Progressive Stop Start Betting

Basics

Pick 5 numbers.
Start betting immediately after any one of those 5 numbers comes up.
1 chip on each.
Stop betting after 5 losing spins.

     - Between START and STOP you might have some wins or none at all.
     - i.e., 25 chips lost if no wins (1 chip by 5 numbers by 5 spins)
     - Still 25 chips lost at the tail (because after win/s you keep going until 5 consecutive loss spins, then stop)

Now Let's Have a Bloody Bad Day (progressive stakes)

As we saw, the formula is just 5 numbers by 5 spins and keep increasing by 1 chip after losing 3 of these, as in the following example:

Stage One Model (1 chip by 5 numbers by 5 spins)

Lost 25 chips (i.e. we stopped betting after 5 losing spins - 1 chip by 5 numbers by 5 spins = lost 25 chips)
Restart betting after any one of our 5 numbers comes up.
Lost 25 again in start-stop as above.
Lost 25 again as above.
Lost 75 chips so far.
Jeff, never forget those 3 by 25 chip loss "sets". They make up the 75 chip loss.
It's just stop after 5 losses and restart after one of our numbers hits (yes, one of our 5 chips is on the last number which won)
Now we're going to have a real bad day. From here on, we simply repeat the above but increase our bet by one chip each time we lose 3 "sets".

Stage Two Model - 2 chips (same as above, except now 2 chips on each of our 5 numbers)

Actual Play

Write down your cumulative loss (because in real play you usually get a combination of wins and losses, rather than all losses like in the above model)
At Lost 75 chips, increase bet from 1 chip to 2 chips.
At Lost 225 chips, increase to 3 chips.
At Lost 450 chips, increase to 4 chips.
At Lost 750 chips increase to 5 chips.
At Lost 1125 chips, increase to 6 chips, etc…
Like I said, a real bad day and it might take another day or so to recoup.

Note: don't be tempted to use that formula for something else. It's designed (or at least based on) by Martin Blakey "for 5 numbers only".

The Experience

In some one thousand hours of play (about 40,000 spins) using that formula, I've never had to go beyond 6 chips to recoup my cumulative loss but I suspect this is due to my further refinements plus (and most likely) downright good luck.
Somehow, the 2 chip bet in particular, commencing at 75 chip loss, is the most useful clawback tool I've seen.
Sometimes I knock off before recouping the loss and then pick up from where I left off next day or even next week - no problem.
I tried a lot of different logical stuff over many years before I got onto this formula. This is about as good as it gets as far as I can figure out.
My play rarely exceeds 3 chip bet, and more often than not it's just a 1 chip affair before I grab my target win and run, as follows.

Refinement - Cash Management

My target is always 100 chip win. That done, I hit another table and start all over again.
I ruthlessly quit when I win 100 chips, even if it means snatching my winning chip from the table if that chip makes up the 100.
Conversely, I play on with any spare chips over my 100 target (but mostly lose it while occasionally going on for a big big win but never touching the 100 initial win)
I double up on my winning bet, so the outlay is always 5 bets on 5 numbers.
The double up approach somehow seems to be a cumulative investment toward either recouping or gilding the target win.
I waited for two wins within 5 spins before I commenced betting on the two occasions I had to go to 6 chip stakes.

Refinement - Two simultaneous games

I play two entirely separate games of the same system simultaneous.
I.e. one or other of the 2 sets of 5 numbers is usually operative, and often both at once.
Keeping separate score with separate betting progression, etc.
BUT, 100 chip combined profit = target achieved and I quit all play immediately (except for only any spare chips.

Bank

Experience taught me that the safe bank/bet ratio is 250 :1 (to play my two simultaneous games)
So, two games = 10 numbers = 2,500 chip equivalent.
E.g. $5k if playing with $2 chips etc.
I've found I rarely need anything like that sum, but I could not have made my progressive profits without the 250:1 ratio.

Which 5 numbers?

Probably doesn't matter.
For the sake of my sanity, I simply use the first 5 numbers that come up when I sit at the table (at least they are reasonably alive)
Then I adopt the next 5 numbers for my second simultaneous game mentioned above.
I stick with the same numbers come hell or high water until I get my target 100 chips.
But I doubt it would matter if I rotated with different sets of 5 numbers to reach the target.

End Result

Rarely do I leave without 100 to 300 chips ahead for the day.
Occasional bad day outlaying 3 or 4 chips on each number, where it can take up to 10 hours to get the 100 target.
Rare occasions involving 25 hours of play over several days or even weeks to recoup and get the target.
Starting from where I left off (no, I'm not into it full time - it's just a fascinating little hobby)
My records show the progressive stakes earn the profit, otherwise I would be about break even with flat betting.

Table Observation

In watching players, I think I'd rather play my system even on a tiny bank.
I notice most money gets lost in two ways:
1. Chasing numbers that don't come up (many players seem to have an overwhelming fear that their number will come up next spin if they stop play. The same fear seems to also pervade the design of many betting systems.
2. For me it's a bloody marvellous feeling to be able to stop play to ensure that I am at the table when my 5 numbers come in with a gush!
betting on too many numbers - the more numbers we play the bigger the bank we need.
that combination of playing too many numbers (e.g. 2 dozen on the outside) plus continuous nonstop play is disastrous from what I've observed

Go to Systems and Downloads: Sistemas y Descargas.

Go to 302 Roulette Systems: 302 Sistemas de Ruleta.