John Gold's Blog.

[John Gold]

I think I can safely say this alternative to the previous idea is better.  You don't need to get double or triple hits with this to stay in front. 

[attachthumb=#]

[John Gold]

A few things to note here about this particular bet.

I don't think it will ever go past 24 numbers to bet in the second cycle of 37 spins.

My records tell me that an average of 4 sleepers will be remaining in each column at the end of the second cycle.
So take into account that there are roughly 12 numbers sleeping from each column after the first cycle of 37 spins.

Now sometimes there will be several chips on the same number. You could just stick to flat betting them with 1 unit if you were already in profit or stick the extra on if you were behind and hope it gets you back in front.

I will need to do a lot more testing and see if there is an optimal way to play it. My early thoughts are that it looks promising enough. Who knows, maybe a few tweaks here and there and it could turn into a half decent bet.

[John Gold]

Hello 

I was reading Mr J's latest method  "stop at 6" and wanted to share this.

It is using my three column approach. Wait for any number from the three columns to appear '3' times in the first cycle of 37 spins and then bet on it until the end of the cycle. DON'T go beyond the first 37 spins.

A programme is attatched. It is simple enough to operate. All you need to do is input the numbers as they come out and it will display the correct markings for the 3 columns and tell you if there is a bet according to the rules above.

If nothing else, it will maybe be useful for anyone interested in studying and experimenting with the three column approach. It sure saves time trying to work things out manually.

cheers.

[attachthumb=#]

[johnd147]

Hi John

Very interesting but also very complicated, may I ask you what is your reasoning behind this method, why should it work?

May be I'm missing something but it looks just like a different way of picking numbers to bet on.

I have only just found this site but have studied roulette since 1980 with a view to beating it and have made a living at it since 2002.

Took me 22 years on and off testing systems that I have invented until eventually I came up with the right one.

Even so there are days when it can lose no system is infallible as we all know, but the one strict rule that I impose on myself is this.   I play 3 times a day and my target is £50 each session, but if I go £25 down I pack in immediately.

This means that to every 2 losing sessions I only need one winning one to catch up.

Good luck to you hope it keeps on working.

[medo]

Hi John

Very interesting but also very complicated, may I ask you what is your reasoning behind this method, why should it work?

May be I'm missing something but it looks just like a different way of picking numbers to bet on.

I have only just found this site but have studied roulette since 1980 with a view to beating it and have made a living at it since 2002.

Took me 22 years on and off testing systems that I have invented until eventually I came up with the right one.

Even so there are days when it can lose no system is infallible as we all know, but the one strict rule that I impose on myself is this.   I play 3 times a day and my target is £50 each session, but if I go £25 down I pack in immediately.

This means that to every 2 losing sessions I only need one winning one to catch up.

Good luck to you hope it keeps on working.

---Playing 3 times a day does this means on line casinos??

[johnd147]

Yes these days it is, I used to travel around many different casinos so as not to visit the same one to often.

[John Gold]

Hello John,

Welcome to the forum  

It is great to hear that you are having success at the game.

Somebody once said that ideas are to be used as an 'analysis tool' rather than as a fixed mechanical system.

I tried to get this point across earlier in the blog by showing many different ways to crunch the numbers.

The last few ideas were an attempt to tackle the 'rule of the third' idea. They are frankly a step backwards because they rely too heavily on gamblers fallacy. Sometimes I think we all go a few steps backwards in order to try and move another step forward.

It is my opinion that the most important element required to be a successful player is timing.

I am looking forward to reading your future posts and wish you continued success.

[johnd147]

Hello John

Yes over the years I have taken 2 steps forward and 4 steps back many times lol.

I wish I had found this site years ago, as I love reading about peoples ideas and systems on the game of roulette.

I have a system that works and makes me a living on roulette, It took me about 22 years to finally arrive at it, I almost gave up the fight so many times and thought to myself many times that the game cant be beaten. 
One thing that kept me going was that I had read the book "Thirteen against the bank" by Norman Leigh and after having practised his method I hit my local casino to try it out.  I was about £120 up and I was suddenly aware of someone behind me looking over my shoulder.  I looked round and it was the manager he said I'm sorry but you will have to stop playing, I said whys that, he said your playing reverse labouchere, I pretended I had never heard of it and said what do you mean.  I can tell by your notes he said, so sorry but you can play any other method but not that.

I was 19 years old then (Nearly 52 now :-(  ) but when I got home I thought to myself that one day I'm going to come up with my own system that no one will know about, little did I know it would take me 22 bloody years lol.

Regards

John

[medo]

--Well congratulations Johnd......am sure you will get
  lot of PMs after your statement.

[WARRIOR]

They said to you to not play the reverse lab hmmmm.

[John Gold]

Time to get back to what really counts in my opinion and that's the art of timing.

I shared what I consider to be a long term winning method on this blog starting on page 5.

Here is a quick session I played tonight.

10.
--
6.
5.
9.
12.  1/2/7. WON.
7.  1/2/8. LOST.  (GROUP 2)
11.  1/2/8. WON.
1.  3/5/8. WON.  (GROUP 1)
11.  5/6/8. LOST.
3.  5/6/8. LOST.  (GROUP 3)  (MISSING GROUP 4)
10.  5/6/8. LOST.
9.  5/6/8. LOST.  (GROUP 3)  BET STREETS 4,7,9,10. +8.
10. (10) 5/6/8. LOST.
1. (3) 5/6/8. LOST.  (GROUP 3) BET STREETS 1,2,3,11,12. +7. (+15)
2. (1,2) 5/6/8. WON.
9. (5) 6/8/12. LOST.  (GROUP 2) BET STREETS 1,2,4,7,9,10. +6. (+21)
4. (4) 6/8/12.

You would need to go back and start reading from page 5 to get an understanding of what's going on here if you are unfamiliar with it.

Group 1 = WIN/WIN (opposite = LOSS/LOSS)
Group 2 = WIN/LOSS (opposite = LOSS/WIN)
Group 3 = LOSS/LOSS (opposite = WIN/WIN)
Group 4 = LOSS/WIN (opposite = WIN/LOSS)

So once the group 4 became the missing group, I was hoping to see the LOSS in the second result of each pair.

I hit 3/3 and decided to quit with a 21 unit profit.

There is nothing really mechanical with this method because it changes all the time going with the flow of what's happening on the wheel.

It only ever costs you 1 bet to try and capture a string of wins.

One progression that seems to suit this method is the "Gr8player" progression. (google it if you don't know it).

A progression should never be an  excuse to bet on every spin. Combining a solid method with a solid progression and using timing as the key will give the player a fighting chance to come out ahead over time.

[johnd147]

Well yes, which surprised me a little bit as Its not an infallible system It relies on you having a good run on one of the EC bets.

Norman Leigh came up with quite a clever system there but one thing that surprised me was the fact that he hadn't realised that if his players had only bet the difference between the 2 bets on R/B or O/E or H/L then when ZERO came in he could of saved a lot of chips, if RED was 120 and BLACK 80 then with his method he would lose 100 but if you bet the diff you only lose 20.

[John Gold]

I am going to set myself a challenge of playing every day at one of the online casinos and see how much profit I  can make before christmas playing the street method. It will be a bit of fun if nothing else.

Betvoyager's No Zero roulette will do for the challenge. They are the only RNG which I would trust playing at.

No doubt they will be ups and downs but I am pretty confident of coming out reasonably ahead.

I will post the daily results here in the blog.

[medo]

Well yes, which surprised me a little bit as Its not an infallible system It relies on you having a good run on one of the EC bets.

Norman Leigh came up with quite a clever system there but one thing that surprised me was the fact that he hadn't realised that if his players had only bet the difference between the 2 bets on R/B or O/E or H/L then when ZERO came in he could of saved a lot of chips, if RED was 120 and BLACK 80 then with his method he would lose 100 but if you bet the diff you only lose 20.

--Meaning on la partage table.

[John Gold]

2
--
1
12
8
11
5
9  2/7/10. LOST.
3  2/7/10. WON. (GROUP 4)
4  7/10/12. WON.
3  7/8/12. WON. (GROUP 1)
3  5/7/8. LOST.
2 (2) 5/7/8. WON. (GROUP 4)
9 (7,9) 1/6/8. WON.
5 (1,5,8) 3/4/6. WON. (GROUP 1)
4 (4,10,11) 3/6/12.

In this example, groups 1 and 4 are dominating. There are only 4 groups and 2 of them can go on some very long winning runs.

Group 1 = WIN/WIN (opposite = LOSS/LOSS)
Group 2 = WIN/LOSS (opposite = LOSS/WIN)
Group 3 = LOSS/LOSS (opposite = WIN/WIN)
Group 4 = LOSS/WIN (opposite = WIN/LOSS)

So you can see looking at the above chart that you are guaranteed a win in the second result of each pair should the 1 and 4 group keep appearing.

You need to be prepared to switch over playing for the WIN or LOSS depending on what the wheel is throwing up.

It's not easy at first but you do get used to it and it eventually becomes second nature to identify all the different betting options that are available.

[John Gold]

-