Here's why I think the Star system is better than a Martingale.
The following is the progression line I use for the Star: 1-1-1-2-2 | 5-10-15-25-35. Ten losses in a row costs you 97 units. Pretty rare but does happen else this could be the HG which it's not.
The 1st 5 bets (1-1-1-2-2) are a parlay so you must win two bets in a row or move to the right one step. Two wins in a row on these 5 bets nets you a profit.
The second set of bets are not parlays. You must still win 2 times in a row, but you stay alive if you win the 1st bet and lose the 2nd bet because you break even and can play that level again. As long as you don't lose the 1st attempt you don't have to move to the right. This means you can have, technically, an infinite number of bets as long as they are WLWLWLWLWLWLWLWLWLWLW etc... This gives a little more of an advantage to the Star system over a martingale. Maybe not much, but more than you're allowing in your posts.
Think about it.
GLC
The following is the progression line I use for the Star: 1-1-1-2-2 | 5-10-15-25-35. Ten losses in a row costs you 97 units. Pretty rare but does happen else this could be the HG which it's not.
The 1st 5 bets (1-1-1-2-2) are a parlay so you must win two bets in a row or move to the right one step. Two wins in a row on these 5 bets nets you a profit.
The second set of bets are not parlays. You must still win 2 times in a row, but you stay alive if you win the 1st bet and lose the 2nd bet because you break even and can play that level again. As long as you don't lose the 1st attempt you don't have to move to the right. This means you can have, technically, an infinite number of bets as long as they are WLWLWLWLWLWLWLWLWLWLW etc... This gives a little more of an advantage to the Star system over a martingale. Maybe not much, but more than you're allowing in your posts.
Think about it.
GLC