Two triggers for profit

[GLC]

Forgive me Ignatius if you've already posted this system.  You're such a prolific system designer that I haven't had time to read all of them.

This can be played on both dozens or columns or both at the same time.  But I will use dozens to explain the system.

1.  Track the dozens for a maximum of 6 spins.  If all 3 dozens hit, this is trigger #1.  It's not necessary to track all 6 spins if the 3 dozens hit earlier.  If all 3 dozens don't hit within 6 spins, it's a failed attempt at trigger #1.  Start over.

2.  Once trigger #1 is fulfilled, we start tracking for trigger #2 by crossing off any dozen that hits in the next 3 spins.

3.  At the end of these 3 spins there must be 1 and only 1 dozen that didn't hit.  This is trigger #2.  If there are 2 un-hit dozens or if all 3 dozens hit, trigger #2 has failed and you must go back to 1.

4.  If trigger #2 is fulfilled, start betting this remaining dozen until a hit or 6 losses.

5.  Our progression is a "fibonacci type" progression:  1-1-2-3-5-8.  (I call it a "fibonacci type" progression so as not to get Steve all riled up.  He tends to pitch a fit if you miss use "Fibonacci.")

6.  Any hit during the six bets leaves us with a profit.  Go to 1.

7.  If you get no hit in the 6 bets, it's a 20 unit loss.  Go to 1.

Each series is played within 12-15 spins. (Not counting zeroes)

I said this system is played on both dozens and columns. 
To do so track both dozens and columns and play the one that qualifies or you can play both if they both meet the 2 triggers.

Please note: If either the dozens or columns qualifies a spin or two before the other, start playing it immediately when it qualifies.  Don't wait for the other one!

When playing both, if one of them wins and it results in a new high bank overall, I end the series and start over.

As you can see, this uses as many aspects of "gambler's fallacy" as I can put into one system.  Also, it uses triggers and with only 12-15 spins, it should qualify as hit-n-run.  But there's no need to run.  You will win most sessions.

It's rare to lose two sessions in a row, so if you want to play very conservatively, you can play virtually until you have a loss and then play for real dinero.  I think you'll see that this is unnecessary but it does make this almost a "can't lose" system.

But you'll have to test it to see how much it does win!

Happy Winning!

GLC

[Azim]

George,

Can it be a rolling 6 spins or do we start again from 1 after the failed trigger first time around?

[GLC]

George,

Can it be a rolling 6 spins or do we start again from 1 after the failed trigger first time around?

It can be a rolling 6 spins.  It's not often you don't get trigger #1 in 6 spins.

Here's a little explanation from a "gambler's fallacy" perspective.  If all 3 hit within 6 spins then it means all 3 are awake.  Now that they are awake and 1 of them sleeps for 3 or more spins, it's due.  We will give ourselves 2 cycles, that is 6 spins, for the "due" dozen to hit.

There are a couple of ways to make this even safer, howbeit, we'll get fewer betting opportunities.  The first way is to expand the 3 spins for one of the dozens to sleep after establishing that they're all awake. We can expand the spins to say 5 or even 6.  This means that one of the dozens/columns must sleep for 5 or 6 spins after all 3 hit within the initial 6 spins. 

A second way is to extend the progression to 1-1-2-3-4-6-9-14-21 or even to 31-47-70.  This means a dozen will have to sleep at least 18 times if you incorporate both options.

I prefer to expand the middle cycle from 3 to 6 and leave the bet progression the same.  This gives us an 18 spin window to play our strategy.  That's 2 sessions per full cycle.

GLC

[Azim]

George,

I was planning to do a tracker.  What ever you want any which way you think is right, I will create the tracker based on that.

[Azim]

George,
6
19
14
27 Trigger 1
33
21
36 Trigger 2 We bet 1st Dozen?
12 we win.

Can I use the following number's from above to create my trigger 1?
14
27
33
21
36
12 Trigger 1.

Or do I have to use new number's?

[GLC]

George,
6
19
14
27 Trigger 1
33
21
36 Trigger 2 We bet 1st Dozen?
12 we win.

Can I use the following number's from above to create my trigger 1?
14
27
33
21
36
12 Trigger 1.

Or do I have to use new number's?

Azim,  Sorry, but I've been busy lately.

I don't use those numbers.  From a purely logical perspective it shouldn't matter but I don't like to go back beyond trigger 2 to start my next session.  In your example you won on the 1st bet so that would be the only number I would use to start the next attack with.  Winning on the 1st spin is not that common.  Usually it wins in the 1st 3 bets.  That would give us 3 of our 6 numbers looking for trigger 1.  That saves a little time in an evenings trip to the casino.

Personally, I don't use any of the numbers.  I start the next attack on the next number after I win or lose 6 bets.

Here's how I prefer it be played.  Track the 1st 6 spins.  If all 3 dozens hit, we have trigger 1.  It doesn't matter when the dozens hit.  They could be the 1st 3 spins.  I still spin the next 3 before I start tracking for trigger 2.  When tracking for trigger 2, I spin 3 times.  Here's an option I didn't mention previously.  If I get only 1 dozen to hit in those 3 spins, I play the dozen with the most hits of the 2 that are left.  I'll explain this more later.  This gives us a few more plays and is a strong addition to the system.  Once I get my 2nd trigger, this session ends with a win or 6 spins.  We can start the next session immediately after a win or the 6 spins.

The reason I added the option of betting the most hit dozen of the two that didn't show when looking for trigger 2 is because this system will work on lines and streets also.  Let's consider streets.  Very often there will be 2, 3 or maybe 4 unhit streets in the 12 spins searching for trigger 2.  So as not to spend so much time tracking, we bet on the unhit street that had the most hits in the tracking for trigger 1.

GLC

[GLC]

Dear Forum Members,

I was looking in my notes and found the summary of this system from a few years ago.  I had a note beside it the entry that referred to Bayes giving this system the thumbs up.  So, I started searching the other forums for posts by Bayes and ran across the following:

link:://:.vlsroulette.com/index.php?topic=20056.msg145971#msg145971

Go to this link and follow the link Bayes gives us in reply #21, and you will find this system.  Maybe not exactly, but in essence.  At the time I didn't know Bayes that well and didn't realize what an endorsement from him meant.

My apologies to Bombus for posting what is basically his system.

GLC