profit were you g9ing to make ??

I would not have played like this in a real game, Harry. I stated that I ignored my stop -loss for that 1 game, to test how far up the progression it would go, since I was under the impression that I could not lose that many times in a row, if using Palestis’s method and following his red flags.

Actually, for that particular game, I won 631 units in 200 spins, because of how high the level 10 bets were. But, like I said, I would never do this in live play, and would have stopped long before that point normally, but I was testing how far up it would go if I followed Palestis’s advice.

Quote
Having said that, let's get down to the nitty gritty. My posted progression looks quite strong. In fact it is only 9 units, as the base bet is 6u not 1u. So it compares with 1.1.2.2.3./9.

Harry, I went back through all 18 pages of this thread, and could not find the progression you are talking about, 1-1-2-2-3. The only progression I can find that you posted is...are you referring to your Post #195 when you said:

(1)3...3....6....6....18....12
(2)4...4....8...14...24....10
(3)5...5...10..24...30.....6
(4)6...6...12..36...36.....0
(5) 9...9..18..54...54.....0 or (5)8...8...16..52...48...-4

Thank you for claryfying these questions, Harry. And feel free to link to any previous posts you made to avoid repeating them here.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Harryj on March 31, 2017, 03:32:41 PM
If you followed that post you would have seen how the flow gradually got worse as the game proceeded. It could have ended in half the time with the same profit. On the other hand playing on showed that the method can hold it's own in adverse conditions.

   I have spent my time playing strong and expensive progressions, but I always came back to short progressions whose length was in balance with their odds. eg. 3 steps for an EC. 5 steps for a dozen. 12+ for a single DS etc. More steps get expensive quickly and recovery becomes difficult.
      Harry
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 31, 2017, 04:04:58 PM
Thank you for playing through, HarryJ. I am very interested in a safer progression such as the one you suggested.

Can you explain the terminology of the abbreviations you used in post #265?

Such as

Quote
T3 w n 1. +2

Does T3 mean you target the 3rd dozen? w = win. Don't know what "n" is. Even though nb = No Bet.

Thanks Harry!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Harryj on March 31, 2017, 04:35:22 PM
Hi Terminator,
       Sorry if my posts confuse you. I have been playing this game so long I tend to forget that others have less experience.
   DS are in fact double streets.
  Natural dozens are the 3 on the layout.1-12. .13-24. 25-36.
  Unnatural dozens are 12 numbers that are linked to form a dozen. eg. 2DS.

  Natural DS are 1-6..7-12.. 13-18..19-24..25-.30..31-36
  Unnatural DS are 4-9..10-15..16-21..22-27..28-33.
     Personally I ignore the unnatural DS.

   There are 2 DS of 6 numbers that are paired together to form an unnatural dozen.
    If we pair DS 1-6 with DS 19-24 and DS 7-12 with DS 25-30 and DS 13-18 with DS 31-36 we form 3 unnatural dozens. That have the same odds as the natural dozens. 

        There are 9 possible pairs of DS that are made up of high and low DS. The advantage of this arrangement is that the dozens now have an equal number of red and black numbers odd and even numbers and high and low numbers. Natural dozens 1 and 3 consist of all low numbers or ll high numbers.

      Mark off the numbers (pockets) around the wheel for DS pairs 1(1-6) and 4(19-24) you will see that they correspond to the string of numbers that follows 14. In other words they are the order that they appear around the wheel. You can do the same exercise for the other 2DS pairs. The idea is to show how the numbers are arranged around the wheel. Showing that any result will always be close to one of your numbers. Givi g you a good chance of getting a hit.

   There are 15 possible "dozens" that can be formed by pairing the 6 natural DS. They are.
 (1-2)(1-3)(1-4)(1-5)(1-6)
 (2-3)(2-4)(2-5)(2-6)
 (3-4)(3-5){3-6)
 (4-5)(4-6)
 (5-6)
    If you remove the natural dozens(1-2)(3-4)(5-6) you are left with 12 pairs.
The important thing to remember is that when you form unnatural dozens you can only use each DS once. Otherwise your 3 dozens won't complete the wheel.
      The questions in the later part of your post can all be answered yes. So I hope itvis very clear now. This may seem a little complex, but you need to understand completely if you arevto succeed.
     Regards.....
 Harry
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 31, 2017, 04:49:16 PM
@ HarryJ.

Thank you, crystal clear now, as far as "pairs" and dozens.

So, you ignore the unnatural dozens, and only play the 15 "pairs" of natural dozens?

 (1-2)(1-3)(1-4)(1-5)(1-6)
 (2-3)(2-4)(2-5)(2-6)
 (3-4)(3-5){3-6)
 (4-5)(4-6)
 (5-6)

(Or do you only play 12 pairs?)

Okay, I follow you so far. But now the question follows, how do you determine, based upon previous spins, which of these "pairs" to bet on? It's not as simple as LMH now.

Also, can you repost your progression again? it starts 1-1-2-2-3. What do we do after the 5th bet is lost? Thank you.

Is this related to your other progression:

(1)3...3....6....6....18....12
(2)4...4....8...14...24....10

If so, I am having a problem making the connection between the two.

Thanks!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on March 31, 2017, 04:53:44 PM
        There are 9 possible pairs of DS that are made up of high and low DS. The advantage of this arrangement is that the dozens now have an equal number of red and black numbers odd and even numbers and high and low numbers. Natural dozens 1 and 3 consist of all low numbers or ll high numbers.

Nice analysis! :D

Another profound benefit of splitting up a larger "pre-made" selection!

"Betting a 12 numbers is always the same regardless of how you bet it."

(https://68.media.tumblr.com/5552543d9915419c4944746ea5f09d98/tumblr_o5gs6l4n431tq4of6o1_400.gif)
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 31, 2017, 05:05:28 PM
@ HarryJ

Quote
There are 9 possible pairs of DS that are made up of high and low DS.

I understood when you said 15 pairs, and when you subtract the natural dozen, you get 12 pairs. But I might need a little clarification on the 9 possible pairs  of High Low Doz. In other words, when you take out the 3 natural dozen, you are left with 12 pairs. And out of these 12 pairs, 9 of them are made up of High and Low?

Okay, I think I follow.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on March 31, 2017, 06:00:40 PM
Okay, I follow you so far. But now the question follows, how do you determine, based upon previous spins, which of these "pairs" to bet on? It's not as simple as LMH now.

Actually, it is that simple. You could think of LMH each being made up of 2 DS's. L = DS1 (1-6) + DS2 (7-12), M = DS3 (13-18) + DS4 (19-24), H = DS5 (25-30) + DS6 (31-36).

To play any other set of "dozens", just take any of the other possible pairs and combine them. e.g. to take the pairs used in my tracker, "dozen" X could consist of DS1 + DS4, dozen Y could be DS2 + DS5, and dozen Z could be DS3 + DS6. All the DS's are represented and you have 3 "dozens" X, Y, and Z which you can track in just the same way as the standard dozens.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 31, 2017, 06:03:13 PM
@ Harry J

Okay, I'm following along with your Game #3 play now. It took me a while to understand, but I understand your betting method now, at least for the first 5 bets: 1-1-2-2-3. Not sure what to do after the 5th bet yet.

I followed your play up until spin #41

AT spin #40, which was roulette #3, you said:

Quote
1L -9. t2.     Win to date +7 = -2,
 The basic outline should now be understandable I intend skipping over the numbers to speed things up.

So, you bet t2 next, and won in 1 spin. This is roulette #23. Which brought your total to 0 units. I understand this so far. Which is why you said:
Quote
t2 w in 1 +2 overall total 0.

Now, after this, you bet t2 again. Starting with roulette spin #29. And, if I follow you, you said you won in 2 spins? When you said:

Quote
t2 w n 2. +1

I am lost here, because the next 5 spins were:

29
34
28
35
34

Which were a loss for me. What am I missing? So, I cannot follow your game passed this point. I'll wait for your clarification, Harry.

Also, if you lose the first 5 bets of 1-1-2-2-3, it seems you repeat this same betting progression on your next bet. Is this correct?

Thanks!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 31, 2017, 06:13:01 PM
@ Bayes:

Quote
"dozen" X could consist of DS1 + DS4, dozen Y could be DS2 + DS5, and dozen Z could be DS3 + DS6.

Thanks Bayes, I do understand this part. It makes sense. And I follow you. So, is this all there is? if so, issue settled. Thanks.

However, my confusion though, is how do the  15 "pairs" of natural dozens fit into the above?

 (1-2)(1-3)(1-4)(1-5)(1-6)
 (2-3)(2-4)(2-5)(2-6)
 (3-4)(3-5){3-6)
 (4-5)(4-6)
 (5-6)

We do not have to worry about betting on (1-3) above, for example? Or are the 15 pairs above for when someone wants to combine their own Dozens, other than the example you gave above? Thanks.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Harryj on March 31, 2017, 06:38:12 PM
Let's deal with the progression 1st. The machineI play on has a minimum of 5 units which can be made up of 5 bets of 1 unit. The smallest bet I can make on each DS is therefore 3 units. That is why my progression starts 3..3. 11223 is as near as I can get starting with 1 unit. It is really the same  progression. It just makes it easier for other players to understand.

   There are 6 sets of DS dozens that allow the high low arrangement.

14..25..36.
14..26..35
15..24..36
15..26..34
16..24..35
16..25..34

     There really isn't a great deal of difference in performance. It is mainly a matter of choosing one that works for you.
     Or you can make a whole load of wheel diagrams and compare the patterns formed and do endless tests to find which pattern works best. I have done this and I felt that 14..25..36. Or 16..24..35 semed to give the best results.

     The 5 bets are the complete progression. As I showed I don't need to increase the basic bet. The natural W/L ratio recovers losses without increasing the bet. If a progression is lost I just accept the loss and continue with the same progression. Which is in effect a flat bet.
     If plenty of B/R is available using a second or a 3rd level could be used. If I was to play professionally I would definitely use a second larger progression.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: jekhb76 on March 31, 2017, 09:15:44 PM

1. bet 1 unit
2. bet 1 unit
3. bet 2 units

If the first bet wins, profit: 2 units.
If the second bet wins, profit: 1 unit.
If the third bet wins, profit: 2 units.
In each of these cases the progression begins new with the sequence: 1 - 1 - 2!

If the first 3 bets are lost, the next bet is determined as follows:with a negative balance between 4 to 9 units the balance is divided by 2,with a negative balance between 10 to 21 units the balance is divided by 3,with a negative balance between 22 to 100 units the balance is divided by 4,With a negative balance over 100 units the balance is divided by 5.

If the result of the division is not a whole number, then this number is always rounded up.

The progression starts always with a bet size of 1 unit!· 

Bet No. 1: 1 unit, in case of a win next bet 1 unit, in case of a loss:· 
Bet No. 2: 1 unit, in case of a win next bet 1 unit, in case of a loss:· 
Bet No. 3: 2 units, in case of a win next bet 1 unit, in case of a loss: 4 : 2 = 2· 
Bet No. 4: 2 units, in case of a win next bet 1 unit, in case of a loss 6 : 2 = 3· 
Bet No. 5: 3 units, in case of a win next bet 1 unit, in case of a loss 9 : 2 = 4.5 =5· 
Bet No. 6: 5 units, in case of a win next bet 1 unit, in case of a loss 14 : 3 = 4.66 = 5·  Bet No. 7: 5 units, in case of a win next bet 4 : 2 = 2 units, in case of a loss 19 : 3 = 6.33 = 7
Bet No. 8: and so fourth...

Now i've come up when a safe 20 step progression.

Bet 1   1
Bet 2   1
Bet 3   2
Bet 4   2
Bet 5   3     
6   5     
7   5     
8   7 
9   7     
10  9     
11  11     
12  14     
13  17     
14  21     
15  21     
16  25     
17  30     
18  36     
19  43     
20  50     Sum 310 units

Without going into too much detail at this stage, say if you won on Bet 10, and you will have -15 units. You will experience a net loss but then you assign that loss to the next equivalent bet that measures that sum, in this case Bet 6 and play on.

In the area in which I specialise there is an 83% chance of a successful strike in the first 4 attempts of the bet.So there is an improving chance of a closure of the net loss quite quickly as time goes on.

As always with this sort of approach you look to nullify the debt if possible within 2-3 attempts. Not always possible but this progression is cleverly designed to assist in that cause.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on March 31, 2017, 09:24:56 PM
@ Terminator.
Now that we cleared the LEVEL issue we can work on the progression.
At least I am now at ease, that we don't multiply your levels by 3. When you said 10 levels I was in shock, because I thought all along that it was 30 lost spins in succession.  Where a progression would  require a B/R only Bill Gates could afford.
I may have overlooked my rules at some points, in testing your numbers, but that shouldn't penalize the system so harshly.  One oversight, or a slight change in version should not render the system ineffective. 
I said repeatedly that once in a great while 3 back to back losses do happen. (that is 9 spins).
That is while testing. 
But in real play in a casino, we should keep our eyes open for situations that don't look right.
And those numbers from your test GAME #3 certainly raise eyebrows, because it was obvious that there was no sufficient mix of all dozens in XYZ or YXZ or ZYX form.
Instead,  there was many streaks of 2 dozens, and when the target dozen was to be bet on, it changed to streaks of another set of 2 dozen, excluding the target dozen.
These are things we have to watch out for, and move on to another roulette, or if you want to stay in one table, take a break until things become more normal.

In the case of 2 back to back losses (that's 6 spins) I don't see a problem as far as risk is concerned.
Anybody can handle 6 lost spins if the 3rd trigger is to be won.
it is when you run into 3 back to back losses that can be problematic.
I think after 2 back to back losses the tune must change to the recovery mode. Just to be safe.
Or raise the starting chip for the next few triggers until you are close to recovery .
But at the same time, while doing this you must get more picky about the triggers.
Like only pick triggers YXX immediately following  XYZ. Someone mentioned this idea and I find it brilliant, and it works.
Or you can undergo a VIRTUAL loss of an entire trigger before you bet the next one.
If 3 back to back losses are rare, and you lose the first one, (virtually), it is highly likely that the next will be won. And with a higher starting chip, recovery will be quicker.
But I am not an expert in progression. What I have concluded in testing this system, is that 3 back to back losses are rare and haven't seen anything beyond that.
Based on that we should concentrate on progression.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: juice on March 31, 2017, 11:47:22 PM
Pales, I'm sure glad it was you who posted this thread and not me! It's turned into a full time job!  Lol, keep it going-
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 01, 2017, 01:12:10 AM
@ HarryJ

Okay, it's becoming more clearer now. So, if I use Palestis's Dozen of XYZ, and I used your progression of 1-1-2-2-3. And I lost the 5th bet, that loss is just accepted. Then then next time I bet, I will start again with 1-1-2, etc.  I understand that.

However, in your case of your DS's, since you cannot put 1 unit down on your dozen, your base bet is 3 units each on both DS. Correct?

So, correct me if I'm wrong:

You bet on X, and this bet is 3 units on 1 DS, and 3 units on another DS. (Compared to the 1-1-2-2-3 progression, this is the first "1")

Bet is lost.

Now, you place 4 units on 1 DS, and 4 units on another DS. Is this correct? (Is this is equivalent to the second "1" in the 1-1-2-2-3 progression?)

Bet is lost.

Now, you place 5 units on 1 DS, and 5 units on another DS Is this correct? Is (Is this is equivalent to the first "2" in the 1-1-2-2-3 progression?).

Thanks for clarifying, Harry.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on April 01, 2017, 01:15:26 AM
Harry said you can use a steeper progression to recover if you are focused on generating a primary income or substantial amount of winnings.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Harryj on April 01, 2017, 08:17:29 AM

@Terminator,
                You seem to have got the progression difference right, Let's look at your question about play.
   At the 1st loss the sequence is(we were betting 3)
1
15
13
6
3L no hit in dozen 3.Last 3 spins 13.6.3 dozens 2.1.1.target doz 2
23w target now doz 2(6.3.23)
29
24w in 2 spins target now doz 3(23,29,24)
28w t now doz 2(29,24,28)
35
34
13w. t now doz 2(35,34,13)
  etc.
     I "backcount" ie use the last 3 numbers spun after a win or a loss. I believe this is important to maintain the flow. Which is an important part of this method. Pal plays intermmitently so only uses the flow to indicate "red flags" we adjusted the play to accommodate this. So he could play his normal style.
       Regards....Harry
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 01, 2017, 09:35:52 AM
Some more results playing all 3 options at the same time on the tracker. Still not seen any consecutive losses > 4. I was using the Holloway progression and there was a tough stretch on the columns with the stake on them getting up to 19 units, but in the end made an overall profit of 38 units. I think the standard progression would have suffered badly playing the columns in this sequence, but haven't checked it.

p.s. you might need to rename the attached file with the .csv extension to open it in excel.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Harryj on April 02, 2017, 03:00:46 PM
Now to play through the same numbers using DS.14.25.36. as dozens. I'll use a slightly different format which should be easier to follow.

141. Nb all same doz
534. Nb all 3 doz
432. Nb all 3 doz
231. Nb all 3 doz
641. T3 w n 1 +2
413. T3 w n 1.+2
133. T1 w n 5.+0
521. T1 w n 2.+1
161. T3 w n 2.+1
153. Nb
332. T2 w n 5.+0
315. Nb
113. T3 w n 1.+2
133. T1 w n 1.+2
331. T1 w n 1.+2
311. T3 w n 5.+0
456. Nb
631. T1 w n 3.+2
664. T1 w n 1.+2
641. T3 w n 2.+1
153.. Nb
231. Nb
565. T3 w n 1.+2
653. T2 w n 3.+2
645. Nb
565. T3 w n 2.+1
543. Nb
331. T1 L. Win to date 22-9=13

366. Nb
513. Nb
644. T3 w n 1.+2
443. T3 w n 3.+1
316. T1 L. Win to date 16-9=7
665. T2 w n 3.+2
312. Nb
156. Nb
363. Nb
444. Nb
563. T2 w n 2.+1
332. T2 w n 2.+1
242. T1 w n 2.+1
254. T1 w n 1.+2
541. T2 w n 1.+2
412. T2 w n 3.+2
665. T2 L.  Win to date 18-9=9

136. T1 w n 2.+1
641. T3 w n 3.+2
146. T3 w n 3.+2
453. Nb
155. T1 w n 3.+2
561. Nb
631. T1 w n 4.+0
364. T1 w n 5,+0
324. Nb
265. T3 w n 1.+2
656. T2 w n 1.+2
562. T3 w n 1.+2
626. T2 w n 2.+1
632. T2 w n 2.+1
245. T1 w n 1.+2
454. T2 w n 4.+0
162. Nb
416. T1 w n 3.+2
524. T1 w n 2.+1
454. T2 L.   Win to date 29-9=20

643. T1 w n 3.+2
524. T1 w n 5.+0
351. Nb
136. T1 w n 2.+1
654. Nb
423. Nb
232. T3 w n 1.+2
323. T2 w n 2.+1
335. T2 w n 1.+2 EOS
 Total win plus 28.
    The ability of the W/L ratio to more than recover without a bet increase is clearly demonstrated.

       Harry

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 02, 2017, 03:45:19 PM
@ HarryJ
Thanks for clarifying your play, Harry. I see where the discrepancy is now. You accidentally wrote the wrong number that was spun from my Game #3.

Post #280:
Quote
23w target now doz 2(6.3.23)
29
24w in 2 spins target now doz 3(23,29,24)
28w t now doz 2(29,24,28)
35
34

It was actually number 34 that was spun, not 24. And this sequence would have been a 5 spun loss, because all the numbers were H (from dozen 3). It's a simple mistake if you wrote these numbers by hand...no big deal.

Anyway, I replayed my Game #3, using Palestis's Dozen's, but using YOUR progression as used above, and I ended up with a 3 unit win at the end (instead of the 21 unit win from the game that had the wrong number). But, a win is a win!

Also, the longest streak of losses was only 7 in a row (11 unit loss), and THAT hardly did any damage (since you do not increase your bets)! Much better than 17 losses in a row with Palestis's Progression, and another 13 losses in a row after that! That resulted in a 2,538 unit loss, which was my biggest debt I reached in that game.

Wow, look at that difference! 11 units vs. 2538 units. Unbelievable. Of course, we must remember that you had 2 extra betting spins of "insurance". So, whereas you made 5 bets in a row before restarting, Palestis's progression made 3 bets in a row. I do see the positive aspect of those 2 extra bets, Harry. Cool.

I have attached my game here. I'm pretty sure I understand now. If you want to quickly double check it, I highlighted in YELLOW the point in the game where the mistaken number was, so you don't have to bother checking my play BEFORE that point (since it lines up with your game up to that point), just the portion from the highlighted number to the end of my game.

Thanks Harry!

I haven't read your most recent post yet, where you use different Dozens, but I'll do that next and replay another game with both your method and progression. I look forward to it! Thank you.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 02, 2017, 06:31:21 PM
Well, I replayed Game #3 with Harry's Dozens AND progression, with the corrected number, and it was pretty close to what you arrived at, Harry, 24 units!

Here is a comparison of the two games played, both using a different dozen, but the same progression. It reveals a lot!

FIRST GAME:
Using Palestis's DOZEN, but Harry's Progression:

Most Losses in a Row            7   
Largest Debt?                       -10   units
Highest Amount Ahead         9   units

Wins =         38
Losses =      78

Total                  
3 units won         

SECOND GAME:
Using both Harry's DOZEN and Harry's Progression:

Most Losses in a Row            7   
Largest Debt?                        0   units
Highest Amount Ahead         25   units

Wins =         47
Losses =      73

Total                  
24 units won            

In Summery:

The biggest losing streaks were identical for both games, 7 losses in a row.
I never went below my starting chips with Harry's Dozens, but was in Debt 10 units with Palestis's Dozens.
Highest amount ahead during game was 9 units using Palestis's Dozen, and 25 units ahead with Harry's.

But the amazing thing to look at is the total individual wins versus losses. Now, playing the dozens, we should expect for every 1 win we will have 2 losses. That is the odds (not including the zero, of course).

So, the first game we had 38 wins. So, we should expect 76 losses. We actually had 73 losses, which is about the expected outcome.

BUT the second game, we had 47 wins using Harry's Dozens. We should expect 94 losses. However, we only had 73 losses!

In other words, the longest losing streaks were IDENTICAL at 7 losses in a row. And the amount of individual losses were identical, 73 losses. However, the amount of wins were greatly different! 47 versus 38. This is roughly 25% more wins!!! Simply by using Harry's Dozens IN PLACE OF the Roulette Felt's chosen Dozen.

I will definitely be testing more games this way to see if the win /loss ratio is this pronounced in most games played.

Oh, and as a side note, compared to my ORIGINAL Game #3 loss, using Palestis's Dozens and progression (where I reached the 10th level and had a 2,538 unit debt at one point), I had only 12 individual wins. So, we should expect 24 losses. However, I actually had a whopping 59 losses! That is 100% more losses than expected! That is tantamount to saying for every 1 win, I had 4 losses! Instead of the expected 1 win to 2 losses.

Maybe this is why Casinos choose their own Dozens for us to bet on...sneaky bastards.

Harry, I have a question. Other than what you already mentioned, do you use any other Red Flags? What are your stop/loss and stop/win amounts? I believe you already stated you would stop if you lost 20 units, correct? What determines when you stop while winning?

Also, a trigger question. Let's say you made a bet and won. The previous 3 bets are Doz 1,2,and 3, so we go to the next 3 spins. Which are Doz 1,1,1. No bet. Now we go to the next 3, which are Doz 1,1,2.

QUESTION. Would you bet for Doz 2? OR, would you wait for the 5 streak of Doz 1 to END before looking at the next 3 spins for a trigger? (I presume you'd bet the doz 2).

Thanks for sharing this, Harry!

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on April 02, 2017, 06:55:53 PM
I believe the difference in stats is, in a significant part, due to the fact that Harry has added 2 additional steps to the progression? 

Regardless of what "mentally bootstrapped" critics claim, the longer your progression, the greater chances of getting a hit within the progression series.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on April 03, 2017, 01:58:04 AM
This system is basically HARRYJ's discovery.
 I mentioned to him about working on a system using only one dozen bet, and he came up with the trigger YXX. Then I went to work testing.
After long term tests it proved to be a very effective system.
Beyond that,  the system can be adapted to everyone's playing style. Harry likes to sit in one table and remain there for his entire session. Therefore he doesn't have too many choices that the  monitoring of several tables provide. So he has to bet more frequently and take advantage of every betting opportunity. (following the flow).
     Progression is not only a personal choice, it has a lot to do with the starting minimum chip.
Where I am,  the min. chip is $10 in 2 tables and the rest are $15 and $25. . Weekends, and when there are more crowds,  it goes to $15 and $25.
Therefore a 5 step progression can be a serious investment. Especially if one level (5 spins) is lost.
For that reason I limit it to 3 steps. Starting with 1-1-1.50 ( like $10-10-15). instead of 10-10-20.
But since I have lesser chances in 3 steps than in 5 steps, I have to increase the certainty of a hit.
   And there are several ways to do that. At the cost of time.
One is to let the first trigger lose virtually (all 3 steps). Then bet the next 2  triggers.
Since 3 back to back trigger losses are rare, one of the next 2 triggers should result in a hit.
Someone I passed the system on to, has played 45 sessions and won all 45. 10 chips win in every session. Takes him about 4 HOURS to win 10 chips. But his certainty is 100%. 
Another way is to let the first bet lose virtually and then only bet 2 steps to complete the 3-bet cycle.
Or lose the first 2 steps virtually, and then bet 3 spins to complete a 5 bet cycle.
If you are patient, there are many ways to manipulate the bets to increase certainty.
Another method:    If you lost one level (3 spins), you can pick a much stronger trigger the next time. That is  XYZ (3 dozens), immediately  followed by YXX and not XYX or XXY.
This trigger scheme has been tested, and rarely produces  more than 2 trigger losses.
The majority of the time you  win in the first trigger.
Once you recover you go back to your regular betting style.
@ Terminator.
I understand that you need to have a pre chosen formula to test the system using excel.
If you test for along time you will eventually know where you stand, using standardized actions.
At the same time, you will eventually find out what needs to be done to eliminate tough situations that you run into.
Then you can adjust your actions whenever needed.
You just have to explore the various schemes that eliminate possible disasters whenever they are about to happen. But you have to do that before they can happen.
Some of the defenses are  described above.
You or anybody else could very well come up with something even  better.
It is worth the time to devote in exploring it. You just have to think harder.
Frequent betting is not always the best solution. 
Especially when you deal with high value chips.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: kav on April 03, 2017, 09:39:42 AM
If you know me you know I'm all about recaps, summaries and clear explanations.
I will try to recap here the progressions that were proposed for the Dozen bet. Btw, a bet that interests me very much. Please feel free to correct me or add more detail I may have missed.

Palestis progression (Martingale [1-1-1,5] + D'Alembert [up as you lose]):
2 2 3   
4 4 6
8 8 12
16 16 24
32 32 48
On a Loss you go up the ladder, on a win you go down the ladder
But Palestis also says:
Quote
You don't really have to climb up so abruptly.
After a trigger loss or 2 back to back losses, you can start the new trigger with a slightly higher chip.
And keep it for the next few triggers, until you recovered completely and/or made a profit. Then you revert back to the usual starting chip.
Now the progression is a little blurry....

Bayes (Holloway progression):
1,1,1,1,1,2,2,2,2,3,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,7,8,9,10,12,14,16,18,20,22,25,28
Reset on a new high, or go back 2 steps on a win.

Harry's progression:
1 1 2 2 3
Quote
The 5 bets are the complete progression. As I showed I don't need to increase the basic bet. The natural W/L ratio recovers losses without increasing the bet. If a progression is lost I just accept the loss and continue with the same progression. Which is in effect a flat bet.
     If plenty of B/R is available using a second or a 3rd level could be used. If I was to play professionally I would definitely use a second larger progression.
What would be those progressions?

jek's progression Martingale/divisor):
First 3 steps are
1. bet 1 unit
2. bet 1 unit
3. bet 2 units
Quote
If the first 3 bets are lost, the next bet is determined as follows:with a negative balance between 4 to 9 units the balance is divided by 2,with a negative balance between 10 to 21 units the balance is divided by 3,with a negative balance between 22 to 100 units the balance is divided by 4,With a negative balance over 100 units the balance is divided by 5.
If the result of the division is not a whole number, then this number is always rounded up.

From the above, I would go with the Holloway progression as more conservative, or maybe Harry's IF I were sure there is an advantage in the betting trigger.
The reason is that I have seen a dozen appear 1 time in 30 spins in live play. And to tell you the truth I'm not convinced that Palestis and Harry's bet selection can improve so much the non-appearance limits. Although I definitely like the stop-restart-later aspect of their play.

I have my own ideas about a dozen progression, but I haven't done the exact math yet to be definitive. Roughly it would be something like this:
1 1 1 1 1
2 2 2 2 2
3 3 3 3
4 4 4
5 5 5
6 6 6
7 7 7
8 8 8
9 9 9
10 10 10
Reset on a new high, go back 2 steps on a win.

Further rules to make it even safer:
If you reached level 5 or above you end the progression not on a new high, but when you minimize your loss equal to the max step you reached. For example if you reached the 6 6 6 step, you end the progression with 6 units loss. You add the losses to the next attack, which starts at level 2.
 
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 03, 2017, 12:09:53 PM
I don't like fixed progressions, preferring to adjust stakes according to (mainly) where I am in relation to my current target, how the session is going, etc. So with that in mind I've changed the progression in the tracker to a simple list of numbers increasing by 1, D'Alembert style. The default is to move up by 1 on a loss and come down 2 on a win, but this can be overridden at any time by highlighting a step. You get a "preview" of what the resulting bank will be using that step, given either a Win/Loss. e.g. in the screenshot the dozen progression has 3 units highlighted, and under the list you see the figures 39/30, meaning that if you choose this stake and win, the bank will be increased to 39 units (33 + 3*2), but if you lose it will be reduced to 30 units (33 - 3).

(http://i65.tinypic.com/33yoowz.png)

Regarding targets, I like to aim for an average of 1 unit every 7 spins. That might seem conservative, but if you were to make that flat-betting on a consistent basis it would represent about a 14% edge (1/7 ~ 0.143), but since we're not flat betting the actual ROI will be less, sometimes a lot less.  :)

Personally I find it useful to know where I am in relation to my target at all times; it's helpful when choosing the next stake. so I'll add an indicator for this which increments a count once every 7 spins.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 03, 2017, 12:10:59 PM
@ Palestis

Quote
I understand that you need to have a pre chosen formula to test the system using excel.

It’s not a matter of a pre-chosen formula. It is a matter of being consistent with the rules of your system, Palestis. No offense, but every time I showed you a losing session of mine, you would change the way you play it, and violate your own rules. And when I point this out to you, you say something like:

Post #278
Quote
I may have overlooked my rules at some points, in testing your numbers, but that shouldn't penalize the system so harshly.


I believe that consistency is very important. Or, as Bayes said in post #258:

"Guys, unless we're all on the same page with regard to the system rules then there are always going to be sequences which are disastrous for one way of playing but work out great for another. It's no use saying after the fact that "I would have played this or that way", same for reverse engineering."

I cannot help but feel that you are taking my lost games, and are reverse engineering them to make wins out of them. Maybe you are not doing this intentionally, but why not be consistent with your own rules when replaying them?

You keep making the claim that 3 back to back losses are rare. Yet, in my testing, this is actually very common, if I use your methods with all your red flags, as stated in your first post.

Quote
One oversight, or a slight change in version should not render the system ineffective.

But, one small change DOES have a huge impact, Palestis. I played TWO versions of this game. The first one was by playing your method of SKIPPING the first trigger after a 3+ repeating dozen. This did very well! Then, the SECOND game I played exactly the same way, except I played the first trigger, and it lost over 2500 units at one point. This is scary.

Also, when you replayed this game, by starting at a different place and playing differently than your own rules, you end up playing different triggers which drastically alters the game itself.

Quote
You just have to explore the various schemes that eliminate possible disasters whenever they are about to happen. But you have to do that before they can happen.
Some of the defenses are  described above.

Before they happen? Well, maybe you, or someone else, can point out to me, specifically, what I should have done different in my game #3, starting when I had that long losing streak. I also used your YXX safeguard several times, to no avail. And virtual betting would not have helped that much, if I waited for a streak of 3 losses virtually (losing one level) before betting, starting at spin #90, then I still would have had 14 individual losses in a row after that (instead of 17).

Besides, I cannot use a virtual betting method, so skip that. I will be kicked off of my online play if I wait too long before betting anyway.

I have attached the point in my Game #3 where I eventually reached a level 10 progression level. All the spins BEFORE this point were normal, and I was winning a lot. You claim that 3 back to back losses are rare if we use your method and red flags, so what am I missing?  I am playing the way you have suggested, and I DID get many back to back loses.

Here are my comments I made in that game (plus some new ones). Maybe you can show me where I did not follow your red flags or methods correctly?

Game: #3, starting from spin #90.

Spin - Dozen - Target - Amount won/lost] - Comments

11   L                  Notice the YXX trigger here.   
26   H                     
31   H                     
36   H   l   -1               
26   H      -1            Streak of H's
16   M         We play this 1st trigger, because it does not contain any H's from the streak. Notice YXX.
3   L                     
11   L                     
1   L   m   -2               
30   H      -2               
31   H      -2               
14   M                     
32   H                     
13   M                     
21   M   h   -4               
20   M      -4               
22   M                  Streak of M's.
27   H                  First trigger of HHM we skip, because we'd have to bet M
33   H                  HMM we play, because M is not the target. Notice the YXX.
17   M                     
18   M                     
11   L   h   -4               
23   M      -8               
7   L      -8               
28   H                     
20   M                  Another YXX trigger.   
4   L                     
11   L                     
33   H   m   -8               
35   H      -16               
25   H      -16            Streak of H's
15   M                  This MML trigger has no H's, so we bet.
14   M                     
5   L                     
14   M   l   -16               
32   H      -32               
23   M      -32               
1   L                     
4   L                     
22   M                     
35   H   m   -32               
24   M      128 win      
27   H                  First win after 17 losses in a row.   
18   M                     
4   L                     
28   H                     
28   H                     
27   H   l   -32               
35   H      -32            Streak of H's.
1   L                  Must stop betting here, even though we would have won.
34   H                     
17   M                  MLM is the first trigger. We bet because target is not H.
5   L                     
14   M                     
14   M   l   -64               
34   H      -64               
19   M      -64               
17   M                     
33   H                     
15   M                     
10   L   h   -128               
22   M      -128               
10   L      -128               
35   H                     
30   H                     
31   H                  Streak of H's
11   L                     
31   H                     
16   M                     
9   L                     
22   M                     
27   H   l   -264               
22   M      -264               
16   M      -264               
1   L                     
26   H                     
12   L                     
21   M   h   -528               
1   L      -528         At this point, I have a 2538 unit loss      
31   H      1056 win         
28   H                     
8   L                     
22   M                     
30   H                     
2   L                     
32   H                     
5   L   l   1056   win            
34   H                     
24   M                     
15   M                     
30   H   h   1056   win      

Note: I would not have gone over a 500 unit loss if playing for real, but I wanted to see how many back to back losses until I recovered.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: kav on April 03, 2017, 12:14:31 PM
The bet selection.

Could it be true that IF there is an advantage in the bet selection process described by Palestis, it is not the specific trigger, but the stop-betting-continue-later methodology?

What IF an advantage appears no matter the trigger (say bet after a hit on the dozen) just because of the "bet-3-times-then-stop" idea?

This correlates nicely with my Skips and series are more balanced? (http://forum.roulette30.com/index.php?topic=1463.0) observation.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: ignatus on April 03, 2017, 12:29:45 PM
When all hell break loose there's nothing to do, and no progression can save you. (yes, it do happen!) no matter how clever betselection or clever progression you have. (I should know!).. :s

So, the real question IS what's a good stoploss?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 03, 2017, 12:56:33 PM
@ Kav

It would be good if we could apply your "Skips and series are more balanced?" observation to this Single Dozens method. I tried following that thread, but it was way over my head...I could not understand the betting method, even though I understood your principle. I'm hoping Juice will post his example in that thread soon!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 03, 2017, 12:59:13 PM
Kav, I tend to agree that there probably isn't anything in the specific bet selection which gives an advantage, because any simple and fixed strategy will have the same fluctuations as any other when the outcomes are random.

If you look at the 27 three spin sequences for a dozen bet, two thirds of them will have two of one kind and one of the other (i.e. XXY), so you're more likely to get XXY than XYZ or XXX etc in any 3 spins, but used as a trigger XXY doesn't predict anything, because if your bet is on Y, you're just as likely to get XXZ as ZZY or XXY etc.

There may be something in the stop-continue method though.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on April 03, 2017, 02:44:33 PM
@Term:  Just want to post this now before I forget:

Its ok to have choices as to how one would like to handle a wagering plan; i.e. aggressive, moderate, conservative choices at each "choice juncture". 

100% rigidity is possible but I think Pales is basically showing us that there is a certain "professional gambler's kentucky windage" possible in the process where we are able to make choices based on instinct; kind of like a deer that is in the brush, sticks its nose out to smell for enemies and if it doesn't smell right, it doesn't emerge.

So I think we should understand that about the way that Pales approaches the triggers.

The best way to emulate his approach would be to deeply understand the logical underpinnings of the system and the "instinctual reasons" for the choices he makes.  I think you are doing this perfectly because you are studying everything very closely. 

So like, take a deep breath and meditate on everything that you have learned and let inspirational understanding guide you a bit.

Its even OK for us to use our own instinct and take responsibility for our own decisions! :D

I hope you can feel where I am coming from?

The truth is that it is virtually impossible to create a system that can be followed 100% to the letter on every spin, while allowing it to be simple enough to follow.  This is because there are so many different exceptions and choices available to a high quality system that it must become something personal to the person placing the bets; a human choice based on instinct/emotion/previous experience; sometimes we just "know the best choice" and make it; intuition?

This is why computer simulations lack "the human element" and should be used as tools with that limitation in mind.  A computer simulation will show us where "the human element" needs to be applied, it does not replace "the human element"! :D
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on April 03, 2017, 03:00:46 PM
@Bayes: There may be something statistically to the fact that 2 unique of the dozens must appear before a bet is placed?

I feel this even more strongly with my variation where the missing dozen after 2 unique dozens in 3 spins is the trigger.

One obvious difference is that we are not betting INTO STREAKS because a break is required by the second unique Dozen.

I believe there are "hidden statistical tunnels" that are "entered" by certain decisions that we make; e.g. moving a bet selection, raising/lowering a wagering amount, resetting to a new session, etc.  These "hidden tunnels" are not obvious until they are traversed with conscious/analytical awareness.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 03, 2017, 03:19:33 PM
I feel this even more strongly with my variation where the missing dozen after 2 unique dozens in 3 spins is the trigger.

Reyth, could you give me a concrete example of one such trigger? Not sure what you mean. Thanks.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on April 03, 2017, 03:24:20 PM
http://forum.roulette30.com/index.php?topic=1376.msg20905#msg20905

So an example:

31 2 4 <=== this is ZXX

The missing Dozen is Y and so bet.

31 2 13 <=== ZXY no bet because there is no mising Dozen.

31 30 29 <=== ZZZ no bet because there is no missing Dozen & no 2nd unique Dozen (this is a narrow sideways channel, like in trading).  A principle behind a narrow sideways channel is that the longer horizontally the channel is, the long the breakout will be when it breaks.

Can you "see" the impact of having a second unique Dozen hit before betting the missing Dozen?  I mean to me, it seems pretty powerful.

But I want to be clear that I am not trying to derail this thread, I think the same principle applies to the actual method.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on April 03, 2017, 03:33:14 PM
When all hell break loose there's nothing to do, and no progression can save you. (yes, it do happen!) no matter how clever betselection or clever progression you have. (I should know!).. :s

So, the real question IS what's a good stoploss?

OK OK!

I crown you King Ignatus!

(http://media.148apps.com/screenshots/910004074/us-ipad-1-roulette-king-free-las-vegas-roulette-and-casino-game.jpeg)
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 03, 2017, 03:34:25 PM
Thanks, but I thought TERM tested that mod and it didn't do so well (see reply # 100).
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on April 03, 2017, 03:40:15 PM
Yes I saw that and his results are 100% valid.  I still believe it should perform better but that's not the point because we are talking about the fact that Harry/Pales require a second unique Dozen to appear in a series of 3 before betting and how that may favorably change the statistics?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 03, 2017, 06:11:18 PM
@ Bayes
Quote
I don't like fixed progressions, preferring to adjust stakes according to (mainly) where I am in relation to my current target, how the session is going, etc. So with that in mind I've changed the progression in the tracker to a simple list of numbers increasing by 1, D'Alembert style.

I like this idea. I have a lot of experience with the D'Alembert in EC play. If I may make a suggestion, since this was designed for EC play, if one uses this on Dozens, perhaps it should go more like: 112233445566, etc. And on a win you would still go back 2 levels.

The good thing about D'Alembert is that if a situation goes WLWLWLWL (or, in the case of dozens, WLLWLLWLLWLL), then we will incease our profits each time it goes back and forth. The negative side is that a bad streak will still kill our bankroll.

I look forward to trying that out!

Quote
I tend to agree that there probably isn't anything in the specific bet selection which gives an advantage...There may be something in the stop-continue method though.

I'm leaning this way, also.



@ Reyth

Quote
The truth is that it is virtually impossible to create a system that can be followed 100% to the letter on every spin, while allowing it to be simple enough to follow.  This is because there are so many different exceptions and choices available to a high quality system that it must become something personal to the person placing the bets; a human choice based on instinct/emotion/previous experience; sometimes we just "know the best choice" and make it; intuition?

This is why computer simulations lack "the human element" and should be used as tools with that limitation in mind.  A computer simulation will show us where "the human element" needs to be applied, it does not replace "the human element"!

Yes, I agree with your statements, Reyth. And I appreciate that Palestis is trying to show us this, too. But, if it's intuition that is making this system successful, and intuition that will cause us to never see many losses in a row, then this is completely separate from anyone's "System" or "Method" causing this. Because intuition cannot be taught by others, it can only be learned by experience.

Also, if, after a certain amount of losses, we should "stop betting this game" and move to another table and restart, then, once again, THIS would be due to Money Management, and not due to anyone's Roulette System. Because Money Management can be applied to ANY System.

And, just so you know, I've never used a computer simulation for the Single Dozen, it was all done by hand. But I am having a very hard time understanding the exact SPOT of where to "Stop" during the progression. That is why I am hoping someone can look at Post #291 and show me what they would do in that situation.

It's hard for me to tell if a bad streak will continue, or cease. It's easy to say what one would do in hindsight, but it's much harder while it's happening live.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on April 03, 2017, 06:17:19 PM
I think its kewl you have played D'Alembert alot!  Have you seen the IDG's D'Alembert system for EC's?  I can link to it if you like.

I think the truth is that there is some "art" to the trigger selection that Pales applies while he is playing; whenever he plays. 

I think you and he have correctly identified the parameters for trigger selection where a "conservative" OR an "aggressive" approach can be used. 

Its up to our personal choice (however we choose to make it) to decide which method to use at a particular time.

This "art" aspect appears in every high quality system and is inescapable.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 03, 2017, 06:28:43 PM
@ Reyth

I have not heard of the IDG variation, please link. Thanks. Does it help improve the original D'Alembert?

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on April 03, 2017, 07:21:16 PM
Yes it definitely helps.  Although it is not like his recommended method because of the worst possible payout but his unique twist is designed to improve it as much as possible but ultimately he would tell you that it is better to move inwards on the felt.  King Jesper agrees! :D

http://forum.roulette30.com/index.php?topic=715.msg10320#msg10320
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on April 03, 2017, 08:58:05 PM
@ TERMINATOR:
 I took the sheet with Game # 3, specifically from spin 90 -180 (where you had the trouble).
That is how I would play that session. It could be that I would make some number jumps, but I would probably end up with no different results if better.
When I say as part of the rule is to avoid the first trigger after a streak and pick the next one, it means the trigger that is almost glued to the streak. If it came after 5 or more numbers obviously the red flag has in a way expired.   If it follows immediately the streak or  very close to the streak
then you pick the next available  trigger.
Starting from the 90th spin, it is obvious that there is something wrong with the flow. A H streak is followed by an L streak then back to H streak ( 31-31-14-32),   even though it is separated by 14, but  still raises suspicion because it follows closely the previous H streak.
I am sorry but when you see things like that, you either wait and see what happens further down, or move on. Most experienced players would do just that. Instead of getting  entangled in a situation that obviously is not normal for this system . But I will let that go.
Anyway look at my sheet and make notes on the places that you have questions and we will take it from there. I will explain my way of thinking.
Just remember this:
 Whenever I see something strange like a streak, I either change tables or wait till things look more normal. I don't have to be on guard and jump on the first opportunity after the streak. Let some numbers go.
Also when I say skip the first trigger after a streak, It is understood that this will be a trigger that shows relatively fast. If it takes more than 5 numbers to see the first trigger obviously it doesn't count, because enough numbers have passed to neutralize the read flags.
I also include a sheet form live numbers from Wiesbaden Casino, for you to process them  to see how they compare with your other games.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on April 03, 2017, 09:18:03 PM
http://forum.roulette30.com/index.php?topic=1376.msg20905#msg20905

So an example:

31 2 4 <=== this is ZXX

The missing Dozen is Y and so bet.
The question is you bet the missing dozen,, but for how long? What if the dozen goes missing for 8-10 -15 spins? I wouldn't take the extreme of 28 spins.
Obviously you must a have a limited number of spins in mind when chasing that missing dozen. It can't go on for too long for obvious reasons.
With the YXX trigger you bet Y but only for 3 spins (one cycle).
Then you wait for another YXX where the Y is not necessarily the same dozen as before. and that's for 3 spins again . Then wait for another YXX. what you do is zig zag a different dozen each time.
If your suggestion is to bet the missing dozen for say 3 spins, and then you bet a different missing dozen for 3 spins and then another missing dozen, then I would say the  system has potential.
It is when you chase one thing for a long period of spins that  runs you into  trouble.
Chasing the same missing group indefinitely is the major cause of great losses in roulette.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on April 03, 2017, 09:38:31 PM
The question is you bet the missing dozen,, but for how long? What if the dozen goes missing for 8-10 -15 spins? I wouldn't take the extreme of 28 spins.
Obviously you must a have a limited number of spins in mind when chasing that missing dozen. It can't go on for too long for obvious reasons.

If I was actively running this system using my triggers, my "book" would say that the farther back that missing Dozen is, the better my odds to hit.  I use your progression and so I end up cycling through betting opportunities just like you do.

What I think is brilliant is your twist where you force me to wait for "a second enemy" to appear before I can consider betting!
 
Quote
If your suggestion is to bet the missing dozen for say 3 spins, and then you bet a different missing dozen for 3 spins and then another missing dozen, then I would say the  system has potential.

Yessir!  I am on board with your philosophy of "make 'em beat me on every separate occasion or just pay me!"
 

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: kav on April 03, 2017, 11:33:15 PM
Palestis,

I don't understand why you skip some spins.
According to your description I would have played some different triggers (in red layer) than you.
Can you please explain why you didn't play those triggers?

PS: in the first trigger I made a mistake I mean the "11 1 30" trigger for the 3rd dozen.
I find it very strange that although the rules seem relatively simple, different people interpret them differently.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: jekhb76 on April 04, 2017, 06:00:20 AM
What if we use the Whitticker Progression.

If the Whittaker progression is applied to twelve number bets, the following starting sequence is used: [/size]1. bet 1 unit
2. bet 1 unit
3. bet 2 units If the first bet wins, profit: 2 units.If the second bet wins, profit: 1 unit.If the third bet wins, profit: 2 units.In each of these cases the progression begins new with the sequence: 1 - 1 - 2! If the first 3 bets are lost, the next bet is determined as follows:with a negative balance between 4 to 9 units the balance is divided by 2,with a negative balance between 10 to 21 units the balance is divided by 3,with a negative balance between 22 to 100 units the balance is divided by 4,With a negative balance over 100 units the balance is divided by 5.If the result of the division is not a whole number, then this number is always rounded up.
The progression starts always with a bet size of 1 unit!·  Bet No. 1: 1 unit, in case of a win next bet 1 unit, in case of a loss:·  Bet No. 2: 1 unit, in case of a win next bet 1 unit, in case of a loss:·  Bet No. 3: 2 units, in case of a win next bet 1 unit, in case of a loss: 4 : 2 = 2·  Bet No. 4: 2 units, in case of a win next bet 1 unit, in case of a loss 6 : 2 = 3·  Bet No. 5: 3 units, in case of a win next bet 1 unit, in case of a loss 9 : 2 = 4.5 =5·  Bet No. 6: 5 units, in case of a win next bet 1 unit, in case of a loss 14 : 3 = 4.66 = 5·  Bet No. 7: 5 units, in case of a win next bet 4 : 2 = 2 units, in case of a loss 19 : 3 = 6.33 = 7
·  Bet No. 8: and so fourth...
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: jekhb76 on April 04, 2017, 06:02:18 AM
The Whitticker 20 step ladder progression.

Bet  1  1
Bet  2  1
Bet  3  2
Bet  4  2
Bet  5  3
Bet  6  5
Bet  7  5
Bet  8  7
Bet  9  7
Bet 10 9
Bet 11 11
Bet 12 14
Bet 13 17
Bet 14 21
Bet 15 21
Bet 16 25
Bet 17 30
Bet 18 36
Bet 19 43
Bet 20 50  (310 units total)

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 04, 2017, 07:53:06 AM
Yes, I agree with your statements, Reyth. And I appreciate that Palestis is trying to show us this, too. But, if it's intuition that is making this system successful, and intuition that will cause us to never see many losses in a row, then this is completely separate from anyone's "System" or "Method" causing this. Because intuition cannot be taught by others, it can only be learned by experience.

Agreed. I'm not saying that intuition is necessarily bunk, only that I don't think the "human element" is necessary. This is because if you can articulate your "intuition" (even to yourself) then it's possible to program a computer, or compile a list of rules which will do the same thing. There may be a lot of rules, but there should be no ambiguity. The rules don't have to be "sharp", they could have "fuzzy" boundaries, but unless  you're talking about precognition (and I don't want to go down that road), where winning numbers just come into your head, it should always be possible to articulate why you make a decision.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on April 04, 2017, 09:18:14 AM
Palestis,

I don't understand why you skip some spins.
According to your description I would have played some different triggers (in red layer) than you.
Can you please explain why you didn't play those triggers?

Yes the first red layer wasn't a trigger. (3-11-1). I skipped  the next available trigger (30-31-14) because it  immediately followed the 1st dozen streak. And it's part of the red flag rules. (which would've won anyway in the second spin with 13 had I followed the 30-31-14).
But even if I picked 11-1-30 by mistake, it still won with 30.
The second red layer you marked was the 17-18-11. That would've won in the second spin with 7.
Yes maybe I skipped by mistake. But in real life betting in live roulettes, that could probably be the first trigger you saw on a score board. If the last 4 numbers were 17-18-11-23 on the board the obvious trigger is 18-11-23 winning with the first bet with 7.
A mistake, or changing tables suddenly, does not penalize the system.
But if you took 17-18-11 as the trigger, 23 was the first VIRTUAL LOSS. ( an added bonus). Then again 7 would've won.
The 3rd red overlay you marked was 15-14-5 which is a trigger. But since it was glued directly under the 33-35-25 streak as a rule we skip it. (skipping the first trigger following directly under a streak).
Had I chosen it by mistake in real live play it would've lost with 14-32-23 coming. But I would've won the next trigger 1-4-22 in the second spin with 24 coming.
The main point is, whether you follow every trigger blindly without any skipping , or mistakenly or purposely skip some triggers here and there,  back to back trigger losses are not happening, no matter how you do it.  This is the strength of this system.
The rest is finding the right progression, to avoid the damage of the rare 3 back to back trigger losses. I t won't happen often, but if it happens it's best to be prepared.
Unless of course you have a huge B/R compared to the starting chip.

Palestis,

I find it very strange that although the rules seem relatively simple, different people interpret them differently.
There is an explanation for it.
When you test a system, from a list of numbers on a sheet of paper, it is not easy to follow all the rules, especially if you have to determine all the time how are numbers  clustered together. That would be a tedious task and very boring indeed. 
In a live roulette everything is in front of you. Including previous numbers. It's much easier to make a decision because at a glance you can see what is happening. And you only have to do that when you are ready to bet. In testing from a sheet of numbers,  you have to do that constantly.
That is y I tested the system without paying any attention to any rules.
Otherwise I would not have performed as many tests as I did. 
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on April 04, 2017, 09:41:45 AM

Yessir!  I am on board with your philosophy of "make 'em beat me on every separate occasion or just pay me!"
This must be the best conclusion for many roulette systems.
Zig zaging many short targets, forces roulette to opposite zig zag your intentions.
You can easily zig zag your targets. But for something to follow your zig zags ( including roulette), it will get "dizzy" before it can catch up with you.
Or simply give up and concede (pay you up).
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: moles40 on April 04, 2017, 12:11:36 PM
Wait for two same dozens and one other dozen to hit in last three spins and bet the single dozen to hit in the next three spins ,with progression of 1 1 2 and if no hit keep tracking then bet 2 2 4 ?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 04, 2017, 06:11:28 PM
@ Palestis

Thanks for replaying this game #3 again. I understand the reasons why you played it the way you did. But I need to clarify something very important.

If you look at my original Post #245 (page 17), you will see that I played TWO version of this game. The FIRST version is where it did VERY WELL, by always SKIPPING the first trigger.

However, the SECOND version is where the problem was, where we ALWAYS played the first trigger, as long as it had no dozens from the streak before it. This was the disaster game.

The reason I compared both games is because you gave us these two DIFFERENT ways to play your method AFTER a streak.

Now, I appreciate you replaying this game again, but unfortunately, you played it by mostly SKIPPING the first trigger AFTER a streak. I already did this and it did great! (Post #245)

What I wanted to test is your other method, by always PLAYING the first trigger after a streak, as long as it does not repeat a dozen from the streak. You did not play this way in your last replay of Game #3. You also explained this in your replies to KAV, as to you skipping the first trigger, EVEN if the previous dozen streak did NOT appear in the first trigger.

So, in your replayed game, you started by using this trigger:

11-26-31

Then, you only made TWO BETS and stopped (36-26). This is what I did also. So we are on the same page

Now notice there is a streak of 4 H's at this point (26-31-36-26). The first trigger after this streak is:

16-3-11

There are no H's in this trigger. This should have been played, not skipped.

I already played Game #3 by skipping the first trigger, and it did WELL, just like your game did well.

But this game #3 is ONLY testing the method of PLAYING the first trigger.

Remember how everyone was confused because you were playing the first trigger differently from your rules? Then you clarified that it was okay to PLAY the first trigger, as long as it does not contain any dozens from the streak?

This was in your Post #210, where you said:

Quote
"I guess the word  "preceding" caused all the confusion."

Then you went on to give many examples of how to play the first trigger, such as

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.

So, I hope this clarifies my position. I understand WHY you skipped the first trigger in your recent game, Palestis, but I was testing it by PLAYING the first trigger, as you suggested in the above post and many others..

Personally, I prefer always skipping the first trigger after a streak, but I was testing it both ways.

Anyway, the way you played it lines up with the way I would have played it also, because I prefer to skip the first trigger after a streak.

Because you chose to play it that way in your recent game, and because I have had more success playing that way as well (by skipping the first trigger after a streak) and because that is how most people in this thread interpreted your original rules, I think it is safe to say that always SKIPPING a trigger after a streak is the better way to play your method, rather than playing the first trigger.

Plus, you said, in reply #307:
Quote
That is how I would play that session. It could be that I would make some number jumps, but I would probably end up with no different results if better.

Since you agree that you would have the same disastrous result if you had played the first triggers also, I think your rule should be changed to reflect this.

Reply #307:
Quote
When I say as part of the rule is to avoid the first trigger after a streak and pick the next one, it means the trigger that is almost glued to the streak. If it came after 5 or more numbers obviously the red flag has in a way expired.   If it follows immediately the streak or  very close to the streak then you pick the next available  trigger.

Palestis, statements like this is  why everyone was confused earlier in this thread. You told us to do this from the beginning of your thread. And this is how I WAS playing your method. Then, you started saying, in Post #210, and many posts prior to that, that you would PLAY the first trigger after it immediately followed a streak, as long as it does not contain any dozens from that streak. This seems contradictory to many readers.

This is what I mean when I show you a losing game I played, you play it differently. I mean, when I had a losing session by skipping the first trigger you played the first trigger instead, and had a winning session. And now that I am playing the first trigger and had a losing session, you are skipping the first trigger and having a winning session.

So, from now on, I am going to be consistent and always SKIP the first trigger. I think your rules should be consistent also, and reflect this as well. And it would avoid confusion among us readers. And would eliminate the possibility of reverse engineering.

I hope I did not insult you or anything, but I am just trying to make your rules clear so everyone can understand them.

Thank you.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 04, 2017, 06:30:30 PM
@ Bayes

Quote
I'm not saying that intuition is necessarily bunk, only that I don't think the "human element" is necessary. This

Yes, I agree that I don't think the human element is necessary, and it can be programmed into a computer. But just to clarify, I was NOT bringing up the argument of intuition. I was only replying to Reyth, who brought up that this is what Palestis was trying to show us.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on April 04, 2017, 06:36:01 PM
Because you chose to play it that way in your recent game, and because I have had more success playing that way as well (by skipping the first trigger after a streak) and because that is how most people in this thread interpreted your original rules, I think it is safe to say that always SKIPPING a trigger after a streak is the better way to play your method, rather than playing the first trigger.

(http://bestanimations.com/Balls&Buttons/Buttons/facebook-like-button-art-animated-gif-4.gif)
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on April 04, 2017, 06:43:37 PM
When a system can go more than one way in a decision (and every good system can), even computerized random choice does not replace or duplicate the infuence of a human decision.

Unless Pales himself tells me that he doesn't scan the situation and make an educated decision based on previous experience and an appraisal of the current situation, which can be therefore summed up as "intuition", I will continue to say and believe that he is indeed using intuition to make his choices regarding triggers.

Its not just triggers its also bet amounts too and its not just that its also things like "is 5 spins enough to separate this or do I need more, or is 4 enough here?" which manifest continuously at each decision point.  A computer cannot make actual human quality decisions UNLESS you wish to sacrifice the human element and become robotic instead.

Human consciousness is too rich to cheapen by trying to equate it with a computer simulation.

Computers can help us to be more "responsible" in our decision making process by logically pointing out areas that need better decision making and that is putting a computer in its proper place, which is a tool to be used by humans to improve.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on April 04, 2017, 09:38:49 PM
@ Palestis

Thanks for replaying this game #3 again. I understand the reasons why you played it the way you did. But I need to clarify something very important.

If you look at my original Post #245 (page 17), you will see that I played TWO version of this game. The FIRST version is where it did VERY WELL, by always SKIPPING the first trigger.

However, the SECOND version is where the problem was, where we ALWAYS played the first trigger, as long as it had no dozens from the streak before it. This was the disaster game.
Terminator
When I tested the game for a long time I did not use any flags or any exceptions.
And it worked very well except that I run into 3 back to back losses a few times (not frequently enough to trash the system) and one time it was 4 back to back (12 spins).
Because I got worried about that, I looked for clues as to what to do to avoid this situation.
And that's how the red flags came about.
Especially, the situation where a target dozen was in a streak prior to the trigger.
The fact that you did well by skipping the first trigger after a streak, is worth taking notice.

But did you determine if the first trigger to be skipped, that IMMEDIATELY follows the streak,   behaves differently than a trigger that comes after several numbers have past? I figured you run into both situations. Did you make a point to take notice?

If several numbers passed, I assume, that maybe it shouldn't count as heavily. As opposed to forming immediately after the steak. That is y in real play I skip a few numbers deliberately, so I don't have to burden my head with more thinking.

You see, I spent a lot of time testing the system without paying attention to red flags.
Then it became clear that paying attention to the red flags, it reduced the amount of back to back losses ,of 3 or more. ( that is 9+ spins, not 3 spins).
I think the fact that we avoid the first trigger, immediately following  the streak (especially if the target dozen was the streak),  is clear and we all agree.
Now it's the issue of the first trigger being unrelated to numbers in the streak.
In a few tests I found that the first trigger of this kind  won after the steak. Lesser times it didn't. You found that it didn't in the game#3 test. . At this point we are not sure if it is a coincidence one way or the other.
You have done a few tests and you will test more.
I am sure your findings regarding  PARTICULAR issues with some red flags,  will be more important than mine. Because unlike  score card tests, in real live play I skip some numbers to get away from ambivalent situations.

Don't see me as the professor and you as the student trying to learn from me.
It could be the other way around as you spend more time examining the issues whenever they arise.
Don't compare your actions to mine as if I was the higher authority in this system.

I can only claim and vouch that the system works, due to the lengthy tests that I did.
One or two red flags without a doubt do make a big difference.
Regarding the particular details of some other red flags, ( which most of your inquiries refer to), you can be the final judge, and I won't have any problem agreeing  with you or learning from you.
I take the easy way out by skipping spins if in doubt. You extreme attention to detail can yield much better findings. Feel free to post your conclusions.
Ps:
 As far as player intuition, I didn't mean in a way that makes the experienced player the predictor of outcomes. What I meant was that whenever in doubt, (if the numbers  significantly exceed their statistical share, variance if you will), then abandon for several  spins, or change table. 

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 05, 2017, 12:44:31 AM
Thanks for clarifying, Palestis. I understand your points. You have mentioned to skip numbers many times when in doubt, and I agree that's a good idea. And yes, we are all students and can learn from each other.

Thanks again for sharing, Palestis! We'll keep experimenting and posting results as needed. It IS an exciting system. Harry's as well. Eddy has some great ideas also...worth looking into.

I look forward to hearing from others as well who play this system!

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on April 05, 2017, 01:27:37 AM
HARRYJ came up with the idea and the trigger.
I tested it for a long time. And it works extremely well. Then added some tweaks like the red flags.
Plus the option to use Virtual losses. Then someone, I think it was Lemon, added the idea of using only YXX trigger with the stipulation to follow immediately an XYZ. ( not YXX by itself without being supported by a an XYZ prior to it.). I found that to be a very effective trigger if it came to added certainty after a few progression losses. Despite the extra wait until this trigger happens.
But I wasn't about to test it  for another 6 months to see which red flags and under what circumstances work the best. That is y I have been flexible on that issue as well as the progression issue.
Anybody's ideas can be as valuable as the system's designer.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 05, 2017, 08:04:48 AM
Human consciousness is too rich to cheapen by trying to equate it with a computer simulation.

Well I think you're misunderstanding the point I (and TERM, I believe) was trying to make. Computers are amazing tools, but they're only tools and have no initiative or creativity. But once a human has conceived of and designed a system, and tested it (perhaps with the help of computer), the implementation of the system can be left entirely to a computer. Of course intuition can play a part in the design stage, but the trouble is it's often unreliable, especially concerning probabilities, so intuitions should always be checked against reality.

What's the point of bringing in ad-hoc deviations from the system and bets based on "intuition" if prior research and testing has already shown the way? And if the testing shows negative results then intuition can't save you. It just amounts to pure guessing.

Anyway, there's a lot more that could be said on this topic, but I don't want to derail the thread. Perhaps we could start a new thread on "The Human Element".  :)
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on April 05, 2017, 02:16:50 PM
Maybe every decision can be boiled down to previously grinded statistics but I doubt it and escpecially because statistics are subjective too but ya derailng the thread.
Title: Divisor for Progression?
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 05, 2017, 07:07:01 PM
I have a question regarding Palestis's Progression.

1-1-2
2-2-4
4-4-8
8-8-16
16-16-32

Whenever there is a win, but we are still in debt, we replay the current level we are on. SO, for example, if I reach level 5 (16-16-32) and win, I will repeat this level until a new high (or a tie).

Now, my question.

Let's say I WIN on level 5, but I am only 4 unit BELOW my previous high.

It seems like a big risk to start betting on Level 5 again, when we are just 4 units away from starting the progression over again.

What is a good DIVISOR, or method, to know WHERE in the progression level to reduce to? For example, it may be a good idea, instead of replaying level 5, to drop down to level 2 or 3 instead.
Is there some kind of math formula to determine the best level to drop down to?

Thanks.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 05, 2017, 07:15:19 PM
In those situations I would drop back to a level such that the first bet, if it wins, would take you to at least break even. So in your example this would be the first bet of level 2: 2 units.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 05, 2017, 07:49:37 PM
Thanks Bayes, I was thinking along the same lines. So, if I was 4 units away from a tie, divide that number by 2 and start at THAT level that begins with a 2 (2-2-4). Thanks!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 05, 2017, 11:02:21 PM
@ jekhb76

Eddy, Thanks for posting your Whitticker Progression. I'll start giving it a try with my tests. BTW, I sent you an email 4 days ago with some questions about your method, did you get it?

This Whitticker seems very interesting, and able to withstand long losing streaks. Thanks.

For those interested, I made an Excel document with this Progression. I also added mouse over comments to make it easier to use this document.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 06, 2017, 12:17:30 AM
@ Palestis

I also improved the Excel document with your Progression as well, with mouse over comments added.

- UPDATE -

There were some errors in the last upload, I corrected this in the 2nd attachment below.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: jekhb76 on April 06, 2017, 06:04:35 AM
@TERMINATOR

Sorry man, been very bussy the last couple of days, so didn't had the time to check my mail. Will go through it later today. Will get back to you.

About the Whitticker progression;
In theory it won't lose, but i will worn you all that it can be a real grind to climb out of big holes. But I think it's a very safe and stable progression that can be even extended to 30 spins, with the right bankroll of course. Also I like to point out, that it is not my own creation. I found it on the Roulette forum.cc posted by Hermes. so all the credits goes to him and lucy. take care friends.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 08, 2017, 08:34:09 AM
Since we have various progressions put forward for this system I was curious what the results would be for each, given this sequence of wins and losses (note that the losses are for individual bets, not sets of 3).

W
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
W
L

88 bets, 20 wins. A tough session (only about 1% would be worse). My currently favoured progression generated the following stats:

Max drawdown 80 units
Max balance 11 units
Final balance 9 units
Largest stake 21 units

How does your progression do?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: kav on April 08, 2017, 08:52:19 AM
Good question Bayes and nice sequence. I will do this test later. Your progression (Holloway) ended 9 units in profit?! That's a pretty good performance.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 08, 2017, 08:55:36 AM
Kav, no, not the Holloway. I'm currently experimenting with various progressions. I'll reveal it when there have been some responses (if any) and post the full sequence again with stakes and bankroll.

But I will test the Holloway on this. Now that you mention it I'm curious how it would do.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: MrPerfect. on April 08, 2017, 11:11:23 AM
If l had this type of session, l would run, instead of thinking about progressions.
    I strongly advise for anyone following:
    When nothing sims to work properly, go to eat an ice cream.  It's more beneficial to wait a bit till things normalise.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 08, 2017, 12:31:52 PM
Walking away is an option, but usually the damage is done before you walk away.

Quote
It's more beneficial to wait a bit till things normalise.

Ah, if only it were that easy. If this were true then no one would ever have a bad run. Truth is, you can make up some arbitrary stop loss or wait for some "virtual" wins, but the sequence from hell could just as easily occur in one session broken up, or over several separate sessions of play. Waiting for virtual wins could even make things worse. In the above session if after the 12 consecutive losses I decide to quit and wait for some wins. After the 3 wins I start betting again, only to see another 8 losses in a row! So I have now encountered 20 losses in a row instead of 12 and missed out on the wins because I was waiting for things to "normalise".

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: MrPerfect. on April 08, 2017, 02:37:15 PM
OK. .. lm helpful exeptionally today, so l will reveal in " print" RIGHT HERE AND RIGHT NOW... the only and most practical way TO BE A WINNER, Or at least to have a chance to be one.
   There is one simple rool how to win in roulette. System players especially,  but not exclusively  ( many" AP l wanna be "as well), should wright it down on the wall in huge RED CAPITAL LETTERS.
    The rool is very simple, very straightforward. 
.
    " WHEN IT'S GOOD - HIT.  WHEN NOT GOOD - RUN".
    So every spin ( before or after your bets) you have to look at the situation you are facing. ...
     In short, pay atention.   
  Following this simple rool will make you a winner on the long run. HG , Bro. 
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 08, 2017, 03:37:20 PM
Bayes wrote:
Quote
Max drawdown 80 units
Max balance 11 units
Final balance 9 units
Largest stake 21 units

My Modified Palestis’s Progression:

Max drawdown 62 units
Max balance 10 units
Final balance 9 units
Largest stake 32 units

Summery:

The middle 2 stats are about equal.

Even though Bayes session had the least biggest stake (difference of 11 units),
my session was down the least amount of debt (difference of 18 units).

Good progression, Bayes!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: MrPerfect. on April 08, 2017, 04:36:05 PM
It's not a good progression. It's a progression from hell. If someone does progressions to overcome HUGE DESADVANTAGE , he simply has problems with a common logic. Such a person can be compared to a fellow who try to consume coffee with the fork, or noodles with the spoon.
    For system play progressions are used when you have a random game. Random game mean that your overall expectation to hit is equal or near basic probability values.
     In this example is clear that something else is hitting, but not the dousen that is expected to hit. So it's simply wrong dousen choice. Need to select other dousen instead of relying on progressions to survive.
      Make simple calculations..  20 hits devided by 88 spins, use calculator if needed.  Result is as far from basic expectation as it can be .
     Instead of something that at least have expected chance to hit, normally " system players" choose something completely wrong. 30% of negative expectation on 12 numbers!!!! It's so near to worst case scenario possible!!! It's nemesis to the roulette player. Throwing chips to the layout without looking at all would produce far better situation.
     One patological looser chooses worst bet possible, other congratulate him on good progression. Are you guys out of your mind????
  Case equates to 7 DAMN ZEROES on the roulette wheel!!!! Seven. IT'S HUMANLY NOT POSSIBLE TO MAKE DESISIONS WORST THEN THAT. Humanly imposible....
    And no need to tell me that such a situation accounts for 1% likehood. This is your REALITY. This is what you guys face day after day.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: kav on April 08, 2017, 05:45:23 PM
When you say "Final Balance": 9
is this a profit or what's left from your initial capital?
If its profit, I think it's better to describe it as "Profit" or "+9"
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 08, 2017, 07:11:04 PM
Yes, Profit of 9 units. Considering it would have been a 48 unit LOSS if flat betting, it's a good result.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: kav on April 08, 2017, 07:58:04 PM
Can you please describe the progression again Term, so we are all on the same page?
Thanks
Title: 2X Divisor
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 08, 2017, 09:42:50 PM
Sure:

1-2-2-
2-2-4
4-4-8
8-8-16
16-16-32
32-32-64

Now, Palestis originally played this by the following: if you are not at least tied with your previous high when you win, you RESTART the level you are on.

So, for example, if you are on the 4th betting level (8-8-16), and you WIN, but you have not at least broken even with your previous high (i.e., 4 units away from break even), you restart the betting with an 8 unit bet from the same level 4 (8-8-16).

This is risky to me, because we are risking way more than we should (risking 8 units to win 4, and winning 16 units when we only need 4), because if a bad streak starts here it will raise our bets very quickly and puts us closer to bust on a smaller bankroll
(or table limit).

My modification is the following:
However many units we are away from a tie with our previous high, we DIVIDE by 2 and start at the level that begins with THAT amount.


Example #1:
Let's say we won on the 4th betting level. We are 4 units away from break even. We DIVIDE 4 by 2, and get 2. So, we drop to the level that begins with a 2 unit bet (2-2-4). So, we would begin the next betting at level 2 instead of level 4.

Example #2:
We are at level 7 and win. If we are 12 units below our last high (meaning we are 12 units away from a tie with our previous high point in the game), we divide 12 by 2 and get 6. There is no level that begins with 6, so we go UP the progression and play the next closest one, which would be 8 (not 4). So, we begin the next bet with an 8-8-16 progression (Level 4).

Example #3:
Let's say we win at level 3 (4-4-8), and after we divide by 2, we get 8! We do NOT start at a higher betting level than the level we are currently on. So, in this case, we would still begin with a 4 unit bet (not 8 units), which would mean we start betting at Level 3.

This helps prevent the progression from getting out of control in the case of a bad streak.

 
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: kav on April 09, 2017, 03:12:57 AM
Bayes wrote:
Quote
Max drawdown 80 units
Max balance 11 units
Final balance 9 units
Largest stake 21 units

My Modified Palestis’s Progression:

Max drawdown 62 units
Max balance 10 units
Final balance 9 units
Largest stake 32 units

Summery:

The middle 2 stats are about equal.

Even though Bayes session had the least biggest stake (difference of 11 units),
my session was down the least amount of debt (difference of 18 units).

I tested my Very conservative progression:
1 1 1 1 1
2 2 2 2 2
3 3 3 3
4 4 4
5 5 5
6 6 6
7 7 7
8 8 8
9 9 9
10 10 10

Max draw-down: -115 units
Max balance: 1 unit
Final balance: -106 units
Largest stake: 9 units

From first sight the results seem disastrous and they are. This is not the kind of progression that can recoup big losses in a couple of hits. Yet it is a progression that can stand much longer and worse losing sequences with less losses than the more aggressive progressions that can recoup losses fast but can amount much bigger losses if the bunch of hits doesn't come soon enough.

In the test sample we have 20 wins in 88 spins. Here is another sequence with the same number of wins distributed differently

W
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
W
W

If someone can devise (not reverse engineer) a progression (within realistic bankroll/bet limits) that can produce a profit in the above sequence, then I think we have a winner - it is too hard.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on April 09, 2017, 03:17:11 AM
I will test my 12x7 progression:

1 1 2 3 4 6 9

+1 to unit size with every progression loss; surf from there.

W 1 +1
L 1 +0
L 1 -1
L 2 -3
W 3 +3
L 1 +2
L 1 +1
L 2 -1
L 3 -4
W 4 +4
L 1 +3
L 1 +2
L 2 +0
L 3 -3
L 4 -7
L 6 -13
W 9 +5
L 1 +4
W 1 +6
L 1 +5
L 1 +4
L 2 +2
L 3 -1
W 4 +7
L 1 +6
L 1 +5
L 2 +3
L 3 +0
L 4 -4
L 6 -10
L 9 -19
L 2 -21
L 2 -23
L 4 -27
L 6 -33
L 8 -41
W 12 -17
L 3 -20
W 3 -14
L 3 -11
W 6 +1 <=== actual play will quit the session here
L 2 -2
L 2 -4
L 4 -8
L 6 -14
L 8 -22
L 12 -34
L 18 -52
L 3 -55
W 3 -49
L 4 -53
W 4 -45
L 4 -49
L 4 -53
W 8 -37
L 4 -41
W 4 -33
W 4 -25
L 3 -28
L 3 -31
L 6 -37
L 9 -46
L 12 -58
L 18 -76
L 27 -103
L 4 -107
L 4 -107
W 8 -91
L 5 -96
L 5 -101
W 10 -81
L 5 -86
W 5 -76
L 5 -81
L 5 -86
L 10 -96
W 15 -66
L 5 -71
L 5  -76
L 10 -86
W  15 -56
L 4 -60
L 4 -64
L 8 -72
L 12 -84
L 16 -100
W 24 -52
L 4 -56

Even though it failed to win, it "stayed in the ballpark".  What amazes me is that the Pales progression actually comes out positive here!?

Definitely makes a person think...

Its the very unique stutter progression that gives it greater statistical power because of its increased length and reduced cost.  It appears to be a custom progression designed especially for the Dozen bet.

Very impressive.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 09, 2017, 07:05:50 AM
Thanks TERM and others for the input. I was surprised to see your modified palestis progression perform similarly to mine. I think the original would have busted. Here's are the detailed results using my progression:

bet # W/L Stake Bank

   1  W      1    2
    2  L      1    1
    3  L      1    0
    4  L      2   -2
    5  W      3    4
    6  L      1    3
    7  L      1    2
    8  L      2    0
    9  L      3   -3
   10  W      4    5
   11  L      1    4
   12  L      1    3
   13  L      2    1
   14  L      3   -2
   15  L      4   -6
   16  L      5  -11
   17  W      6    1
   18  L      3   -2
   19  W      4    6
   20  L      1    5
   21  L      1    4
   22  L      2    2
   23  L      3   -1
   24  W      4    7
   25  L      1    6
   26  L      1    5
   27  L      2    3
   28  L      3    0
   29  L      4   -4
   30  L      5   -9
   31  L      6  -15
   32  L      7  -22
   33  L      8  -30
   34  L      9  -39
   35  L     10  -49
   36  L     11  -60
   37  W     12  -36
   38  L     13  -49
   39  W     14  -21
   40  L     15  -36
   41  W     16   -4
   42  L      6  -10
   43  L      7  -17
   44  L      8  -25
   45  L      9  -34
   46  L     10  -44
   47  L     11  -55
   48  L     12  -67
   49  L     13  -80
   50  W     14  -52
   51  L     15  -67
   52  W     16  -35
   53  L     17  -52
   54  L     18  -70
   55  W     19  -32
   56  L     20  -52
   57  W     21  -10
   58  W      9    8
   59  L      1    7
   60  L      1    6
   61  L      2    4
   62  L      3    1
   63  L      4   -3
   64  L      5   -8
   65  L      6  -14
   66  L      7  -21
   67  L      8  -29
   68  W      9  -11
   69  L     10  -21
   70  L     11  -32
   71  W     12   -8
   72  L     13  -21
   73  W     14    7
   74  L      1    6
   75  L      2    4
   76  L      3    1
   77  W      4    9
   78  L      1    8
   79  L      1    7
   80  L      2    5
   81  W      3   11
   82  L      1   10
   83  L      1    9
   84  L      2    7
   85  L      3    4
   86  L      4    0
   87  W      5   10
   88  L      1    9

This progression isn't my invention; it's designed for the EC's and has been called "Foolproof" or "Maxim". The rules are quite simple; just increase stakes by 1 whether win or lose and reduce such that a win will only increase the profit by 1 unit. Since it was designed for EC's it's too aggressive for a 2-1 bet, but out of the box doesn't do too badly.

I'm confident I can improve it for the dozen bet, but just out of interest I ran Kav's redistributed sequence:

   1  W      1    2
    2  L      1    1
    3  L      1    0
    4  L      2   -2
    5  W      3    4
    6  L      1    3
    7  L      1    2
    8  L      2    0
    9  L      3   -3
   10  W      4    5
   11  L      1    4
   12  L      1    3
   13  L      2    1
   14  L      3   -2
   15  L      4   -6
   16  L      5  -11
   17  W      6    1
   18  L      3   -2
   19  W      4    6
   20  L      1    5
   21  L      1    4
   22  L      2    2
   23  L      3   -1
   24  W      4    7
   25  L      1    6
   26  L      1    5
   27  L      2    3
   28  L      3    0
   29  L      4   -4
   30  L      5   -9
   31  L      6  -15
   32  L      7  -22
   33  L      8  -30
   34  L      9  -39
   35  L     10  -49
   36  L     11  -60
   37  L     12  -72
   38  L     13  -85
   39  L     14  -99
   40  L     15 -114
   41  L     16 -130
   42  W     17  -96
   43  L     18 -114
   44  L     19 -133
   45  L     20 -153
   46  L     21 -174
   47  L     22 -196
   48  L     23 -219
   49  L     24 -243
   50  L     25 -268
   51  W     26 -216
   52  L     27 -243
   53  W     28 -187
   54  W     29 -129
   55  L     30 -159
   56  L     31 -190
   57  L     32 -222
   58  L     33 -255
   59  L     34 -289
   60  L     35 -324
   61  L     36 -360
   62  L     37 -397
   63  L     38 -435
   64  W     39 -357
   65  W     40 -277
   66  L     41 -318
   67  L     42 -360
   68  W     43 -274
   69  L     44 -318
   70  W     45 -228
   71  L     46 -274
   72  L     47 -321
   73  W     48 -225
   74  L     49 -274
   75  L     50 -324
   76  L     51 -375
   77  W     52 -271
   78  L     53 -324
   79  L     54 -378
   80  L     55 -433
   81  W     56 -321
   82  L     57 -378
   83  L     58 -436
   84  L     59 -495
   85  W     60 -375
   86  L     61 -436
   87  W     62 -312
   88  W     63 -186

Not a winner this time.  :) However, notice that with only one more win the stake would be reduced by about half, and a mild positive swing would have got you back in profit.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 09, 2017, 07:20:20 AM
Kav Wrote:

Quote
If someone can devise (not reverse engineer) a progression (within realistic bankroll/bet limits) that can produce a profit in the above sequence, then I think we have a winner - it is too hard.

Well, my modified progression made a profit from your session, Kav, but I had to invest pretty steep. Since a realistic bankroll varies from person to person, I'll post my results anyway:

Max drawdown  1402 units
Max profit 66 units
Final profit 66 units
Largest stake 528 units

Personally, I would only risk 500 units per game, but this might be acceptable to someone else?

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 09, 2017, 07:25:17 AM
Reyth wrote:
Quote
What amazes me is that the Pales progression actually comes out positive here!?

Just to clarify, it was my modified Pales progression. If we played Pales original progression, the results would have been much different.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on April 09, 2017, 12:11:40 PM
A sequence like this I haven't found yet. I understand that it was brought up only for the purpose of finding the right progression if it ever happened. And if the system could survive under the most adverse circumstances.
Another situation I am exploring at the moment, is refining the trigger, after several losses have occurred. But before those losses can bring pressure on the B/R
It seems that betting after a YXX trigger only,  brings more positive results than a XYX or XXY trigger. Especially if there is no Y prior to the YXX in the last 2-3 spins.
So if there are a few losses playing all 3 triggers, it might be a good idea to switch to only betting after YXX. It will make recovery a lot easier without stretching the B/R to its limits.
But many more tests are required to determine if the YXX trigger is more successful, as it compares to YXY and XXY. With the stipulation that no Y is present for 1-3 spins prior to the YXX.
So far it looks promising.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: kav on April 09, 2017, 01:36:38 PM
Palestis,

I don't want to sound like Real, but I do believe that by "refining the triggers" you just make the bet situations rarer and therefore the losses seem more infrequent. But this is just a perception. You just lose less because you play less.

Like I said before I like the use of triggers because they help you avoid continuous betting. But one can use whatever trigger he likes, like 'start the attack after a hit and stop after 2 bets'. I really doubt that by adding rules and diminishing the bet situations you actually increase the hit rate. You just decrease the losses because you play less.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: MrPerfect. on April 09, 2017, 03:36:01 PM
It's all depends what you are looking for.... black/ red can't be a trigger... it's all over the wheel. Real triggers are physical, or stats based. Anyhow, physics is mandatory be for even considering a play..  stats are just a tool in this case.
    We can not explore situation that is really " random ".... miracles do not exist and math is right.
    But if situation  is at very least random ( or better) we can attack and explore.
    Random - money out of blue with progression, non randome- money from exploration.
 It's only highly negative situation we have to run... others we can explore.
  In both cases we will explore frequency of hits. .. but differently.
     Simple roulette facts:
  In each spin, depending on external variables, there are 2 or 3 high probability zones and all rest is negative .
    Some of these zones are more likely then others.
    Comulative amount f numbers that may hit are not more then 9 ...    rarely 12-15.
    Relating these 9 numbers to the next outcome produces non random situation. .. it's due to the fact that no dealer is random and no roulette is entirely random.  Even on entirely random roulette ( abstraction that haven't been found) from physical point of view will be nonrandomness... 
      About triggers: these are good then justified. Red can not be trigger, it not limmits previous or posterior results in any way , just becouse that red can be found all over the wheel.
Title: Merging Palestis with HarryJ
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 09, 2017, 06:29:06 PM
Palestis wrote:
Quote
Another situation I am exploring at the moment, is changing the trigger

I've been working on this also, with impressive results. Basically, combining HarryJ's method with Palestis's method. I will explain more after further tests.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on April 10, 2017, 01:19:02 AM
Palestis,

I don't want to sound like Real, but I do believe that by "refining the triggers" you just make the bet situations rarer and therefore the losses seem more infrequent. But this is just a perception. You just lose less because you play less.
Yes I am well aware of that.
That is y, I only consider the hit rate in the tests (hits/# of triggers played) to draw conclusions.
As opposed to being deluded  by the perception of less frequent losses. Even if the losses seem more infrequent, if you test long enough, that illusive perception will eventually become a solid average.
Therefore we can't assume that all triggers are the same, if we don't take the time to test.
Betting all triggers a system requires, also leads to a hit rate. However that hit rate will conclude faster, because you have more frequent triggers.
For example if you find that you get 9,000 hits out of 10,000, all inclusive triggers played, you can safely assume that the hit rate is 90%.
If I test 10,000 refined triggers and find that 9,500 out of 10,000 triggers hit the target then the hit rate is 95%. Which is obviously better.  The only difference is that it will take a lot longer to test 10,000 refined triggers. But they are still subject to a statistical average. And that average will hold true in every session.
Besides I only came up with the idea of a "refined trigger", to reduce a possible damage, or  the psychological effects  of an extended progression. And so far this particular trigger performs better that all the triggers of this system. But the tests are not over yet.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on April 10, 2017, 01:25:27 AM
Of course my "roulette heart" tells me that the YXX trigger must be the best; its the one that makes the most sense to me. :)
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 10, 2017, 08:58:15 AM
Still working on the progression. This one uses a divisor and is based on a win target of 1u profit every 7 spins. The results of the original sequence are similar to those using the Maxim progression, but drawdown not so high.

Max stake = 25 u
Max drawdown 64 u
Max profit 10 u
Final profit 9 u

1  W      1    2
    2  L      1    1
    3  L      1    0
    4  L      1   -1
    5  W      1    1
    6  L      1    0
    7  L      1   -1
    8  L      1   -2
    9  L      1   -3
   10  W      1   -1
   11  L      1   -2
   12  L      1   -3
   13  L      1   -4
   14  L      2   -6
   15  L      3   -9
   16  L      4  -13
   17  W      5   -3
   18  L      2   -5
   19  W      3    1
   20  L      1    0
   21  L      1   -1
   22  L      1   -2
   23  L      2   -4
   24  W      3    2
   25  L      1    1
   26  L      1    0
   27  L      1   -1
   28  L      1   -2
   29  L      2   -4
   30  L      3   -7
   31  L      4  -11
   32  L      5  -16
   33  L      7  -23
   34  L     10  -33
   35  L     13  -46
   36  L     18  -64
   37  W     25  -14
   38  L      7  -21
   39  W      9   -3
   40  L      3   -6
   41  W      4    2
   42  L      1    1
   43  L      2   -1
   44  L      3   -4
   45  L      4   -8
   46  L      5  -13
   47  L      7  -20
   48  L      9  -29
   49  L     13  -42
   50  W     18   -6
   51  L      5  -11
   52  W      6    1
   53  L      2   -1
   54  L      3   -4
   55  W      4    4
   56  L      1    3
   57  W      2    7
   58  W      1    9
   59  L      1    8
   60  L      1    7
   61  L      1    6
   62  L      1    5
   63  L      1    4
   64  L      2    2
   65  L      3   -1
   66  L      4   -5
   67  L      5  -10
   68  W      7    4
   69  L      2    2
   70  L      3   -1
   71  W      4    7
   72  L      1    6
   73  W      1    8
   74  L      1    7
   75  L      1    6
   76  L      1    5
   77  W      2    9
   78  L      1    8
   79  L      1    7
   80  L      1    6
   81  W      2   10
   82  L      1    9
   83  L      1    8
   84  L      1    7
   85  L      2    5
   86  L      3    2
   87  W      4   10
   88  L      1    9

Now the second killer sequence:
   1  W      1    2
    2  L      1    1
    3  L      1    0
    4  L      1   -1
    5  W      1    1
    6  L      1    0
    7  L      1   -1
    8  L      1   -2
    9  L      1   -3
   10  W      1   -1
   11  L      1   -2
   12  L      1   -3
   13  L      1   -4
   14  L      2   -6
   15  L      3   -9
   16  L      4  -13
   17  W      5   -3
   18  L      2   -5
   19  W      3    1
   20  L      1    0
   21  L      1   -1
   22  L      1   -2
   23  L      2   -4
   24  W      3    2
   25  L      1    1
   26  L      1    0
   27  L      1   -1
   28  L      1   -2
   29  L      2   -4
   30  L      3   -7
   31  L      4  -11
   32  L      5  -16
   33  L      7  -23
   34  L     10  -33
   35  L     13  -46
   36  L     18  -64
   37  L     25  -89
   38  L     34 -123
   39  L     46 -169
   40  L     62 -231
   41  L     84 -315
   42  W    114  -87
   43  L     33 -120
   44  L     45 -165
   45  L     61 -226
   46  L     83 -309
   47  L    113 -422
   48  L    153 -575
   49  L    208 -783
   50  L    282-1065
   51  W    383 -299
   52  L    109 -408
   53  W    148 -112
   54  W     43  -26
   55  L     12  -38
   56  L     16  -54
   57  L     22  -76
   58  L     30 -106
   59  L     41 -147
   60  L     55 -202
   61  L     75 -277
   62  L    102 -379
   63  L    138 -517
   64  W    188 -141
   65  W     54  -33
   66  L     15  -48
   67  L     20  -68
   68  W     28  -12
   69  L      8  -20
   70  W     10    0
   71  L      4   -4
   72  L      5   -9
   73  W      7    5
   74  L      2    3
   75  L      3    0
   76  L      4   -4
   77  W      5    6
   78  L      2    4
   79  L      3    1
   80  L      4   -3
   81  W      5    7
   82  L      1    6
   83  L      2    4
   84  L      3    1
   85  W      4    9
   86  L      1    8
   87  W      1   10
   88  W      1   12

Max stake = 383 u
Max drawdown 1065 u
Max profit 12 u
Final profit 12 u

Still ridiculous stakes and drawdowns, but better then TERM's modified palestis progression, at least as regards to max stake and drawdown.

Taking Mr P's advice, in practice it would be better to track the expectation over the last few spins, and if it's too low, then no bet. Whatever progression you use something like this would be necessary to keep the stakes and drawdowns within sensible limits. You wouldn't need to necessarily bet 0 units, but just drastically reduce them. This would effectively mean that you're using a kind of hybrid negative/positive progression.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 10, 2017, 11:04:47 AM
Well, how about this? This is just a preliminary experiment; the parameters can be tweaked, but looking at the last 6 outcomes (w/L) and betting 0 units if there is less than 2 wins (i.e. at least expectation in the last 6 spins), and reverting to the standard divisor otherwise, the results are as follows:

Original sequence:

Max stake 20 u!
Max Drawdown 50 u!
Max profit 8 u!
Final profit 1u

   1  W      1    2
    2  L      1    1
    3  L      1    0
    4  L      1   -1
    5  W      1    1
    6  L      1    0
    7  L      1   -1
    8  L      0   -1
    9  L      0   -1
   10  W      0   -1
   11  L      1   -2
   12  L      0   -2
   13  L      0   -2
   14  L      0   -2
   15  L      0   -2
   16  L      0   -2
   17  W      0   -2
   18  L      0   -2
   19  W      0   -2
   20  L      1   -3
   21  L      2   -5
   22  L      3   -8
   23  L      4  -12
   24  W      0  -12
   25  L      5  -17
   26  L      0  -17
   27  L      0  -17
   28  L      0  -17
   29  L      0  -17
   30  L      0  -17
   31  L      0  -17
   32  L      0  -17
   33  L      0  -17
   34  L      0  -17
   35  L      0  -17
   36  L      0  -17
   37  W      0  -17
   38  L      0  -17
   39  W      0  -17
   40  L      8  -25
   41  W     11   -3
   42  L      3   -6
   43  L      4  -10
   44  L      6  -16
   45  L      8  -24
   46  L      0  -24
   47  L      0  -24
   48  L      0  -24
   49  L      0  -24
   50  W      0  -24
   51  L      0  -24
   52  W      0  -24
   53  L     11  -35
   54  L     15  -50
   55  W     20  -10
   56  L      6  -16
   57  W      9    2
   58  W      2    6
   59  L      1    5
   60  L      1    4
   61  L      1    3
   62  L      2    1
   63  L      3   -2
   64  L      0   -2
   65  L      0   -2
   66  L      0   -2
   67  L      0   -2
   68  W      0   -2
   69  L      0   -2
   70  L      0   -2
   71  W      0   -2
   72  L      4   -6
   73  W      6    6
   74  L      1    5
   75  L      2    3
   76  L      3    0
   77  W      4    8
   78  L      1    7
   79  L      1    6
   80  L      0    6
   81  W      0    6
   82  L      2    4
   83  L      3    1
   84  L      0    1
   85  L      0    1
   86  L      0    1
   87  W      0    1
   88  L      0    1

For Kav's version of the sequence, results are even more impressive.

Max stake 25u!
Max drawdown 57u!
max profit 7u!
final profit 7u!

   1  W      1    2
    2  L      1    1
    3  L      1    0
    4  L      1   -1
    5  W      1    1
    6  L      1    0
    7  L      1   -1
    8  L      0   -1
    9  L      0   -1
   10  W      0   -1
   11  L      1   -2
   12  L      0   -2
   13  L      0   -2
   14  L      0   -2
   15  L      0   -2
   16  L      0   -2
   17  W      0   -2
   18  L      0   -2
   19  W      0   -2
   20  L      1   -3
   21  L      2   -5
   22  L      3   -8
   23  L      4  -12
   24  W      0  -12
   25  L      5  -17
   26  L      0  -17
   27  L      0  -17
   28  L      0  -17
   29  L      0  -17
   30  L      0  -17
   31  L      0  -17
   32  L      0  -17
   33  L      0  -17
   34  L      0  -17
   35  L      0  -17
   36  L      0  -17
   37  L      0  -17
   38  L      0  -17
   39  L      0  -17
   40  L      0  -17
   41  L      0  -17
   42  W      0  -17
   43  L      0  -17
   44  L      0  -17
   45  L      0  -17
   46  L      0  -17
   47  L      0  -17
   48  L      0  -17
   49  L      0  -17
   50  L      0  -17
   51  W      0  -17
   52  L      0  -17
   53  W      0  -17
   54  W      9    1
   55  L      2   -1
   56  L      3   -4
   57  L      4   -8
   58  L      6  -14
   59  L      8  -22
   60  L      0  -22
   61  L      0  -22
   62  L      0  -22
   63  L      0  -22
   64  W      0  -22
   65  W      0  -22
   66  L     11  -33
   67  L     15  -48
   68  W     20   -8
   69  L      6  -14
   70  W      8    2
   71  L      3   -1
   72  L      4   -5
   73  W      5    5
   74  L      2    3
   75  L      3    0
   76  L      4   -4
   77  W      0   -4
   78  L      5   -9
   79  L      7  -16
   80  L      0  -16
   81  W      0  -16
   82  L     10  -26
   83  L     13  -39
   84  L      0  -39
   85  W      0  -39
   86  L     18  -57
   87  W     25   -7
   88  W      7    7

 :)
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 10, 2017, 11:23:05 AM
A more sophisticated plan would be to adjust stakes according to your moving average strike rate. So like the Kelly plan, you need to know what the strike rate is. e.g. say your strike rate is X, and P is some fixed %, then the rules could be as follows

IF SR < X over the last 10 bets
   Stake = Stake - Stake * P

IF SR < X over the last 20 bets
   Stake = Stake - Stake * 2 * P

IF SR < X over the last 30 bets
   Stake = Stake - Stake * 3 * P

and a similar set of rules for when SR > X, except Stake = Stake + Stake * P
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 10, 2017, 09:52:10 PM
@ Bayes

Very impressive progression. I cannot understand how you determine how much to bet, and when to bet 0, but I know you're still working on it. When you finalize your progression, I'd love to test it myself.

Hopefully this progression will also do well in "average" games. Most progressions I've tried that do well in losing sessions, don't do too well in average or good sessions (profit is too low). Hopefully it's not the case here.

Great work!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: MrPerfect. on April 11, 2017, 01:36:26 AM
 My advice was to select " dousen" wisely. Problems with the dousen are that they are composed by numbers scattered all over the wheel. If dousen hit on last spin, it just means that somewhere on the wheel ball stoped, nothing else. Wheel layout designed the way to maximise randomness of dousens and other "choises" kindly offered with so called " equal" chances.
      People have to understand that these "choices" is just an illusion of the choices,  "equal chances" are not equal either.
      It's imposible to overcome wrong choice with progression. There are math limits to its performance and these are dictated by variance.
When variance on your side, you just do not press hard enough,  when it egainst you, you will be chasing losses. In first case it's loss of time and on second.... worst, it's loss of both time and money.
       W/L stats may be used to judge performance of best sector of consequtive numbers , to try limit affect of some unknown variable, to measure your performance in selection of bets,even to design progression..... but only in the case when DEGREES OF THE SYSTEM ARE LIMITED. 
      Choice of one " fixed" randomly scattered around the wheel dousen do not offer anything for analysis unless it's your ability to choose it in the first place. Would be much more productive to design progressions for something else, like best 12 numbers , for example. Designing specific progressions for specific situations where your numbers of choice will have different edge will be super! You could upply it on any wheel....
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on April 11, 2017, 03:11:26 AM
Harry J uses double streets which are quite flexible on the felt.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 11, 2017, 10:09:15 AM
@ Bayes

Very impressive progression. I cannot understand how you determine how much to bet, and when to bet 0, but I know you're still working on it. When you finalize your progression, I'd love to test it myself.

Hopefully this progression will also do well in "average" games. Most progressions I've tried that do well in losing sessions, don't do too well in average or good sessions (profit is too low). Hopefully it's not the case here.

The algorithm is fairly simple, and there are 2 main parameters: the divisor and the target, both of which can be varied, although you really need to keep the target fixed until you've achieved it over a number of spins (which may vary). The divisor can be varied at any time, depending on current conditions. I'll post a detailed example of how it works later, but here's an example of an "average" game, with the target set to 1u every 7 spins and a divisor of 2.8.

   1  L      1   -1
    2  L      1   -2
    3  L      1   -3
    4  W      1   -1
    5  L      1   -2
    6  L      1   -3
    7  L      0   -3
    8  W      0   -3
    9  W      1   -1
   10  L      1   -2
   11  W      1    0
   12  L      1   -1
   13  L      1   -2
   14  L      1   -3
   15  L      2   -5
   16  W      0   -5
   17  L      3   -8
   18  L      0   -8
   19  W      0   -8
   20  L      4  -12
   21  W      5   -2
   22  L      2   -4
   23  L      3   -7
   24  W      4    1
   25  L      1    0
   26  L      1   -1
   27  W      1    1
   28  W      1    3
   29  L      1    2
   30  L      1    1
   31  L      1    0
   32  L      1   -1
   33  L      2   -3
   34  W      0   -3
   35  L      0   -3
   36  W      0   -3
   37  L      3   -6
   38  W      4    2
   39  L      1    1
   40  L      1    0
   41  W      2    4
   42  W      1    6

So the target was achieved after 42 bets (6 * 7 = 42). The price you pay for keeping the target modest is that on really good sequences you still only make 1 u every 7 spins, which isn't very efficient, but I have some ideas about how it can be improved when the expectations are running high.

The divisor is the main factor which determines how quickly stakes increase on losing runs. If it's the same as the odds, then this amounts to a martingale type progression (1 win clears all debt and gives a profit). i.e. if the divisor was set to 2, because the odds are 2-1, a win will clear all losses and give you profit of whatever the current target is. This allows for a lot of flexibility because you can adjust the divisor to whatever odds you like. Find the odds of an event and set the divisor to it. For example, you could target 2 dozen wins in a row, the odds of which are approx 8-1, so setting the divisor to 8 will get you to your target when this event occurs.

 
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: MrPerfect. on April 11, 2017, 11:18:46 AM
Harry J uses double streets which are quite flexible on the felt.
Single ones are even more interesting. .. many of them have numbers that are near one with another or opposite. Often player may miss a revolution or ball miss diamond...  it goes opposite quite often.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 11, 2017, 03:17:59 PM
This allows for a lot of flexibility because you can adjust the divisor to whatever odds you like. Find the odds of an event and set the divisor to it. For example, you could target 2 dozen wins in a row, the odds of which are approx 8-1, so setting the divisor to 8 will get you to your target when this event occurs.

Oh, I see now. Thanks for explaining it more clearly!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Harryj on April 11, 2017, 03:40:25 PM
  @Mr Perfect,
             I did try ones and twos and threes etc. I found that alternating sectors around the wheel didn't work. One needs to fight random with random !  In the end I found that one sector of 3 or 4 pockets and the rest in twos worked best. As long as they were fairly evenly BUT RANDOMLY SPREAD. I found that betting 12 single numbers on the layout was a bit of a bore. I could achieve almost exactly what I was looking for using DS on the European wheel.
          Be warned it is more complex on the American wheel, because DS are not randomly spread. If I were playing the American wheel I would redo the research to account for this fact. 
          Harry

 
Title: Probability Question
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 12, 2017, 05:36:07 PM
Can someone help me with this math problem? I need an answer for "Z1" and "Z2" to my question at the end.

Now, I know the answer to this:

For every ONE (Z1) time I win a bet for a Dozen, I will lose TWO (Z2) times, to the other Dozens.

However, I'm doing testing on the YZZ scenario (how many times it wins vs loses). This is what I am doing. After a YZZ, if it WINS on the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd bet, I count that as a WIN. If it does not win by the 3rd bet, it is a loss.

I am not keeping track as to WHICH bet wins (1st, 2nd or 3rd), just whether or not it wins, period.

Now, my question is the following:

For every "Z1" times I WIN a bet for Y, I will lose "Z2" times to the other Dozens.

1 win to every 2 losses does NOT work for the above question, since there are as many as THREE bets to take into consideration (3 chances) and not just ONE.

Thanks for your help!
Title: Re: Probability Question
Post by: Bayes on April 12, 2017, 05:43:37 PM
Now, my question is the following:
For every "Z1" times I WIN abet for Y, I will lose "Z2" times to the other Dozens.

TERM, can you clarify? This isn't a question but a statement.  :D

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 12, 2017, 05:46:44 PM
I am looking for a number to enter in place of "Z1" and Z2." Sort of like Algebra.

"For every (blank) times I WIN a bet for Y, I will lose (blank) times to the other Dozens."

Does this make more sense? Maybe I'm not phrasing my question correctly.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 12, 2017, 05:56:15 PM
Ok I think I know what you mean. You want to know how many times you mark a win (w) considering that it's a win when you get at least one hit in the 3 spins versus how many times none of the 3 spins gives you win, right?

If that's correct the probability is 70% you will get at least one win, so for every 7 times you win, you will lose 3 times. i.e the odds are 7-3 for a win, 3-7 against.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 12, 2017, 06:38:00 PM
Thank you, Bayes. That's what I needed!

I went thru the last 20 games tested, and looked for all the YZZ patterns. So far the average number of wins is 7.5, and the average number of losses is 3.2. So, this YZZ pattern does a LITTLE bit better than the average expectancy so far.
Title: Excel - Single Dozen Tracker for all your games
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 12, 2017, 07:00:27 PM
For those interested, I created an Excel sheet to keep track of all your games tested or played on ONE sheet. It can be used for testing purposes, or to keep track of your actual play with real money.

It automatically keeps track of the following TOTALS, AVERAGES, and HIGHEST AMOUNTS REACHED in the following categories:

- Total Units won or lost
- Number of individual bets won
- Number of individual bets lost
- Highest Progression Level Reached
- Most Losses in a Row
- Highest Bet Made
- Largest Debt
- How many times an XYY pattern won
- How many times an XYY pattern lost

An example of the last 20 games I played are on here. Simply delete the numbers on the left side of the sheet. I created another sheet with my results deleted, so all you need to do is enter your own results. When you enter your own numbers on the left side with your own results, the right side statistics are automatically displayed.

Also, I am putting the most recent update to the Single Dozen individual games also. Enjoy!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on April 12, 2017, 09:18:40 PM
Thank you, Bayes. That's what I needed!

I went thru the last 20 games tested, and looked for all the YZZ patterns. So far the average number of wins is 7.5, and the average number of losses is 3.2. So, this YZZ pattern does a LITTLE bit better than the average expectancy so far.
If you are going thru all this trouble, y can't you keep track of the most frequent winning  range?
If it is in the first 2 pins (either spin-1 or spin-2) where most of the winnings happen, then obviously that's a great advantage.
 
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 13, 2017, 12:10:16 AM
I tried doing that in the beginning, but it was too time consuming. It has to be done manually for each game played. And instead of 1 simple category (of either a win or loss for XYY), I needed at least 4 additional categories (000 XYY,  X00 XYY, 0X0 XYY, and 00X XYY) with a win and loss in each one.

If this could be automated somehow, I'd gladly add this to my stats.

I DID do the first 2 games. And when there was NO X in the previous 3 spins before XYY, it had 6 wins. When there was an X00 XYY, there were 3 wins, and both 0X0 and 00X had 4 wins each.

But it was way too time consuming, and when I double checked my work, there were mistakes and such. So, I am just focusing on just XYY for now.

Palestis, if you want, I will do ONE category. So, instead of XYY by itself, I will just look at those XYY's where NO X's appeared in the previous 3 spins at all, since this is most likely the most profitable. Would you prefer I do that instead of XYY by itself?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 13, 2017, 05:46:09 AM
Okay, I went through my last 20 games, again, and THIS time I looked for all triggers of XYY, in which the previous 3 spins did NOT include an X. Here are the results:

Wins =  53
Loses = 15


So, if it's 7 wins to every 3 losses, it seems like a very good outcome! If we divide both numbers by 5, then the losses become a total of 3. And the wins are 11 (actually 10.6, but I rounded it off). Considering that 7 are the expected wins, winning 11 is pretty damn good!

So, this small sample of 20 games (200 spins each, total of 4000 roulette spins), seems to confirm that an XYY trigger IS a favorite to hit when the previous 3 spins were NOT an X.

 :D That's 57% ABOVE expectation!  :D

 
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 13, 2017, 08:36:02 AM
Okay, I went through my last 20 games, again, and THIS time I looked for all triggers of XYY, in which the previous 3 spins did NOT include an X.

TERM, do you mean just bet the missing dozen in the last 3 spins?

I would be cautious about coming to conclusions based on limited data. Mathematically all 27 three spin patterns have the same chance, although one or two may dominate in a given short term (which actually might be quite a lot of spins). You could try tracking all of them and betting on the one in the lead, or combining the top performers and selecting the dozen which is common to them, but that would be taking us far from palestis' original selection method.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on April 13, 2017, 11:21:06 AM
Okay, I went through my last 20 games, again, and THIS time I looked for all triggers of XYY, in which the previous 3 spins did NOT include an X. Here are the results:

Wins =  53
Loses = 15


I am certain that besides the higher hit rate of this trigger under the conditions of no X's prior to the XYY, it is very rare to run into back to back trigger losses. Where counting all triggers, sometimes 2 back to back trigger losses are possible, in this case they become even more rarer.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: kav on April 13, 2017, 12:07:36 PM
The normal hit rate if we bet a dozen 3 times is 70%
The 53/68, if it is any indication, is a 77% hit rate.

So after all the suggested trigger is after XYY bet X if there was no X before X?

YYXYY is a trigger?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 13, 2017, 06:26:44 PM
Bayes asked:
Quote
TERM, do you mean just bet the missing dozen in the last 3 spins?

No, I'm not saying this. See below.

Kav asked:
Quote
So after all the suggested trigger is after XYY bet X if there was no X before X?
YYXYY is a trigger?

Not exactly. Your example is only looking at the last TWO previous spins (YY) BEFORE the XYY trigger; whereas I'm looking at the last THREE spins prior to the XYY trigger.

This is what I'm doing. As Reyth pointed out in an earlier post:
Quote
Have you noticed a difference between triggers:

1) YXX
2) XYX
3) XXY

I would expect that trigger #1 would perform the best, followed by 2 and with 3 performing the worst.

The statistical differences as far as streaks are concerned are:

1) 85.92% (2 buffer + 3 bets = 5 streak)
2) 79.16% (1 buffer + 3 bets = 4 streak)
3) 69.16% (0 buffer + 3 bets = 3 streak)

This is a 16.76% difference between trigger 1 and trigger 3!

So, the YXX trigger is the most likely to hit of the 3 different triggers.

However, as Palestis pointed out, there may be ways to make even THIS more likely...IF we look at the PREVIOUS THREE SPINS before that XYY trigger.


This is what I did in my tests:
Of all the occurrences of the XYY trigger that I wagered on in my last 4000 spins, I went back and LOOKED at the previous THREE spins BEFORE the XYY trigger. If there was NO "X" in those three spins, then I would record if that XYY trigger WON or LOST. That's it.

It turns out that it won 57% above the expected outcome.

Hope this clarifies your questions?

Kav wrote:
Quote
The normal hit rate if we bet a dozen 3 times is 70%
The 53/68, if it is any indication, is a 77% hit rate.

It wasn't a 53/68 win/loss rate. It was a 53/15 win/loss rate.

If the hit rate is 70%, that means for every 3 losses, we get 7 wins.
Therefore, let's take the 15 losses I got. The expected wins are 35. But instead of 35 wins, I got 53 wins instead! This is 57% above expectation. Over a course of 4,000 roulette spins.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 13, 2017, 06:54:16 PM
I think a good way to take advantage of this is during a bad losing streak.

For example, if the progression level reaches a certain level and we lose, to cut down the chances of losing even MORE, we can now be MORE SELECTIVE of our trigger selection. The next time we look for a trigger, ONLY look for an XYY trigger. Once that XYY trigger is found, THEN do one more step.

Look at the previous 3 spins BEFORE that XYY trigger. If the "X" appear in those 3 previous spins, do not bet. If it does NOT appear in those 3 previous spins, then you bet.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on April 13, 2017, 06:57:48 PM
LOL!  You guys ready!?

http://imgur.com/syUDdFm (http://imgur.com/syUDdFm)

I think I know what Pales and Harry were thinking regarding this trigger!  Its like horse racing where each of the Dozens are in a race and we don't back the sleeper, nor do we back the front runner but we back the NORMALLY APPEARING number instead!

So for me its a battle between spin by spin statistics, analyzed by series and LOTT analyzed by groups of 37 spins.

I must say though, that I seem to want to hold to spin by spin statistics! O_o o_O
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: kav on April 13, 2017, 09:04:24 PM
Kav wrote:
Quote
The normal hit rate if we bet a dozen 3 times is 70%
The 53/68, if it is any indication, is a 77% hit rate.

It wasn't a 53/68 win/loss rate. It was a 53/15 win/loss rate.

If the hit rate is 70%, that means for every 3 losses, we get 7 wins.
Therefore, let's take the 15 losses I got. The expected wins are 35. But instead of 35 wins, I got 53 wins instead! This is 57% above expectation. Over a course of 4,000 roulette spins.

Term,

I never said it was a 53/68 win/loss rate. i said it was a 53/68 win rate. In 68 attacks you won the 53.
This is 53x100/68 =78% win rate (77,9% to be exact)
This means that (if the stats of your test hold long term), in every 100 attacks, you will win the 78.
Without any triggers one should on average win 69 (69,2 to be exact) times out of 100 when betting a dozen 3 times.

In 68 attacks, betting on dozens 3 times without trigger one expects 47 wins and 21 losses, instead of your 53 wins and 15 losses.

In 50 attacks your trigger will produce 39 wins 11 losses. Without trigger we will have 35 wins 15 losses.

I think that the win/loss rate is misleading.
Anyway this is it:  3,5 wins per loss with the trigger, 2,3 wins per loss without the trigger.

With the disclaimer that we are not sure that your preliminary test will hold true in the long run.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 13, 2017, 09:20:52 PM
Thanks for clarifying that, Kav. I misunderstood.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: kav on April 13, 2017, 09:32:24 PM
You are welcome Term.

Your point that with the trigger we have 50% more wins per loss is true.

The big question is if these stats will hold long term. Need to test more spins.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on April 13, 2017, 10:13:05 PM
That's  the whole idea behind an effective trigger. 
To ensure that the target can be hit with at least its statistical expectation rate in one of the intended series of bets.
While at the same time it does not allow enough consecutive losses that can neutralize the higher hit rate.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 14, 2017, 04:13:04 AM
The big question is if these stats will hold long term. Need to test more spins.

Yes. Hopefully those who are either testing or playing this method can verify and post their results on XYY in this thread as well. The more testing from everyone the better!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: ShadowBlue on April 14, 2017, 12:20:44 PM
Good idea Terminator. I will also post results for XYY and other triggers...

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 14, 2017, 12:29:12 PM
This is what I did in my tests:
Of all the occurrences of the XYY trigger that I wagered on in my last 4000 spins, I went back and LOOKED at the previous THREE spins BEFORE the XYY trigger. If there was NO "X" in those three spins, then I would record if that XYY trigger WON or LOST. That's it.

TERM, were you ignoring the "red flag" rules in your tests of this?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 14, 2017, 03:52:35 PM
Worst session yet encountered. At spin 28 (on the Dozens) there were 4 losses in a row, followed by 2 wins, another loss, a win, then another 3 losses in a row. This took the stake to the maximum of 27u. It did eventually recover flat betting at the max stake and made the target profit of 42 units at spin 336.

This was a negative 3 stdev event.  :P
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on April 14, 2017, 04:37:54 PM
Very nice!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 14, 2017, 04:53:44 PM
TERM, were you ignoring the "red flag" rules in your tests of this?

Good question, Bayes! Let me explain. I used ALL of the Red Flag rules while I actually played the game itself. HOWEVER, when I went back to see the previous 3 spins PRIOR to the XYY, it WAS necessary to ignore Rule #3, when we only bet TWICE instead of THREE TIMES.

I will give you some examples (XYY trigger is in bold blue):

Example #1:

H                            (This HLH is the 3 spins before THE MLL TRIGGER)
L
H
M
L
L
                             (I bet for M starting next bet)
L                             (Bet 1 unit, lose)
L                             (Bet 1 unit lose)
H                             (STOP BETTING because the two L's above appeared in the dominant dozen of the trigger)

In the above case, I would COUNT that last "H" as part of the 3 attempts, and this is recorded as a LOSS. That way, the sequence of 3 is complete, otherwise, if we only take into consideration the TWO spins that I bet, this will mess up the expected 70% win rate of using a sequence of 3 for this XYY test. We CANNOT use the NEXT bet from the NEXT trigger (even though that's where we actually bet the third time), because the next trigger is a DIFFERENT trigger.

-

Example #2:

H                            (This HLH is the 3 spins before THE MLL TRIGGER)
L
H
M
L
L
                             (I bet for M starting next bet)
L                             (Bet 1 unit, lose)
L                             (Bet 1 unit lose)
M                           (STOP BETTING because the two L's above appeared in the dominant dozen of the trigger)

-

In the above case, I would COUNT that last "M" as part of the 3 attempts, and this is recorded as a WIN. Even though we DID NOT bet this spin in the actual game. Otherwise, the stats would be thrown off.

-

Also, if one of the 3 previous spins were a ZERO, that zero IS part of the previous 3 spins, so I would count it. For example:

Example #3:

M                            (This M does NOT count as part of the 3 spins prior to the trigger)
H                            (This H0H is the 3 spins before THE MLL TRIGGER)
0                            (A ZERO was spun in the 3 spins prior to the XYY trigger)
H
M
L
L
                             (I bet for M starting next bet)
L                             (Bet 1 unit, lose)
H                            (Bet 1 unit lose)
M                           (Bet 2 units, win.)

The ZERO does COUNT when looking at the prior 3 spins, BECAUSE this is a spin where the Target Dozen did NOT appear. And this is recorded as a WIN. FYI, when I play my games, I ALSO ignore the zeros, since several people have confirmed that there is NOT much of a difference whether or not we SKIP the zero's.

Hope this clarifies your question.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: kav on April 14, 2017, 05:14:00 PM
Bayes,
Very good results.
Which progression did you use?

Thanks
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 14, 2017, 05:23:36 PM
Worst session yet encountered.

Bayes, I cannot follow your triggers in your results doc.

For example, in spin 28, an "l"  at spin 28 is usually placed at the END of the trigger. Correct? So, spin 26,27, and 28 would be the trigger, and you indicate if this trigger won or lost by placing a W or L on line 28 if one of the next 3 spins won or lost. At least this is how your last version of Dr Dozen worked.

Thanks for clarifying.

Also, I would love some more details on your progression. Are you still fine tuning it?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 14, 2017, 06:13:00 PM
The price you pay for keeping the target modest is that on really good sequences you still only make 1 u every 7 spins, which isn't very efficient, but I have some ideas about how it can be improved when the expectations are running high.

1 unit every 7 spins is better than what I am currently averaging, Bayes. I average 22 units every 200 spins. If you average 1 unit every 7 spins, that would make your average 29 units per 200 spins, which is awesome.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 14, 2017, 06:35:21 PM
Which progression did you use?

It's a modification of the progression I used on the "sequence from hell" I posted earlier. The mod is to keep track of the target which increases by one every 8 spins (raised from 7 which I thought was too optimistic - and actually I think it could be raised further, especially since some spins are not bet - I think 10 would be better).

Initially the bank and target are set to zero, and at all times if the bank is greater than or equal to the target the stake remains at one unit. Otherwise, the stake is increase by 1 u per spin, unless, when the profit is calculated assuming this increase it would result in more than 1 u profit if the bet won. If this is the case it's adjusted down so that it results in no more than 1u profit.

i.e.

Add 1 to stake
IF 2 * stake > (target - current bank) THEN
    stake = (target - current bank) / 2

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 14, 2017, 06:57:28 PM
Bayes, I cannot follow your triggers in your results doc.

Yes it is a bit confusing if you forget that having started an attack, it continues for 3 spins regardless of when the win occurs. Also note that it doesn't look for a trigger until 6 spins have been recorded. Also the start of the losing sequence begins after the 27th bet not the 28th (the numbers are shifted down by one because the column headings are in line one on the spreadsheet).

So starting from the beginning the first bet is on line 7 and is on H. This is won on line 9 but there is one more spin before looking for a new trigger, which is found on line 10 and is H. However, this bet is aborted after 2 spins (line 12) because of rule #3, and there is then one more spin to complete the 3 spins before another trigger is looked for. If you continue in this way you should see that it all works out by the time you get to the 4 losses in a row.

Rule #3 does present a bit of a problem and I never thought to look at the next spin and to record a virtual loss or win. I suppose you're right in that it does throw off the stats, but then you always lose 2 bets, so it doesn't seem right to record it as an actual win, because you never place the winning bet.

Regarding the progression, I haven't implemented in the tracker because I'm planning to write a more generic application, since it can apply to any odds. So it's probably better to explain it in a new thread. I'll do that tomorrow.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: kav on April 14, 2017, 07:41:29 PM
Bayes,

Thanks for your reply I understand this description

Quote
Add 1 to stake
IF 2 * stake > (target - current bank) THEN
    stake = (target - current bank) / 2

What I don't understand is why there are instances that your total is negative yet you bet 0

A summary would be very useful, because we are brainstorming on various ideas and it gets confusing.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 14, 2017, 08:20:09 PM
Thanks for explaining your Results doc more clearly, Bayes.

Rule #3 does present a bit of a problem and I never thought to look at the next spin and to record a virtual loss or win. I suppose you're right in that it does throw off the stats, but then you always lose 2 bets, so it doesn't seem right to record it as an actual win, because you never place the winning bet.

But remember, this XYY test is SEPERATE from the actual game itself. The only thing we are trying to determine, at this point, is if the XYY HITS more times than not, within those 3 spins (if an "X" does not appear before it). Period. It does not matter how many actual BETS we made for that XYY trigger (whether it's 1,2, or 3), because we are not looking at how many BETS we made. We are only looking at how many HITS it made within those three SPINS after the XYY trigger (and the 3 spins prior).

So, that's why we look at the three SPINS (regardless if they were all bet or not).

After these XYY results are in, and we determine that they ARE more profitable, only THEN can we incorporate these results into our actual game. And THEN we can determine whether or not to use the Red Flags when using this Special Trigger.

For all we know, it may be more profitable to IGNORE rule #3 only when we use this special XYY trigger in this specific circumstance, but still use rule #3 on XYY when we do NOT take the previous 3 spins into consideration. But we will not know this if we only take into consideration the spins that were bet.

For example, if we look at 100 XYY bets in which we used rule #3, and made only TWO bets, and it turns out that the 3rd bet (the one we did not bet on) would have actually WON in 80 of those games, then we might consider ignoring this red flag for this special trigger.

But, if we IGNORE this 3rd bet in our XYY Test because we did not BET this 3rd bet, then we will never know!

Quote
Regarding the progression, I haven't implemented in the tracker because I'm planning to write a more generic application, since it can apply to any odds. So it's probably better to explain it in a new thread. I'll do that tomorrow.

Awesome! I look forward to it. Maybe you can elaborate as to what you meant when you said "keep track of the target" and "current bank" when you post this in a new thread.

Thanks Bayes!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on April 14, 2017, 09:44:45 PM
Worst session yet encountered. At spin 28 (on the Dozens) there were 4 losses in a row, followed by 2 wins, another loss, a win, then another 3 losses in a row. This took the stake to the maximum of 27u. It did eventually recover flat betting at the max stake and made the target profit of 42 units at spin 336.

This was a negative 3 stdev event.  :P
I am a little puzzled about this:
First there are WW back to back. What trigger the second W comes from?
 Because you can't have either WW or LL in this system in 2 consecutive numbers.
Then there is a W  in the 3rd spin after WW and another one in the 3rd spin after WW..W..W.
I was wondering what triggers they came from. That can only happen if numbers from previous triggers are used.
And the same I noticed in the first L  of the 4 back to back losses.  If the trigger used was 33-20-20 then the L should be marked in the 3rd losing spin. That would be 12-17- 20 the three losing spins of the trigger. That will push the next trigger a little further.
Can you clarify this?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on April 14, 2017, 11:03:11 PM
@Bayes.
I processed the numbers you worked on in the excel sheet, manually.  But only the range where you observed the concentration of the most losses. I started using numbers from the beginning. After all it is a test.
But I didn't run into 4 back to back losses. ( that is 4 trigger losses).
By back to back losses I always mean an entire trigger loss@ 3 spins each.
So 4 back to back losses translates into 12 lost spins. I only found 2 back to back losses ( 6 spins).
Also when a trigger wins in the 3rd spin, I don't mark the first 2 spins as lost (red dash).
I only place 3 red dashes if the entire trigger loses.
Likewise, I don't mark the first spin as lost if it wins in the 2nd spin.
I consider a win in any of the 3 spins,  as a won trigger cycle.
I wanted to clarify your findings as 4 consecutive losses,  if it was 4 spins or 12 spins.
When you say 4 in a row, I take it as 12 spins (4 triggers @ 3 spins ea.).
Because I get the impression that you count each individual spin as 1 loss.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 15, 2017, 07:08:01 AM
Palestis, in your screenshot you've marked the spins starting at line 13 (H M M) as a trigger, but since the 3 spins prior to the trigger are LLL this breaks rules 1 and 2, so this trigger should be skipped?

And also don't forget that the tracker waits until 3 spins have passed after a trigger before looking for a new one, which partly explains why my triggers are different.

Yes, when I refer to losses I mean L = a failed trigger, which equals 3 bets.

Since you've had the tracker for a while now and haven't said that anything was wrong with the bet selections, I assumed it was ok. That was the main reason I sent it to you in the first place.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 15, 2017, 07:14:00 AM

What I don't understand is why there are instances that your total is negative yet you bet 0

A summary would be very useful, because we are brainstorming on various ideas and it gets confusing.

Kav, this progression is a mod of the one I used in the original sequence I posted, not the redistribution of it you posted in reply # 344. In that first progression (similar to "foolproof" and "maxim") there is no betting of zero units; that was something I added to the new divisor progression I created in response to the sequence in reply 344.

I agree, it's getting confusing. Perhaps we should stick to discussing the bet selection in this thread, which is also confusing.  ;)
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: kav on April 15, 2017, 09:10:20 AM
I see now. What you are doing is this:

Quote
Looking at the last 6 outcomes (w/L) and betting 0 units if there is less than 2 wins (i.e. at least expectation in the last 6 spins), and reverting to the standard divisor otherwise

and this:

Quote
Add 1 to stake
IF 2 * stake > (target - current bank) THEN
    stake = (target - current bank) / 2

Great ideas both.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 15, 2017, 09:57:55 AM
Because you can't have either WW or LL in this system in 2 consecutive numbers.

I agree you can't have LL in 2 consecutive numbers, but why can't you have WW in 2 consecutive numbers? This makes me think the way I'm choosing triggers is completely different from the way you're doing it. According to my understanding, this is valid:

M
M
H  Trigger = H
H  win. Now look back 3, the trigger is M
M  win.

So 2 wins in 2 spins??

A reminder of your first post in this thread:

Quote
The trigger is in the form of XXY. (XX are 2 numbers in the same dozen and Y is another dozen).
 Needless to say that XYX and YXX is the same thing as far as the trigger is concerned.
When we see this trigger in the last 3 numbers spun we simply bet the single dozen (Y), for 3 bets

I think we need to go back to basics and clear up any misunderstandings and ambiguity.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 15, 2017, 10:12:29 AM
@ Kav, I wasn't using both those rules together in the session I just played, because they belong to different progressions, but they could be combined.

Quote
Looking at the last 6 outcomes (w/L) and betting 0 units if there is less than 2 wins (i.e. at least expectation in the last 6 spins), and reverting to the standard divisor otherwise

It might be better to look at things in terms of "cycles", where a cycle for a dozen bet is 3 spins. In that case, the above rule doesn't work because you could have WW LLLL :  Here there was no win in the last cycle, even though over 2 cycles there were 2 wins. So an improved rule might be "at least one win in each cycle. e.g. WLL LWL or WLW LLW would satisfy the rule but LLL WWL or WWW LLL would not.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: MrPerfect. on April 15, 2017, 10:37:12 AM
To wait for something to happen first need to sertify yourself that this somethING does in fact changes expectation. If not, why to bother?
   Stats trigger for randomly selected group of numbers ( dousen) , when it already does not hit... sounds like a wishfull thinking. 
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 15, 2017, 11:14:02 AM
Mr P, in the first place, it's not wishful thinking but an attempt to capitalize on trends/clusters, which do occur. Secondly, it's not a "random" dozen. It's chosen by a particular selection process. You can argue that the process is flawed (but not according to the empirical data gathered so far), but the dozen itself isn't randomly chosen.

I think your post is just another example of "It's not AP so it won't work!".   ::)
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on April 15, 2017, 01:12:11 PM
Because you can't have either WW or LL in this system in 2 consecutive numbers.

I agree you can't have LL in 2 consecutive numbers, but why can't you have WW in 2 consecutive numbers? This makes me think the way I'm choosing triggers is completely different from the way you're doing it. According to my understanding, this is valid:

M
M
H  Trigger = H
H  win. Now look back 3, the trigger is M
M  win.

So 2 wins in 2 spins??

I think we need to go back to basics and clear up any misunderstandings and ambiguity.
Now I see how you get WW.
Translating your example into numbers it will look like this:
M M H H M:   20-21-30- 31-22.
The first trigger (20-21-30) wins with 31.
That forms another trigger which is 21-30-31 which also wins consecutively with 22.
I don't know if I  made it clear from the beginning, but I always meant to use fresh new numbers when proceeding in the next trigger after one trigger was processed. ( whether it was W or L).
In this example I'd wait for new numbers to spin after 31. Without taking into account any previous numbers prior to 22. (31 was the end result of the last trigger)
Maybe that wasn't clear from the beginning. But in my manually processed examples I always circled the next trigger using fresh numbers. If I had to circle previous numbers, obviously the circles will intersect each other and the picture will look like a mess, making it impossible to understand.
HARRYJ does use previous numbers if they form a trigger. ( with conditions of course).
To expedite the session, since he only plays in one roulette seated. Plus to take advantage of "the flow", whenever there  is one.
The system doesn't behave badly if you use prior numbers.
But I found that using fresh numbers only, it gets better results.
Plus it simulates  actual playing conditions.
That means after a trigger and its results, you have to wait standing by in the same roulette to see the next 3 numbers.
Which might take some time, waiting to see an XYX or YXX or XXY. Plus complying with the rules of selection.
However the next table, or tables (in a real casino), might already have a ready made trigger with the last 3 numbers displayed. Then obviously you will move over to that table.

Anyway I hope that this clears any misunderstanding about trigger selection.
Maybe that explains y I don't find 3 back to back losses, except in extremely  rare occasions, and certainly haven't found 4 yet.
I don't know if Terminator is using fresh numbers only, or uses some of the already spun numbers if they form a trigger.
Needless to say that after a trigger,  the 1 or 2 or up to 3 bets that you will place, are also considered
used up numbers. 
At the same time is this new information going to affect the tracker? 

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 15, 2017, 02:36:26 PM
This makes me think the way I'm choosing triggers is completely different from the way you're doing it. According to my understanding, this is valid:

M
M
H  Trigger = H
H  win. Now look back 3, the trigger is M
M  win.

So 2 wins in 2 spins??

A reminder of your first post in this thread:

Bayes, this is the way HarryJ picks triggers. Palestis has said in several earlier posts that he never uses triggers from previous bets.

Quote
Palestis, in your screenshot you've marked the spins starting at line 13 (H M M) as a trigger, but since the 3 spins prior to the trigger are LLL this breaks rules 1 and 2, so this trigger should be skipped?

Yes, it should be skipped. But, in my experience, the rules usually change when Palestis replays our lost games. No offense Palestis.

@ Palestis:

Quote
But I found that using fresh numbers only, it gets better results.
Plus it simulates  actual playing conditions.
That means after a trigger and its results, you have to wait standing by in the same roulette to see the next 3 numbers.

Yes, I second this. I experimented with lots of games using both Harry's and Palestis's methods, and the win/loss ratio was definitely much better with Palestis's. Even though Harrys' does get that lucky 5 or 6 wins in a row spin after spin sometimes, and it is more fun to play Harrys' because we're betting more frequently, Palestis's did have better results.

Quote
I don't know if Terminator is using fresh numbers only, or uses some of the already spun numbers if they form a trigger.

I only use fresh numbers, as far as all the games and tests I have posted in this thread. And I use all of your rules and Red Flags, Palestis, the way you explained them. I have also tested Harry's and Eddy's methods, as well as tons of different progressions, on the side, but all games I posted in this thread were according to your method's.

Bayes, can you please post a link here if you start a new thread with your progression? I'm looking forward to experimenting with it! Thanks.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: MrPerfect. on April 15, 2017, 02:48:45 PM
Mr P, in the first place, it's not wishful thinking but an attempt to capitalize on trends/clusters, which do occur. Secondly, it's not a "random" dozen. It's chosen by a particular selection process. You can argue that the process is flawed (but not according to the empirical data gathered so far), but the dozen itself isn't randomly chosen.

I think your post is just another example of "It's not AP so it won't work!".   ::)
So how much data you get  so far? It shows credible confidence interval, isn't it? It's definitely statistically relevant , stable in results and credible choice of a target, right?
    Obviosly nothing will work if you bank negative expectation.
    You can make your choices impirically, nothing wrong about it. Just need to do do it based on something other then results themselves.  You need hypotesys formed first and empirical confirmation later. It's all should be conducted in environment where parameters do have limits ( at least registered and accounted). If not, how you wanna have multivariable analysis sample size allowance without going multivariable in the first place?
  I'm not arguing, just informing.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 15, 2017, 03:16:22 PM
But I found that using fresh numbers only, it gets better results.
Plus it simulates  actual playing conditions.
That means after a trigger and its results, you have to wait standing by in the same roulette to see the next 3 numbers.

I knew that Harryj bet a different way, but I don't recall you saying your way gave better results. Not sure what you mean about actual playing conditions because if Harryj plays the other way the conditions are also "actual", but different.

Anyway, I will have to change the coding in the tracker but I would have had to do it anyway, so no harm done.  ;)
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 15, 2017, 03:39:42 PM
Quote
Anyway, I will have to change the coding in the tracker

I do believe this will be an improvement, Bayes.

Also, since you're changing the coding, if I may make a suggestion, I think it may also be an improvement if you start looking for a trigger immediately after a win (instead of waiting the full 3 spins every time). This will allow less waiting time between triggers. Especially since casino's will not allow us to sit and wait too long in between bets. And it will also increase our overall profits, since we'll be betting more frequently. At least these are what my tests show.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 15, 2017, 03:47:54 PM
TERM, waiting for "fresh" spins means waiting for at least 3 spins after the previous W/L before looking for a new trigger, so the waiting time will actually be longer on average, but that's ok because the 3 options on the tracker will make up for it.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 15, 2017, 04:32:45 PM
Bayes, can you please post a link here if you start a new thread with your progression? I'm looking forward to experimenting with it! Thanks.

Sure. I won't have time today to post it but will do in the next couple of days.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 15, 2017, 04:42:39 PM
Thanks Bayes. By the 3 options, are you referring to the "Dozens, Columns, and DStreet" columns? Yes, I guess you're right, if one was betting on 2 or 3 of these options in the same game. But I was looking at it from only betting on 1 of the 3 in an actual game. But it's okay, whatever you feel is best. It's your program, and you have done an incredible job with it so far!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: kav on April 15, 2017, 05:54:29 PM
Bayes,
It is a simple question: What are the rules that tells you to bet 0?

Btw, betting 0 is like saying don't bet yet, wait for something. In a sense it is a new trigger condition incorporated into the progression.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on April 15, 2017, 11:54:01 PM

Quote
Palestis, in your screenshot you've marked the spins starting at line 13 (H M M) as a trigger, but since the 3 spins prior to the trigger are LLL this breaks rules 1 and 2, so this trigger should be skipped?

Yes, it should be skipped. But, in my experience, the rules usually change when Palestis replays our lost games. No offense Palestis.

Yes Terminator.
After the LLL (8-12-11), the next trigger that should be skipped due to the presence of LLL prior to it, is 34-13-22 (HMM as you pointed out). And I skipped it.
 The green check mark on 34 doesn't mean that this is the trigger.
It simply means that 34 was the winning number from the trigger prior to it.  Which was 4-35-8.
Therefore the next available trigger is the one I used. 13-22-28. and I circled it indicating that this is the trigger. That is MMH. That's the trigger next to the skipped one.
I hope you don't take the green checkmark as a trigger.
No. It is the winning number from the trigger before it.
Here is how I do it manually:
All 3 numbers that form a trigger are circled.
Green check mark indicates the winning number. (Placed next to the spin that won).
3 Red dashes indicate that all 3  spins after the trigger lost.
If a trigger wins in the 3rd spin, I don't put red dashes in spin-1 and spin-2.
Or if it wins in the 2nd spin I don't put red dash in spin-1. 
I hope that clears any misunderstandings. 
Title: This is just Too Bizarre! XYY Test.
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 16, 2017, 05:10:41 AM
Okay everyone. I am in the MIDDLE of doing another 4000 spin test (I have finished 10 of my 20 games), for the XYY trigger Test (with no "X" 3 spins prior).

Before I reveal the result, I want to mention something from my LAST 20 games.

As far as INDIVIDUAL WINS AND LOSSES, I had 413 wins and 751 losses. Out of 413 wins, the expectation is a loss of 837 times (11 times lost to zeros, 826 times lost to the other dozens). I only lost 751 times. A difference of 86! 

Which means I ran pretty damn good for those 20 games.

And those 20 games, for the XYY trigger, it also ran pretty damn good. As you know, the true probability is 2.3 wins per loss. But I managed 3.5 wins per loss!

ANYWAY, maybe I had a 3.5 to 1 ratio because I ran so good?!?!? Well, get a load of THIS! Out of the 10 (out of 20 games) tests I ran so far:

As far as INDIVIDUAL WINS AND LOSSES, I had 192 wins and 448 losses. Out of 192 wins, the expectation is a loss of 389 times (5 times lost to zeros, 384 times lost to the other dozens). But I lost a depressing 448 times! That's 59 losses OVER expectation!

Which means I ran pretty damn BAD for those 10 games. I ran TERRIBLE!!! Many, many losses in a row. My longest losing streak was 20 individual losses in a row!!!! WOW. The worst ever. (However, I made a profit in every game, because I never went above my 500 unit stop/loss limit)

But NOW for the whopper! How did the XYY test do??? You would THINK it would have done equally bad. Right?

However, the result is IDENTICAL to the last 20 games. It is EXACTLY 3.5 wins to every loss!!! Where the expectation is 2.3 wins for every loss. It is STILL doing awesome, even though I had many, many more losses than expected over all.

Anyway, I thought these results were impressive and inspiring and I just wanted to share it. There is definitely something to this XYY trigger with no previous X's in the 3 prior spins.

For these XYY triggers to do EQUALLY WELL whether I run GOOD or BAD, is really amazing.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on April 16, 2017, 07:04:43 AM
Great work Term!  Your work is truly inspiring! :D

Bayes work is inspiring too but Bayes by default equals inspring!
Title: Re: This is just Too Bizarre! XYY Test.
Post by: Bayes on April 16, 2017, 08:38:04 AM
My longest losing streak was 20 individual losses in a row!!!!

TERM, so that equates to 6 losses in row, counting 3 individual losses as one "attack" loss.

Since the bet selection seems to be in a state of flux (I believe palestis is also testing some other variation), I'm going to hold off recoding  the tracker until we get some firm results one way or the other. In the meantime I will focus on the progression, and add it to the tracker.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 16, 2017, 08:42:06 AM
Bayes,
It is a simple question: What are the rules that tells you to bet 0?

Kav, less than 1 win in a cycle is the condition for betting 0. A cycle for the dozen bet being 3 spins, for DS it's 6 spins, etc.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on April 16, 2017, 08:52:46 AM
Most successful roulette players I think bet 0 from time to time! :D

The other one (cough, cough) I think is doing something crazy like some form of "min bet". O_o
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: kav on April 16, 2017, 10:10:33 AM
Kav, less than 1 win in a cycle is the condition for betting 0. A cycle for the dozen bet being 3 spins, for DS it's 6 spins, etc.

Bayes I believe this a great idea.
In fact I believe it is a great type of trigger build in a progression. It is something I would certainly like to try when betting dozens continuously.
But I don't think it works well in combination with an independent trigger like the one of Palestis. It is like the one trigger tells you "bet now" and you saying "no I wont, because I lost too many attacks recently"

Maybe we should start a "Bayes' dozens" Topic.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 16, 2017, 11:17:52 AM
Kav, it's interesting to calculate the chances of getting a "whipsaw" when skipping bets in this way. This is the curse of any attempt to use "virtual wins" as a trigger. For a dozen, we know that the chance of at least 1 hit in 3 spins is 69.1% (single zero). Suppose we follow the rule of no bet when you don't get at least one hit in the last 3 bets (a cycle).

The following could happen, in which case it's equivalent (in terms of loss) to getting 12 losses (individual single bets) in a row. Assuming flat bets to keep things simple, we get:

W Trigger
L  -3 u
W Trigger
L -6 u
W Trigger
L -9
W Trigger
L -12

Now let's calculate the probablity of this sequence, given the probability of a win = 69.1% and probability of loss = 100 - 69.1% = 30.9%

There were 4 losses and 4 wins so the probability is (0.691)4 x (0.309)4 = 0.21%

Now let's calculate the probability of 12 straight losses in a row for a dozen bet:

Probability = (1-12/37)12 = 0.91%

So although both probabilities are small, and both results are financially speaking the same (and 12 bets were made in both cases), the 12 straight losses are 0.91/0.21 = 4.33 times more likely than the same number of losses when following the "only bet after a win" rule. Nice!  :)   
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on April 16, 2017, 12:28:36 PM
Holy crap!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 16, 2017, 01:26:32 PM
Reyth, that was my reaction too. I kept thinking I'd made a mistake so I checked and double-checked, but the calculation is good as far as I can see.

Most system players who play around with bet selections would probably feel intuitively (there's that word again!) that there is some value to them - some more than others. But it's nice to see a mathematical confirmation; it means they can't all be dismissed as "wishful thinking", or an illusion caused by the fact that it takes longer to lose merely because you're waiting for triggers.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: kav on April 16, 2017, 01:48:42 PM
Bayes,

I don't understand what your first equation calculates. IMO we don't care about the probability of the win, we just wait for it to happen. When, how soon or late, it happens is not important. There is no point to take into account the probability of win. The trigger is a point of reference, its probability doesn't affect the other probabilities. If the trigger was snow weather, would you take into account the probability of snowing?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 16, 2017, 02:48:57 PM
Kav, the point was to show that 12 losses in a row can happen when you're using the rule about only betting when the last 3 spins show at least one win, and that can only happen when the particular sequence wLwL... etc. occurs. Note that if there are multiple losses between the wins such wLLwLLLw etc, it doesn't matter, because you won't be betting after the initial L.

To calculate the probability of that sequence, you can't ignore the wins, you have to get the probability of the sequence as it actually would occur, otherwise a comparison with the "straight" sequence of LLLL wouldn't be valid. See what I mean?

Suppose you decide to bet Red only after it hits. It would be the same thing. What would be the chance of getting 5 losses in a row if you're following this rule? You would have to calculate the probability of RBRBRBRBRB, because this is the alternating pattern which must appear in order that you lose 5 times in a row, when following the rule that you only bet on red after a red.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 16, 2017, 03:06:21 PM
If the trigger was snow weather, would you take into account the probability of snowing?

It depends on whether you're looking for a "sequence" of snow. Suppose I want to go skiing for a couple of days, and my "trigger" is a day of snow. Since I'm going for 2 days I need to know the probability of 3 days of snow (the trigger day, plus the remaining 2 days). I can then look at the weather records and see how many times 1 day of snow will be followed by a further 2 days of snow.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 16, 2017, 05:18:45 PM
Bayes wrote:
Quote
So although both probabilities are small, and both results are financially speaking the same (and 12 bets were made in both cases), the 12 straight losses are 0.91/0.21 = 4.33 times more likely than the same number of losses when following the "only bet after a win" rule. Nice!

Interesting Bayes. So, in other words, are you saying that by using Virtual Bets (after a loss, wait for a win and then bet), it will be over 4 times more likely to avoid a losing streak of 12 losses than playing without virtual bets?

This knowledge could definitely help protect our bankroll!

My longest losing streak was 20 individual losses in a row!!!!

TERM, so that equates to 6 losses in row, counting 3 individual losses as one "attack" loss.

Yes, 6 LEVEL losses in a row. And I finally won my 21st wager on the LAST bet of the 7th level. Then, I won my next bet on the second spin after that.

So, if I was using Virtual Bets, instead of 20 losses in a row, I would have had 4 losses in a row (the initial 3 losses, then after the virtual win I would have bet and lost the first bet but won the second).

Quote
Since the bet selection seems to be in a state of flux (I believe palestis is also testing some other variation), I'm going to hold off recoding  the tracker until we get some firm results one way or the other. In the meantime I will focus on the progression, and add it to the tracker.

Sounds good. I think we could eventually incorporate both your virtual losses AND the XYY trigger into the bet selection eventually.

I was tentatively thinking of it this way: Your virtual losses will ALWAYS be in effect throughout the betting selection. But as a FURTHER safeguard, to do something like this:

Once we LOSE level 1, BEFORE we begin level 2, we simply look for an XYY trigger (no matter what 3 spins came before it) before betting level 2. Then if we lose level 2, THAT is when we look for the XYY special trigger (only play XYY if the 3 spins prior to it had no "X").
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: MrPerfect. on April 16, 2017, 08:12:58 PM
 Nothing will happen wait you for something or do not wait. Result on long run will be same. Variance is limited by limiting degrees of freedom. In this particular case nothing is limited.   If in doubt, try to explain to the ball this theorium of yours and make sure it understood and remembers everything.
   There is one way only to protect a bankroll playing this way: keep your losses on the paper.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on April 16, 2017, 10:35:46 PM
Once we LOSE level 1, BEFORE we begin level 2, we simply look for an XYY trigger (no matter what 3 spins came before it) before betting level 2. Then if we lose level 2, THAT is when we look for the XYY special trigger (only play XYY if the 3 spins prior to it had no "X").
There is a good reason y the XYY trigger is so powerful if there is no X 3 spins prior to XYY.
It means that the X only showed up once in 6 spins. And if it doesn't show up in the next 3 spins that will be played, it means that only one appearance of dozen X in 9 spins will have to happen in order to lose the  level.
In the 2nd level the next XYY trigger has to also be limited to one appearance in 9 spins in order to lose. And that X will be a different dozen.
One dozen may disappear for over 20 spins. But a variety of dozens appearing only once in 9 spins, I find it extremely rare.
It's worth testing this trigger for a long time to confirm its better performance. My tests show the same results.
If long term tests confirm  the initial tests,   then it's the best trigger for recovery from losses when using all triggers.
But at the same time it can be used as the only trigger if you bet with high chips.
2-3  wins with $100 chip and you are done.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 17, 2017, 05:02:53 AM
Just an update. I just finished another 4000+ spins, 20 games, and the XYY Special Trigger results are still holding at 3.3 wins for every loss. Way above the expectation of 2.3 wins for every loss.

As a side note, my first 20 games, as I already mentioned, my individual wins were 86 spins ABOVE expectation. Which means I ran really good. THESE 20 games, my individual wins were 85 spins BELOW expectation. Which means I ran really bad.

Yet, the XYY trigger results remained relatively unchanged!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 17, 2017, 08:25:16 AM
TERM, do you have any stats on your results (individual wins/losses) for the XYY trigger (where no X in the previous 3)?

BTW, I know I said I'd post details of the progression, but I'm short on time today, and since it's an adaptation for roulette of a staking plan for sports betting, you can read about it here:

http://thestakingmachine.com/pro.php

The example given is for UK horse racing, where "point" means "unit", and substitute "spin" for "race". The target value given in the example is far too high, but this is a parameter which can be varied to whatever you like, as can the divisor.

The only way my version differs is the introduction of the "bet zero" rule when the last 3 outcomes don't include a win, otherwise the principles are exactly the same. Any questions on it let me know.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: kav on April 17, 2017, 08:49:15 AM
Bayes,
The link doesn't work
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 17, 2017, 09:16:24 AM
That's odd, it works fine in my browser. Do a google search for "The Staking Machine", then click on the "Pro" link in the list of "Back Staking Plans" in the top right corner. The Pro plan is the 7th link down.
Title: Stats for last 40 Games
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 18, 2017, 04:35:42 AM
TERM, do you have any stats on your results (individual wins/losses) for the XYY trigger (where no X in the previous 3)?

Yes, I will attach a summary of all the stats from my last 40 games (over 8,000 spins), in the attachment below. I'm not sure what specific stats you're looking for (other than individual wins/losses), so if you do not see what you're looking for, I'll be happy to give you a copy of all 40 individual games I played. They're all very detailed.

Quote
BTW, I know I said I'd post details of the progression, but I'm short on time today, and since it's an adaptation for roulette of a staking plan for sports betting, you can read about it here:

The description on that page is too confusing for me. Just take your time posting your progression. Whenever you get around to it is fine.

- Updated Document - Now has a Summery -

For clarification, from now on I'll call this special trigger the:
XYY+3 Trigger.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 18, 2017, 04:24:45 PM
...the win/loss rate...3,5 wins per loss with the trigger, 2,3 wins per loss without the trigger.

Kav, I have a clarification question. You said the expected win is 2.3 for every loss (in reply #380). Does this include the Zero on the Single Roulette wheel also?

If not, would you mind verifying this number so I can reflect this in my stats?

I think I would subtract 0.08 to the 3 spin sequence of the XYY+3 trigger stats, right? Because this is how often a zero should hit every 3 spins? So, would it be 2.2 wins per 1 loss, if we include single zero?

Thank you.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 20, 2017, 12:57:06 AM
Bayes, I have one question, for now, about your progression. This is from one of your excerpts. Can you tell me HOW you determine the bet sizing in the following examples? (I realize there are no virtual wins, but I am only looking how you get to your next bet size)

   40  L     62 -231
   41  L     84 -315
   42  W    114  -87
   43  L     33 -120

So, starting from spin 41. You bet 62 units last spin and lost, and are currently down 231 units. How did you decide to bet 84 units on spin 41?

When you are down to 315 units, how did you bet 114 units on spin 42?

And when you won on spin 42, you were down to 87 units, and how did you determine to bet 33 units?

Thanks Bayes!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 20, 2017, 08:09:04 AM
TERM, I'll definitely post the progression (in another thread) later today.  :)
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: probasah on April 21, 2017, 06:53:47 PM
Hi all,

Can anyone post here the final system so i can program it in excel and then release it to all?
I tested all sort of systems in the past on RF.cc (100 plus so far) -all failed to variance.
the tracker will make the betting condition and the result.
i need as well the progression.

Results here free for all. As always with me.
XYY / YXY or XYY -bet X for 3 times only -
no bet if before XYY / YXY or XYY we have a repetition of any XYZ ( double or triple XX,YY,ZZ or XXX,YYY,ZZZ)
progression holloway or
122
244
488
8 16 16
16 32 32
32 64 64
etc

Is that accurate?
Alex

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: probasah on April 21, 2017, 11:05:07 PM
Hi all

Attached in this message the tracker as promised.
Please let me know if there is anything you might need.
The tracker progression has the holloway progression inbuilt. But you can change that from the prog tab
LW history on the right side of the screen
Max Ls in a row top right corner
graphic of BR
bet decisions pre calculated including the units
free for all as always.
Press F9 to refresh the numbers -randbetween 0..36 or insert your list on the left side column- green

Please let me know i might have missed something.:)
Regards,
Alex
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on April 22, 2017, 01:35:38 AM

Please let me know i might have missed something.:)
Regards,
Alex
Good work.
I  don't understand y you skipped the second and third trigger. The first was 9-19-23 which you picked and processed.
The second trigger was 5-26-7 and the third was 23-5-8. and you skipped both. And you picked 7-4-32 as your next trigger in line. Can you clarify ?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: probasah on April 22, 2017, 07:32:58 AM
Hi palestis,

There was an error in the formula with counting the dozens repetition.
I made a correction in that.

See attached version 2.0

Please let me know if it works as you want to.
Or if there is anything else you would like to try.
I think its the correct bet option now.

What say thee?:)

Alex.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 22, 2017, 03:32:06 PM
Can anyone post here the final system so i can program it in excel and then release it to all?
i need as well the progression.

Hi Alex, that's something I'm still working on. I'm waiting on Bayes progression before doing more tests.

I'll give you the details when I'm finished testing.

Thanks for your document, but I tried opening your document, and it will not open in Excel 2010. It says "Opening in Protected View", but just hangs there forever. I have both "protected view" and "file block settings" disabled. Any suggestion as to how I can open your document? Thanks.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: probasah on April 22, 2017, 03:58:21 PM
Hi Terminator!

The file is a MS Office 2013 document. Try googling your error message. It might be a compatibility problem ie different ms office versions.
All cells/formulas are in any case visible:)
You can modify the progression in the prog tab depending on the step the progression is at(1,2,3....)

Do let me know if you need anything else. I can make any adjustment to the bet/ progression at any time.
If you have examples, the better

This invitation is open for all😀😀😀

Alex
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 22, 2017, 04:32:31 PM
Hi Alex, I tried googling it but could not find a solution. Would you be willing to save this document as an excel 2010 document, to see if I'll be able to open it then? This feature is available when you do a "Save As".

If it doesn't work, I'll just get the newest version of Excel. Thanks! I look forward to trying your tracker.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: probasah on April 22, 2017, 05:20:08 PM
try this terminator

one macro enabled the other one xls
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 22, 2017, 05:24:25 PM
Thanks Alex, both files opened. I'll give it a try soon!
Title: Greatly Improved and Updated Game Result Tracker
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 22, 2017, 05:34:26 PM
Okay everyone, I have 5 documents here.

ONE is a blank document, for you to keep track of your stats. It automatically gives you TONS of totals, ratios, percentages, averages, etc. for all your games. Just plug in your numbers on the LEFT side, and you'll get lots of statistics displayed on the right side and bottom of the page (Summery).

The other 4 documents are the 8,000 spins test I did. All games are around 200 spins each, not risking more than 100 units per game. Test B has 20 games. Test C has 20 games.

Scroll down and look at the SUMMERY for these 4 documents and compare them side by side. You see some amazing things.

TEST B - is where I used Palestin's triggers & Progression with my Divisor.
TEST B XYY - is where I made a NEW betting trigger for these same games, still using Palestis's progression with my divisor.

The original TEST B and TEST B XYY have VERY similar results. I did well in BOTH games. Notice the XYY+3 trigger stats in the summery.

TEST C - is where I used Palestin's triggers & Progression with my Divisor.
TEST C XYY - is where I made a NEW betting trigger for these same games, still using Palestis's progression with my divisor.

UNLIKE Test B - Test C was a disaster. I LOST money during these 20 games.
However, when I applied the NEW XYY trigger (in TEST C XYY), it MADE money.

In all these tests, notice all the STATS for the XYY+3 trigger in the Summery, and on the right hand side disply. No matter how good or bad the game is, the XYY+3 trigger always had amazing results, and turned a losing game into a winning one!

If you want to know the DETAILS of how I used this new XYY+3 trigger, just ask.

When Bayes posts his progression, I will reply all of these 40 games with his progression, and compare them with these results.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 22, 2017, 06:31:43 PM
progression holloway or
122
244
488
8 16 16
16 32 32
32 64 64
etc

Hi Alex, your tracker is awesome! This will save a lot of time testing! I've been playing all my tests manually and it's so time consuming.

The above progression you mentioned above is Palestis's Progression. Would it be possible for you to make another document with his progression? In my tests, the Holloway did much worse in the long run.

Also, I did improve on his progression a lot. If possible, can you also add my divisor to it? If you are willing to do this, the details of this improvement is in post #343 in this thread.

http://forum.roulette30.com/index.php?topic=1376.msg22034#msg22034 (http://forum.roulette30.com/index.php?topic=1376.msg22034#msg22034)

Thanks for your help, Alex.

NOTE: Can anyone tell me how to post a link directly to a specific post? The above link takes you to the first post on that page, not my post #343. But I've seen other links where it automatically takes you to a specific post. Thanks!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on April 22, 2017, 08:56:21 PM
http://forum.roulette30.com/index.php?topic=1376.msg22034#msg22034

(http://i67.tinypic.com/bimlq0.jpg)

Left click the top line and select "copy link address".
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: probasah on April 23, 2017, 06:18:02 AM
Hi Terminator & all

Here is the tracker with Holloway and Palestis Progression.
version 3.0
2 graphs / 2 progressions
added some game data betting statistics
fixed some errors
1008 spins
LW history

I havent programed the palestis variation money management yet but that should not be an issue.

I still do not see any statistical advantage from what i see in this method, as the wins still cover about 1/3 of the betting options. 33% wins for a dozen bet.

you can generate as many LW lists as possible just press f9 or add your spins on the left column.

Please let me know if there is anything you might need.

Regards,
Alex
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on April 23, 2017, 09:34:39 AM
(http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/78/78587fe9ebb1b5f961c60dd499067622023addf67f9fc873d008e2b71c71aac2.jpg)
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Bayes on April 23, 2017, 10:12:48 AM
Hi guys, sorry about the delay. After further testing I've come across a lot of really bad sequences (see attached for an example on the columns). I know I'm not using the exact selections that palestis recommends but I doubt whether it will make much difference, because as Kav has pointed out, you can make up any sequence which will make a system lose heavily, and if this sequence is no less likely than another, where is the advantage? I know this seems "negative", but I'm just trying to be honest here. IMO the selection is too specific and "brittle"; it should be more flexible.

Regarding the progression, I can still post it if you like but in my view progressions should be taylored to particular bet selections, and since I don't see any evidence that the selection has any particular merit, I can't recommend any "out of the box" set of parameters for it (the progression). The only advantage it has is flexibility, so if you feel the stakes are getting too high you can increase the divisor, but this is the case for any other divisor progression, such as Lanky's six point divisor, described here (http://forum.roulette30.com/index.php?topic=1016.msg22521#msg22521). You can find a similar one here.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on April 23, 2017, 11:07:13 AM
I think we should stick with what we at least know is statistcally advantageous in the short run as a basis.

My personal opinion is that it will be at least the XYY +3 trigger and if you were to ask me I would say that my "farthest back" method will do even better.

Regardless of our selection basis, we will have a drawdown.  Our survival depends on our method of recovery.  How else can we learn to recover but to study our drawdowns?

We need to beef up our recovery methods so we can ULTIMATELY continue winning all the time!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Mister Eko on April 23, 2017, 04:23:03 PM
probasah,

This system is very interesting, I read about this whit pleasure before I registered, but sometimes I doesnt understand, what the hell is speaking about. Now, what you uploaded these excel files I downloaded, and I think is good, but can be seen that with both progression the profit/bankroll line went slowly to the negative. I misunderstood something?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: probasah on April 23, 2017, 04:43:43 PM
Hi Bayes

I am really interested in your progression. Even though this method seem to follow the normal 33 % win expectancy for a dozen, i believe that we need to focus more on the money management than a "magic" system.
I tested sooo many methods by now and all show the negative balance when i refresh the page with 15000 random spins.
Results come like : +5, +14, +20 ( you start feeling the buzz, this thing really works), than it comes
                              -46, (still hoping), +12, +5, ( we can do it...), than -230. Game over.

All the hype is dead.
Back to square 1
Back to mathematics.

I really think that the Winning method is about money management - PROGRESSION more than the bet selection.
Anything else is just wishful thinking.

I do invite all of the members here that found a way to win consistently, if they want to help not to reveal their method ( for the obvious reasons) , but at least to give us a push in the right direction.

I am here if you need to test your ideas.
Regards,
Alex
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on April 23, 2017, 05:16:42 PM
My best advice is not for us to be disheartened by drawdowns but instead to isolate them, publish them, study them & conquer them.

My opinion, without studying a single drawdown sequence, is that the solution will simply be to identify the universal onset of an aberrant sequence & cease betting until the universal onset of non-aberrancy.

Although this may not be the solution in its entirety, I believe this will respresent the lion's share of any solution and this is because the drawdowns that kill us are large, yes but also RARE, so that simply avoiding them will SAVE money; a penny saved is a penny earned?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: scepticus on April 23, 2017, 06:40:30 PM

" Ido invite all of the members here that found a way to win consistently, if they want to help not to reveal their method ( for the obvious reasons) , but at least to give us a push in the right direction." probasah

If you factor in a negative then the result will always be negative. IMO
If winning depending solely on Money Management then I think that Professional  Mathematicians would have solved the problem  by now. I think we need a reasonable Bet Selection coupled with  Money Management .Like Palestis  I think we need  to limit the Table Bank to aid recovery.
I think that  using the Nine Block's 2 indicated numbers as dozens and wait for a First Loss of the 2 and then bet for a limited number of spins - say 4 - could be advantageous. This will show more losses than what has been put forward but in real world betting  we must be prepared to accept losses. What matters is that the profits exceed the losses.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on April 23, 2017, 08:21:07 PM
Like Palestis  I think we need  to limit the Table Bank to aid recovery.

(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/e3/61/2f/e3612f47a98270124ac68f33c5916172.gif)
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 23, 2017, 08:47:00 PM
@ Alex

Thank you for adding Palestis's progression to your version 3. You have a talent for programming Excel. Such detailed work! And thanks for being willing to add my divisor at a later date.

Even though there may not be a statistical difference in Palestis's original trigger selection, in all my tests, there IS a statistical advantage to the XYY+3 trigger. But I've only tested 10,000+ spins manually so far. I would very much like to test this ONE specific trigger with your Excel programming talent.

Would you mind creating another Excel document testing just this ONE item? The XYY+3 Trigger? No progressions or divisors are necessary. Just the W/L stats. It should be relatively easy compared to what you've already done.

Here is how the XYY+3 trigger works:

Step 1: Only use the XYY trigger (XYX and YYX triggers are ignored)
Step 2: If the PREVIOUS 3 spins do NOT include an "X", then bet. If it does include an "X", ignore this XYY trigger.
Step 3: Bet up to 3 times, and then stop. If 1 of the 3 bets win, it's a win. If no win within the 3 bets, it's a loss.

That's it! If it loses, you don't have to increase the NEXT XYY+3 trigger bet.

If you can do this, it would be a great help! Thank you, Alex.

Statistically, there should be a 69.1% win rate (on a Single Zero wheel). But during my 10,000+ tests, the lowest win rate I reached was 76% (during each 4,000 spin test), and the highest win rate I reached was 84%. I have NEVER had a losing session with these XYY+3 triggers yet in 10,000+ spins.

If you do decide to create this document, Alex, maybe you can also add a win percentage feature? Thanks!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 23, 2017, 08:55:32 PM
@ Bayes,
Yes, I am still definitely interested in your progression. Please post when you get a chance. I agree that money management and progressions are the key to winning. Your results with your progressions that you posted in this thread seem to be the most impressive of all so far. I like how it is flexible, because that's what we need.

@ Reyth,
Can you give a summery of your "farthest back" method?

Quote
the solution will simply be to identify the universal onset of an aberrant sequence & cease betting until the universal onset of non-aberrancy.

I totally agree with you and Alex that this is one of the best approaches to winning. Well said!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on April 23, 2017, 11:45:01 PM
Farthest Back Dozen Selection

1) Spin until there are 2 unique Dozens in the last 3 spins and bet the missing Dozen
2) Stop the progression if a zero should hit while betting and ignore any zero that occurs otherwise; e.g. XX0Y = XXY and is a stronger trigger to bet Z

Notice that this is different than simply betting the farthest back Dozen because there must be 2 unique Dozens present in the last 3 non-zero spins; this changes the statistics even more favorably.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on April 24, 2017, 04:57:38 AM
Hi guys, sorry about the delay. After further testing I've come across a lot of really bad sequences (see attached for an example on the columns). I know I'm not using the exact selections that palestis recommends but I doubt whether it will make much difference,
Bayes, I isolated the instance where there were 5 back to back trigger losses in columns, but as you say you used a different trigger selection. In fact all 5 losing trigger selections were formed from the numbers of the previous 3 bets.
I have tried this route during tests and it didn't work for me either.
When I use fresh numbers, I never run into so may back to back losses.
In this case the total losses would've been 3 back to back triggers.
Also the same in the other instance of 4 back to back trigger losses in columns and one 4 back to back in dozens.
Had new numbers been used it wouldn't have gone  that far. 
There has to be an explanation for it, but I can't explain it.
I can only go by test results.
3 people have been testing this system manually for at lest 6 months and nobody has reported such disturbing results.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 24, 2017, 05:37:25 AM
I have tried this route during tests and it didn't work for me either.
When I use fresh numbers, I never run into so may back to back losses.

Yes, I can also confirm that the back to back losses are lower when using fresh numbers, than they are when using numbers from previous bets. I have tested using both HarryJ's method (which uses triggers from previous bets) and Palestis's, and the losses are greater with HarryJ's.

I think the reason is that when we use fresh numbers, instead of previous numbers, it gives us more time to notice an anomaly and take action.

Quote
3 people have been testing this system manually for at lest 6 months and nobody has reported such disturbing results.

Actually, I have posted worse results. My worse game is 20 individual losses in a row, following your method to the letter, and using all your Red Flag rules. However, they are rare. And the wins more than make up for these occasional losses. I do not think any method will be immune from long losing streaks once in a while. But Palestis's system is definitely one that loses a LOT less than most other systems.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: probasah on April 24, 2017, 12:12:07 PM
@ Alex

Here is how the XYY+3 trigger works:

Step 1: Only use the XYY trigger (XYX and YYX triggers are ignored)
Step 2: If the PREVIOUS 3 spins do NOT include an "X", then bet. If it does include an "X", ignore this XYY trigger.
Step 3: Bet up to 3 times, and then stop. If 1 of the 3 bets win, it's a win. If no win within the 3 bets, it's a loss.

That's it! If it loses, you don't have to increase the NEXT XYY+3 trigger bet.

If you can do this, it would be a great help! Thank you, Alex.

Statistically, there should be a 69.1% win rate (on a Single Zero wheel). But during my 10,000+ tests, the lowest win rate I reached was 76% (during each 4,000 spin test), and the highest win rate I reached was 84%. I have NEVER had a losing session with these XYY+3 triggers yet in 10,000+ spins.

If you do decide to create this document, Alex, maybe you can also add a win percentage feature? Thanks!

Hi Terminator,

Here you are.

Please let me know if there is anything else you might need.
I kept the 122 progression steady
you have the bets LW history as well as the 3X LW ( groups of 3)
+ some statistics.
Refresh (F9) or add your numbers on the left column.

Regards,
Alex
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: ShadowBlue on April 24, 2017, 06:01:40 PM
Hi Terminator,

I did some test with the XYY +3 trigger. I did the test for the original system and also with Jekhb76 alternate dozen system.

I only tested 1000 spins but very interesting Jekhb76 alternate dozen system did gave much more triggers then Palestis' original one.

1000 spins did gave 138 triggers and a 77.5% winrate.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 24, 2017, 07:04:39 PM
Thank you so much, Alex. Wow, your program is much better than I expected. Thanks for adding those extra statistics, too. Incredible job! Really. How did you learn to do all this in Excel? I didn't even know Excel could do half the things you've programmed it to do!

You're awesome, man.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 24, 2017, 07:23:48 PM
Jekhb76 alternate dozen system did gave much more triggers then Palestis' original one.
1000 spins did gave 138 triggers and a 77.5% winrate.

Awesome results, ShadowBlue! I played a few games with Eddy's (Jekhb76) triggers also. It is a good system. Every game I played DID make more profit than Palestis's. However, each game also had higher bets made, and a bigger debt, in order to win more money, compared to Palestis's. I prefer games with lower risk that win less money, rather than higher risk to win more money.

But, I only played a few games with Eddy's original progression (which was aggressive). Maybe I'll experiment with a few more games with his triggers using a different progression. I haven't heard from Eddy in a few weeks, he must be busy.

ShadowBlue, what progression do you use with Eddy's triggers? Also, how many bets at a time do you make once your trigger is selected? (Palestis' method bets 3 at a time, Eddy's bets 10 at a time)

Hmmm, one more question. How do you apply the XYY+3 trigger to Eddy's method of picking triggers? His method is so different than Palestis's that I don't see how to do it. We pick 2 numbers that are from the same dozen within 3 spins of each other and within 3 numbers of each other. that is "X". Do you simply make sure there's no other numbers within a count of 3 of "X" in the prior 3 spins?

Thanks.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 24, 2017, 08:39:26 PM
Please let me know if there is anything else you might need.

Hi Alex, I was playing through your document, and I noticed in your version 3.0 that, when there's a WIN, the Palestis Progression goes back to the first bet of level 1. His progression actually only does that when he either TIES his previous high, or gets a new high. If we are below our last high, it actually starts with the first bet of the level we are currently on.

Would it be possible to change this in your document? If so, maybe you can add my divisor into it as well? My divisor really keeps the progression levels down and helps with money management. I know it's a little tricky, and maybe it's not possible to do this in Excel, but I thought I'd ask. If you need any clarification as to how the divisor or progression works, please let me know!

Thanks again for your awesome work, Alex.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on April 25, 2017, 01:25:43 AM
Hi Terminator,

I did some test with the XYY +3 trigger. I did the test for the original system and also with Jekhb76 alternate dozen system.

I only tested 1000 spins but very interesting Jekhb76 alternate dozen system did gave much more triggers then Palestis' original one.

1000 spins did gave 138 triggers and a 77.5% winrate.
A 77.5% win rate is certainly extremely good for a single dozen.
Hopefully it works in regular intervals with only one or two losses in between if they have to happen. 
As opposed to an overall average, where long losing gabs can occur before a tsunami of wins. 
There is no need to risk an entire B/R due to a rare exception, for a trigger that has proven to work flawlessly.
In a real casino with many roulettes available, a YXX+3 trigger should not be that hard to find.
Plus there is an added advantage.
You may come across a score board that reads HMHLMMH. The trigger would be LMM. And it already has the first spin lost when H came. But with no wager on it, as it was already made when  you arrived at that table. Then you can either bet the next 2 spins, or bet 4 spins (including the one that lost), but at the cost of 3 spins. These situations are possible  when you walk around observing many roulettes.
You may even come across a YXX +3 trigger that has already lost all 3 spins.
It pays to be on standby at that roulette, so that you will be ready for the second YXX+3 trigger that will form. Since 2 back to back losses are rare for this trigger, there is a high degree of certainty for a hit.
So there are many surprise advantages when you play in a B+M casino.
You just have to be able to back count on the score board to identify those situations.

 
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 25, 2017, 04:46:27 AM
Good point, Palestis. Thanks for pointing out that extra advantage for B&M roulette.

And for clarification (ShadowBlue can correct me if I'm wrong), but I believe that 77.5% win rate is for every sequence of 3 bets in a row. So, the expected win rate would be 69.1% for Single Zero. Not the usual 33% for a single bet on single dozen. I have had similar results of between 76% to 84%

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: ShadowBlue on April 25, 2017, 09:35:36 AM
Hi Terminator and Palestis just wrote a long post this morning and when i was about to post an error occured.

Everything was gone. I have no time more for today so i will post tomorrow.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 25, 2017, 03:44:34 PM
Sorry to hear that. I hate when that happens! To help prevent that from happening in the future, I use the add-on LAZARUS: Form Recovery for Firefox. It remember everything you wrote and brings it back with a click of the button. Otherwise, typing your post in Microsoft Word first, then transferring it to your post, also prevents these kinds of losses.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: ShadowBlue on April 26, 2017, 10:25:51 AM
Hi Terminator,

The 77.5 strike rate i had was not with Jekhb76,s original system. But with the XYY +3 trigger.
For the alternate  dozen system. It is not so strange that i had much more triggers because there are.
Not one but two triggers. Also nice that you don't have to wait so long.

For J's system there are the XX+3 trigger and the XYX+3 trigger.Example: 14 8 7 28 33 ( 28 33 = XX+3trigger).
After 28 33 bet 3 times dozen 3, progression 1-1-2.

Example:   14 17 22 3 29 10 ( 3 29 10 = XYX +3 trigger. After 3 29 10 bet 3 times dozen 1-1-2.
Sometimes this happens 3 6 11 13 31 17 29  A trigger for dozen 2 and also one for dozen 3. What i do is this.

i will start the second progression for dozen 3. That is 2-2-4, two back to back losses don't happen that much.
And just like you i don't like high risk and progressions. That's why i don't go higher then 2-2-4.

Before i play i always look if the table is behaving good i don't have a cold table.

You did a good job 10.000 spins without any losses. You must have a lot of patience waiting so long for the XYY+3 trigger.  ;D
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 26, 2017, 05:02:16 PM
The 77.5 strike rate i had was not with Jekhb76,s original system. It is not so strange that i had much more triggers because there are. Also nice that you don't have to wait so long.

Oh, thanks for clarifying, Shadow. FYI, HarryJ's method also has more triggers and much shorter waits. Have you tried his method yet?

Quote
28 33 = XX+3trigger
3 29 10 = XYX +3 trigger

Hmmm. Maybe I'm missing something, but neither of these are a trigger from Jekhb76,s method. Eddy and I were communicating through email, and he told me for there to be a trigger, there are 3 things that must be true:

1 - the numbers must be within 3 digits of one another (i.e., 1,1 or 1,2, or 1,3, or 1,4),
2 - they must be within the same Dozen,
3 - they must be within 3 spins of one another.

The above triggers fit rules #2 and 3, but not rule #1: they are not within 3 spins of one another.

However, by skipping rule #1, there are a lot more triggers to play!

Quote
You did a good job 10.000 spins without any losses. You must have a lot of patience waiting so long for the XYY+3 trigger.

Thank you. Actually, what I did is this. During the FIRST progression level, I played Palestis's method, with his triggers and red flags.

Once I went to level 2, I ONLY played the XYY trigger, STILL following the red flags, BUT using the previous 3 spins if possible (like HarryJ gets his triggers from), since the occurrence of XYY alone has a longer wait time (3x longer than Palestis's 3 original triggers).

And once I reached the THIRD level, I would only play the XYY+3 triggers (also using the previous 3 spins if possible) and ignore all the red flags. It is still profitable when ignoring red flags, and since the wait time is HUGE between XYY+3 triggers (4x longer than XYY trigger alone, 12x longer than Palestis's 3 original triggers), we have to compensate.

I had separate stats for the XYY+3 trigger, and even though Palestis's original 3 triggers would lose once in a while in every 20 game sequence, the XYY+3 trigger never has yet. Even though when I use Alex's Excel program, the XYY+3 trigger has the same statistical hit rate as expected, the last 10,000 spins on the manual games I played were well above expectation.

Oh, and I also used my 2x divisor to determine which level to play. This makes a huge difference! Not only for managing bankroll, but cuts down on the wait time between triggers also.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on April 26, 2017, 08:57:19 PM
Oh, and I also used my 2x divisor to determine which level to play. This makes a huge difference! Not only for managing bankroll, but cuts down on the wait time between triggers also.

You mean by raising the inclination; somehow you are betting more than you would by using the divisor which means you recover faster?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on April 27, 2017, 12:12:48 AM

I had separate stats for the XYY+3 trigger, and even though Palestis's original 3 triggers would lose once in a while in every 20 game sequence, the XYY+3 trigger never has yet. Even though when I use Alex's Excel program, the XYY+3 trigger has the same statistical hit rate as expected, the last 10,000 spins on the manual games I played were well above expectation.
I guess in light of all the positive info about the XYY trigger, then it pays to use this trigger only with a higher chip. The extra patience required will be well worth it.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on April 27, 2017, 05:51:07 AM
You mean by raising the inclination; somehow you are betting more than you would by using the divisor which means you recover faster?

Actually, just the opposite. I'm betting lower, which means I lower the progression level I'm on, thus lowering my risk if a bad streak hit. This also means possibly changing the trigger...so if I'm on level 4 (an XYY+3 trigger) and use my 2x Divisor to lower it to a level 2 (XYY trigger), then that means I wait less between spins because I am not playing an XYY+3 trigger.

Here is a more detailed description of my 2x Divisor:

http://forum.roulette30.com/index.php?topic=1376.msg22034#msg22034
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on April 27, 2017, 05:59:23 AM
Wow Term, very profound!  I can assure you that we all would have missed that subtlety if you hadn't of spelled it out!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: ShadowBlue on April 27, 2017, 11:16:32 AM
Hi Terminator,

Looking back to Jekhb76's alternate dozens i see that i misunderstood rule nr 1.
I have been playing it  this morning. I had good results and i haven't tried HarryJ's method yet.
I will check it out. We have a lot of triggers now..... Thanks for your 2x divisor.

i will papertrade your progression. Normally i don't go higher then 1-1-2 and 2-2-4.
And playing it with NLE. NLE ( Nice Little Earner ) 3 even/changes to become 4.
I use a leveller progression +1 on a loss -1 on a win.

Stop loss = 4 losses in a row. And some times i play reversed NLE 3 even/changes not to become 4.

But maybe i need to play more aggressive.....  ;)
Title: Can anyone else Program in Excel?
Post by: TERMINATOR on May 06, 2017, 02:30:44 PM
The work that Alex did with Excel is incredible, and I appreciate all the work he did with his program. However, he has not logged on in two weeks, and there are some things that need correcting. I was able to correct some things with my basic knowledge, but not the more advanced.

The major problem is this:

In Palestis's (and Holloway's) progression, after a win, it resets to the FIRST betting level. This is why there are a lot of losses whenever we press the "F9" key.

For example, let's say we reach level 3 and WIN on the 2nd bet of the 3rd level. That is an 8 unit loss. The current excel program does NOT resolve that loss. Instead, it begins the next bet with that loss at the 1st bet of the 1st betting level. Therefore, no matter how good we do in the game from that point forward, that game is guaranteed to be a loser, if there will be no losses that will be resolved.

The correct way is to continue with the progression from a set point, until it is resolved, and THEN reset the progression. Such as with Palestis's original method of starting from the same progression level we were on when we won, or starting from a lower progression level with my 2X divisor.

Can someone fix this Excel sheet so that when there's a win, palestis's progression will go back a "CERTAIN" amount of bets to recoup previous losses, instead of always starting again at level 1 on every win? (maybe with my 2X Divisor)?

I have attached Alex's most recent program (with my corrections) for your examination.

I think this change would make a huge difference in the results. Thanks everyone!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on May 07, 2017, 03:00:57 AM
I don't believe anyone has shown that this system is losing yet.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on May 07, 2017, 03:27:20 AM
There gonna be no difference in results.  It's a dead end.  It's not a bet a selection, just rulls that someone invented to loose in " organised way".
    I would be happy to help you, but unfortunately,  its just a waste of your precious time and potentially waste of mine also.
Y don't you show us your winning system mr. Perfect step  by step. Then we will start taking you more seriously. Vaguely insinuating that physics is the only way to beat roulette, has no credibility unless is followed by facts that can be tested and confirmed by others.
Should all cancer researchers abandon their search for the cure, simply because someone claims he  has the secret formula that cures cancer? Thus rendering all research a waste of time?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on May 07, 2017, 06:06:18 AM
I have already proved to myself that there is a huge difference in results. Out of over 12,000 spins tested so far, I have lost 1 game out of every 20 played (a loss is when I reach a 100 unit loss). I won close to 1,000 units in that time. This comes to an average of 4 units per hour won played at roulette (50 spins per hour).

I replayed those same 12,000 games over with many different betting progressions, including the betting patterns in Alex's Excel sheet, and I LOST hundreds of units instead of winning almost a thousand.

This proves, beyond any doubt whatsoever, that the progression alone can make the difference between a losing session and a winning session.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: MrPerfect. on May 07, 2017, 02:52:20 PM
 Terminator, progression is a good thing. It can make money in favorable situations. The catch is that situation itself should be somehow favorable for upplying correct progression.
   Progression itself is just a tool, you need right tool for a job, that's all about it.
    If you are right in your situation assessment,  progression will progress winnings, if not... 
    Real qwestion for progression is what kind of sequences it require to attack. Progressive betting it's like a net for fishing... right net for a right fish.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on May 07, 2017, 08:32:23 PM
Terminator, progression is a good thing. It can make money in favorable situations. The catch is that situation itself should be somehow favorable for upplying correct progression.
   

Yes, I agree, and that is what I am doing. I am NOT applying the progression arbitrarily to Palestis's Single Dozen method. I only play the Level 1 progression using his method. When I increase to level 2, I only play XYY triggers. Then, when I increase to level 3 progression, I only play XYY+3 triggers.

This has worked very well for me so far.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on May 07, 2017, 11:36:37 PM
I think that's genius Term!  I actually proposed something like this in another thread (I could link it if you want) but I never actually attempted to implement it.  I am glad you are proving it works! :D
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: bigfish10 on May 09, 2017, 11:02:53 PM
Hello to All, First of all, I am amaze with the passion you guys have with the game. I am new and after reading the whole thread. I am going to ask a dumb question to get more clarification.

Based on the tracker built by Alex, the WIN ratio is averaging at 30%. Is there are hidden secret being the betting progression?

This is because no matter how many times I randomize the spins, it will still LOSE.

Thanks,

BF10
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on May 10, 2017, 12:23:15 AM
Progressions are built around average appearance expectations of the chosen target.
It is the careful selection of the trigger in a system, that ascertains  that this average expectation doesn't deviate too far from its average. Because if it does, no progression can save you from a disaster.
Therefore system trigger and progression are very much interrelated.
Progression alone cannot make a system win.
When the furthest deviation observed in tests, is within the available B/R limits, then the right progression will eventually prevail.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on May 10, 2017, 10:57:49 PM
This is because no matter how many times I randomize the spins, it will still LOSE.

Hi Bigfish,

The main reason why Alex's Excel program loses is because the progression code is in error. The way we play them, the progressions must be resolved FIRST before proceeding back to level 1 again.

Unfortunately, Alex designed them so that after the first HIT, it goes back to level 1, even if it means starting at a loss.

For example, let's say the progression gets to level 4 and we have a hit, but are at a 12 unit loss. We must CONTINUE with the progression until the 12 units are resolved. THEN start at level 1 again. But Alex's Excel program does NOT resolve this loss, but starts again at level 1.

Therefore, these games will mostly lose because each time it does this, the losses accumulate. If we start each level at a LOSS, it will get progressively worse. Now, this would be FINE if we were playing a Martingale, but the progressions for the Single Dozen usually requires several hits before we are in profit, not just 1 hit.

Alex has not logged on in a few weeks, so he has not been able to correct this error. I don't know of anyone else who knows EXCEL good enough to correct his work either.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: mfj on May 12, 2017, 07:25:16 AM
Terminator, progression is a good thing. It can make money in favorable situations. The catch is that situation itself should be somehow favorable for upplying correct progression.
   

Yes, I agree, and that is what I am doing. I am NOT applying the progression arbitrarily to Palestis's Single Dozen method. I only play the Level 1 progression using his method. When I increase to level 2, I only play XYY triggers. Then, when I increase to level 3 progression, I only play XYY+3 triggers.

This has worked very well for me so far.

Hello everyone. Based on what I've read this system seems promising. It makes sense to me to test only the special trigger. That is, XYY (with no previous occurrence of X in last 3 spins). I don't know anything about programming. I think it would be interesting to test wins/losses over 1 million spins. Is anyone up to the task of writing a program to test just this trigger? Thanks in advance.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on May 12, 2017, 09:45:03 AM
I am certainly willing to code this.  I can produce output files to prove that my code is accurate and to document the most serious loss sequences that we can expect to ever face.

Please correct my "off the cuff" summary of this system, using Term's adaptive rules:

1) During the FIRST progression level, I played Palestis's method, with his triggers and red flags.

The trigger is in the form of XXY. (XX are 2 numbers in the same dozen and Y is another dozen).
 Needless to say that XYX and YXX is the same thing as far as the trigger is concerned.
When we see this trigger in the last 3 numbers spun we simply bet the single dozen (Y), for 3 bets

Situations where you avoid betting, and wait for things to become more normal
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).
2. If the playable target dozen ( Y), has appeared more than 3+ times immediately prior to the trigger. (meaning it has appeared enough times already and runs the risk to disappear when you begin betting it  3 times after the trigger).
3. If the first 2 bets after the trigger result in XX (same dozen as the majority dozen in the trigger, you stop and only lose 2 bets). Easily recoverable in the next trigger
4. if there is more than one 0 in the numbers preceding the trigger. (0's tend to come in packs).

 
2) Once I went to level 2, I ONLY played the XYY trigger, STILL following the red flags, BUT using the previous 3 spins if possible (like HarryJ gets his triggers from), since the occurrence of XYY alone has a longer wait time (3x longer than Palestis's 3 original triggers).

3) And once I reached the THIRD level, I would only play the XYY+3 triggers (also using the previous 3 spins if possible) and ignore all the red flags. It is still profitable when ignoring red flags, and since the wait time is HUGE between XYY+3 triggers (4x longer than XYY trigger alone, 12x longer than Palestis's 3 original triggers), we have to compensate.

4) Oh, and I also used my 2x divisor to determine which level to play. This makes a huge difference! Not only for managing bankroll, but cuts down on the wait time between triggers also:

Actually, just the opposite. I'm betting lower, which means I lower the progression level I'm on, thus lowering my risk if a bad streak hit. This also means possibly changing the trigger...so if I'm on level 4 (an XYY+3 trigger) and use my 2x Divisor to lower it to a level 2 (XYY trigger), then that means I wait less between spins because I am not playing an XYY+3 trigger.

Here is a more detailed description of my 2x Divisor:

Sure:

1-2-2-
2-2-4
4-4-8
8-8-16
16-16-32
32-32-64

Now, Palestis originally played this by the following: if you are not at least tied with your previous high when you win, you RESTART the level you are on.

So, for example, if you are on the 4th betting level (8-8-16), and you WIN, but you have not at least broken even with your previous high (i.e., 4 units away from break even), you restart the betting with an 8 unit bet from the same level 4 (8-8-16).

This is risky to me, because we are risking way more than we should (risking 8 units to win 4, and winning 16 units when we only need 4), because if a bad streak starts here it will raise our bets very quickly and puts us closer to bust on a smaller bankroll
(or table limit).

My modification is the following:
However many units we are away from a tie with our previous high, we DIVIDE by 2 and start at the level that begins with THAT amount.


Example #1:
Let's say we won on the 4th betting level. We are 4 units away from break even. We DIVIDE 4 by 2, and get 2. So, we drop to the level that begins with a 2 unit bet (2-2-4). So, we would begin the next betting at level 2 instead of level 4.

Example #2:
We are at level 7 and win. If we are 12 units below our last high (meaning we are 12 units away from a tie with our previous high point in the game), we divide 12 by 2 and get 6. There is no level that begins with 6, so we go UP (he means DOWN boys and girls watching at home) the progression and play the next closest one, which would be 8 (not 4). So, we begin the next bet with an 8-8-16 progression (Level 4).

Example #3:
Let's say we win at level 3 (4-4-8), and after we divide by 2, we get 8! We do NOT start at a higher betting level than the level we are currently on. So, in this case, we would still begin with a 4 unit bet (not 8 units), which would mean we start betting at Level 3.

This helps prevent the progression from getting out of control in the case of a bad streak.


Ok, so assuming that the above is all correct and complete, I have everything I need to create the code.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: mfj on May 12, 2017, 02:08:35 PM
Reyth--first of all, thank you for the response and your willingness to work on this project.  I'm definitely interested in the system you summarized, but I had a much more simple test in mind. It would be useful to see the results based on multi-level system described above, but I simply wanted to find out the results for wins losses when betting on the most conservative trigger of all. That is, what about looking at just level 4. What is the win/loss rate when dealing with only the level 4 trigger and betting the next two (or perhaps three) spins. Even though this trigger may require our patience for its appearance, I want to discover if the win rate is considerably greater than the loss rate. If so, it may be worth simplifying the system and betting only when this more rare trigger shows up. 
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Reyth on May 12, 2017, 02:43:25 PM
Ok, well it will simply make my job simpler to start out that way. :)
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on May 13, 2017, 03:20:57 AM
Quote
Ok, so assuming that the above is all correct and complete, I have everything I need to create the code.

Hi Reyth.  If you could create a code for all those things, that would be awesome! WOW. I did not know it would be possible, because it seems too complicated.

Everything you mentioned in your post, for clarification, is correct. The only thing I would suggest adding to your code, for each user individually, is a LIMIT in units. For example, I always limit each game of 100-200 spins to a maximum of a 100 unit loss. (I never forgot ONE game where I had a streak from hell and was down over 2500 units - using Palestis's original method and progression, not mine). It would be nice if the user can add his OWN limit in there, depending on what he's comfortable with. Or even NO limit. So, when your code DOES reach a unit loss limit, it will stop there and start a new sequence. This also is more reality based, as nobody has an unlimited bankroll.

I know this code would be time consuming to create, but I really think it would be worth it. I have been experimenting with this method for so long now, that I really believe it has potential. I have tested over 12,000 spins so far, MANUALLY, and the results are more impressive than any other roulette method, by FAR.

If anyone would like to see a SUMMERY of all these results, I'd be happy to attach it to my next post.

Thanks again, Reyth for your willingness to create this code. I still work every day on improving this method. Maybe your code would help me do analysis even further.

For example, for those with a SMALL bankroll, I have found a progression which works GREAT for not busting easily during a bad streak. It's called the Bread Winner. No need to change it from the original method (even though it's for EC bets). The profits are cut in HALF from what the 2X Divisor progression can win, but the odds of busing are drastically reduced (I busted zero times in 80 games totaling 12,000 spins). This bread winner would be good for BUILDING a proper bankroll. Then once that bankroll is achieved, move on to a more productive progression in which you can sustain several busts.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: WinDaily on May 15, 2017, 09:02:19 PM
I wonder if this system works on rng or airball though. Anyone could clarify?

I've been reading on roulette for a couple of months, however I didn't lay my hands down yet been thinking hard with my brains about the inside bets of numbers for quite bit of time trying to figure out my best before going for anything real or sharing though. Anything of numbers selections and dozen are worth the time, the rest are waste of time. Anyway great single dozen system palestis!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: WinDaily on May 17, 2017, 05:07:43 PM
Hello bros and sis, no response from anyone. Does this system works on rng or airball though. Anyone could clarify? Bro palestis could clarify or anyone?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on May 17, 2017, 07:14:30 PM
Yes it works very well in air ball  at a real casino. I can't vouch for online RNG.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Harryj on May 18, 2017, 08:02:47 AM
Hi windally,
               I have used the " odd dozen" extensively on air ball and RNG. The question is "can you trust RNG"  ? Note I do play slightly differently than Palestis. I believe that my style of play is more suited to airball than Pale's.
    This system relies on 2 basic principles. (1) The fact that one dozen is often "sleeping" and is therefor out of play. (2)The flow, "Regression toward the mean", is still trying to maintain equality with the 2 dozens that are in play.
              Harry
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Akanni on May 18, 2017, 01:12:38 PM
Hello to all and Senior members of this great forum. I became a member when new dozen system by Mr. Palestis was trending. I became fascinated and still studying it.
However, my contribution to this great system is on how to select a trigger dozen. I find it easy and suitably compliant to search for a trigger in every 3 spins especially where there're no three or more consecutive dozens, a 0,0  before the trigger. Where a zero comes before, after or in between the three spins is counted not as a trigger but to complete the three spins and move on. Suprisingly, and in compliance with Mr. Palestis red flag rules, I have seen only three back to back losses scattered in about 10,000 spins actually played online at a British casino.
I will like the experts in the house to examine and critic this selection method of mine for optimal results. My special thanks to Mr. Palestis and thank you all
Akanni
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on May 18, 2017, 05:14:58 PM
Hi Akanni,

Can you clarify, by example, your trigger selection? I'm a little confused. When you say "zero" above, are you referring to the green zero on the roulette wheel?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Akanni on May 18, 2017, 08:42:21 PM
@Terminator,listed hereunder are examples:
32  31  7#  10/ 19- 15- 20-/24 6 12/ 8 17 0/ 0 13 1/ 6 31 24/ 0 26 14/ 12 10 2/ 30 3# 31 2/
26 1# 27 4/ 6# 34 32 32x 29x/ 23 16 32# 31/ 7 10 19#15.
# indicates betable dozen
- indicates streaking or consecutive dozens
X indicates repeating x in the trigger.
Hope am clearer!
Regards
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on May 18, 2017, 11:18:42 PM
Sorry, I can't follow what you're saying.
For example, in the "6# 34 32 32x 29x" section, the "6-34-32" is a trigger, and we would bet on the Low Dozen. How is the 29 repeating in the trigger?

Also, what exactly are you doing that is different from Palestis's version? As far as I know, he searches for a trigger every 3 spins also.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Akanni on May 19, 2017, 01:35:01 AM
I transmitted a sequence which occurred one after another without a break to where I stopped for an illustration. 6 34 32 is a trigger which is followed by 32 29, according to Palestis you do not bet the 3rd(xyy and followed by yy. I used this method since I don't know where to start looking for a trigger after one ends betting an existing trigger.
In my case, where I identify a trigger, I bet 3 times and terminates betting win or lose to count 3 spins waiting for a trigger within the 3 spins in the sequence.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on May 19, 2017, 07:53:31 AM
@Terminator,listed hereunder are examples:
32  31  7#  10/ 19- 15- 20-/24 6 12/ 8 17 0/ 0 13 1/ 6 31 24/ 0 26 14/ 12 10 2/ 30 3# 31 2/
26 1# 27 4/ 6# 34 32 32x 29x/ 23 16 32# 31/ 7 10 19#15.
# indicates betable dozen
- indicates streaking or consecutive dozens
X indicates repeating x in the trigger.
I think you separate triggers with a forward slash. Then you indicate the target dozen with #.
 32-31-7- is a trigger and with 10 after that it wins in the first bet. Then in the next series there is no trigger because either the 3 prior spins were in the same dozen as the target dozen or if a 0 is involved. And if after  YXX trigger the first 2 spins is XX again, then you skip the 3rd bet. Is that what you mean? Which happened in the case of 6-34-32 and then 32 , 29 came.
In my tests too, I usually  find only 3 back to back losses and they only happen kind of rarely.
You probably also noticed that whenever you run into 3 back to back losses ( and also 2),  there are more consecutive wins after that.
The way I play it is to let the first trigger lose VIRTUALLY and then only play 2 triggers after that.
if there is only 2 back to back losses ( the virtually lost trigger inclusive),  you recover and win.
If there is 3 back to back losses (including the first virtually lost trigger), you only lose 2 triggers.
Then you stop until the next trigger wins.
That way you avoid actually losing 3 triggers in a row (or more if they ever decide to happen).
Once the bad sequence is broken by a winning trigger, it is extremely rare to have another bad sequence of 3+ losing consecutive triggers, following that win.
Using the virtual loss mode is ideal for a live roulette B+M casino where you have several roulettes in sight. One of those roulettes might have a trigger formed in its last 3 numbers. In that case you wait for the next 3 spins to lose. In another roulette you might se something like  5-7-32-16-3.
5-7-32 being the trigger,  it has already lost the first 2 spins with 16-13. One more lost spin and the entire trigger has lost virtually because you did not play. Then proceed to bet the next trigger that will show up. Another roulette might have 5-7-32-16-3-20-17-30. it means the 5-7-32 trigger already lost 3 times with 16-3-20. In that case you can go back one number and use 20-17-30 as the next playable trigger.
There are many possibilities when you observe several roulettes. But you have to practice some back tracking to become an expert in working backwards.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: SugTips on May 19, 2017, 01:46:45 PM
I transmitted a sequence which occurred one after another without a break to where I stopped for an illustration. 6 34 32 is a trigger which is followed by 32 29, according to Palestis you do not bet the 3rd(xyy and followed by yy. I used this method since I don't know where to start looking for a trigger after one ends betting an existing trigger.
In my case, where I identify a trigger, I bet 3 times and terminates betting win or lose to count 3 spins waiting for a trigger within the 3 spins in the sequence.

Thanks God.
Good Morning All.

Thank you Palestis and other members who has given this system and their inputs.
Thank you Akanni for sharing, I have figured it out a long before and exactly playing Akanni's way and have fantastic results so far. Key is a good bankroll and virtual losses.

Love and Light.
SugTips
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: WinDaily on May 19, 2017, 02:20:04 PM
Hi windally,
               I have used the " odd dozen" extensively on air ball and RNG. The question is "can you trust RNG"  ? Note I do play slightly differently than Palestis. I believe that my style of play is more suited to airball than Pale's.
    This system relies on 2 basic principles. (1) The fact that one dozen is often "sleeping" and is therefor out of play. (2)The flow, "Regression toward the mean", is still trying to maintain equality with the 2 dozens that are in play.
              Harry

I wouldn't really trust RNG though. I don't really understand, maybe you would wanna share full detail on your style of play? That would be great!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Junscissorhands on May 19, 2017, 09:11:29 PM
Do you guys think if casinos find out that more and more players are adapting this method/system of playing plus winning on a constant basis that they will eventually ban us ? I mean if i think of it, don't you guys think casino staff members will go on the web and look for websites/forums like these and find a way to prevent us from winning ? (especially if it's consistent and recognizing this play-style).

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Sheridan44 on May 19, 2017, 09:55:07 PM
Well , system wise - if roulette is so perfect....and so unbeatable...in any form (airball,rng or otherwise)...as many in that industry subscribe to...there is no reason to ban anybody.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Junscissorhands on May 19, 2017, 10:37:27 PM
It seems like this system doesn't lose. If a system prevails and snowballs and goes viral..what then ? Like martingale worked ...until the casinos put out tablelimits. Do you understand what i mean ?

It's like the casino eq 10000 men army vs us 100, they have the HE, but if you hand the 100 men a machinegun they'll ban firearms.

 DrTalos decided to not expose his system with a reason.

Casinos can always adjust so that the players can't win.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Sheridan44 on May 19, 2017, 11:56:27 PM
Hello Juns....and welcome.....

The system described indeed looks like a good one. It's difficult to test because it keeps getting revised. Not sure of what the current version is. I had done some testing of it at various stages....the results were mixed but generally positive. And that's perfectly alright. I'm not looking for one that just keeps winning forever....I doubt that one exists.

A method that is able to keep one on the positive side for lengthy periods of time would be at least a "partial" grail to me....for you would have plenty of opportunities to bail out with a profit. Astute money management is a key element in this or any system.

Insofar as Talos' reasons to communicate cryptically...I'm not sure what his motives are to do this. But his topic has been strung out through 35+ pages (with the "Talos Dump" section and others) of posts....possibly the longest of any subject in the history of this forum. I guess one has to hope that he is trying to be helpful in regards of opening our eyes into new ways of developing strategy and tactics.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: MrPerfect. on May 20, 2017, 01:52:16 AM
Little fairytale. .. ones upon the time there was a fellow,...
    His imagination told him that there is a system that never loose. He was lazy, but smart.
    He desided to tell entire world that he already descovered such a system and proposed to entire world to gess how it works.
   Result was unexpected! !! 35 pages on the forum where folks stress with others for qwoting previous posts.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Junscissorhands on May 20, 2017, 04:16:41 AM
Hi sheridan and other fellow roulettists.

To be fair and honest and def.  not to brag about, i have been playing with this method for the last 2 years, but it has definetely being perfected by palestis and harryj. The only difference is i combine it with number prediction a la Kimo Li.

If you are in the midst of playing the dozen look carefully for the pattern on the board, numbers will repeat esp. In the last 20 results. You will find it much easier to predict as you know the hit rate of the yxx+3 is high. If you know your sectors by heart plus the dealers sig, your HG might be even better :)
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Junscissorhands on May 20, 2017, 04:35:28 AM
MrPerfect, fairytale ..dillusional or narcistic he could be all of them. But as sheridan pointed out it's good to make us think and progress. It's like being a good parent you don't want to spoonfeed your kids. They need to fall and learn. If he is capable of making an AP player(ie a system sceptic) like yourself think again..thats quite an achievement :)

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: MrPerfect. on May 20, 2017, 10:25:12 AM
 Jan@, there is absolutely nothing remarkable about myself. Anyone can make me think, it's not an achievement. ...
     AP are Real System players. We are not sceptical about systems in any way... it's just we base our systems on reality ( what ball/ wheel does), instead basing them on some " random wheel " model that do not correspond reality.
    Difference between this " random wheel model" and reality is exactly the thing that AP explore to make money.
     Being " forced" to create systems ( strategies, betting plans) on the go in a daily basis,  we naturally get some experience in doing it. More you do something, more experience you get...
     Beating this game is not easy even if you got advantage, reality can be harsh.
   Now imagine yourself in a position of AP... you get general idea of what is posible in the game and what is not posible. There is a fellow who tell you that he can win in desperate situation despite the odds, math , general common logic. ... no clear explanation offered, no example of use , only " secret squirrel " in the black box.
     " it's bs" , that's what l thought ... and still think about it. Up till now l sou nothing that could make me change my opinion. If this is what you mean by " make myself thinking"... then yes, he MADE it.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on May 21, 2017, 12:48:23 AM
The only difference is i combine it with number prediction a la Kimo Li.

If you are in the midst of playing the dozen look carefully for the pattern on the board, numbers will repeat esp. In the last 20 results.

Hi Junscissorhands, can you give examples of what you mean? Any thing that adds to our win rate would be appreciated. Is there a link you can give to read about Kimo Li? Thanks.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Junscissorhands on May 21, 2017, 05:46:51 PM
Explaining here would be very difficult, Kimo Li has written two books on prediciting the right number and where the ball will land.

One was for the American wheel and one for the European. The whole book contains jargon like Pendulum, Nuking, Pinwheel etc. Those are patterns of where the ball lands every time the dealer spins. By knowing those patterns and combining  it with your own knowledge of the wheel you can easily pinpoint where the ball will land in the next spin. Things will be even easier if you know which dozen (less chips because you are betting lesser numbers of the sector). I myself have studied the wheel extensively after years of playing and i bet most of the players here do too.

Have a look on the web on kimo li, he was also active on various roulette forums.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: drenek on May 23, 2017, 06:12:04 PM

Hello,
I am a French member of the forum. I beg you to excuse my mediocre English. I use a goolge translator.

it is with attention that I go through the various subjects of which this one.

I code different systems with Roulette Xtrem (RX).
In the enormous thread of this subject, I chose to start coding Terminator's suggestion:

"Step 1: Only use the XYY trigger (XYX and YYX triggers are ignored)
Step 2: If the PREVIOUS 3 spins do NOT include an "X", then bet. If it does not include "X", ignore this XYY trigger.
Step 3: Bet up to 3 times, and then stop. If 1 of the 3 bets win, it's a win. If not within 3 bets, it's a loss. "

I added a progression like this:

1-2-2-
2-2-4
4-4-8
8-8-16
16-16-32
32-32-64

With REYTH's relevant suggestions for using progression in case of winning. This is what he said:
"My modification is the following:
However many units we are away from a tie with our previous high, we DIVIDE by 2 and start at the level that begins with THAT amount.

Example # 1:
Let's say we won on the 4th betting level. We are 4 units away from even break. We DIVIDE 4 by 2, and get 2. So, we drop to the level that begins with a 2 bet unit (2-2-4). So, we would begin the next betting at level 2 instead of level 4.

Example # 2:
We are at level 7 and win. If we are 12 units below our last high (meaning we are 12 units away from a tie with our previous high point in the game), we divide 12 by 2 and get 6. There is no level that begins with 6, so we go UP (he means DOWN boys and girls watching at home) the progression and play the next closest one, which would be 8 (not 4). So, we begin the next bet with an 8-8-16 progression (Level 4).

Example # 3:
Let's say we win at level 3 (4-4-8), and after we divide by 2, we get 8! We do NOT start at a higher betting level than the level we are currently on. So, in this case, we would still begin with a 4 unit bet (not 8 units), which would mean we start betting at Level 3.

I think I managed to code this version of the system.
I still have to do some tests to check.
Have a good day.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Akanni on May 23, 2017, 07:51:16 PM
Honorable members, I have been reading about betting progressions geared towards winning at roulette. Is there a winning progression for up to 18 or 20 bets?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on May 24, 2017, 01:11:50 AM
Hi Drenek, that would be awesome if you could code this method! Thank you.

Oh, and just a few clarifications. The progression you're using is fine, that's what I use too. However, depending on which level of the progression I am on:

Level 1: I use all the triggers (XYY, YXY, YYX)
Level 2: I only use the XYY trigger (XYX and YYX triggers are ignored)
Level 3 and above: I use only the XYY+3 trigger (If the PREVIOUS 3 spins do NOT include an "X", then bet. If it DOES include an "X", ignore this XYY trigger.

Also, just a correction here. You said:
Quote
With REYTH's relevant suggestions for using progression in case of winning. This is what he said:
"My modification is the following:
However many units we are away from a tie with our previous high, we DIVIDE by 2 and start at the level that begins with THAT amount.

This was actually my idea from my post. I call it my "2X divisor".

 
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: drenek on May 24, 2017, 11:10:54 AM

Also, just a correction here. You said:
Quote
With REYTH's relevant suggestions for using progression in case of winning. This is what he said:
"My modification is the following:
However many units we are away from a tie with our previous high, we DIVIDE by 2 and start at the level that begins with THAT amount.

This was actually my idea from my post. I call it my "2X divisor".

Oops sorry for my mistake I confused the different message
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on May 24, 2017, 08:10:37 PM
Is there a winning progression for up to 18 or 20 bets?

If you have a very small bankroll, I would recommend the Bread Winner Progression. The winnings are very small (compared to using Palestis's progression), but the chances of busting are very slim as well. This is the best progression to use which can outlast a very bad losing streak.

I tested over 12,000 spins using Palestis's Progression with my 2X Divisor and XYY+3 triggers. Then, I went over the same games using the Bread Winner. Limiting each game to a 100 unit lost (this would be a bust), the results are as follows:

Palestis' Progression with My Modification:
4 Busts out of 80 Games (average 1 out of 20 games will be a bust).
Average winnings are 12 units per game (150 spins per game).

Bread Winner Progression:
0 Busts out of 80 Games (never even came close).
Average winnings are 6 units per game (150 spins per game).

Be warned, you need a LOT of patience with the Bread Winner. Also, these results are NOT continuing the Bread Winner progression from where it left off with the previous game. I also tested this, and the profit is the same, 6 units per game. However, it busted 2 times out of 80 (because the progression gets higher when continued each game).

I would use the Bread Winner to build up your small bankroll safely. Then, once you have the proper bankroll, use Palestis's Progression with my 2X Divisor.

Oops sorry for my mistake I confused the different message

That's cool. It can easily happen with so many posts on here.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Mister Eko on May 24, 2017, 10:45:28 PM
After 12,000 spins how much your bankroll has increased? Have you same examples, how is your modification going in game? Because I mixed some progressions , and metods here so I dont know how is it going now, but thanks guys very match.
Title: 12,200 Spin Test Results
Post by: TERMINATOR on May 25, 2017, 05:36:23 AM
Sure! Here are all my test results. Here's a short description of what's in this ZIP file:

There are 4 Tests.
Tests B,C,D and E. These 4 Tests have around 12,200 spins total.

You will see TWO Test B's, C's, D's and E's.
This is because I tested each one TWICE with two different progressions.
One with the Bread Winner Progression.
The Other with Palestis's Progression, with my modification of XYY and XYY+3 triggers, as well as my 2X Divisor.

So, you can see all 8 tests individually by clicking on these results.

ALSO, I have 3 documents called "Test Results Combined."

Each summarizes the AVERAGE results FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL GAME PLAYED for ALL 4 TESTS on one page. But I have 3 different progressions here.

1 - The "100 max - XYY at L2, XYY+3 at L3" (which is Palestis's method with my modifications).
2 - The Bread Winner (Starting each game from the 1st level)
3 - The Bread Winner - Continue Each Game (where I Continued each game from where the progression left off from the previous game played, if the progression was not resolved).

I did NOT include each and every test individually, as that has a total of 240 Excel sheets (80 for each progression). However, if anyone is interested in these individual tests to verify my work, I will be glad to zip those as well. But these summaries in this ZIP file should be sufficient for everyone.

Oh, and these Tests were all done MANUALLY. I have no software to automatically test this method.

If you have any questions, please ask.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: drenek on May 25, 2017, 09:48:35 AM
Hello Terminator  :D
I coded a version of the method like this:
"Step 1: Only use the XYY trigger (XYX and YYX triggers are ignored)
Step 2: If the PREVIOUS 3 spins do NOT include an "X", then bet. If it does not include "X", ignore this XYY trigger.
Step 3: Bet up to 3 times, and then stop. If 1 of the 3 bets win, it's a win. If not within 3 bets, it's a loss. "

I added a progression like this:

1-2-2-
2-2-4
4-4-8
8-8-16
16-16-32
32-32-64 "

I also used your idea 2X divisor when there is a gain and we are below the highest

I did a test on the month of April 2017 on a real permanent "Casino WIesbaden"
I attach the output file so that you can check.
I also attach the graphical representation

How do I view an image directly in the post?

have a good day :D
Drenek

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Mister Eko on May 25, 2017, 08:03:54 PM
Wow, its just a fantastic work TERMINATOR. Such a huge database, thanks, I can lost between these database :D  So 12,000+ spins, and you are in profit with this single dozen system? You beat the roulette in long therm?
So we bet XYY, but we bet, when the previous 3 spins do not include the X, am I right? Example X-2 Y-15 Y-16. But in previous 3 spins every time will include the X, dont? 16,15,2...or we look the previous 3 spins before the X-2?
What is your opinion about this system? What is your experience after 12,000+ spins, which modification is the best in avarage winnings and in security ?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on May 26, 2017, 12:39:29 AM
Hello Terminator  :D
I coded a version of the method like this:

Wow, thanks Drenek. Great job!

Can I ask you, would it be possible for you to add a feature so that when I press the F9 key, all the spins will automatically be randomly generated again? And also, can you put a graph, like the one posted above, inside that Excel document, to show the results of the next 5,000 spins?

Thanks again for all your awesome work!
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on May 26, 2017, 12:47:34 AM
Wow, its just a fantastic work TERMINATOR. Such a huge database, thanks, I can lost between these database :D  So 12,000+ spins, and you are in profit with this single dozen system? You beat the roulette in long therm?

Thanks Mr. Eko. I don't know if 12,000 spins is long term, but I have made a profit so far. And these are just tests, not actual play for real money. However, all my tests were from REAL spins downloaded from Live Roulette games online. No RNG's.

Quote
So we bet XYY, but we bet, when the previous 3 spins do not include the X, am I right? Example X-2 Y-15 Y-16. But in previous 3 spins every time will include the X, dont? 16,15,2...or we look the previous 3 spins before the X-2?

Sorry, but I really don't want to keep repeating myself. The details of how I play are mentioned throughout this post.

Quote
What is your opinion about this system? What is your experience after 12,000+ spins, which modification is the best in avarage winnings and in security ?

The best modification, so far, is the one I came up with, IF you have the proper bankroll. For small bankrolls, the Bread Winner is the best.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: boyd30 on May 26, 2017, 09:14:51 AM
12000 spins is not much. It needs millions of spins to really test it. Maybe It's difficult to do this with live spins but I guess the roulette RX program has a feature to test with randomly numbers and I think that can be equal compared with live spins. Myself I don't have the program and skills for it but if someone could do, much appreciated.
Terminator, would you like to explain the bread winner progression? Tried to download the zipfile (xls), but it didn't work. Will try again later. Tried to Google bread winner progression but not much info.
Thank you.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: boyd30 on May 26, 2017, 01:53:19 PM
Drenek, Thanks for the test in roulette but it looks you were in the bottom of the progression with only 3000 spins? ...  ???
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: MrPerfect. on May 26, 2017, 06:32:08 PM
 Normally, if you do everything right, chances are that you will go negative on the very beginning of play. Later , when your edge assert itself, it's difficult to have drowdowns.
    In case of no edge, drowdown can happen in any moment.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Junscissorhands on May 26, 2017, 10:29:02 PM
I've just run this system through wiesbaden of the 25th. 4 consecutive losses.

2nd pic you can see the play from the beginning.

Before the 4 consecutive losses there was also 3 consecutive losses. First 3 back to back losses one red flag was ignored on the 4 back to back losses were no red flags, these two events happened within 140 spins on one table.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on May 26, 2017, 11:56:56 PM
When 5-9-5-1 came (bottom of the first column), you don't count the 1st dozen either in the XX or the target Y. You move on to the next trigger. Also if there is a XXY and the next 2 spins are XX you stop there and don't play the 3rd spin. (which is the most costly).
Anyway I didn't see 3 back to back but I encountered 4 back to back in the general area you pointed out.
The best defense is to stop after you run into 2 back to back losses. Then wait till one of the next triggers wins (Virtually). That way you avoid any bad sequence of 3+ back to back losses. You only lose 2 back to back.
You resume after the next trigger following  the back to back losses wins.
And almost always after a bad sequence there is an increased back to back winning series.
That's where you need to start with a higher chip .
Title: Bread Winner
Post by: TERMINATOR on May 27, 2017, 04:33:43 PM
Terminator, would you like to explain the bread winner progression? Tried to Google bread winner progression but not much info.
Thank you.

Yes, there's not much info on the Bread Winner because nobody plays it! You need a LOT of patience.

Anyway, it is designed for ONLY EC bets, but it works great on Dozens without changing anything. Here's how it works. (you need paper, or keep notes on your computer).

Start by betting 1 unit. Your goal is to win ONE UNIT only. Every time you are up one unit, or tied with your last high, progression is over and you start again.

For each loss, you write "1". Keep betting 1 unit. For each win, you cross out the 1's.

EXAMPLES:

I have 3 losses:  111
1 win:  111
another loss:  1111
And another win: 1111

I am at even. Start again.

Now, once you have FIVE 1's written down. You increase your bets to 2 units: Let's say you have 7 losses:

1111122

NOW you get a win. You do NOT cross out the 2's yet, you start with the next lower bets. SO, four 1's would be eliminated:

1111122

NOW you win again. There are not enough 1's to cross out, so you cross out the 2's:

1111122

Which leaves 1 unit to recoup. You place another 2 units bet and win. You are 3 units up (that 4 unit win minus the 1 unit on paper).

NOW for the next level:

11111222223

You increase bets BY ONE UNIT after every 5 losses.

When you win a 3 unit bet, start by crossing out the 2's, but you REPLACE FOUR 2's with TWO 1's: so it will now look like this:

111111123

WARNING: If you cross out the 3's BEFORE the 2's, it will mess up the progression and it will not work.

If you win another 3 unit bet, this is what you cross out:
111111123

Start by crossing out the 2 and a 1, and since there are no more 2's left, cross out the 3. So it will look like this now:

11111

NOW that all the 2's are gone, DECREASE your bets from 3 units to 2 units.

Bet 2 units and WIN:

11111

Only 1 unit left. Bet 2 units again and lose:

12

Bet 2 units again and win: You are up 1 unit!

If you reach 4 unit bets, for each win you cross out four "3's" and replace them with two 2's. When all the 3's are gone, cross out the 4's. When 4's are gone, decrease bets to 3 units each.

If you reach 5 unit bets, for each win you cross out four "4's" and replace them with two 3's. When all the 4's are gone, cross out the 5's. When 5's are gone, decrease bets to 4 units each.

Good Luck!

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: drenek on May 27, 2017, 04:41:22 PM
Hello Terminator  :D
I coded a version of the method like this:

Wow, thanks Drenek. Great job!

Can I ask you, would it be possible for you to add a feature so that when I press the F9 key, all the spins will automatically be randomly generated again? And also, can you put a graph, like the one posted above, inside that Excel document, to show the results of the next 5,000 spins?

Thanks again for all your awesome work!

Hello Terminator
No it is not possible to do this because it is not encoded with Excel.
I use the Xtrem Roulette software.
But with RX, I can test all possible permanence. I have more than a million number from real casino permanence.

However, I just found a small error in my code that I corrected. The results are a little different.
On the other hand I have a question concerning the progression: what do you do when you reach the maximum of permanence? You stop ? Do you start again in step 1?

Because during my tests on a permanence of 400 000 numbers, I was in positive the first 100 000 then I found myself in negative after 100 000 until reaching  -39336 unit.

Could you provide me with a 200-300-number line with your betting comments to confirm my code?
Thank you.

Drenek
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on May 27, 2017, 04:41:54 PM
I've just run this system through wiesbaden of the 25th. 4 consecutive losses.

You are going to have lots of losses also. My worst game was 17 losses in a row, then after 1 win I had another 13 losses in a row. That is why I limit each game to 100 units lost.

I did not use virtual bets during my 12,200 spin test. However, I will take Palestis's advice and use Virtual Bets after 2 consecutive losses if betting for real money.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on May 27, 2017, 05:00:29 PM
I have a question concerning the progression: what do you do when you reach the maximum of permanence? You stop ? Do you start again in step 1?

Sorry, I don't know what you mean by "permanence." Can you rephrase?

Quote
Could you provide me with a 200-300-number line with your betting comments to confirm my code?
Thank you.

Each game is completely different, and it may not address the specific questions you may have. I do things in my games which may confuse you. For example, I play both Dozens and Columns at the same time, which would be too difficult for most people. It would be easier if you just give me an example of a trigger that you have doubts about and I'll correct you if needed.

Also, there is really no "right" way of playing. You can change it to your liking. Which is why there's so many variations in this post.

You may have to change depending on where you play. For example, I am playing at an online casino right now, but I must CHANGE my strategy because I get kicked out of game for not betting often enough. So, I cannot play my XYY and XYY+3 trigger there. Also, instead of using the NEXT 3 spins for my trigger, I use HarryJ's method and play the previous 3 spins as my trigger, but still using all the Red Flag rules. This is the only way I can play without getting kicked off for inactivity.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: drenek on May 27, 2017, 05:14:28 PM

excuse me,
What you do when you reach the maximum of progression
In the example ... 32 32 64. you stop? Do you start again in step 1?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on May 27, 2017, 05:52:01 PM
Oh, I limit my games to a 100 unit loss. As long as my next bet does NOT take me over a 100 unit loss (if that bet would lose), then I keep going up the progression. If my next bet takes me OVER my 100 unit max, then I stop that game and start another from level 1.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Junscissorhands on May 27, 2017, 07:42:28 PM
@Terminator, omg so you have encountered 5 back to back losses plus 2 spins before a win ? Is this online, RNG or B+M ?

I am curious out here all the players that have played this system, anyone encountered 4 or 5 back to back losses when playing it at B+M casino ?

The bread winner method is basically a labby right ? I might try that but it indeed needs  A LOT of patience.

@Palestis, is this also how you play ? So after two back to back losses wait for a virtual win and then proceed with a higher chip/progression on the following trigger ? But do you start at level 1 progression or you proceed with level 3 ?

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on May 27, 2017, 07:59:06 PM
@Terminator, omg so you have encountered 5 back to back losses plus 2 spins before a win ? Is this online, RNG or B+M ?

Yes. But this test was BEFORE all my many modifications I have now. You can read about it in an earlier post in this thread. This was BEFORE I used the XYY and XYY+3 Triggers, and BEFORE my 100 unit loss. BEFORE my 2X Divisor. BEFORE I skipped the FIRST trigger after a streak of 3+ and played the 2nd trigger, IF that 2nd trigger target was different from the dominant dozen of the last streak. There were many other changes I made since then as well.

In that game, I reached a 2522 unit loss, but if I played the same game today, it would not have gone over a 100 unit loss. Also, I replayed the same game with the Bread Winner progression, and instead of a 2550 loss, it only reached a 189 unit loss. This is making the same, exact bets, the only difference was the progression.

I have attached BOTH games to this document for your review.

And to answer your question, the spins were downloaded from REAL Live casino's online, None of them were RNG. Then I played through them manually.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on May 27, 2017, 10:20:25 PM
@Palestis, is this also how you play ? So after two back to back losses wait for a virtual win and then proceed with a higher chip/progression on the following trigger ? But do you start at level 1 progression or you proceed with level 3 ?
At $10 minimum starting chips (and most other roulettes at $15, I can't risk extended progressions.
Stopping at 2 back to back losses avoids the possibility of 3+ back to back. After a virtually winning trigger I expect to see more frequent winning triggers. Definitely I don't  expect to see 3 back to back, following immediately after 3 back to back. After a winning trigger brakes the back to back losing sequence I start with a higher basic chip, but the progression is proportionate to the lower value chip. As soon as I come close to recovery I revert back to the usual chip. 
At the same time I also use the YXX+3 trigger after 2 back to back losses. With many roulettes available on the casino floor it doesn't take long to find such trigger. Where on line in one roulette you have to wait till it happens.
Also in a real casino, you may find (by back counting), a trigger that already lost 1 round. That is considered money saved. Then by playing the next 2 trigger is like playing 3 triggers at the cost of only two. I also keep an eye for situations like this:
1-2-35-3-22-17-26-4.  The 1-2-35 trigger lost with 3-22-17. With 26 we have another trigger (22-17-26). which already lost the first spin with 4. Then I can play another 3 spins , which in effect is four spins, but at the cost of 3 spins.
I rely more in these types of scenarios, rather than progression. But you have to be able to process numbers, starting backwards on the score board. You have to be mentally alert all the time.
You also may find 2 triggers that already lost 2 back to back . Already made without spending a single penny.
Needless to say that after that you proceed with a very high value chip.
These situations are available when you have many roulettes to chose from.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on May 27, 2017, 10:51:24 PM
Before I forget here is another very effective system involving a single dozen
It is the "Pattern repeat" system. ( it is the exact opposite of the "pattern breaker", which requires to play 2 dozens).
We take groups of 3 numbers and note their pattern.
Example 1-10- 22 ,the pattern is 1-1-2.
25-17-8. The pattern is 3-2-1
18-30-2. The pattern is 2-3-1.
Once we establish the dozen pattern of the last 3 numbers spun, we play the exact pattern in the next 3 spins. Once we match it in one of the next 3 spins we win and stop. Then go to the next pattern.
If lose go on to the next trigger/pattern.
Below is a worksheet of an entire session.
No 2 back to back losses.
As an initial red flag I would say avoid patterns that involve the same dozen in 3 spins.
Like 32-27-30 (3-3-3).

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Junscissorhands on May 28, 2017, 12:36:55 AM


I like the pattern repeat system, but 3 or 4 back to back do occur more often after a quick run through wiesbaden's table 3 on the 27th.

I think hit and run or start play after 2 virtual losses with higher value chip is better for more certainty.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: drenek on May 28, 2017, 09:12:51 AM
PLEASE DO NOT QUOTE PREVIOUS POSTS

Hello Palestis,
I have coded "Patterns repeat"
With the following red flags:
If 3 identical dozen then stop. we search 3 dozen others
If the 0 appears during the trigger search then stop. we search 3 dozen others

For your example here is the graph:
Chart 1_08022017_table2
Detailed file: file 1_08022017_table2

Another day: 03042017:
Chart 2_03042017_table 1
File 2_03042017_table 1
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on May 28, 2017, 02:12:33 PM

I like the pattern repeat system, but 3 or 4 back to back do occur more often after a quick run through wiesbaden's table 3 on the 27th.

I think hit and run or start play after 2 virtual losses with higher value chip is better for more certainty.
I think more tests are needed to determine the possible maximum back to back losses.
 3 or 4 are still rare. if it's determined that 4 are in fact are rare and 3 are also somewhat rare, then one or two virtual losses  is the best way to go. Then play the next two triggers with actual money.
The good thing is that triggers form as fast as the roulette spins. So there is no waste of time waiting for a special trigger to form.
Maybe the appearance of a 0 during the 3 bets should cancel the remaining bets. (if it came in the 1st or 2nd bet). 
Initially I would take the pattern of 3 numbers and play that same pattern to repeat for one of an extended number of spins. ( without changing to another trigger after 3 unsuccessful spins). In that case the winning range was longer, with usual maximum up to 6 spins. But rarely it would go to 13 spins. But that was extremely rare. (which in fact translates to about 4 back to back losses with changing triggers).
Changing the trigger every 3 spins, I find it much more effective and more manageable. 
I am also looking into the case of taking DS patterns. (6 numbers DS patterns playing for one to  repeat in one of the next 6 spins).
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Harryj on May 28, 2017, 04:25:28 PM
   Pal,
        When we 1st explored the dozens together this trigger was proposed. we found that the "odd dozen"(single dozen) was stronger and concentrated on that.
      However my local casino has only one auto machine. I have therefor used this and "guns" and a couple of other EC pattern match methods, to avoid being seen to win with only 1 System. My results show this is a break even method. A progression is definitely needed to ensure a win.
      I have just got my PC running after it being unused and moved around while I was in the UK. I will look at some of my records and pass on info.
        Harry
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on May 29, 2017, 01:00:12 AM
Harry
When we were testing the dozen pattern match , we were taking one pattern like 321 (if the numbers were 30-20-10) and carried it to the end. Until it either won or lost. After that we were picking the next pattern. And you found the winning range to be 1-6 spins.
This time I revised it, to take the pattern and play it for 3 spins or stop if it is a match.  Then pick another 3 number pattern. And play that one for up to 3 spins. ( just like we do in the "odd dozen").
This way it is much easier to back count and find virtual losses that already happened.
The other way (sticking to the same pattern),  as I was back counting I was making a lot of mistakes and that caused me many problems. And that's the reason I abandoned it.
Changing the trigger/pattern every 3 spins, makes it a lot easier to back count, because I only have to count 3 steps back. Plus it offers more variety in triggers.
The other way (sticking with the same pattern),  I was going as far back as the bottom number on the board. And worked my way up to most recent numbers. And most of the time I got lost.
As I told you, the casino nearest me is brutally slow in spinning. ( they stack the chips manually by the dealer).
Any back to back losses with the "odd dozen" system, translates into a long wait to recover. Maybe more than an hour. Or maybe 2 hours if I have to use the YXX+3 trigger. And that's a problem.
In the revised dozen pattern match,  triggers come fast, and it is very easy to spot virtual losses, by back counting.
Once the rarest back to back losses limit is determined, the rest is easy. All you have to do is find virtual losses that are just  below the rare limit, and start playing the triggers after that.
I very much doubt that every time you bet , you will be breaking  the already rare back to back loss limit record.
So I have to do more tests to determine what that back to back loss limit is. 

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on May 30, 2017, 02:38:09 PM
HarryJ, I'm familiar with your version of Single Dozen. But when using your version of Single Dozen (by using the previous 3 spins, instead of the next 3 spins), you said that you really don't use any Red Flag rules.

I'm just curious. What techniques do you use to avoid a long losing streak? And what warning signs do you look out for? What actions do you take? If any.

Thank you.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Harryj on June 01, 2017, 05:03:46 PM
  Hi Terminator,
                  I restart the count at the following red flags. 3 spins showing all 3 doz. 3 spins showing only one doz. At zero.
        I play a 5 step insured marty. Concentrating on the first 3 spins, and being happy with a break even or a small loss on spins 4 and 5.
       I back count from where the bet ends. ie. no new spins unless the last 3 spins do NOT provide a trigger. This allows for the two active doz to repeat several times.eg 2,3,2... bet 3.. 3w... last 3 spins =3,2,3... bet 2....2 w.. last 3 spins,2,3,2... bet 3... 3w..... doz 1 has slept for 6 spins. Not unusual, strings of wins like this are quite common.If doz 1 really goes to sleep it is possible to get 5 or 6 wins in the space of 9-10 spins.

     With a 5 spin progression back to back losses are less common. I do not increase my stake on the 1st loss. I rely on the W/L ratio to recover. An increase on what you would call the 3rd level is fairly safe. It would require the equivalent of 5 loses on a 3 spin cycle.

      This version is designed for continuous play on a single random flow. Not for intermittent play switching from table to table(as per Pale). Pale's version works, but there are many more back to back losses. Which require a stronger progression to recover quickly.

    Harry

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on June 02, 2017, 08:04:02 PM
Thanks for your explanation, Harry.

And just to Double Check your betting amount from an earlier post of yours. Can you verify if this is how you bet?

You start by placing TWO DS bets. Each are 3 units. You make a sequence of 5 bets in a row.

Let's say you make the 1st of 5 bets, and lose. Then your 2nd bet will be 4 units each. If lose, your 3rd bet will be 5 units each. If lose, your 4th bet will be 6 units each. And finally, your 5th and last bet will be 9 units each.

Is this correct?

If so, what happens if you lose all 5 bets? Do you start back at 3 unit bets for the next sequence of 5 bets? Or do you increase your first bet?

Thanks for clarifying.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: palestis on June 03, 2017, 01:01:18 AM
@ Terminator
The system I posted regarding the dozen pattern match continues to perform very well.
I have been testing it, feverously for the last two weeks and I don't see any problems with  many back to back losses. (but I pay attention to the previous numbers to make sure there is nothing out of the ordinary). 
Any roulette in sight has a trigger. Its last 3 numbers. Except when the same dozen appears 3 times in the intended trigger. Plus one great advantage is that you can spot "virtual losses" very easily.
All you have to do is go back 6 numbers on the score board, and take the 6th ,5th and 4th numbers as the trigger.
Then check if there was a dozen pattern match in the very last 3 numbers on the board.
If not, you automatically have one virtual loss. (No real money spent).
Then you take those last 3 numbers and use them for the next rigger.
In the picture (inside the blue border), if those were the last ( 6 most recent numbers) that you see on the score board, 21,29,33, was the trigger. The 2-3-3 pattern did not match any of the 32,18,13 pattern.
So it was a loss.
Taking the 32,18,13 as the new trigger its pattern is 3-2-2. Which matches the 33 that came next (32 matches the 33 as they both are in the same dozen). If you want 2 virtual losses, go back 9 number on the score board.
I also found that using the 3 numbers (that caused the previous triggers to lose), as the new trigger it usually wins about 90% of the time on average. Very frequently with the 1st or 2nd spin.
And Junscissorhands found the same hit rate of 90%, by doing his own testing.
I also found that zero or 00 is the culprit that frequently causes a loss. It's best to abandon betting when  0 appears. Then pick the next 3 spins after the 0 as the new trigger.
I find this system much better where roulettes spin slow. With 8-10 minutes wait from spin to spin, the XYX is impossible to play it. That's how long it takes to spin the ball in the nearest casino from me. And if you are looking for YXX+3, well it might an hour.

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on June 03, 2017, 01:32:13 AM
Thanks Palestis, I'll experiment with your Dozen Pattern Match also.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Harryj on June 03, 2017, 04:28:09 PM
   Hi Terminator,
           You have the progression correct I do not increase my stake after the first loss. With a 5 step progression back to back losses are rare. If a second loss is encountered I do increase the stake. A third loss would involve 15 spins. ie equivalent to 5 back to back with only 3 steps. It does happen, but not often.
      Technically I should increase again after the 3rd loss, but I am a "play it safe" type of guy. I either go home with what is left of my daily bank. Or drop back, and start again from 1 unit.
       Harry
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Junscissorhands on June 03, 2017, 11:06:38 PM
Jim, the dozen repeat after one virtual loss hit rate is definetely higher than the xyy+3 trigger after testing.

I start the progression fairly low and i do not abandon the game when a zero hits. Don't ask me why but when i play i substitute the 0 as 3rd dozen (26/32 european wheel) and so far so good.
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: TERMINATOR on June 04, 2017, 05:43:51 AM
  If a second loss is encountered I do increase the stake. A third loss would involve 15 spins. ie equivalent to 5 back to back with only 3 steps. It does happen, but not often.
     

Thanks again, Harry. May I ask what you increase your stakes to on the third loss? Do you simply double it?
Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Junscissorhands on June 04, 2017, 10:52:34 AM


Update: 4 back to back losses, almost 5 !

Title: Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
Post by: Harryj on June 04, 2017, 02:22:03 PM
   No terminator, I increase by about 50%. So the basic 3,3, stake becomes 5,5. The other progression steps are increased in preportion.
      I believe that bad variations tend to arrive in clumps. If a session goes bad it can stay bad for a long time. I consider 3 losses as a sign that I have encountered such a clump. I eitherdrop back to minimum and accept the loss. Or I gather whats left of my daily bank, and head for home.
       Harry