SYSTEMS

THE CONVERGENCE OF PROBABILITIES

Overworking the equiprobability of two chances (the bank is the favourite) they created hundreds of systems, som eof which were very expensive and/or linked to some more or less accurate softwares

we know many kind of system, and both the scientific and theoretical evidence pointed out that overworking these system we do not have anuy advantage. In other words it would seem that the equiprobabiltiy of chances is not enough to break into the game room fortune.

In spite of this, some great European experts, (some of those belong to our team!) are working unceasingly on this subject, and we think this experts will be able to loudly beny what we are saying.

The majority of these studies, base itself on the theory of a great scholar of roulette and Trente et Quarante, Marigny de Grilleau

In the following lines we are going to analyse his technique, applied to the Point Bank. this method is looking for a probabilities convergence.

LET'S EXAMINE SOME "RULES"

1) 1) We will not use classic simple "chances", but we will consider GROUPS (of any kind) and INTERMITTENCES as opposite chances. We will also take into consideration separately, if these groups and intermittences appear as SINGLE or as AGGLOMERATE (of any kind).

Example:

1 .P
2 .P
3 .P
4 ...B
5 .P
6 .P
7 .. .B
8 .. .B
9 .P
10...B
11.P
12...B
13 P
14 P


a) numbers 1 2 3 create a G
b) number 4 creates an I
c) numbers 5 6 create a G
d) numbers 7 8 create a G
e) number 9 creates an I
f) number 10 creates an I
g) number 11 creates an I
h) number 12 creates an I
i) numbers 13 14 create a G

We have now, for both G and I, nine ballotages, from which 4 are G and 5 are I.

What does it mean "to bet I" or "to bet A" by practice?

Let's imagine for a while that, up to the 14th blow, the system suggests us to bet I.(It's just an example). How can we play in I? We just wait the G to stop with the appearance of the Bank and we bet POINTER (In this case the Bank previously came out, will create a I).

In the same way, if up to the 14th blow the system aggests us to play for A. How can we play this chance? We just wait the G to stop with the appearance of the Bank and we bet BANK again (in case of winnings two Banks will create a G).

Refering to the above example, considering S and A, we notice the following situation:
Letter a) single blow (G)
Letter b) single blow (I)
Letters c) and d) agglomeration (G)
Letters e), f), g), h) agglomeration (I)

We can't classify letter g),because if in the following numbers there will be an intermittence, g) will be a single blow, otherwise it would be an agglomeration.

2) 2) Let's use discards at least of three times the square root of ballotages. (As "ballotage" we mean appearances of G and I or S and A; for example a series of 10 R wont be seen as ballotage, but as a single; in facts it creates a G);

3) 3) Let's use a number of discards created by a number of ballotages between 20 and 40, the scholar thought them to have a better compensation power;

4) 4) The attack must be suspended once we obtain one piece's profit. In any case if we do not obtain it up to the 5th blow, it's better to suspend the attack without considering the cash-desk condition.

EXAMPLE:
Let's imagine to find in 25 ballotages (number who satisfies the 3rd condition) 20 G and 5 I. The discard will be: 20-5=15. The square root of 25 is 5; 5x3=15. So our discard is 3 times the square root of considered ballotages. 2nd condition satisfied.

ATTACK CONDITIONS
It is necessary that results (5, in the example) of the deficient modality (I, in the example) appear as S. In our example our intermittences must be all single, creating no agglomeration.

In these conditions we can find the convergence of 2 discards:

discard between I and G
discard between A and S

Now it's time to wait for an agglomeration, of 2nd or 3rd degree, of the deficient chances (I in the example). If A (Agglomeration) degree will be more than 3, it would be better not to play.

Let's notice: "Agglomeration degree"means the numbers of chances we can find on it. For example: RRRNNRR.

As soon as we run into one or more groups or more, we wait the next I. Now we are going to play for an agglomeration of intermittences, we'll play for the formation of I.

If we win, our attack will be considered finished and we will find, in the same roulette or in other machines, new game chances. Otherwise, if we lose we'll wait for another I, and we're going to play for the formation of a group made by I. We continue in this way till we have one piece's profit or up to 5 blows.

Let's notice: If some sinlge "I" will appear while we're waiting for an agglomeration of "I", our system can lose effectiveness. We'd play again only when we'll find a primer (the agglomeration of previous 2 or 3 intermittences). Without considering this primer, G and I will still belong to the discard (discard as 3 times the square root of the number of ballotages).

Contrary to the roulette we have to play ALWAYS AND ONLY TO FIND THE BANK AGGLOMERATION, which, being more probable, will able to agglomerate in an higher measure.