Hello to everyone in the Forum!
I've spent weeks reading so many good things from so many contributors in this forum, and I must say, it's quite the lively crew. I feel I've gotten to Know some of you well, but of course, since this is my first post, this will be your first impression of what I have to bring. So...let me introduce myself.
I am new to you in this forum, but NOT new to forums. I've had quite the following in extensive threads in other financial endeavors. The reason it's taken me so long to post, is mostly because of the inevitable number of Venom-Spitters that will come in with their negativity, and make sure everyone leaves feeling down as dirt. We all know who they are, and Jean-Claud-Hopper, if you could just refrain...LOL!
Anyways, this is gambling. Nothing is a sure bet, and why can't everyone just accept that? There will be NO sure bet in an open system, as it would be impossible to cover EVERY possibility for a profit. A CLOSED system would be where every possibility is covered, but that won't produce a profit in Roulette because of the House Edge. How many have tried covering 35 out of 37 possible possibilities, and still LOST? LOL. More then one soul has tried that. So until ALL possibilities can be covered at a profit, there will NEVER be a Holy Grail. Since the rules of the game, don't allow for it, we can only observe what could work, and be wise enough to notice our ass is getting kicked, and quickly surmise it's time to call it a day...LOL. It's that simple.
Also, I find it kind of entertaining to observe the self-proclaimed ADVANTAGE PLAYERS, who call everything Gambler's Fallacy, except what THEY do. When Really, what they have done is to put together a whole SERIES of gambler's fallacy systems, and INTUITIVELY apply them to a game in session...LOL ! I know. I am one of those guys...! More then once, I was whispered around a table that I was a Professional player, when I'd keep hitting on just a few placed bets on inside numbers, over and over again.... BUT, unbelievably, I could still get clobbered occasionally, and hence I decided to make a structured type system, which didn't require all the mental gymnastics to have a successful session...A system where the chances of winning are high, and consistent enough not to have to worry about total loss. I could always start a gym session, if I seen I was getting in trouble...lol. It kinda works. One simple AP rule would state, If it ain't working...go the other way!
It's also kind of funny when you think about this. If Roulette were like life, and you claimed to make $3,000. 00 a month at your JOB, but when you take a loss of $1200 for rent, a loss of $600 a month for food and transportation, and other losses adding up to yet another $700. 00, leaving you with $500 at the end of a month's session, some people would say you are doing well. BUT, if you have a Roulette system, that does the same thing, you are called a LOSER...lol! The Venom-Spitters say..."Well, your system had to Pay Rent, Transportation, and other costs, and only left you with $500. 00. What the hell kind of garbage system is that...??!! There's no sure bet here! Come on...here's a list of REAL Spins from 1966, that shows it lost BIG. Where's my Self-Importance Guarantee, you bastard? Boo Hoo!...hiss!...hiss!"
LOL. Anyways, just rambling on here...take what you need out of this, and leave the rest...
I will post the system in my next reply. Here comes!
Cheers!
Omniwiz
Omniwiz System... Dozens and Columns with Sweet Spot
After each spin, mark down the Dozen and Column the number appeared in. . . Example 24. . . It will always be in Dozen 2 and in Column 3. The number 5 will always be in Dozen 1 and Column 2. So these two numbers would be marked down as such. . .
24 2 3
5 1 2
Ok. Now we wait for a win in either side. A win is when any last two columns or dozens repeats in any of the last two or three spins. . and start betting the Dozen or Column that wins. . say the number 32 shows up. . . then we have this. . .
24 2 3
5 1 2
32 3 2
Ok. We now have a repeat in the columns, and also note that if 33 had shown up, it would have been a 323 pattern in columns, and also qualifies as the side to bet on for the next spin. Thing is we are trying to AVOID the 213-213-213; 123-123-123; 312-312-312 etc. patterns on either side, where the third spin back is repeating. We want to be on the side where just two columns or dozens are active, and we'll be playing the last two winning columns or dozens that show up. Even if the pattern goes 1-3-2-2-2-2-2-2-2, in this scenario we will be playing on 3, 2 even though the 3 is back 8 spins ago. Ok? We now place 1 unit on each column 3, 2. Now the number 36 shows up...
24 2 3
5 1 2
32 3 2
36 3 3
Now we can start marking the score sheet for wins and losses on BOTH Dozens and Columns, (actual and virtual) but we STAY on the side that won where our bet was placed, until there's a loss or a secondary style of play, a sweet-spot . . . A W is a Win, and an X is a loss. The V is our first virtual win, and after that we can start betting. So the scorecard will be marked as such. . .
D C
24 2 3
5 1 2
32 3 2
36 3 3 w W(V)
Our next bet is on Columns 2, 3 and the number 20 shows up. . .
D C
24 2 3
5 1 2
32 3 2
36 3 3 w W
20 2 2 x W
Ok. Two wins. . . bet Columns 2, 3 again. . . and. . . the number 1 shows up. . .
D C
24 2 3
5 1 2
32 3 2
36 3 3 w W
20 2 2 x W
1 1 1 x X
Ok, rare but happens, both sides lost. We stay on Columns, as this is where your last win is, and play Columns 1, 2. At this point we will NOT double or triple our bets, but mark the loss, or circle it to remind us to cash out at a "Sweet Spot". We will also remember to scratch it off, after a successful win at our Sweet Spot. (Note: Conservative players can wait until a W appears) The number 28 shows up...
D C
24 2 3
5 1 2
32 3 2
36 3 3 w W
20 2 2 x W
1 1 1 x X
28 3 1 x W
So far we have won 3 times, and lost once. As dozens and columns pay 2-1 that means at $5 per unit, you would have won $5 on 36, won $5 on 20, Lost $10 on 1, and won $5 on 28, leaving you with $5 profit so far. . . Now, depending on your style of play, as a conservative player you would continue flat-betting on columns 1,2, or if you are an aggressive player with a larger bankroll, you might want to take advantage of the sweet-spot on dozens. . . I will DEFINE the Sweet-Spot for you right now.
When the pattern XW or ESPECIALLY XXW shows up in a Dozen or Column, if you visualize a 45 degree arrow pointing downwards to the opposite D or C from the Last W, you will win more then lose. To make this simpler, look at this score sheet where we are at. In C, we have an X at 1, and a W at 28. So, the scorecard is predicting a W in the Dozens. You could try to regain your loss from when the number 1 showed up, by placing 2 units on dozens 1, and dozens 3. Or super aggressive with 3 units on each. The style of play is up to you, and your own appetite for taking risks. This pattern SELDOM loses twice in a row. ONLY play the Sweet Spot ONCE after an xW or xxW. Another xW or xxW has to appear before it can be considered a new Sweet Spot. So the wheel spins. . . the number 26 shows up. . .
D C
24 2 3
5 1 2
32 3 2
36 3 3 w W
20 2 2 x W
1 1 1 x X
28 3 1 x W
26 3 2 W W
We won either way we played it. Now, the SWEET-SPOT moves over to Columns, and especially sweet as the pattern on Dozens is XXW. An aggressive rich player might put $10 on each column 1,2. Or a conservative player simply flat bets once again on Columns. . . the number 25 shows up. . .
D C
24 2 3
5 1 2
32 3 2
36 3 3 w W
20 2 2 x W
1 1 1 x X
28 3 1 x W
26 3 2 W W
25 3 1 W W
Won again. . . Staying on columns. . . the number 9 shows up. . .
D C
24 2 3
5 1 2
32 3 2
36 3 3 w W
20 2 2 x W
1 1 1 x X
28 3 1 x W
26 3 2 W W
25 3 1 W W
9 1 3 w X
Since we lost here on columns, we now shift over to dozens. . . We mark the loss, and place 1 unit on Dozen 1, and Dozen 3, waiting for a sweet spot. . . The number 8 shows up. . .
D C
24 2 3
5 1 2
32 3 2
36 3 3 w W
20 2 2 x W
1 1 1 x X
28 3 1 x W
26 3 2 W W
25 3 1 W W
9 1 3 w X
8 1 2 W X
We win, playing on Dozens once again. The number 18 shows up. . .
D C
24 2 3
5 1 2
32 3 2
36 3 3 w W
20 2 2 x W
1 1 1 x X
28 3 1 x W
26 3 2 W W
25 3 1 W W
9 1 3 w X
8 1 2 W X
18 2 3 X W
We lose. . . but a sweet-spot has appeared. We play on Dozens again to however you want to recover from the two losses. You lost $20 on 9, and 18, and made $5 on 8. Down $15 on those spins. 2 or 3 units on dozens for the next spin. . . the number 16 shows up. . .
D C
24 2 3
5 1 2
32 3 2
36 3 3 w W
20 2 2 x W
1 1 1 x X
28 3 1 x W
26 3 2 W W
25 3 1 W W
9 1 3 w X
8 1 2 W X
18 2 3 X W
16 2 1 W X
Nice win. Good profit. . . once again on Dozens as we are clear on all progressions. . . and on and on.
Bouncing back and forth from Dozens and Columns, is by far the most effective (percentage-wise) way of playing roulette. The cost though is high, if you miss on a sweet-spot, and your session is likely done if as a conservative player you miss twice in a row. . . LOL. If you have sufficient bankroll you could try on a third progression at a sweet spot. Takes a long time usually to have that happen, and usually you will win there, but the stakes will be high. You COULD just flat-bet the sweet spots for a good profit, but there are times when a column or dozen will run for 20 or more wins in a row, and you've missed some easy money. It's a good system, flexible, and can be personalized. The winnings can be substantial on a good day as well.
Hope I've been helpful.
Cheers!
Omniwiz
I appreciate you writing all that out. However, playing it in a real casino would be a nightmare.
U do NOT know anything about APlaying.
So u can t have an opinion on it....
And yes ur system isn t even a system.
Hi Cheese!
This is a VERY simple system once you know the table. When any number shows up, you would know instantly the row and column that number is in, and you could know what the next bet is in seconds. Maybe I over-explained it, but it is certainly worth learning, and developing your own style for it. And there are no complicated progressions to figure out along with that. At least not at this point. There are many good progression experts in here who might be able to stretch this out for some extra viability. . .
And hi Jean-Clawd. I see you respected my request to refrain from spitting any venom in my very first thread. . . LOL! I guess it takes all kinds to make the wheel go round. . . lol.
Cheers!
Yes but if only AP were playing in the wheels...the wheels wouldn t exist anymore..LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOOLOLOL
U are just a man that descovered Roulette some months ago...or U just don t have the mind to understand that Roulette is unbeatable with Maths and Patterns
Quote from: Jean-Claud on October 01, 2010, 12:33:27 PM
U just don t have the mind to understand that Roulette is unbeatable with Maths and Patterns
At last! A man who speaks the truth!!!!!
Trying to beat roulette with patterns is like trying to complete a jigsaw with one piece missing. The missing piece is the house edge. No matter how many different ways you put the pieces together you will never have a full jigsaw. You guys are working without a full set! ;D
I can see JC can't even read. In my second paragraph, I asked you to stay out of this thread. It's this reason alone, I've decided not to participate in this forum for as long as I have. Same everywhere you go. Try to be helpful, and the snakes come in droves to remind everybody, how great they are, and how stupid everyone else is, and discredit everyone who doesn't feel as they do, which is lower then a snake's belly. Presumptuous and judgmental, these types always do their best to destroy good intentions, and basically ruin anything that might prove beneficial, helpful, or if nothing else, entertaining. AND if a system has some merit, will go to any length, to prove where it has failed somewhere, all the while professing their AP greatness without any proof whatsoever.
Nevertheless, JC and Mike. Have you proven this system has no merit? Other then nothing works, except what WE do?
For instance, I can also be presumptuous and judgmental. I can tell you two have played a lot of systems, that cost you, and came to the conclusion that they were hurtful, and when you finally found that working with the flow is what ends up working best after all, figure you are doing EVERYONE a favor in here, by discrediting something, even before it gets off the ground. Maybe your intentions are good, but your approach is wrong. My intentions were to help people by starting out with a good basic structure, and it will certainly teach them through noticing what happens in the flow of a session, how better to become an AP. But, by pre-empting my intentions here, with your worthless attacks, you could possibly kill what I have to offer. Fine upstanding person you are?...so I will ask you once again to stay out of this thread. I could make you look like a real fool, but you are doing well enough on your own...so let's end it here.
I think this system is worth testing out to the extreme. It does have merit. Those who would even spend an hour with this, will see there's something there. It's not the Holy Grail, but has long term potential. Anyone with questions or suggestions is invited to PM me. In the meantime, I wish there was a venom-spitters den in every Forum, where the folks who think they know it all, can slither into that den, and just share their poison between themselves, and leave everyone else alone.... LOL !
Cheers!
Omniwiz
This seems very similar to bikermotormans system,
follow the winning column/dozen, then alternating on a loss.
Probably a little more in depth, and i hope gives better results but we shall see
Quote from: Omniwiz on October 01, 2010, 02:53:36 PM
Nevertheless, JC and Mike. Have you proven this system has no merit? Other then nothing works, except what WE do?
That's the point. There are literally an endless number of roulette systems which can be created, but they all have the same structure. None of them negates the house edge. Failure to understand this keeps you in the loop of searching. I'm not trying to be a**hole for the sake of it, and neither do I make any claim that AP is necessarily better - where have I made that claim? I have said that POTENTIALLY it can work because roulette is ultimately governed by physics, not math. I have also investigated many "trending" systems but none of them did any better than what should be expected. Why is your system any different? WHY should it work? where is the logic?
What drives me crazy is that no-one does any math even in regards to the success of their own systems. If you'd said, "I have tested this over X spins and made Y profits", which is Z standard deviations over what you should expect", then I would be impressed. But there no math whatsoever, no mention of probability and expected outcomes. I don't see any evidence of any statistical knowledge anywhere in this forum, only complete ignorance. And I'm curious as to how you could make us look like fools, wouldn't that involve actually giving some proof that your system works? in which case why didn't you do that in the first place? At least some facts and figures of your results would be helpful.
To be honest, I think that the only reason people post systems here is because they do the testing by hand and they want others to help them. If you learn how to program a computer you could do it all yourself and would soon realise that ALL SYSTEMS ARE ULTIMATELY THE SAME. They have different degrees of variance, some take longer to crash than others, but there is no consistency in any of them because you are dealing with RANDOM outcomes. How many more f*cking times does it have to be said? :girl_wacko:
Hi Mike!
Thanks for your response. At least it wasn't a quick kick in the balls, and then leave...LOL! Ok. I actually want to thank you for all your comments, as it gives me a chance to "clear the air", and express a lot of thoughts I've really had on this subject of roulette. We'll talk, but there are some things I disagree with. Please don't take ANYTHING I say here too overly personal, ok? In a way I'm talking to a few others at the same time...lol.
You asked, "where is the Logic?" Pure Logic can defeat most of your statements here...
Mike Says..."That's the point. There are literally an endless number of roulette systems which can be created, but they all have the same structure. None of them negates the house edge. "
Wrong. LOGIC...It has been as FACT that many players have been BANNED from casinos. This is not up for discussion. It is provable and documented. If they were banned, it is because they HAVE beaten the House Edge, otherwise they would still be allowed in the casinos. Secondly, they DO HAVE a system; otherwise what reference are they using to get the ball to land in their betted slot? I can add even more logic here...IF every spin is RANDOM, how did they win, except by cheating? In which case, they deserve to get kicked out. If they had a system that consistently beat the house, then LOGIC would preclude that the game IS NOT RANDOM. Otherwise, these players just walk up to the wheel, drop a hundred on a couple of numbers the Croupier's tits were pointed at, and the Casino owners just got tired of handing the money over...LOL! That's a little too Lucky, don't you think? Logic defeats everything you've said.
Mike Says. . . "I have also investigated many "trending" systems but none of them did any better than what should be expected. Why is your system any different? WHY should it work? Where is the logic?"
Define what your expectations are first. I never expect that this system will never lose on any given day. That would simply make me a nut. What I have is a REASONABLE expectation of profit. The rent might come due, the car might need to be fixed... Did you read my first post?. . . LOL. And anyways, did all of those trending systems lose money for EVERYONE, all the time? Did the Casino always get paid back with interest? Until you are sure that ultimately they all failed, to where the house won it's EDGE back on EVERY trending system, with EVERYONE that played it, there's no point going into an argument about a new system.
Mike Says... "What drives me crazy is that no-one does any math even in regards to the success of their own systems. If you'd said, "I have tested this over X spins and made Y profits", which is Z standard deviations over what you should expect", then I would be impressed. "
Logic Replies... If you actually take a LOOK at the system, the math is quite simple. There's nearly a 65% chance of winning on either side. If one side is trending away from two lanes, the other side will generally be trending TOWARDS two lanes. This keeps the likelihood of winning close to 2 out of 3 spins, consistently. Now simple OBSERVATION of the further correlation of where a win takes place as these TWO variables plays out shows a further advantage on a progression of what seems to me to also be OVER 65%. So, if you are always winning 65% of the time, even on progressions, it's likely to be profitable. Now maybe some math wizard can do the exact formula for this, but my math is this. If I win $5, and $5, and $5, and $5, I've won $20 dollars! Now that's impressive! Are you impressed, now Mike? But thanks for giving me a chance to talk a bit about the math. I was going to get to that eventually, but was waiting to see how much interest there was first... Sorry.
Also, not all information needs to be handed over on the spot, just because someone EXPECTS that Mike. But, what if I told you this? What if I told you, that I've never lost with this system, and that with a little bit of AP, I've made over $500 a day EVERY DAY, would that make it a "Closed" unbeatable system? Of course not, nor would that make any difference to those who may be interested, because it hasn't been part of THEIR experience. The numbers that have been recorded that I won on, aren't likely to be repeated in the exact same sequence in the next billion years, so what's the point of splattering all that up in a post? I just love using common sense. The free system I am offering is also flexible to a player's abilities, bankroll and willingness to take risks, so my results could vary SUBSTANTIALLY from someone who may have been playing at the same table. So, what's to report?
Mike says..."How many more f*cking times does it have to be said?"
Now here's one other thing to ponder, Mike...If you are tired of doing something, or saying something, then WHY do you BOTHER with doing and saying the SAME THING? You belong somewhere where you don't need that frustration. I just want you to be happy! LOL!
But, I do appreciate this comment...
Mike Says..."I have said that POTENTIALLY it can work because roulette is ultimately governed by physics, not math. "
Physics can have a lot to do with it, but results can still be correlated with mathematics, don't you think?
Cheers!
Omniwiz
Omniwiz,
I disagree with all of your statements. Let's examine your assumptions.
QuoteWrong. LOGIC...It has been as FACT that many players have been BANNED from casinos. This is not up for discussion. It is provable and documented. If they were banned, it is because they HAVE beaten the House Edge, otherwise they would still be allowed in the casinos.
Yes, players have been banned. But do you know for what reasons? A casino has the right to ban any player who they deem as a threat to their business, it doesn't mean that a player has 'beaten the house edge' using a system based on patterns or math and statistics. They could be card-counters or advantage players (wheel clockers), or maybe they just got lucky.
QuoteSecondly, they DO HAVE a system; otherwise what reference are they using to get the ball to land in their betted slot?
Wrong. They could just be scattering their chips blindly over the table. And even if they do have a system it could just be on a long lucky streak.
QuoteIF every spin is RANDOM, how did they win, except by cheating?
By luck. You continually underestimate or ignore the fact that any player can have long winning runs. The concept of luck is quantified by standard deviation which anyone can verify.
QuoteIf they had a system that consistently beat the house, then LOGIC would preclude that the game IS NOT RANDOM.
Sorry, I don't understand what you're trying to say here. You seem to be saying that if they had a winning system it proves that the game is random? :-\ Please clarify.
QuoteDefine what your expectations are first. I never expect that this system will never lose on any given day.
Simple, the expectation of any roulette system is that it will lose at a rate governed by the house advantage. So for every unit you wager, in the long run you will get 100% - 2.7% back. In other words, on balance you will make a loss.
QuoteThe numbers that have been recorded that I won on, aren't likely to be repeated in the exact same sequence in the next billion years, so what's the point of splattering all that up in a post? I just love using common sense. The free system I am offering is also flexible to a player's abilities, bankroll and willingness to take risks, so my results could vary SUBSTANTIALLY from someone who may have been playing at the same table. So, what's to report?
You're saying that your results aren't likely to be repeated by anyone else, so that's why you haven't given any stats? In which case, why would anyone bother to learn and use your system if there is no indication that it's likely to be successful in THEIR case. What you have said is an admission that you're dealing with RANDOM outcomes and that anything can happen, but at the same time YOU personally have done well. At least you admit that in the end, it's all down to luck. If you didn't think so you wouldn't have made that statement.
QuoteNow here's one other thing to ponder, Mike...If you are tired of doing something, or saying something, then WHY do you BOTHER with doing and saying the SAME THING? You belong somewhere where you don't need that frustration. I just want you to be happy! LOL!
Contrary to what other members are saying (that I'm a frustrated loser who can't stand to see other people win), the reason I'm frustrated is because many appear not to understand what seems to me to be crystal clear. But, on the other hand, I got sucked into the world of roulette systems so I can't be too harsh. I guess I need to think of other ways to explain why no roulette system can possibly work, which is a challenge because it can SEEM plausible that there are systems out there which will win. Again, I'm talking ONLY about systems based on patterns, looking at past results, math and statistics, NOT methods based on the physics of the wheel and dealer.
QuotePhysics can have a lot to do with it, but results can still be correlated with mathematics, don't you think?
I don't know what you mean by this. There are lots of correlations with mathematics, but none of them can help you predict the next number.
Most bans either springs out from "disorderly conduct", cheaters, self bans (gambling problems), suspicion of money laundry, and card counters or other AP players.
Thanks kelly. I have only seen one documented case of a player using a system being bannned.
nolinks://roulette.gamingsupermarket.com/news/1169/banned-for-winning-too-much-money-on-roulette (nolinks://roulette.gamingsupermarket.com/news/1169/banned-for-winning-too-much-money-on-roulette)
If you're wondering what his "formula" is, it's nothing more than waiting for X losses and then doubling up on a loss.
@ Omniwiz,
The trouble with systems based on trends is that a trend is subjective. There could be many trends going on, it depends what your definition of a trend is. The other thing is that you have to make another subjective judgement about over how many spins you choose to identify a trend. Over the last 10 spins it could a trend to dozen 1, but over the last 30 spins it could be dozen 3, and over the last 50 spins there may be no definite trend. So which is the "correct" trend to bet on? You can do the same thing for patterns. There are hundreds of patterns which you might single out, and for each of those you then have to decide how far back in the spin history to look. None of these "trends" are reliable as indicators that the trend will continue. They may or they may not, there's just no way to know. The math says that every pattern of a defined length has exactly the same probability of hitting as any other pattern, which effectively negates the notion that any identified trend will continue.
Has anyone bought the book that Balvinder Sambhi has just brought out in the uk on 26th September... It is priced at £ 100.00 here, so must be ok.. .nolinks://nolinks.whsmith.co.uk/CatalogAndSearch/ProductDetails-Sequential+Roulette+-9780955965104.html (nolinks://nolinks.whsmith.co.uk/CatalogAndSearch/ProductDetails-Sequential+Roulette+-9780955965104.html)
And here is the arcticle in the national papers in the uk....
nolinks://nolinks.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1218061/In-money-Gambler-banned-UK-casinos-winning-28-000-using-secret-system.html (nolinks://nolinks.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1218061/In-money-Gambler-banned-UK-casinos-winning-28-000-using-secret-system.html)
paul2010,
The system is I believe posted on this forum somewhere. Please don't spend £100 on the book, the system is worthless. :nono:
Thanks mike, on the off chance do you know whats its posted under. I am curious about this system.... Thanks again :) :) :) :)
Ok. I think it's time to get to the "heart" of the matter here Mike, and I would like to address ALL system bashers here. I am not going to refute ANYTHING you have to say because I'm done with arguing, and it's always proven non-productive.
To Mike, and all you System Bashers, (SB's or I prefer SoB's) I want to tell you something. I want to make it plain, why there is so much upset in these forums, in a way that you can understand, and WHY your approach to what so many others are trying to do is WRONG. Even if you are 100% correct, in every statement you have ever made. I thought that Extreme Off Roading, and Roulette might have a lot in common, so I will use Extreme Off Roading as a comparative example here, in the hopes that you might finally comprehend...here goes.
Here's what Roulette and Extreme Off Roading has in Common:
1. There's a great deal of interest by the participants in each category.
2. Both types of participants want to make it to the TOP.
3. Can be extremely risky.
4. Can be extremely dangerous.
5. Can be looked upon by others as a 'dumb' thing to do.
6. Can be VERY expensive.
7. Other paths can be pursued to "Get to the Top" without using either approach.
8. There's a LOVE of the game, by the participants, one set of players, the Challenge of Roulette, the other participants, the Challenge of the Sport...
So now, both types of participants have a Forum set up, to discuss their journey. Notice I say JOURNEY here, because in either category, there's no GUARANTEE of having a successful destination on any given day. In both forums, the participants are usually talking about the VEHICLE they are using. In one forum, they are talking about a 4 wheel drive, the "Physics" of a particular brand of tire they intend to use on an attempt on a particular terrain. In the other Forum, they are talking about a 4 progression VEHICLE, (i. e. SYSTEM) and how the "Physics" might work in a particular terrain. There's really going to be not much difference. Nevertheless, even between these two groups of people, a percentage of Off-Roaders are going to think the one group is 'dumb' for trying to be successful in their endeavor, and a percentage of Roulette players are going to think that Off-Roading, is a 'dumb' thing to try to be successful at. In either case, the participants believe that their endeavor is a worthy pursuit. And they develop a close-knit community to support and help one another in their chosen JOURNEY.
Then along comes a guy named MIKE. Now Mike is an intelligent guy, and because of his experiences as a driver, and as a computer programmer, has a gift for both understanding probabilities, and the physics involved in negotiating a hill. He is welcomed by both forums, because there is strength in numbers, and everyone will accept his help, if it gets their vehicle to where they want to go. He enters each forum, and at the time, there is a lot of camaraderie, everyone is honestly trying to help each other succeed. The Spirit of Community has already been born. Even though EVERYONE in both groups knows that there could be more intelligent things to do, and ALREADY KNOW, the inherent risks involved, each participant LOVES the challenge they have chosen.
Mike introduces himself. Then lets everyone know he has gifts to offer. Everyone says "Hi", and waits. The Ultimate Challenge is to beat Mogul Hill in one forum. The other Forum, the challenge is to beat the Casino. Mike has Never beaten Mogul Hill, and Mike has Never beaten the Casino. There are rumors around that "somebody" has beaten Mogul Hill. Mike doubts that, because there were no verified pictures available. There are rumors around that "somebody" has beaten the Casino. Mike doubts that too, because he's never been able to do it himself. So Mike understands that failure is the only option. He remembers all the frustration, and failure he had in trying to get his 4X4 up to the top of one hill in the back 40, and how he was stuck for nearly a day before digging himself out. He remembers the 4,000 hours and $4,000 he lost trying to win at the wheel. His love of both pursuits has been broken. So now, the only way to be helpful is to remind everyone of the pain and loss that will occur in either of these two attempts, as HIS experience has shown that he couldn't win. . .
Because he doesn't know where else to go, and maybe just maybe, there's some hope he can end his feelings of unworthiness, he hangs around an off-road qualifying event. A driver has chosen the wrong ridge to try to get to the top. Mike knows this, and because of his close proximity, runs over to the driver, and this driver assumes Mike's a friend, a part of the community. But Mike says. . . "Well, George, you idiot! Anyone can see you had no chance by taking the side on the left. I have proven by my gifts in telemetry, kinetic energy, and computer mathematics, you were doomed to fail! What's wrong with you? You don't have enough horsepower to beat Mogul Hill anyways, so why bother? And if you did, just the extra weight of the engine, would also be your demise. Why don't you just give it up you fool?!" George is hurt. He lashes back at Mike. "I thought you came out here to help! Could you pull up with your vehicle and help winch me out?" Mike blurts back. . . "Why bother? You are going to fail anyways, so just leave the wreck here, and you'll be better off, trust me. I know. " Then Mike kicks George in the ass. Now Mike in some strange way feels good about himself. . .
In the meantime, an engine builder has designed a super-light, high horsepower engine that could be used in Off-Roading. He's pretty sure he can make the difference in getting George's vehicle to the top of Mogul Hill, but there's always some doubt. The engine builder hears about Mike's tirade, George's sore ass and how Mike had broken George's love for Off-Roading and is thinking of giving up the sport. The Engine Builder was serious about joining that community, but knows Mike's still there, and who needs the hassle? He doesn't join the community. . . Later on, it's discovered that his engine design has made Mogul Hill a simple challenge. . .
So, this is what the Mikes, and other SoB's do to a community. The basis of most Forums, is not the end result, but the Journey. There's a Spirit, and a Love that's involved. It might sound airy-fairy, and taboo to be talked about, but this is the "HEART" of the matter. Whenever a point of DIVISION occurs in a community, it can be considered a CRIMINAL act. Whenever someone inserts division, and tries to Divide the SPIRIT and LOVE of a community, it NEEDS to be considered a CRIMINAL ACT. If there are too many criminals around, a community will fall. It cannot stand. There might not be any structured laws right now in society that deals with this poison. But when anyone honestly considers the "Spirit of the Law" the only truthful conclusion is that the Mike's and Jean-Clauds are CRIMINALS. They insert division, and propagate it. Society usually polices these sorts, and sends them to 'jail' (banned) or Rehab. If the Love and Spirit is no longer there for that community, there's certainly no point in keeping them in the community. There are many others where they can choose to fit in. It's just the right thing to do.
So, anyways that's what I have to say. And if I haven't said it plain enough, I'll say it like this. Whether any system we use to try and win, will work, or absolutely not, WE ARE GOING TO DO IT ANYWAYS! That's what we LOVE to do. Now deal with it.
Cheers!
Omniwiz
When he cannot make money on roulette at least makes some on the book. He will not reveal the system in the book and if than only partially. The lesson learned is as always: Don't bring the attention of the casino to your play! If the idiot would be satisfied with around $800/evening and changing casinos nobody would notice him. Greed has cost him money! I don't feel pity for him. Everybody has to pay price for stupidity.
Greed makes many blind and deaf.
Hermes
P.S. Bargain Sequential Roulette for $25. nolinks://nolinks.highstakes.co.uk/shop/product.php/12615/0/ (nolinks://nolinks.highstakes.co.uk/shop/product.php/12615/0/)
Enjoy
Absolutely true Hermes!
I learned that the hard way myself. Back in the winter of 2000-2001, I had invented a baccarat system. Then I played it online at 888. com. I was pretty happy when on the first day of flat-betting, I had run the total up to over $800 from an $80 banKroll, playing $1 a hand. And as online gaming was not as well known as it is now, I didn't realize that winning hour after hour after hour, was going to cost me. They certainly had to turn off the Win button, as for a stretch of 150 hands I didn't win once! Not once. I guess I got greedy, as there was NO OTHER POSSIBLE explanation for losing that many times in a row. If I played both sides, I could see where I Would Have Won, but when money was placed on one side only, it would lose. Unreal. It ended up, it reset itself, after I lost everything, and used only the comp points to start over. I quickly ran it up to around $350 using a second system, and cashed out. I've never sent another penny to any online casino since.
Now of course everyone knows to limit the time in their sessions online. But, I also know that the patterns were all I had to go on to win like that. It also worked in B and M casinos, and I ended up playing there only. So when someone says you can't win betting patterns, and trends and the like, I know they are full of it. It was maybe how I tracked it, that made it profitable. To this day, I have seen nobody repeat the system I used to win at Baccarat. Yet you know, it's a lot like the original hair-pin. The guy that put the crinkles in the hairpin, became a millionaire! LOL.
Cheers!
Omniwiz
Omniwiz,
All you've posted is long-winded, rambling way of repeating the same old mantra: "you can't win so you bash others who claim they can". You could have actually addressed the points I raised in my previous post, that would likely have resulted in a more interesting discussion. I can only assume that you didn't refute anything I said because you don't know how to. Ah well, I guess if the only tool you have is a hammer, then everything looks like a nail. You don't even seem to realise that my feelings on the matter are entirely irrelevant; what matters is the merit of the argument itself, not my motivation for putting it forward.
And I have to say, your picture of this forum (or any roulette/gambling forum) as a cosy little nest of friendly fellows all eager to share their systems in a collective bid to defeat the big bad casinos strikes me as incredibly naive. The casino is merely a middle-man - they provide the games and take a cut, but ultimately every winning player takes money from other players. The number of members who actually post in these forums is a far lower proportion of the membership than in a forum on, say, extreme off roading. Most are here just looking for ideas or in the hope that someone will post a winning system. Sorry if I sound cynical, but that's how it is.
I'm getting a bit bored here now anyway, so you'll probably be pleased to hear I won't be posting much, if at all.
Good Luck.
Hi Mike.
Sorry if you thought I was seeing you as a nail that needed to be hammered. That's not it at all. You were right about one thing. I was kinda hoping a person with your gifts and abilities would possibly do a viability test on the system I presented. I would have accepted the cold hard data, and I would have considered you a true friend. Instead, you came in entirely sure of it's eventual failure, without first showing any sort of kindness or respect, which by the way, are higher forms of intelligence, then you are now presently expressing. From there, further development of the system, or scrapping it would have made my journey with it much clearer. But, that can't happen, when your true goal, it would appear, is to do an unwarranted, unasked for Intervention, to save all the naïve people from themselves. Maybe the long ramble I wrote for you has made the point. It appears you understand you don't belong here, and not everyone is unaware of the huge challenge that's been accepted, even if 'Your" empirical evidence doesn't even support the challenge. Nevertheless, I would like to help you down the road. There's a system available that WILL make a guy with your talents, EXTREMELY wealthy, within weeks and certainly in a few short months. Now, I could do that easily, as well. But, my HEART isn't into it. Understand? No gambling involved at all and no big costs involved either. In exchange, I would like to kindly ask you to run a viability test on this system, let's say for 3000 spins, with progressions placed at XWcross, and at XXWcross, and then report. After that, I will PM you the details on your possible new future. In the meantime, NO OTHER posts from you, anywhere on the board, that doesn't have the qualities of kindness, and respect included in them...
Well, Mike. Deal, or No Deal?
Whatever you choose, is fine. If I don't hear from you, I would like to wish you all the best of luck, in your next chosen adventure, with whatever challenge you decide to take on next. I am sure you will do well.
Cheers!
Omniwiz
Quote from: Jean-Claud on October 01, 2010, 08:42:55 AM
U do NOT know anything about APlaying.
So u can t have an opinion on it....
And yes ur system isn t even a system.
Who made you God? Are you Clairvoyant? How do you know he does not know AP? Are you a pro and specialist? How do you suggest that this is not a system? Oh wait, I see. You just had to say something. Ok I forgive you. Go sit in the corner and be quiet now. Thank you son.
Killroy was here
;D I also want that low-cost sure win no gamble get rich in a week or two or a month or two at most system! I'm sure I'll be into it! Or I will learn to get into it! :D
Quote from: Omniwiz on October 04, 2010, 02:31:13 PM
Hi Mike.
Sorry if you thought I was seeing you as a nail that needed to be hammered. That's not it at all. You were right about one thing. I was kinda hoping a person with your gifts and abilities would possibly do a viability test on the system I presented. I would have accepted the cold hard data, and I would have considered you a true friend. Instead, you came in entirely sure of it's eventual failure, without first showing any sort of kindness or respect, which by the way, are higher forms of intelligence, then you are now presently expressing.
Ok Omniwiz, I'll write a program to test your system, I was actually thinking about doing that anyway, to show you that it can't possibly work, but then I thought "what's the point?" this is just one system, it won't undermine your belief that there remain systems as yet undiscovered which WILL win.
How many systems do you have to see fail before it dawns that NO system can win? 50? 100? 1000? When I first started writing programs to test my ideas, I was pretty sure that I could find SOMETHING that would work. I lost count of how many programs I wrote, but it was well over 100. And many of these simulated "families" of systems which cycled through many parameters testing each one. For instance, I wrote a program which simulated a system which waited for X spins, then bet Y numbers for Z spins, with X, Y, and Z taking various numbers from between 1 to 50. If you do the math, you'll realise that's a helluva lot of systems. I also tested a huge number of progressions and money-management schemes, pattern betting, waiting for "opportunities", using separate banks to recoup, using "triggers" like standard deviation etc. You name it, I tried it. The final results were ALWAYS the same: -2.7%
Now, I'm not saying that it necessarily follows that because you fail many times it means that you will NEVER succeed, after all, didn't Edison perform over 1000 experiments before he invented the light bulb? According to you and others, I am a quitter - I haven't found a system which works, therefore I'm a bitter and twisted loser who is simply attacking others who claim they win, out of jealousy.
But wait. Wasn't it a little strange that the results ALWAYS converged on the same figure, namely -2.7%? Think about it, if there was the possibility that some systems could do better than others - and therefore the possibility of a WINNING system existing - don't you think the results would show a little more variability? What a strange coincidence that -2.7% is exactly what the math predicts! ;D
You talk about "kindness and respect", but even if I had the time and inclination to do it, are people best served by me writing endless computer programs which show that system after system will fail, when I can cut to the chase and tell them just to look at the math?
You really don't have to do the work I did before realising that all empirical results will be as the theory predicts. No computer simulations are necessary. Even the math isn't really necessary.
Look, if I said to you "let's play a game in which I flip a coin and you try to guess which side comes up next - heads or tails. When you guess correctly, I pay you 95 cents, but if you get it wrong, you pay me $1". Would you not immediately protest that this was not a fair game, and that you wouldn't be able to win? would it not be intuitively obvious that the longer you played this game, the more money you would lose?
Your intuition (common sense) is correct. When you ignore it, the endless world of roulette systems becomes possible. :skull:
Mike wrote:
Quote
Your intuition (common sense) is correct. When you ignore it, the endless world of roulette systems becomes possible
Mike does make some good points. Thanks for the gentle reminder, Mike :)
However, I would venture to argue that "intuition" is a little more than normal objective reasoning and commonsense as we ordinarily think of it...
Intuition seems functioning at a higher level of consciousness and brings us that sudden "hunch" or flash of inspiration that can also turn out to be prophetic in nature. I personally have experienced this phenomenon in my life at times and also during the game of roulette on a few occasions...
Imagine if we could learn to develop it and harness this "inner vision" capability and have it serve us beneficially.
Surely this is a wonderful world of exploration and worthy avenue of investigation which will open up further and grow during this 21st century of progress and wonders?
A.
Ok Omniwiz, I'll write a program to test your system.
Cool.
Omniwiz :)
Atlantis, good post. :o)