It's easy to win at Roulette. All you do is to use your method to see if it is currently working well, if you can. It could be the simplest system ever created, just bet on black all the time. In the short term you can see if it is working for you by your win rate.
But how do you control losing?
Are there techniques to tread water while you are waiting to see when your system starts working? Is it possible to break even while waiting to see what works? If progressions are dangerous to people that use break even techniques then what is the best way to break even?
----------------
WARNING about James Albert Wendel for all new visitors!
James goes by many names. He thinks that he has special math knowledge that allows him to win. He uses this forum in order to put people on the hook, that will believe his fantasies and delusions. He thinks he has a gambling team that goes with him to casinos. Don't be fooled by what he says. James has a damaged brain. He is clinically being treated for mental illness. Mostly, and so far, he has been a harmless nuisance by interrupting and disrupting several threads here. You know what they say at the zoo? Don't feed the animals. James is an attention deficited, zoned out, maxed zoomed dweeby. Make sure you are sure of your facts before engaging James in his fantasies.
Roulette is a game of negative expectation.
To break even you need to overcome the house edge, so isn't breaking even in effect winning?
If you can break even you're more than half way home, and from there it shouldn't take much to show some profit.
Breaking even is the hard part.
Quote from: Gizmotron on October 14, 2009, 11:09:16 AM
WARNING about James Albert Wendel for all new visitors!
James goes by many names. He thinks that he has special math knowledge that allows him to win. He uses this forum in order to put people on the hook, that will believe his fantasies and delusions. He thinks he has a gambling team that goes with him to casinos. Don't be fooled by what he says. James has a damaged brain. He is clinically being treated for mental illness. Mostly, and so far, he has been a harmless nuisance by interrupting and disrupting several threads here. You know what they say at the zoo? Don't feed the animals. James is an attention deficited, zoned out, maxed zoomed dweeby. Make sure you are sure of your facts before engaging James in his fantasies.
If he proved to be mentally 'not okay', people can just ignore him.
A member (whose posts I admittedly liked) got banned recently for inappropriately attacking Wendel. Was it really worth it? Anyone with a brain can notice that his posts are pure nonsense, so why bother?
It's just that there are those here (and in every gambling forum) who simply
want to believe in something, those who test a couple of 60-100 spin sessions and jump to the conclusion that all he claimed is right and start giving him praise and thank you's. But then again, these will always exist whether you continue to warn against him or not.
Quote from: Marven on October 18, 2009, 09:20:02 AM
If he proved to be mentally 'not okay', people can just ignore him.
A member (whose posts I admittedly liked) got banned recently for inappropriately attacking Wendel. Was it really worth it? Anyone with a brain can notice that his posts are pure nonsense, so why bother?
It's just that there are those here (and in every gambling forum) who simply want to believe in something, those who test a couple of 60-100 spin sessions and jump to the conclusion that all he claimed is right and start giving him praise and thank you's. But then again, these will always exist whether you continue to warn against him or not.
Well excuse me Marvin but you are slightly misinformed if you don't mind me pointing it out. James busted into every thread I was posting on and disrupted it. He gave his testimony that I was leading people to his version of destruction and that he would disrupt everywhere I posted for it. He appointed himself moderator of anything that I post. Did you miss that? Many times I was tolerant and asked for my posts to be removed. But James never quit with his relentless interruptions. If you guys moderate all his disruptions then I will stop warning people that he has special permission to disrupt threads while he does not ask questions in or contribute to it in ant way. I see it more as a failing of the moderators than a nuisance caused by this usual pest. Please respond. I find it interesting that you missed Jame's interruptions.
To be honest with you Mark, I intentionally ignore his threads. Any threads he opens outside of his section will be moved to the latter by the admins.
As for disruptive posting in your or anyone's threads, I will personally remove any ones I spot. Mind you he's been warning (lol) us mods about moving/removing his posts, but even those complaints will be stopped. He's to be quarantined in his own section where he is free to post whatever mind-blowing revelations he can imagine. Him initially refusing to stick to his own section, should already be a clear indication of his thrive to mere public attention.
Quote from: Skakus on October 18, 2009, 06:32:43 AM
Roulette is a game of negative expectation.
To break even you need to overcome the house edge, so isn't breaking even in effect winning?
If you can break even you're more than half way home, and from there it shouldn't take much to show some profit.
Breaking even is the hard part.
Wow, I wonder if anyone can prove that Roulette is not "a game of negative expectation."
For probability stats to come true a player must have thousands of hours playing time, actually placing equal valued, equal conditioned bets, in order for the stats to force a negative expectation to happen. At least that appears to be the truth concerning betting systems that tend to do this very thing.
If 100 players chose to play 50 hours of EC's then perhaps a few of them would finish those 50 hours in a positive state. In fact a professional player might have several wins too, in just fifty hours of play. I have noticed that a fixed set of rules, that make the exact same type of bet selections, always ends up in the negative if tested over thousands of thousands of spins. But what if you have 10 different sets of bet selection rules that have the ability to be changed to match what is currently being seen from the recent spin results. With an intelligent bet selection process, combined with a quit while you are in the positive state rule, can anyone beat the math statistics. I believe that it is assumed that you must experience the full effect of deep losses in order to cause the negative expectation to occur. What if you change to something else that is winning and it causes the deep effect of losses from continuing. What does that do to the stats? You have taken a proactive approach to minimizing the deep loss effect? Does that have an effect on the long term stats? How do you know that the losses must happen and that you can't change away from them. How do you know that? Just saying it does not make it so. How do you know that you can't change away from large downturns? The only thing that will help anyone on all these forums is for someone to prove it, one way or another.
Marven, that's great. I had no idea the plan was to put him in his location set for him. So I will just flag his disruption with a please move Jame's post and this request to move his posts too. Sounds easy enough.
In my opinion, that is something that can only be proven to yourself (experience over a period of time).
Ron.
Roulette is a game for leisure and relaxation and any slight losses which might occur could be considered well I can afford this game. :diablo: :diablo:
This is the truth and 29 1/2 years have taught me to come to this conclusion.Due to my superb bet selections backed by a well constructed MM system I have never experienced any steep draw downs. I might have reached the border of my loss limits
but strict discipline has prevented me form a miss step. :ok:
It`s a losing game therefore don`t embrace false prophets.
Nathan Detroit.
Hi Gizmotron.
All ANYONE has to do is Hit the (Report to moderator) Icon at the bottom right hand side of any Post.
That will bring up a box and You and everyone else can type in the reason.
Like ..Abusive....Disruptive etc.
That way the Post comes to the Moderators Straight away and then We can deal with it ASAP.
Lanky.
Quote from: Nathan Detroit on October 18, 2009, 02:45:59 PM
...Due to my superb bet selections backed by a well constructed MM system I have never experienced any steep draw downs. I might have reached the border of my loss limits
but strict discipline has prevented me form a miss step.
That's very interesting. I have noticed that bet selection goes through the three states that trends exist in also. They go through working very well at times, chop at times, and working very bad at times. It's based on the three stages of the trend continuing or ending right away. You can have any type of bet selection process and if it's consistent in nature it will go through these same stages. There are times when my guessing, based on trends, is doing very well. It's clear as a bell to me that I'm having a very good stretch. There are things you can do when this happens that are way above your normal flat betting scheme. You can use let it ride, you can use very large flat betting. I think it's critical to know when these times are happening for you.
Yep test was spot on.
It worked Perfectly Giz.
Lanky
Cool, I won't have to make posting requests that need to be removed also. It just cleans up the discussions.
Quote from: Gizmotron on October 18, 2009, 07:08:39 PM
Cool, I won't have to make posting requests that need to be removed also. It just cleans up the discussions.
Exactly Giz.
Its a win win for everbody that uses it.
Lanky.
What I don't understand is if someone is banned, why allow them back here again with a different username???
I would delete all their their posts, threads, sections they would soon be forgotten. Now you know why they
would never have me as a Moderator, far too ruthless ;) ;D
Back to the Topic. If a system has all the necessary components, produces info, maximum number of spins, exit
strategy, which includes break even situations, minimum losses, then it has to create an advantage and make
a profit in the long term.
Hopefully I should have the Signum system, EC, B&R, website finished by next week and it will contain all the
components mentioned above.
Richard
Quote from: Mr Chips on October 20, 2009, 04:21:42 AM
Hopefully I should have the Signum system, EC, B&R, website finished by next week
Richard
Waiting for it
QuoteWhat I don't understand is if someone is banned, why allow them back here again with a different username???
Hi Richard.
Mate Victor has the Correct answer to that and He knows far more about it then I do.
All I will say is that this has been brought up before in the Mods area on different occasions and with different Administrators and Mods.
However Victor's answer will explained it all to You.......
Your Friend.
Lanky.
PS> Sorry Giz for the off topic....but I figured You would want to know the answer as well and would not mind.
Hello dear Richard,
It is known people at the same internet server provider do get shared IP's.
We once applied banning IP ranges and it happened one of the offending users was using America Online (AOL) as provider. Guess what, many people from that provider got banned.
Banning single IP numbers is pretty much useless as the IPs are changed regularly in a normal fashion. Also, if you ban complete ISP's you'll end up banning lots of non-cheaters too. It is not worth.
There are some administrators who have posted they aren't afraid to ban entire ranges but we aren't like them.
Besides, nothing prevents a person from physically going to a friend's computer or access from public internet places, or hiding their IP by other means.
We handle this in a case-by-case basis mate, but banning entire IP ranges is not an option for us, as we want the most people to enjoy our service and it wouldn't be nice for anyone to go to a website and being told "you are banned" when having made nothing against the place.
Quote from: Gizmotron on October 18, 2009, 12:33:29 PM
...I have noticed that a fixed set of rules, that make the exact same type of bet selections, always ends up in the negative if tested over thousands of thousands of spins. But what if you have 10 different sets of bet selection rules that have the ability to be changed to match what is currently being seen from the recent spin results....
How do you know that the losses must happen and that you can't change away from them...
I believe that a chameleon response to random changes is the way to go, but you could end up with 10 losing sets, or losing after 10 times as long at the table. If you try to change away from loses, you could just end up switching to more losses. Your proactive efforts could just as easily be your undoing.
There is definitely something there though.
QuoteIf you try to change away from loses, you could just end up switching to more losses.
That must happen. There has to be a time when your first moves to change must lose. This does not keep up if you opt out of steep downturns. It would make no sense to keep betting anything that had many losses in a row. I change with my feet and get up and leave. I also begin betting after checking to see that I'm not in a lose - lose condition when I start. The trick is to minimize losses while allowing win streaks to continue. What is difficult is playing when it is choppy. Your wins and losses balance out. You don't lose but you don't win either. If you play with patience then you can wait for win streaks. Sometimes the win streaks jump with you when you change. It literally comes down to win / loss observation while it relates to effective bet selection schemes. You can do this without changing your bet selection process. But changing can help you walk into a win streak. Sometimes it's so simple it's just betting the opposite of your bet selection premise. If it's a down streak then the opposite is a win streak. It's hard to know when to adjust. In my opinion, knowing when to change and how, is everything.