Proof of a HG

[NoBody]

Hi guys,

How does someone prove that he or she has the HG?

There is no way to prove it unless he or she share it out.

The best proof is others can experience and duplicate the winning result the creator claims.

By showing pictures of drawings or profit is never enough.

If we can learn and experience the same experience (winning). Then that is proof!!!

It will shut ever one's mouth up.

But so far, no one has done that.

No one can share his way of winning and let others duplicate it (win).

Why?

Why can you win but not teach other to win?

Why you are winning and others are losing?

Why using the same system gets different result? (some win , some lose)

Why do we ask for proof?

Generally is so that we can believe you and spend more time on you.

But in 99% our time were wasted. The 1% we gain is " Yes! I have found another way to lose ( another way that don't work)

Thomas Edison tested many different kinds of material in creating the light bulb....each failure has a small gain, telling him which material is not suitable. In the end, he found the filament.

I believe in God, but I can not prove that God exist.

I believe in the HG, but I don't have proof that it exist.

Ok, so far my research in roulette, I have found the Devil or the 100% losing bet!

Bet on all numbers 0,1,2,3....35,36.....(37 numbers) you get a loss every spin!

The opposite? Don't bet at all, you stay even ( even = win) every spin!


All the best to you all!

Regards,
NoBody ^.^

[Mr Chips]

I think that the constant search for a HG is misleading, as supposedly it should win 100% of the time and we all (lets say most of us)
know this is a nonsense.
 
The best we can aim for is a system that can make a consistent profit over time. If someone has such a system and it works well in a
number of b & m casino's and the system makes a consistent profit month after month, year after year, then really  he or she has
nothing to prove, as they know they have not only made a profit but overcome the house edge.
 
The question as to why someone can win and not teach others to win comes down to fact that most people want an easy way to win.
 
I personally don't believe that there is an easy way, but I won't criticise someone for trying, as I had to find out, when I first started playing
roulette many moons ago.

Most people hate or can't be bothered to master a complicated system or worse still try to simplify the system in the hope of easy wins!
 
In the Mr Chips section I am endeavouring to prove that the maths and gamblers fallacy relating to roulette is false and if I succeed then
my system is proven to win in the long term, as far as I am aware, there is no other way to prove it.
 
Mr Chips

[Diarmaid]

Someone here said the key to winning is "not to lose when you are not winning"

In my opinion that is the key to winning long term.

Any system that uses a huge progression will never work long term as some day you will have a bad run and lose everything.

Flatbetting with VERY MILD positive and negative progressions is the best way to go I think.

Cheers
D

[Marven]

W2ua5Y  <a href="hxxp: zocorpqaptpr. com/">zocorpqaptpr</a>, ddnswwfikprw, [link=hxxp: srekcxnhixfi. com/]srekcxnhixfi[/link], hxxp: trmhmlxtlhys. com/

[Diarmaid]

Amen to that, friend.

Progressions look impressive in the short run.
They make you think that the bet selection doesn't matter much as the progression will enable it to win. Evidently, nothing could be further from the truth.

After some experience with all styles of playing this game, I can tell you: Spike is right, bet selection is everything.

Bet selection doesn't necessarily mean the triggers/method itself, since the triggers/method/system you're using can be only implemented as a mere tool to chart the random flow with. The key doesn't lie in it but in how you're going to interpret the data flow it produces and decide where and when to place your next bet. To me, THAT is bet selection, not the actual system/method.

Assuming your bet selection can win flat betting, you can chose to stick to flat betting (like I mostly do), or implement a MILD (never aggressive) staking plan.

P.S. The reason why I personally mostly prefer flat betting is that I found that, to ME, the win ratio (session bankroll requirement / average win per session, or in other words: How many sessions does it take you to double your bankroll) using flat betting is somewhat better than when using the staking plans I tried, plus you would never have to worry about table limits, etc.

Double Amen!! to you,

it took me a long time to realize it but aggressive progressions make you go broke and also massively restrict your ability to use large unit values.

Cheers
D

[Spike]

Someone here said the key to winning is "not to lose when you are not winning">>

I said that and it is the key. I do it every time I play and its boring as hell but when you start winning again, there is no pit to climb out of, so its worth it.

[pins]

the best way is to have a good memory. after playing for a few hours you get a sense that a number is about to play. i can not teach you this. back only single numbers. if youre bank roll is about 200 dollars. patience  is your best weapon. i have got down to my last five dollar, and walked away winning.  do not think about the outside only the inside. playing safe is for suckers.try to win 50.100.or two hundred a day. here are a few pointers . if eight plays back the 17. and vice versa. and the numbers along side. 17.25.26.27.34.6. or8.11.23.30. after a wqhile winning is easy.

[bali96]

Hi Pins,

You said..."Here are a few pointers . if eight plays back the 17. and vice versa. and the numbers along side. 17.25.26.27.34.6. or 8.11.23.30"

Sorry, but I can see no logic at all to playing those numbers. Would you be kind enough to elaborate on the reasoning behind this statement?

Thanks
Bali

[Spike]

do not think about the outside only the inside. playing safe is for suckers.>>>

Sigh. Here we go. EVERY bet in roulette is EQUAL to every other bet. The straight up numbers, the dozens and columns, the streets, the splits, the corners, the EC's, all of it, EVERY SINGLE BET or combination of bets, is equal. Can't you do even simpleton math? The odds for every bet is equal to the odds for every other bet. Why is hell do you think roulette is so hard to beat? The only bet thats NOT equal is the 1-2-3-0 bet and its HIGHER odds than the rest.

[winkel]

The only bet thats NOT equal is the 1-2-3-0 bet and its HIGHER odds than the rest.

Sorry: 

That´s a simüle corner odd 

[pins]

all bets are equal. but when you have a bankroll of two hundred dollars and you are playing single numbers. two dollars wins you 72. you do not need many hits to be well ahead. as to the 8. 17. watch the board when you go to the casino. it will not happen every time but it will happen. the same patterns happen a lot in roulette.  another example the 4.and the one. it might sound crazy. but it happens. if all bets are equal you should pick a winning number every 37 spins.this is enough.

[Spike]

if all bets are equal you should pick a winning number every 37 spins.this is enough.>>>

And if you do, you're in exactly the same place as playing the EC's. If all bets are equal, how is any one bet for 'suckers'?

[Just_Gabe]

Someone here said the key to winning is "not to lose when you are not winning">>

I said that and it is the key. I do it every time I play and its boring as hell but when you start winning again, there is no pit to climb out of, so its worth it.

Spike, you are THE dude.  As soon as I read that it suddenly came to me something that I don't understand why I never realized in the first place: instead of waiting for a winning streak why not play the other way around and take advantage of the losing streaks?

Seriously, how come that I've never thought about that...? thx for the inspiration!

[pins]

it would take a long time to win big money backing even money bets for small amounts, the bets may be equal but if you want to win big. i would play the single numbers, say i go with a bank of two hundred. i put two dollars on a single number. i would have to put, 70 dollars on the even money bet for the same result. i like to spend a few hours at the table. pick which bet you think gives you the best chance of winning.  good luck.

[Marven]

it would take a long time to win big money backing even money bets for small amounts, the bets may be equal but if you want to win big. I would play the single numbers, say I go with a bank of two hundred. I put two dollars on a single number. I would have to put, 70 dollars on the even money bet for the same result. I like to spend a few hours at the table. pick which bet you think gives you the best chance of winning.  good luck.

You're looking at the payouts and forgetting about the different probability/hit rates of these two bets.

Ok here goes:

Say you're going to bet 70 dollars on an EC bet.
The probability of your bet winning on the first spin and giving you a +70 dollar profit is around: 48.7%

Now say you're going to bet 2 dollars on a single number.
The probability of your bet winning on the first spin and giving you a +70 dollar profit is about: 2.7%

This is basic stuff. An EC bet hits more often, but has a lower payout, whilst a single number bet hits less often but has a higher payout. But If you do the math you will clearly see that, in terms of investment/return/probability ratio, both bets (and any other bets for that matter) are perfectly equal.

The size of your capital does NOT change that and/or make one bet "more profitable" than the other.

[Marven]

-