There are some basic laws you have to account for in designing any system in roulette.
1. House edge exists, like it or not.
2. Progressions do not work, they cannot eliminate house edge, therefore they are redundant.
3. The results are random in the long run. baised wheels will be fixed, a croupier with a signiture will go home and the guy who owns the RNG wheel will program it to take his money back and yours as well.
4. Looking for patterns within randomness as an answer in itself just because you saw them on the side of an Aztec temple is akin to astrology.
5. Roulette is about mathematics. Specifically stochcastic probability and distribution. The answer lies within that and how you can manipulate the dataset to potentially predict the outcome above the rate of chance. Not to actually expect to get it right all the time.
Futility is repeating the same thing over and over and getting the same result. All of the solutions I have seen to roulette are variations of the same thing.
QuoteAll of the solutions I have seen to roulette are variations of the same thing.
:thumbsup: Some people die without even seeing any solution, and you have seen more than one! Hooray!
QuoteThere are some basic laws you have to account for in designing any system in roulette.
1. House edge exists, like it or not.
or not.
sorry Arteinvivo
I have yet to see a mathematically proven ellimination of the house edge. You may do better than the predicted house edge for a limited time, but if you can't give support of it by math then ultimately it will claim back what it hasn't taken allready.
I say that with one reservation, there is a way to negate house edge though play but it doesn't mathematically elliminate house edge, the edge is still there.
Monte Carlo
Yes, math shows us that eventually we will lose no matter what we will play. But, mathematics also say that earth will be lost in crash with asteroid eventually.
And house edge exists, yes, but we choose when to play and when not, and house edge exists globally, not locally, so we got chance to avoid it if we're careful
Pick the right fruit from the tree and the house edge does not interfere. 8-)
QuoteThere are some basic laws you have to account for in designing any system in roulette.
1. House edge exists, like it or not.
2. Progressions do not work, they cannot eliminate house edge, therefore they are redundant.
3. The results are random in the long run. baised wheels will be fixed, a croupier with a signiture will go home and the guy who owns the RNG wheel will program it to take his money back and yours as well.
4. Looking for patterns within randomness as an answer in itself just because you saw them on the side of an Aztec temple is akin to astrology.
5. Roulette is about mathematics. Specifically stochcastic probability and distribution. The answer lies within that and how you can manipulate the dataset to potentially predict the outcome above the rate of chance. Not to actually expect to get it right all the time.
Futility is repeating the same thing over and over and getting the same result. All of the solutions I have seen to roulette are variations of the same thing.
Hello Mate.
Rest Assured that When I get better.
You & I are going to lock horns over some of those ridiculous statements you have made.
Like This
QuoteFutility is repeating the same thing over and over and getting the same result.
[highlight]That's How a lot of us Win.....the more it Repeats the better it is.....for Time line Players at least[/highlight].
[highlight]And This was the grand Daddy of then all.[/highlight]
QuoteAll of the solutions I have seen to roulette are variations of the same thing.
[/quote]
Your Friend
Lanky
QuoteHello Mate.
Rest Assured that When I get better.
You & I are going to lock horns over some of those ridiculous statements you have made.
HaHaHaHa - Lanky is back.
iggy
Lanky I am always open to intelligent arguement of ideas.
I stand by all 5 of those laws until convinced I am wrong. Please feel free to try to change that.
As for my comment:
"Futility is repeating the same thing over and over and getting the same result. All of the solutions I have seen to roulette are variations of the same thing."
First of all don't decontextualize, both sentences belong together.
Second, I stand by that also. I have yet to see a system that doesn't give me the same answer. A death by a thousand cuts is still a death, it just takes longer to get there.
Monte Carlo
BTW I hope that your health is getting better, I look forward to our discussion when you feel ready to proceed.
Hi Mate
Yes I am Looking forward to our little discussion as well.
As for this
QuoteFirst of all don't decontextualize, both sentences belong together.
I did no such thing......There were two sentences....that need to be addressed separately in my humble Opinion.
The two sentences are
Quote"Futility is repeating the same thing over and over and getting the same result. All of the solutions I have seen to roulette are variations of the same thing."
Unless I am mistaken then there is a full stop after the word (result.)
Then the 2nd sentence needs to be addressed on its own.
If however you feel that would be unfair to You by Me doing it that way.
[highlight]Then You should not have written it.[/highlight]
[highlight]Funny how Victor picked up on the last sentence in a previous post & you didn't whine about that then.[/highlight]
Any way I don't want to start there with you .
I want to when I am a little better start further up your list.
And Thank you for your kind words about my Healing.
I am sure that we are going to enjoy each-others company in the future.
[highlight]By the way Mate how do you play the game of Roulette ?????
VB etc ????
Just a Brief description will do Cobber.[/highlight]
Your Friend
Lanky
QuoteBy the way Mate how do you play the game of Roulette ?????
My
bet is carlo is tracking sequential spins, making a line of events, being a "
timeline player" too Lionel!
He seems to be like a hawk, waiting for the right moment without betting, getting in and achieving target to stop (or in case he doesn't, it still is a recoupable loss, as the bet per attack is not a huge amount of bankroll).
Of course, he doesn't use a progression on his play.
This is what I have grasped, my best bet, but better to let him explain. To me the hints he has provided about his play remind me of something... I have seen that type of phylosophy before...
cut point methodology.
The ball is in your court dear M. Carlo.
Your friend,
Victor
Lanky said:
"Unless I am mistaken then there is a full stop after the word (result.)"
thats in reference to this said my myself:
"Futility is repeating the same thing over and over and getting the same result. All of the solutions I have seen to roulette are variations of the same thing."
That full stop as you refer to it is commonly called a period. In the words before it you will find a noun, a verb and a object (which is also a noun). Together they form a sentence and that requires a period. Another example can be found directly after the period behind the word result. The reason the period is there is because of grammar.
Lanky said:
"I did no such thing (decontextualize)......There were two sentences...."
Yes there is two sentences and as you will also note they follow each other directly to form what is called a paragraph. By definition a paragraph (from the Greek paragraphos, "to write beside" or "written beside") is a self-contained unit of a discourse in writing dealing with a particular point or idea.
Lanky said:
"Then the 2nd sentence needs to be addressed on its own. If however you feel that would be unfair to You by Me doing it that way. Then You should not have written it."
I did as a paragraph. Therefore they should not need to be addressed seperately.
Lanky said:
"Funny how Victor picked up on the last sentence in a previous post & you didn't whine about that then."
this is in reference to what Victor said:
"Some people die without even seeing any solution, and you have seen more than one! Hooray!"
Victor was being tongue in cheek. I have no objection to humor.
what you originally said was:
"You & I are going to lock horns over some of those [highlight]ridiculous statements [/highlight] you have made. Like this"
Which was in reference to the original futility statement. This I would regard as no less than needlessly aggressive.
Now lets wipe the slate clean and start over from the beginning.
Monte Carlo
Welcome back, Lank. Glad to see they didn't cut out that fire in your gut!
Monte, I read it this way: One form if insanity to repeat the same action and expect a different result. If you continually hit your thumb with a hammer expecting a knot to form on your head, you're crazy. In more than one way......... (Tongue firmly placed in cheek."
I relish the thought of two intelligent men debating and the whole forum winning.
Darn, I'm glad I came back!!
Sam
Gees Monte
All I asked was on simple Question...As Below
[highlight]By the way Mate how do you play the game of Roulette ?????
VB etc ????
Just a Brief description will do Cobber. [/highlight]
Mate Fair Dinkum you would make Fred Astaire Blush with the fancy footwork you used to avoid that Question.
And it would appear that the Reducing Volatility Thread is suffering the same fate.
Mate I did not ask for an English or a Greek Lesson.
And Monte Remember this mate You are talking to probably the stupidest person ever to play Roulette.
So I can't Compete with You on an Academic Level.
You are far too clever for me in that regard.
So take it easy on Old Lanky with the big words mate.
See the only word I could I understand in those impressive arsenal of words that You used was the word Period.
Period I Understand My Wife use to get that once a month.
And during that time if the Neighbours cat up the road had Kittens I would get the blame for it.
Or if a bloody bird flew within a 100 mile radius and looked the wrong way at Her I would get the blame for putting the bird up to it.
Even the dog would hide for a week as soon as the 21st of the month came around.
Also during that time she would say some silly things.
Like I was getting aggressive with Her
Or something could not be done because of this & that reason.
In the end and after this Delightful week had passed and the dog came out of hiding I was able to explain to Her why things could work if you looked at it differently & or delved deeper into why it happens because its been happening that way since the 17th Century. She would then consider my side of it.
I hope You don't live Your life on these 28 day cycles Monte.
Otherwise this conversation between us is about to heat up My Friend.
On My next post I will tackle that particular statement of Yours that I found a little out of whack.
But as You said in your last post to Me.
Lets now wipe the Slate clean & start again.
Your Friend
Lanky
Welcome back Lanky, get well soon
Bloom
I am sorry that this has taken so long but I have been Ill and I am sure that You the Forum will Understand the position I have been in.
There are some basic laws you have to account for in designing any system in roulette.
1. House edge exists, like it or not.
Yes Monte there is a house edge.
But it can be drastically Reduced by doing one simple thing.
Lets take the Double Zero wheel for an example.
There are players that Know if you play a certain amount of past spins.
That the 5.26 % is reduced to 1%
Now I am not sure that I have the right to divulge how many past spins do that because this information I think was told to me in confidence.
And the Members here know that I can be trusted with that sort of Thing so You will just have to rely on my good word for the time being until I can check & see If I can reveal the amount of past spins to be played that will cause this to happen.
2. Progressions do not work, they cannot eliminate house edge, therefore they are redundant.
Now if what I said in the above Paragraph (1) above is to be believed.
And believe Me it is a Fact.
Then by adding a slight progression would only increase the chances of Winning.
This is only My opinion.
The Kelly Criterion Betting Plan is the most favoured I do believe.
Better known as the Kelly Betting Plan
And some of these people can bet more in one bet then I win in a Year.
Now I think most people who know me would say that I am proficient with the use of the Divisor Plan.
I can use it from 2/3/4/5/6/7/8/9/10 Divisors >>to whatever I need to do with it.
Its like a tap for me I can turn it on & off any Time I want to.
Eg:
I can Turn it off when the bad times are around &
I can Turn it on when the Dispersion of hits favour Me at the time.
And there has been odd times when I could not win & I simply just left Not winning & sometimes not losing either.
But providing that I have kept my wits about me and not started off with betting too big at the beginning.
In the end I will win.
It might take me 2 or 3 sessions but in the end I will grind out a win.
Last Year on the RR Forum I had the pleasure of doing a test with Ronjo on His Due Group Numbers.
He sent me an Email during the test to tell me he could see that a certain 12 number Group had fallen asleep but He would continue to bet them knowing they would lose so that the Forum could see how powerful the plan was and how quickly the progressive betting plan He was using would recover even under bad times.
He did what he said & it was truly amazing to see exactly what He said unfold before my Eyes.
So No I don't agree with you about progressions being Redundant.
Its knowing when to disable them & if need be take a loss that matters My Friend.
Now Before people Come jumping out of the woodwork.
There are people who I know that do win Flat betting certain numbers.
Ronjo>>He can do Both
Herb
Ray
And it would appear Your good self Monte. Plus more that I have missed putting down here.
They Can all do it but those people are betting certain amount of numbers straight up.......and good on them.
But for us people that mainly bet on 18/19/24 + Numbers it is my belief that we need to play with a slight progression.
3. The results are random in the long run. baised wheels will be fixed, a croupier with a signiture will go home and the guy who owns the RNG wheel will program it to take his money back and yours as well.
About Bias Wheels.This is just not true Mate .
You Might believe it as will others but its not True.
There are & have been in the past Brand New wheels which can be & are Bias.
It don't bother the Casino as long as they are winning with them.
If The casino's are winning they will simply let it go.
There was a well documented event about this in America.
Which was in the Newspapers & even made the Television Years ago.
The particular Casino barred some players for playing a certain wheel.
Thanks to the good information the reporter received.
He chased it up with the Gaming Commission.
The Casino In question was Fined a Hefty sum of money by the Commission & was told to smarten their act up or lose their license.
The said Players were again allowed back in.
About Dealers signatures.
I have made it a practice to study this a lot over the last year.
And as Kimo Li Pointed out in His Global Pie Method.
The Small Black & the Big Red Numbers are to the right of a single Zero wheel.
And
The Small Red & the Big Black Numbers are to the left of Zero.
I have seen one side hit
23 at Dublin bet
19 at Airball
18 at Star City
17 at Video Roulette.
It did not matter if there were dealers or Not.
In fact I have seen Dealer changes & the same side still hit.
Just go to Spielbank And You can see this happen everyday.
Maybe not to the extent I have put here but you will see plenty that you haven't seen before if you have not noticed this in the past.
4. Looking for patterns within randomness as an answer in itself just because you saw them on the side of an Aztec temple is akin to astrology.
Funny That you have said this because Victor once said that the Lw patterns that he plays have probably been there since Roulette began.
I have thought about this a great deal.
And I have to say that I believe That Victor is 100% right.
I don't think that if you take into consideration the following Methods.And the way that people play them.
HERB=Bias+ Visual Ballististics
KIMO LI= The Global Pie Method and all the various ways it can be played.
RONJO= Due Numbers + Visual ballistics
RAY= His own unique way of playing both Live & Rng wheels
VICTOR= The Lw Methods and I mean on any of His Selection Methods.
That we are really discovering anything new that has not been there since Roulette began.
What Might happen is that we may see different patterns that no-one else has seen Yet.
But I would be awfully surprised if they are not part of or are from the same Sectors , Sections , or Methods Used above.
I was present when Victor carved the so called Math experts up about 18 months ago with His Lw Methods on another Forum.
And They Supplied Victor the Numbers.
He did a complete Demolition Job on Them.
To this day They say His methods won't work.
Well I beg to differ.
To My Knowledge Two Cat Sam has never lost with the Lw Method.
To my Knowledge Natural 9 has never lost with it Yet.
I have lost once in 99 sessions.
( And that was my own stupid Fault )
(and to be fair I have broken even 4 times as well)
5. Roulette is about mathematics. Specifically stochcastic probability and distribution. The answer lies within that and how you can manipulate the dataset to potentially predict the outcome above the rate of chance. Not to actually expect to get it right all the time.
Futility is repeating the same thing over and over and getting the same result. All of the solutions I have seen to roulette are variations of the same thing.
This next bit was what I got a bot hot under the collar about.
I have since had second thoughts about it and decided that I may have taken the written words the wrong way.
However I don't know what is wrong about repeating same patterns ??
Its what makes Us the Timeline Players a better then Average chance of winning on those particular Patterns.
We bet when we think the dispersion of numbers from the wheel will favour us.
Take Sam for example.
When he saw the L's starting to form he would simply walk away & let the wheel spin. And when the wheel began to Disperse more W's Then The L's.
Then He would recommence playing them.
Pretty bloody smart is our Samster.
Some 6 months or so ago Victor & I were chatting.
And we discovered that many years ago we both had nearly the same system that we were playing.
Now Isn't that amazing That Two people from the opposite ends of earth had virtually the same system.That they Could get to work.
To this day people will not believe it works.....But it does.
And I will tell you the reasons why or what we had in common.
1) We both had nearly the same system (I may have waited one more spin before I bet )
2) We both had a slight progression that worked even though they were different they both worked in the same manner. They both could be made to bet Higher or Lower Units depending on the dispersion of hits the wheel was giving at the time.
3) We both knew when to Disable both the Betting Plan & the Selection Method. And when to restart the both of them either separately or together.
Your Friend.
Lanky
Lanky, nice to hear from you again. Hope you are doing well in your recovery
Now for our discussion. Where to start? At the beginning I suppose.
(all text within quotes are from Lanky unless otherwise noted)
In reference to #1 (house edge)
[ch8220]There are players that Know if you play a certain amount of past spins.
That the 5.26 % is reduced to 1%[ch8221]
Not true. The house edge remains in this case 5.26% inside any inclusive dataset. Your potential to win may change through incorporation of spins into the dataset that you have not bet on on bets designed to cancel themselves out. This I have never argued against, in fact it is what I base my own work on.
As for the I have information that I cannot divulge, I will leave that alone much as I do flat earth and alien theories. If you should get permission from whomever, please supply me with the mathematical formulas that actually creates this reduction to 1% and we will discuss it then.
In reference to #2
[ch8220]Now if what I said in the above Paragraph (1) above is to be believed.
And believe Me it is a Fact.
Then by adding a slight progression would only increase the chances of Winning.
This is only My opinion.[ch8221]
Not true. Progression doesn't change the odds. It only delays the occurrences of loss. But in doing so it loses in a mathematically balanced way. Only a progression that eliminates the ultimate stochastic event of loss would overcome this.
[ch8220]The Kelly Criterion Betting Plan is the most favored I do believe.
Better known as the Kelly Betting Plan[ch8221]
From what I understand (all of this paragraph) this is a mathematically based system of bankroll management based on logarithmic principles of growth. Its not a progression theory in itself but rather a method of sizing your bets related to odds of success and table odds. It may provide you with what looks like a progression but is not. It increases the size of your bet because your bankroll has grown or the odds change. It is not used as a method of recovering losses. I can see how this would be used in a dynamic odds system like blackjack but not really so much in roulette. Since it is based on math I will look into it a bit more and get back to you..
[ch8220]I can Turn it off when the bad times are around &
I can Turn it on when the Dispersion of hits favor Me at the time.
And there has been odd times when I could not win & I simply just left Not winning & sometimes not losing either.[ch8221]
I don't disagree with this, I have said so much before. When to bet and not to bet is the key in roulette. But you have to include the numbers not bet into the dataset and mathematics of the system otherwise they don't count in the long run due to the laws of large numbers and infinity.
[ch8220]He sent me an Email during the test to tell me he could see that a certain 12 number Group had fallen asleep but He would continue to bet them knowing they would lose so that the Forum could see how powerful the plan was and how quickly the progressive betting plan He was using would recover even under bad times.
He did what he said & it was truly amazing to see exactly what He said unfold before my Eyes.[ch8221]
I will take this to be part of the above secret theory of prior numbers. I would guess that 40 numbers would be about right to do this. It would allow you to check the law of thirds against distribution. Then throw out the first 15 or so and wait for the dataset to return to 40 numbers. Analyze the numbers again then cross reference to the first set. Any numbers remaining outside one standard deviation would be due. With a computer in front of me it wouldn't be hard to do. Problem is starting the computer at the casino.
In reference to #3
[ch8220]There are & have been in the past Brand New wheels which can be & are Bias.
It don[ch8217]t bother the Casino as long as they are winning with them.
If The casino[ch8217]s are winning they will simply let it go.[ch8221]
Minimum dataset to even begin to state this would be in the 5000 range. 5000/30 spins per hour = 166.7 hours. If you spend 3 hours per night 5 nights per week at the casino then it would take you about 11 weeks to decide if it even was biased. By then the casino would have you marked out for your great run on the bank.
[ch8220]There was a well documented event about this in America.
Which was in the Newspapers & even made the Television Years ago.
The particular Casino barred some players for playing a certain wheel.
Thanks to the good information the reporter received.
He chased it up with the Gaming Commission.
The Casino In question was Fined a Hefty sum of money by the Commission & was told to smarten their act up or lose their license.
The said Players were again allowed back in.[ch8221]
Since it was so well reported could you do me the favor and provide a reference to this.
[ch8220]I have seen one side hit
23 at Dublin bet
19 at Airball
18 at Star City
17 at Video Roulette.[ch8221]
The lower three are within statistical odd on any table over a years play assuming 30 spins per hour 24 hours a day. The Dublin Bet is a bit higher 1 in 4 million or once every 15 years per table. Rare yes, impossible no.
[ch8220]Just go to Spielbank And You can see this happen everyday.
Maybe not to the extent I have put here but you will see plenty that you haven[ch8217]t seen before if you have not noticed this in the past.[ch8221]
My point exactly. What do you think they do with these numbers? They use them to make sure the tables are unbiased. They post them because they know it doesn't matter because the tables are unbiased.. Hell you shouldn't be able to find a spot to play there for all the punters with their failure proof bias systems. They are still in business and they made a lot of money last year and every year.
In reference to #4
[ch8220]Funny That you have said this because Victor once said that the Lw patterns that he plays have probably been there since Roulette began.[ch8221]
Of course they have always been there and the planet has been around since before humans discovered it. Lw patterns are a byproduct of the game. Pascal didn't sit there and decide to include Lw patterns in exchange for something else.
[ch8220]I don[ch8217]t think that if you take into consideration the following Methods.And the way that people play them.
HERB=Bias+ Visual Ballististics
KIMO LI= The Global Pie Method and all the various ways it can be played.
RONJO= Due Numbers + Visual ballistics
RAY= His own unique way of playing both Live & Rng wheels
VICTOR= The Lw Methods and I mean on any of His Selection Methods.
That we are really discovering anything new that has not been there since Roulette began.[ch8221]
There something I agree with. Casinos are still making money from roulette and the day they don't they will burn all those tables. A bunch of small time punters are not a threat to them until they can prove that it works. That is what the math is for, proof.
Tell me Lanky have you quit your job and moved into a million dollar mansion with a yacht off the oceanside view and a fleet of Ferrari's in the garage. If your system works it works in small numbers then it works in proportionally larger numbers. I don't know what the table limits are in whatever casino you play. But planes will take you to Speilbank, Atlantic City and Monte Carlo. They have much higher table limits and will even raise them on request. So mortgage the house, kennel the dog and get to a high roller table. If you made 10000 last year on 100 max tables with your system then you stand to make one million in Monte Carlo.
As for the above systems, only Victors show promise. I wouldn't do it his way though, Fold the permutations over on themselves to multiply the dataset for cross reference. The shallowness of modulation should allow you to bet both directions through inversion of the bet criteria.
[ch8220]I was present when Victor carved the so called Math experts up about 18 months ago with His Lw Methods on another Forum.
And They Supplied Victor the Numbers.
He did a complete Demolition Job on Them.
To this day They say His methods won[ch8217]t work.[ch8221]
Could you or Victor please supply me with a link to the above discussion so that I may read it myself.
In reference to #5
[ch8220]However I don[ch8217]t know what is wrong about repeating same patterns ??[ch8221]
My comment is about generally variations of the same system. If the first 200 variations didn't work it is quite unlikely that #201 will. Try thinking outside the box. 250 plus years of searching for the magic pattern that will make chaos readable hasn't worked. If RRBRBR doesn't work than the other 720 permutations based on a arrangement of EC outcomes probably won't either.
Monte Carlo
Hi Monte
QuoteTell me Lucky have you quit your job and moved into a million dollar mansion with a yacht off the oceanside view and a fleet of Ferrari's in the garage. If your system works it works in small numbers then it works in proportionally larger numbers. I don't know what the table limits are in whatever casino you play. But planes will take you to Speilbank, Atlantic City and Monte Carlo. They have much higher table limits and will even raise them on request. So mortgage the house, kennel the dog and get to a high roller table. If you made 10000 last year on 100 max tables with your system then you stand to make one million in Monte Carlo.
Mate I think You Have me Lanky Mixed Up with Lucky.
And due to My health I am about to lose My Job.....Not Quit it
I have never ever professed to being a big better at Roulette.
Quite the Opposite.
I started 14 months ago using Victor's Lw Methods & I tweaked them along the way to suit me.
I started with a $2000 bank
And set out to prove that it would work by trying to win 2.5% or 50 units on average as I went.
In That time the bank has grown to $9006 =$7006 profit.
That is a lot of Money to me Monte.
It Might be a laughable amout to You...But to me its a lot.
I don't put this here to show how clever I am Monte I put it here so that it would would encourage other small betters like me that it can be done.
With plenty of Luck & a lot of Patience.
I will send You a Report that I did at the end of last year By Pm its here on the Forum somewhere.
Maybe Victor can give you the Link to it.( I am Hopeless with Computers)
I will also send you the other information that you requested as it becomes available.
Now Previously You accused me being aggressive with my Replies.
I think the reply Quoted from you.
Is you being the aggressive one and that just fine with me mate.
I think that you are a self Opinionated Big Head who has tried to belittle Me.
You have made out that either I am a Liar or At the very best fanciful with what I say.
I don't have to prove a Bloody Thing To You Mate I have met two People & played Roulette with One of the Members from this Forum on a Few Occasions.
There have been Many Many People from the Forums That I have & still do help to the best of my ability.
I have gone to spielbank and tested & tested with some of those people. I still do.
Tell me Monte what have you brought to the Forum here ??
Show me where there is an easy explained way that You Play with easy to follow examples ??.
Instead of trying to Drag people down with You smart Arse attitude.
Why don't you ask Victor to Give you your own section where you can reveal all and by doing so making us The People of this Forum all better Players ????
I don't think You will mate....I think that would be beneath You....
Monte you Can take Your Holier then Thou Attitude & Shove It Mate.
As Far as You and I are Concerned We Are Done.
I Don't want anything to do with You or anything You say in the Future.
Ps
The report as promised will follow this post.
Lanky
Friendly Talk / General Board / Lanky's Big Thank-You To everyone on: 12/30/07 at 14:35:42
Hi Forum. I would like to dedicate this report to You The Family Here at the Forum. The Wonderful, Caring ,Supportive And Sharing People of this Forum. Every time Nancy & I was Sick....You Cared & Prayed For Us. Every time I Lost.....You supported Me. It was Truly Amazing the amount of Posts , PMs & Emails That We got when any of these things happened to Me/Us. What is even more Amazing is that We All come from different parts of the world. And We are all Better People for the Sharing Attitude that exists in this Forum. We don't stop people from referring to Other Forums. And I have yet to see or hear of a post that has been Deleted by Victor. I trust that I have been to You.....What You have been to Me. I have done My best for You when Health allowed Me to. And I Apologise to those People Who had to wait for Me to get back to them when I have been Sick......sometimes the Old Ticker (Heart) is not the best. There are too many to thank Individually so don't get Cranky with Lanky. If Your name is no mentioned. I am Sure You all understand. To Victor & Family..... For Teaching Me the Lw Methods and for being the great Person that He Is.And also to His lovely Wife for Allowing Him the time He spends on Here. To Ronjo , Alice & Family..... For teaching Me His Methods Ronjo & I have become good Mates He is a straight shooter & I love that. To Digf for flying to Sydney & meeting with Nancy & Me. That was an experience that we will never forget (Love to Joyce Cobber) To Lohnro ,Wife & Family...He really stepped up to the plate as Moderator. For his Sharing & willingness to Give & Help Others. There is a chance that Lohnro & I will be meeting on 30th January. Good On Ya Mate. To Cps10 For laughing at My Humour ...He was the only one..LOL.. Good on Ya Cobber. To Maltezan. For Simply being one of the most Helpful , Caring & Honest People I have ever had the pleasure to Meet. Good On Ya Malty. Ok Now on the Victor.s Lw Method. I played 79 sessions since April.. Lost 1 -$200 (My Stupid Fault not the Systems) Broke even 4 times. & Won 74 sessions I started with a $2000 Bank Its Now $6123 I won $4123 That's 206.15% profit on starting Bank Nancy & I will be forever grateful to You Victor. Thanks Mate. Outside of this I had another 2 losses doing other things -$550 -$200 ............. -$750 However using Ronjo's Methods & a touch of Me & John Solitude Mixed In . I won . $1869-$750 =$1119 Profit. Thanks Ronjo ....You're a beauty Mate.We are Grateful to You too Cobber. So adding the year up its $4123 =From the Lw Method of Victor's $1119=From Ronjo's .................. $5242=Profit = 262.1% Profit on Starting Bank.=$101 per week. We are very pleased with this amount as I work...& have not been able to get there every week due to Health reasons. Please understand I did not put this here to show you how clever I am. Or what a smart arse I can be. Actually this will be the last time that I do this. I Put it here for all us Little Betters....The Battlers. The people that can only afford to Bet Small. In the hope that someone , anyone, would take heart from it & see that it can be done with heaps of patience of trying to get the Timeline right of when to bet. That gives us the best chance of winning. From the dispersions of numbers that the Roulette Wheel gives us. That we have built this Amount from the ground up....by winning Little amounts....that add up To Bigger amounts at the end of the year. Sure I know that we have had to Pay the expenses. Petrol & Toll fees ,Food etc. We even gave our children $1000 out of it But Roulette has paid for all of that. Thanks to Victor & Ronjo. Well Guys We hope that someone will get some benefit from this. And as Ray Said in His Pm to Me..There will be no mistakes in 2008...Thanks Ray And Nancy I Hope that you all have a great New Year in 2008. And I hope that GOD Grants Me His Grace To be here with You for another year at least.... You People Inspire Us Both. And Lastly To My Beautiful , Gorgeous ,Loving & Understanding Wife . Who Looks after Me & Helps & Makes this all possible....... Thank You Sweetheart You are the Best Mate. Lanky
My apologies Lanky if you feel that I have belittled you. That was not the intent and nearly all my words are dry and without personal context. Except for the above quoted passage. In that I wished only to illustrate the point that if the system you use works then there is no excuse not to apply it to the maximum potential.
You initially chose to take apart my arguement line by line. I have only been defending my position in the arguement. You have chosen to use a lot of creative writing embelishments to illustrate your point in manner that I could easily find personally offensive. But, I know that you don't mean it personally and are doing it in the spirit of the arguement. So i take no offence.
Your track record in roulette of $2000 to $9000 in one year is very impressive and better than 99% of the punters out there. Congradulations. I don't know how much table time you invested but the simple fact you still have money does say something.
I am here to work out ideas in solving the problem of roulette. To do that you present ideas, take on arguements and defend your position until proven wrong or right. It's not personal, it's academic.
I hope you can accept my apology. Best wishes for your health and future job prospects.
Monte Carlo
Hi Monte.
No Problems Mate.
We are Sweet ( Aussie for Good).
Lets put it behind us and get on with trying to help others (and Ourselves )the best we can.
I believe Out Of every Argument comes some good.
Either you Respect the other persons point of View or You don't talk.
Its good that we remain Friends.And try & be a benefit to the Forum.
Even if we don't agree on some things.
Thanks Monte
Lanky
Hey guys...........
Welcome back to the fray, Lanky.
Gotta say I believe Lanky. He has helped me understand the Lw process with great patience. If he says he won a buck, he won it.
Now as to MC......
This guy is making me think. He may very well be onto something; don't know, can't say, but I am (almost) convinced the 2.7% advantage of the house can be increased. Possibly it can also be decreased as Lanky says.
This forum and these positions make a person think. That in itself has great value as it exercises the brain.
Lanky is right about one thing: I won money using the Lw system on dozens and columns. As long as I did the absolutely boring, repetitious work of figuring and betting, I won. Then I started gambling........
Well, enough said.
Sam
Kimo Li
Math is not the skirt that I hide beneath, but the ground upon which I stand.
Do I wish to discredit roulette with math?
No. In fact I know that you can beat roulette with math. With a computer and some coding it is not hard to gain a serious advantage over the house. But doing that in a casino is much more tricky.
Now I have thick skin and don't take things personally but I also don't take demands either. If the price of admission to your club is to hand over years of work then I politely decline. I have lots of things to do with my time. On the other hand if you want some direction in looking at this problem from a different angle that may actually produce serious results than I am willing to give you my time and guidance for free.
Monte Carlo
QuoteNo. In fact I know that you can beat roulette with math. With a computer and some coding it is not hard to gain a serious advantage over the house. But doing that in a casino is much more tricky.
M. Carlo,
Are implying that's it's possible to beat the random
game of roulette, or are you referring to beating the
gaming device?
-Herb
Herb
I am uncertain of your differentiation between the two.
I am refering to the game of roulette. As in you the player winning against the casino. Provided that the wheel is physical and not RNG.
Monte Carlo
Well, this ought to get interesting............
When you refer to beating the game with math, are you referring to exploiting biased wheels or visual ballistics?
Herb
If you definition of a biased wheel is a poorly maintained, unlevel or otherwise physically defective wheel exhibiting a non random dataset then the answer is neither.
Monte Carlo
Let me get this straight then, you are implying that you have found to beat the random game of roulette?
Does you system have anything to do with dealer's signature, and approximately how many numbers do you bet on average each spin?
I think I know where MC is going here. Be nice because he has a fresh approach. I dont believe his system is based upon dealers signature and the amount of numbers is dependent upon the users selection criteria, so it can vary. Basically their are multiple ways of formulating the criteria from within the mathematical construct. How did I do MC.
If one applied a Neural Net, to this they could potentially win the vast majority of your spins flatbetting, theoretically. Talk about exploiting, that would be exploitation. However, manually it can still be done, just requires a little extra focus.
Bloom
M. Carlo,
Let me get this straight then, you are implying that you have found to beat the random game of roulette?
Does you system have anything to do with dealer's signature, and approximately how many numbers do you bet on average each spin?
M. Carlo?
Herb
I don't care about dealer signatures.
Number of chips depends but I often prefer systems that only require one or two bets. How you get to those two bets can often be complex though.
Monte Carlo
Let me get this straight then, you are implying that you have found to beat the random game of roulette?
Herb
I do not intend to answer this question regardless of the number of times you ask it. It doesn[ch8217]t really matter. I don[ch8217]t care if you believe me or not. Read my posts and decide for yourself if what I say has any validity. If it does use it, if not then ignore me.
Monte Carlo
you are implying that you have found to beat the random game of roulette?>>>
Roulette can be beaten because it IS random, don't look at that as being a handicap. My favorite place to practice is on random.org, on the coin flips. You have pure random there, not produced by an RNG or influenced by a dealer.
Quoteyou are implying that you have found to beat the random game of roulette?>>>
Roulette can be beaten because it IS random, don't look at that as being a handicap. My favorite place to practice is on random.org, on the coin flips. You have pure random there, not produced by an RNG or influenced by a dealer.
Roulette can be beaten because it IT IS NOT RANDOM, and the constant is 111. Check every 6 spins what is the result. It will be always close to 111 and if roulette would be random like you are saying the result would be from 6 to 216. Also check the result after 36 spins (one full cycle) and the result will be always close to devil.
Practice on random.org, is waste of time and cant give you any advantage or edge. If you want to practice, which without knowlege again is waste of time, then is better to do it with real spins and maybe you will learn something.
Influenced by a dealer DOES NOT EXIST, only in peoples heads maybe.
Cheers
What do you mean the constant is 111?
There is no meaningful information that can be derived by just adding up the numbers that have hit.
By the way, the actual number translated to represent the devil is 616 not 666. 666 was the result of an earlier poor translation.
I meant the 666 = devil numbers, but 666 is also the sum of roulette. The constant 111 is roulette constant in 6 spins and constant of the square of the sun, 666/6=111.
You can find the sum 111 if you know which streets go together: two streets, 6 number, sum is exactly 111 ( 1+2+3 and 34+35+36 = 6+105=111). The numbers in the roulette wheel, the green carpent and in the sun square are in perfect order and they are not inserted random. You need to look, I mean really look how numbers are connected. On the wheel you can also see that european table is divided in two parts at numbers 5/10 and 26/32 and the sums for each half is exactly 333, so 333+333=666
The special six numbers which go together are 26+3+35+12+28+7=111 and also every other six are close to this sum.
But like I know you dont belive in the square and ancient knowlege.
Cheers
Alfa,
If you're playing for fun, then have at it. Unfortunately, the sun/square will not enable you to make any meaningful connections in the game of roulette and it will not enable you to win in the long term, since it fails to take in account the position of the rotor and the ball during the spin.
I dont need or want to prove you anything and it is not important to me what is your opinion. Numbers do repeat all the time and you can see it in the square, just like you can see in the pascal triangle. But if it is all you can see in the square is just sums 111 every line and 222 the cross, then you are only scrathing the surface and you cant see what is really hidden inside. I study numbers and ancient knowlege for quite some time now and roulette wheel is made by ancient knowlege. Pascal didnt invented the wheel, but it was a gift from friend who brought to him from china. And great Pascal prove his third law after he got the wheel and not before. The law of third is visible from the green carpet.
Cheers
"And great Pascal prove his third law after he got the wheel and not before. The law of third is visible from the green carpet."
Alpha
I don't mean to quibble about language, but the "third law" and the "law of third" can be very different. Which did you mean?
I Googled the Square of the Sun and it's fascinating. Don't know if it's magic, but it is a very unique phenomenon.
Sam
I mean ,
THE LAW OF THIRD MADE BY PASCAL PROVIDES THAT THE CYCLE OF THEORETICAL SORTITA OF A GROUP OF NUMBERS AS IN ROULETTE, TWO-THIRDS OF NUMBERS WILL BE TAKEN AND A THIRD PARTY WILL NOT 'EXTRACT
12 hit once, 12 will repeat and 12 no show. Of course in reality there will be differences, but Pascal did know exactly how to calculate the differences.
The law of the third doesn't enable people to win at roulette either. Never has, never will.
QuoteThe law of the third doesn't enable people to win at roulette either. Never has, never will.
Because they really dont know how to used it correctly and how to calculated numbers. The great Pascal use his triangle to do calculations. But belive what you want.
For starters, there really isn't a law of the third. It's more of a probability observation. It's really no different than saying that a number will, on average, hit once in every 38 spins.
Such information is not going to enable you to overcome the house edge because there is not any useful information that can be derived from it. In roulette, each spin is an independent trial. This means numbers are never due to catch up or hit because they haven't hit in a long time. The house payout is also less than fair.
It's really not unusual for novice gamblers to become distracted by systems that claim to exploit hidden math laws like the law of the third in order to win. Many people have fallen prey to such mistakes over the centuries.
For more information search: Gambler's Fallacy.
Sorry Herb,
but your conclusions are absolutly wrong.
This "stochastical" (not a math!!) law gives you hints.
of course you can´t be sure that it is always this distribution, but you know it must come over all to the statistical limits. for that it will give you hints to the trend.
br
winkel
QuoteFor starters, there really isn't a law of the third. It's more of a probability observation. It's really no different than saying that a number will, on average, hit once in every 38 spins.
Such information is not going to enable you to overcome the house edge because there is not any useful information that can be derived from it. In roulette, each spin is an independent trial. This means numbers are never due to catch up or hit because they haven't hit in a long time. The house payout is also less than fair.
It's really not unusual for novice gamblers to become distracted by systems that claim to exploit hidden math laws like the law of the third in order to win. Many people have fallen prey to such mistakes over the centuries.
For more information search: Gambler's Fallacy.
Im not talking about law of third like 99% of system used it, playing slepper, hot numbers or repeaters after 36 spin cycle, but Im talking about calculating numbers. Every number have a value, like or not.
Pascal, brilliant person, did not want to complicate the lives of anyone with his triangle, but most use complicated formulas, but when Blaise Pascal started on the construction of the triangle reasoned in simple formula using as a starting point basis the number 1 and number + 10 + / -- And how you will see any number increases by 1 changing the cadence (odd and even) and the figure, while with + / - 10 changes the dozen and figure (but not the frequency) and often useful even for the color.
Im finished with this discussion anyway.
Somewhere along the way, someone has snookered you into believing that Pascal's triangle can be used to beat roulette.
If you read up on your basic math you will see that someone is having a laugh at your expense.
Pascal's triangle never will and never has been used to successfully beat roulette. It is nothing more than a geometric arrangement of the binomial coefficients in a triangle.
Using Pascal's trianlge to beat roulette is like using a fork to beat blackjack or a crossword puzzle to repair a car. :)
Best regards.
-Herb
I once tried to fix a car using a crossword puzzle, I nearly had it as well, I just could not get 22 down. Anyway, I had to scrap the car in the end. :D
Quote
Using Pascal's trianlge to beat roulette is like using a fork to beat blackjack or a crossword puzzle to repair a car. :)
Best regards.
-Herb
something to think about:
(https://www.vlsroulette.com/proxy.php?request=nolinks%3A%2F%2Fnolinks.roulette-board.de%2Fuploads%2Fpost-36-1212332229.gif&hash=7a9094bb1bd6da369be305453bb91f592502b718)
yellow = numbers which appeared at all
green = hnumbers appeard more than once
white box = numbers appeared once
orange = sleepers
So what? Sorry, but it's just a triangle with numbers in it.
sorry, i didn´t mention that the coloured lines show the binomial-distribution.
Hi Herb,
if you just wanna see what you want, i can´t help.
if you would be open minded, you read the informations that the lines could give you
And if you would be able to combine the arithmic triangle with this shown above, you could get something to think about
br
winkel
Like I said, using the triangle to try and win at roulette is like using a crossword puzzle to try and fix your car.
Multiplying the numbers within the triangle will not mysteriously predict the next likely number on the roulette wheel anymore than solving a crossword puzzle would fix a flat tire on my car.
The triangle doesn't take into account the position of the rotor when the ball is released, the position of the ball in relation to the rotor during the spin, the speed of the wheel in relation to the ball, etc. The triangle is of no value whatsoever.
i like to call it law of unequal distribution cause we dont know the exact number of missing numbers that will occur within 37 spins but you can count there will be atleast a repeat. That info alone wont help you beat roulette but I really think if you waited for key times you could always come out ahead. I think the most unique numbers ive personally saw was 22 on bet365 few years ago when they still accept US wagers i played there often. Problem is its sorta unrealistic cause very few people will wanna sit and track 5 hours to make $10-30 it might be fine if you can play online but live in person casino would be dreaded. You could wait for a string of 15 unique numbers but still the progression would be brutal once you get to 20+ which is very possible although unlikely. But on the low note it could take a few hundred spins to even find such a string.
Quote... cause we dont know the exact number of missing numbers that will occur within 37 spins but you can count there will be atleast a repeat. ....
There at minimum one more information we can trust on after 37 spins:
There will be no more repeaters than sleepers!
e.g. if we have 10 repeaters there have to be at minimum 10 sleepers.
If someone is interested i will give you a list of the most outcomes of sleepers, numbers once, and repeaters after 37 spins.
br
winkel
QuoteLike I said, using the triangle to try and win at roulette is like using a crossword puzzle to try and fix your car.
And the sun is spinning round the earth.
winkel
I'm interested. I'm TwoCatSam@cox.net.
Thanks
Sam
1 month, RNG, about 14500 times 37 spins
0 = sleepers
1 = came once
>1 =repeaters
sorry, have to learn to post excell-sheets
[dohtml]
>
0 1 >1 count
6 25 6 0
6 26 5 0
7 23 7 2
7 24 6 3
7 25 5 3
7 26 4 1
8 21 8 9
8 22 7 12
8 23 6 14
8 24 5 6
8 25 4 1
9 19 9 27
9 20 8 68
9 21 7 59
9 22 6 20
9 23 5 10
9 24 4 2
10 17 10 47
10 18 9 152
10 19 8 216
10 20 7 112
10 21 6 24
10 22 5 11
11 15 11 55
11 16 10 235
11 17 9 499
11 18 8 343
11 19 7 144
11 20 6 30
11 21 5 4
12 13 12 42
12 14 11 267
12 15 10 649
12 16 9 758
12 17 8 447
12 18 7 170
12 19 6 26
12 20 5 5
13 11 13 16
13 12 12 183
13 13 11 612
13 14 10 930
13 15 9 864
13 16 8 420
13 17 7 81
13 18 6 16
13 19 5 1
14 9 14 5
14 10 13 81
14 11 12 364
14 12 11 776
14 13 10 956
14 14 9 638
14 15 8 219
14 16 7 41
14 17 6 12
15 8 14 22
15 9 13 100
15 10 12 282
15 11 11 603
15 12 10 576
15 13 9 330
15 14 8 117
15 15 7 19
15 16 6 0
16 7 14 10
16 8 13 65
16 9 12 176
16 10 11 279
16 11 10 254
16 12 9 147
16 13 8 43
16 14 7 8
16 15 6 0
17 5 15 0
17 6 14 15
17 7 13 29
17 8 12 85
17 9 11 138
17 10 10 95
17 11 9 50
17 12 8 18
17 13 7 3
18 4 15 1
18 5 14 3
18 6 13 22
18 7 12 39
18 8 11 40
18 9 10 22
18 10 9 19
18 11 8 12
18 12 7 1
19 4 14 1
19 5 13 4
19 6 12 5
19 7 11 9
19 8 10 6
19 9 9 1
20 5 12 0
20 6 11 0
20 7 10 1
20 8 9 0
21 4 12 0
21 5 11 0
21 6 10 0
21 7 9 0
|
[/dohtml]
winkel,
very useful data.
i have been working on a system with a friend that i have making a profit flat betting over 8000 spins of actuals. I am tweaking that one to try and make it more profitable since profit is 1600 units over that time frame and its a grind that has ups and downs but with money management will make more of a profit and be smoother.
This data made me think about an old system i once tried. cost me a lot of cash because i didnt do any testing and just went for it. I thought what about if i apply the old system with some principles of the above - based on your data it must work.
Anyway - so far i have run through 350 spins of my actuals. It had 7 attacks and returned 419u. knowing my chicken style of play, i would have stopped before my win goal on a lot (ie win goal of 50 and i get 45 i would stop). That was on 7 attacks with flat betting.
I'm off to test some more and if it works
It basically involves waiting for unequal distribution of repeaters or non repeaters in x and flat betting that it will equal out and return more towards the statistical averages. ie wait for lump of non repeaters and assume that on average there are an amount of repeaters, therefore lump on numbers searching for them for a set number of trials based on flat betting. i came up with around just over 200 bank needed. therefore 50 sounds a good target for each attack if the bank is 200.
spent 5 mins testing, so need to examine more but in my experience something which wins 2 banks without loss, invariably has promise to win more banks than it loses resulting in long term gain.
Thank you Winkel and i will certainly post more after i have tested this further to see if it flies. might be a day or two since i have lots of work on at present.
tuck
Are you speaking of the "Magic 5" system?
The author leaves out an important piece of information.
Sam
Hello Tuck, [smiley=welcome/welcome08.png]
I'm glad you are having success with your tests, only thing is I think you missed a bit of typing here:
QuoteI'm off to test some more and if it works
...if it works... Will share it with the friends here? [smiley=GG/emot_happy.gif]
Best regards.
winkel
tuck may find your data useful, but I fail to understand it. What are you trying to convey?
Sam
Hi TCS,
I would like to explain this in a new thread.
But therefore I need a hint ho to use excel-cells in an post.
what do I need to create exact rows and columns?
in germany it works with
[dohtml] an
What do i use with this forum-software?
br
winke
l
winkel
I wish I could help you on that, but I am pretty excel challenged. I'm a pencil and paper man.
Sam
No idea what the magic 5 system is.
On my comment about going of to test - that was just enthusiasm on the initial results.
i still havent run enough tests to see if it will work.
i'm still looking at the best stats on it and once i have a view on what could work i'll post here. no poit wasting anyones time on a dead duck.
oket dokeey - been doing some more testing and its time to post more detail since i think i may have stumbled on something interesting and there are some good brains on here who can probably help / improve my thoughts.
I look for a sequence of 12 numbers where there are no repeats in last 12. ie 12 different numbers. example below:
4
7
23
29
27
5
21
13
34
18
3
25
based on calcs - there is a normal number of repeaters and non repaters in say 36 spins, 24 spins and 12 spins. Clearly a run of 12 is underhit. does this mean there will be hits or repeaters. no. however - on my tests so far, it is returning a profit if we play for the next 12 spins.
so after these 12 numbers we bet the 12 numbers and any additions to spin 24.
so spin 13 = 12 units staked.
28 = lose. therefore we are -12 and next bet is 13u and 28 added to list.
23 = win. +23 so +11
18 = win = +23 so +34 overall
25 =win =+23 so +57 overall.
now is a twist. on +50 i was thinking of stopping. i also tested on +45 since 50 is my target and i normally stop if i am within 10% of target win (based on stock market experience where a target price often falls just short!)
anyway - for example i carry on.
7 win 23
10 lose -13 (now bet 14 numers)
1 lose -14 (now bet 15 numvers)
23 w +21
4 w +21
6 lose - now bet 16
5 w +20
21 2 +20.
so normally i would be +57. if i carry on, its a mega session of +120.....
are all sessions good like this = no. do sessions end negative = yes indeed. i have different numbers at work and is not doing as well but only tested 100 spins.
on this set of numbers - 693 spins of wheel. instances to bet =16. so not many.
flat betting on all 12 spins = +608.
flt betting up to +50 or more = +574
flat betting up to +45 or more = +517
it maybe i have good set of numbers so far for this method and it will fail badly soon.
another thing i notice - is that on the 12 spins played - on every one there is a sequence of 2 wins or more in a row on each one.....
losing attacks = 4. -47, -49, -6, -3.
Two in a row in one instance. Highest wins = 157, 123,120,102.
not tried any progression as yet but i suspect one may be good if on a bad run.
will test more and post results on here
tucktuckster, i think you have a very interesting concept. i suggest you move your post to start your own thread maybe into the testing zone area, where it can get better testing and system feedback attention by others.
Bloom
I agree
If you're going to post test results, why not put it under testing?
SamSamster
i prob will.
it holds up quite well.
i have a list of actuals and on these from spins 1000-2000, turbos 4 unit repeater one gets killed. It doesnt like repeaters in these spins.
this one also suffered - since lack of repeaters but loss was a lot smaller and nothing in comparison to plus results of first 1000 spins. but this analysis at work and me at home.
the one that led me on to this was doing similar with the 12's. ie 1-12, 13-24 and 25-36. I testd for 8000 spins and had over 1000u profit at end flat bets but ups and downs.
i am sure with progression we can do better.
The only law that matters in roulette is the Law of Series. Everything else is irrelevent.
So what is your theory on this. What if you were playing on a NO ZERO WHEEL ? Not a Single Zero, or a Double Zero Wheel, but a Wheel with just the 36 numbers of 1 through 36 and NO ZERO's. Since this would completely eliminate the "House Edge" would you then be racking in chips faster than you can carry them to the cashiers cage ? Think you would ? I really think you wouldn't. The "House Edge" is there all right; but more than anything else it is used as AN EXCUSE for losing when the real culprit is plain old weak play. The big MYTH is alls you have to do is plunk down any bet at any time and the outcome will always be the true odds minus the "House Edge". That MYTH is one of many that makes Roulette THE MOST MATHEMATICALY MISUNDERSTOOD GAME in the WORLD. The mathematical truth would be learned very quickly on the above mentioned Hypothetical NO ZERO WHEEL; and that is plopping down any bet at any time is lazy play akin to say a tennis player just standing in one spot on the court hoping the ball comes to that spot so she doesn't have to move to much to hit it. There, in actuality is nothing passive about winning at this game; in other words you don't get your share of the mathematical equation just by plopping down a bet; you must be Active in following the Trends; and the Trends are the mathematices that dictate that all 37 to 1 propositions BEHAVE EXACTLY THE SAME WAY IN A LONG RUN; Sometimes coming in at greater; and sometimes lesser that true odds. Therefore the MYTH that dictates "its silly to follow Trends" because "the ball has no memory" is what in-of-itself is silly and the strong MATH at play in this game dictates that like the Tennis Player who must be active to win, the roulette player must also be active to win, and that activity is simply understanding the math and using it to ones advantage. Thats what you'll do if you truly want to win, but first you MUST STOP USING THE "HOUSE EDGE" as your convenient excuse for why you are not doing so now. RENOPOLIS
Renopolis wrote: Therefore the MYTH that dictates "its silly to follow Trends" because "the ball has no memory" is what in-of-itself is silly and the strong MATH at play in this game dictates that like the Tennis Player who must be active to win, the roulette player must also be active to win, and that activity is simply understanding the math and using it to ones advantage. Thats what you'll do if you truly want to win, but first you MUST STOP USING THE "HOUSE EDGE" as your convenient excuse for why you are not doing so now. RENOPOLIS
--------------------------------------------------------
Renopolis,
I think you need to read about gambler's fallacy. Unfortunately, the house edge is still a big problem. You can't win in the long run just chasing trends. The house advantage is like compounding interest for the casino. The longer you play, the more you lose.
Good Luck.
-Herb
Oh hi Herb,
Yes Herb, I already know what you think before you say it OR think it. I introduced you to a seed of NEW THINKING there, but it just couldn't make a the slightest indentation in the thick steel walls of your pre-programed mind. Not putting you down personaly; but you didn't address or even allude to any of the more-than-valid points I raised, so that is the only logical conclusion that can be drawn.
By the way Son, I know more about the "TRUE HOUSE EDGE" than you know about any subject under the sun, and to set the record straight; I AM NOT A GAMBLER. When I go into a Casino I invest in a series of known Mathematical Patterns and Ratios using a Mathematicaly Balanced, sound and viable methodology. You are the absolute CLASSIC EXAMPLE of what I alluded to in the previous post; in that you are so obsessed with what you perceive as the House Percentage (which does exist; but its true mathematical characteristics are completely unknown to the masses), that you automaticaly chalk up every one of your losses to it, instead of your inadequate methods and decision making skills , and therefore will spend your whole lifetime not being motivated to actually improve your play and results by understanding the Mathematical TRUTH of the games you are playing. I for one, have no problem with that.
Go ahead and lecture me on fallicies (which I understand and you don't) untill your satisfied that your next loss can fully attributed to what you think you know; and if you need me -- I'LL BE AT THE CASHIERS CAGE. (Its not bragging if its true) Please keep playing just the way your playing and make sure you stay closed to ever learning anything new. REGARDS; RENOPOLIS.
OK, altogether now, anda one anda two anda three
What a sack of t**ds!
By the Way; "LUCK" is not a factor in my play, but I know the millions upon millions upon masses of millions of average gamblers all wish "good luck", as its another massive fallicy that it was the "LUCK" that caused them to lose instead of their unskilled below-novice-level playing. So please do continue perpetuating this as well. Thanks. RENOPOLIS.
Oh nice, I give you imagination; coherancy, outside of the box new ideas (and just look for yourself--its usually a pretty small box in these forums),....springboards to higher levels of discusion, and I get back grade-school naughty boy at recess adolescent bibble-t**d-banter. Is there anyone intelligent out there who would like to be a pioneer and further this discusion in the spirit of actually illuminating something valuable and new? or is this all there is? (I've got a feeling I'll probably have to wait 40 or 50 years before any significant portion of the masses catches up to what I'm talking about -- not a put down to anyone, but just how this world works -- Nikoli Tesla is still waiting for his true recognition by more than just a few, and he's been dead about a hundred years. Again not a put down, just new and true thinking just can't break through the pre-conceptions of the masses is a simple fact)
So once more; I know theres plenty of intelligence out there; if anyone wants to step outside of the little box and use thiers and further the conversation in a meaningful way, THEN -- Lets Go. If not. Then write me off as a fruit-cake and I'll keep making a living doing what your dreaming about doing, IN-COGNITO. REGARDS.....RENOPOLIS.
By the way Herb, I feel like I should send you the bill for my Dry-Cleaning.....as I couldn't help but do a "spit-take" of my Cranberry juice all over my shirt and tie when I read your "...you can't just use TREND's to win in the long run". Kind-of like a Cross Country Pilot saying,....."well theres no point in me studying these here Weather Charts and information, because the Weather doesn't have a memory so how could it put out any TRENDS I could use?!?"
Son, wether or not it is clear to you; you live in a UNIVERSE of TRENDS. Sun-Spot Cycles; the cycling of disease epidemics, the formation of new Stars; the colliding of galaxies; the wax and wane of caribou populations, the long-term peaks and valleys of the Markets ---- they are ALL TRENDS. Be oblivious to them and lose; get savvy to them and have a chance of winning if you know how to handle the other aspects; its your choice.
Here's a question I've posed to the "Mainstreamers" and so called "Experts" many times with never any sembelance of a coherent or logical answer. You give me one if you can. If there are no TRENDS in these games or as you say "you can't use the TRENDS", then why is it you can predict all the way down to the One Hundreth Decimal Point exactly how much profit the House is going to make on every roll/spin ???? That every roll/spin that was independent from the last from a dice/ball that has no memory by the way. Hmmm...lets see, no possibilty of a coherent TREND yet I know that the House is going to take 2.46% of every wager made.....Well, seems to be a contridiction in your dogma big enough to drive the Queen Mary through, but if you can logically and coherently explain it, then please do. Thanks and REGARDS.......RENOPOLIS
Renopolis,
Sorry, I was just trying to help you out.
I certainly don't want to try and debate this with you. I just assumed you were possibly new to gambling because of your posts. My goal was to help you avoid any heavy losses on your end. I hope I haven't made you even more determined to prove me wrong.
I know you're thinking that you have the world at your finger tips, but I've noticed that you likely have a misunderstanding of basic probability. In the short term, there are some very good system testers on this forum that could help you test your theories, so that you don't have to risk real money. Maybe you could also help them out with some of your novice ideas or teach us all some grand way of winning sometime soon.
Best of Luck (I know you don't feel that you need it, but it's also just a friendly gesture. :) I hope you do find success with your system in the near future.
-Herb.
Renopolis
You are an offensive person who offers nothing but criticism and negativity. Why do you waste your time typing? Why don't you leave?
Better yet, why don't you go over to the MattyMattz challenged thread and find this ol' boy named Ronjo and straighten him out. You'll win friends and influence people, believe me!
TwoCat
Herb why are you here? What's your point? To just tell people that roulette is unbeatable? Do you really believe none has heard that before? Again and again and again.... And anyway if you believe that roulette is unbeatable and there is no way beating it, what are you looking for in a roulette forum where people try to beat roulette.
Thanks to you Winkel has stopped posting his interesting ideas and knowledge. What's next?
Kav,
I like discussing the logistics with other like minded people. I also have a background in mathematics, so I enjoy helping people out that may have fallen victim to the game itself.
There are ways to beat the live wheel.
Regarding people like Winkle, or Reno. I don't really care to get into that GG style of bickering. I'll state my point maybe once, sometimes twice, but when it's clear that they can't back up their arguments, then I will generally just leave them be. You can't help someone if they don't want the help. It's also very tricky and difficult to explain to someone that they are dead wrong when they are so determined that they are right in the first place.
When someone begins acting like a fool, and starts name calling or moving too far off topic, I will usually just ignore them.
The reason: If you debate a fool, after a while, people cease to recognize which person is the fool.
Herb,
your idea to prevent people from losing their money seems to be very kind, but it isn´t.
you´re acting like people who wanna prevent the world from any bad. And what are the results? e.g. Wacko.
people who are here to discuss ideas and testing them, just do, what you claim: They are trying to save their money.
On the other hand they have fun to fight the unknown enemy which they call probability.
Not everyone who drinks is an alcoholic, not everyone who plays roulette is a gambler.
But everyone who is spreading the truth is dangerous to freedom of speech and ideas.
So I say: You are right: The earth is flat, the sun circles around earth, and there is nothing proofed, because everything is written in a big book, which no one knows. So let us all stop searching for anything, because there is no use to it.
sometimes this would have been better, because people like you wouldn´t have the platform of the WWW to spread their senselessnes.
Winkel,
Please reread the last line of my above post.
Thanks. :)
You know Herb, if I'm not mistaken, that phrase came from Will Rogers, Oklahoma's favorite son. I don't know what part of the world you're in but I'm happy to hear it quoted.
His most known quote: No, my people didn't come over on the Mayflower, but they met the boat! You see, he was Native American.
Sam
I like this better (hope to translate it right)
Don´t argue with a fool. first he´s dragging you to his level and then he beats you with his experiences there.
@herb
you talking about arguments. Where are your´s? Repeating things read somewehere else, are no arguments, but proving you´re not thinking by your own.
As you said you´re experienced in mathematics. so please tell me what Wolfgang Döblin found regarding the Theories of Kolmogorof and Markov.