perfect 10

[warrior]

Hi Paja,
The following is taken from that freeroulettesystem site:

======================
The 2 up - 2 down progression
======================
(a simple progression for small to medium bankrolls)
This is suitable for the Even Money bets in Roulette and could also be used for Mini-Bac.
You commence with a 1 unit bet and you continue betting 1 unit until you lose 2 consecutive bets.
When this happens you increase your bet to 2 units and continue to bet 2 units until you
a) win 2 consecutive bets at which point you reduce your next bet to 1 unit
b) lose 2 consecutive bets which means you increase your next bet to 3 units.

The progression is 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 - if you reach 5 you should restart at 1 or you can continue 6, 8, 10.
Just remember you go up to the next number after 2 consecutive losses and you go down one step to the next lowest number after 2 consecutive wins.

For example: if you win 2 consecutive bets of 4 units each your next bet would be 3 units.

=========
The exceptions I made is if I get level to my highest recorded profit then I reset to the starting bet of 1. Also when I am close to recovery; if I don't need to bet the full amount of units that the system says, then I just drop to the bet level which is enough to make a +1 on my previous highest recorded profit total. Hope you get that.

Believe me, it would be difficult, tricky and confusing to play this on more than one EC!

A.

ATLANTIS that is a good way for the money m. as far as all 3 chances very complex way of plaing in a real casino setting the simpler the better  ,because when you bet is not going well you start to panic so if the bet is simple it helps on location at a time .

[atlantis]

ATLANTIS that is a good way for the money m. as far as all 3 chances very complex way of plaing in a real casino setting the simpler the better  ,because when you bet is not going well you start to panic so if the bet is simple it helps on location at a time .

I fully agree.

Warrior, Are you ready for next result in the 30 session test?

The result is:

+15 in 100 spins; maxdrawdown=16; highest bet=4.

So we have so far:

1) +25 in 100 spins; maxdrawdown=13; highest bet=5
2) +15 in 100 spins; maxdrawdown=16; highest bet=4

I will post next result tomorrow.

A.

[atlantis]

Hi Warrior,

I was wondering if the method of tracking 5 results and betting the opposite has any advantage over just playing the DBL on each spin?? Or maybe just alternating DBL with FTL?  Would sure be a lot easier and you could always stop after 3 L's and wait for a virtual win before continuing...

And now some unwelcome results, I'm afraid.
I managed to find time to play another 2 sessions @100 spins for 4th and 5th MAY 2010 - Table 3 at Wiesbaden
3) -8 in 100 spins (there was a high point of +13)
4) -31 in 100 spins (I reset to 1 after losses at 5 but it still lost twice)
Also session 4 lost from the outset and never got in to any kind of profit at all. 
So it seems has now failed Compa's CWB criteria challenge at least with my testing on R/B with DBL and using the 2u-2d prog... So I will stop the 30 session test now.

That does not mean it would not work better with a different progression or your own favoured progression, so wouldn't be too bothered by those results as I know you've been getting good winning results yourself.

After those losers my idea is maybe to restrict the 2u-2d prog to a max of 3 units before restarting - that way only 12 units is put at risk 1-1,2-2,3-3 then restart @1
Anyone else been trying this system or playing it differently?

A.

[warrior]

Hi Warrior,

I was wondering if the method of tracking 5 results and betting the opposite has any advantage over just playing the DBL on each spin?? Or maybe just alternating DBL with FTL?  Would sure be a lot easier and you could always stop after 3 L's and wait for a virtual win before continuing...

And now some unwelcome results, I'm afraid.
I managed to find time to play another 2 sessions @100 spins for 4th and 5th MAY 2010 - Table 3 at Wiesbaden
3) -8 in 100 spins (there was a high point of +13)
4) -31 in 100 spins (I reset to 1 after losses at 5 but it still lost twice)
Also session 4 lost from the outset and never got in to any kind of profit at all. 
So it seems has now failed Compa's CWB criteria challenge at least with my testing on R/B with DBL and using the 2u-2d prog... So I will stop the 30 session test now.

That does not mean it would not work better with a different progression or your own favoured progression, so wouldn't be too bothered by those results as I know you've been getting good winning results yourself.

After those losers my idea is maybe to restrict the 2u-2d prog to a max of 3 units before restarting - that way only 12 units is put at risk 1-1,2-2,3-3 then restart @1
Anyone else been trying this system or playing it differently?

A.

IM GOING TO STICK TO THE ORIGINAL STRATAGIE,2 losses in a row are very rare .

[Paja]

Thank you Atlantis for explanation.

I played DBL with pluscoup progression and it also crashed within first 4 sessions.

Playing all 3 EC with separate progression on each is complicated. I was suggesting playing 3 EC with one progression for all 3 at the same time. All 3 EC are one bet with same number of chips, depending of progression step.

Win all 3 EC = W
win 2 out of 3 = W
lose 2 out of 3 = L
lose all 3 = L

Follow R/B, O/E and H/L of penultimate result and treat  both W's the same, no matter do they earn +1 or +3. Same with L's.

It looks to me (not sure yet) that tracking all 3EC produces different W/L results than tracking 1 EC because of overlapping trends.

I will start  a new topic about EC, when i have more time, where people could debate about roles of LD, DBL and compare W/L registries of different bets. You and Warrior are more than welcome to join discussion. 

[atlantis]

Playing all 3 EC with separate progression on each is complicated. I was suggesting playing 3 EC with one progression for all 3 at the same time. All 3 EC are one bet with same number of chips, depending of progression step.

Win all 3 EC = W
win 2 out of 3 = W
lose 2 out of 3 = L
lose all 3 = L

Follow R/B, O/E and H/L of penultimate result and treat  both W's the same, no matter do they earn +1 or +3. Same with L's.

It looks to me (not sure yet) that tracking all 3EC produces different W/L results than tracking 1 EC because of overlapping trends.

I will start  a new topic about EC, when I have more time, where people could debate about roles of LD, DBL and compare W/L registries of different bets. You and Warrior are more than welcome to join discussion. 

Hi Paja,

That's an interesting idea playing all 3 EC's of penultimate decision. Sure go ahead and start new topic.

A.

[warrior]

Hi Warrior,

I was wondering if the method of tracking 5 results and betting the opposite has any advantage over just playing the DBL on each spin?? Or maybe just alternating DBL with FTL?  Would sure be a lot easier and you could always stop after 3 L's and wait for a virtual win before continuing...

And now some unwelcome results, I'm afraid.
I managed to find time to play another 2 sessions @100 spins for 4th and 5th MAY 2010 - Table 3 at Wiesbaden
3) -8 in 100 spins (there was a high point of +13)
4) -31 in 100 spins (I reset to 1 after losses at 5 but it still lost twice)
Also session 4 lost from the outset and never got in to any kind of profit at all. 
So it seems has now failed Compa's consistent winning bet criteria challenge at least with my testing on R/B with DBL and using the 2u-2d prog... So I will stop the 30 session test now.

That does not mean it would not work better with a different progression or your own favoured progression, so wouldn't be too bothered by those results as I know you've been getting good winning results yourself.

After those losers my idea is maybe to restrict the 2u-2d prog to a max of 3 units before restarting - that way only 12 units is put at risk 1-1,2-2,3-3 then restart @1
Anyone else been trying this system or playing it differently?

A.

WITH THIS TEST WERE YOU PLAYING ONLY DBL or with the results like the perfect 10 stratagie  im a little confused.

[atlantis]

Hi Warrior,

That's right I was playing DBL only  - so not a valid test on the original way...

A.

[iggiv]

thank u very much GLC

[warrior]

1st =1 my session today
2=1
   3=4
    4=1
        5=2
          6 =5 loss
            7=4
              8=1
                9=2
                   10=1 i used a fibo i think this is the way to go with the perfect ten stratagie
                   +6 profit all the best warrior

[GLC]

1st =1 my session today
2=1
   3=4
    4=1
        5=2
          6 =5 loss
            7=4
              8=1
                9=2
                   10=1 I used a fibo I think this is the way to go with the perfect ten strategy
                   +6 profit all the best warrior

Warrior,

I'm a little confused.  When I total the above 10 sessions I get +17-5=+12 but you say only +6.  How do you figure?

GLC

[warrior]

Warrior,

I'm a little confused.  When I total the above 10 sessions I get +17-5=+12 but you say only +6.  How do you figure?

GLC

GLC LOL thanks for the corection i forgot to take the winnings from the first 2bets ,i need a holiday thats for sure.

[Pappy]

I was sorry to see this topic go dead as I felt this method was close to completion.
Warrior and Atlantis are you guys still using the Perfect 10 and if so did you decide on the  best MM to use.

[warrior]

I was sorry to see this topic go dead as I felt this method was close to completion.
Warrior and Atlantis are you guys still using the Perfect 10 and if so did you decide on the  best MM to use.

I STILL USE THIS, the mm. stepladder,works well or go virtual first spin after tracking and ready to bet for a safer way.

[albalaha]

Dear Warrior,
         can you please elaborate this technique for massesin simple words and through citing example of actual number than DD, DL etc. George you may also help clear the lingo