Fact and Fiction regarding the 'Consistent Winning Bet'

[Marven]

At first I thought that everybody have/will eventually come to some similar conclusions on their own, but I figured it would be nice to share what I think about this, and see what others have come to conclude with regards to this so called 'consistent winning bet' that has been getting some serious attention here at VLS.

Ok, here goes:

Dear friends,

There is no bet/bets (no matter where/when placed on the table) that, if played constantly, will overcome the house edge.

Therefore there are no such long term consistent winning BET placeable on the roulette table.

Therefore there are no HG bet selection.

Common Sense Fact:
It is not "bad luck" that makes all these systems fail.

Let me try to put this differently:
If, for example, we define roulette as this equation: 1+1=2
By trying to find one bet to be placed on the roulette table and give us consistent return (i.e. wins more than it looses in terms of financial returns), we are consequently trying to find a way that makes 1+1=3

Possible?
I don't think so.
Charles does. (or seems to do, based on a literal understanding of what he wrote)

The other -unlikely, but must be mentioned- possibility is that he meant something else, and we misunderstood him. That we are looking in the wrong way by trying to find such bet: One that beats the table, when we shouldn't because it is impossible. Now this possibility have been MY ONLY AREA OF INTEREST with regards to this funny-unprofessional-looking site, and this is the only reason I have been involved in such research.

Everyone goes to that site, spends some time reading it, and comes back with a table layout at hand, trying to find a bet that wins more than it looses as he says, although that this also means a bet that overcomes the house edge, since:
W >  L / LongTerm = ByeBye House Edge. (am I missing something?)

However, he does at the same time say that this house-edge CANNOT be beaten.

Hmmm, sounds to me like an outright contradiction, or is it?
Can we overcome the house edge without overcoming it?

In the following paragraphs, I will tell you what I personally think and offer my personal response to this topic based on my very humble opinion and knowledge of the game (I have only been studying roulette for months now).

ROUTE ONE:

If choose the VB (visual Ballistics) route, then yes. Making money from roulette on a long-term basis is achievable. Bear in mind, however, that this requires a great deal of study and dedication, as in any real job.

ROUTE TWO:

If you STILL want to play the so called 'systems' way, then yes, it is also achievable IF and only IF you are willing to accept the following;
- First: 2.7%.
Forget about systems, and the idea of finding one system or bet selection that will make you win consistently. HOWEVER, the only way to learn and understand this fact is by learning and studying systems and bet selections in the first place. That is why I will never tell anyone what to do or not to do, only share what I have learned, hopefully it will prove useful to someone someday.
- Second, forget about purely mechanical-robotic playing. You have to become a strategy player. Know yourself and your limits. Cultivate your self-discipline. Practice a lot and develop a player's intelligence and the ability to make human-based decisions.
Bet selection is NOT the holy grail (sorry Spike), it is not as important as you might think. Gather all bet selections you can gather, and pick a few you're most comfortable with, or just make your own. Then, BUILD A STRATEGY. This is the most important part. You are investing in a slightly unfair game. But smart and solid strategies do survive such circumstances. Strategic money management is the most important part in my humble opinion. ( ---> Hence the idea of "beating the GAME not the odds". The latter is not a very good expression as it is a bit self-contradictory, so I hope I have succeeded in making a better explanation of it.)

NOTE: This is how some of our dear teachers and friends, such as Victor or Lanky, play and win.

------------------------------------------------------
REMEMBER: It is needless to say this, but I will: None of these two routes is supposed to make you a millionaire. Period.
------------------------------------------------------

Objective Conclusions Regarding Charles' Website:

There are two possibilities regarding this website. Feel free to pick one of them, or still consider both (like I do).

1) The man, the website, and the questionable claims (namely the financial ones) on it are mere results of inventive imagination; and the true/sound/wise advices in it are probably only hit by chance (or also imagination).

or,

2) The man is for real, and the fake name and poor design of the website etc. are just some of his understandable attempts to remain under the radars, and still divulge without divulging. The only problem is that this challenge of 'teaching without revealing' lead to most of his ideas being (unintentionally) poorly communicated, in such a way that leads most of the readers (especially those who rely on systems) to look at the wrong direction, e.g. by trying to find a consistent winning magic BET, while all that he really meant was only (for example) to use a bet that doesn't overcome the house edge but has more odds of hitting w's than L's in its Lw registry (i.e. covers as many numbers as possible), and implementing that bet within a whole STRATEGY and solid MM scheme and recovery plans. ALL of this combined together, form this so called "bet", not the apparent idea of an actual bet selection to be placed on the table as what most tend to think and start looking for after reading the website.

RELEVANT SIDE NOTE: During the days I have been studying this website, when reading the part where he says that you need to forget all that you have learned and think simple/unconventional, I decided to try this, but I knew that I might not be able to do this and just 'unlearn' everything I learned about roulette overnight. So I called a member of my family (14 years old younger brother) who doesn't know roulette at all, quickly explained the rules to him and asked him to show me a way that can always win. He answered: "Easy, put chips on all numbers, that way you always win." I told him that you can't do that, there must be a possibility of loosing in order to win. So he said: "Ok then, cover all numbers and leave one uncovered."
So as you all see, the simple and (somewhat) logical idea was to use a bet selection that covers as many numbers as possible, and build from there.
The interesting thing is that I have already (and so does Victor, I think) been using this (well, still in theory, I don't play for real yet) for the production stage, and whenever a loss occurs, I would slowly recover the lost units using a couple of the 'safest' grinders that I have found and that I use only for my recovery mode. As Victor said: "I then enjoy the best of both worlds: covering plenty of numbers at production with the consequent usual winnings and a defined and clear unit-goal in recovery to consider it as a mini-session with a relatively low risk if things do regular (Targetting 5 units with a 2000-unit backup is achievable and makes sense to me)."

Personal Conclusion Regarding Charles' Website:

Charles' website haven't given me any magic way of suddenly overcoming the house edge via a super powerful bet selection that wins consistent. HOWEVER, it did lead me to reach all of the conclusions I have written above. I have reached a fiction-free understanding of the game, and will put more study and dedication on VB and the 'dark side of the force' , along with a continuous side-practice of strategy play and proper long term MM plans. So I have still walked away a winner after all.

The same we should do with roulette: enter an unfair game, and still walk away as a winner. Be it using the first route or the second one, or both (if you are up to it), thus 'overcoming the house edge without overcoming it'.


All the best to all of you.
Your friend,
Marven

[ryan08]

nice post marven, im sure it will be very useful to people mate,

"dark side"


[smiley=3D-Smil/36_2_29.gif]

[Marven]

Haha, right on mate! "Darkside"

Thanks.

-Marven

[Marven]

-