1 in 3 with 2.

[darrencasino]

I have combined 2 elements of systems off this forum. I do not want to take credit fully for this system.

It seems to work. Why? (don't frown upon me for saying this) but if you discount the the Zero...You have a 1 in 3 chance if you bet 4 streets. If you bet 8 Streets..you have a 2 in 3 chance. If you combine that with a 3 step progression...I don't know the exact maths..but you have a 1 in 3 chance playing 2/3rds of the table.

The Groups of numbers.

Group A

4 5 6
22 23 24
28 29 30
34 35 36

Group B

1 2 3
10 11 12
16 17 18
25 26 27

Group C

7 8 9
13 14 15
19 20 21
31 32 33

No Waiting..you bet AB, BC, AC. It goes round and round and round.

The progression should you miss is

1 unit (at your own choice) on 8 streets win 4 units
3 units on 8 streets win 4 units
10 units on 8 streets win 6 units..

Got bored playing around with it tbh...went to 3rd progression once in a hour..
Won 100 units in 1 hour (decided to stop) (as it hit a milestone and I was bored)

Thought it would be posted here to get feedback and maybe someone test it..or look into
with livewheel results?

*the layout of groups I had written down - must be from this forum as I don't use any other roulette forum*

[poxet pool]

i'll check it here with tnites spins on rapid roulette..about 1/2 hour play
16 AB win
22 BC lose
32 AC win
34 AB win
7   BC win
14 AC win
31 AB lose
12 BC win
3   AC lose
12 AB win
21 BC win
31 AC win
1   AB win
28 BC lose
15 AC win
22 AB win
10 BC win
7   AC win
16 AB win
34 BC lose
13 AC win
6   AB win
4   BC lose
6   AC win
1  AB win

19 wins
6   loss
Yea i can see how boring it gets... to win all the time.. good results for first play..

[kattila]

 The combination you have used with my system (and numbers) give good results also, as my original system.
The problem is that both variants  seem to be  winning in the short term(or long?), but still can earn some money.
Indeed,   -The no wait-  and prederminate series as AB, BC, AC , 3 steep progression ,
or (try this too!) AB, BC, BC / or  AB, AC, AC /      or BC, AC, AC /  or  BC, AB, AB        or AC, AB, AB / or  AC, BC, BC ,
give good results.   Think we did a good job together.
I make some test  ,around  60 spins real wheel, and have a profit  around 100 units.

[Number Six]

I simulated a little over 10,000 bets in excel. There were 6552 wins and 3450 losses. The win rate is 65.6%, as expected. Flat betting the loss would have been 1392. The longest losing streak was ten bets.

[VICLIMKS]

More testing plzzzzzzzzzzzz???

[Number Six]

Eh? I just proved in 10 minutes, with a signifant sample, that it won't work 

[Allin]

With RNG, it won't work.  There is no difference between, picking random 24 numbers and this.  Not sure about live wheel.

[Number Six]

Why would you say it won't work on an RNG but possibly might on a live wheel? Unless you're using a physical approach to the game there is absolutely no difference whatsoever between an RNG and a live wheel.

[Mr J]

FORGET about the "testing" results darrencasino. I like your method, thank you for sharing!  Ken

[Number Six]

FORGET about the "testing" results darrencasino. I like your method, thank you for sharing!  Ken

This is terrible advice, in fact it's criminal. And since when did mechanical systems become "methods"? There is no methodology in it. He shared, I tested 10000 bets and, predictably, it didn't work. It took ten minutes to write a spreadsheet and analyse the numbers from Wiesbaden. The bet selection has a hit rate that represents the expected 24-number value. The progression will bust too many times to profit. There, in a nutshell is the truth. I guess next time I simulate a bet and it fails, I'll just pretend that it's the holy grail to make everyone happy - then hopefully people will go out, play it and lose their shirts. Great. It would be a small price to pay to keep a smile on Mr J's face.

[kattila]

Yes ,it is not a HG, Numbers 6, nobody  said it , and  nobody is forced to play this system, especially with  a start progression from 1 euro.  Just start the 3 steep progression from  0,20  or 0,30 , short sessions 20-30 spins.
As I said before (post 3) this is a short term winner and  we can earn some money.

[Mr J]

"This is terrible advice, in fact it's criminal" >>> Here's the issue.... NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO method will pass a LONG test (not that it means anything to me), so ALL the "methods" posted here would fail LONG term testing (cough). So the purpose of this board would be what? (I have asked that question like 200 times). I expected ANOTHER bias (input) on this thread in regards to testing. Your time put into the testing is great, I have NO problem with that Number 6. TO EVERYONE READING THIS >>> Advantage play (cough) is garbage and a myth and will not work!! It worked just fine in 1879 but NOT now, do NOT fall for the BS. Use methods, study methods, CREATE methods, trial & error, talk things out etc.!!!!!!!!! Also, do not get involved in ANY sort of roulette computers!!   Ken

[poxet pool]

I tried to work this system into the mix of my plays but got a little complicated..so i'll work it out here..
tnites spins"00" live wheel
2   AB win
0   BC lose
8   AC win
12 AB win
18 BC win
8   AC win
2   AB win
26 BC win
14 AC win
17 AB win
32 BC win
34 AC win
22 AB win
19 BC win
23 AC lose
12 AB win
1   BC win
24 AC win
4   AB win
21 BC win
12 AC lose
29 AB win

17 wins
3 loss
i don't know why the mixed results with testings?these are the spins i played on..maybe starting at like 2 to 3 spins later may produce a different outcome? but i would have made a profit playing like so..

[Number Six]

this is a short term winner

Sorry, there is not such thing. A system either wins or it doesn't.

NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO method will pass a LONG test

10k bets is not that long of a test when you're betting every spin.

According to the advice of Mr J, testing means nothing, we should all ignore THAT, and simply invest our time and money in systems we "like". This bet selection is simple and easy to play. It's likeable, therefore in the eyes of the new holy grail framework, this is it. I recant everything I said and apologise deeply for simulating it and confirming the expected. It certainly isn't going to happen ever again.

[Mr J]

Thats a double edge sword my friend. It might be ok to test using NOT TOO MANY spins and if the method holds up, oh, oh thats not enough spins to claim victory. OR, very many spins (800K should cover it) but NO method will survive that many spins. So.....now what?  Ken

[Mr J]

-