Roulette Forum
Roulette Forum => Roulette Systems => Topic started by: MickyP on January 06, 2018, 11:18:56 AM

The ten finals group of numbers are:
0, 10, 20, 30.
1, 11, 21, 31.
2, 12, 22, 32.
3, 13, 23, 33.
4, 14, 24, 34.
5, 15, 25, 35.
6, 16, 26, 36.
7, 17, 27.
8, 18, 28.
9, 19, 29.
The numbers in the groups tend to follow each other in a random yet frequent manner. Systems have been developed around this concept so I have no claims on this except for my enthusiasm at developing a sound system based on these number groups.
Palestis, you created a working system based on a 38 spin cycle where the finals are recorded and the least hit finals are bet (up to four finals). I ran a few short tests and was surprised by the positive outcome.
Kav suggested playing only one final (3 or 4 numbers). Reyth also showed interest in betting few numbers. This would be flat betting. I second this viewpoint. Play few numbers flat betting if possible. If a progression is at all used, it must be a very soft one.
I have taken a list of about 150 numbers; I know it's too short to come to any conclusions but nevertheless I had to start looking at this to see if I can find some way of playing an active rewarding game. The numbers are divided into 18 number lotts. The first 18 numbers are used to track and establish your game. An X is placed next to each final that hits and the finals with the most hits are played for 18 spins. One or two finals is perfect but three is also okay. The one test I did showed zero and six as dominant and in the 18 spins I had ten hits.
I know this doesn't prove too much but playing on single numbers with a 351 return and only playing a few numbers is worth the effort.
Another approach I tried was to take the two most recent finals and play them for 12 spins or a win whichever is first. My average win rate was 7 games out of 38 spins. I tried with three and four finals but I'm not crazy about betting too many numbers with a progression.
I must state that I have faith in Palestis and knowing that he has experience with finals including his own system tells me that I am on the right track. Thank you Palestis.
I look forward to your input.

[size=0px] A fact about finals is that 4 finals cannot go missing for more than 24 spins (that's the rare max).[/size][/size][size=0px] 3 finals cannot go missing for more than 36 spins except 789 (9 numbers), that can go up to 40 spins missing (again that's the rarest limit).  Another fact is that when 4 finals can be combined in quads, it is more likely that when one appears it will be in a quad rather than a split. Example 5869It forms 2 quads ( 5869 and 25262829) and 15/18, 16/19 and 35/36 splits. You have to expect to hit the 2 quads more often than the 3 splits. You may play only the quads to save chips. In the long run you will be ahead. I personally love the 789 finals because they are only 9 numbers and most of them can be combined. Like street 789, 17/18 split and 28/29 split. Also the 0789 are great because all of them are concentrated in 3 DS's: 7/12, 16/21 and 25/30.
A quote from Palestis above .
Maybe due to statistics the most hit in 18 spins operate on the LoTT so playing the most hit has merit.[/size]

Did some more testing and must say Palestis is on the mark but my method preformed very well as well.
I record 38 spins and select the two weakest showing finals. I then bet the finals for the next 38 spins and have found that the first 18 bets produce the most wins (average 8 wins in 18 spins). The wins slow down in the second 18 numbers.
On my method of betting the two recent finals I get hits within 9 spins but there are times when I have gone to 1215 spins without a hit. By creating a threshold of 12 spins to stop, I am able to contain the game and recover the losses with ease.
I will really appreciate assistance in testing this further. If anyone has the time and inclination then please let me know.

I use to play finals alot. Start off with the last final that repeated. For example, if the last few numbers hit were 7, 13, 8, 12, 19, 3 (most recent on the right).... I would play the 3 finals until a hit up to 9 spins. If no hit in 9 spins, play the the most recent final that repeated. Has a great success rate, and not bad to use a progression with
If there are 4 numbers in the final, play 9 spins. If 3 numbers, play 12 spins, if 5 numbers play 7 spins. If you are playing 3, 13, 23, 33 for 9 spins and dont get a hit play the next most recent repeated final. Raise bet to 2 units. If its 7, then play 7,17,27 for 12 spins. Raise bet on eah series loss. Ive never seen more than 4 series lost before 2 numbers are hit in a series

Yes that's another good system playing only 1 final at a time. As long as you limit the chasing to a few spins. 9 sounds fine, but if you start another repeated final and wins soon enough to make a profit then you should abandon and start all over again with 1 final. That way you don't get carried away with playing too many numbers.
@Mickey.
So that I understand, is this how you suggest playing your version of the finals system?
Take 18 numbers and play the 2 most frequently appeared finals?
In the pic the 1's and 6's are clearly ahead. And sure enough with 26 and 36 coming very soon it made an impressive profit.
Is it how you play it? and do you continue after a profit or look for new frequent finals and start another session?

Thanks for the input. There are two ways I've been testing the finals approach.
First approach: straight off the bat, select and play the two most recent finals to appear and play for 12 spins or a hit whichever is sooner. With a hit or 12 spins past immediately begin playing the first number to land and include the second on the next spin. Repeat the process until a hit or 12 spins without a hit then start fresh with new finals. The session length is 38 spins plus minus.
Second approach: (this is the method you are interested in Palestis) . Record 18 spins marking what final they belong to from zero to nine. Select the two most hit finals and play them for the next 18 spins giving you a session total of 36 spins (18 used to track and 18 for play). With this method and the limited tests I've done the hit rate is pleasingly high. Playing until your first hit will turn this into a grind and you will miss out on many hits. My tests show that after 18 spins of play the two "hot" finals slow down. Nothing is set in stone at this time and the suggestions of limited spins per play is designed for a single hit eg; play a 4 number final for 9 spins. Playing 2 finals for 18 spins after tracking produces a lot of wins. These numbers can be changed to optimise potential hit rate.
The reason why I have selected two finals to play as opposed to one is because although both produce hits, one of them dominates the spin cycle. There is enough meat on the payout to play two finals without stress.
As stated, finals are nothing new but with a good method of play you will be able to have short exciting games with great rewards, hit and run if you like.
I am still to work out the progression, bankroll requirements and so on. The two methods above are wannabe methods/systems at this time . Much more testing is required.

Yes that's another good system playing only 1 final at a time. As long as you limit the chasing to a few spins. 9 sounds fine, but if you start another repeated final and wins soon enough to make a profit then you should abandon and start all over again with 1 final. That way you don't get carried away with playing too many numbers.
Yes, my explanation was probably confusing, but I only play 1 finale at a time. If no hit in 9 spins, I switch to another one

Scarface, thanks so much for your contribution. I clearly understood your method of play and do not doubt the success it can achieve.
I'm looking at approaching this from a different angle that may bring to light a new finals method of play. What's running through my mind while I consume myself with tests is as follows:
1. Short exposure of bankroll chips on the table
2. A few numbers bet for a limited number of spins.
3. The best way to qualify the bet selection.
4. The use of a soft progression, flat betting or both.
5. How to proceed after the first hit?
6. Building a Stop Loss into the game by limiting playable spins in a session.
7. Finding trends that may produce faster wins.
8. A safe bankroll to cover at least three sessions a day.
9. Thoughts on how best to recover from a lost session.
10.qualifying a table before play.
11. Effect that croupier changes will have on a running game.
12. Keeping the play easy, simple and manageable.
13. Will I be able to effectively use the LoTT to benefit the system.
There are so many things to consider and get clarity on. That is why I opened this system discussion on the forum so that anyone interested in giving their two cents worth may do so. After all, is this not what the forum was designed for?
I do apologise for not responding to your post; it was not intentional.

Mickey, Finals are one of the first systems I played. And I still go back to it sometimes. I'll keep an eye on this thread and test to see what I can contribute. My only suggestion is to never play cold number finals, only hotties ;)

Thanks Scarface.
My tests are so revealing at this point that I have to abandon the method of tracking 18 and playing the hottest for the next 18 spins.
The hits do not justify the tracking period and tests reveal twists in the game where the hottest will become cold in the 18 spins. What to do about the hottest when they are hot? Here is what I'm looking at now...
I've noticed that finals cluster together in a few spins. When recording the 18 spins, not all the finals will appear. There will be one or two that will be a complete no show and three or four will have one or two hits. I see strong repeats in three sometimes four of the finals and I want to cash in on those trends but as quickly as they appear, so too do they disappear.
Looking at how the finals fall over 18/36 spins; playing one final when it repeats is more of a psychological pacifier even if you only play it for nine spins. For this reason my choice of playing two finals for a limited number of spins is justified because the odds of the two selected finals not showing in nine spins is slim. I do all my tests manually so it's a bit of a grind but worth every moment. We tend to think we know everything about the game until we put pen to paper and study the different aspects of the game.
The one method that has stood it's ground in my tests is as follows:
No tracking required but you must record your game so you do not loose track of where you are. Table distractions can be a bitch!
The first spin reveals your first final. Play it. The second spin reveals your second final (you may have a hit from your first bet so no opportunity is wasted). Play the two finals for eight spins or until a win. Start over again. Here are 38 numbers I tested as an example:
27first final.
35second final
19
2
1
8
1
27Hit
27 first final
34 second final
7 Hit
9  first final
5  second final
2
32
3
34
5 Hit
17  first final
16  second final
16 Hit
31  first final
3  second final
32
32
21  Hit
0  first final
16  second final
32
6  Hit
27  first final
35  second final
22
7  Hit
30  first final
28  second final
2
28  Hit.
The hit rate above shows as a good example of the tests I've been conducting. This is only the beginning as the system has to be packaged with all other aspects taken into account. All this and much more testing is required before I will consider it a playable system.

An example of first hit and no hit.
27  first final
17  Hit
1  first final
30  second final
21  Hit
34  first final
31  second final
16
9
29
27
23
9
30
5  stop play  No Hit.
35  first final
36  second final
28
3
0
26  Hit.

I have just completed a 300 spin test:
Wins =50 games.
Loss = 6 games.
:)

The problem with the hot finals in 18 spins is that you have to take a look at other spins previously to the 18 spins being tracked.
Because if the hot finals in the 18 spins were also hot in the previous spins they may become colder in the 18 playable spins.
Also it's a good idea to have a god mix of the finals, instead of one number appearing repeatedly.
If 14 appears many times it doesn't necessarily mean that the 4's are hot. it's much better if 24 and 34 add to the count, instead of just one number or two with the same final.
One thing is for sure. If 3 or 4 finals are cold, in 38 spins, when most of them appear, 2 of them will become hot.
Also you will find that when most of the cold finals appear, whenever one of them reappears it will usually drag another one from the group, is a few spins.
At some point the previously cold finals that started to appear, they will usually group together. Not all of them . But at least 2 of the 4.
I am sure you noticed that already.
Look at the example in the pic.
After marking the first 38 numbers, 02357 seem to be colder.
But notice that most of them are appearing as group where there is a blue check mark.
Often times 5 times in a row.
Whether you chose to play all 5 finals or 2 or 3 of them in any grouping, they all appear close to the other. And that goes for many spins to come.
I am sure you would've made a profit in this table, regardless of how many of those 5 finals you played. Then you can start the process again.

I see your reasoning regarding hot finals in 18 spins and the need to look at the previous 18 spins to establish what trend exists. Your screen shot clarifies this very well.
The more finals you play per spin, the more hits you are likely to have but I'd like to keep the bets down to two finals max. That's 6, 7 or 8 numbers at a time. Add a progression to that and you will require a fairly large bankroll to safely play a few sessions.
As an exercise I've taken the numbers from your screen shot starting from the left top to bottom and played with two finals running through 76 spins. The tally is 11 wins and 3 losses. No back to back losses recorded. If you like I will tabulate the exercise for you.
What I need to look at is the average win loss ratio on this method to determine if it's worth playing this way.

I do not get what you are after (Win I grasp) but in what case will finals be an advantages? Only if you find a wheel, deep in the forest, which has no maintenance for years it may do, They rob you on your way home.
You can build it, you can win, but just you are lucky.

You've lost me Jesper. I really have no idea what your win 1 statement is about or your question on advantage. Will you please clarify so I can answer you properly. Thanks

The finals 0 to 6 are 4 number bets and the finals7/8/9 are three number bets. The features of a 4 number bet are universal for all kinds of 4 number bets. Sleepers for more than 50 spin are not rare. This makes the final bets very risky. The DTOP for the finals is very large. Results are unpredictable.

Thanks to Palestis and MickyP for sharing their finals strategies. I like to play the finals and find particularly interesting recently the strategy that Palestis posted that involved waiting for 2 of the same final to appear in 4 spins and then bet that final for 8 spins only. Because there are gaps in play where there are no bets, I started to test playing for a repeat of the last final that shows during those gaps only. When I play on a crowded table or alone in B & M casinos the dealers don't like it if I skip 4 or 5 or more spins. Below is a random session from a test of downloaded spins that illustrates the power that finals can have. Please note that whenever 2 finals occur within 4 spins I no longer play for a repeat, so generally you are only playing 4 numbers, seldom 8 numbers, very very rarely 12 numbers (3 finals) could occur, but I haven't seen it. Note that I missed a repeat of the "5s" five spins down because I was already betting the "4s." You can see in this particular 36 spin session I was able to catch 4 repeats, more typical is 1 or 2 repeats.
This is definitely not a HG, there are losing sessions, and profit more typically, (if there is such a thing), would be 3050 units.
Palestis and MickyP, have you ever tested a similar strategy?
28
6
24
14 win 36
15
25
0
35 win 36
1
4 win 36
6
16 win 36
30
4
6 win 36
22
6
35
14
4 win 36
18
19
3
34 win 36
22
32 win 36
12 win 36
26
0
25
36
23
26 win 36
12
3
16 12 win 360  164 196 units won

Thanks for the input Dobbelsteen.
I noticed how long finals can go to sleep and the risk you refer to is with reference to playing one final at a time. This is why the active play is restricted to 9 spins and with only one final flat betting is possible.
I have sought to reduce the risk by playing two finals at a time, also for a limited number of spins (9). So far in the tests I have conducted the hit rate has been very good and the inspiration to continue developing the system remains.
Palestis method of tracking 38 spins then playing the least hit finals works. Tracking 38 spins at a live casino table is a long process and it is not always possible to join the table at the right time.
I'm looking at a system that you can get in and play for short periods at any time. The finals do create patterns but trying to find a worthy trigger or entry point to play is a daunting task. Playing two finals produces more frequent hits and thus allows an open entry point to the game.
Some triggers do actually work like Palestis xxy trigger but most trigger types are simply windows dressing for an approach. I have no trigger incorporated and at this point the game entry point is blind.
I agree that the results are unpredictable and that is the nemesis of all types of systems and strategies. We can not hide from the fact that finals tend to flock together for short bursts and sometimes for a long stretch. This trait can be exploited if approached correctly. Two finals in play is manageable both on the table and the bankroll you carry. The more finals you play simultaneously the faster the hits. I've noticed that there are always one or two finals that sleep for 18 plus spins. So we are potentially looking at two finals out of eight finals that need one appearance in 9 spins. I don't think the odds are too bad.

Hi Horsewill, welcome to the forum and thanks for posting.
This is my first attempt at creating a system from the finals and it's a work in progress at this stage.
Palestis has some amazing systems that are posted on the forum.
Your method of play is interesting but I could not follow your example very well.your first win is on final 4 and it's first appearance is the previous spin. When did you start betting on final 4? Will you repost the play example and indicate where you start betting?
As stated this is a work in progress so feel free to contribute or question any inclusions or changes made. Thanks again.

Palestis, I was reading the posts on this thread and the penny dropped on using quads, single streets and splits with finals bets that you suggested. I feel like such a dunce...lol
This is actually a vital piece of information when playing three plus finals at the same time. It's a game changer. Wow! I have work to do. You can look forward to an interesting post when I'm done crunching numbers.
:o

Hi MickyP
In response to your question, when I was testing, I treated every 36 spin session separately. So, to start the session, there aren't any series of 4 spins with 2 of the same finals, so I am betting the finals of the last number that came up, when the 14 shows I was betting the "4s" because the 24 had previously appeared.
However, I was not betting the "5s" when the 25 appeared after the 15, because I am already betting the "4s" because the 14 & 24 had shown within 4 spins and I don't bet the finals of the last number spun when I am already betting a final based on "Palestis same 2 finals occurring in 4 consecutive numbers". I attempt to bet as few numbers as possible. If you have any more questions or suggestions, let me know.
28 Loss
6 Loss
24 Loss
14 win 36
15 Loss
25 Loss
0 Loss
35 win 36
1 Loss
4 win 36

One of the systems I got from Carrie Woodfalk (as referenced in the Pattern Zero thread I started) was similar to this but I thought right away it was BS. Basically suggesting that numbers with the same digits would cluster. So I read this thread and am still confused  these are simply pockets on a wheel with numbers stuck to them. The wheel doesn't care or know that a certain digit should appear several times. The only way I can see why this works is because of where the numbers are on the wheel in relation to each other, but even that doesn't really work as groups of numbers are not known to trend together (which was the basis of the Pattern Zero theory which people here quickly rubbished).
It just feels like betting on random numbers to me... :o

Sam41, I'm not familiar with Carrie Woodfalk. What I learnt about the finals comes mostly from this forum. Like everything, I ran a sequence of numbers and identified the finals then I researched a bit more and ran some more numbers just to identify the stated facts about the finals. I saw potential in creating a system based on the finals and this is the bundu bashing I'm doing right now. So far so good and I'm hoping for continued positive results.
If you consider it BS based on a system that maybe failed you; I'd suggest you do some homework to understand why you feel the way you do. Unfortunately the numbers don't lie but I have to agree with you that "random" is always at play.
Why this group of numbers and not any other groups of numbers? This specific group of numbers is easy to identify and play but most importantly they do tend to cluster and repeat within a short amount of spins. As I said, the numbers don't lie. Please test this fact from any reputable live spin data. Don't take my word for it; check and test it for yourself.
The randomness you refer to exists and I wouldn't risk playing one set of finals due to this, even if it's flat betting. I have been testing two sets of finals and have had positive results thus far (6 to 8 numbers bet for 9 spins). I initially had it at 12 spins but 9 spins works just fine. I'm not into wanting to know why a number falls when it does or why a certain group of numbers will not appear for 40 spins. That is the nature of the game. The wheel has a degree of consistency to it. The numbers are always in the same place and the ball will always land in one of them. It's a closed circuit.
I will find out through due diligence and perseverance whether I'm barking up the wrong tree. If anything I am broadening my knowledge of the game at no cost.

Palestis, I was reading the posts on this thread and the penny dropped on using quads, single streets and splits with finals bets that you suggested. I feel like such a dunce...lol
This is actually a vital piece of information when playing three plus finals at the same time. It's a game changer. Wow! I have work to do. You can look forward to an interesting post when I'm done crunching numbers.
:o
That's the way I have been testing the finals for the last 10 years.
I started by checking the 16 numbers that fit on the score board trying to find 4 missing finals.
Then I realized 16 numbers were too many as it was hard to find 4 missing finals.
Then I scaled it down to the last 1213 numbers and then I was looking for 3 missing final that along with another final, that was on the score board already, were forming 2 quads.
And when that happens those finals automatically are combined in splits.
This worked out much better as there were many more betting opportunities. Because most of the time the objective is achieved more frequently compared to many wasted winning opportunities.
However, a big red flag to this way of playing is if 2 or more finals keep on repeating, creating 5 or more missing finals in 13+ spins.
This is a red flag. If you see 5 or more missing finals and it is obvious that 2 of them keep on repeating strop playing. it is very likely that either those abundant finals will keep on repeating, or one or two already there will take their turn to keep on repeating. Leaving the missing finals still AWOL.
Though this is the biggest red flag, it will turn into a golden opportunity if you have a little patience.
Once the missing start repeating 2 times each, 23 of them will saturate the score board with back to back appearances. There you can make a killing.

@ Horsewill
No I haven't tested it that way.
It looks like you keep on betting the same final (after it appeared twice ), even if it won already and brought a profit early in the betting.
Maybe the numbers you tested worked out well for this scenario, but if you stick with the same finals for a prolonged time, eventually they will significantly be delayed and there will be a lot wasted chips, taking away from other finals that win.

We can build the play with use of finals, in some way a fast an easy bet, on three or four numbers. What we should be aware of, it is no magic link between them they hit as any three or four number bet. Every way we play win if the numbers we play hits, that just the simple truth.
I did some on final zero, got some hit, but the fact the bets were finals did not help, it was rather this number hit enough to go plus. If I check the numbers fallen, this was not the best choice.

We can build the play with use of finals, in some way a fast an easy bet, on three or four numbers. What we should be aware of, it is no magic link between them they hit as any three or four number bet. Every way we play win if the numbers we play hits, that just the simple truth.
I did some on final zero, got some hit, but the fact the bets were finals did not help, it was rather this number hit enough to go plus. If I check the numbers fallen, this was not the best choice.
Will be interesting to learn how you made your bet selection to play with the tests you've conducted.

Palestis, as always the info you provide is worth gold in my eyes. I didn't realise that you have been toying with finals for a decade already.
Contrary to what others may think I do not dispute the numbers and I would rather look for opportunities to exploit the numbers to my benefit.
I have been looking at pairing the finals for easy bet placement on splits, single streets and quads. What I'm trying to do is to reduce the finals to five groups. I will then run tests to see how many spins to a hit on average will be a viable approach.
Like most systems past spins normally dictate the bet selection but I'd like to minimise the dependency on spin history and focus rather on probability and variance. These are two big factors that drag so many systems into the mud. The ideal would be to make a bet selection based on all factors.I find the maths behind bet selection to be particularly intriguing.
The red flags you introduce in your game play help so much to curb unnecessary losses. I see them as an immediate response to changing conditions rather than using spin history to charter the way forward.
I'll carry on crunching the numbers with the guidelines you have provided. Thanks for your continued support. Much appreciated.

The idea of pairing finals adds a touch of randomness to a system dictated by rules. Here are the pairs I've come up with:
Note: Each pair is covered by 4 units; 1 unit on each split and where there is a single number it is covered with one unit. Bonus when it hits!
1st Pair:
0  10  20  30
3  13  23  33
4 splits covers this pairing.
2nd Pair
2  12  22  32
5  15  25  35
4 splits cover this pairing
3rd Pair
1  11  21  31
4  14  24  34
4 splits cover this pairing
4th Pair
6  16  26  36
9  19  29
3 splits and 1 straight up number
5th Pair
7  17  27
8  18  28
2 splits and 2 straight up numbers.
I've run a few tests playing one pairing at a time off the bat using the last spun number as an entry point and was not impressed with the results. I then tried playing two pairings as they appear on spin one and two. Because this is close to an EC bet, it faired very well with most hit coming in 4 or less spins. I'm not crazy about playing too many number due to runaway progressions. This may suit online players with small unit values.
The most I want to play is two finals at a time so I'll continue looking at all possible pairings that may arise in a game. I need to improve what I already have on the two finals method. I think the game entry point is a big factor that could make or break the play.
Suggestions are welcome.

Will be interesting to learn how you made your bet selection to play with the tests you've conducted.
I just took finale zero, it was no kind of rule in the selection, more than I took one below seven, making it a four number bet.

There are also other combinations:
0102030
71727 combined in 7/10, 17,20, 27/30 and 0 alone.
2122232
91929 combined in 9/12, 19/22, 29/32/ and 2 alone.
1112131
81828 combined in 8/11, 18/21, 28/31 and 1 alone.
I like finals that can be combined in quads.
I think its a good idea to make a statistical research to determine how often (when you combine 4 finals), they show up in the quads vs. the splits.
For example if 1289 is to be played, try to determine the percentage of the results falling into the
891112 and 28293132 quads, as opposed to 1/2, 18/21 and 19/32 splits.
If the statistics determine that the quads have an overwhelming majority of the hits, then you might only bet the quads, giving you the chance to bet economically and also use progression without running into dangerous levels.
You can also do something else.
Place more emphasis on the quads and use the splits as insurance. Like you can bet the 2 quads with $25,s and the 3 splits with $5's. A total of $65 bet.
if the splits show up you make $85.
But if the quads come much more frequently, you stand to win $200 (8x$25).

Palestis, thanks for adding the other three combinations. That makes a total of eight possible combinations to work with on the two finals approach.
I also liked the idea of playing big on quads with the splits as insurance. The variables to using the finals if used at the right time could produce some good winnings.
I looked at the position of the finals on the wheel and they are all spread around the wheel. A combination of two finals will not cover more than two slots at any point on the wheel. This fact is actually a positive as the distribution is spread around the wheel and that I feel plays into the variance hand.
Now, taking the eight combinations of two finals each and using the first as a trigger, if the second appears on the next spin we automatically play the split mode for the final 8 spins. If the first and second spin do not make a pair we play them as normal to the 9th spin.
If we are only going to play the 8 combinations then we must qualify a pair before we start betting
I've been thinking a lot about the best possible entry point to playing the pairs. Is nine spins still the optimum number of spins to play? I will have to look at this again.
The entry point is vital before anything else can be confirmed. Any ideas?

The problem is that some finals can be combined with several other finals.
1 for example pairs with 4 but also with 8 and the 0. 2 pairs with the 5 and the 1 and the 9.
The question is which pairing will you chose? ( I assume from the prearranged list).
But the appearance of the first final I don't think it is necessarily a trigger, whether the second matching final comes immediately after or not.
Like all triggers there much be a reason to justify the starting of betting.
From my long experience in testing and playing finals, a trigger is when 3 finals are missing for about 1213 spins and they can be combined as quads with another final, even if it is already on the score board. If not then you have 4 finals absent in 1213 spins.
Like you I don't enjoy betting 4 finals or 1416 numbers (depending if 7,8,9 is involved). But the success rate is hard to turn down. You can only lose if one or 2 finals start to stick. In that case you will lose 23 spins, but you will avoid a potential disaster. But in the next trigger you will recover.
Anomalies like this don't happen back to back.
Now to play 23 only is a much better deal as the proceeds are much higher.
But for 2 finals it takes a better preparation and more patience.
You have to wait for the right conditions.
In the picture (in the blue frame), the 0's are missing and there is only one 5 and one 6. But you have to wait until each appears one more time.
There are plenty of 1's and 4's and 2's.
That's a good opportunity. If you wait a little. as soon as one of them shows up (5 was first), you start playing the 5's
Next the 0 shows up with 20. You start playing the 0's. (along with the 5's of course).
Next 6 shows up with the 6. You start playing 056 finals.
Needless to say that the profit would've been impressive.
If you want to play 2 finals, whether you chose 0,5,or 0,6 or 5,6 you still would've made a big profit, even if there were some gaps between them. The fact that you only play 8 numbers, makes a big difference when the 2 you play appear vey close to one another without long gaps.
That makes a big difference.
Now there is a temptation to continue playing those 3 finals for a while. But my preference is to stop as soon as I make a good profit. Then wait for another opportunity like this.
My suggestion is to do a lot more testing, somewhere along these lines.
Eventually you will begin to notice patterns and repetitive behavior. You will also notice potential red flags. I guarantee you that after a while you will know exactly what to do, under a variety of circumstances.

Thanks, I'll continue the testing and report my findings.

Every final bet selection has the feature of a number bet selection. The problem is that the DTOP is very large. That means that all the trials have short run results. Short run results are unreliable for conclusions.

Every final bet selection has the feature of a number bet selection. The problem is that the DTOP is very large. That means that all the trials have short run results. Short run results are unreliable for conclusions.
I had to read some of your posts to fully understand what you are trying to tell me. For the benefit of all thoso following this thread I'll break it down.
1. DTOP: Dobbelsteen Turn Over Point.
2. DTOP is the change over from short run to long run.
3. DTOP is about 120 spins.
4. Numbers bet selection with large DTOP: Betting on few numbers for an average of 120 spins.
The risk vs reward in the short run is what I'm looking at. I know I could get my butt kicked if I hit a bad streak of numbers that gives me back to losses. It is unpredictable, I agree but I do not plan to make an overnight killing. I am looking at ways to use the unpredictability to my favour.
Each game is 9 spins long. Do you calculate the DTOP using the criteria of the system you are testing or is it a general assessment based on the amount of numbers in play? I play between 6 and 8 numbers.
The way I understand DTOP is that the more numbers in play the smaller the DTOP at about 120 spins and the predictability thus more accurate. This can produce a long term winning system. BUT, a long term Winning system can be a short term (say 50 spins) looser.
How will DTOP affect a short run game? The start and end points are intermittent so we are not dealing with an indefinite number of consecutive spins. I know there will be losses but I will always be happy if the wins outweigh the losses.
I completed a test of 650 consecutive spins and recorded 108 wins to 10 losses. 63% of the wins occurred between one and four spins. Only 3 games got to spin 9 for the win. The losses were 8%.
I have tested a lot and the numbers I've given you are within my average results of all tests conducted so far.
I appreciate your input Dobbelsteen and maybe you could make suggestions more pertinent to this specific system. Thanks.

What have I done with the pairing of the finals?
Palestis and I came up with 8 pairs of finals that when played can be converted into splits with one single unit on 4 pairs and two single units on one pair. I only played the 8 pairs for a total of 304 spins. I tracked the spins and as soon as I came across a pair I began betting. I managed 25 games; 21 won and 4 lost playing nine spins per game.
My conclusion about playing the pairs exclusively... way too slow!
Nevertheless it was an interesting test in that the results are pretty much in the ballpark of the win loss ratio of this method.
My conclusion overall on playing two finals at a time is as follows:
Playing two finals for nine spins per game has an above average to high hit rate with great returns. Keep each session to a maximum of ten games only. Two to three session a day is plenty of action for one day. There are no triggers or best entry points at this stage. You do not depend on past spins although it is wise to study them to identify trends. A red flag that I picked up studying my losses is that they all had strong repeats of one or two other finals within the nine spins. But I have also won many games with strong repeating other finals in the nine spins. So is this a red flag to stop play and reset? You be the judge.
My intention was to create an easy to play hands on game that produced regular wins without having to wait for too many spins to begin play. The first spin is your marker or entry point. At a win or after nine spins you wait one spin to get your marker to commence play. It truly is a very simple system to play.
Unfortunately you can not flat bet this system so a progression is required. Use a nine step progression that works for you.
I have used live spin data to conduct my tests with but please do your own tests before you play with real money.
One thing I noticed is that after a hit there is normally a second and third hit within three to four spins. I'll look at this more closely.

I completed an interesting exercise in my quest to further understand the finals.
Work on 38 spins. Treat each final as a separate game so you are playing ten games in one 38 spin cycle. As soon as a final shows bet it for nine spins flat betting. You will end up playing several finals at the same time but the wins will keep you playing on. The aim is to hit each final once in 38 spins. With a hit that final is removed from the game. If a final only shows late in the game and will cut short your 9 spins then don't play it. The hit rate made me smile.
This was a random exercise but with some brainstorming it could lead to something. Any ideas?

I don't think I understand exactly what you mean.
Each number that shows up , do you play its finals for 38 spins or 9?
In the pic 172815 came in the first 3 spins:
Do you play the 7's then the 8's plus the 7's, then the 5's plus the 78?
Then 1 came and won immediately (You remove the 1's ). Then 22 came and won immediately. (you remove the 2's).
Then with 18 and 7 the 8's and 7's won, so you skip those as well.
5 didn't show up so do you continue betting the 5's plus the 4's when the 24 came?
All the others have been removed as they won (some sooner some later).
Then you add the 9's when 29 came and it is immediately removed after it won in the next spin.
Then the 4's are removed as 4 came after 2929.
From this point you only play the 5's since it hasn't shown up. All others have been started, then removed because they won.
Is that how you play it and test it? Or am I missing something?
Nevertheless it looks interesting and with some tweaks it might have a great potential.

I think you meant 9 bets for each final. That way 9 bets @4 numbers each final you get a cycle of 38 spins approx. But if it is 789 do you bet the finals for 12 spins as these 3 numbers only have 3 numbers instead of 4?
I was wondering if you can test another version of this system.
Instead of starting the finals as soon as their number shows up, you wait to lose 45 times (virtual loss). Then you bet them for 9 spins. Total of 14 bets. 5 virtual and 9 actual. If it shows up in the first 45 spins, it is a lost opportunity but not an actual loss.
You can also include the same final if it shows up again, whether or not it won. That way you take advantage of some finals that stick more than the others.

The tests I did on playing all appearing finals was a shot in the dark but the results surprised me so I thought I'd throw it into the mix and see if we can do something with it.
There are ten finals. Play each final as it appears for 9 spins then stop. All appearing finals are played for nine spins. The appearance of a final is your entry point, you start betting that final for 9 spins then stop. The game is 38 spins long. At spin 29 you do not play any new finals but finish play on the finals you are playing. You may miss opportuniis now and then but this is a safety net so you do not lose some of your winnings or bankroll or be tempted to play more than 38 spins.
In your example all ten finals appear within 29 spins. In the tests I've conducted there are normally one or two finals that do not show up in the 29 spins. In your example of the 10 finals played, 6 finals won and four lost. The four that lost were:
Final 7. Appeared at spin 10.
Final 5 appeared at spin 16.
Final 0 did not appear again.
Final 6 appeared at spin 11.
Playing the finals for more spins is dangerous unless the game is contained in some way. Possibly reduce the number of spins per game or set a win and loss target to end the game at.
I'll test your other recommendations in the meantime.

I was wondering if you can test another version of this system.
Instead of starting the finals as soon as their number shows up, you wait to lose 45 times (virtual loss). Then you bet them for 9 spins. Total of 14 bets. 5 virtual and 9 actual. If it shows up in the first 45 spins, it is a lost opportunity but not an actual loss.
You can also include the same final if it shows up again, whether or not it won. That way you take advantage of some finals that stick more than the others.
I looked at this in tests I have conducted and I can't seem to validate waiting for 45 virtual spins as the finals appear pretty close together. Extending play with a progression may salvage some losses. But I think targets in a game would be the better option.
I have looked at another way to play finals. Will post shortly.

"PLAYING FINALS ON SINGLE STREETS"
As rewarding as playing the finals can be, the risk of loss is ever present. The logic behind playing the finals on streets is that although the risk of loss is ever present, it is reduced due to the increased amount of numbers covered. But payout is also reduced.
To transfer a finals bet (3 or 4 single numbers) to a street bet is easy. Simply place the bet on the street that the final number is in. Example :
We are going to play final 4. Place one unit on street 4, 5, 6. One unit on street 13, 14 ,15. One unit on street 22, 23 ,34. And one unit on street 34, 35, 36. Add one unit after a loss and minus two units on a win.
If final zero is played the first bet covers 0, 1, 2, 3, then street 10, 11, 12, street 19, 20, 21, and street 28, 29, 30.
Finals 7, 8 and 9 are bet on 3 streets only.
Palestis, I played the first 38 numbers from the last example you posted and this is how it went.
11 games played in 38 spins.
Game 1. Hit on spin 2.
Game 2. Hit on spin 1
Game 3. Hit on spin 1
Game 4. Hit on spin 1.
Game 5. Hit on spin 6.
Game 6. Hit on spin 4.
Game 7. Hit on spin 2.
Game 8. Hit on spin 1.
Game 9. Hit on spin 2.
Game 10. Hit on spin 1
Game 11. Hit on spin. 3.
As you can see from the example above, the hits come quick. Do your own tests for peace of mind. Use a progression you are comfortable with. Set a realistic win goal per session. A fun easy way to use the finals as a basis for your bet selection. Let me know what you think.

A GENERAL OBSERVATION ON REPEATING FINALS.
I ran a small test of 180 numbers and starting from spin one I work down the list until I get a repeating final and so on. I recorded 38 groups of finals with repeats at different stages. The highest number of spins to a repeat was seven. Here is the breakdown:
1 spin 3 hits
2 spins 2 hits
3 spins 14 hits
4 spins 9 hits
5 spins 6 hits
6 spins 1 hit
7 spins 3 hits.
This was an exercise simply for observation purposes. Very interesting outcomes. We have 28 out of 38 hits within four spins.
System testing continues...

It's great that you keep on testing. The only thing that worries me is the fact that you don't establish a trigger, that initiates the start of betting.
One can easily argue that starting to bet a set of finals is no different than starting to bet any 4 numbers. Starting with 4 numbers and keep on adding 4 more numbers will eventually result in frequent hits just as with the case of finals.
Though finals is more convenient to remember to remove them after a hit. Where 4 any numbers requires more attention.
But one thing keeps popping up time after time. A set of finals that are behind in a complete cycle of 37 spins, once some of them show up for the first time in a new 37 spin cycle, they keep on appearing more often, usually as a group. Without long gaps from one another.
I also have examined the most dominant finals in the 1st cycle, but I don't see them sticking in the new cycle, as much as the slow finals stick.
The picture below from 12118 in Wiesbaden is a typical situation that represents the rule rather than the exception.
As you can se once the finals that are missing or are significantly behind in appearances, show up, their appearances increase in frequency, very often as a tight group.
and usually they continue to appear in a tight group even after some gaps.
So its bet to quit once you have a profit and start again under the same triggering circumstances.

A trigger or entry point to the game is also a big concern to me. With the testing I'm doing, I'm constantly looking for an entry point. I'll focus on this for now and will see what I come up with. Thanks for pointing this out.

So I've been running a lot of tests and studying sequences of numbers to try and identify a trigger or an entry point to the game. I've also thought deeply about why I need an entry point. ...I'm still testing, looking and thinking...
This post is more to answer some questions asked in a mail.
The idea behind this thread is to build or create a system/strategy using the finals as the core or focal point. I was hoping for members to participate along the way but I guess I was aiming a little high. To this point Palestis has been my saving grace.
I have not played any of the mentioned methods in this thread at a casino yet. The reason being that I have not completed enough tests and have not considered other aspects that influence the approach like bankroll and progressions. Even the length of a game at 9 spins is not set in stone yet.
The method I'm looking at is the two finals method (68 numbers). All my recent testing is focused on playing two finals. I've taken some advice from one of Mr j's (Ken) posts and am applying that in the development of the finals method. It's a process of looking at what I want and expect. The building continues.
Bankroll is best discussed in units as it is a more universal expression. Simply convert one unit to your own monetary values.
I will add to the thread when I have something positive to share. This is an open subject so anyone wanting to post is welcome to do so.