DIVIDE & CONQUER

[XXVV]

Alberto,

Once again thanks for that data posted from Wiesbaden.

I went through the second set of results and my outcomes on the stage 1 approach were:

Dozens :   -50 points because of three losses - all were hits on the fourth attempt.

So also there were two consecutive losses - first time I have seen them adjacent but never mind, that's Nature for you! This would have been a very hot phase for my loss method.

Columns :  +31 points because 31 in the streak and no loss.

A fresh thought occurred to me this morning - I am going to develop a third set of variables to monitor along with Dozens and Columns - there could be many but for simplicity and speed  I am going to monitor Streets ( in each category four streets and these will alternate down the table). So Streets A, B, C

Then as a fourth variable I am going to monitor the wheel sets - zero section and two others in groups of 12 adjacent numbers on the wheel.

This will be easy and fast to do the way I propose - although of course you could easily mix them to devise new combinations. Wheel A, B, C.

Idea here is that when the Ecart is in a strong phase and stable on any two , or three, I will be able to take a cross fix on some inside bet targets. that's the idea anyway. Will suit busy tables with a slow rate of spin!

[broadsword_uk]

now my head is spinning let alone the wheel! Joking aside we come back to what we discussed a few pages back on the James Bond in that we need to time our entries and play our streaks. I trade a little forex and it's a damn site easier than this! ;-)

Question: if we play columns, dozens, sections, streets at the same time.... doesn't that mean that some of those methods will be in losing streaks and others in winning streaks at the same time? Therefore focussing on a LLLW or an LLW as an entry trigger would be more manageable/practical? unless we got some sort of tracker for all the D+C approaches with stop at 6 points on each method or perhaps stop at 6 points overall.

i take my hat off to you XXVV for all the effort you've made on this.

Respect

[XXVV]

Now for some fresh ideas so we can take this onto stage 2, 3  and beyond in terms of betting.
This is designed from lateral thinking.

Lets start with just a couple of variation ideas on the win strategies.

We can use the progression 1-3-9 as you have seen and my results overall demonstrate that this works well in its own right but I would suggest stop start methods of taking say from 3 up to 12 games in a row and then pausing. Suggest minimum of a cycle of spins, ie 37 or more space.

I have referred already to the micro series and the macro series.

To clarify here are three macro game results, and you can even view the three games as a triad in its own right, another macro.

W  LW  LLW

At one level macro they are W+W+W

At a triad macro they are    3W and 3L or +3 for three wins

At micro they are WLWLLW

By looking at this sequence in three ways, three ways of betting open up, but I will return to that later.

Firsts we are interested in accentuating the wins, and earning a better result than just +3 points for this sequence.

So we can parlay, progress and step a series.

I suggest keeping these sequences in short triads, but you can extend and return is in relation to risk and is a subjective call. testing however can demonstrate an optimum level.
That is why I choose 3 steps.

Parlay 2-3-5

2 unit values on the first bet. then use a portion of the profits on the next step and so on.

If the first step fizzes no harm done just start again. Risk exposure is reduced

Progress 2-3-5

This will generate more return but the risk exposure is greater

Stepping

Now this can be in groups of three but I like the series when it goes up to nine, but it can be volatile if a loss is encountered ( macro loss, ie goes beyond the 1-3-9 progression)

1   1
2   3
3   6
4  10
5  15
6  21
7  28
8  36
9  45         ie +45 points can be won in 9 games ( compared to +9)

Risk is that on say the 7th step you encounter a -26 loss. Then its a bit like snakes and ladders. However I have found that you can build up to +550 points or more before re-traces, so I would again be selective and take profit say once at 400 plus and then start again.

On the example above macro scale you would step 1, 2, 3 and have achieved +6 points

A safer way is to keep the stepping cycles in groups of three.

These methods all work well when the mode is WIN streak.

Another way is to look at this in the micro scale and plough on at the elemental level.

For example WLWLLW extended by further outcomes to WWWLWLWW

could translate if we apply a positive progression for a win, and drop to base on a loss

+1 -2 +1 -2 -1+1  ....  +2+3+4 -5 +1-2 +1+2   =  +4

Another way would be to progress on a win and just step back 1 on a loss

+1 -2 +1 -2-1+1 ....     +2 +3+4-5+4-5+4+5     = +10


Again I would emphasise set small realistic goals and take the profit then re-start.

Anywhere from +3 to +10 points is a great result.

Now lets turn our attention to losing...

That will be the next post.

[XXVV]

Now my head is spinning let alone the wheel! Joking aside we come back to what we discussed a few pages back on the James Bond in that we need to time our entries and play our streaks. I trade a little forex and it's a darn site easier than this! ;-)

Question: if we play columns, dozens, sections, streets at the same time.... doesn't that mean that some of those methods will be in losing streaks and others in winning streaks at the same time? Therefore focussing on a LLLW or an LLW as an entry trigger would be more manageable/practical? unless we got some sort of tracker for all the D+C approaches with stop at 6 points on each method or perhaps stop at 6 points overall.

i take my hat off to you XXVV for all the effort you've made on this.

Respect

You are quite right. Too much information is counter-productive. I am just suggesting an overview playing virtually and then zone in when opportunities present.

I would probably only ever play 2 sets simultaneously.

The analogy with Forex is an interesting one. Are they really so different? In both cases many find it difficult to win in the long term.

I would be fascinated to see a study comparing these phenomena.

One difference, and please correct me if I am wrong, is that roulette outcomes are Nature derivatives, and Forex is man made derivative.

[XXVV]

Losing.

Have you noticed with D+C and all the emphasis on winning we make +1  when we win but we are trying to dodge those bullets of a loss at -2. We stake with 2 bets trying to avoid that upper number on the matrix.

Is this not like trying to swim against the tide at times?

Why not reverse all that and get paid +2 for a hit and only lose -1 if a loss.

You can do that if you bet to lose.

Certainly there are cycles of W and cycles of L on the macro scale, and there are in the bigger picture twice as many W symbols as there are L symbols.

On the micro scale it is different.

We can have

LLW  LW and  LLW  in one set of three games (triad), 3 wins yet  5 losses!

So on both the macro and micro scale there are cycles and clusters of opportunities for Loss to prevail, and if we are smart we could bet Loss at those times and win!!

In order to do this we use the reverse psychology and just bet the dozen we weren't earlier supposed to bet and earn +2 for the pleasure.

On that basis you could reverse the preference earlier given to that micro bet step progression earlier shown, and instead of going down 1 at a loss you accentuate the losses by adding 1 to a loss and reducing on a win!

For example

LLW LW LLW   can be read on the micro scale as LLWLWLLW and then there may follow an L

so we could play this without any need for progression

+2 +2 -1+2-1+2+2-1   and +2 being the icing on the cake  =  +9 points

There are opportunities in the flow of the game where there is a surplus of Loss.

The following example may help.

This is a set of outcomes monitoring groups of three games ( triads). You may prefer other groupings, but this is the example in principle only, then you can go and formulate your own method.

In every triad there are 3 wins on the micro scale, by definition, so they are constant.

For example

LLW  W  LLLLLW  this last game broke the progression so was a macro loss but we still record the (eventual win).

This example has 3 wins but 7 losses.

Those were 7 losing bets on the micro scale.

So we record a series of triad outcomes to get a feel for the flow of a session,

The following was taken from test data...

As the wins are constant, we are only interested in recording the Losses as a measure

Dozens

0
1
1
1
2
4
6
0
1
2
1
1
3
0
1
5
1
1
2
1

The same data but in Columns

4
0
0
0
2
1
0
1
0
3
2
3
3
1
2
2
2
1
2
1

Do you notice with each series how the losses cluster.

Key will be to spot the turning point or the Tipping Point. Its a natural principle.

From this you can derive some trigger points.

I use a sudden change over the previous three on a moving average. Its not hard.

Find the trigger to enter and to exit. The exit is easy - you have made some profit.

Once you enter a new triad to play, all you have to do is very gently step as a win is +2 and a loss -1, so the tide is in your favour.

If you can encounter 'trouble' ie a cluster of losses that on the macro scale would cause a progression to fail, you are in the money!

That is what I mean by looking for trouble.

There is plenty of food for thought in that lot and there are all sorts of triggers you can derive to initiate Loss strategies on both micro and macro scale.

The ideal play, and this is my final word on this subject, as I have probably overstayed my welcome on this thread, is to swing in your reading of the Ecart from playing win streaks, to playing clusters , groupings of Loss.

If you have any questions please ask. I have done enough testing on this method now. In my view it is a wonderful matrix method and you could base a very successful professional playing strategy on it alone.

PS:

Always when playing Loss stake Zero as an independent game for a serious win every time it appears.

On that crazy sample from Wiesbaden that Alberto selected for 120 spins, zero appeared NINE times and it doubled within that series.

The stage 1 outcome on Dozens using D+C showed a -50 point loss, but on Columns we had a streak of 31 ( ie +31) without loss in spite of the zeros.

In other words had we staked zero independently the Dozens outcome would have been a strong win ( 8 of those zeros were targetted). On the Columns outcome the profit would have trebled.

Always cover Zero.

Good HuntingXXVV

[strato1985]

Thank you xxvv

do you mind explaning the macro and micro .

i'm going to read back but just that one thing would be much appreciated

i've enjoyed your posting very challeging

[XXVV]

Here are the outcomes for six games of D+C

I tabulate them ( for my own reasons) in groups of three ( a triad)

These are macro results

W   W   W

W   W   W

This is because all six games were winners, ie were concluded within the 1-3-9 progression

When we look in more detail the outcomes in reality were like this....

LW  LLW  W

W   LLW   LW


On the first triad the micro outcomes were as follows

LWLLWW    ( three losses and 3 wins)

If you flat staked to play loss through this you would have

+2 -1 +2 +2 -1 -1  = +3 points

There are phases of play where you can 'play to lose' and win.

PS : the average outcome, of course, for a triad is 1.50 losses

The trick is to find which direction play is heading so you can bet accordingly.

Obviously this is an overlay bet on top of the automatic bet that the D+C matrix spits out, which is to always bet to win by avoiding one particular of three possible outcomes.

There will be more on this idea later this week in my workshop thread in the Framework section.

Hope that clarifies macro and micro.

[strato1985]

Cheers xxvv

that's crystal I did read back most of the thread an I got it second time round but that's clarified it nicely

so many promising methods here its exciting

cheers buddy

Scooby hows your results for the original method ?

[ScoobyDoo]

Hello Everyone,

I would like to thank all olf you for participating in this thread and I would especially like to thank XXVV for all of the magnificent testing and explaining all of the finer points and tweaks of Divide & Conquer.

Even though I was to one who originally created this method, XXV has taken it to a much higher level and turned it into a way for all of you to become roulette professionals if and that is a big IF you can train yourselves to have patience and to start thinking that that it is not neccessary to win large amounts of cash in one sitting.

When you have a meat roast for a meal, you don't try and put the whole roast in your mouth all at once...You eat it, one small bite at a time. This method is designed to function in the same manner...Jump in, win 3 units and then get out! If you are playing live play online, that is easy to do.

You have both dozens and columns to play as well as having more than one roulette account (Maybe three accounts) to switch back and forth from. By doing that, there will be a time segment in which you are not playing at any given casino, giving you more opportunities to play.

The second thing you have to teach yourself is to NOT be greedy. How much do you earn at your job each day? My suggestion is to try and win one to two day's salary each time you play, of course it will depend on the size of your units.

There is another point I want to bring up. STOP jumping from one method to the next! If you find one that works, stick with it. That is how you are going to be able to win consistantly.

Scooby Doo

[XXVV]

Thanks Strato
What is really exciting is that, particularly when playing loss in micro then when you get the timing right, and I have shown how you can do this, you can play flat staking, and do very well, at lower risk than by progression. In time you can safely increase the flat stake unit values.

As always its all in the timing. Actually its in timing the swing of the Ecart.
Best of luck also. XXVV

[XXVV]

Thanks ScoobyDoo

This is great advice and it is so simple clear and true.

You have a method here that indeed may be all you need.

Start planning!

[strato1985]

cheers people

I understand what you say scooby . I have been only playing pb and p4 with stong results so far.

it's just exciting seeing such positive things about this.. i'm like a kid in a sweet shop!!

[Kingspin]

Accurate post scooby but consider this with regard to what you say about not winning big in one session and going for small wins of say 3 units.  Personally i don't want to win 3 units i want to win hundreds of chips minimum in a single session.  I think many don't have time or patience to be playing for only 3 chips ! 

Think about it , thats a mind twister mate..

[XXVV]

Final note here from me on my reference to flat staking losses in micro ( by now you will know what I mean by this shorthand). I will cover in more detail generically on my own threads, here specifically with reference to D+C, but of course it will apply to ALL matrix betting where you apply flat staking.

It is rare to be able to achieve flat staking in such a volatile game.

If it were that easy everybody would be doing it, and there would be no progressions! Or at least you would hope so.

When you find a strategy and technique that can achieve sequences that are stable enough to bet flat, then remember they can end abruptly. You need an entry trigger and an exit strategy.

I have been advised and my own experience confirms, that you can seek short gains in the region of +3 to +5 points, sometimes more, and then take the profit and exit.

There are opportunities with D+C for this and why I have emphasised 'loss' play is that you have a single unit bet  but make +2 points net with it.

The other way round it may be harder although you can have long win streaks but they are mainly on the macro scale ( I have had win streaks in excess of 100 games). The probability expectation on win streaks is 26 if you play 1-3-9. So you would be unlucky to strike out within the first 6 games say, but of course it depends on the position of the Ecart.

That has a life of its own in its swing whether you are at the table or not.

To peck away and take small and consistent wins on the macro scale is a great strategy and you have been well advised on that, but bad sequences can still happen! So always be realistic. This applies to all matrix progression work. It may be a sweet shop but you still need plenty of resources at hand to buy the goodies sometimes. And patience.

Key is to find where the swing stands in relation to win or loss sequences, so timing is everything.

Regarding loss sequences over a period of 250 games, I have tested and found that              (surprise surprise) up to half the outcomes can be in a loss sequence and that entry exit points points can come in short clusters particularly when three or four micro games can fail consecutively. The great thing about this strategy is that if you were on the wrong side of the game and playing macro at that time you would lose your progression. With micro loss it is a win+win situation. You will note losses often attract losses.

Here are the results from 250 games (macro).

Dont feel it is as easy as saying I will follow a micro loss as a trigger.

There were 98 betting opportunities in that sequence ( say 1000 spins) to follow a micro loss.

Only 30 resulted in a further hit.

21 were single wins
5 were double wins
4 were triple wins.

Flat betting that continuously (with obviously a bet following every hit also) would have resulted in a loss.

You could progress or step bets to play losses but caution because the longest sequence enabled a hit on the 13th bet attempt.

There are better ways to succeed but it is feasible to play this with a stop start progression and get good frequent results. Progressions are always a problem in relation to table limits  (and of course your own bank limits).

The best way I found was to be curious and strike when the swing was clearly to loss and in that sample and others of similar size I have tested there were about 7 situations where a flat bet result from +5 to +7 could be achieved. Thats about every 100-150 spins. If you monitor three sets of data you could reduce the waiting time to say once an hour or so. Patience.

Now I dont want to confuse or deter or put you off from playing the standard game because it is a winning strategy and you should be able to build on it steadily. I am simply advising that there are other ways to play the game as well, in different styles and at higher unit value, when you have proven ability to correctly determine the flow of the game.

I really hope that information helps and once again thanks  to ScoobyDoo for the opportunity to present ideas on this method and his patience and goodwill in letting this story unfold.

[broadsword_uk]

The analogy with Forex is an interesting one. Are they really so different? In both cases many find it difficult to win in the long term.

I would be fascinated to see a study comparing these phenomena.

One difference, and please correct me if I am wrong, is that roulette outcomes are Nature derivatives, and Forex is man made derivative.

Hi XXVV. It is interesting about Forex because it is driven by News events, politics, economics, natural diasaters wars etc. these events, and they are daily, drive the market in a 'north or south' direction (we say long or short) and the moves may be large. However, the moves do not just go up or down, they go in a zig zag pattern which we call ABCD. A is the start of the move, B is the next high, then C is a retracement as people take profits and D is end high. Of course its not always a simple as this but you will see this pattern time and again. After a pattern is completed, C will become the new A and off we go again until another event changes the direction of the market. (I really am simplifying this for brevity). Now the interesting part is the retracements and targets (points C and D) which happen at key Fibonacci numbers. You are probably already aware of nature's golden numbers. Put any forex chart on you like and any time frame you like and you will see these Fibonacci points over and over. The question really is are they naturally occurring or are they there because we as logical traders place buy or sell orders at these points which then becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. Do a search on Fib numbers and forex and you will have enough reading to last you a year. It really would be fascinating to see how the Fibonacci numbers hold up in roulette.

Wouldn't it be great if you you were monitoring a streak of losing bets and be able to predict roughly where the turning points were at each key support level. I don't have the intellect for this but someone somewhere has probably already had a go.

Anyway, that's the short answers to your question XXVV,

Regards
Ian