Winning at Roulette with a system is very possible.

[RouletteFanatic]

I'm not lying, open up your minds people. Because, I'm certain I've finally created one.

Here are some few tips to create the best system possible:

1)The hit rate
how often would you win? The higher the hit rate the better. For example flat betting a one single lone number isn't going to do much good as a number can sleep for 600+ spins.

2)Curb potential to lose it all
For example martingale which easily has the potential to lose it all, almost a certainty in the long run. Progressions are alright, but must be kept short with stop loss, and use a mild progression.

3)Prepare for rare events
Doubling up, such as martingale or other systems that does not prepare for the rare event would be a 100% fail if played in the long run. Have a system that even when "rare events" happen, would not lose, or lose too much.

4)Practicality
A system might grind and win 10 units consistently but only after every few hundred spins. Then such a system is not practical for real use.

5)Use repeaters
The holy grail lies within repeaters, roulette numbers are bound to repeat,and repeat more often then not, the thing now is to find a system that is not super aggressive to such that you would lose quickly but enough to contain the normal occurrence of a few repeaters here and there but make a stop loss when a "rare event" of a repeater not coming up happens.

Anyway, research and research, do not give up, the answers to build a holy grail already lies within the board. A holy grail does not win 100% of the time, but wins more then losses.

Good luck to you guys, I've finally found the answer and now I hope you guys do.

[Jean-Claud]

I'm not lying, open up your minds people. Because, I'm certain I've finally created one.

No U haven t...U just think that u have.

Here are some few tips to create the best system possible:

We all know these tips and they aren t working.

1)The hit rate
how often would you win? The higher the hit rate the better. For example flat betting a one single lone number isn't going to do much good as a number can sleep for 600+ spins.

Dozens .Colums and the ECs can also sleep quite enough to make u lose nomatter what u are doing

2)Curb potential to lose it all
For example martingale which easily has the potential to lose it all, almost a certainty in the long run. Progressions are alright, but must be kept short with stop loss, and use a mild progression.

Mild progressions are same as the martignale...both lose

3)Prepare for rare events
Doubling up, such as martingale or other systems that does not prepare for the rare event would be a 100% fail if played in the long run. Have a system that even when "rare events" happen, would not lose, or lose too much.

There are no rare events...all the events are equal

4)Practicality
A system might grind and win 10 units consistently but only after every few hundred spins. Then such a system is not practical for real use.

If a system could make 10 chips in 100 spins it would be the BEST!But even this can t happen.

5)Use repeaters
The holy grail lies within repeaters, roulette numbers are bound to repeat,and repeat more often then not, the thing now is to find a system that is not super aggressive to such that you would lose quickly but enough to contain the normal occurrence of a few repeaters here and there but make a stop loss when a "rare event" of a repeater not coming up happens.

U can never know what is going to repeat or no to repeat.

Anyway, research and research, do not give up, the answers to build a holy grail already lies within the board. A holy grail does not win 100% of the time, but wins more then losses.

There are no holy grails.

Good luck to you guys, I've finally found the answer and now I hope you guys do.

No U haven t found any answer...
U need to study Roulette more to find out that nothing can win.
Exept VB and bias.

[Jakkalsdraai]

.......vb, bias and Spin-geek

[RouletteFanatic]

Why do you feel that a game with such complexity can't be beat? Let me ask you, according to maths do you 100% believe EVERY negative expectation game produces negative profit in the long run?

[Jean-Claud]

Y              E                 S

[RouletteFanatic]

Y              E                 S

nolinks://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parrondo's_paradox

I just proved you wrong, read up on this.

Of course this does not apply to Roulette, but there are ways to win it just haven't been found or is obscured. Like before how the parrondo's paradox is discovered every guy like you would believe all negative expectation games would ALWAYS lead to negative value, but this Parrando's paradox proves you wrong.

Its like how pit bosses were stumped when edward thorp was constantly winning in blackjack. They can't in their mind think how is it possible to win because their mind was closed to the possibility that blackjack can be won that they were 100% convinced he was cheating when technically he was not

[Jean-Claud]

U are so silly!
I already told u that the only way to win is gain advantage with phisics in Roulette(VB-BIAS)
Thorp he used the advantage of the card counting in BJ and this is why he was winning.

Learn to read 1st.

[RouletteFanatic]

U are so silly!
I already told u that the only way to win is gain advantage with phisics in Roulette(VB-BIAS)
Thorp he used the advantage of the card counting in BJ and this is why he was winning.

Learn to read 1st.

you are the silly one. I just proved you wrong that not ALL negative expectation games leads to losing. See the wiki link.

[Jean-Claud]

this wiki has nothing to do with E. Thorp.
U are copnfusing the apples with the oranges.

[elmo]

The way I always look at it is like this.
Most gamblers have bigger egos than most people. So if they can't find a winning system, then it does not exist.
I have NEVER read anywhere on a gambling board someone say "well guys, I can't find it, but good luck to the guys who have found it and I hope you win loads" lol.
You will only ever find "there is no winning bet"  It is very predictable and also very boring but who likes to admit they have failed.

[RouletteFanatic]

this wiki has nothing to do with E. Thorp.
U are copnfusing the apples with the oranges.

forget about e.thorp. Im just saying you believed every negative expectation game would lead to negative value in long term but parrando's paradox proved you wrong. So your statement of saying "yes" was wrong.

[Jean-Claud]

No it wasn t.
Roulette exists more than 400 years in Casinos.
Even Albert told that Roulette can t been beaten.

IF u knew who Albert was U wouldn t dare to search for a way to win.

Go and study what he descovered and how he changed the word and then maybe u will underatand.

And keep in mind that he wasn t the only one that said it...
It was all the great mathimatisians and statisticians of the world.

[Jean-Claud]

The BEST proof and Best example that Roulette can t been beaten is that as U can t find a system to win more than it loses ...U can t also find a system that lose more than the expected -2.7!!!

So if u understood my little unexpirienced friend there are NO good or bad systems.
There are NO good and bad selections

ALL ARE SAME!!!    -2.7

[RouletteFanatic]

No it wasn t.
Roulette exists more than 400 years in Casinos.
Even Albert told that Roulette can t been beaten.

IF u knew who Albert was U wouldn t dare to search for a way to win.

Go and study what he descovered and how he changed the word and then maybe u will underatand.

And keep in mind that he wasn t the only one that said it...
It was all the great mathimatisians and statisticians of the world.

You are being silly. What does Einstein know about Roulette? The ones that play Roulette are the ones that know roulette.

Anyway if you knew Einstein he always said imagination is more important than knowledge. Before he came up with the theory of relativity, who would have believe time dilation is possible and travelling to the future (even if its just milliseconds) is an undeniable feat that can be done?

[RouletteFanatic]

The BEST proof and Best example that Roulette can t been beaten is that as U can t find a system to win more than it loses ...U can t also find a system that lose more than the expected -2.7!!!

So if u understood my little unexpirienced friend there are NO good or bad systems.
There are NO good and bad selections

ALL ARE SAME!!!    -2.7

I already found a system that wins more then losses. Your point?

[RouletteFanatic]

-