Nice little earner!!

[bleep24]

Hi Priyanka,
Yes that is the way. Some of your unit staking amounts are not quite correct.  It is a +1/-1` staking progression so if I am down 2 units next stake 3 units if 1 opportunity.  2 units each if 2 opportunities.  1 unit each if 3 opportunities at same time. You could be betting say R O L.  If 2 out of 3 win you are down 1 unit: next stake 2 units.  I calculate stake as I go depending how much won/lost.  In last example you could have lost 3/2/1 units or won 3/2/1 units but we are not talking big stakes so 1 or 2 units is neither here nor there.  It is the overall winning.

Good luck,   Brian

[denzie]

Basically you try to win at least 1 unit per spin if there is a bet. No matter on what or how many ec's it is .  Correct?

[Priyanka]

Basically you try to win at least 1 unit per spin if there is a bet. No matter on what or how many ec's it is .  Correct?

Thanks for the right question.

This money management is the part I am struggling with after reading the whole thread.

[nottophammer]

Pri
how refreshing to see you struggle with something, theres hope for all of us

[nottophammer]

off topic
but Pri i thought this was going to be good, but i just keep ending minus
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=13696.msg117848#msg117848

[bleep24]

Hi Denzie,

Yes and no.  Depends on how many E/C`s you are betting on.  Could be 1, 2, or 3.  If you had just started and 3 opps. came up at same time:   3 x 1    If all win you are up 3 units.  if all lose you are down 3 units.  Next stake depends on how many opps. come up.   Say it was 2.  You would bet 2 x 2 so it is a progression but you have to adjust stakes slightly depending on wins/losses but it is no great deal.

Cheers,    Brian

[tuddilue]

Hi tuddilue,

...
Anyhow today I played a couple of sessions using bleep24's original way using +1/-1 and betting like in nottophammer's chart. It's a lot easier without the hassle of prior tracking like I was doing before...

It seems a surprisingly cool way to play and I quickly won a couple of live online dealer sessions without much trouble either.
I agree also with Brian with what he said earlier about the chain betting - I did not play on a chain after winning a series of 2 becoming a series of 3.
There's a lot to like about it.

Regards,
A.

Hi Atlantis,
It's the same for me, I also overthinked it. I tried nottos chart today and it works. I had one session that it went a little bit south. But if I had played as bleep24 is saying in this post all should have gone well:

Hi Denzie,

Yes and no.  Depends on how many E/C`s you are betting on.  Could be 1, 2, or 3.  If you had just started and 3 opps. came up at same time:   3 x 1    If all win you are up 3 units.  if all lose you are down 3 units.  Next stake depends on how many opps. come up.   Say it was 2.  You would bet 2 x 2 so it is a progression but you have to adjust stakes slightly depending on wins/losses but it is no great deal.

Cheers,    Brian

The reason is that it is always one of the EC that goes well, that has more streaks than the others. So playing and adjusting the bets to get a little ahead that I think is the way forward.

Thanks bleep24 to explain how you bet.
-Tuddilue

[bleep24]

Hi all.
You play your way and I will play mine: never the twain shall meet.

As long as you are winning who cares what way you play.

Here a tweak, there a tweak, everywhere a tweak, tweak.

Good luck all,
Brian                              (I will do the Frank Sinatra  -- My Way)

[Redherring]

Haven't tried it but looks similar? Might be easier to tweek the progression rather than martingale than write again?

link:://uxsoftware.com/roulette/systems/v20/Kryptos_Roulette_System.dgt

[mogul397]

Hi,

Still using +1/-1.   Works fine.  I do vary stake slightly if there are 2 or 3 betting opps. at same time so for instance if I am 1 unit down and 2 opps. come up I will bet 1 unit on each.  If I was 3 units down and 2 opps. came up I would bet 2 units on each so just a slight tweak.

Good luck,
Brian

Bleep, it's a funny thing how we wander around in our methods and thoughts.
But as it would happen my most recent (real betting) work has centered around
your method. Or similar.  I have been working it from another angle I suppose.

Just still focused on the 2-3 in a row area.

This is a little off topic, but still on topic. So here goes.

I was working on one bet after two. Either the same or a change.
It seemed to me (and still does) that these results cluster enough to
where playing for the previous result (a double or >2) seems to help as
you tend to get a bunch of doubles in a row.

At some point I was looking to play, after two in a row, with a 5 step martingale
for a change.   2 red, and bet for black the next 5. There's something intuitively
wrong about that (I said intuitively) because isn't that the textbook case for
a martingale loss?  The killer streak that kills you.

And since this "third in a row" thing happens so much, I said that I'd bet the
marty for a REPEAT of the two, for 5 in a row. This seems to work.  But
once in a while (seems like once a session) you will get the 2 red and 5 black,
or vice versa. 

I thought about splitting 3 and 3 and if there were 3 losses, take the next
opportunity for 3. That's 6 steps. But what seems like a better idea is to
use the last results you find as a template. If you pick a predefined pattern
you're sure to hit it. But what about the same pattern twice in a row?

So now I'm looking at seeing 2 in a row, looking at a previous pattern after
2 in a row, and betting that pattern against this double.

Just a thought.

[mogul397]

Hi RG,
I only ever play `live` on-line.    Four to five times per week.  I aim for plus 30 units.   I am 1 unit = 1 GB pound.   I have never lost with this way of playing.  2`s becoming 3`s happen continuously.  Just look at any old spin history and you will see that it is so.  One thing I did point out in very original post was that I only play for an E/C of 2 to become 3.  Quite often that 3 will go on to become 4/5/6 or more but I just do the one play of the chain because there will be other E/C opps. coming out all the time and it can get a bit confusing and many more 2`s will become 3`s than go on to become 4/5/6 etc.  Just my style.

Good luck  (I enjoy reading your posts)
Brian

It is a bit of a boring method so playing for about 1 hour is my limit and I usually win 20/30 units.

Brian,

I know we discussed this before.  But what you are doing is a D'alenbert. I love that,
yet it also scares me.  What do you find is a typical end game for that progression,
and do you ever get "stuck" out somewhere where you are betting, say, 5-6-5-6-5-6
or something with no resolution?

Thanks

Alan

[bleep24]

Hi Mogul397.
Yes it is a D`lambert of sorts but the main difference is that you are not just playing one E/C so losing runs are short.  You could try contre D`lambert but I have not.

Sometimes it can feel like you are going nowhere then you win 3 units followed by another 3 units and hey presto you are on the up again.  Swings and roundabouts as long as you come out on the right side at the end.

I have not kept any statistics on what % 2`s become 3`s but from where I am sitting it is above 50% hence success.I  never had to bet more than 10 units (single stake) and that is rare.  2/3/4 or 5 are the norm.

Another method that I like and have had success with is a DD method. Look at last 4 spins and see if there are only 2 different dozens. Bet missing dozen.  I flat bet this.  I have played several ways so cannot give a definitive answer but it is definitely worth toying around with.  Standard method is on this forum somewhere.  Not mine.

Good luck,  Brian

[mogul397]

like reply 151

Honestly, every time I see that window, I have no idea how to
read what's inside.

[mogul397]

Hi tuddilue,

I also think I have been overthinking a bit in my cautious adaptation (using a rolling 64 history + separate bank for all 6 EC's... I think my way was slightly problematical in that it was concentrating on under performers returning to mean - trouble is they can go on sleeping as we all know; even when you think they must surely be due! So it ended up missing other EC series that WERE performing well... in addition was way too slow with infrequent bet opps..)

Anyhow today I played a couple of sessions using bleep24's original way using +1/-1 and betting like in nottophammer's chart. It's a lot easier without the hassle of prior tracking like I was doing before...

It seems a surprisingly cool way to play and I quickly won a couple of live online dealer sessions without much trouble either.
I agree also with Brian with what he said earlier about the chain betting - I did not play on a chain after winning a series of 2 becoming a series of 3.
There's a lot to like about it.

Regards,
A.

That chain thing is kind of an opposite way of saying what I had been saying about
playing the clusters. And a good implementation. There are times, when I'm in test mode,
when I see 2-3 in a row when I would bet the opposite.  2-3 multiples in a row and I'd
go for the simple double.  I think the work being done on this is refining well.

[mogul397]

Thanks for the right question.

This money management is the part I am struggling with after reading the whole thread.

When I look at this (as it happens while paper trading) often I will just not bet
on multiples.  The tracking gets more confusing and you are exposed more.