FISHING FOR DOUBLES
================
Record DOZEN results in a 4-wide GRID.
Bet AGAINST vertical trebles forming (double dozen bet)
I'm not using the standard 2doz progression - instead on each loss I increase the next bet by 1u - but immediately reduce to 1u when level or ahead.
However, if I lose 3 consecutive bets - I will stop and wait for a trip not to form first before resuming betting against them forming (that didn't happen in this test)
NOTE: qualifying trigger vertical doubles cannot use results from already formed triples, quads etc... in the same column.
Good news is that it's not too long before a bet is indicated as shown below - so you can usually manage to get through a few sessions in a day.
Example - 100 spins (random)
1 2 1 1
1 1 1 3
3 3 3 3 --w+1@col1 ; w+1@col3
2 1 1 2 --w+1@col4
2 1 3 3
3 1 1 2 --w+1@col1 ; L-2@col2
2 1 3 1
3 1 1 3
2 2 3 3
2 2 1 2 --w+2@col4
1 2 3 1 --w+1@col1 ; L-2@col2
3 1 3 2
3 2 3 1 --L-4@col3 (increase to 3-3)
2 2 1 2 --w+3@col1
3 3 1 1 --w+3@col2 (reduce to 1-1)
3 3 1 2 --L-2@col3
1 2 1 3 --w+2@col1 ; w+1@col2
1 2 1 2
2 3 2 2 --w+1@col1 ; w+1@col2 ; w+1@col3
1 1 2 3 --w+1@col4
3 1 1 3 --w+1@col3
1 2 1 1 --w+1@col2 ; w+1@col4
1 3 3 3 --w+1@col3
2 1 2 1 --w+1@col1
3 2 3 2
won=25
lost=10
Profit=15pts
3 2 3 3
3 2 3 2
3 1 3 1--L-2@col1 ; w+2@col2; L-2@col3
1 3 3 3
1 1 1 2
1 1 3 3--L-4@col1 (increase to 3-3)
1 3 1 2--w+3@col2
3 3 3 1
2 2 1 1--w+3@col2 (reduce to 1-1)
3 1 3 1--L-2@col4 (increase to 2-2)
1 1 2 3
2 3 2 3--w+2@col2 (reduce to 1-1)
2 1 3 1--w+1@col3 ; w+1@col4
1 2 2 3--w+1@col1
2 2 1 3
1 2 3 1--L-2@col2 ; w+2@col4
1 3 3 2
2 2 1 2--w+1@col1 ; w+1@col3
1 1 1 1--w+1@col4
2 1 3 3--w+1@col3
1 2 1 1--w+1@col2
2 2 2 1
1 1 3 1--w+1@col2 ; L-2@col4
3 2 3 1
1 3 2 2--w+2@col3
won=23
lost=12
Profit=11pts
One more example...
1 3 3 3
3 2 3 2
3 3 3 1--L-2@col3
2 1 3 2--w+2@col1
2 3 2 2
2 1 2 3--L-2@col1 ; W+2@col4
3 3 3 1--w+1@col3
3 3 2 2
2 1 3 1--w+1@col1 ; w+1@col2
1 3 2 1
1 3 2 2--w+1@col4
2 3 1 3--w+1@col1 ; L-2@col2 ; w+2@col3
2 2 3 2
1 2 3 2--w+1@col1
3 1 1 2--w+1@col1 ; L-2@col4 (increase to 2-2)
3 3 3 1
3 3 1 3--L-4@col1 (increase to 3-3)
2 1 1 1--w+3@col2
1 3 3 2--w+3@col3 (reduce to 1-1)
3 3 3 3
2 3 3 3--L-2@col2 ; L-4@col3 (increase to 3-3)
1 3 3 1--w+3@col4
1 2 2 1
3 3 1 2--w+3@col1 ; w+1@col4
1 3 1 3
won=24
lost=16
Profit=8pts
Another real session just now...
3132
1112
2132 - L-2@col2 u to 2
1233 - w+2@col4 d to 1
3323 - w+1@col3
2133 - L-2@col4 u to 2
3233
3222 - w+2@col3 d to 1
2121 - w+1@col1; w+1@col2
3232 - w+1@col3
1211
2311 - w+1@col2
2331 - w+1@col3; L-2@col4 u to 2
2112 - L-4@col1; u to 3 ; w+3@col2
1122
1312 - w+3@col2; L-2@col4
2222 - w+2@col1
1221
3323 - w+1@col2; L-2@col3
2131
2222
1233 - w+2@col1 d to 1
3312 - w+1@col2
2323
1232 - w+1@col2
1312
3131 - w+1@1; w+1@4
+11pts
A.
On second thoughts - forget this - it ain't gonna work very good. :-[ :-[
I'm moving on to something else now! :-X
A.
Hi Atlantis,
How can you say that this is not going to work. You have shown examples of it working. Yes it might be a bit long-winded and win units are not great but it seems to be a very steady system where there are not likely to be any severe losses.
We all know where these get rich quick systems go: up up and then down with the loss of a long progression
I have tested 4 sessions of this and all I was suffering was 1 loss followed straight after by a win.
Have you thought of doing the columns at the same time to give more betting opportunities? There are gaps to fill.
What about a pyramid matrix. I think that Katilla (sorry about the spelling) posted a system using pyramids.
Brian
This is pretty close to lankys holy grail. I made an entire roulette forum dedicated to it
I tried to help
Thanks guys for your input. I did get a RFH bad session and with it happening so soon it kinda put me right off.
RouletteGhost is right. This is pretty close to Lanky's Holy Grail.... - and that may be better way to go!? :)
Maybe playing after an LL or LLL would help - but that also means a lot less bet opps.
I'll think about tweaking it though.
Thanks,
A.
Hi Atlantis,
Bad news you encountering a RFH with this. I thought this might be a pretty low risk of this. I do not think that it is practical to wait for a L or LL.
I have played a further 4 sessions and most losses in a row was one.
What I would suggest after LL is change tables but carry on with where you were in progression. Also it is possibly only my thing but I usually change tables after a zero comes out.
Will take a shuffty at Lankey`s HG.
Brian
I was thinking about flat betting with this. Win +1 lose -2 Not sure if betting dozens is a 1 in 27 chance of a loss or 1 in 81 chance of a loss. If a loss occurs switch matrix to DS`s and bet that a 2 will not become a 3. Much higher odds of winning playing DS`s so could be more chance to recover your lost than from playing the dozens. Bigger stakes with DS`s but a lot less opportunities to bet so change back to dozens after you have recovered.
So basically only allow 1 loss on the dozens before changing. No good waiting for LL as that will only happen once in a blue moon.
Brian
Hi Brian,
Having reviewed it again I think Lanky's HG is a better proposition by far; and so I really encourage you to go back and check it out.
Here I play after an LL trigger using a +1 progression on each Doz just to be safe - but then you cannot get a really long losing run with Lanky's method. I think it was stated the most L's in a few years was a 7-timer and Lanky purportedly made thousands of $$$ because he used bigger unit values and played after 4 L's trigger..
Here I show the profit/loss from a session so you can see - but I do not think it my place to show or reveal the full operational mechanics of his method.
1 2 1 1
1 1 1 3
3 3 3 3
2 1 1 2 +1
2 1 3 3 +1
3 1 1 2
2 1 3 1
3 1 1 3
2 2 3 3 +1
2 2 1 2
1 2 3 1
3 1 3 2 +1
3 2 3 1 +1
2 2 1 2
3 3 1 1
3 3 1 2
1 2 1 3
1 2 1 2
2 3 2 2
1 1 2 3
3 1 1 3
1 2 1 1
1 3 3 3
2 1 2 1 -2
3 2 3 2 -4
3 2 3 3 +1; +3
3 2 3 2 +1
3 1 3 1
1 3 3 3
1 1 1 2 -2
1 1 3 3 +2
1 3 1 2
3 3 3 1
2 2 1 1
3 1 3 1
1 1 2 3 +1
2 3 2 3
2 1 3 1 +1
1 2 2 3
2 2 1 3
1 2 3 1
1 3 3 2 +1
2 2 1 2
1 1 1 1
2 1 3 3
1 2 1 1
2 2 2 1
1 1 3 1
3 2 3 1 +1
1 3 2 2
1 3 3 3
3 2 3 2 +1
3 3 3 1
2 1 3 2
2 3 2 2
2 1 2 3
3 3 3 1
3 3 2 2 -2
2 1 3 1 +2
1 3 2 1
1 3 2 2
2 3 1 3
2 2 3 2
1 2 3 2 +2
3 1 1 2
3 3 3 1
3 3 1 3 +1
2 1 1 1 +1
1 3 3 2
3 3 3 3 -2
2 3 3 3 -4; +1
1 3 3 1
1 2 2 1 +3
3 3 1 2
1 3 1 3 +1
3 1 3 2 +1
+13u
A.
The only time lankys ever lost was on RNG
Hi RG,
We cannot emphasize enough and often to newbies the perils of RNG. I experienced it first hand years ago and do not go near it now. In short bursts and not too often you can get away with it but on your own head be it. (Bound to be loads of posts from members playing RNG and winning zillions every day!!)
Brian
(Am working my way through posts about Lankys method)
Yup that was my point
RNG is trash
Lankys
Write dozens left to write in a 4 wide matrix
We play vertically. Any unique set is a L. I think lanky waited for 4 Ls then bet for a W with 1 3 9
Example of one Column in matrix
1
2
1 W
3 L
2 L
In simple terms of the dozen is not the same as the two above it counts as an L
----------
I wrote this in the past
You are writing the results left to right (horizontally) BUT you are playing up and down (vertically). If one of the 2 unique dozens above the dozen number you write is the SAME you write a W for a win, if it is different then the 2 unique dozens above you write L for a loss. L is what you want because thats where you get your triggers.
When you have 2 to 3 Ls vertically then when you get back to that particular column it is safe to start betting for a win (W)!
When you have 2 Ls vertically you can start betting the 2 dozens that match the 2 unique dozens above it. Lanky
waits for 4 Ls but no need to, max that ever was hit was 7.
Also, when a 0 or 00 (on american) comes (play european if you can but no difference), write a W for a win next to it. Because when you have a trigger a 0 will be a win because you will always place insurance chips on 0. So when a 0 comes you treat it as a W and write W, this will not be a L that would lead to your trigger.
---------
I won every airball session I played but triggers took awhile
Lanky would track many tables and play all day
Hi Atlantis,
Mentioning Lanky and 1 3 9. Did he use his divisor method with this or just the 1 3 9 if you know?
Brian
RG wrote:
Quote
If one of the 2 unique dozens above the dozen number you write is the SAME you write a W for a win, if it is different then the 2 unique dozens above you write L for a loss.
I believe that to be absolutely correct. As I understood it when starting to create a dozen grid you have to wait for the 2 UNIQUE dozens to occur in a column before you can start recording W/L's for that column...
EG:
A column at the start of a grid.
1
1
1
2 - 2 uniques have now appeared so can begin recording W/L registry from next below result when it happens.
Brian wrote:
Quote
Mentioning Lanky and 1 3 9. Did he use his divisor method with this or just the 1 3 9 if you know?
Lanky DID like that method such a lot - but I dunno if he used it on this or not, I'm afraid. Maybe RG can throw some light on that?
Lanky would wait for 4 L's before using the 1-3-9.
Whatever though; the system does requires TIME, PATIENCE, DETERMINATION.
Quote
When you have 2 Ls vertically you can start betting the 2 dozens that match the 2 unique dozens above it. Lanky
waits for 4 Ls but no need to, max that ever was hit was 7.
Did a real session and won +4 using +1/-1 like that with small units. Took 50 minutes online live dealer.
Token insurance on the 0 a good idea - in case.
A.
Yes the way I remember was he bet after 4L and most L in a row he's ever seen is 7.
I think RNG went 9 but never more than 7 with real spins
I played airball a few times and it went very well but patience isn't my best friend.
I've never seen 4L in real play. So due to lack of patients I'd go for W after one virtual L
Patience*
7L diagonally is. Very rare
And keep in mind L is a good thing. What's the trigger
Vertically**
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Feb 06, 03:47 PM 2017
7L diagonally is. Very rare
I remember Lanky's matrix. Well it loses of course. Tested that a lot . It's the gamblers fallacy at his best :thumbsup:
Think I've seen 12 or 13 L ....
If it loses so bad then why didn't you bet for the L?
That would be betting only one dozen
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Feb 06, 04:06 PM 2017
If it loses so bad then why didn't you bet for the L?
That would be betting only one dozen
Why bet if I'm sure it loses ?
Common. RG you ain't moving forward at all.
Your in the game long enough to know this.
I think if it's played properly and it's fully understood it is decent
Personally I never had major struggles with it and I tested it for months. But that's just me
I think 12L may be a little bit extreme. That's 12 uniques in a row vertically
Could it happen sure
So how did 4 winning examples in the beginning of this thread turn
to trash?
Hi Mogul,
For dozens it`s a 1 in 3 chance every spin so it does not matter if there has been 100 losses previously there is still the chance of another one. What we are talking here is likelihood. Most that I have seen is 5 L vertically but I had already bet on the 2 (and lost) so would not be betting after that anyway.
12 or 13 L must have odds in the hundreds of thousands so an extremely rare event. If you bet after 2L it does not matter how many come out after that because you are no longer betting that column.
RNG, double zero etc. all have an effect so depends what people are playing.
I still think that it is a reasonably good method. Use Gr8, leveller, divisor etc. prog. and I feel that it should be ok.
Everyone should have a few decentish!! systems/methods and swop them around (even on the same table/session) especially if you can see an advantage/disadvantage trend forming.
We all know that playing 1 way continuously will hit a RFH. Why take the chance. Lower the odds of it happening by playing shorter sessions of 1 way then change.
Brian
Well I think you hit it. I'm a little busy with my bathroom and some other
things, but lately when I think of the urge to stop by and pick up
my $20, I go into gridlock. I think "what method am I going to play,
how am I going to play it".
You define what has happened to me where as I'm watching results my
brain is picking up all kinds of patterns and I jump on one or the other
here and there.
Not the level of confusion I want then. But I think it is defining itself more
as the solution. The toolkit.
Exactly bleep. 12l wouldn't matter if you bet after 2