Possible Holy Grail?

[falkor2k15]

Straight Ups: we already know that if you start betting the 1s our first repeat might not happen till spin 25, in which case we would reach the table limits by the time we get there - as it requires a steepish progression. However, if you wait for the first repeat and then apply the same strategy of covering all numbers whose occurrence  is >=1 then we should get there with a max BR of just over 1,000. Our profit for the 2nd repeat should be anywhere between +1 to +35; and we can continue to play like this for at least the 3rd and the 4th repeat (requires less BR than the 2nd) before we are in danger of leaving only 2 0s.

And since this does seem HGish I think there might be a way of transferring it to the more practical streets: I envisage we wouldn't always be playing for >=1, but sometimes >=2 since the 12 streets can all appear before the first repeat. The progressions may be more complicated though.

Thoughts other than: "oh no not another delusional HG thread!!!"? 

[RouletteGhost]

Stop making threads with HG in the title.

You are just being an attention whore.

[falkor2k15]

Rather then finishing on 4 or 5 repeats we should be thinking about how many 0s occurred between those repeats; if we get our 2nd repeat quite early:
5 0s > Repeat 1 > 4 0s > Repeat 2...
instead of
18 0s > Repeat 1 > 2 0s > Repeat 2...

In the above scenario we should keep playing longer based on how many 0s have appeared in total. What then happens is that we can get caught on a winning streak of multiple repeats. So let's say we played like that for so many ebbs and flows till we got to a winning streak of 18 at around leg 24 (or the total 0s is greater than, say, 75 at this leg): 
7 1 5 2 8 1 1 3 4 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 4 1 10 1 2 1 18 1 3 1 6 1 3 1 19 1

In the above scenario we should then switch to playing the 0s till there are none left (the last one here would have required a 19 step progression, though, which is nothing for 1 number)

[falkor2k15]

Here's the *shortest* session I came across in 100K spins (note: the first step is rather high!):
21U > 2R > 2U > 2R > 2U > 1R > 4U > 4R > 1U > 3R > 1U > 1R > 1U > 4R > 1U > 1R > 2U > 3R > 1U > 8R > 1U

Here we would have 20 wins with a maximum 5 step progression and a BR much lesser than 1K. There would be some kind of trigger that after 17 wins we should switch to the 0s for 2 wins progressed through 3 steps and 8 steps, respectively.

[3Nine]

If you need a progression you're delaying the inevitable.

[falkor2k15]

If you need a progression you're delaying the inevitable.

If there were no table limits then we could win ECs with a marty progression. However, not only do these progressions fit within the table limits, but they require a max BR of about 1050. If progressions weren't a threat to the casino then they wouldn't impose table limits.

[denzie]

5 step progression. ... sure we win many sessions. But do we win enough sessions to stay ahead ? No

Better use 1-1.... and....

Look how many times the 1-1 would lose after each unhit ......

Twice? Three? Four ? More or is that an extreme rare event ?

[falkor2k15]

denzie, unless my understanding is fundamentally flawed (and I double-checked my progressions calculator!), this should win every set/session without fail. The only waiting time is 1-25 spins at the beginning then we play for up to about 250 spins max - all with placed bets - to complete the set/session (sometimes only 100 spins). profit should be about 300 (or is that the minimum?).

[denzie]

I don't get it 
can you explain step by step pls

[mogul397]

Stop making threads with HG in the title.

You are just being an attention whore.

As are you.  "Just fishing for attention".

Back to painting the house.

[falkor2k15]

I tracked 2 repeats over 100K spins (= 8000 sessions) and the highest combined results for the 0s with 1 repeat between was 25; here's the top 10 extreme sets in terms of the initial 3 legs:
21   1   4
16   1   8
17   1   6
19   1   4
22   1   1
10   1   13
10   1   13
19   1   4
17   1   6
18   1   5

21   1   4
1   21   15   -21
2   22   7   -65
6   23   13   -203
17   24   1   -611
56   25   5   -2011

This requires a 2,011 bankroll.

16   1   8
1   16   20   -16
1   17   3   -33
2   18   3   -69
5   19   16   -164
11   20   12   -384
26   21   6   -930
67   22   8   -2404
185   23   1   -6659
555   24   1   -19979

This one is not viable, so it looks like we need to start betting for the 3rd repeat onwards.

17   1   6
1   17   19   -17
1   18   1   -35
3   19   16   -92
6   20   4   -212
15   21   13   -527
38   22   5   -1363
105   23   2   -3778

19   1   4
1   19   17   -19
2   20   13   -59
5   22   11   -169
14   23   13   -491
41   24   1   -1475

22   1   1
1   22   14   -22
2   23   4   -68

10   1   13
1   10   26   -10
1   11   15   -21
1   12   3   -33
2   13   13   -59
3   14   7   -101
5   15   4   -176
9   16   4   -320
17   17   3   -609
34   18   3   -1221
72   19   3   -2589
162   20   3   -5829
389   21   6   -13998
1000   22   2   -35998
2770   23   12   -99708

This one breaks the table limits! 

But still, none of the above are as extreme as trying to get the first repeat:

1   1   35   -1
1   2   33   -3
1   3   30   -6
1   4   26   -10
1   5   21   -15
1   6   15   -21
1   7   8   -28
2   8   28   -44
2   9   10   -62
3   10   16   -92
4   11   8   -136
6   12   8   -208
10   13   22   -338
16   14   14   -562
27   15   5   -967
49   16   13   -1751
93   17   16   -3332
186   18   16   -6680
393   19   1   -14147
885   20   13   -31847
2124   21   13   -76451
5461   22   3   -196593
15123   23   6   -544422
45369   24   6   -1633278
148480   25   2   -5345278

So, if anything, commencing on the third repeat will keep us within the table limits (to be tested next).

[RouletteGhost]

As are you.  "Just fishing for attention".

Back to painting the house.

I think you are in love with me