Due

[GLC]

 This particular concept has been presented before by me and others, but rather than wake up a sleeping dog, I think I’ll just start a new topic.

There are at least two ideas used to develop most systems.  First is the concept of trends.  Everybody knows that there are trends in roulette.  The problem is catching a trend before it ends in order take advantage of it.  Most trends are only recognized after they are over.  Also, how long they will continue is impossible to determine ahead of time. 

I think by far most systems are built around this idea of spotting a trend, jumping on the trend and hoping it will continue long enough to win some profits.  I don’t doubt for a minute that there are ways to play this by seasoned roulette enthusiasts that generate wins  on a regular basis.

The second method is to wait until something has not happened for a while and then bet that it will happen.  This is the idea that something can be due.  It is a valid concept because given enough spins, everything tends toward the mathematical probability.  The dilemma is that we don’t know how long a deviation from  the norm will last before it corrects itself, but correct itself it will, eventually.

I have focused mostly on the trend methods in the past, but I am turning my attention more and more to the due methods.  The main enemy of this method is something going to sleep for a very long time while you’re betting on it.  We’ll have to have a counter measure to stop of from chasing a sleeper into infinity.

All systems can have a lot of variables that make little if any difference in the overall effectiveness of the system, so I will include a couple with this system.

EVEN CHANCES:

Our first system is built around the even chance bets.  It uses the idea that if one side of the even chance doesn’t hit as often as it should, it will eventually make up the difference and get back to normal.  We already know that this can happen quickly or take a month of Sundays.  Happening quickly will win us some money, taking a long time can bankrupt us.

First, we track all 3 even chances for at least 18 spins.  I’ll use R/B for explanation.  If either R or B gets down to 40% or less of the hits, we will say that it is due.  We can start betting a flat bet on it. 

Let’s say that we have had 18 spins and Black has only hit 7 times.  It should have hit 9 times, so it is falling behind and we can expect it to start catching back up to where it should be.  We will bet 1 unit on Black until we get a win or until we lose 3 times more than we win.  If we lose 3 times more than we win, we will check the other even chances to see if one of them is equal to or has a lower strike rate than Black.  If we have one, we will start betting on it.  If Black is still the most due, we will wait until it hits 1 time and then we will start betting on it again.  We can bet on it until it hits 2 times more than it loses or  loses 2 times more than it hits or we get to where Black  =  approximately 50% of the hits.

Option 1: Once an even chance qualifies we bet on it for 7 bets.  At the end of 7 bets  we re-evaluate the percentages of all the even chances and our next 7 bets are on the most due even chance.  But, if it’s the even chance we were just betting on, we must wait until it hits 1 times before we begin our next 7 bets.

Our safety measure is that we can’t bet more than 7 times on an even chance that’s not improving its hit rate until it hits again and is the most due even chance of all three.

Option 1A:  Aggressive method.  Once an even chance qualifies, play a 5 step martingale (1-2-4-8-16) that it will hit.  If it hits within the 5 steps, wait until the 5 spins  and then bet it again.  After each win, re-evaluate the other even chances to see if one of them qualifies with a worse strike rate.  If so, after the 5 spins end, start betting on it with a 5 step   marty.

Instead of a 5 step marty you can play a 7 step fibo (1-1-2-3-5-8-13).  Remember, you must win 2 times in a row playing a fibo.

Dozens/Columns:

Option 2:  We can play this on the dozens or columns.  Track for at least 21 spins.  If a dozen is only 20% of the spins, flat bet it until it gets to 30% or for 7 bets.  After 7 bets, if you haven’t had a hit, wait until the dozen finally hits and bet it again for 7 bets. 
Continue playing the dozen until it reaches 30% of the hits or another dozen or column has a worse strike rate.  If another dozen has a worse strike rate, at the end of the next 7 bets, switch to the new dozen or column.

Option 2A:  Aggressive method.   Instead of a flat bet, you can play an 8 step martingale for dozens (1-1-2-3-4-6-9-14).  No progressions.  If you win, you wait until the 8 spins complete and then bet again.  Remember, at the end of 8 spins, re-evaluate for a more due dozen or column.

For flat betting, I think a 20 unit buy-in is more than adequate.  You can quit at any profit.  This is not hit and run.

For the marty’s, I’d have 100 units.  If you have 2 losses betting the marty’s I’d call it a day.

GLC

[GLC]

One other way of using the above imbalance to win a few chips.

Anytime an even chance shows less than 40%, it's a good time to test this idea,

A result is more likely to happen anywhere than at an exact location.

So, if I blindfold you and throw a baseball out into a field and I tell you to walk out into the field and stop anywhere you wish.  The odds of you finding that baseball within 3 feet of you are much less than finding it anywhere in the field.

If Black has shown less than 40% of the spins, if we start betting a 7 step martingale on Black we have 2 things working for us.
1)  We can expect Black to start hitting more as the unknown force called equilibrium works on it.
2)  Having 7 Reds hit in a row starting at that exact point would be very bad luck.  On par with walking to within 3 feet of that baseball.

If we were playing every spin against a run of 7 Reds, we would for sure find it.  But playing hit-n-run we might never find it in our lifetime. 

You can play this for 5 wins starting on the very next spin after a color doesn't hit 40% or more.  Wait until you have 10 spins from when you started betting before starting the next marty.

[GLC]

Last but certainly not least, we can play this imbalance idea with series vs singles.  It's played the exact same way as R/B only it will be Series/Singles.

A Series is two or more of a color in a row, sometimes called a streak or repeats and a Single is only 1 of a color sometimes called chops or alternating.

Mathematically they should hit an equal number of times not counting the zero.  If the  number of one or the other gets behind 40%, we can flat bet for that event to happen more than normal. 

So, if we have 12 singles and 8 series, we can start flat betting for series or repeats using the same bet methods outlined in the 1st post of this topic.

For added winnings, you can play the even chances and the series/singles at the same time. 

For plenty of betting opportunities you can play both of those plus the dozens and columns at the same time.  Not often will you be betting everything at once.

[Proofreaders2000]

You could do a virtual betting first and possibly find a starting trend in betting against an imbalance

example: virtual...high/low: 20,19,36,17

Then bet for real against the fourth consecutive high even chance showing up (martingale optional.)

[Ralph]

I can not see a trend or imbalance can work in reasonable time, to have use of it.
This is one of the few things I have tested over a lot of spins. We will find corrections, but not so often and sure, we can really make use of it.

The corrections will come, if you use %  in calculations. If you use numbers no.
In 100 spins you can see often 45/55  which is 10 in difference, and 45% and 55%.
In 10000 spins you can often see  480/520 which is  40 in difference and 48% and 55%
In larger series of spins the % part will come closer, but the difference in number will not do it more than in some rare cases.
1/38 or 1/37 will be a zero hit as well.

Repeating pattern or number, may be, I am still not sure.

I have tested a lot of things, and as most of it, it will not work good, the game is difficult.
I use the methods, anyhow, what else are there? If the method we use suit the outcome, we are right, and will not know before.
Its a human speciality, to see much more than there are.

[Ralph]

I got some typos above 55%  correct is 52%.
10000 should be 1000.

[Master_of_pockets]

"""One other way of using the above imbalance to win a few chips.

Anytime an even chance shows less than 40%, it's a good time to test this idea, """

The best way to take advantage imbalances and not fall in the trap of 1 of them sleep forever  is with the new concept of mine.
Have you read it GLC?

[GLC]

"""One other way of using the above imbalance to win a few chips.

Anytime an even chance shows less than 40%, it's a good time to test this idea, """

The best way to take advantage imbalances and not fall in the trap of 1 of them sleep forever  is with the new concept of mine.
Have you read it GLC?

Point me to it MOP so I know which one you mean.

[GLC]

Here's some more thoughts.

I know we're playing for a correction in a very small window.  Big wins will not be expected.  Maybe just enough to win over time.

In order for an even chance to "catch up" it must hit more than the other even chance.  In order for it to hit more than the other even chance, it must hit multiple times in a row.  If we play virtual until we have a R and then we bet for another R, we will be catching the extra R's (wins) needed for R to catch up.  f there's always a B after each R which would be a loss, we're not catching up.

GLC

[Bayes]

Point me to it MOP so I know which one you mean.

George, the thread is here - link:://rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=10094.0

You can download the PDF in reply #5

[GLC]

Thanks Bayes.

Ivo, can you tell us how you played this marathon system?

link:://vlsroulette.com/index.php?topic=12083.0

Page 2, Reply #23

Thanks, Mate

[Ralph]

The D'Alembert betting system is designed long time ago, and is a winner, if things even out. Now we know it is not a winner, and then we got problems trying to find a winning system using the history.

It is not so complicated to run tests, and in short runs, they can even out, or grow. If it start to change, it may continue, or switch again.

I think numbers, colors, and any bet will be kind of due, if the imbalance is there.
If we use a casino like BV which will allow you to bet from 1 to 100000, we can start use the D'Alembert
which adjust for the balance and end up on the starting bet as soon the are equal number of EC:s.

Such an experiment can last from minutes to years. It will not be needed to end back to starting bet, and still be on plus.  Bankroll requirement is millions.

[Ralph]

I think I should do a test, and stretch the limits, using D'Alembert. Did it once and got the longest session to last for more than a month.
I will use my fun account at BV. The  bankroll will be 100626.81 which is equal to over a milion units, which in the worse case may not be enough, in most it will win one units any spin.

I would not dare to do it in real mode, more than sometimes.  As we do not withdraws in fun mode I have a sufficient bankroll for the experiment.

If I get stuck in it I may stop at 100000 or more spins. I do not have a bot for it, but may have some time every day to run it.

Lets see if the chances even out! Picture starting balance

[GLC]

I think I should do a test, and stretch the limits, using D'Alembert. Did it once and got the longest session to last for more than a month.
I will use my fun account at BV. The  bankroll will be 100626.81 which is equal to over a milion units, which in the worse case may not be enough, in most it will win one units any spin.

I would not dare to do it in real mode, more than sometimes.  As we do not withdraws in fun mode I have a sufficient bankroll for the experiment.

If I get stuck in it I may stop at 100000 or more spins. I do not have a bot for it, but may have some time every day to run it.

Lets see if the chances even out! Picture starting balance

Bravo Ralph,

This will be interesting.

[F_LAT_INO]

Thanks Bayes.

Ivo, can you tell us how you played this marathon system?

link:://vlsroulette.com/index.php?topic=12083.0

Page 2, Reply #23

Thanks, Mate

--Just seen this George mate.Oh that was few years back,don't like even remember that...it was the real battle......and if didn't had enough bullets would be killed.Without bullets in this game
you can't win the battle...Agree ?