Turbo Denzie or is it Denzie Turbo

[Steve]

Falkor, the first thing i saw in your image was PIGEONS. Little flappy birds.

What is going on up there?

Seriously Falkor your explanations are so warped nobody can make sense of them. The image looks more like an advertisement.

And the parts that are clear are actually INCORRECT. And when someone points it out to you, you still argue the point. What are we supposed to do? Keep arguing the point when you either dont understand or dont care?

[RouletteGhost]

It's on purpose Steve. He gets willies off disinfo.

[RouletteGhost]

This is how I imagine Falkor's random thoughts forum

[DoctorSudoku]

Okay, let's say you had Straight Up number 1 hit:
Number 1...
Low...
Dozen 1...
Line 1...
Street 1...

Your first bet needs to be the OPPOSITE:
High
Dozen 2+3
Lines 2-6
Streets 2-12
Zero

Gilius-Falkor,
For the US double zero wheel, any method worth its salt needs to include the columns.

If you ignore the columns, you will do so at your own peril !

[RouletteGhost]

Gilius-Falkor,
For the US double zero wheel, any method worth its salt needs to include the columns.

If you ignore the columns, you will do so at your own peril !

American wheel

Columns

I've heard the rumors

But haven't seen the meat and potatoes

[Steve]

RG, it's hard to know if someone's serious or not. Or if its like you said and he's just trying to get attention.

If you recall CEH, he told me personally that he did all he did because he "liked to make people think". So in his mind, he was helping people. He knew he didn't have a winning system. He was just telling people IDEAS he had, and he wanted people to test them for him.

It's dishonest. It's a bad thing to do. It was manipulating people into thinking his methods worked, when really they were just unfounded concepts. His belief he was helping people to think and develop methods was partly delusion. It does not help people to send them off on wild goose chases.

But then again, some other members are equally ignorant about roulette. But they are mostly still learning, not deliberately misleading others.

Is Falkor the same? I could argue he just ignores basic facts and keeps going regardless. But he isn't the only person to do this.

And what about the flat earth crap? No logical person could believe that crap, especially when there's not a single valid piece of information to support it.

With all things considered, I think it's a bit of everything. He's not too bright. He expresses unfounded ideas. He is willfully ignorant of basic facts. And he knowing misleads people and sends them on wild goose chases.

Alternatively, it's an intelligence issue. Again though I don't believe that's entirely the case. It's a mixture of issues.

It doesn't mean he should be banned. He is being moderated. I just think everyone needs to say it as it is with him, and to notify new members of his history of posts. And warn people that others have tried paying attention, but end up on wild goose chases. In this case I think we've had ample patience.

Falkor, understand it from our view. You have pigeons in your charts. Your charts are twisted and time-wasting jargon. It looks deliberate. They look more like attempts to get attention and advertising. And anything you say that is clear is incorrect.

But if in the off chance you are sincere, understand the issues and please change your approach. ie give crystal clear examples in correct context, and leave pigeons, flat earth and roofing out of it.

[RouletteGhost]

and leave pigeons, flat earth and roofing out of it.[/b]

I forgot about the roof!

Saxon house was it?

[cht]

I'm of the opinion that falkor does all this to try discuss his ideas without revealing his method. His last post describes the earlier heatmap trot he posted.

Falkor, if you want a discussion about your 'dependency' findings you need to provide details else no can understand you. Even if anyone do understand anything he wouldn't be too interested to reconstruct that heatmap trot when you haven't shown any proof it's worth the while to do it.

So, share that heatmap with the members here, provide crystal clear explanations of what you're going on about or else you're you're getting the brickbats, your choice.

[MoneyT101]

What I understand from the last few post of falkor.. he is saying to play multiple things at the same time with a specific strategy.

When one thing wins, it will win in different areas. 

I believe this is the direction to the HG, I've been attempting for months but it's very difficult to put together 😫

** CHE system was similar!

[Steve]

he is saying to play multiple things at the same time with a specific strategy.

There is only one event. The winning number. It has the same payout, and the only thin you can possibly change is the odds of winning.

[cht]

What I understand from the last few post of falkor.. he is saying to play multiple things at the same time with a specific strategy.

When one thing wins, it will win in different areas. 

I believe this is the direction to the HG, I've been attempting for months but it's very difficult to put together 😫

** CHE system was similar!

You are correct. You need to construct that relationship of multiple variables in a visual manner to see this 'dependency' he's talking about. That's where the percentages he talked about, rightly or wrongly, comes in.

Falkor, I repeat - share it.

[Steve]

Where is any evidence of dependency?

[maestro]

i think that falkos pictures will be very good if printed on toilet paper so as you are there doing what you doing you can study in deep all relations and all...

[MoneyT101]

You are correct. You need to construct that relationship of multiple variables in a visual manner to see this 'dependency' he's talking about. That's where the percentages he talked about, rightly or wrongly, comes in.

Falkor, I repeat - share it.

That is correct...

CHE system was basically a mix between columns/dozens/EC... I came close to figuring out all the steps but i just got a new job and been distracted and overwhelmed.  I will share this tho... CHE played in a way where he will almost always win minimum 1 unit or break even.  The loss is so rare in a session of 100 spins, break even was the worst outcome.  Best outcome was 20-60 units per session flatbet.

Falkor is sharing good info, he just chooses to explain it in a complicated way.

ive been struggling for months trying to put it together because i get distracted to test out other ideas but the main concept of what falkors speaks of is this....

EC>Dozens>Lines>Streets>Splits>Straight

straight is all the way zoomed in, EC is all the way zoomed out

if you know dozen 1 should win, you can play LOW and cover more numbers and win.  just an idea! 

now mix that up with multiple plays and imagine winning all at the same time or missing zoomed in but winning zoomed out.( just like CHE bets!)

[Taotie]

Gilius-Falkor,
For the US double zero wheel, any method worth its salt needs to include the columns.

If you ignore the columns, you will do so at your own peril !

American wheel or not, columns are another legitimate zoom feature.

And if you care to leave the comfort of the table layout, you could add a plethora of other significant zoom features to you preferred complications.