The WHOLE truth and nothing but the truth!

[Blue_Angel]

Many years have passed since the foundation of the game and still people around the world are in their individual quest for discovering the holy grail.
We have to ask ourselves; Is it realistic expectation or is it vanity??

What exactly do you expect to find and what is the definition of reality for you?
Along the long path of history knowledge has been evolved, thus perception has been shaped accordingly.

When perception changes, your reality is changing..."the world you be is the world you see..."
By understanding a partial reality, I'm not influencing the whole of what is real, nor any of its parts, what I actually change is my angle of perception, in other words the level of my consciousness/awareness.

While no single existing system has perpetually succeed to cease all of the so-called "loopholes", each one of all those "loopholes" has been blocked by at least one system.
Thus, by maintaining a two dimensional mentality in a three dimensional world, you are framing yourself.
The champions of mainstream theory support that each and every result is independent.
Probably you have heard: "roulette has no memory" and every time I recall it I laugh very hard!

So,if you ask me, I'd respond that there is correlation between outcomes and this does NOT have to do with MEMORY!
So who's right and who's wrong??
My answer is EVERYONE and NO ONE!

Everyone partially, up to a certain extend, BUT no one as a WHOLE!
In my point of view, no one can comprehend the COMPLETE "picture" because it's too big and regarding your approach you see ONLY a different part of the WHOLE.
If we were to interpret this generic theory in roulette terms, one could not satisfy all parameters with a single method.

Like Greek ancient philosopher once said: "The only constant (in universe) is the change (evolution)
So when some see only randomness in action, I see the chain re-actions unfolding before my eyes...
I hope to contribute for a greater degree of understanding the events/facts.

[Blue_Angel]

I don't believe in luck, I believe in opportunities and life is full of them...
Allow me to give my own definition about luck;
Luck is when the good preparation meets the proper opportunity...!
Just think about it for a minute,what we call "luck"?
Isn't it the circumstances which are playing a very important role in our lives?

Circumstances may allow or may not to achieve what you deserve...so if the half part is to be ready till the opportunity arises,the rest is the circumstance,chance,opportunity or whatever you want to call it.
And I'm not talking only about gambling...in a way,life is a big gamble.
The way I think casinos is certainly NOT my enemy,but an enterprise which is giving me the chance to claim what I deserve.

When I'm winning,I'm not receiving the casinos money,but other gambler's money.
The casino is just a mediator,an arbitrary authority to provide a nice,comfortable venue and because of their expenses (salaries,taxes,security,service...etc) have to acquire a percentage of the total action,which I found very reasonable.
In gamble like in life many people want,have desires,but very few can achieve what they really want,the rest just compromise with their circumstances...

Some say gambling is a big problem because of the addiction,I say gambling is NOT necessarily a problem,BUT lack of moderation IS the problem and as a matter of fact,lack of moderation is problem for EVERY asset of life!
Even "harmless" things like watching TV and eating could be proved FATAL with lack of moderation!
If you ask me why I gamble,I would respond: It's the sense of independence,freedom,the sense of achievement and success through something NOT ordinary,nor easy.

My mentality receives difficulty as a really good challenge,an opportunity to achieve what very few can.
I'm also positive person from nature,when others say impossible,I say "why not...let's give it a try!"
In time,my experience became the equalizer of my positiveness and my realism and that's the KEY, BALANCE!
This is my approach in gambling,but I really do understand when others consider gambling as social disease and gamblers as lepers...

It's the same people who are considering money as the source of all evils!
Money is NOT evil,some people are...money has no will of its own,people have and some of them are willing to kill,steal,rob,blackmail and deceive in order to gain it.
So who is the evil after all,the money or some people?!

Guns don't kill,people do...but it's always is easier to find a "skip goat" than to face reality!
Gambling is not a disease,but it could be many different things for different people...perhaps for some could be their way to realize their dreams and deepest desires.
While for some others could be a disaster...both statements could be true!!
You might wonder,how could two extremely different statements could be true?

The answer is in the notion: "The world you see is the world you be..."
In other words if you believe that something is negative,then it'll be for YOU because you believe so!
Our beliefs forming our reality before our eyes,faith is not to demand proof as a way to believe,but quite the opposite...first you believe,believe in yourself and then,and ONLY then,you can see the results!

[NextYear]

 

[Blue_Angel]

Since the creation of the roulette wheel and the foundation of roulette game,knowledge around gambling has been evolved.This is a fact which is hard to deny.

However the rules of the game remain the same as used to be approximately 1 and a half centuries ago.
This leads to the conclusion that if something remains static,while the opposite side progressing,that eventually will overcome the static side.

If my conclusion is true,then why the majority of roulette gamblers cannot overcome the HE in order to become overall/long term winners?

This is an accurate objection,however,there is an answer.
For all the long term losers there must be a common element which they share in order to be,all of them,in the negative side.
You might wonder what could it be?
So many different people are using a lot of different approaches to the game,so how could be even 1 mutual element among them?
The answer is quite simple,perhaps they are using different strategies,methods,systems,money managements,but there is however 1 single mistake which is the same for all of them!

What is it,can you think of something?
There are systems/methods which are more conservative,persistent than others and another category which includes the more aggressive and less stable systems/methods.

I'm not advocating either side,the first would gain less profit more times and it's going to lose more money less times,while the second will gain more profit less times and it's going to lose less money more times.
In this generalization both of the approaches seems equal in the end,but there is something else which,both of them,have in common.

All of them are winning from time to time (and losing),what it changes is the frequency of the winning and losing sessions,as well the amounts being won or lost,but none of them could always win or lose.
Let's face it,you can not avoid defeat,but you could minimize it if you include it in your plans.
How could someone minimize the loses? Here comes the important part so pay attention!
No matter what method of play and/or system you are using,it cannot be an overall winner. Why?
Let me remind you the opening of this post; "...if something remains static,while the opposite side progressing,that eventually will overcome the static side."

Now let's place your system in the static side and the roulette results in the progressing,evolving,changing,dynamic side...which side do you think has the upper hand?
Why you think so?

There is no system/method which could satisfy all the conditions one might encounter on the ever changing roulette outcomes,every system could win just once or more,but none always because no matter the approach,it's static,passive,while the outcomes are not.

Therefore it cannot adapt to the new conditions which are not always the same,for every "left" there is a "right",for every "up" there is a "down"...and so on
Thus if you apply a strategy which supports only one side of the "coin",sooner or later you are going to lose.
This leads to the conclusion that there is the need for a flexible strategy which could been adjusted to any kind of outcomes. Is it possible? Of course!

Let's begin with the definition of such strategy,shall we?
The very first thing we have to discard is to use the same approach all the time!
So there must be,at least, two quite different methods.The alternatives provide us flexibility,flexibility means an ability to adjust to the ever changing outcomes.

How one could know before hand which of the two (or more) methods would work on any given session?
One word: pre-qualification!
You have to pre-qualify the game before you sit down at the chair of the table.

Let's say you have some certain conditions to meet regarding your two (or more) alternatives,see if you were betting both of them simultaneously,which one would gain the most? Option A or option B??
The pre-qualification period doesn't have to be too long,you have to act before it's too late.
Yet you might oppose my reasoning by stating: "By the time I finish pre-qualification and begin betting,what I saw has changed because it didn't last long"
This might not be the case always,but yet again could happen,that's why you should have an alternative for applying both of your methods/systems simultaneously.

You might think: "By applying two quite different systems simultaneously,how I could gain a profit? Because when one is winning the other is losing"
The answer is to increase very conservatively the winning side,while the losing one to remain on the same levels until it starts winning.

Whether you decide to select 2 or more approaches,it's up to you!
Whether you decide to apply 1 approach at a time or not,it's up to you!
What it matters most of all is the main principle, flexibility provides endurance and endurance provides the gain!
"Conquers the one who endures"

[Blue_Angel]

THE 17 ENIGMA:


1 * 17 = 17 = 8
2 * 17 = 34 = 7
3 * 17 = 51 = 6
4 * 17 = 68 = 14 = 5
5 * 17 = 85 = 13 = 4
6 * 17 = 102 = 3
7 * 17 = 119 = 11 = 2
8 * 17 = 136 = 10 = 1
9 * 17 = 153 = 9
10 * 17 = 170 = 8
11 * 17 = 187 = 16 = 7
12 * 17 = 204 = 6
13 * 17 = 221 = 5
14 * 17 = 238 = 13 = 4
15 * 17 = 255 = 12 = 3
16 * 17 = 272 = 11 = 2
17 * 17 = 289 = 19 = 10 = 1


Aristotle describes the "Unmoved Mover" as being perfectly beautiful, indivisible, and contemplating only the perfect contemplation: itself contemplating, the Active Intellect.


1. There exists movement in the world.


2. Things that move were set into motion by something else.


3. If everything that moves were caused to move by something else, there would be an infinite chain of causes. This can't happen.


4. Thus, there must have been something that caused the first movement.


5. From 3, this first cause cannot itself have been moved.


6. From 4, there must be an "Unmoved Mover".




For after all what is man in nature?
A nothing in relation to infinity, all in relation to nothing, a central point between nothing and all and infinitely far from understanding either.
The ends of things and their beginnings are impregnably concealed from him in an impenetrable secret.
He is equally incapable of seeing the nothingness out of which he was drawn and the infinite in which he is engulfed.


B. Pascal



"When goodness is lost, it is replaced by morality."


"The usefulness of a pot comes from its emptiness."


"The best people are like water, which benefits all things and does not compete with them.
It stays in lowly places that others reject. This is why it is so similar to the Way."


"When people see some things as beautiful, other things become ugly.
When people see some things as good, other things become bad."


“Try to change it and you will ruin it. Try to hold it and you will lose it.”


"Those who know do not say. Those who say do not know."


"A journey of a thousand miles starts under one's feet."


"The more that laws and regulations are given prominence, the more thieves and robbers there will be."


Laozi, Tao Te Ching

[MumboJumbo]

If you bet on all 37 numbers 1$ you will always end with -1$, if you bet 36 numbers you can lose 36$, so is there any HG?

[Steve]

If the HG means beat every wheel, maybe it exists. Maybe not. Whatever the case, the only way to win consistently is change the odds (increase accuracy of predictions). How you do it is the question.

[Bebediktus3]

If the HG means beat every wheel, maybe it exists. Maybe not.

Much better is to talk not about beating, but about playing better than -2.7%. I think that i can on any wheel do that , but how much better - maybe  mine ROI will be -2%, maybe -0,2%, maybe it will be in positive side.
That i can say only after some observattions, but that finally will reach result better than -2.7% - I am sure...

[Blue_Angel]

But what's the point of all these??
Does it really matter who we think is correct or not?

This is not a debate about politics made by persons who seek popularity.
On the other hand, we, as individuals who don't engage in politics, have no gain, thus no reason for seeking acceptance, appreciation, publicity and popularity because our aim is not votes and what comes along with power.

The person who sells (goods and/or services) is absolutely depended from the buyers and competition.

The person who is related in politics, in one way or the other, is  absolutely depended from the voters and competition.

So ask yourself this question; "Who is really independed?"
A gambler could be depended from the results, yes if he/she cannot handle any kind of results.

In my point of view, I'd rather try to master random results rather than human nature by trying to bend others' will to my benefit.
Whatever you do you are depended from other persons, no matter if those persons are called employers, husbands, wives, family, consumers, buyers, voters...and the list goes on.

I've chosen not to relate my well being by others, this is the way I've walked for years, this is my way.

The one who thinks he/she knows better than anyone knows only what he/she knows, the person who listens to what others have to say, knows everything that it's being offered...so who is the real gainer after all??

In today's world with its capitalistic system, which by the way favours only a few against the majority, knowledge and human values are becoming more and more obsolete as the time passes by.
Materialistic values and who you know became the essence of living...

[falkor2k15]

THE 17 ENIGMA:


1 * 17 = 17 = 8
2 * 17 = 34 = 7
3 * 17 = 51 = 6
4 * 17 = 68 = 14 = 5
5 * 17 = 85 = 13 = 4
6 * 17 = 102 = 3
7 * 17 = 119 = 11 = 2
8 * 17 = 136 = 10 = 1
9 * 17 = 153 = 9
10 * 17 = 170 = 8
11 * 17 = 187 = 16 = 7
12 * 17 = 204 = 6
13 * 17 = 221 = 5
14 * 17 = 238 = 13 = 4
15 * 17 = 255 = 12 = 3
16 * 17 = 272 = 11 = 2
17 * 17 = 289 = 19 = 10 = 1

That's NEAT!

[falkor2k15]

Blue_Angel, why don't you be the scientist instead of the philosopher? The real movers and shakers were the ones who used experiments to demonstrate their philosophy... With Roulette some peeps are driven by greed, but others are driven by its curious paradoxical nature, which you address with your philosophical statements. I doubt vanity comes into it for many?

It's the same people who are considering money as the source of all evils!
Money is NOT evil,some people are...money has no will of its own,people have and some of them are willing to kill,steal,rob,blackmail and deceive in order to gain it.
So who is the evil after all,the money or some people?!

Evil begins with ignorance IMO. It has a lot to do with different types of abuse that people inflict on each other - and not just physical. Psychological abuse is easier to get away with and doesn't leave any physical bruises or marks - only emotional wounds that a court judge would seldom penalize. I discovered that the most widespread form of abuse in the world is the silent treatment:   
link:s://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silent_treatment

"It may be a passive-aggressive form of emotional abuse in which displeasure, disapproval and contempt is exhibited through nonverbal gestures while maintaining verbal silence. Clinical psychologist Harriet Braiker identifies it as a form of manipulative punishment."

Sometimes we have no choice but to ignore psychopaths who are already inflicting abuse on us - otherwise there's no excuse to ignore someone, thus the person giving the silent treatment is evil. And why are people evil?

[Blue_Angel]

Blue_Angel, why don't you be the scientist instead of the philosopher? The real movers and shakers were the ones who used experiments to demonstrate their philosophy... With Roulette some peeps are driven by greed, but others are driven by its curious paradoxical nature, which you address with your philosophical statements. I doubt vanity comes into it for many?
Evil begins with ignorance IMO. It has a lot to do with different types of abuse that people inflict on each other - and not just physical. Psychological abuse is easier to get away with and doesn't leave any physical bruises or marks - only emotional wounds that a court judge would seldom penalize. I discovered that the most widespread form of abuse in the world is the silent treatment:   
link:s://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silent_treatment

"It may be a passive-aggressive form of emotional abuse in which displeasure, disapproval and contempt is exhibited through nonverbal gestures while maintaining verbal silence. Clinical psychologist Harriet Braiker identifies it as a form of manipulative punishment."

Sometimes we have no choice but to ignore psychopaths who are already inflicting abuse on us - otherwise there's no excuse to ignore someone, thus the person giving the silent treatment is evil. And why are people evil?

Very interesting point Falkor which is unfortunately true.
I believe it begins with the non acceptance of the difference, for example if there is a minority inside a majority, sooner or later, the majority will try to eliminate the minority with one way or the other...
Try to think about it in general and you will find too many examples!

I believe that good and evil lives in human nature, 1000 years before people were good and bad, today are still the same, 1000 years later human nature will be the same, so what does really change?

Changes the way we are doing things, on the past they were using crossbows and axes to kill, now they are using nuclear rockets and mini-guns...
On past used to cook by the fire, now are using microwave ovens, knowledge and technology have advanced but not human nature, we've just achieved to make everything easier, everything includes good and bad things.

Therefore we are reaching the same destination by a different path, in 1000 years from now we will discover many more paths to reach the same destination...

[RouletteGhost]

A thread with blue angel and falkor

Someone call the internet

We are gonna need more cyber space