This is so simple, I just cant believe. Yes, you need a large bankroll, but you can virtually win 1$ on EVERY bet.
Wait for 9 consecutives ECs (color, even/odd or H/L) and just start simple MARTINGALE (yes, the classic MARTINGALE) start betting 1$, and double up on every loss.
We all know MAXIMUM consecutives ECs is 22 (detected in Vegas 10 years ago in real live spins and tested over 12 MILLION RNG spins in this forum: nolinks://vlsroulette.com/reference-area/12-million-rng-spin-stats-shared-by-poit/ (nolinks://vlsroulette.com/reference-area/12-million-rng-spin-stats-shared-by-poit/) )
Progression (13 steps):
1,2,4,8,16,32,64,128,256,512,1024,2048,4096 (9 virtual spins + maximum 13 bets)
total = 8191$
recommended bankroll = 8191$
I know it seems stupid to bet 4096$ to win 1$, but mathematics are on our side, or not?
At least 2 online casinos have max bet of 10000$ limit for outside bets
Has anybody tried this system (or similar)
Am I missing something?
The question is:
If you get to that last level of betting, how confident are you putting down over 4 grand on a 50/50 chance?
It's not like records can't be broken.
Ok, yes I GLANCE at some methods. lol I did a thread for this already (kind of). Something like..."What is the best non-playable method?" You can file this under that thread. It might 'look good' on paper but thats it. Also, you would need a casino that went from a min. bet of $1 UP TO a bet of $4,100 and balls bigger than mine, good luck. Ken
MR J. There are some casinos with 10000 table limit for outside bets.
I dont have balls to try it because 8000$ are money for me, but I am sure there are people with enough money to try it and have tried before....
Remember: maths are in our side!
I would like to know in 12 million spin test, how many bets for this method could we have (not many 9 consecutive ECs), and how many times we can get to the last level of progression
"There are some casinos with 10000 table limit for outside bets" >>> Thats fine but it has to be COMBINED with a minimum outside bet of $1. At most casinos, a HIGH max bet (outside) will have a higher minimum bet than $1, just saying. Ken
"There are some casinos with 10000 table limit for outside bets" >>> Thats fine but it has to be COMBINED with a minimum outside bet of $1. At most casinos, a HIGH max bet (outside) will have a higher minimum bet than $1, just saying. Ken"
OK, thanks Mr J. I knew I was missing something....
If I had to estimate. A max outside bet of 10K, probably $100 would be the minimum for that same outside. Ken
Quote from: Mr J on August 03, 2010, 06:04:18 PM
If I had to estimate. A max outside bet of 10K, probably $100 would be the minimum for that same outside. Ken
Probably more like $500 minimum.
It's not like records can't be broken.>>>
In 1947 a casino in Brasil recorded 33 reds in a row, thats the record as far as I know.
I made similar topic in Brainstorm section and made some calculations for dozens if you want to read.
Maths, as you put, is not on your side. Casinos just love guys like you.
I have seen 32 (thirty two) reds in a row once and over 20 EC in a row many, many and many more times.
So, do yourself a favor and pass on this one...
Insidebet
36 SPINS--THREE LINES ALTERNATING--7-12,19-24,25-30--
Happened to me personally last year.
36 SPINS--THREE LINES ALTERNATING--7-12,19-24,25-30--
Happened to me personally last year.
You are behind! The record 30 years ago was 32 REDS in row. I don't believe that in 12 mio spins (live wheels) don't come more than 22 in row! That's a fairy tail. RNGs for real money (not for fun!)will soon make new record. Than you can rip your hair.
Hermes
"The record 30 years ago was 32 REDS in row" >>> I have an issue with records. What the current record is, means nothing. Granted, I dont like this method but I'll say this. Lets pretend this was a decent method. You would have to be playing at the EXACT time that the current record would be broken. What are the odds? Hundreds and hundreds of casinos around the world and you are playing a method at the SAME time the world record is broke? No way. Ken
"Probably more like $500 minimum" >>> I was thinking about this. You are probably correct Bombus, more like $500 but certainly not $1. Ken
You are right Mr j but if you have a bad karma the record will be broken exactly at that casino at that time you are playing on that table. There is no insurance against that event. Long time ago, for 6 months of testing I didn't get a numbers from hell but already first live wheel game showed me that the hell is alive! My $2,000 bankroll went to hell.
From that time rule: Never say Never!
Hermes
I would hate to witness a near record EC sequence and get only $1 out of it!!
As a rule, I do not try to tame the wheel, but ride along with it.
Quote from: Jeromin on August 18, 2010, 09:51:14 PM
I would hate to witness a near record EC sequence and get only $1 out of it!!
As a rule, I do not try to tame the wheel, but ride along with it.
Well that's a different story.
It even wins on continous 8 spins repeating,
on the 1+ 1- rules.
You don't have to progress as you presented,
and it's rec.la partage,or even better,En prison table.
I have try ed to place my excelprogram of the Shoeshineboy on the downloadside. It is based on a randomrow of 20 ECs shall not fall. If it is available try it. You can download the program also with:
hxxp: nolinks. mijnbestand. nl/Bestand-VRKS8BU7W3M3. xls
Let me know your be-finding.
Just by thinking of playing this system is considered "CRIME THINK" . :diablo:
N,D.
And possibly the worst part of all is that you must wait for 9 consecutive ec's just to make $1! How much profit will that add up to per spin?
Casinos all over the world beware !!! You are about being taken !!! The Grand army of VLS is on the march with their ruthless ( toothless) systems !!!Watch for the bite. :sarcastic:
N.D.
Quote from: zwanatico on August 03, 2010, 05:17:55 PM
This is so simple, I just cant believe. Yes, you need a large bankroll, but you can virtually win 1$ on EVERY bet.
Wait for 9 consecutives ECs (color, even/odd or H/L) and just start simple MARTINGALE (yes, the classic MARTINGALE) start betting 1$, and double up on every loss.
We all know MAXIMUM consecutives ECs is 22 (detected in Vegas 10 years ago in real live spins and tested over 12 MILLION RNG spins in this forum: nolinks://vlsroulette.com/reference-area/12-million-rng-spin-stats-shared-by-poit/ (nolinks://vlsroulette.com/reference-area/12-million-rng-spin-stats-shared-by-poit/) )
Progression (13 steps):
1,2,4,8,16,32,64,128,256,512,1024,2048,4096 (9 virtual spins + maximum 13 bets)
total = 8191$
recommended bankroll = 8191$
I know it seems stupid to bet 4096$ to win 1$, but mathematics are on our side, or not?
At least 2 online casinos have max bet of 10000$ limit for outside bets
Has anybody tried this system (or similar)
Am I missing something?
I'm sure you never entered real casino.--22 OF SAME RECORD??????
Every few days I see more than that.41 IS A RECORD HIGH NUMBERS.
With shoeshineboy you have never wait for a available row!!!
you are an idiot who has never played roulette and knows nothing about runs, because if you did you would know that while you are sitting there like an idiot waiting for your "event" to occur, the total of all runs longer than the one you are waiting for will cancel out your wins (even as infrequently as both will occur, if you are waiting on long runs) and the house edge will prevail.
Simon for whom is your reply?In this case I think you call me an ideot. I play a very long time in the casino and the last years on internet. I study the roulette and I program the different systems on the computer. For every idea is a computerprogram. A simulation is the best way to judge an idea or a system. My best advice for you is to look in a mirror before writing a reply. Beware of your words!!
I hit reply to the very first post in this ridiculous thread touting some kind of successful system by waiting for x amount of consecutive outcomes and then betting against them (should have quoted it.) I am calling the poster of this system an idiot for posting this system as it shows he knows nothing about roulette and nothing about math, like others here who think you can win with any kind of progressive betting (especially an idiotic play like a martingale), because they do not understand that when there is a negative expectation on every bet, the sum total of all bets will be negative no matter when or how or how many chips you place on the board. this is a long-ago proven theorem of applied mathematics but the people left at this board have a lot to learn, and will continue to make the same mistakes all over again that newbie players make.
roulette is not hard to beat but it is hard to conquer.
True words warrior but keep the battles short.
"roulette is not hard to beat but it is hard to conquer" >>> I love this saying. I will be using it. :good:
Ken