The second time around I won a little more than what was necessary to stay even. In short, two sessions I had not been convinced. It ‘s true I had lost very little and win as much, but at this point it was not worth losing time. I explained it to a friend who occasionally accompanied me in these tours and tried again a third time. Unfortunately it was a complete disaster. But here’s intuition. My friend pointed out to me that the table was the one who had lost more in that session.
So I grabbed the loser of that round I was and if anyone else had played my opposite would have won quite a while. And from there was born the system to two. I told my friend to start playing together. I found an alleged loser and he aimed to turn my exact opposite: a sort of chain of losers! Obviously, having divided the capital into 2, if I was winning he lost and vice versa, we would be always on the same and it did not make sense. So affinai method: whenever I win the bet diminish first of three pieces, then 5, and so on up to the limit of the table, every time you lose instead of two pieces increases the bet. In this way we created the balance: who won risked losing less in case of a sudden negative, while those who continued to lose was to recover more pieces when he reached the lucky shot. At the end of the game, the balance between the two closed in positive and we split the winnings are proud of our game. The method of two-described therefore requires some sort of partnership with another player who bets on our side. The betting instead follow some procedures. We explain this better. For example, if the table limit is a euro. I point red and black partner. Tot 2 euro invested that they will return intact in our pockets after the game. If I lost I raise the next bet of 2 pieces, so point 3 euro red, socio winning 1 euro instead of continuing to focus on black.
If I lose again I found ourselves with a passive 1 piece, then -1. I Ripunto red but this time 5 Ђ (plus 3 first 2 increments) and his partner always 1 euro. I win: the shareholder loses a piece that added to that of the previous budget is -2. 10 pcs them I win then the budget will be a +8. If you’ve lost me again now there would be a deficit of -5 and continurei to raise two. Instead, continuing the first hypothesis, this time I win, then I have to lower than 3 because I won: I play 2 euro (first 5 – 3), my partner who lost tip my hand opposite of EUR 3 because it has increased the initial bet of Ђ 1 + Ђ the two increments.
That this is a coat of transition where you do not win or lose anything and will always remain to +5 because we are aiming the same amount of chance opposite. However, the step is important to designate who will continue to raise it and who will lower your post. Let the last shot, so I think now the example is clear: if he wins the next shot, he and I will point 5 of the table that the limit is one, if he wins even after we have a winning total of 8 pieces that add up to + 8 above, then a total of +16. Otherwise, the member loses, we lose 3 pieces that make us less than the eight to go to a +5 again. This is therefore a system that can do well two if you have a friend or a woman to have a company.