Flat bet no progression system that works. (2000 spins, +732 units profit)

[Number Six]

The proof no method or system can ever work consistently is simple to explain, impossible for people to accept.

In a fair game, on any spin, does the ball have an equal chance of falling into any of the pockets? Answer: yes.

You can post proof that says I can't accurately guess the next spin at greater than 50% by looking at past spins? No you can't. And you know it.

Your statement is pointless. Show us the maths behind your system and we can rebuke it for you. Otherwise this is like saying, can you prove I am not wearing Speedos at the moment? 

[Spike!]

does the ball have an equal chance of falling into any of the pockets?>>>

Thats WHY it can be beaten, because its dependable. What you think is a negative, is really the Achilles Heel of the game. Ironic, huh.

[Spike!]

Show us the maths behind your system and we can rebuke it for you. >>>


No no no, you guys are the ones who say you have the math that says I can't win. Lets see it. You don't have it and you KNOW you don't have it. You can't have it or I wouldn't be doing it.

[kav]

Noble Savage,

You consider everything different than your (baseless) opinion misinformation. That's your problem. I'd let the readers decide.

PS: hey! why not ban everyone who disagrees with you out of the forum, as to help stop the spread of misinformation? doesn't this sound good?

[bombus]

The proof no method or system can ever work consistently is simple to explain, impossible for people to accept.

In a fair game, on any spin, does the ball have an equal chance of falling into any of the pockets? Answer: yes.

Yes and no.

Due to the very unique set of physical properties created at the commencement of each new spin, certain areas of the wheel can be calculated for inclusion/exclusion in the landing zone. However, ball scatter will destroy this calculation much of the time. I think this method is called visual ballistics or something. 

[Number Six]

What you think is a negative, is really the Achilles Heel of the game. Ironic, huh.

Not really, because it isn't true. YOU can't prove otherwise.

you guys are the ones who say you have the math that says I can't win.

The ball has an equal chance of falling into any pocket. Therefore the odds hold true on every spin. Any sequence of ECs of any given length has the same chance of happening as any other of the same length. The past doesn't matter.

[Noble Savage]

You consider everything different than your (baseless) opinion misinformation.

Baseless? lol

Show me one system/strategy that wins consistently. Just ONE out of hundreds of years of roulette existence, all the gamblers, mathematicians, and system developers who studied it and still do.

You have no proof, just wishful thinking.

I have science, math, reality, along with my own personal experience (much of which is in the form of documented results).

[Spike!]

Any sequence of ECs of any given length has the same chance of happening as any other of the same length. >>>

So don't base your bets on sequences. Duh.

[Spike!]

Show me one system/strategy that wins consistently.>>

The funny thing is, thats what the casinos said about BJ before Thorp. When in fact, people all over the world had quietly been counting cards since the game began and winning doing it. Some of them begged Thorp not to write his book, to no avail. So never assume that just because nobody has shown you something, that means it doesn't exist.

>>I have science, math, reality, along with my own personal experience>>

You're what, 22? Are you trying to make me laugh on purpose? Like Mark Twain said, "When I was 15 my father was the stupidest man on earth. By the time I was 25, it was amazing how much the old man had learned." When I was 22 I thought I knew EVERYTHING. When I look back its just slightly embarrassing at how much I really knew.

[gizmotron]

Show me one system/strategy that wins consistently. Just ONE out of hundreds of years of roulette existence, all the gamblers, mathematicians, and system developers who studied it and still do.

If, at the end of this nebulous discussion, eons from now, all will finally admit that the simplification of the technique will require the player to use a balanced system with one win above the normal expected distribution as the basis for educated guessing, a winning system. For example, if you bet the two dozens with a one unit win against a two unit loss by covering two of three dozens then you must win twice to balance and three times eventually to get the simplification amount. That extra win represents the  completion of the system. This is an amount fought for by reading randomness and using educated guessing. A statue outside of Vegas belongs to Spike. There should be a monument to math believers too. How about the iniquitous misconceptions and assumptions of them? Don't forget them. They get the ubiquitous 'Thinker' once again. A monument to losers.

[Noble Savage]

So the question remains: Who will shut Vegas down first, Fender1000 or Spike?

Like Herb says, it's theater of the absurd with you guys.

[Spike!]

Who will shut Vegas down first>>>

Nothing will shutdown Vegas, they just take counter measures lie they did with BJ.

>it's theater of the absurd>>

Whats absurd is people who know a little and think its enough, when in truth their real education hasn't even been started yet. They're the ones dressed in the clown outfits on the stage, bumping into each other, saying 'Huh?' 'What?'

[keel44]

Spike, can you tell us how you play roulette?  Do you have a "technique" or strategy you can share? 


I am open minded.  We need more of that.

[Spike!]

There should be a monument to math believers too>>

The dogs need somewhere to relieve themselves..

[Spike!]

Spike, can you tell us how you play roulette? >>>

I look at the past spins and make an educated guess. Thats 95% of it.

[Spike!]

-