TurboGenius' 50 Max system tweaked!

[GLC]

It's called 50 max because it is based on only being able to bet 50 units maximum.


The system is designed to provide a chart that tells you what to bet to be able to win a certain unit amount with the lowest odds of loss.


I think this system will satisfy all those who want to win 1 unit per day.  Or you could use it to win 1 unit per attack and play as many attacks each day as you want.


I will present the system the way he did by betting for a repeat of the Hi or Lo, Dozen, Line, Corner, Street, Split, or Single number.


If you think you have a better bet selection method(s) by all means, use them.


Here's the system.  We are trying to win 1 unit.


We start with a 6 step marty 1-2-4-8-16-32. 


As long as we win once in the 1st 6 bets, we will win our 1 unit.  We can't bet a 7th step marty because that would put us over our 50 unit max bet.  If we lose 6 straight bets we will be -63 units and will need to go to betting on dozens or columns to stay below 50 units per bet.


Our dozens bet will be 32 units on the last dozen to hit which if it wins will pay 64.  We are down 63 units so that will give us our 1 unit win. 


If we lose this bet we will be down 95 units and will have to bet 48 units on the last dozen to hit.  If we lose this bet, we will be down 143 units.  We would have to bet more than 50 units to reach +1 if we bet on dozens, so we will have to make a Line bet because it pays 5:1.


We must bet 29 units on the last line to hit.  That will pay us 145 units which is +2 units over our -143 units and we can start over on our 6 step marty.


That should be enough explanation for you to get the idea, so I'm just going to give you the progression.


Even chance bets Hi or Lo (or R/B or O/E)
1
2
4
8
16
32


Dozens
32
48


Lines
29
35
42
50


Corners
38
43
48


Streets
39
43
47


Splits
33
35
37
42
45
48
50


Straight number
26
27
28
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
45
46
47
49
50


That's it.  All you have to do is win just 1 of these 49 bets to reach +1.


If you happen to lose all 49 bets, it will cost you 1783 units.  So please test this thoroughly before you decide to play for real money.


Just in case you don't like a maximum bet of 50, you can extend it to 100 or 200 or whatever.  You will have to rework the bets, but that's easy enough to do.  It'll just take some time, but the math is simple.


If you make the maximum bet 100, you can get more bets at the better odds and eliminate some of the bets on Splits and Single numbers.


Play with it and see how it best fits your playing style.


LOL


GLC

[Bayes]

Wow, this is a blast from the past. 

I figured out what chance you have of making your 1 unit:

1 - (19/37)⁶ x (25/37)² x (31/37)⁴ x (33/37)³ x (34/37)³ x (35/37)⁷ x (36/37)²⁴ = 99.92%

Pretty good, although Turbo did warn on his site that it failed in long-term testing.

[monaco]

i think that's the highest % i've seen!

thanks for posting GLC

[vundarosa]

"If you happen to lose all 49 bets, it will cost you 1783 units.  So please test this thoroughly before you decide to play for real money."

--------------

that is quite a costly way of gaining 1u.....

vundarosa

[GLC]

"If you happen to lose all 49 bets, it will cost you 1783 units.  So please test this thoroughly before you decide to play for real money."

--------------

that is quite a costly way of gaining 1u.....

vundarosa

It is a gamble and definitely not for the faint at heart if you decide to go all the way.  You could only play up to the splits or maybe even the streets and if you don't get a win, you take a lesser loss.

Turbo's original system was based on 2 units per spin as the win target.  I'm still on the fence regarding shooting for +1 each attack or going for a larger win.  I know that +1 keeps the bets lower, but maybe not low enough to give up some good wins most of the time.

Bayes is correct, Turbo did say that it failed long term testing, but don't they all?  He also said that he considered this to be one of his best systems ever.  Even he admits that he's not a genius, but he's still pretty knowledgeable about roulette.

Here's Turbo's original post

link:://turbogenius.webs.com/50max.htm

GLC

P.S.  I thought I would post this just to keep ideas flowing.  You never know when someone might take an idea like this, tweak it and come up with an Ace.

[mr.ore]

This Turbo's system was an opposite of what should you do according to math. Instead of betting minimal units possible to reach your target no matter what odds is, his system bets max unit possible in order to maximize short term probability of hiting, so it exposes more of bankroll to house edge. I tried reveresing the table he had, and simulation showed it worked better actually. The biggest problem with that original system is that it is just another martingale betting for one unit. Start with a virtual loss of your visit target, then it is not that bad system. Of course martingale is as near HG as possible if only you had "magic oraculum" aka bet selection to avoid that long and unevitable losing streak...

[Bayes]

The biggest problem with that original system is that it is just another martingale betting for one unit. Start with a virtual loss of your visit target, then it is not that bad system.

Agreed. What does it matter if you're betting an EC or a single number if your MM is to get back ALL losses on the first win? The payouts may be higher for less numbers covered, but the wins are proportionally further apart. What do you mean by a 'virtual loss of the visit target'? do you mean wait for the  loss on paper of the complete progression? or a loss for each bet in each section?

[mr.ore]

You start as if you already lost some in that progression. It is like starting martingale with 16 units in order to win 16 units, if it is your target for a casino visit. You can of course wait for a virtual loss if it makes you feel better, or have it fail once completely and then play on the same location - no advantage there, but psychologically it might be helpful, if you BELIEVE that two loses of that in a row are not that common. If you start with virtual loss, your chance of winning is lesser, but potential profit is higher, of course.

[GLC]

I'm sure nobody will actually play this way.  I just thought it was intriguing.   It might be interesting to know what the odds of winning are at each stage.  I'm guessing that your best odds of winning are in the first 6 bets, and each stage you go through without winning will drastically decrease your odds of winning at all.