A Pair of Evens

[keel44]

Hello all,

This system has to do with 2 even chances coming together.  There are 12 pairs of even chances:

HE ---- (high and even)
HO
HR
HB
LE
LO
LR
LB
RO
RE
BO
BE

I have found, after numerous tests, on average, ALL of these 12 pairs will show in about 14-15 spins.  Occasionally, there will be one stubborn pair that will not show for about 20-25 spins.

This is how I propose to turn this into a profitable system:  

You start by tracking 6 spins.  You cross off the pairs of even chances as you go along.  

Starting on spin 7, you place 1 unit on each part of the even chance pair.  You simply choose any pair that has yet to show.

If all even chance pairs have shown by spin 6, simply track again.

You stop betting after spin 10.  You don't want to chase that stubborn sleeper.

If you get an early win, and there is another pair that has not shown, you can bet on that one as well, but only up through spin 10.

After spin 10, and you didn't get a win, track 6 spins again to repeat the process.

This is the progression:  2 (1 unit on each even chance) - 4 - 6 - 8 - stay at 8 until new profit or even.  The progression carries over from game to game.



Here is a completely random example:

BLUE = Tracking     RED = Lost Bet     GREEN = Won Bet

27     Cross off HO..RO..HR
35     Cross off HB..BO
17     Cross off LO..LB
7       Cross off LR
29     Already Crossed Off
15     Already Crossed Off

RE..BE..LE..HE not crossed off  (Choose one to bet)

26
16

ALL CROSSED OFF AT SPIN NUMBER 8 ....track again

1
11
8
34
0
0
10
13

Ignore zeros when tracking.  HO..HB has not shown yet  (Pick one)

5    You could lose here if you bet HB
21   You could win here
23
29  Definitely win here

All show by spin 10




I like the fact that if you get one of your even chances to hit, you break even.  This is similar to the "zone" style of play.  I find this method to be safe and profitable.  It could be profitable flat betting as well.

Any questions?


KEEL

[GLC]

Good job Keel,

I haven't had a chance to test this, but I am impressed with what a unique idea this is.

I'm going to have to call you a "mate" or a "cobber" for this one.

Cheers,

George

[Carsch]

Interesting. I'll be testing too.

[GLC]

Keel,

Have you done any testing on this?

With so many new ideas going on all the time, it's hard to focus on any one system.

Sometimes it's the timing of our posting that causes members to overlook a potentially profitable system.

George

[GLC]

Keel,

Tested this for 53 spins.
Didn't test exactly as you play it.  After a win, I would use the last 6 spins to determine what had hit.  I would look at my past hits to see if one of the sets was lagging way behind, and I would bet on that one.

I didn't stop at 4 and 4, but went all the way to 32 and 32.  Made this bet 3 times and won all 3.  Could have gone the other way just as easily.  Luck never hurts.

Ended up 51 units.

If someone likes a martingale, this is a good system to play it on because of the break even when one of the 2 bets hits.  If you're willing to go to something like 128 and 128, you could rack up a lot of units before losing both bets 8 times in a row.  Unfortunately, when you do it will set you back 510 units.

Overall, your bet system is much safer and keeps the units down, but can be a grind if you have many losses in a row.  Not the way I like to play, unfortunately.

To be fair, I will test it exactly as you have presented it above to see how it compares to the way I played it.

I think it's as good a bet selection method as any I've seen lately.

LoL,

George  

[keel44]

I have tested quite a bit actually.  I usually do a visual test.  I scan thru lists of numbers (actual spins and RNG spins).  I am really impressed with the safe and sure method I have described in the first post. 

Usually all pairs show themselves in 14-15 spins.  After 6 spins (I don't care how you get them) you usually have 2 - 3 to pick from.  So you got 4 spins to knock one them down.  The secret to this success is you break even most of the time.  It is hard to prove accurate tests because of the fact you choose which pair you are betting on.  People might not trust the results.

[GLC]

Keel,

I want to be accurate with my comments on any thread.  

I realized another thing that I did different from your original post.  I failed to limit my bets to 4 per attack.  Instead I continued to bet on my selection until it finally hit.  This can make a big difference as to how many losses in a row before a hit.

I will test a session with your exact rules which as I understand them are:

1.  Spin 6 times and cross off all of the 12 pairs that have come up.

2.  If at least 2 pairs haven't hit, pick 1 and bet on it for up to 4 spins with progression 2-4-6-8-8-8-8 until ahead overall.

3.  Never bet past the 10th spin so as not to be betting on a long sleeper.

4.  If there are 3 or more unhit pairs and you hit the one you pick right away, it's okay to pick another one to bet the remainder of the 10 spins on the 2nd pair.  Never bet beyond 10 spins.

5.  Spin 6 new spins after a win or loss to start the next attack.

6.  If only 1 or 0 pair are unhit, retract.  Do not bet if only 1 pair is left after 6 spin tracking.

That's how I'll play it unless you have something to correct in the above rules.

George

[GLC]

Keel,

I was just noticing that some of the pairs have different numbers of numbers.

RO = 10 numbers
RE = 8 numbers 
BO = 8 numbers
BE = 10 numbers
RH, RL, BH, BL, EH, EL, OH, OL all have 9 numbers

I'm thinking that this can have some impact on our outcome.

If I have a choice between RO and BO, I want to take RO because it has 2 more numbers to make me a winner.

As a matter of fact anytime I can bet RO or BE, I have a big advantage over all the other pairs.

I'm thinking that tracking until RO or BE are one of the last 2, 3 or 4 sets and then betting on them will give us a big edge.

Betting on RE or BO gives us a big disadvantage no matter what since only 8 numbers in each are winners.

We might be able to devise a system that focuses on a trigger that results in a bet on either RO or BE.

Maybe even playing RO or BE continuously with a good progression.

Maybe even playing them both at the same time trying to get random working in our favor.

It just seems like we should be able to exploit the extra numbers some way.

What do you think?

George

[keel44]

Hello George,

Let me say that this is wrong:  

6.  If only 1 or 0 pair are unhit, retract.  Do not bet if only 1 pair is left after 6 spin tracking.

If 1 pair is left, bet that 1 pair.


Yes RO has 10 numbers that you win, but also 10 numbers that you lose.  I believe there is no real advantage anyway you slice it.  

All your interpretations of my rules are correct except for rule 6 above.  Try to test this.  It is cool!

[GLC]

Hello George,

Let me say that this is wrong:  

6.  If only 1 or 0 pair are unhit, retract.  Do not bet if only 1 pair is left after 6 spin tracking.

If 1 pair is left, bet that 1 pair.


Yes RO has 10 numbers that you win, but also 10 numbers that you lose.  I believe there is no real advantage anyway you slice it.  

All your interpretations of my rules are correct except for rule 6 above.  Try to test this.  It is cool!

Keel,

I had just realized that there is no advantage because the opposing pair has 10 numbers also.  That means fewer numbers causing  a break even.

Thanks for the correction on rule #6.

G