Kitchen Martingale

[Kav]

This is sort of a slow Martingale (increase when you lose) with a bit of D'Alembert (decrease when you win) strategy.

The bet selection is up to you. Originally, Harryj said you should play the losing Even Chance after it lost 3-4 times. And you bet for the next 3 spins. If a color runs for 5, 6 or 7 spins you win, if it runs for more than 7 spins you lose. The reasoning is that there are far more same color spin sequences with a length of  5, 6 or 7 spins, than there are with a length of 8 spins or more.
But you can chose a different trigger if you like.

What makes this really interesting, aside from the very balanced wagering plan, is the fact that you take a break after 3 losses. You see the trigger, you bet and if there is no win after 3 bets, you stop and wait for the next trigger. Though theoretically there is no difference, this approach protects you from long losing sequences.
Is this the best roulette strategy ever? Probably not. Is it a good starting point, a good newbie strategy? Definitely! IMO it is better than the majority of the strategies found on most sites and forums and relatively simple.

[thelaw]

Both Kav and Reyth (from video) have a wealth of experience in the game.

Not sure about Kav himself, but Reyth is truly obsessed.

[Kav]

 thelaw,
Thanks

Let Me Win,
Choose a better nick.

[Let Me Win]

Huh?

How about you stop spamming this forum?

What are you good for really?  Publishing a rediculious bet with no instructions for a decade...

Or running a forum in the style of the Nazi Party where free speech is not allowed and is good only for reading the daily drivel of MickeyP

Reyth left ages ago....

[Let Me Win]

Experienced roulette players know that there is no such thing as a trigger.


"You see the trigger, you bet and if there is no win after 3 bets, you stop and wait for the next trigger. Though theoretically there is no difference, this approach protects you from long losing sequences."

This is an example of an oxymoron amathes.

[Kav]

Excuse me but I can't discuss seriously with someone called Let Me Win. No offence, I just can't.

[Let Me Win]

Don't worry there is nothing serious here to discuss.

The only reason for your post is to drive traffic to your website and You Tube channel.

[Kav]

Since this topic didn't get many replies, I took a look at some recent topics that attracted attention:

   
• Soul patterns and Graph theory
• Is roulette spins truly random ?
• Over There but Here, Reading Randomness
• Facts about Non-Random in 2019 and the cost of winning
• Increasing/decreasing probability in Roulette
• Applying Fractals to Roulette
• Does random have limits?
• Martingale Psychology
• Precognition - PROOF!

Now this is scary! I mean are we so disappointed by real specific betting systems that we turned to the philosophy of probability or something?
Maybe it is the noise of useless 10-minutes-of-thought systems that pop up every week that doesn't allow us to focus on the good ones?

I have written my share of theoretical texts about roulette, but this is getting out of hand. Experienced players still wondering what is independence, the nature of probability and if quantum theory is the answer to our problems...

Ok I'm rambling, or maybe I do have a point. Fact is I was a bit disappointed that my original post about a quite Simple and Useful strategy didn't get any attention. This is actually a quite simple progression for EC, by the late Harryj, and you could do much worse than use it.

Simple description In his words:

1.2.3. Martingale end of series after any win.   
3/9  3 is the bet 9 the total risk.  ALL THE FOLLOWING BETS ARE FLAT UNTIL
3/12                                       A NEW LEVEL IS REACHED OR THE LINE IS CLEAR.   
4/16   
4/20   
5/25   
5/30   
6/36
6/42   
7/49   
7/56   
8/64   
8/72   
9/81   
9/90   
10/10   
10/110   IN MY OWN PLAY i NEVER REACHED THIS LEVEL BUT ABORTED THE PLAY AT A CONVENIENT POINT LONG BEFORE. ACCEPTING A SMALL LOSS  PROVED MORE PROFITABLE THAN CLEARING A LINE THAT LINGERED ON.       

PS: I do miss people like GLC, he would have liked it.

[nottophammer]

PS: I do miss people like GLC, he would have liked it.

And what about Mr J

[Kav]

And what about Mr J

In later years MrJ stopped posting systems, just like Turbo...
I wonder where MrJ is. Anyone know?
Or where is GLC...

[luckyfella]

Since this topic didn't get many replies, I took a look at some recent topics that attracted attention:

   
• Soul patterns and Graph theory
• Is roulette spins truly random ?
• Over There but Here, Reading Randomness
• Facts about Non-Random in 2019 and the cost of winning
• Increasing/decreasing probability in Roulette
• Applying Fractals to Roulette
• Does random have limits?
• Martingale Psychology
• Precognition - PROOF!

Now this is scary! I mean are we so disappointed by real specific betting systems that we turned to the philosophy of probability or something?
Maybe it is the noise of useless 10-minutes-of-thought systems that pop up every week that doesn't allow us to focus on the good ones?

I have written my share of theoretical texts about roulette, but this is getting out of hand. Experienced players still wondering what is independence, the nature of probability and if quantum theory is the answer to our problems...

Ok I'm rambling, or maybe I do have a point. Fact is I was a bit disappointed that my original post about a quite Simple and Useful strategy didn't get any attention. This is actually a quite simple progression for EC, by the late Harryj, and you could do much worse than use it.

Simple description In his words:
PS: I do miss people like GLC, he would have liked it.

Systems and MM is regurgitating same old bullshit. Record stuck in the track.

Not everyone consume that kind of thing.

AP and mathboyz shit on it every single time. And they are right.

No offence, nothing personal, it's what it is.

[Joe]

I mean are we so disappointed by real specific betting systems that we turned to the philosophy of probability or something?

Systems like the one you mentioned are the reason why people are looking for something else. Simple systems like that are a dime a dozen. I'm surprised at you Kav, I thought you were more discriminating.    If you're going to produce videos on roulette systems, at least come up with decent systems, not garbage like this. Less style, more substance! Sorry if that seems harsh.

[Joe]

What makes this really interesting, aside from the very balanced wagering plan, is the fact that you take a break after 3 losses. You see the trigger, you bet and if there is no win after 3 bets, you stop and wait for the next trigger. Though theoretically there is no difference, this approach protects you from long losing sequences.

No, it doesn't. Theory and practice are the same, it's just that most people don't understand the theory properly. 

[gizmotron2]

Systems and MM is regurgitating same old bullshit. Record stuck in the track.

Not everyone consume that kind of thing.

AP and mathboyz shit on it every single time. And they are right.

No offence, nothing personal, it's what it is.

I'm sorry but I just disagree. Reading Randomness is different and those that master it are "shitting" as you put it, all over the mathBoyz. I'm doing this just to take that shit. It feels so good. Ahhh!

I would love to see you try it, for you to honestly try to learn it. You can't though. You would rather go down with the ship. That's OK. Somebody has to. I guess you will stir up a  lot of noise and scream and shout as you won't go quietly. Oh well, such is life.

[Kav]

Simple systems like that are a dime a dozen.

Simplicity is a virtue not a vice. And a big one too. So this system qualifies in this respect.
Now it is your job to try to hear within the noise, search among the garbage to find the gem and chose which systems are worth your time and effort.

I'm willing to compare this system to anything you think is better. So tell me from all these thousands of topics and posts you have read and wrote which other simple system you think is superior. You asked for substance. Let's be specific then.