### Author Topic: SYSTEM WITH FEWER NUMBERS  (Read 2894 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

#### Third

##### Re: SYSTEM WITH FEWER NUMBERS
« Reply #15 on: December 04, 2018, 07:53:41 AM »
We can always identify the numbers that will hit above expectation because they are a mathematical certainty but we cannot identify the gapping patterns which they will manifest on their journey at the top.  I suspect it may become fruitless but I will try and analyze these gapping patterns over the weekend.  I forgot this last Saturday night.  Here is an example:
A number will either hit within 35 spins or outside of 35 spins, either a "+" or a "-".  Since we are only dealing with the top peforming 4-5 numbers, when we see a pattern like ++-, it would seem more likely that a "+" will occur.  Similarly with ++-- or maybe ++-+ etc.
« Last Edit: December 04, 2018, 07:55:28 AM by Third »

#### rimsky

##### Re: SYSTEM WITH FEWER NUMBERS
« Reply #16 on: December 04, 2018, 09:37:09 AM »
Palestis,

to pinpoint hot numbers I start betting them when they hit twice within 12 spins.Every time a number hits twice I add it to a string which can contain max 4-5 numbers, the hottest.Flat betting.
But every time an already hot number in my string scores another hit I add a unit on it. New hot numbers delete the oldest, so the string is always between 1 and 4-5 numbers. If I have no hit for let's say 12-15 spins I could delete the last one/two numbers of the string.But it depends. Hot numbers are not all the same. Some hit burn and quickly fade away, other remain hotover the whole session. I notice that if a number that I deleted hits again later it's a good sign it's a consistenthot number and worth of betting.In your example 16, 8 and 17 look like such these numbers.
« Last Edit: December 04, 2018, 09:43:21 AM by rimsky »

The following users thanked this post: palestis, Third

#### Third

##### Re: SYSTEM WITH FEWER NUMBERS
« Reply #17 on: December 04, 2018, 10:39:07 AM »
There are numbers that simply don't stop being good but all numbers must sleep and get hot.  The good ones just do less sleeping and more hitting.  Any number that ever can be shown to be the top number historically from all observed spins, will never be one of the long term worst numbers at any time in the observed sequence.  About 12 of these such numbers can be observed, which will become a long term list of the strongest numbers no matter how long the sequence extends.  Of these 12, 4-5 of them will be consistently the strongest of all numbers for the entire sequence.
« Last Edit: December 04, 2018, 10:44:05 AM by Third »

The following users thanked this post: rimsky

#### scepticus

##### Re: SYSTEM WITH FEWER NUMBERS
« Reply #18 on: December 04, 2018, 03:34:42 PM »
I remember reading about a guy  who noted all numbers  which had  won while he sat at the table and bet ALL those that had won 3 times . ALL of them ALL of the time   !  Until he was ready to go home.  He said it was overall profitable . Flat Bets .

The following users thanked this post: rimsky, Third

#### palestis

##### Re: SYSTEM WITH FEWER NUMBERS
« Reply #19 on: December 05, 2018, 12:23:17 AM »
Palestis,

to pinpoint hot numbers I start betting them when they hit twice within 12 spins.Every time a number hits twice I add it to a string which can contain max 4-5 numbers, the hottest. Flat betting.
But every time an already hot number in my string scores another hit I add a unit on it. New hot numbers delete the oldest, so the string is always between 1 and 4-5 numbers. If I have no hit for let's say 12-15 spins I could delete the last one/two numbers of the string.
I did a test based on your idea.
30 won after at least 35 spins.
21 won after 20 spins.
34 won after about 30 spins.
20 won in the 3rd spin
13 disappeared.
7 won after 20 spins.
10 won after 25 spins.
32 won right away.
24 disappeared.
23 won after 32 spins.
This is only a preliminary test.
But it seems many numbers come back for the 3rd time well beyond the 12-15 spins that you will play.
As long as they appear before 36 spins,  you either make a profit or recover your money.
Of course the sooner they show up the bigger the profit.
some of the losses from the numbers that never showed up in 35 spins will be made up by numbers that came quickly.
I think the basic idea is good.
But it needs more testing  and tweaking.
Fewer numbers make for bigger profits as long as they show up.

The following users thanked this post: rimsky, Third

#### palestis

##### Re: SYSTEM WITH FEWER NUMBERS
« Reply #20 on: December 05, 2018, 01:06:39 AM »
Another way I have been testing is this:
We wait a full cycle (37 spins ), and mark the numbers that didn't show up.
In the same example in the picture above 2,5,10,12,22,26,28,31, 32,35,36 are missing in 37 spins.
we play each of those numbers only after they show up.
10 came immediately after showing up for the first time.
31 came twice back to back after 15 spins.
26 came back in 5 spins.
2 in 8 spins.
28 in 9 spins.
32 twice back top back after the 1st show. (wow).
28, 10,and 32 all one after the other after 2 spins.
By this time you have a HUGE profit.
You don't need to go any further.
Start a new count for 37 spins.

The following users thanked this post: rimsky, Third, sweaterszn

#### anil26

##### Re: SYSTEM WITH FEWER NUMBERS
« Reply #21 on: December 05, 2018, 06:05:46 AM »
Another way I have been testing is this:
We wait a full cycle (37 spins ), and mark the numbers that didn't show up.
In the same example in the picture above 2,5,10,12,22,26,28,31, 32,35,36 are missing in 37 spins.
we play each of those numbers only after they show up.
10 came immediately after showing up for the first time.
31 came twice back to back after 15 spins.
26 came back in 5 spins.
2 in 8 spins.
28 in 9 spins.
32 twice back top back after the 1st show. (wow).
28, 10,and 32 all one after the other after 2 spins.
By this time you have a HUGE profit.
You don't need to go any further.
Start a new count for 37 spins.

Yes Palestis, I was telling this only
In fact I am playing this for last three days and it's good winnings

But  I play for only three numbers or 4
Then again wait for another 37 full cycle

Thanks

#### ionutpotop

• New
• Posts: 6
##### Re: SYSTEM WITH FEWER NUMBERS
« Reply #22 on: December 05, 2018, 11:17:51 AM »

get une spin from roulette for example if the number 1 comes  put the split 27-30
then  if  number 2  comes play 13-16
if number 3 comes play 21-24
if number 4 comes play 33-36 and so on
every win closes the game returns after 10 20 minutes if you respect  this rule you meke money
good luck

#### palestis

##### Re: SYSTEM WITH FEWER NUMBERS
« Reply #23 on: December 05, 2018, 02:45:46 PM »
Yes Palestis, I was telling this only
In fact I am playing this for last three days and it's good winnings
But  I play for only three numbers or 4
Then again wait for another 37 full cycle
Thanks
Ok. So after 37 spins (full cycle), you mark the unseen numbers and start betting them as soon as each one shows up?
That's what I suggested as a version of the original post.
And it seems to be working very well.
Some of the numbers unseen in those 37 spins don't show up for the second time.
But some others show up and they show up soon enough to make a profit.
As you say the best thing do do is stop when you made a profit and do a recount.
That way you don't have to suffer losses from the numbers that will not show up again.
Also some of those numbers will be showing up frequently, maybe because they start to become hot.
But that means you have to play all numbers as they show up, and keep betting on all of them,  hoping that some will become hot.  But you will also have to play the numbers that will stay cold.
So the best thing to do is stop when in profit. And restart.
You give up opportunities from numbers that will become hot, but you also avoid losses from numbers that will stay cold.
You also have to decide if you will continue betting the number that won,  or remove it from the playing list. That keeps the number that you play, very few like 3-5, otherwise as you add numbers that show up, and keep betting them again the list will grow bigger.

The following users thanked this post: Third

#### GIAJJENNO

##### Re: SYSTEM WITH FEWER NUMBERS
« Reply #24 on: December 05, 2018, 04:19:29 PM »
I like the idea of the system.

I tested 15 sessions, 12 of them was profitable. Summarizing it was +214 units, and I never went under 200 until betting.

My remarks is, after the 37 cycle, when our betting numbers not come up in the early stage to make us profit, later, when we have on 5,6 or 7 numbers chips, harder to generate profit, because we go down quickly. Of my 12 winnings session I often had this situation, and I often felt that it might be a huge losing, but then came up some of my numbers, and I was close to break, or a little bit profit, or not profit.

The following users thanked this post: Third

#### Mako

##### Re: SYSTEM WITH FEWER NUMBERS
« Reply #25 on: December 05, 2018, 06:05:13 PM »
Yes Palestis, I was telling this only
In fact I am playing this for last three days and it's good winnings

But  I play for only three numbers or 4
Then again wait for another 37 full cycle

Thanks

Anil, you can also try a positive progression on the numbers that do wake up, especially if you're only playing 3 or 4 numbers.  You could experiment by staying on those numbers until their second or third hits, with say a 1u-5u-10u progression.

It's amazing when you do large batches of repeater tests how often you see a number hit after it's been dormant, usually in a short span of spins as well.

The following users thanked this post: palestis

#### anil26

##### Re: SYSTEM WITH FEWER NUMBERS
« Reply #26 on: December 05, 2018, 06:53:29 PM »
Yes Palestis, I was telling this only
In fact I am playing this for last three days and it's good winnings
But  I play for only three numbers or 4
Then again wait for another 37 full cycle
Thanks
Ok. So after 37 spins (full cycle), you mark the unseen numbers and start betting them as soon as each one shows up?
That's what I suggested as a version of the original post.
And it seems to be working very well.
Some of the numbers unseen in those 37 spins don't show up for the second time.
But some others show up and they show up soon enough to make a profit.
As you say the best thing do do is stop when you made a profit and do a recount.
That way you don't have to suffer losses from the numbers that will not show up again.
Also some of those numbers will be showing up frequently, maybe because they start to become hot.
But that means you have to play all numbers as they show up, and keep betting on all of them,  hoping that some will become hot.  But you will also have to play the numbers that will stay cold.
So the best thing to do is stop when in profit. And restart.
You give up opportunities from numbers that will become hot, but you also avoid losses from numbers that will stay cold.
You also have to decide if you will continue betting the number that won,  or remove it from the playing list. That keeps the number that you play, very few like 3-5, otherwise as you add numbers that show up, and keep betting them again the list will grow bigger.
Yes Palestis
Stop and recount is better
But I do after winning at least 3 numbers
And then recount
Yes opportunities may be lost, but we have thousands of spins more to come, recount is better
Thanks

The following users thanked this post: palestis

#### anil26

##### Re: SYSTEM WITH FEWER NUMBERS
« Reply #27 on: December 05, 2018, 07:03:00 PM »
Yes Palestis, I was telling this only
In fact I am playing this for last three days and it's good winnings

But  I play for only three numbers or 4
Then again wait for another 37 full cycle

Thanks

Anil, you can also try a positive progression on the numbers that do wake up, especially if you're only playing 3 or 4 numbers.  You could experiment by staying on those numbers until their second or third hits, with say a 1u-5u-10u progression.

It's amazing when you do large batches of repeater tests how often you see a number hit after it's been dormant, usually in a short span of spins as well.
Yes Mako
Can try that, but until now doing well with 3 to 4 numbers and recounting another 37 cycle, just to maintain discipline
But if not make profit within 37 spins for that particular 3 to 4 numbers, i recount and start betting with 2 units but again flat bet and only 3 to 4 numbers
Just once iIhad to do that until now
But the 5th 6th and 7th number came immediately, I could have made profit in that way
But at the end, i think it's a good plan
Just now one session played little differently, that will post tomorrow, thanks guys

The following users thanked this post: Mako, Third

#### palestis

##### Re: SYSTEM WITH FEWER NUMBERS
« Reply #28 on: December 05, 2018, 11:09:40 PM »
In the example below, 8 -10- 11-15-19-23-25-31-33-34-35 are missing in the 37 spin cycle.
We start with 15 when it showed up.
Until 34 came we have spent 8 chips on 15. Then we bet 2 chips ( 15-34).
So we have a total expense of 10 chips, but the 34 gives 36 chips right away. (Net profit 26 chips)
One version is to abandon the number that wins (in this case 34).
So we continue with just 15. we will spend another 15 chips till 25 comes. Which wins in the 3rd spin.
that makes up for the chips spent on 15. (which was doomed anyway).
New numbers make up for the expenses of dead numbers.
The 10 was another doomed number but 8 made up for it.
I think long tests are needed to determine which is the best way to play it.
1. Do we abandon a number that won, or continue playing in case it becomes hot?
2. How many spins do we play per number? Continue indefinitely (what if it is cold?)
Or do we set a number of spins per number and then abandon it, to avoid chasing possible
cold numbers?  (like playing up to 15 or 20 per number)?
3. Do we used some progression? (add another chip to the numbers?)
If we did that after 34 came, then the profit would've been double. With 25 and 8 too.
I am almost certain if long testing is performed those question will be answered.
Also we need to find an average statistical figure, about the most frequent range of spins a missing number will repeat after showing up for the first time.
if it is,  say within 20 spins from the first showing up, then there is no need to waste chips going beyond 20 bets.
« Last Edit: December 05, 2018, 11:20:10 PM by palestis »

The following users thanked this post: rimsky, Third, sweaterszn

#### rimsky

##### Re: SYSTEM WITH FEWER NUMBERS
« Reply #29 on: December 06, 2018, 07:12:12 AM »
In the example below, 8 -10- 11-15-19-23-25-31-33-34-35 are missing in the 37 spin cycle.
We start with 15 when it showed up.
Until 34 came we have spent 8 chips on 15. Then we bet 2 chips ( 15-34).
So we have a total expense of 10 chips, but the 34 gives 36 chips right away. (Net profit 26 chips)
One version is to abandon the number that wins (in this case 34).
So we continue with just 15. we will spend another 15 chips till 25 comes. Which wins in the 3rd spin.
that makes up for the chips spent on 15. (which was doomed anyway).
New numbers make up for the expenses of dead numbers.
The 10 was another doomed number but 8 made up for it.
I think long tests are needed to determine which is the best way to play it.
1. Do we abandon a number that won, or continue playing in case it becomes hot?
2. How many spins do we play per number? Continue indefinitely (what if it is cold?)
Or do we set a number of spins per number and then abandon it, to avoid chasing possible
cold numbers?  (like playing up to 15 or 20 per number)?
3. Do we used some progression? (add another chip to the numbers?)
If we did that after 34 came, then the profit would've been double. With 25 and 8 too.
I am almost certain if long testing is performed those question will be answered.
Also we need to find an average statistical figure, about the most frequent range of spins a missing number will repeat after showing up for the first time.
if it is,  say within 20 spins from the first showing up, then there is no need to waste chips going beyond 20 bets.
As I said I've been playing and testing this kind of systems for the past eight weeks.
It's hard to determine clear patterns in the betting plan, because sometimes you make a big profit with only two-three hot numbers and sometimes you lose even betting on five-six hot numbers. This is not HG.
However, in my view the approach which is developing in this thread points at the very right direction - few numbers, flat betting with possibly a positive progression.
I think the first milestone to put should be consider a win goal/stop loss. For me the best ratio for this kind of systems is +80/-100. If you reach a new high that exceeds +80 you can implement the "guarantee & excess" strategy as explained by John Patrick locking up your profits. But you should stop at -100 and quit your session.
Palestis, as regarding your questions I never give up a number that wins - why should I do that? Instead, if it's showing a regular hitting attitudine I would add an additional chip on it and keep on betting.
How many spin do we bet a number? My tests show that we should insert again a number in our betting "string" if he re-awakes after we delete it. That is, a number that once was very hot never really fall asleep, and keep hitting on a regular basis (in the short-medium period). I remember LOTS of times when I give up numbers that I considered become sleeping and then they hit in the next spins, this happens tons of times. So, if let's say the permanence is showing several hot numbers in a certain cycle of spins I could bet even six o seven numbers. Yesterday session was such a permanence, and I made a profit eventually betting 7 numbers. But generally it does not work this way.
I never use a negative progression. What sometimes I do is: if I lost two sessions in a row, the next session I double the chip unit and implement a hit & run approach in order to recoup (it may well happen both of these: you make a huge profits with the double chip, or you face another drawdown so here the stop loss should be more conservative).
All of this is only my two cents. Sorry I can explain things better because of the language, but that's it.Cheers.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2018, 07:15:05 AM by rimsky »

The following users thanked this post: palestis