I have to say it........there are hundreds of methods/ideas on this board and other boards. I TRUELY believe that if a "very good" method came out and we were all doing WELL with it, it would soon be forgotten. We LIKE the method for awhile, then its on to the next big thing. Being happy with something GOOD, as it seems, is not GOOD enough.
My question being...... is there a method here (or any board) that you have read 4+ years back and still to this day, are playing that method? I really dont care if you name the method, the question itself is what I'm curious about.
Ken
Good Question :thumbsup:
MrJ....
Ball 24 by Rafin.
I started with it and still play it.
Track last 24 spins (can be any amount) and play the repeats for 1 hit statically (same spins in that 24 even if they drop off) or Rolling (as they come and go in last 24)
I will play repeats above 2 sometimes. I will play statically or Rolling sometimes. I play last 17 usually (the marquee)
Its all Ball24 (I guess I play Ball 17 then)
I play lots of things....but that's the only one that never left my play list.
Turner
Quote from: sturrock on Feb 23, 11:44 AM 2014
Good Question :thumbsup:
This one should answer it......how many methods did you test and come as a winner at the start at most of those.......now next move is up to the player and move after the first move...you get me.
Roulette is not the best way to make money. The exception is if you have ideal conditions nearby, or a large bankroll to make it worthwhile (unless you are ok with smaller wins like $500 etc). But for the average player, I don't advise professional play at all. It is not just the wheel, its actually more about avoiding detection.
To answer your question, my methods have all been much the same.
Hello again Steve.
Only trying to help here : )
Why not give a trusted member (yet to be decided) on the forum your computer system to test for a certain amount of time.
This would be the proof of the pudding for me.
QuoteWhy not give a trusted member (yet to be decided) on the forum your computer system to test for a certain amount of time.
I already did that. That's what the testing with Ronjo was all about and he found out I was telling the truth. I didn't choose Ronjo. The forum members did. The idea was they chose someone they all trusted. His focus of testing was consistency of results specifically that the computer could accurately predict diamond hits. Plus ronjo said:
QuoteAnd to cap it all, Steve put me in contact with one of his players here in my country and we met up and discussed the computer and he was getting very good results. I can not let out what we discussed, but I can tell you that you would have to be very serious about playing this way and if applied correctly with timing in placing your bets you would do very well,that's all I can tell you
Before that, it was sent to two others but they didn't have time to test it.
I've also had public demos (93% hit rate covering 15 numbers, but you could have easily used 3 numbers):
Roulette Computer with 93% Hit Rate Betting 15 Numbers (link:://:.youtube.com/watch?v=PUqjvSvEnX8#)
What else more should I need to do? Reality isnt that complicated. I'm actually honest.
In any public testing I do, I only show the basics because the more advanced parts are only for actual players. It is not my intention to amaze people, only to show basic capabilities so they know fact from fiction.
An obvious question is why sell it? Firstly, i have profit split teams that pay me part of profits, so yes I use it myself this way. Secondly, there are far too many casinos for me to manage more teams to fill all casinos. So selling them too, at least some of them, maximizes income from them. Keep in mind the better ones are between $15,000 - $80,000 each. Thats why I bother selling them.
Steve,
Thanks for your reply.
Either way I couldn't afford your program.....
Sincere cheers,
AMK
I totally agree with Ken on this.
People get "bored" too fast with roulette methods on roulette forums.
That's part human nature and part a consequence of too many systems posted continuously.
Too many systems too little time to stay focused on one specific system.
I admit I am (at least partially) guilty of the "attraction of a new approach" sinn.
But you Ken, are also guilty of changing system if I read your posts correctly. Btw, I wonder why change systems if they are successful on the average? I mean If with a specific system yoy have managed to make overall a profit, even if it was disapointing recently, why abandone it?
I still play the same way as I have for the last 10 years...of course minor tweaks or whatnot along the way...but pretty minor (example...now I'm tracking 18 past spins instead of 24 for hot numbers...that kinda thing)
I play multiple methods (tools so to speak...up to maybe 6 or 8 in total)...sometimes played singularly...usually play 2-4 concurrently, as there is a limit as to how much I can track, analyze and place bets in a certain period of time between spins. All the methods have stop-losses and usually if one is struggling the other 1-3 that I may be playing at the same time are holding their own or hopefully 1 or 2 are doing quite well.
We see alot of methods/systems that are talked about for quite awhile and some just very briefly...many show nice climbing charts and then are ignored or just lose interest just as we have some like GUT that keep resurfacing when a new member starts researching and it revives interest. I think alot of serious players have a comfort zone in how they like to play and are reluctant to change unless overwhelming evidence forces them to switch it up...and we all know we are not going to get overwhelming evidence to change in this arena.
For me the only real change I have made in the last 10 years is money management...and that wasn't major either...just a different approach on a couple of the methods I use from time to time.
@Kav >> I'll do more tweaking of a current "good" method compared to a NEW method. If you really look things over in the last 10 years, I have posted fewer methods than you might think. (I have 2 that I won't post).
For example, my......COMPLETE STREET method has at least 2-3 versions. I'm in the middle of IMPROVING on it again. "Good" is fine but why not shoot for "great"?
Ken
I still play catch the8train.