VLS Roulette Forum

We have systems which we think are profitable. But how many spins should a system stand through in the testing phase?

Sam has already shown us that G.U.T. is profitable to him, to me it failed.
Mr.Chips 4selecta has been tested over 10.000 spins with a good profit.

Please substructure your input

Hand testing is a waste of time.   Use a computer to test a significant volume of spins.

I think betting location and the lenght of its cycle should be computed for such an answer. It just can't be the same to test betting even chances versus 1 single number.

Cycle for even chances is two spins.
Cycle for numbers: 37 spins.

This difference should be computed to properly tell.

Quote from: Herb on November 26, 2008, 08:00:13 PM
Hand testing is a waste of time.   Use a computer to test a significant volume of spins.

You are an idiot.

Making love to yourself is also a waste of time, but sometimes it gives you some relieve and satisfaction.
Making love to your wife is also a waste of time, because doing it to yourself is much quicker - and in the long-time much cheaper.

What about if every thread is opened wiht this words:

[highlight]This strategy is tested over 20million spins with the resilt of -2,7%
Writing it is for me a waste of time.
Reading it is for you a waste of time.
it is just to have something to do, while others are simply scamming and spamming the world by repeating senseless and contentless phrases.[/highlight]

so @herb would have nothing to say anymore

as long as you have this guy here, good people and nice ideas will not be seen on this forum, or are being disturbed by the sickness of this guy.

Everyone who is interested in Roulette knows the probabilities and chances. But no one needs to be flamed by such an idiot.

sorry, but I had to say this and wl  remain silent further on.

br
winkel

Actually, there needs to be an infinity test on a system.

As far as current testing standards, computer and several hands testing (100 different people tracking a system is the way to go (IMHO.)

BTW.  Welcome back Winkel.

Winkel,

I don't understand why you're launching personal attacks against me.

Also, I thought that you had already left this board humiliated because your system crashed when KonFuSed tested it.
If you don't agree with the testing, then perhaps you would like to give us a live demonstration on Dublinbet.com using real money.

However, if you would like to debate the facts just a bit, then I would be more than happy to take you to school on the basics.
Don't worry, I will use small words and type small sentences, so that you can comprehend what I'm saying. 

-Herb

I have just to reply to this:

QuoteAlso, I thought that you had already left this board humilated because your system crashed when KonFuSed tested it.

This is a wrong statement. But this is your system and your style

Therefore it is natural that I do this:

QuoteI don't understand why you're launching personal attacks against me.

Your not hunting a wrong idea, your always hunting the person behind it. and your purpose is to ruin this board an flame people.

another proof to this is:

QuoteIf you don't agree with the testing, then perhaps you would like to give us a live demonstration on Dublinbet.com using real money.

1. Just take the tests of TCS for example
2. If I do or like TCS does, we will hear from you: The amount of bets is not big enough to proof anything.

I´m not that idiot you think nor the kind you are

no further reply will be made by me

No, you left humiliated.

Regarding the flaming, show me one post where I flamed you.

Regarding your rediculious system that is built on gambler's fallacy:  Put up or shut up.  Give us a live demonstration using your own money.   ;D

QuoteYour not hunting a wrong idea, your always hunting the person behind it. and your purpose is to ruin this board an flame people.

No, that's not true.  Besides, I only pointed out the flaws in your stupid sytem when you began insulting people that asked you questions. 

Don't let the door hit your sorry A S S on the way out!  ;D

-Herb

For the ones that vote "10.000.000" i just have to say no way.
In a life time you want play 10.000.000 so there is no need to test it so much.

We are here to have a ball, have some fun.
If you know how to place 5000 bets for EC and make 500 then you can play for real, why would you test it for more then that, there is no reason.

Cheers LS

I've to agree with some point with herb. I know he's almost alway's "negative" but I think its better to have someone telling you the shortcomings of a system, then losing your br in the casino, because you thought you had the holy grail.

Same as in the "why are we here" thread. It's good to hear that sam is winning, but as I said before it's just luck. Ofcourse if you're betting 15 or so numbers, you have 40% or so of winning, there's nothing mythical about it, doesn't matter how many crosses you see. When you get a trigger signal. Do you really think those 15 numbers have any more change of hitting then those other 22?

I only think you can win at the casino, with proper moneymangement, and bet every spin. Waiting for triggers, is just waisting time.

Hi Lucky Strike, and all,

You wrote:

Quote

If you know how to place 5000 bets for EC and make 500 then you can play for real, why would you test it for more then that, there is no reason.

But you are not alone in this world... ;)

Suppose you have this method and show it to 100 people. At this board, f ex.

They all place 5000 bets.

That's a 500,000 bets test - isn't it?


Now, suppose that half of those lost. They grump.

The other half won and tell 40 people each. Friends and relatives...
All of them tries the method for 5000 bets.

That's a 10,000,000 bets test... Isn't it?

If the system looks good it will be tested for 10,000,000 bets, sooner or later.
It's better that you do it sooner than 100s of people do it too late.
That's one reason...


Best regards,
KFS


BTW. In my view the question in the poll is not correct.
First of all; like Victor said it must be different for how many numbers are bet.
AND it should say "bets" - not "spins" - because it's the bets that really tests the system. Only charting doesn't.

I would like to vote for "As many bets as possible"...

Herb,
 

QuoteAs usual your pathetic attempt to discredit people who are willing to share their systems on this
forum.
 
In the 'Why are we here' thread I put the following question to you and of course you chose to
ignore it :
 
"Why don't you take up Victor's offer and have your own section and make a useful contribution
to this forum and dazzle us with your own way of playing roulette?"
 
PUT UP OR SHUT UP
 
Mr Chips

Thanks, but I'll stick to teaching people how to win in the chat. :)

in my opinion the only way to test a system is with real money in a real casino. the numbers in the test might be completely differnt then the numbers you get when playing for real. no one should be critised for giving any system. thats what the board is for, only a insane system will beat roulette. like my system   that certain numbers cause other numbers to play. it is a known fact that 23. and 32. follow one another more then they should. thats all folks. good luck.

Hi Pins, an all,

I'm sorry, but I don't agree with you...

You wrote:

Quote

the only way to test a system is with real money in a real casino. the numbers in the test might be completely differnt then the numbers you get when playing for real.

So I go to the casino and I try a system for real, betting money.
That's OK with you.

But I also note each spins-result and when I get home I test another system using the same spins.
That's NOT OK by you as I'm NOT at the casino betting real money?

If so: Why not? It's the same spins - I could just as well had been testing the second system at the casino, instead of the first.
The numbers in the second test are the same as the numbers I got when I was playing for real - right?

However, if THAT is OK with you (that I note spins and use them at home) - what's the difference to testing on Wiesbaden live spins - like table #3 for example?
It would have been the same if I really had been there... right?


You also wrote:

Quote

it is a known fact that 23. and 32. follow one another more then they should.

So you say that if I'm only betting #32 whenever I see a #23 I will win more often than 1/37 (or is it a 00-wheel? 1/38)...
"A KNOWN FACT" ???
Please show proof of that.

If that really IS a "known fact" - don't you think the casinos would've get rid of #32 already?
;)


But I DO agree with you on this:

Quote

no one should be critised for giving any system.

What one SHOULD be criticized for, is making ridiculous claims w/o any kind of supporting proof.
Like saying:

Quote

it is a known fact that 23. and 32. follow one another more then they should.

Best regards,
KFS

Ka2

What I have done with the G.U.T may just be luck.  I readily admit it!  I began my trot with $201 and betting .50 I doubled that.  I then went to $1 and took that to $771 before I lost $71.  So I have lucked my way from $201 to $700.

Frankly, I don't care! 

I once only wanted to play for fun and didn't care about my money.  The Dow was at 14,000.  This recession has cut into my disposable income drastically.  So if I can luck me $500 a month (my goal) I will cash the checks!

As to your statement about numbers crossing, I still agree.  There is no reason why 14/13 should want to become 13/14, but I'll tell you this from observation:  It seems they do want to cross!! 

Again I'll pose the question:  How much would the G.U.T have to win for you to think there is something to it?  $10,000? 

Sam

KFS

As always, you are the source of logic and reason on this forum. 

Sam

i know i read a article on the 23 and the 32. but i can not find it./ if anybody read the same article let me know. good luck.