Omniwiz System… Dozens and Columns with Sweet Spot

[Omniwiz]

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]

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

[cheese]

I appreciate you writing all that out. However, playing it in a real casino would be a nightmare.

[Jean-Claud]

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.

[Omniwiz]

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!

[Jean-Claud]

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

[Mike]

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! 

[Omniwiz]

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

[buffalowizard]

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

[Mike]

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?  

[Omniwiz]

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

[Mike]

Omniwiz,

I disagree with all of your statements. Let's examine your assumptions.

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.

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.

Secondly, 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.

IF 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.

If 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.

Define 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.

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?

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.

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!

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.

Physics 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.

[Kelly]

Most bans either springs out from "disorderly conduct", cheaters,  self bans (gambling problems), suspicion of money laundry, and card counters or other AP players.

[Mike]

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

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.

[paul2010]

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

[paul2010]

-