Method must study it propely

[TwoCatSam]

Well, that's a blow.........

Still, I'm hatching an idea.

It doesn't need a matrix to work, but I'm trying to incorporate one into it so it will get some play.

One never knows where the spark of idea may come from

EGO, I do also wonder why?

Perhaps you are just not a gambler.

Sam

[ego]

 
-

I like to know where the ball will end up before i place my bets.

[Wally Gator]

Have unswered that can't open your spins.
Also,even if I could,wouldn't check unless it's
numbers from actual permanenzes.
Next time send some actuals,preferably one after other,
not from diff.years.Got my point.

Please read my posts.  Not sure why you believe these are not actuals because they are.  I've provided the spins in multiple ways because you've wanted them that they. 


Simply looking for someone who knows how to play this method to play this particular series of spins.  That's it.  I've only said that it tanks from how I was playing it.  I may be playing it wrong.  It also appears that there are now multiple ways of playing it.  Doesn't matter to me how you play it, I just wanted to see if I was playing it correctly.


@JL, the spins are in an excel spreadsheet on topic #306.  Real spins, real wheel, real casino, B & M.  Good luck.  Be interested to see the results and methodology.

[Johnlegend]

-

I like to know where the ball will end up before i place my bets.

Wouldnt we all.

[ego]

Wouldnt we all.

Then why don't you take a look into visual ballistics ? Physics !

[Johnlegend]

Then why don't you take a look into visual ballistics ? Physics !

Its not a stable proposition. You would like to know where the ball lands. What I do is try to find out where random isnt able to go. Then it doesnt matter if Im playing on a wheel in Hong Kong. Or Atlantic City. Of ole London town. Or Latvia online, with all those barbie dolls who are supposed to distract us from winning. I know basically the outcome will be very similar.

[ego]

Its not a stable proposition. You would like to know where the ball lands. What I do is try to find out where random isnt able to go. Then it doesn't matter if I'm playing on a wheel in Hong Kong. Or Atlantic City. Of ole London town. Or Latvia online, with all those barbie dolls who are supposed to distract us from winning. I know basically the outcome will be very similar.

  What is the logic behind any existing Roulette System !!!
First spin.
First the dealer pick up the ball and give the rotor a tiny slight push.
The rotor is moving with one specific speed.
Then the dealer spin the ball with one specific force.
The ball will travel on the ball track and later lose force and hit one deflector.
Finally the ball will hit rotor and scatter around to finally stay in one pocket.
The winning number.
Second spin.
The dealer pick up the ball and give the rotor a tiny slight push.
The rotor is moving with one specific speed witch is not the same speed as the previous spin.
Then the dealer spin the ball with one specific force witch is not the same as the previous spin.
The ball will travel on the ball track and later lose force and hit one deflector witch probably will not be the same deflector as previous spin.
Finally the ball will hit rotor witch as a new position then previous spin and scatter around to finally stay in one new pocket witch is not the same winning number as the previous spin or indpendet luck will make be the same as previos number - no way to know.
-
The rotor has random speeds and different positions at the end as the ball has different travel length or time-frame to the very end when it randomly strike one deflector among others to finally hit rotor and randomly scatter around and at the very end stay in one pocket - the winning number.
-
This means that the wheel has 37 degree of freedom and there is no laws or probability witch can predict where the ball will end up as nothing is due to happen.
This is what gamblers fallacy is based upon - that past result can not have any impact or influence or future ones as we deal with 37 degree of freedom.
-
This means that every existing roulette system or book that you can read for free or buy should be criminal as they are based upon a lie.
-
Cheers

[Johnlegend]

  What is the logic behind any existing Roulette System !!!
First spin.
First the dealer pick up the ball and give the rotor a tiny slight push.
The rotor is moving with one specific speed.
Then the dealer spin the ball with one specific force.
The ball will travel on the ball track and later lose force and hit one deflector.
Finally the ball will hit rotor and scatter around to finally stay in one pocket.
The winning number.
Second spin.
The dealer pick up the ball and give the rotor a tiny slight push.
The rotor is moving with one specific speed witch is not the same speed as the previous spin.
Then the dealer spin the ball with one specific force witch is not the same as the previous spin.
The ball will travel on the ball track and later lose force and hit one deflector witch probably will not be the same deflector as previous spin.
Finally the ball will hit rotor witch as a new position then previous spin and scatter around to finally stay in one new pocket witch is not the same winning number as the previous spin.
-
The rotor has random speeds and different positions at the end as the ball has different travel length or time-frame to the very end when it randomly strike one deflector among others to finally hit rotor and randomly scatter around and at the very end stay in one pocket - the winning number.
-
This means that the wheel has 37 degree of freedom and there is no laws or probability witch can predict where the ball will end up as nothing is due to happen.
This is what gamblers fallacy is based upon - that past result can not have any impact or influence or future ones as we deal with 37 degree of freedom.
-
This means that every existing book that you can buy witch offers roulette systems should be criminal as they are based upon a lie.
-
Cheers

Books you can buy maybe. Not what I know from experience and results. You are thinking about all the things I rinsed from my mind long ago Ego. Probability and gambler fallacy. NO, All you need to do is find out WHERE RANDOM CAN RARELY GO. And you basically have the game beaten. I've found out a few times. That's why I know I will always profit overall from the game. Random has virtual limits, points it is unable to cross very often. What we then do is find out if we can profit from these findings.

Keep your eye on Bayes RNG over the coming months and you will start to realise I know what I'm talking about. I've been beating roulette for several years. Now I'm going to actually show the members on here first how I beat an RNG. Then how I beat a real wheel. Its showtime literally.

[ego]

  What is the logic behind any existing Roulette System !!!
First spin.
First the dealer pick up the ball and give the rotor a tiny slight push.
The rotor is moving with one specific speed.
Then the dealer spin the ball with one specific force.
The ball will travel on the ball track and later lose force and hit one deflector.
Finally the ball will hit rotor and scatter around to finally stay in one pocket.
The winning number.
Second spin.
The dealer pick up the ball and give the rotor a tiny slight push.
The rotor is moving with one specific speed witch is not the same speed as the previous spin.
Then the dealer spin the ball with one specific force witch is not the same as the previous spin.
The ball will travel on the ball track and later lose force and hit one deflector witch probably will not be the same deflector as previous spin.
Finally the ball will hit rotor witch as a new position then previous spin and scatter around to finally stay in one new pocket witch is not the same winning number as the previous spin or indpendet luck will make be the same as previos number - no way to know.
-
The rotor has random speeds and different positions at the end as the ball has different travel length or time-frame to the very end when it randomly strike one deflector among others to finally hit rotor and randomly scatter around and at the very end stay in one pocket - the winning number.
-
This means that the wheel has 37 degree of freedom and there is no laws or probability witch can predict where the ball will end up as nothing is due to happen.
This is what gamblers fallacy is based upon - that past result can not have any impact or influence or future ones as we deal with 37 degree of freedom.
-
This means that every existing roulette system or book that you can read for free or buy should be criminal as they are based upon a lie.
-
Cheers

What to say - i stay behind every word i wrote ...

[Johnlegend]

What to say - i stay behind every word i wrote ...

That's your perogative Ego. A few months down the line you will see I proved what I say. Its not some maths book theory that couldnt relate to the game. But yet has virtually everyone thinking like a loser (yourself included) from the get go. It will be plain fact. This games beatable in the long run.

[ego]

 
That is a lie.

You have not write or show any idea that is better in any way then other existing systems.
It is sad that you don't understand that.

All systems are the same.

[Johnlegend]

That is a lie.

You have not write or show any idea that is better in any way then other existing systems.
It is sad that you don't understand that.

All systems are the same.

If thats what you think. watch this space. You are exactly the kind of mind im doing this test for.

[Drazen]

Please read my posts.  Not sure why you believe these are not actuals because they are.  I've provided the spins in multiple ways because you've wanted them that they. 


Simply looking for someone who knows how to play this method to play this particular series of spins.  That's it.  I've only said that it tanks from how I was playing it.  I may be playing it wrong.  It also appears that there are now multiple ways of playing it.  Doesn't matter to me how you play it, I just wanted to see if I was playing it correctly.


@JL, the spins are in an excel spreadsheet on topic #306.  Real spins, real wheel, real casino, B & M.  Good luck.  Be interested to see the results and methodology.

I don't understand you  Wally.

You have my explanations in reply #325 when i was explaining to mr. Sam.
It is not possible to explain it more detailed, and that could understood even someone who even doesn't speak English.

I don't have intention to play your 500 spins. This is most simpliest system on forum, so don't tell me you can't understand.

I realy don't understand why are you moaning. You are not retard, and even someone like that would understand that from my explanation.

Cheers

Drazen

[Wally Gator]

I don't understand you  Wally.

You have my explanations in reply #325 when i was explaining to mr. Sam.
It is not possible to explain it more detailed, and that could understood even someone who even doesn't speak English.

I don't have intention to play your 500 spins. This is most simpliest system on forum, so don't tell me you can't understand.

I realy don't understand why are you moaning. You are not retard, and even someone like that would understand that from my explanation.

Cheers

Drazen

Drazen,


Thanks.  I didn't know your reply in #325 was to me.


So, it appears what you are saying is that the spins I've provided and the way I was playing are accurate and the system, in fact, tanks and is not worth anyone's time.  Is that right?


If this cannot withstand a simple 500 spin example, I think that's something members would be appreciative to know before spending any time testing it.


That's all I needed to know.  By the way, Vile was the one asking for the spins to be provided in different formats.  I was simply providing them.

[iggiv]

its not good to play any method 500 spins in a row

Drazen,


Thanks.  I didn't know your reply in #325 was to me.


So, it appears what you are saying is that the spins I've provided and the way I was playing are accurate and the system, in fact, tanks and is not worth anyone's time.  Is that right?


If this cannot withstand a simple 500 spin example, I think that's something members would be appreciative to know before spending any time testing it.


That's all I needed to know.  By the way, Vile was the one asking for the spins to be provided in different formats.  I was simply providing them.