Building a system on finals.

[ahlidap]

Finals are nothing more than 3-4 pockets...we could bet a street or this group: 4,13,22,31 and have exactly the same probability.

...

If we were talking about 4 scattered pockets in comparison with 4 continuous wheel pockets that would have a difference.

Final of 4 nrs probability:
4 / 37

4 sector number probability:
4 / 37

....
Thanks for your sharing MickyP

[MickyP]

Some wise words BlueAngel. All told, simplicity is the key here. remembering the groups of finals is easy and tracking them in trends is even easier. Yes. 4 random numbers will work or 4 consecutive numbers on the wheel; I'd like to see you follow these random numbers and identify a playable sequence on the trot (while playing).

Take time to study table trends and then you may understand why you need an accurate record of recent past spins to analyse for a potential start of play. All your questions will be answered as you study the trends/waves. No magic, just random numbers that create pictures.

I think I have avoided over complicating things with my rather simplistic approach.

[BlueAngel]

I do charting myself, however I don't think we perceive results in the same manner.
My objection is not against the time needed, I do take my time, but in analysis...for example when someone sees 32,15,19 could interpret them as 3rd dozen, 2nd dozen, 2nd dozen, while I see 3 hits in a row for a specific continuous 3 sector.
You see 32 and your minds connects it with a bunch of other, unrelated numbers chaotically scattered around the wheel.

Expecting random to express outcomes as probability indicates is completely unrealistic, this happens only in the 10s of thousands of results but we live and we die on the here and now.

For the casino makes sense to play the waiting game, but not for the player.
A bet is good till it's not anymore, you don't know when this happens, the game knows and decides for us...if you think you know better then find out  for yourself if random agrees with you.

Systems are as good as the conditions they serve, when conditions change they are becoming obsolete.
Random is a moving target, a system with rigged rules becomes the sitting duck.
Hitting a moving target is hard, it's dynamically evolves with each successive spin, we should become the betting chameleons, to mimic it in order to defeat it!

[MickyP]

do you suggest chasing a moving target? A static bet in the field of play is more likely to catch a moving target than the chase.

[BlueAngel]

I'm suggesting for a versatile and flexible selection, it makes sense to adapt to whatever the situation might be instead of becoming the sitting duck.

If I would betting 2 dozens or 2/3 of the wheel then I'd employ 1/3 static and 1/3 chasing around, eventually the ball will get caught or be trapped by the static, either way a winner.

[palestis]

I've posted this before and I will post it again.
Marking the finals frequencies in the first 3 blocks (or for as long as it take to see a significant difference),  of the numbers table it is clear that 7 and 8 lag behind.
If you noticed when one of the 2 numbers appears it tends to draw the other number with it. As if there were in a special group of their own.
I've been testing this for 15 years and it never fails to work like this all the time.
The key point is 1)to have a significant difference among the frequencies of the various finals and 2) to quit when in profit.
Then start a new table of frequencies or have one ready simultaneously as you prepare the first one.
Sometimes there is a gap between clustered appearances between 7 and 8, but you can quit betting after 6 bets. And start betting again when one of them reappears.
It's only 6 numbers (7-17-27-8-18-28), and a mild progression will recover  and provide a significant profit when the numbers cluster again.
Or quit while you win and start the process again.
You don't start betting after you determine which numbers lag behind.
You start betting when one those numbers appears. And like a magnet it will pull the other number too.
It requires patience until you find a table that provides this significant difference among the finals of the numbers. But it's well worth it.

[Mako]

Thanks Palestis, did a quick test using sequential single table spins from spielbank Duisburg.  1u bets, progression for new BR high on any hit (highest it saw was 4u x 8 numbers = 32u total bet).

Let it run for 54 spins to develop a relatively large imbalance for two sets of Finals, began betting at spin 55:

SPIN #   LANDED #   
1   4   
2   25   
3   34   
4   8   
5   14   
6   12   
7   32   
8   28   
9   34   
10   14   
11   29   
12   9   
13   31   
14   24   
15   18   
16   2   
17   32   
18   10   
19   14   
20   13   
21   26   
22   21   
23   24   
24   14   
25   31   
26   19   
27   8   
28   27   
29   35   
30   12   
31   4   
32   22   
33   9   
34   33   
35   11   
36   8   
37   17   
38   35   
39   9   
40   8   
41   1   
42   13   
43   3   
44   28   
45   29   
46   35   
47   17   
48   22   
49   30   
50   8   
51   2   
52   22   
53   13   
54   16   
55   23   <---Begin betting lowest two Final groups: 0,10,20,30,6,16,26,36
56   34   
57   3   
58   17   
59   5   
60   20   Win
61   31   
62   7   
63   13   
64   0   Win
65   28   
66   21   
67   26   Win
68   25   
69   2   
70   29   
71   21   
72   16   Win
73   30   Win
74   1   
75   3   
76   11   
77   18   
78   10   Win
79   4   <---Switch to lowest two Finals, new bets: 6,16,26,36,7,17,27
80   15   
81   31   
82   11   
83   26   Win
84   27   Win
85   7   Win
86   3   <---Switch to lowest two Finals, new bets: 0,10,20,30,6,16,26,36
87   13   
88   32   
89   28   
90   21   
91   36   Win
92   17   
93   12   
94   28   
95   1   
96   22   
97   23   
98   29   
99   16   Win

Terminate session, all Finals groups are relatively close in total appearances at this point.

NET: +212u

Worked well, even playing it relatively mechanically, without subjectively evaluating the mini-clusters for bet placing (I basically bet them all as soon as the imbalances justified it and stayed on them).

At spin 79, a third low Finals group replaced one of the initial two low groups, I switched it in, then once it got ahead, switched back again to the lowest two.

Looks good.

[dobbelsteen]

If you had played SSB than you had won 40 units

[ahlidap]

If you had played SSB than you had won 40 units

Hi dobbelsteen,

what is SSB?
Is it this one? https://www.roulettelife.com/index.php?topic=1488.0

[ahlidap]

Tracker for finals here:

http://ahlidaproulette.ddns.net/finals [nofollow]

It uses 37 spin cycle, so only the last 37 results (inputs) are used.

[dobbelsteen]

SSB is my famous system, I have developed  and published it about 35 years ago. It is described and discussed on the forum many times. My Excel program is free available and it is spread all over the world.