@DrTalosConcerning the pair coverage/wagering you say that we have multiple ways to choose regarding a given target debt. As a person who have read quite a lot about your key concepts, I think there's no straight answer to the question which is the preferable path. So we stay, if the question is asked in these terms. However, if we add some context to the question, some choices start to seem better than others. Let me quote you and express my beliefs.

The difference between a system and a recovery is that the system needs a single hit to end a session, while recovery implies several hits to go back to normal expectations, and so to get a profit.

For the recovery to have a chance of a success, it must have few units to recover, and rely on a situation that "must" occur.

The recovery and the system should be, in my opinion, a different way to grab the same target. As you can see, my first 4 spins cover the 1/60 ratio. The rest of the system push a little bit forward to a worst ratio than that. If I do not hit, the recovery kicks in, and in the recovery I need to reach that ratio (or close).

Recovery must rely on bigger picture than the system, or it will not work. When you bet, you are changing your statistics, your probability, your chances. You all have to understand this.

For me, there's a clear distinction between the system and the recovery. I'll give my point of view.

First things first, the system.

As outlined above, to have a realistic chance of pursuing success, the system itself cannot "sink" exaggeratedly because the recovery may not have enough "breath" to restore the bankroll in its fullness. Still, it kind of is our "close range shot in the woods". We want to hit more usually than we miss. To achieve this there has to be a commitment between the numbers played (odds of success) and the debt we accept to develop (if needed).

I don't know to which extend your system goes, but I can say that the first attachment of my prior post was a trial of doing a sort of introduction to the recovery. You mentioned that, when you played 1/60, the first 4 spins covered the ratio and the rest of the system pushed the ratio a little forward. That's exactly what that small parachute does. The first 4 spins go for 1/66 and at the end of the sequence it closes at 1/144.

At this point, odds matter, and matter because we want to hit as soon as possible to avoid recovery. Knowing that, even if we cannot manage to hit, we need to at least try to turn the tables at our favor. The odds of a number coming out are (in a perfect wheel) always the same. It doesn't matter we played a, b, c or x, y, z. The wheel has no memory. Anyhow, let's imagine a coin toss. Respecting the fact that, at each toss, we either guess correctly or wrong, after 10 losing tosses, at the 11th, are we more likely to guess correctly or wrong? Independently of our choice. It doesn't matter if we're always choosing heads or if we're crossing between heads and tails intermittently. I know what you're thinking and therefore you don't need to reply to this.

Do you want another case where you have binomial behavior? We already know that the situation that "must" occur you repeatedly talk about is the wheel very rarely producing a cycle of 37 different outcomes (or 38 depending of the wheel). We either get a set of 37 different numbers or we don't. Ladies and gentleman, binomial probability.

Again, I bow once more towards Sputnik for the fascinating shares here. Conclusion: at the system phase, we need to bet the most numbers we can leaving the less trace possible; small coverage options are not desirable because we want to hit, betting with good to acceptable odds of success.

At the tail of the system it's where we start to show what we're really going after. And the recovery has to know well our target. Being a financial one, the debt, or game-derived, the situation that "must" occur. Ideally, both.

What I managed to achieve, inspired by your lead, is something that goes "side by side" with the system but with as many bullets as the session determines. The coverage we have available at this point depends of how far are we willing to go with the wagering. And even that might vary. After a hit, are our bankroll, total numbers played, spins played, hits achieved (just to name a few) equal to what they were before? I think the posts where I presented this problem translated into a system of equations help to understand how mutable and prone to change this counterbalancing is. The bottom line is that now we have access to multiple hits to restore our balance and at each n numbers (n=60, n=66, ...) we have one more shot.

For all that, I hold that even in the recovery we should try our best to bet as many numbers as possible. A sure thing is that as the recovery gets longer and longer we start to do some "long range shooting". Why does that happen? What limits how wide our coverage can go it's our current session state (debt being the most important variable) and the caps we might have to our wagering. I can mention numerous restraints but there are two that ring a bell:

- at max 1 unit per number (to some extent reminds me of flat betting);

- at max 1% of the original bankroll (or the variant, 1% of the current bankroll).

The main way I got to define how high the "ceiling" is it's neither one or the other. I'll keep it for me for a little longer. I want the members here to get their heads develop things by/for themselves.

As referred previously the recovery has to be alert of the situation that "must" occur. This is a tricky part to explain. Honestly, I think each and everyone here can intrinsically understand what the sentence I have been repeating here a few times symbolizes. I'll give an example though. Let's imagine we are playing with 1/66 only with DSs. After 11 spins there were played 66 numbers. In the carpet there are 11 DSs. What do you think it's more probable? All 11 coming out or a couple of them repeating? Do you think it's a coincidence I've chose that ratio? Just a few questions for the ones with insomnias.

Another shout-out to Mr. Dobbelsteen and his remarkable SSB.Conclusion: at the recovery phase, we kind of are on the same boat as the system when sizing the coverage of our bets, what changes is that now we have multiple steps till profit; we might have a special way though of weighing the price of each bet, since now the game is not static as in the system; who remembers the jellyfish analogy?

A recovery means you need more than one hit to end the session, otherwise is just your system streching out. My suggestion is to keep numbers as low as possible. The total bankroll needed must be low.

I did a quick refurbish on the last quote just to present the ideas in good order for later discussion. The core original idea remains.

I'm quoting this because although I have my certainties, your latest words gave me a question. I hope you haven't become sleepy with all the reading DrTalos.

**In this last quote you say "keep numbers as low as possible". Do you mean units or coverage?** They both make sense if not explicitly stated. I'm asking because it's an idea you reinforced in your post here. Not to mention that you gave emphasis to the split and solo number bets. You even set a question old fashion Talos' style. I'm looking forward to your reply if you take the time to do it.