MEISEL METHOD #2

[Richard Meisel]

Here is another of my Methods. This is Betting on any 2 Dozens and any 1 Column. I prefer staying on the number that just Spun. For instance the Spin was 20, Bet 1 Unit on the 2nd Dozen any any other Dozen and Bet on the Middle Column. I prefer 100 as the Unit but let's use 10 as the Unit. Every Spin we will have 4 different decisions: WL, LW, WE, and LL. The WL is 20 -10 -10 = 0. The LW is -20 +20 = 0. The WW is +20 +10 = 30. The LL is -10 -20 = -30. So what is nice with this Method is all the WL and LW are even. The only money decisions are the WW and LL. In the 2 Dozens we have a 63% chance of Winning (24/38), and a 37% chance of Losing (14/38). In the Column bet we have a 32% chance of Winning (12/38), and a 68% chance of Losing (26/38). Doing all the math we come to the mathematical odds that in every 100 Spins we should get 43 WL, 12 LW, 20 WW, and 25 LL. When we get a  0 or a 0-0 we do a Virtual no Bet if you're following the Spin for a Repeat. If not, then no Virtual bet. What is nice about this Losing System is that I've found very seldom 4 consecutive Losses among all the non decisions. I think this Method is ripe for a Martingale. Someone please check the consecutive Losses.

[2BobBet]

Interesting method , can you post an example please.

Im not sure on what you mean by virtual no bet ?

Do you mean if the number hits the column or dozen ? or both ?

[RP501]

What is nice about this Losing System is that I've found very seldom 4 consecutive Losses among all the non decisions. I think this Method is ripe for a Martingale.

With 4 consecutive losses -- what is the Table Limit that you're playing with?  Covering 28 numbers is pretty steep, looks kinda risky to me.  You might get lucky for a while, but long-term it will eventually go bust.  Unless you're extremely lucky, like people who's been driving all their lives, and have NEVER been in a car accident.   

[ati]

10000 no zero spins test

consecutive losses:
7; one time
6; one time
5; five times
4; 28 times
3; 101 times
2; 392 times

consecutive wins:
6; three times
5; four times
4; 16 times
3; 70 times
2; 351 times

Max consecutive zero result is 12.
Five or more consecutive zero results happened 492 times

[huskerdu]

Another variation is playing the last 2 dozens and last 2 columns, covering 32 numbers.:
When both win: +2 units.
When only one dozen or column wins: -1 unit
When lose both: -4 units.

Chances (theoriticaly):

44,5% ; win 2 units
44,5% : lose 1 unit
11% : lose 4 units

Method of recovery:
You play the half of the total amount of losing units, waiting for the moment that a win hit of both dozens+columns will occurs. eg. if you have lost 6 units you play  3 units on each dozen and column and if both hit you win 6 units. recover all lost bankroll. If the total amount of losings is growing big then you just determine a limit of bet on every dozen-column (e.g. 6 units - total 24 units) and flat bet.

[Richard Meisel]

10000 no zero spins test

consecutive losses:
7; one time
6; one time
5; five times
4; 28 times
3; 101 times
2; 392 times

consecutive wins:
6; three times
5; four times
4; 16 times
3; 70 times
2; 351 times

Max consecutive zero result is 12.
Five or more consecutive zero results happened 492 times

.    Thank you very much, Ati. This goes with my original calculations that there will be 25 LL to 20 WW in every 100 Spins. Just a 1.5% Lost to Win ratio giving this Method a wonderful try with the dreaded Martingale.

[Richard Meisel]

Sorry, just a 1.25% Loss to Win ratio. Wonderful odds for a Martingale or even the dreaded Super Martingale progression.

[Richard Meisel]

Another variation is playing the last 2 dozens and last 2 columns, covering 32 numbers.:
When both win: +2 units.
When only one dozen or column wins: -1 unit
When lose both: -4 units.

Chances (theoriticaly):

44,5% ; win 2 units
44,5% : lose 1 unit
11% : lose 4 units

Method of recovery:
You play the half of the total amount of losing units, waiting for the moment that a win hit of both dozens+columns will occurs. eg. if you have lost 6 units you play  3 units on each dozen and column and if both hit you win 6 units. recover all lost bankroll. If the total amount of losings is growing big then you just determine a limit of bet on every dozen-column (e.g. 6 units - total 24 units) and flat bet.

Big difference between your another variation (LW=-1, WL=-1, LL=-4, WW=2) and mine (LW=0, WL=0, LL=-3, WW=3).

[huskerdu]

Big difference between your another variation (LW=-1, WL=-1, LL=-4, WW=2) and mine (LW=0, WL=0, LL=-3, WW=3).

Yes, but you have less chances to win and more chances to lose those 3 units. But on the other hand you have more chances not to lose your 3 units.
WW : 23%
WL/LW : 54%
LL: 23%
Anyway , I don't say that the one is better of the other, there are many variations for those kind of systems. Everybody choses what he prefers.

[Richard Meisel]

Yes, but you have less chances to win and more chances to lose those 3 units. But on the other hand you have more chances not to lose your 3 units.
WW : 23%
WL/LW : 54%
LL: 23%
Anyway , I don't say that the one is better of the other, there are many variations for those kind of systems. Everybody choses what he prefers.

But I believe it is the Loss to Win RATIO that matters.

[Richard Meisel]

It's hard to find the losing streaks in this Method because every alternate Bet includes a Random Bet.