First, a few explanations of terms used:
1. Brute Force = To attack a computer encrypted file, the final positive result of success will be acquired by testing every permutation of an access code until the file becomes readable. A Brute Force attack is a continuous attack until success.
2. Interval or Interruption = Here interval or interruption is to illustrate the use of a deliberate pause or the use of a virtual bet.
3. Trigger = any rule that tells the better to place a bet or to interrupt.
4. Mechanical = Any rule based system is functional by a set of instructions that appear to be mechanical in nature. If the exact same set of numbers were to appear at the beginning of any mechanical based system then the exact same result would be the result to both.
5. Over Time = Several thousands of spins from hundreds of visits to the casino.
-----------------------------
Now the questions.
Do all mechanical, rule based systems, over time end up losing to such a degree over time that the system used only yields results that are close to the casino's (House Advantage) percentage?
Do mechanical systems, while using rules that include intervals or interruptions, end up losing to such a degree over time that the system used only yields results that are close to the casino's (House advantage) percentage?
Do charting based systems that include instructions that trigger when to bet over time end up losing to such a degree that the system used only yields results that are close to the casino's (House Advantage) percentage?
Can Roulette be beaten by Brute Force?
Please suggest any questions using these terms that also have the ability to show the nature of the game of Roulette.
Quote from: zippyplayer on February 20, 2011, 10:12:03 PM
First, a few explanations of terms used:
1. Brute Force = To attack a computer encrypted file, the final positive result of success will be acquired by testing every permutation of an access code until the file becomes readable. A Brute Force attack is a continuous attack until success.
2. Interval or Interruption = Here interval or interruption is to illustrate the use of a deliberate pause or the use of a virtual bet.
3. Trigger = any rule that tells the better to place a bet or to interrupt.
4. Mechanical = Any rule based system is functional by a set of instructions that appear to be mechanical in nature. If the exact same set of numbers were to appear at the beginning of any mechanical based system then the exact same result would be the result to both.
5. Over Time = Several thousands of spins from hundreds of visits to the casino.
-----------------------------
Now the questions.
Do all mechanical, rule based systems, over time end up losing to such a degree over time that the system used only yields results that are close to the casino's (House Advantage) percentage?
Do mechanical systems, while using rules that include intervals or interruptions, end up losing to such a degree over time that the system used only yields results that are close to the casino's (House advantage) percentage?
Do charting based systems that include instructions that trigger when to bet over time end up losing to such a degree that the system used only yields results that are close to the casino's (House Advantage) percentage?
Can Roulette be beaten by Brute Force?
Please suggest any questions using these terms that also have the ability to show the nature of the game of Roulette.
No!
Roulette can't be beaten by statistics, physics, or science - no proof exists that it can be.
I'm hoping that money management can in some way but I've not see any evidence yet.
However, many folks believe in UFOs so there will be folks who believe that Roulette can be beaten; many folks here believe this.
Sadly, all kinds of voodoo science/math must be used to "prove" that Roulette can be beaten.
Funny this is that when asked to demo this new science/math they can't - there are all kinds of excuses given.
Wonder why?
I have challenged forummembers to test my HG .Nobody has taken the challenge.
The principle is as follows.
High is positive 1 ,Low is negative 1and zero is 0 .Is the deviation + 15 or -15 bet one unit contrary till the deviation is zero. Test more than 1M spin .Finish the sample with a deviation 0.
The result oscillate always around 0 for infinite sequences.The betting and no betting series can be very large.
More variations of this principle are possible.
Quote from: schoenpoetser on February 21, 2011, 08:23:02 AM
The principle is as follows.
High is positive 1 ,Low is negative 1and zero is 0 .Is the deviation + 15 or -15 bet one unit contrary till the deviation is zero. Test more than 1M spin .Finish the sample with a deviation 0.
The result oscillate always around 0 for infinite sequences.The betting and no betting series can be very large.
You have got to be kidding. :nono:
Are you seriously trying to tell me you have made money playing this way? if you have you clearly haven't been playing long.
A deviation can run for thousands of spins without ever going back to zero. This is classic gambler's fallacy. :skull:
Quote from: MauiSunset on February 20, 2011, 10:47:28 PM
Roulette can't be beaten by statistics, physics, or science - no proof exists that it can be.
I'm hoping that money management can in some way but I've not see any evidence yet.
You think that roulette can't be beaten using physics or science and yet hope that money management will succeed?
Sorry, but that's absurd. Roulette CAN be beaten using physics, the only "proof" you need is the laws of mechanics. Money management alone is a complete waste of time. Frankly, I thought you would have known better. You're starting to sound like the very people you're heaping scorn on. :-\
Mike where can you read this HG can make money.I wrote the betting and no betting sessions can be very large.This is the same you write.I suppose you can program that principle after your test on my conditions we can discus this topic further.I don`t discus about imaginary facts as "It could be".Take the challenge!
Quote from: Mike on February 21, 2011, 12:25:22 PM
You have got to be kidding. :nono:
Are you seriously trying to tell me you have made money playing this way? if you have you clearly haven't been playing long.
A deviation can run for thousands of spins without ever going back to zero. This is classic gambler's fallacy. :skull:
I've been trying to figure out just how long deviations can run by autospinning on the BV no-zero practice wheel. I've seen huge deviations in red/black that are still worsening after 5000 spins. Very disheartening.
Sam
Quote from: Mike on February 21, 2011, 01:12:18 PM
You think that roulette can't be beaten using physics or science and yet hope that money management will succeed?
Sorry, but that's absurd. Roulette CAN be beaten using physics, the only "proof" you need is the laws of mechanics. Money management alone is a complete waste of time. Frankly, I thought you would have known better. You're starting to sound like the very people you're heaping scorn on. :-\
So the only proof is no proof?
Give me a break.
Money management uses mathematics and not voodoo science.
I don't have a MM system that works - just that if there is any way to improve my usage of Roulette from just a break from BlackJack following the laws of math is how it will be done.
Just making a claim " the only "proof" you need is the laws of mechanics" is just gibberish; it means nothing.
Quote from: MauiSunset on February 22, 2011, 01:22:42 AM
So the only proof is no proof?
Give me a break.
Apart from anything else, a lack of proof does not make your opposite claim true.
Money management uses mathematics and not voodoo science.
So does astrology, does that make it valid? and physics is not voodoo science
I don't have a MM system that works - just that if there is any way to improve my usage of Roulette from just a break from BlackJack following the laws of math is how it will be done.
The laws of math don't govern how the world works, math only "works" to the degree that your model of the world is accurate. You''re putting the cart before the horse; first you discover how the world works and then try to use math to describe it, not the other way around, that's junk science. How can MM help to predict where the ball will land? it's absurd.
just making a claim " the only "proof" you need is the laws of mechanics" is just gibberish; it means nothing.
I thought you were an engineer? If you take into account the initial conditions (state of the wheel, speed and position of ball release, and other factors) then in principle you know where the ball will land. The outcome is deterministic and not random to the degree that you can specify the initial conditions, that's just basic science.
Give me one reason why money management can help you win.
Quote from: birdhands on February 21, 2011, 10:18:54 PM
I've been trying to figure out just how long deviations can run by autospinning on the BV no-zero practice wheel. I've seen huge deviations in red/black that are still worsening after 5000 spins. Very disheartening.
Sam
When people say that things "even out" they are talking about the PROPORTIONS, but the gap between red and black actually gets bigger as you get more spins. This seems like a paradox but it's just the way the math works. If you take 1000 spins and have 490 blacks and 510 reds, the proportion of reds is 510/1000 = 0.51. There are 20 more reds than blacks. Now spin 5000 times and you could get 2,480 blacks and 2,520 reds. This time the proportion is 2,520/5000 = 0.504, which is CLOSER to the "true" proportion of 0.50, but now there are 40 more reds than blacks! There is a difference between the PROPORTION of reds and NUMBER of reds versus blacks. The gap between the NUMBER of blacks versus red gets BIGGER as you take more spins, but the PROPORTION of reds gets closer to 0.5.
Birdhands nobody play 5000 spins.Program 250 spins for example High/Low .Let the program draw a diagram of the balance.Do this 10 times and study the performances of the diagrams.The line oscillate around the zero axe.The amplitude is seldom larger than 15.These features are useful for a successful strategy.I wrote before long run test are senseless.
Quote from: schoenpoetser on February 21, 2011, 06:35:02 PM
Mike where can you read this HG can make money.I wrote the betting and no betting sessions can be very large.This is the same you write.I suppose you can program that principle after your test on my conditions we can discus this topic further.I don`t discus about imaginary facts as "It could be".Take the challenge!
What is your challenge?
Quote from: Mike on February 22, 2011, 04:04:06 AM
Give me one reason why money management can help you win.
Sure, the very definition of "Win" and "Loss" can re redefined; I've found one MM system that does just that.
I like the concept; there might be something here but I've only tested it for 1,000 spins and it holds up.
When I get 10,000 spins and it hold up then I'll get excited.
It uses plain old math and doesn't need UFO technology to work.
Has 8.5 many wins as losses but losses are larger than wins.
in 10 sessions of 100 spins 9 were large winners (doubled bank roll) and 1 lost equal to just 1 win.
Sounds good doesn't it - will it hold up?
Don't know but I plan to invest a lot of time and money to find out.
So yes, MM can turn a 50/50 bet (ok 47%/47%) profitable - I've found one that might actually work.
There will be more out there too.....
Mike that is very simply.If you doubt my prediction, program my idea and test it for a sample over 1M.I did it long ago on the commodor 64.It is pure a theoretical research.
Quote from: schoenpoetser on February 22, 2011, 11:53:35 AM
Mike that is very simply.If you doubt my prediction, program my idea and test it for a sample over 1M.I did it long ago on the commodor 64.It is pure a theoretical research.
I'm going to program this to prove to you that it can't work. This is my understanding of how you would play it:-
Take 250 spins at a time, if there is a deviation of +/- 15 then bet the non-deviating side until it goes back to zero OR until you run out of spins. Is this correct?
Quote from: MauiSunset on February 22, 2011, 10:42:01 AM
Sure, the very definition of "Win" and "Loss" can re redefined; I've found one MM system that does just that.
re-defining Win and Loss is not a reason why MM methods can work. :blink:
Like I said in another post, using progressions is equivalent to flat-betting, given enough spins. And you can't win flat-betting without an edge. :spiteful:
Yes that is OK but a sample of 250 may be to small.It is important to program a stop after a hit.My suggestion of this HR is special for a long run test.Formerly I did it in basic.I shall try to program the HG in excel also for a small sample.In my SSB program I have also a stop programmed before the end of the sample.In which language do you program?
Quote from: Mike on February 22, 2011, 01:56:36 PM
re-defining Win and Loss is not a reason why MM methods can work. :blink:
Like I said in another post, using progressions is equivalent to flat-betting, given enough spins. And you can't win flat-betting without an edge. :spiteful:
And who elected you Mr Know-it-all? You don't know Jack about what I'm doing but that doesn't hold you back from sounding like a fool.
If I find something I will demo it here - if not I won't.
You're welcome to do the same thing since you know so much.....show us.
I thought not....
Quote from: schoenpoetser on February 22, 2011, 06:38:01 PM
Yes that is OK but a sample of 250 may be to small.It is important to program a stop after a hit.My suggestion of this HR is special for a long run test.Formerly I did it in basic.I shall try to program the HG in excel also for a small sample.In my SSB program I have also a stop programmed before the end of the sample.In which language do you program?
Ok but as a programmer you should know that definite rules are needed.
"a sample of 250 may be too small".
So how big a sample is necessary then? there must be a cut-off point or it can't be programmed.
I use Python.
Quote from: MauiSunset on February 22, 2011, 07:40:34 PM
And who elected you Mr Know-it-all? You don't know Jack about what I'm doing but that doesn't hold you back from sounding like a fool.
I don't know it all but it's pretty obvious I know more than you. The fact is, you can't create a winning system using pure money management. Instead of resorting to personal attacks you should try to educate yourself. Why do you guys assume you know better than the mathematicians?
If I find something I will demo it here - if not I won't.
You won't find anything.
You're welcome to do the same thing since you know so much.....show us.
I've already told you it can't be done, so I can't show you anything. You're not paying attention.
I thought not....
Yes, you're correct. I have nothing. :)
Read part 4 of Ed Thorp's "The Mathematics of Gambling":
nolinks://nolinks.bjmath.com/bjmath/thorp/tog.htm (nolinks://nolinks.bjmath.com/bjmath/thorp/tog.htm)
"There are hundreds of schemes designed to overcome the house edge in roulette and craps based solely on manipulating the size of one's bets. As will be seen, all such attempts are futile".
Just trying to help... :whistle:
MIKE:The hit and no hit sessions can be very large.This is the reason a sample of 250 spins can give no profit.Your program language I don`t no.I only will prove that it is possible to beat the roulette on long run with a strategy.
The program conditions as follow.
1 the length of the sample 1.5M spins
2 High + 1 :Low -1 and zero 0
3 program High- Low
4 print High -Low
5 If High -Low is +15 bet 1 on Low, till H-L=0
6 if High- Low is -15 bet 1 on High, till H-L=0
7 summon bets
8 summon payouts
9 if number of spins>1M and H-L=0 end
By the statement 9 the proof will ended always with a hit between 1M and 1.5 M .
The en prison rule gives more profit but is more complicated to program.Do not program the double zero.
Quote from: Mike on February 23, 2011, 07:26:06 AM
Read part 4 of Ed Thorp's "The Mathematics of Gambling":
nolinks://nolinks.bjmath.com/bjmath/thorp/tog.htm (nolinks://nolinks.bjmath.com/bjmath/thorp/tog.htm)
"There are hundreds of schemes designed to overcome the house edge in roulette and craps based solely on manipulating the size of one's bets. As will be seen, all such attempts are futile".
Just trying to help... :whistle:
Of course Ed is correct, basing a MM technique solely by changing the size of one's bet is futile; it won't help make a flat bet system work any better.
That's why I changed the definition of "win" and "loss".
The net net final size of the bank roll is all that matters.
I would look at what I'm doing as algebra - you can add in something to both sides of the equation and the equation is exactly the same: X=Y to X^2 +5 = Y^2 +5 and if that now allows you to do something in those 5 extra units you now have something different that might work.
I don't know if what I'm doing will pan out since I don't have enough statistics background and must use brute force to see if there is something there.
But more important, even if what I did find something, can I can gamble with it over a long haul? I found many stock market systems that kind of worked but I could not put up with the punishment they dealt out in order to use the system. (number of losses and draw down)
We will see, I'm guessing I will experiment with this for 1 year and if I actually use it to make some money I will demo it here. It will not be for sale, but smart minds can reverse engineer systems and that would be my contribution to those here who want to spend the time.
I have yet to see anyone play 2 hours of Roulette and it was 100% obvious that they had mastered Roulette - that will be easy to spot....
Yes yes and Yes
Flat betting.
;D
And with >>>>>>>>
Something stupid like card counting to roulette. +/0/- Lets see who knows this?
Quote from: Twocando on February 23, 2011, 02:03:37 PM
Yes yes and Yes
Flat betting.
;D
And with >>>>>>>>
Something stupid like card counting to roulette. +/0/- Lets see who knows this?
Hi Twocando,
I guess it has to do with pocket counting from last number spun. + stands for clockwise movement (+1/18), - stands for anticlock movement (-1/18) while 0 stands for same pocket(number) repetition back to back. After some recording and tracking you can try an strategy seeking those most favoured distances in both directions on the wheel. Kind of a hit and run system.
Just my 2 cents as it is said.
Cheers,
Carlos.
Quote from: schoenpoetser on February 23, 2011, 08:17:58 AM
MIKE:The hit and no hit sessions can be very large.This is the reason a sample of 250 spins can give no profit.Your program language I don`t no.I only will prove that it is possible to beat the roulette on long run with a strategy.
The program conditions as follow.
1 the length of the sample 1.5M spins
2 High + 1 :Low -1 and zero 0
3 program High- Low
4 print High -Low
5 If High -Low is +15 bet 1 on Low, till H-L=0
6 if High- Low is -15 bet 1 on High, till H-L=0
7 summon bets
8 summon payouts
9 if number of spins>1M and H-L=0 end
By the statement 9 the proof will ended always with a hit between 1M and 1.5 M .
The en prison rule gives more profit but is more complicated to program.Do not program the double zero.
I haven't forgotten about this, just a matter of finding the time. Been pretty busy lately.
@ Mike, I'm looking forward to seeing your results.
Roulette can be consistently beaten. No two ways about it. Einstein was wrong!
Clues to consider:
- Use inside betting only
- Think of smart ways to kill the zero
- Create your own virtual wheel so that the dealer misses your numbers
- Take advantage of double-hits and possible triple hits
- The magic is in how many numbers you bet on and the number pattern arrangement you use
Get a picture of a roulette wheel and study what the dealer cannot avoid
Quote from: RouletteSlayer on March 01, 2011, 12:46:39 PM
Roulette can be consistently beaten. No two ways about it. Einstein was wrong!
Clues to consider:
- Use inside betting only
- Think of smart ways to kill the zero
- Create your own virtual wheel so that the dealer misses your numbers
- Take advantage of double-hits and possible triple hits
- The magic is in how many numbers you bet on and the number pattern arrangement you use
Get a picture of a roulette wheel and study what the dealer cannot avoid
Wow, that was riddled with many magical beliefs. It's also an incomplete statement. Missing is the reason for selecting "how many numbers you bet on and the number pattern arrangement you use."
If I revealed how many numbers as well as the pattern, you would end up in Roulette heaven and the casinos would be shocked and change the game entirely.
Quote from: RouletteSlayer on March 01, 2011, 01:00:59 PM
If I revealed how many numbers as well as the pattern, you would end up in Roulette heaven and the casinos would be shocked and change the game entirely.
I wish I could have a good day like you are having. It's an absolute blast to believe that you have the holy grail and that you are going to be very rich. Have you power tested your secret yet? You might want to try that at home first.
Quote from: RouletteSlayer on March 01, 2011, 12:46:39 PM
Roulette can be consistently beaten. No two ways about it. Einstein was wrong!
Clues to consider:
- Use inside betting only
- Think of smart ways to kill the zero
- Create your own virtual wheel so that the dealer misses your numbers
- Take advantage of double-hits and possible triple hits
- The magic is in how many numbers you bet on and the number pattern arrangement you use
Get a picture of a roulette wheel and study what the dealer cannot avoid
This sounds just like all the dribble on those UFO sites - all the really smart folks are wrong all the time.
At least Einstein published what he talked about and didn't talk in riddles.
I can only be guided by proven results.
Imagine figuring out a roulette system where you simply make easy bet selections based on using unique number patterns wherein ANY dealer cannot avoid hitting numbers consistently.
No need to scratch my head and ask the question: "How do I bet next?"
No need to qualify any dealer because the bet selection process kills the zero and places the long-term odds in the favour of the player.
I cannot reveal too much because it is just too powerful and simple once the formula has been figured out.
Holy Grail? That's right! No kidding! This is a god-damn licence to print money.
It is so powerful, I have to use a losing system to disguise my confidence from the casinos, then I apply my system and take my assured profits.
Imagine that: Being scared to play your system because it's so simple and powerful and you're worried that the casinos might figure it out.
Would you fully reveal such a roulette masterpiece? Hmmm . . . I don't think so.
Quote from: RouletteSlayer on March 01, 2011, 01:51:32 PM
I can only be guided by proven results.
Imagine figuring out a roulette system where you simply make easy bet selections based on using unique number patterns wherein ANY dealer cannot avoid hitting numbers consistently.
No need to scratch my head and ask the question: "How do I bet next?"
No need to qualify any dealer because the bet selection process kills the zero and places the long-term odds in the favour of the player.
I cannot reveal too much because it is just too powerful and simple once the formula has been figured out.
Holy Grail? That's right! No kidding! This is a god-damn licence to print money.
It is so powerful, I have to use a losing system to disguise my confidence from the casinos, then I apply my system and take my assured profits.
Imagine that: Being scared to play your system because it's so simple and powerful and you're worried that the casinos might figure it out.
Would you fully reveal such a roulette masterpiece? Hmmm . . . I don't think so.
Many here talk exactly the same way - they have a secret and won't share it but want everyone to know they have a secret. If it makes you feel better, I'm happy for you.
Just take my little demo test and you will capture the title of "Sole Roulette Player that Actually has a System that Works".
nolinks://vlsroulette.com/bet-selection/if-you-want-to-demonstrate-your-system-in-public/ (nolinks://vlsroulette.com/bet-selection/if-you-want-to-demonstrate-your-system-in-public/)
You don't have to say a word in the 2-hour demo - amaze us instead....
I'm interested in maintaining complete privacy for my system. My system is for my eyes only. I'm not interested in trying to impress anyone in public because that's not my style. I don't feel the inclination to prove anything. I've applied my mind to roulette and I'm very pleased with the solution I've discovered.
However, I've provided clues for those who have the ability to see patterns within the arrangement of numbers. Once you decode the balanced arrangement of the numbers on the wheel, you'll realise that you can trap the dealer in his own game.
- Can a dealer avoid hitting doubles?
- Do most dealers hit sectors or not?
Inside betting leads the way to the ideal solution.
Create your own virtual wheel: let the dealer play against your wheel and not the other way around.
Can Roulette be beaten by a system? Yes!
Quote from: RouletteSlayer on March 01, 2011, 12:46:39 PM
- Create your own virtual wheel so that the dealer misses your numbers
What can this possibly mean? How can we benefit from the dealer missing our numbers on our virtual wheel? I have to admit it is an interesting riddle if nothing else.
Quote from: RouletteSlayer on March 01, 2011, 02:25:52 PM
I'm interested in maintaining complete privacy for my system. My system is for my eyes only.
Yeah, I tried that too. I went on for years with it that way. But then I discovered a way to share it. And I got a bonus too. It ticked Spike off so badly that his hair caught on fire. In the process of teaching others, I discovered how difficult it is to learn this and to do what I do easily. So I'm trying to lay down a course of study knowing that everyone will not be able to do this. Think of this as a game. Some will learn it some won't. Now they will have that to argue about.
When the dealer spins his/her wheel, you spin your virtual wheel based on the previous spin result.
There are now two wheels in the game: your virtual wheel that you have created based on how a real wheel turns through 360 degrees (but based on your balanced arrangement of inside bet numbers); and there is the real wheel operated by the dealer. Now you have two wheels rotating in relation to each other.
The master stroke is to decide . . .
- How many numbers to bet on
- How to arrange your numbers in a perfectly balanced manner on your virtual wheel to nullify the zero
- How to create the virtual number wheel
BTW, the system is based purely on flat-betting. No progression is needed.
Quote from: RouletteSlayer on March 01, 2011, 02:25:52 PM
I'm interested in maintaining complete privacy for my system. My system is for my eyes only. I'm not interested in trying to impress anyone in public because that's not my style. I don't feel the inclination to prove anything. I've applied my mind to roulette and I'm very pleased with the solution I've discovered.
However, I've provided clues for those who have the ability to see patterns within the arrangement of numbers. Once you decode the balanced arrangement of the numbers on the wheel, you'll realise that you can trap the dealer in his own game.
- Can a dealer avoid hitting doubles?
- Do most dealers hit sectors or not?
Inside betting leads the way to the ideal solution.
Create your own virtual wheel: let the dealer play against your wheel and not the other way around.
Can Roulette be beaten by a system? Yes!
We're all grownups here (well maybe) - of course you are bragging and boasting and offer no proof.
You're like many here and at other chatrooms - all boasting and afraid of a roasting.....
Quote from: RouletteSlayer on March 01, 2011, 03:07:14 PM
When the dealer spins his/her wheel, you spin your virtual wheel based on the previous spin result.
There are now two wheels in the game: your virtual wheel that you have created based on how a real wheel turns through 360 degrees (but based on your balanced arrangement of inside bet numbers); and there is the real wheel operated by the dealer. Now you have two wheels rotating in relation to each other.
The master stroke is to decide . . .
- How many numbers to bet on
- How to arrange your numbers in a perfectly balanced manner on your virtual wheel to nullify the zero
- How to create the virtual number wheel
BTW, the system is based purely on flat-betting. No progression is needed.
Is this like when the transporter, on the Star Ship Enterprise (NCC 1701), malfunctions and beams folks up and a duplicate is accidentally created? A virtual crew member.
I know that's a heck of a problem for Captain Kirk....
The grail is in the clues. :-)
The system was challenging to arrive at.
However, the resulting system is so simple, I could literally show it to a 10 year old and they would be making money within 30 minutes. All I would need to do is provide him/her with my signature groups of virtual wheel numbers, then show them how to easily select a specific group for betting. It's really a no-brainer system, and that's why I can't reveal it. If I did, forum members would be so successful, the casinos would try to find a way to ban such players. The situation would be out of control.
Quote from: RouletteSlayer on March 01, 2011, 05:15:53 PM
The grail is in the clues. :-)
The system was challenging to arrive at.
However, the resulting system is so simple, I could literally show it to a 10 year old and they would be making money within 30 minutes. All I would need to do is provide him/her with my signature groups of virtual wheel numbers, then show them how to easily select a specific group for betting. It's really a no-brainer system, and that's why I can't reveal it. If I did, forum members would be so successful, the casinos would try to find a way to ban such players. The situation would be out of control.
There are many here with similar systems - the casinos will go out of business if their system is revealed.
Why not ban together and force the casinos for a piece of the action?
Say 25% of each casino's profits, from Roulette, be deposited, daily, into your PayPal account. That way you can still play your system and get profits at the same time!
I'd actually pay money to see that statement!....
(Don't forget my 10% finder's fee)
So here we have a Holy Grail.
I just have one question...
If the system plays inside numbers, why the hell do you need to "kill the zero"? :scratch_ones_head:
if you have the holy grail. just go to the casino and make your fortune. why waste time teaching anybody else.think about number one. everybody else is. but i think the truth is you go to the casino and win or lose like us all. but then you go a little crazy and believe you have the secret to winning. all system sellers started out playing roulette . the more you lose the more you think you will win. i play roulette i have winning days. but the casino is in front. it is impossible to have a system. leaving out computers. that will win. if you play it for 24 hours,
On a European wheel outside betting is better than inside betting.The EV for inside betting is 1,35 and the EV for outside betting 2,4.There is no system that can beat the roulette.With a good strategy you can try it.
Quote from: schoenpoetser on February 23, 2011, 08:17:58 AM
1 the length of the sample 1.5M spins
2 High + 1 :Low -1 and zero 0
3 program High- Low
4 print High -Low
5 If High -Low is +15 bet 1 on Low, till H-L=0
6 if High- Low is -15 bet 1 on High, till H-L=0
7 summon bets
8 summon payouts
9 if number of spins>1M and H-L=0 end
@ schoenpoetser,
The condition highlighted means that the program will never terminate. I said in an earlier post that the difference between say, red and black increases as you take more spins, so it will NEVER go back to zero. I've written the program and it proves my point: it never stops. You would be better off betting that the gap will widen, not close. :)
Alternatively you could just reset the numbers to zero when your new balance is higher than the old balance. Say you get to a situation where you have +10 in the bank and there are 128 reds and 143 blacks. 143 - 128 = 15 so you start betting red. Instead of waiting until blacks and reds are equal you wait until your bank is at +11 and then reset the counts of both red and black to zero, then start again.
I tested it using the modified rules and the result was negative as expected. This was using La Partage rule which only takes half the stake when the zero hits. If there is no house edge you can get lots of runs which end positively, but every now and then you get a big loss which cancels out the wins.
The zero has a LOT to do with constructing a successful virtual wheel. Nullify the zero as relates to a virtual wheel and the casino loses some of its edge.
I am visiting the casinos and making good money.
I can never ever become a system seller. Do you know why? Because I can spend just I hour every single day of the year and make £$ 1000 during that time span, using £$ 5 inside bets. I could make more, but I'm not greedy.
My system will never be explicitly shared. IT'S TOO GOOD.
Cryptic, isn't it?
That's why the solution is SO unique. That's why the system is SO special.
Who has ever heard of the concept of creating a virtual roulette wheel using inside bets as the spokes of that wheel?
Quote from: RouletteSlayer on March 02, 2011, 04:26:47 PM
Cryptic, isn't it?
That's why the solution is SO unique. That's why the system is SO special.
Who has ever heard of the concept of creating a virtual roulette wheel using inside bets as the spokes of that wheel?
I know what you mean - it's Loony Tunes in my book......
Quote from: RouletteSlayer on March 02, 2011, 04:26:47 PM
Who has ever heard of the concept of creating a virtual roulette wheel using inside bets as the spokes of that wheel?
It's been done before...
over and over again.
I'll ask again, why remove the zero? It is just another pocket when playing inside bets. You do know that don't you?
Quote from: RouletteSlayer on March 02, 2011, 04:26:47 PM
That's why the solution is SO unique. That's why the system is SO special.
So what? it makes me laugh when people say you have to "think out of the box" to beat the game, it's like the more wacky the idea, the more effective it is. The ball doesn't care about any of that, good 'ol fashioned physics is good enough.
Quotegood 'ol fashioned physics is good enough.
Sure is :)
Those who want to create their own grail can do so based on ALL the clues provided.
Those who want to continue struggling to make money using roulette can continue on that route. That's their choice.
Fortunately, because I'm no longer in that losing category of people, I don't have to visit forums trying to find a solution. I've been able to use WACKY insights to finally crack the code. And it is only WACKY insights that have made it possible for me to sigh with relief and realise that I'll be able to retire young.
Use my WACKY insights to change your life! Or, you can continue with the illusion that roulette cannot be beaten and continue struggling with so-called strategies that do not work in the long-run.
Good luck to those who choose not to pursue my clues.
And I say congratulations, in advance, to those who crack the code using my WACKY insights.
This is the only forum that I have shared my clues with.
Get to work and change your life!
Change your life to the extent that you will never ever have to visit a roulette forum in search of a solution because you will finally have the grail that gives you the power to earn as much money as you want, whenever you want.
Print off all that I have said because when you continue to fail, you might think at some point, "Have I missed the greatest opportunity of my life by not pursuing the WACKY idea of a virtual wheel?"
This is my last post.
I wonder how many people at this forum will crack the roulette code like I did? ;-)
All the best.
@ Rouletteslayer,
Obviously, since I don't know the details of your method I'm not in a position to criticize it. I was just making the point that so many seem to think originality is the benchmark of an effective method, when in fact it is neither necessary nor sufficient.
There are an infinity of possible systems, so it makes sense to narrow down this set of possibilities by eliminating those which don't have a chance - namely those which utilize the notions of "balance", "trends" or statistics, which are only of interest AFTER the event, never before. You can also mark for deletion all those which try to "beat random with random".
Good luck with your method, I hope for your sake that you've tested it thoroughly, many have believed that they had the holy grail only to see it suffer a slow death...
Quote from: RouletteSlayer on March 03, 2011, 07:24:55 AM
This is my last post.
Thank God for that, or, I'll see it when I believe it...
Quote from: RouletteSlayer on March 03, 2011, 07:24:55 AM
Those who want to create their own grail can do so based on ALL the clues provided.
Those who want to continue struggling to make money using roulette can continue on that route. That's their choice.
Fortunately, because I'm no longer in that losing category of people, I don't have to visit forums trying to find a solution. I've been able to use WACKY insights to finally crack the code. And it is only WACKY insights that have made it possible for me to sigh with relief and realise that I'll be able to retire young.
Use my WACKY insights to change your life! Or, you can continue with the illusion that roulette cannot be beaten and continue struggling with so-called strategies that do not work in the long-run.
Good luck to those who choose not to pursue my clues.
And I say congratulations, in advance, to those who crack the code using my WACKY insights.
This is the only forum that I have shared my clues with.
Get to work and change your life!
Change your life to the extent that you will never ever have to visit a roulette forum in search of a solution because you will finally have the grail that gives you the power to earn as much money as you want, whenever you want.
Print off all that I have said because when you continue to fail, you might think at some point, "Have I missed the greatest opportunity of my life by not pursuing the WACKY idea of a virtual wheel?"
This is my last post.
I wonder how many people at this forum will crack the roulette code like I did? ;-)
All the best.
I know you don't have diddly-squat in terms of a system to beat Roulette.
You are like some here - delusional. If you had anything you'd be a full time Roulette player and that's all the gratification you need - not bragging on an internet chat room how special you are.
You shout "Look at me, I'm special" and get your jollies from it. You sprinkle around wacky ideas that you hold the key to our fortunes and to the destruction of the gaming industry. Personally, I'm embarrassed to be associated with you guys. You offer no solutions, guidance, interaction, or even mild entertainment, just your constant drumbeat of "I'm special; look at me".
Do-it-yourself psychiatry is very dangerous - leave me out of your search for solutions please....
P.S.
Want to make me look like a fool? Just take my challenge and if you have a profit of even $1, after 2 hours or 100 minimum spins, I'll apologize and heck even send you a $25 gift certificate to Outback Steak House - I hand them out to folks all the time as thank yous:
nolinks://vlsroulette.com/bet-selection/if-you-want-to-demonstrate-your-system-in-public/ (nolinks://vlsroulette.com/bet-selection/if-you-want-to-demonstrate-your-system-in-public/)
Quote from: MauiSunset link=topic=18039. msg130309#msg130309 date=1299167784
I know you don't have diddly-squat in terms of a system to beat Roulette.
You are like some here - delusional. If you had anything you'd be a full time Roulette player and that's all the gratification you need - not bragging on an internet chat room how special you are.
You shout "Look at me, I'm special" and get your jollies from it. You sprinkle around wacky ideas that you hold the key to our fortunes and to the destruction of the gaming industry. Personally, I'm embarrassed to be associated with you guys. You offer no solutions, guidance, interaction, or even mild entertainment, just your constant drumbeat of "I'm special; look at me".
Do-it-yourself psychiatry is very dangerous - leave me out of your search for solutions please. . . .
P. S.
Want to make me look like a fool? Just take my challenge and if you have a profit of even $1, after 2 hours or 100 minimum spins, I'll apologize and heck even send you a $25 gift certificate to Outback Steak House - I hand them out to folks all the time as thank yous:
hxxp: vlsroulette. com/bet-selection/if-you-want-to-demonstrate-your-system-in-public/
Does your test require flat betting or can progression be used?
Quote from: ll l ll l lll ll on March 03, 2011, 01:22:40 PM
Does your test require flat betting or can progression be used?
Doesn't matter to me - you do what you want.
I'm just interested in watching folks play Roulette for 2 hours, or 100 minimum spins, and if they have a winnings of even $1 that is something to behold. You don't have to say a word - just play in real time.
I understand anyone can have a bad day and if the person want's to repeat the exercise up to 2 more times then the total of the sessions just has to exceed $1; and I'll send anyone a $25 gift card at Outback.
Just knowing that someone out there has a winning system is a big deal in my book - it will have me looking in new directions and questioning my beliefs - well worth the $25.
P.S.
If you're thinking of doing the challenge I'm on vacation in Maui until March 14, 2011 and we are extremely busy having fun - March 14 or later is best for me when I'm available 24/7.
Hello Rouletteslayer! I sent you private message, please read my message. Donik777.
I think most people don't get the big picture.
Let's take a simple example.
Me and you are playing a game. I have 6 black balls, you have 5 red balls.
We put them all into a hat. Then you have to draw one, if it's black, you give me 1 unit, if it's red, I give you 1 unit. After each game we put all the balls back in the hat.
Basically, I have an edge on you, as I have 1 more ball of my color in the hat, but, that doesen't mean you can't beat me on a long run. It's really possible, try it yourself. . .
Even online roulette can be beaten easily if you have a fair amount of money and a clever system.
Quote from: Valex on May 04, 2011, 10:57:07 AM
but, that doesen't mean you can't beat me on a long run.
er.. yes, that's exactly what it means. That IS the big picture - I can't beat you in the long run.
E(X) = 5/11 - 6/11 = -9.1% (worse than double zero roulette)
QED
Here is how you beat a negative expectation game. Don't perform to expectation. That's mostly a fallacy anyway. When you expect something to happen that does not mean it will perform exactly as you expect it to.
If you quit at any up point in your session then you are beating short termed expectations. If you do it every time you go to a casino then you are doing it long term too. There is enough variance in a practical game to be in the winning state at least once before descending below the even point for each session. If you are smart you won't start in a downturn. That's doable by just watching your first bets as virtual bets, just to see that you are not in a steep downturn. Your goal can be 1 unit up and leave. In that way you can beat the odds easily. It's just that greed takes many new players over. They lack self control. There is where the pitfall really exists.
Definitions (again) = Long Run?
Ken
The answer is YES, but the system involves cheating.
After every spin you should compute the profit percentage of the total betting.Let the computer draw a diagram. In the beginning the diagram can be positive or negative with big amplitudes.The EC give smaller amplitudes than the numbers. After a certain number of spins it is allways negative and the result is - 2,7% This is the result of every long testruns.
A strategy uses the features of such diagrams.
Honestly, and this is just my opinion, I don't think there is a system for roulette that will allow for winning 100% of the time.
I have developed quite a few systems and tested dozens of others, and some allowed me to win a lot more than I lost. The problem is, however, that most times it took several wins to equal one loss.
Recently, I have resigned myself to believe that using Kimo Li's matrix to identify and isolate winning bets is the best course of action for consistent winning.
Looking at the wheel as a grid instead of how we traditionally see it (as a wheel) allows you to detect and recognize several patterns for betting that can be exploited.
I don't use a set system, but I use the matrix chart to identify potential profitable bets, such as rows or columns that have not hit in some time, and adversely, rows and colums that are hitting more than others. Unhit splits and number clumps (3-6 number stretches - I call them "neighbor streets"), are also easily identified and exploited.
I came under fire a few years ago and was accused of lying about how much I won. Now, there are no hard feelings about this, but I wanted to explain a little.
I do win on probably 90% of my outings, but let me clarify this.
I go for $30-$50 profit on a trip. Now, that may not sound like a lot. But I live 5 miles from the casino and it's easy to go and earn $30 or $40 in a couple of hours.
Now, I think if you all think about it, you will realize that most of you probably get up $30, $40 or more on any given outing. However, that's peanuts to most roulette players, so many shoot for more and in the end they end up losing a little.
But for me, $30 or $40 is great because I can go every day and it hardly costs anything in gas to go.
I'm happy with that, and it's almost always doable if you can use the matrix to recognize potential betting hot spots. Just my two cents. :)