Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - mogul397

Pages: [1] 2
The Notepad / Ignatius
« on: December 08, 2016, 11:26:24 PM »
Is it possible, anywhere, for you Ignatius to present a method that we
can actually use, that doesn't require a 1000 unit bank and has a couple
200 unit drawdowns?

That is what I expect to see when you make a post with a bunch of charts.

Seems like you've got that down pat. But as the old commercial said,
"Where's the beef"?

General Discussion / Pattern breaker
« on: October 13, 2016, 08:25:42 PM »

Anyone ever see this and play with it?

Main Roulette Board / one or two things
« on: September 30, 2016, 01:28:04 AM »
So the one thing that I want to address is that I find that this is the most
active forum. As such, I don't find much focus in roulette. Most of what
goes on here is off topic or quibbling.

The second thing is that I have been working an idea. But I don't want
to bother to post it cause mostly things get no response. Not the reason
of Tamino or MrJ who say "I know something, I won't tell", or just scoff.

I wish these matter would get cleaned up and that people who want to
explore methods would just explore them.

Don't know what else to say, but mostly it will be nothing, cause I don't
feel like having my ideas ignored or trampled.

The Notepad / Idea about betting double dozens
« on: September 24, 2016, 03:52:36 PM »
This idea is so new, I checked it a bit, but I thought of it last night.

So I was thinking about betting double dozens. Normally we pick some
data set as our selection. Like betting the last 2 dozen.

My idea is to bet the data set that came out in the last two spins.
Here is a random example.

1  This number was the "next to last".
2  This number was the "third to last".
3  So we bet here next to last (1), and third to last (3).

And continue that picking pattern every spin. So as the tendency
changes, we move with that change.  Try it a bit and offer feedback
about if it's just the same old, same old...


So this was a thread. Is this another "proof reader deletion"?

Please just explain this to me. I'm just trying to figure out why things

As it would happen I printed the tread out, so I have the info.

What gives?

Testing zone / Bleeping method!!!!
« on: August 13, 2016, 01:46:10 PM »
What happened to bleep?  And this topic? I have been doing some
actual testing and work, but I'm not going to bark at the moon.

"Nice little earner".

There was also a thread in notepad called "a hot even chance trigger system"
that I bookmarked, and disappeared.  Wonder about that.

Professional Systems & Advice / Try this
« on: August 10, 2016, 12:52:29 PM »

Main Roulette Board / WASH002
« on: July 29, 2016, 02:31:57 PM »

I've been looking at this and playing with it a bit.  Not having
terrible results, and if played the right way pretty good. Just
getting my feet wet.

Went for live play a couple days ago and cautiously bet $5 table.
I won a couple bets and tracked for a while. I would have won 49 and
lost 28 units for a flat profit of 21 units.

I went again yesterday and the thing just chopped even. I got
5 chops (including a zero loss) and still walked out even.

As I check the 0/00 modification against some data, it almost
is funny how often even my wins hit the dead spot on the modification
for a loss. Not sure what people are getting with the regular or the mod.
But the regular looks promising.

My first run had several double losses in a row (zeros included).
My last run only had single losses.  I was thinking about a 1,3,9
progression. So far it seems safe. On the first run even if I had a loss
of 26 units I would have had a profit (counting all the units I would
have saved using the progression).

Any thoughts or updates on the method? It's easy on the nerves.

The Notepad / Grass roots in the toilet
« on: June 26, 2016, 06:10:01 PM »

So I had been playing grass roots on paper in various ways. One
way I played, if you remember, was with a computer generated
list to play against.  Somehow picking a sequence (like 1-2-3)
and using that and playing 1,3,9 seemed to make the most sense.

I played and practiced the random thing. And hit a loss after, like, 4 wins.
I reported that and as usual RG crawled up my ass telling me about longer term,
this and that.  Which is why I use my wallpaper test. Weeds out most of the

So I tried again on paper and did better. And to be honest, picking 1,2,3 and also
having the randomness of entry within a group of 3 doesn't seem that stupid.

So I'm heavy in cash right now and just decided to go for it. I brough money,
my paper and pen. And played. Against 1,2,3. I won two groups (of 3. Play for one
win in the group of 3). And like clockwork lost the 1,3,9 on the 3rd group.
So I lost $120 at a $5 table.

Guess I got closure on THAT idea. (I WOULD have won my 4th bet).........

And as I tracked and watched and played again all I could thing was that, while
it may be unusual (you be the judge of "unusual" with 2 triple hit losses in
two consecutive sessions), but there ALWAYS seem to be "losses" in the trifecta
of attempts, while searching for the single win every 3 spins.

And I'm wondering, "why not play them"? Seems odd that it could be so easy to
consistently pick the 2-1 and miss the 1-2.

Testing zone / WHAT'S THE PROBLEM???????
« on: June 11, 2016, 07:14:32 PM »

What the problem is, is simply this. Loosely put, the problem is not
WHAT is going to happen. It's in what ORDER.

I know you can have variation on EC, but for the most part they
come in close to even. Can't make any money flat betting that.

So we use a progression. Inevitably the progression gets out of hand
and recks things.  So instead of betting flat and basically coming out
even, you lose your bank...

THAT's the problem.

Testing zone / 123 vs EC. Not your typical 120 page thread (I think)
« on: June 04, 2016, 12:02:22 PM »
So after my latest run looking for single dozens that made my head hurt
that just ended, and a revisit to the 123 method, a happy medium
came up.  What about the EC?

If you look at it, the 123, 2 dozen method is simply a 3 step martingale on
2 dozens.  Risky but effective.  It ends up that the selection method is a
"crap shoot". Shotgun. And that is it's strength. Moving target is harder to hit.

Then we all swing the other way looking and hoping for 2-1 payoff
on single dozens.  What about the EC?  Here is the comparison.

123 is a martingale which, if played with a 1,3,9 will risk 28 units. At
a $5 table that is $140.

If you do the same thing with an EC, you can do a 1,2,4,8,16 martingale,
risking $160 at a $5 table.

So the math difference is small, only based on how the bets are packaged.
Everyone makes fun of a martingale. But recently it almost occurred to me
that it really is the only way to win.  And as everyone would like to ignore,
the gambling community agrees, via it's love of 123 with a 1,3,9 martingale.

Every time someone talks about a martingale they have this tendency to decide
that bet selection is just playing red or black and talking about how they can
come in 25 times in a row.  The truth is that I always wondered (and spoke about
several times) that you can or should play a martingale in a more flexible fashion.

Like the shotgun selection used for 123. So each series you play, you fire a shotgun
and pick your 5 EC's and play it out. Same as the 123 1,3,9 method now.

What is the advantage?  Well it brings you half way over to the single dozen,
2-1 thing that we keep looking at. It softens the blow of the progression, giving
you more chances to resolve your martingale. Admittedly, it is apples to apples
in the math world.

But one thing that's helped is the effect of the zero. If you play 34 numbers hoping
not to hit the ONE number, winning most of the time, the zero will KILL you.
Giving you more than your share of ass whipping when you lose 34 units on a
loss. So we soften that blow with smaller share bets where a zero loss just
gets absorbed. That is one benefit of this method of betting.

So other than the change of venue to EC from double or single dozen here is
simply taking note that we can pick out 5 random EC's that we don't want to
hit and play them the same way as the double dozen.  It doesn't look or feel the
same since we don't have numbers (like 123). Intead red/black, etc.

But it's easier on the nerves. At least on the surface. With a similar risk.

Main Roulette Board / New way to look at bet choices
« on: May 16, 2016, 08:44:11 PM »
I've been working on my own for a while looking at different methods of bet play and

You have, betting next to last.

And these kinds of tracking methods.

I like D'alenbert for betting. I just always have, even though I know it can
be a disaster depending on how it goes.

But a variation of looking at one side of a thing is to switch betting sides
and follow the result that is happening.

For "next to last", on a loss, you switch to "opposite of last".
For the methods looking for 2 EC's or 2 dozen, the same thing.

I have been watching this for a while now. I went to do some paper play today,
and, like a lot of my recent data and zumma tests, it seems to hold up.

One specific thing I was looking at playing the "next to last" was to pick a number
like 5 and if you lose that bet, then you quit and start over.  Take your 15 unit loss,
and play sessions based on that.  It seems to have a good result.

If this gets off the ground then I'll post some actual runs of live data, like what
I got today.  The betting is different between EC's and dozens. But the results always
seem to cluster enough. When I play dozens (+1 -1) and there is a loss I go to playing
the "opposite two" flat, and back again.  Two different games, so to speak.

But with the right betting scheme applied to the right bets, this idea seems to hold up.

Main Roulette Board / There are no losing zumma pages
« on: April 20, 2016, 03:17:58 PM »

After such a long time with my head up my ass I FINALLY realized something.
THERE ARE NO LOSING ZUMMA PAGES!!!!  They are all winners!!!  Every one.

If you have a method where the results from a page tend to make your method lose,
all you have to do is adjust your method.  And you will WIN BIG!!!!!!

With enough practice you can do this LIVE at a table. Just bring your crystal ball. Or,
more practically, bring your pencil and paper. And just adjust your method BEFORE the
spins, so that you pick the right choice. It works for everything. Individual numbers,
dozens, colums, evens, splits.

So don't get stuck down on one method of play. When it starts to lose, just adjust the rules,
throw more money at it. And it will win.

I'd rather not give the credit for who taught me about this. But look around and you will know.
If you PM me I'll be glad to tell you, so you can watch this happen live.


General Discussion / latest 2 dozen method New Idea!!
« on: February 22, 2016, 08:07:12 PM »
Well in talking in these rooms one person likes to wait for 4 dozen in a row
where one dozen doesn't show up, and then bet that dozen the next 4 spins.
Works quite a bit, but not really.

So as I'm testing this the simple fact that it doesn't come in, or that the other
2 keep coming in gets my attention.

So simply put, wait the 4 decisions for a missing dozen and bet against it coming in.
It often does come in. But NOT 3-4 in a row!!!!!!! So there is your double dozen method.
I'm sure it can be cleaned up or added to.

It's funny, but so often we wait for a missing thing and then play for it. This is
the opposite.

Can we get 100 pages out of this?

Main Roulette Board / roulette checkmate
« on: February 11, 2016, 01:55:59 PM »

Anyone know anything about this?

Pages: [1] 2