dozen thing I noticed

[Tomla021]

With all of the John Legend stuff etc in the last few months I wrote something down in a notepad and forgot it till today:
I wrote Dozens down by four  as in 2313.
2313
1123
3301
3122


etc etc....
I did 1000 double zero spins and never  went more than 8 spins before matching a dozen with one in  in the above line......seems bizzare as when i have looked at other dozen bet methods you always get sleepers from 10-20 times.
anyone ever test anything similiar?

[Robeenhuut]

With all of the John Legend stuff etc in the last few months I wrote something down in a notepad and forgot it till today:
I wrote Dozens down by four  as in 2313.
2313
1123
3301
3122


etc etc....
I did 1000 double zero spins and never  went more than 8 spins before matching a dozen with one in  in the above line......seems bizzare as when i have looked at other dozen bet methods you always get sleepers from 10-20 times.
anyone ever test anything similiar?

Hello Tomla

I went quickly through my SL live spins and found that it went more than 8 spins 3 times - once 11 spins. I don't think you can exploit something here. You may wait few virtual loses but basically you would get similar strike rate as in JL Reversed Code 4. I saw there 17 spins without match. 

Regards 

[GLC]

Tom,
I'll check out a few spins and see how it looks also.  Even 8 to 11 between hits isn't that bad since we'll be betting a single dozen.  Heck a dozen can sleep for a lot more spins than 11 tracking in a straight line.  This might be exploitable, but I'm sure it'll involve some big bets to keep it out of the grinder territory.
GLC

[Juiced91]

On RX it went up tp 21 in 10K spins.

Are we playing the whole line? or only one win per line?

[GLC]

On RX it went up tp 21 in 10K spins.

Are we playing the whole line? or only one win per line?

I think Tom was hoping that we could play the whole line.  I also have seen a 13 and a 15.  It's looking like we will have to be ready to bet a steep martingale progression for a full recovery on one win or get into a "grind your way back up" situation after a long stretch with no matches.
For betting dozens or columns, my favorite has always been the "Penthouse" progression:

111222333444555666 etc...  Move 1 to the right on a loss and move 3 to the left on a win.

It can be adapted to fit your risk tolerance by changing the line:
112233445566 etc... or 11112222333344445555etc...

You can also ratchet up or down the risk by moving 5, 4, 2 or even 1 to the left after a win.  The numbers below 3 increase risk of larger bet sizes and of course, the opposite  for the numbers larger than 3.

If we're getting a better strike rate than expected, any of these will work.  The work "work" meaning win a lot of small attacks and every now and then have to accept a large loss.  With a higher than expected strike rate the small wins will outrun the large losses.  That's the hope anyway.

GLC

[iggiv]

don't waist your time hoping that this particular dozen (which hit in particular sequence before)  won't sleep for too long.

[Robeenhuut]

2 me betting for any dozen or column or mix either sleeping,repeating or matching in any pattern, virtual loses, triggers, different style progression etc. wont produce strike rate good enough in d long run 2 make it successful method. 2 go 4 broke would be foolish as we found out in earlier posts. Tomla in 1k spins never saw more than 8 spins without match n Juice in 10k reported 21... which is not surprising 2 me at all. If you shorten your progression d strike rate is simply not there. 

[Juiced91]

I will try find the win loss ratio.

[Tomla021]

The Hope was that by using the matrix that you shorten the long sleepers.... Only can be checked by testing to see if it makes any difference

[iggiv]

"due theory" is wrong. Nothing is due. if something does not hit frequently enough (more than average, which for dozen is once in 3 spins) then it does not make sense to "improve" it with long progression, which will make things worse. Nothing is "due".

link:://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/rbf/HIPR2/figs/gauss1.gif

Something that does not hit for long time does not happen frequently, but once it happens it kills everything, and it will happen regularly enough

[Juiced91]

Well did 100K spins well actually 99996 spins in order to get the first bet line.

Losses = 66415 = 0.66 = 66%
Wins = 33581    = 0.34 = 34%

I used +1 on a loss reset to 1 on a win(just to see the longest loss which was 27). And it made 3000+ units albeit on a NZ table.

[Tomla021]

not really due theory but hoping that a 3,4,5 matrix might break up the general nature of playing straight roulette.....thanks for the test.
you reset after every win?

[Robeenhuut]

Well did 100K spins well actually 99996 spins in order to get the first bet line.

Losses = 66415 = 0.66 = 66%
Wins = 33581    = 0.34 = 34%

I used +1 on a loss reset to 1 on a win(just to see the longest loss which was 27). And it made 3000+ units albeit on a NZ table.

I just dont see any advantage. Do another 100k spins and you will be down more than 3000...
And if you covered 0 then do d math 

[Tomla021]

well running another 100,000 would be interesting then.

[iggiv]

guys, roulette kills any CONSISTENT patterns. but try to invent new patterns each time and u may be OK. if u use matrix, try to bet each time a new pattern on it. there could be lots of them. just my idea. think about it.