The > BlackPearl Double DZ/CL Strategy < Enjoy !!!

[Bayes]

First, I would like to see your face if you will stubbornly bet on sleeping dozen the whole fib progression if the dozen sleeps for 25 spins?

This does happen of course, but it's not that common. And as the stated progression only runs to 10 steps, and you are increasing the stake on the sleeper (or is it the non-sleeper? - still confused) beyond a certain point (which acts as a form of damage limitation) then this serves to soften the blow when it occurs. And of course, it will. The only thing which matters is - does the system make a profit overall in the long term? not necessarily every session.

[BlackPearl]

Dear friends/colleges,

Here is the example, You have asked for ...:

BASIC RULES:

A)  -1-   =  Basic Bet Unit, Your standard Chip size, should be as low as possible
B)  1,2,3,5,8,13,21,34,55  =  Progression according Fibonacci Nb Line ( I don`t use 1,1,2,3, etc.)
    This Prog is used first on the SD (Sleeping DZ), Later on the LD (Last DZ),
    if needed also on the TD (Third DZ, can be pulled along later). Described below.
C)  Bet always adequate sum on ZERO to cover it. Start here with -1- on ZERO,
    when there are more then 15 usd/euro on the table. Enlarge, as needed.


=================================================

In our Example 1  we use the THIRD DZ as the SD (Sleeping DZ)

START SEQUENCE:

1)  START SIGNAL for DAILY SESSION:   One DZ (the THIRD ONE, 25-36) sleeps for 5-8 times
2)  You place -1- on the SD and -1- on the LD

Here we go:

12
18
1
23
14
6
23
9

START SIGNAL:  You place -1- on the SD ( 3rd) and -1- on the LD (1st)

19          -1-  on LD (sec),   -1- on SD (3rd),     bet: -2-     total loss,     bilance:   minus -2-
4            -1-  on LD (sec),   -2- on SD (3rd),     bet: -3-     total loss,     bilance:   minus -5-    
3            -2-  on LD (1st),    -5- on SD (3rd),     bet: -7-     part loss,     bilance:   minus -6-
31          -1-  on LD (1st),   -8- on SD (3rd),     bet: -9-         Win            bilance:   plus    -9-

RESET the BET:
Place again -1- on the SD and -1- on the LD
This will be  -1- on SD (3rd, 31)  and  -1- on LD (sec, 19), see above numbers    


Now you don`t need a Start Signal anymore for this daily session! - Just go on...
IMPORTANT: Stop at Winning goal or at your Stop Loss goal.

==================================================


I am sorry, cannot explain it better in English language...

Sincerely,
ROLF  

[Bayes]

Thanks Rolf.  

BUT -

RESET the BET:
Place again -1- on the SD and -1- on the LD
This will be  -1- on SD (3rd, 31)  and  -1- on LD (sec, 19), see above numbers    

Doesn't the SD (the sleeping dozen) now become the 2nd dozen because it hasn't hit in the last 3 spins?
And the LD (last dozen) is now the third dozen isn't it? (because 31 was the last number to hit)

But you have it the other way around...

[bombus]

Yes Bayes, I think it's the other way around.

Anyway from the example we can see that each dozen pulls its own progression along seperately with a re-set of both progressions when an overall profit is reached, or win goal/stop loss is reached.

[BlackPearl]

Dear Bayes,

I understand Your point, but I think....

You are pointing to the STARTING SIGNAL for the Daily Session!
quote:
START SEQUENCE:
1) START SIGNAL for DAILY SESSION:   One DZ (the THIRD ONE, 25-36) sleeps for 5-8 times

After the ONE START SIGNAL for the Daily Session there is NO start signal anymore.

OK, You can use one, if you want, but this is your personal decision then...

Sincerely,
ROLF 

[BlackPearl]

Dear Bombus,

You are very correct !

THX a lot for your contribution !!

ROLF

[Bayes]

Rolf,

Can I just clarify what you mean by the "SD"?

Is this the dozen/column which has hit least since you started the session OR the dozen which is "furthest back"?

In your example, at the reset point:

12
18
1
23
14
6
23
9

19
4
3
31 <= reset here. "Furthest back" dozen is now the second (no. 19).

If you interpret the SD as "furthest back" then at this point it is the second dozen. But if its the dozen which hit least since the session began, then it's the third dozen. But even if this last interpretation is the correct one, I still don't see why you have selected the LD as the second dozen, when the LD (the last dozen which hit) is 31, which is the 3rd dozen.

But then, this means that the SD and the LD are the same....

 

Sorry... we'll get there in the end!  

Communication can be difficult, even when people do speak the same language. Thanks for your patience.

[buffalowizard]

The way I interpret it is this:

LD is the dozen just hit
SD is the farthest back dozen so:

13
23
31  - bet D3 and D2
2    - Loss. bet D1 and D2
16 - Win bet D2 and D3
32 - win bet D3 and D1
12  - win bet D1 and D2
19  - win bet D2 and D3
8    - Loss bet D1 and D3 (furthest back)
3   - win bet D1 and D3
33  - win bet D3 and D2
15   - win bet D2 and D1
12  - win etc etc

[buffalowizard]

    Not sure if this is right, let me know Black Pearl!

20     
11    D1 AND D3 
3      WIN  D1 AND D3
30    WIN D3 AND D2
17    WIN D2 AND D1
29    LOSS D3 AND D1
0      LOSS
20    LOSS D2 AND D1
22    WIN D2 AND D1
29    WIN D3 AND D1
13    WIN D2 AND D1
6      WIN D1 AND D3
5      WIN D1 AND D3
11    WIN D1 AND D3
7      WIN D1 AND D3
15    LOSS D2 AND D3
9      LOSS D1 AND D3
14    LOSS D2 AND D3
7      LOSS D1 AND D3
16    LOSS D2 AND D3
12    LOSS D1 AND D3
35    WIN D3 AND D2
29    WIN D3 AND D2
16    WIN D2 AND D1
28    LOSS D3 AND D1
18    LOSS D2 AND D1
0      LOSS D2 AND D1
24    WIN D2 AND D1
11    WIN D1 AND D3
2      WIN D1 AND D3
6      WIN D1 AND D3
5      WIN D1 AND D3
19    LOSS D2 AND D3
15    WIN D2 AND D3
12    LOSS D1 AND D3
2      WIN D1 AND D3
34    WIN D3 AND D2
24    WIN D2 AND D1
16    WIN D2 AND D1
29    LOSS D3 AND D1
32    WIN D3 AND D1
17    LOSS D2 AND D1
7      WIN D1 AND D3
4     WIN D1 AND D3
3      WIN D1 AND D3
4      WIN D1 AND D3
19    LOSS D2 AND D3
11    LOSS D1 AND D3
10    WIN D1 AND D3
4      WIN D1 AND D3
7      WIN D1 AND D3
27    WIN D3 AND D2
28    WIN D3 AND D2
28    WIN D3 AND D2
8      LOSS D1 AND D2
26    LOSS D3 AND D2
27    WIN D3 AND D2
3      LOSS D1 AND D2
14    WIN D2 AND D3
26    WIN D3 AND D1
1      WIN D1 AND D2

[BlackPearl]

LD = Last Dozen = the DZ, which was hit by the last ball (some seconds ago...)

SD = Sleeper Dozen = the DZ, which is lying back most/ farthest back . . .


Sorry, friends, but I have explained everything in detail. Please read it over again, it`s worth that work!
I can do/write it not better, because my mother language is german and I will not pay for a translator ...

btw, my english is not that bad... 

Greetings
ROLF

[BlackPearl]

Dear Buffalo,

congrats, you got it !!!

Please apply now:

1) adequate ZERO bet ( when more then 15 usd/euro are on the tableau)
2) the FIB Prog ( separate on both choosen DZ )

then it´s perfect... 

Please cooperate with Bayles a bit, because I am at my dead end now
with explaining this very effective and nice to play strategy!

THANKS greatly for Your understanding and patience!!!

Always Yours
ROLF 

[BlackPearl]

If Someone wants to talk through SKYPE about that Strategy,

my SKYPE name is:  Infinitetruthkeeper


ROLF

[buffalowizard]

I'm ok at understanding systems and testing them. Its the profit/loss I'm not too great with.

I can't work out if the above session would have ended in profit...any ideas?

[Bayes]

I can't work out if the above session would have ended in profit...any ideas?

Since your longest losing run was only 6, I'm guessing it would have been profitable.

Thanks again for your patience Rolf.  

To code a system you need to think like a computer - ie; very stupid.  
I wouldn't want to misinterpret the system and then declare it a loser after coding it. I'd prefer to get it right, and then declare it a loser.  

Just kidding.

BTW, please keep posting your results. Still waiting for that losing session... 

[buffalowizard]

Since your longest losing run was only 6, I'm guessing it would have been profitable.

Thanks again for your patience Rolf. 

To code a system you need to think like a computer - ie; very stupid. 
I wouldn't want to misinterpret the system and then declare it a loser after coding it. I'd prefer to get it right, and then declare it a loser. 

Just kidding.

Looking forward to your results when its coded Bayes

[buffalowizard]

-