Minimum 4 Repeaters with 37 spin cycle

[denzie]

Problem #1 - recording, tracking spins is useless. You need to start from spin 1, not wait for some event to happen before betting. This is a huge mistake among people who try systems and methods. Tracking and then jumping in doesn't work. Play from spin 1.

Few things.... What if the first repeater comes at spin uuuhm 21 ?

In your time machine example you said...you could bet on # that hit ones but why would you...

Isnt This a bit contradicting ?





And why did you go from your 1/5 or 5/25 progression to 1/2/4/8/16/etc ?

And why did you played on different ways on those graphs at GF ? One you decrease the # and one you take them all with you.  (Only those who hit within a.....sssstttt)

Note both didn't start from spin 1.

[ignatus]

I'm not sure I understand all about how you are playing.

1- You increse the bet in all numbers being bet by 1 on a hit? Or you just increase the number that just hit?

2- You "reset" after hiting a new high bankroll? In this case, reset is to play just last hit number with 1 unit on it. If it's not, tell me where I'm wrong.

Thanks.

Yes, that's how i played!    +1u bet on all numbers bet, *when hit* ,(This is oscar's grind) until reach a new high, Then re-start/reset and bet that single number hit with 1u bet.

[fossell]

I don't think tg was suggesting starting on single numbers. You end up with too many of course. Jump in on the 2s.
Try your results starting from 2s and with both 1/2/4/8 and 1/5/25 progs.

[ignatus]

I don't think tg was suggesting starting on single numbers. You end up with too many of course. Jump in on the 2s.
Try your results starting from 2s

No? He said, if you read the first posts, that he *didn't* bet numbers hit twice, he said "bet from spin 1", furthermore, He said he played with a *positive progression* (from denize's earlier post, in another thread)  and that IS "oscar's grind"....

[fossell]

Well yes I suppose you could bet from spin 1. Depends what TG means by 'play' from spin one.
Its just my preference to wait for 2 repeats. I don't consider a number 'becoming' hot from one show.
I imagine he was suggesting that too many people 'wait' for numbers to become hot before jumping in with bets.
Two shows isn't hot, but 'waiting' to have a collection of repeats is pointless. Start betting from the first repeat (2peater in my case).
And yes I know your prog is positive. But why not try the aggressive positive progs. Just out of interest is all.

[denzie]

No? He said, if you read the first posts, that he *didn't* bet numbers hit twice, he said "bet from spin 1", furthermore, He said he played with a *positive progression* (from denize's earlier post, in another thread)  and that IS "oscar's grind"....

That's what I meant by TG contradicting himself.

Anyway I agree with Fossell.  Start on 2s. It cuts down a lot of numbers. Remember on a real table we can't bet 20#.

[ignatus]

That's what I meant by contradicting himself

I'm just following what TG said;

(1) bet from spin 1,

(2) bet all numbers that show---> Here is what HE said " Because a number "was" hot, doesn't mean a damn thing about it staying hot - it can go cold or hit on average while you're now betting on it. If you were tracking and not playing it as it became a "hot number" then you already missed the boat. There's no value in betting something once it's hot - you can only win by betting it while it's becoming hot."

(3) use a positive progression

This has worked , as i have proven,(?)....(haven't lost yet?) sure it demands a large bankroll, and would not be practical playing for real....(on real live-tables?)....

[denzie]

Yes ignatus your right. But unless TG is some sort of mutated octopus he can't place all those chips. But....

He probably will clear this up.

[denzie]

Steve...... I'll bet your eyes are like 

[DoctorSudoku]

That's what I meant by TG contradicting himself.

Anyway I agree with Fossell. Start on 2s. It cuts down a lot of numbers. Remember on a real table we can't bet 20#.

Denzie,
That is what I have been testing with also -- betting on the 2-peaters becoming 3-peaters.

That way, we have a reasonable number of numbers to bet on. But as I noted in another post yesterday, I CANNOT get it to work consistently flatbetting. I am forced to use negative progressions. And the amounts bet do threaten to spin out of control frequently.

[RouletteGhost]

Once you sit down the 37 spin cycle starts

Here is how I look at it:

More times then not, there are ‘3’ peaters in a cycle

So bet on all the numbers that have hit twice

In my opinion

Math guys can say whatever they want to, look at any history, more times then not there are three peaters in 37 spin cycles

I don’t have the time or money to play this way at this time but I do plan to.

If my penny stock investments come through 

[Madi]

Playing from spin one doesnt mean u need to play all the number before a repeat. You can play 1 or 2 number.

[DoctorSudoku]

Playing from spin one doesnt mean u need to play all the number before a repeat.

You can play 1 or 2 number.

And how would you know which 1 or 2 numbers to correctly select from all the numbers that are showing up?

[Blood Angel]

i guess the question from me is, do we raise on them all after a hit or just the one that's just gone from a 2peat to a 3peat?

[fossell]

Im getting a little bit of deja vu!
Theres plenty of reading here and GF on repeater basics.

Essentially your limiting your field of play by picking 2peaters. Theyre out the blocks and in the race.
We're aiming to be backing the fastest best performers. If they're doing better than the rest, the progression logically follows them. You back the leaders. Where that race ends, how you measure there ongoing performance and how you're selecting are all key factors. We know you cant cover them all.