*PATTERN BREAKER*

[DoctorSudoku]

Actually, I have tried in the past of tracking the patterns in the alternate way that you suggested.

The advantage is that the tracking and waiting time for the 7th pattern is substantially shortened.

But, in my limited testing, I did get choppy results. By that I mean I got some losses early on (mixed in with wins, of course).

So I did not persist with it.

Maybe I gave up on it too easily.

But, for sure, this alternate way of tracking does shorten the tracking and waiting time.

By the way, I call tracking the above way, tracking on a "rolling" basis. Just a terminology thing.

[Gzgzbee]

Ok then...so the normal way you track a pattern is in blocks of 3 spins.

How much spins does it normally take to get 7 patterns?

And in 100 games people are winning 94 approx and losing 6?

What’s the odd of losing the 3 step progression?

[DoctorSudoku]

Ok then...so the normal way you track a pattern is in blocks of 3 spins.

How much spins does it normally take to get 7 patterns?

And in 100 games people are winning 94 approx and losing 6?

What’s the odd of losing the 3 step progression?

I don't want to say that this alternate way of tracking does not work.

It may work, but more testing is needed.

When I tested it (in the summer of 2015), it gave choppy results.

I gave up on it -- but maybe I gave up on it too soon.

Right now, I cannot commit any time to it because I am busy testing Andre's PB version and some columns methods involving the double zero wheel (a perennial interest of mine !).

I hope others who have time give this alternate tracking method some serious consideration. It may have some potential.

   

[DoctorSudoku]

I don't want to say that this alternate way of tracking does not work.

It may, but more testing is needed.

When I tested it (in the summer of 2015), it gave choppy results.

I gave up on it -- but maybe I gave up on it too soon.

Right now, I cannot commit any time to it because I am busy testing Andre's PB version and some columns methods involving the double zero wheel (a perennial interest of mine !).

I hope others who have time give this alternate tracking method some serious consideration. It may have some potential.

   

Just to encourage others to do some testing of this alternate "ROLLING" tracking method, here is a brief description of it.

Let's say, you have the following six hands:
1. B
2. P
3. B
4. B
5. B
6. P

With the NORMAL way of tracking, you will get the following TWO patterns:

BPB (for hands 1 2 3) and

BBP (for hands 4 5 6).

With the alternate "ROLLING" tracking method, you get the following FOUR patterns:

BPB (for hands 1 2 3)
PBB (for hands 2 3 4)
BBB (for hands 3 4 5), and
BBP (for hands 4 5 6).

I hope you guys get the idea of this rolling method of tracking.

And as you guys can see, this rolling method of tracking generates patterns much faster than the traditional tracking method (good for cutting down on the tracking and waiting time for the first 7 patterns to appear).

So if any one of you have some time, please test this alternate rolling tracking method a try and see if it gives results different from the regular tracking method.

   

[RouletteGhost]

i have been testing it on the rolling basis...anytime a pattern shows i cross it off

much faster than only going in groups of 3

BPBBBP

standard that would be BPB and BBP

on a rolling basis this would be BPB, PBB, BBB, BBP

much faster

[DoctorSudoku]

i have been testing it on the rolling basis...anytime a pattern shows i cross it off

much faster than only going in groups of 3

BPBBBP

standard that would be BPB and BBP

on a rolling basis this would be BPB, PBB, BBB, BBP

much faster

It cuts down on the waiting time, for sure.

But in terms of actually winning using the PB method (betting against the 8th pattern), does this rolling method of tracking deliver better or worse results than the traditional method of tracking?

That is the all-important question.

When I tested it in the summer of 2015, I got mixed results. That is why I did not pursue it any further.

But maybe it was too hasty on my part to do so.

[RouletteGhost]

I have begun testing a baccarat method using a 3 wide matrix

using a 1 2 4 progression, if lose the 3 steps: take the loss

in one shoe I had a total of 2 progression busts and 19 wins leaving me with +5 units

will publish after i test several shoes

one progression bust -7 units
second progression lost -7 units
total down 14 units

total wins = +19 (stopping on a win and waiting until next series)

If I continue to duplicate this type of result making profit every shoe even after the busts, I will definitely be using large unit size

I have learned not to jump the gun, will test several shoes first....

[DoctorSudoku]

Just to encourage others to do some testing of this alternate "ROLLING" tracking method, here is a brief description of it.

Let's say, you have the following six hands:
1. B
2. P
3. B
4. B
5. B
6. P

With the NORMAL way of tracking, you will get the following TWO patterns:

BPB (for hands 1 2 3) and

BBP (for hands 4 5 6).

With the alternate "ROLLING" tracking method, you get the following FOUR patterns:

BPB (for hands 1 2 3)
PBB (for hands 2 3 4)
BBB (for hands 3 4 5), and
BBP (for hands 4 5 6).

I hope you guys get the idea of this rolling method of tracking.

And as you guys can see, this rolling method of tracking generates patterns much faster than the traditional tracking method (good for cutting down on the tracking and waiting time for the first 7 patterns to appear).

So if any one of you have some time, please test this alternate rolling tracking method a try and see if it gives results different from the regular tracking method.

   

Ricky,
Sorry for putting you on the spot. You seem to have some time nowadays doing some heavy duty testing and playing PB. Can you find some time to test this rolling method of tracking and see how it fares in playing PB (either JL's version or Andre's version)? If you are too busy or simply not interested, then just ignore this request. I won't mind one bit.

[Ricky]

Ricky,
Sorry for putting you on the spot. You seem to have some time nowadays doing some heavy duty testing and playing PB. Can you find some time to test this rolling method of tracking and see how it fares in playing PB (either JL's version or Andre's version)? If you are too busy or simply not interested, then just ignore this request. I won't mind one bit.

Hi DR
I had a thought about your idea and my take is that if you are going to bet more often by closing the patterns sooner you are getting close to gambling and results could go either way. You give random a chance to beat you more often. I will give it a go once I complete my current testing.

At the moment I am almost up to 70 games and am getting winning and losing streaks. So will need to look at fine tuning the rules. I am still being too exposed to the variance as all my losses came before I had a chance to go into tracking only mode. At one stage I got 4 losses in a row which caused all profits to be wiped out.

So based on this result hit and run needs to be less exposed to long sessions. The sessions need to be staggered more to try and dodge those losing streaks.

Cheers,
Ricky

[DoctorSudoku]

Hi DR
I had a thought about your idea and my take is that if you are going to bet more often by closing the patterns sooner you are getting close to gambling and results could go either way. You give random a chance to beat you more often. I will give it a go once I complete my current testing.

At the moment I am almost up to 70 games and am getting winning and losing streaks. So will need to look at fine tuning the rules. I am still being too exposed to the variance as all my losses came before I had a chance to go into tracking only mode. At one stage I got 4 losses in a row which caused all profits to be wiped out.

So based on this result hit and run needs to be less exposed to long sessions. The sessions need to be staggered more to try and dodge those losing streaks.

Cheers,
Ricky

Ricky,
No problem -- if you have some time in the future, give it a try out. In the meantime, please continue reporting back to us on your current PB testing and playing.

[DoctorSudoku]

Hi DR
I had a thought about your idea and my take is that if you are going to bet more often by closing the patterns sooner you are getting close to gambling and results could go either way. You give random a chance to beat you more often. I will give it a go once I complete my current testing.

At the moment I am almost up to 70 games and am getting winning and losing streaks. So will need to look at fine tuning the rules.

I am still being too exposed to the variance as all my losses came before I had a chance to go into tracking only mode.

At one stage I got 4 losses in a row which caused all profits to be wiped out.

So based on this result hit and run needs to be less exposed to long sessions.

The sessions need to be staggered more to try and dodge those losing streaks.

Cheers,
Ricky

Are you playing PB continuously? How many games (1 trigger means 1 game) are you playing per day or per session?

In my experience, the main reason that I am having some success with PB is because, in addition to playing PB on a hit-and-run basis, I play PB relatively sparingly.

So, for instance, I only play 4 games of PB at airball roulette and 2 games of PB at baccarat per casino visit (I can only visit casinos on some Fri/Sat nights and my average casino stay is usually for about 6 hours -- from a little after 10:00 PM to about 4:30 AM).

Ideally, I would like to get the above numbers reversed -- my preference would be 2 games of PB at airball roulette and 4 games of PB at baccarat (per 6 hour casino stay).

But I find it difficult to do that because the baccarat tables are usually totally occupied even as late as 2:00 AM! Over-the-shoulder betting is allowed at the 2 casinos that I visit, but I don't feel comfortable doing it (however, I might just have to overcome my inhibitions and start doing that type of bet placement in the near future!).

[Ricky]

Are you playing PB continuously? How many games (1 trigger means 1 game) are you playing per day or per session?

In my experience, the main reason that I am having some success with PB is because, in addition to playing PB on a hit-and-run basis, I play PB relatively sparingly.

So, for instance, I only play 4 games of PB at airball roulette and 2 games of PB at baccarat per casino visit (I can only visit casinos on some Fri/Sat nights and my average casino stay is usually for about 6 hours -- from a little after 10:00 PM to about 4:30 AM).

Ideally, I would like to get the above numbers reversed -- my preference would be 2 games of PB at airball roulette and 4 games of PB at baccarat (per 6 hour casino stay).

But I find it difficult to do that because the baccarat tables are usually totally occupied even as late as 2:00 AM! Over-the-shoulder betting is allowed at the 2 casinos that I visit, but I don't feel comfortable doing it (however, I might just have to overcome my inhibitions and start doing that type of bet placement in the near future!).

Hi DR,
My bot is playing continuously not me. It has been running for 2 days straight. In that time I have been enjoying Easter with my family, sleeping, enjoying the holidays, going to the casino, and today just came back from a visit to a local walking trail. In between I have been responding to and adding message on the forum. In all this time the bot was playing DISCIPLINED and with PATIENCE. Technically it is doing exactly as I had hoped without losing my bankroll or hit my 100 euro stop loss. Performance is not great at the moment but its still in the black.

The Bot has played a total of 67 games with a 0-1-2 progression and current performance is 53-14 and 17 euro profit.
Base bets are 0/4,0.4/8.6,0.6 which covers the Zero.
Recovery bets are 0/6.2,0.62/12.6,1.13

I am limiting winning streak to max 8 games continuous play before pausing until I get a virtual loss

Current largest winning streak is 16W,0L
Current Largest Losing streak is 4L, 1W (happened twice)

I still have 33 games to go before my first 100 set is complete. Then I will analysis what went right, what went wrong and what tweaks I can make to improve the performance and avoid those losing streaks. But My currently view is this is getting very close to a typical Hit and Run expected Performance. The fact it is able to selectively stop betting and just track creates an opportunity to avoid potentially catastrophic losses while maximizing winning streaks. And that it is doing it with patience and discipline will help keep it on track for success.

In regards to manual play I totally agree with you, not because hit and run is any better than continuous play, but because I only intend to bet manually for my own enjoyment and challenge to meet my financial goals using a system that has an excellent hit rate without being too exposed to variance and random's ability to pop up and steal your money.

Yesterday's experience losing on Andre's version of PB after so many successful attempts is a timely reminder that random can pop up at any time. The challenge is not being there when he does. And for both Andre and me to lose at such close proximity in time playing on different casinos is a reminder that this method is not foolproof. After struggling to find the pattern for two days at B&M casino and online for a week and then to popup like that was uncanny. Since then I've been having a big think about the 3-4 step progression now that I am looking at increasing my betsize while playing only 3 sessions a day and 6 sessions a week.

One Idea I have is to use a reverse martingale where I bet big on the first Step and instead of flat betting or doubling my bet I may consider halving my bet on the next step to minimise larger losses. I know it sounds counter productive but its like you know the pattern should not repeat for too long its just you do not know how long. So by putting on smaller and smaller bets you know you will eventually win which means you will recoup some of your lost bets. I guess its like the D'Alembert but instead of increasing your bet on a loss you are decreasing it. But always start back at the highest bet size for the next game. I will have a bigger think about it for long term play using PB Andre style and see if most wins come on 1st step. It will make sense in this case to do this.

Cheers,
Ricky

[viclimks]

Ricky.....Which is safer bet for 1 2 4 progression....roulette or baccarat?

[Ricky]

Ricky.....Which is safer bet for 1 2 4 progression....roulette or baccarat?

Depends what bet selection you are using. If its just a random selection the progression is the same risk. But in my experience when you are looking for a specific "rare" pattern that you hardly see then Baccarat has more limited variance in randomly generating those patterns. So you should feel safer betting 1-2-4. But, as a lot on this forum have mentioned including myself a risk averse gambler does not like using 1-2-4 due to the risk/reward factor. You are risking 7 units to make 1 unit. I feel more comfortable risking 3 units to make 1 unit especially when I start betting $100 base bets

Cheers,
Ricky

[atlantis]

Did anyone try the 3-bet progressive cycle betting series?

1-1-2
1-2-2
2-2-2
2-2-3
2-3-3
3-3-3......etc

If all 3 bets in a cycle are lost move up to next bet cycle.

If a win occurs in a cycle then restart from the beginning of that cycle line UNLESS level or ahead overall in which case restart from cycle 1 (1-1-2)

A.