How many members think there is some pattern or group of numbers which hit more often than others, and if so, why?
Even simple bet selection methods like DBL (bet decision before last) implicitly assume that this is true. That way of betting has been around for a long time, maybe since the game was invented, but when you actually count how many sequences result in net wins, and how many result in net losses (using DBL) you see that the wins and losses balance out. So why do people persist in believing that there is SOME way of choosing bets which will net more wins than others, when symmetry tells us that it isn't possible?
We can be misled into thinking that asymmetries exist, but these apparent imbalances are illusory, they are present only in the labels (for example, the fact that there are fewer red numbers in the middle column than in the others).
Nice thread bayes.
I thought that there was a consistent winning bet in the first months of my roulette "life".
After a while when I looked at the whole picture, I have been more and more skeptic about it, I'm thinking of more "physical" ways now. I try to have an open mind tho..
hi bayes,
I totally agree with you that a "one bet selection beats all" system does not exist.
from what I've read, experienced and learned I come more and more to the conclusion that a complete cwb, if it really exists, must at least contain 2 different bet selections.
cheers
hans
There is no consistent winning bet.
Simply because it is completely out of logic.
The person that 1st talked about consistent winning bets is CEH...
He was Boffiden before and he was selling a consistent winning bet...a lot of people bought it and it was a loser like all the other systems and bet selections.
He is trying to do the same with the W3M site.
After some incidents he proved me that he is a scam.(I have a topic in this forum about all this)
So NO there aren't any consistent winning bets.
I totally agree that there can not be any bet selection which can give consistent winnings over a long period of time. It will indeed lose more and earn less due to house edge be it a single number to upto 35 numbers. Every single number has exactly identical chance of appearing in every spin. Staking plan (flat betting or progressions or a combination of both), stop loss and loss recovery staking ( after suffering a loss and using stop loss) are decisive features alongwith luck
Albalaha you are 100% accurate with your post.
U just described the game of Roulette perfectly in this post of urs! :)
I am happy for you my friend.
ps. This forum is starting to advancing. because every day-week-month more and more members can realise that roulette is ajust a game of luck with a negative expectation in the long run
There is no consistent winning bet - agreed. So what's left? (apart from physics).
Suppose you track a bet selection (any one will do); are there times when you can achieve consistent wins? and is it possible to identify them?
As I understand it, Victor's tool/system assumes that there are, or does it also depend on multiple bets at "opportune" times? (a complete package).
So are there any "opportunities" to win on a consistent basis? or do you think it all comes down to money management?
Note that stop losses and win targets also assume that there are times to play/times not to play, otherwise how do you know when the time is "right" to quit or take your wins?
Unfortunately only physics can win .
I say unfortunately because there not a lot of wheels left that we can win with physics and also it needs a hole team in order to descover those rare wheels and take data for days and then play.
Victor system is just a system like all the others. It doesn't have any real advantage in it.It is pure gambling.
In gambling it is natural that we will win some times...and it can be BIG wins!
But in the long term the house edje will hurry us and make us be minus.
Taking a lot of datas to see the movements on the wheel is just uselles.
The movements every time will be different according to the wheel conditions and the dealers conditions.
The only way to win in any lucky game is to have the 6th sence.
END OF STORY
Quote from: Bayes on Oct 29, 11:10 AM 2010
So are there any "opportunities" to win on a consistent basis? or do you think it all comes down to money management?
Opportunities come and go. The trick is spotting them. The more information you have available at your disposal, the better off you are.
How would someone define 'on a consistent basis'. I could have a solid bet that maybe comes around every 30-40 spins or so and regularly wins. If it makes me a profit, then that is consistent enough for me. For someone who bets nearly every spin, I think they are going to find it pretty hard to find a winning consistent bet. This is where people trick themself with the money management side of the game. We are just a spectator watching the tiny white ball go around the wheel. All these MM plans are attempting to force an outcome in our favour and unfortunately time is not on our side due to bankroll and table limits.
It really is a case of not just where to bet, but more importantly, WHEN to bet. A lot of players have run out of money by this time trying to force the issue and the opportunity goes begging.
Quote from: flukey luke on Oct 29, 07:32 PM 2010
Opportunities come and go. The trick is spotting them. The more information you have available at your disposal, the better off you are.
How would someone define 'on a consistent basis'. I could have a solid bet that maybe comes around every 30-40 spins or so and regularly wins. If it makes me a profit, then that is consistent enough for me. For someone who bets nearly every spin, I think they are going to find it pretty hard to find a winning consistent bet.
But are they really opportunities? if they are genuine opportunities (in the sense that a biased wheel is a real opportunity) then isn't that effectively a consistent winning bet?
So if you have a lot of information, there is no reason why, in principle, you couldn't bet every spin (or nearly every spin). To do that, you would need a computer to track many events, but even without it, if the event is dependable, does it matter if you only get a bet every 30 - 40 spins?
Quote from: Jordan on Oct 29, 12:24 PM 2010
Victor system is just a system like all the others. It doesn't have any real advantage in it.It is pure gambling.
Maybe, but he claims otherwise. We'll see.
QuoteThe only way to win in any lucky game is to have the 6th sence
In other words, you have to be lucky! ;)
I guess what I'm trying to say is; you can classify different ways of betting (choosing your bets) but whether it's based on "timing" or patterns, it really amounts to the same thing. You can call it a "fixed" bet or a "flexible" one (adapting to the wheel), but is there any way to escape from variance in any of these methods? it would seem not, because if you think you've found a way, then that way becomes just another system, which has its own variance.
Bayes I am glad that you have also "woke up" and you are moving to the correct way(AP)
The most simple and fast phraze to include everything in the game of roulette is that
PAST OUTCOMES DO NOT EFFECT THE FUTURE ONES
The proof it of this phraze is :
1)The game of roulette still exist for more than 400 years.
2)The true logic(maths) proove it.
The only players that i can excuse in trying to beat Roulette with silly maths or patters ways are only the players that are very NEW into roulette.But If after some months of research,they are still trying to beat Roulette with maths or patterns then they will be silly for the rest of their lives.
Now lets talk a little about AP.
In the old days (before 40-30-20 years) the APers became RICH by playing in Biased wheels and in tilted wheels with VB or RC.
The casinos after waching this "DARK ARTS" hired proffecionals APers and gave them huge amounts of money to explain to them WHAT was the reason and the tecknique that theu were using.....
So the Casinos learned and took care of these good Conditions that were helping the Apers to win ....
It was so simple for them to do it!!!
1)They used more perfect wheels in both Bias and VB...
2)They are taking datas (throwgh a Computer) for the last 1000-2000-3000 outcomes for every roulette to see IF the wheels are Biased.(in pockets,or frets,or anything)
3)They also learned the VB art and they do not allow to have any Tilted wheels(that is a MUST to win in VB)
4)they are using very light balls in order for the VB player not to be able to have a steady average scatter of the ball.
5)BUT even if a VB player will indeed find a tilted wheel with a managable scatter...when he will start playing (after recorded at least 100 spins ) the Casino can IMEDIATELLY spot what he is doing....Because he is looking IN the wheel to make the prediction and also bet late...
So if he is starting to be winning they are IMEDIATELLY giving directions to the dealer to
a)spin the wheel with deferent speeds in every spin (so the scatter will be a lot deferent)
b)Say N.M.B very early(so the VB player can t make the prediction.
U see all is easy for the Casinos...because the have the money and the knowledje.
But even IF there is a very sirious and patent and HUNGRY player that want to try beating the wheels with AP...he CAN NOT do it alone!
He MUST have a team of at least 3 ppl....
So this also make it even harder ....
Thats why the casinos do NOT aftraid any more of the APers.
Dear Jordon,
Your entire discussions lead to only one conclusion, roulette is purely unbeatable unless someone get a rare tilted wheel. Is it true?
Yes my friend.
Roulette is unbeatable IN THE LONG RUN exept if we can find a Biased or tiled wheel with nice scatter that the Casino didn t notice.
Now IF we have a very good CAMO and if we have a big team and we are playing with shifts so the Casino mamagment will not notice what we are doing then and only then we can make money....
Search all you want and as much as you want....time and true logic will lead you to the same conclusion.
no one can beat MATHS or LOGIC
As I said before only people with 6th sence can win in all these negative expectation games.
Quote from: Jordan on Oct 30, 05:40 AM 2010
As I said before only people with 6th sence can win in all these negative expectation games.
And have you ever seen this 6th sense demonstrated? if not, what makes you think it exists?
Suppose you watched someone at your local casino win day after day, you don't know how they're doing it - you've inspected the wheels and analysed the spins, there doesn't appear to be any bias or conditions for advantage-play, and yet this person continues to win. Would your explanation be "6th sense" or something else? personally, if I had to choose, I would put it down to some kind of method, rather than psychic powers. If you can invoke a 6th sense to explain winning, then you're on shaky ground, logically speaking; you can hardly invoke logic to assert that no systems will win if at the same time say you can get around that by using a 6th sense. ???
I posted about the 6th sence, not because i belive that it exists.
But to explain to u that only with super and unnatural powers u can win a game that it isn t beatable with true logic......
please do not change my words....It was an example to explain to u that with maths and patterns it isn t beatable.
Quote from: Bayes on Oct 30, 02:38 AM 2010
So if you have a lot of information, there is no reason why, in principle, you couldn't bet every spin (or nearly every spin). To do that, you would need a computer to track many events, but even without it, if the event is dependable, does it matter if you only get a bet every 30 - 40 spins?
Reading between the lines, I think this is what Victor's new tool is trying to achieve.
If it can consistently win at a quicker rate than any method I use, I will gladly use Victor's tool for as long as possible.
Here is where I am at. Personally, I don't like to bet on every spin, even flat betting. I find that it is too volatile for my liking. I am more than happy to wait for a trigger to appear which has the ability to enjoy a 'purple patch' or a 'clumping of wins'. Depending on how many different streams of data that I am able to work with because of time constraints will determine if I can get down enough bets to make it worth my while or not.
There are no guarantees in gambling, however, you can train yourself to be a winner. This is how I interpret Jordon's 'sixth sense' comment.
You can train yourself to be a winner only with AP.
all the others are Gambling Fallacy.
@jordon, you are the best fisherman on any gambling forum, but you 'aint reeling me in buddy. :thumbsup:
....... Ok Jordan, lett's hear the advantage play then..........??
Carlitos 8)
Flukey
I really can t understand what u mean ...but I don t care either. U are free to spend ut time in searching ways in the gambing fallacy.
Quote from: flukey luke on Oct 30, 07:45 AM 2010
@Jordan, you are the best fisherman on any gambling forum, but you 'ain't reeling me in buddy. :thumbsup:
I think I know what you mean... I could be wrong, but in my opinion Jordan is still here because he secretly hopes there is a way to win using systems - he's pretty sure that systems CAN'T win, but there are some niggling doubts. Correct me if I'm wrong Jordan, but I would guess you've done ok playing systems in the past, but they don't give you the psychological "comfort" that AP does (because the maths and logic say no systems can win - only physics). Maybe you've done just a well, if not better, using systems as you have using AP, after all, you've posted quite a few systems here and at VLS in the past. Systems don't offer any long-term guarantees, but they are relatively easy to play (no searching for the right wheels and conditions). On the other hand AP DOES offer the security of knowing you have a true long-term advantage, but it's much harder to find the opportunities.
Again, I could be wrong, but perhaps Jordan thinks if he can convince members that there is no hope for systems, then he will be able to kick the bad habit himself (and get rid of those last niggling doubts). Am I right? ;)
U are NOT correct in the part that I may have doubts that we can win with systems...
I know 100% that no one on earth can win with systems.
I am here just to help you with any system or Advantage-play method.
I am here to correct you in some things that I might know better.
I am here to pass my time with a subject that I have completely explore step by step.
These are my intentions and the reasons why I am still here...
But the point is to win in roulette...and not try to understand why any of us is here...LoL
In all the forums there are a lot of fights...this is because if you are trying to beat something that it is unbeatable(like trying to make a hole in the water) your nerves are broken along with your hopes...
So the only way to express your anger is to start fighting with the other members...
I will just won t take any part of these fights because I am a lot wiser in this game...and a wise man (in a subject) is just observing and helping the others...
cu
U could freeze the water, and that would put a hole in it.
U could blow really hard, (really, really hard) and then U would have a hole in it.
U could drop/push a tube into water, then U definitely have a hole in it.
What am I doing here.....................
Showing U that things are possible, its only the impossible that takes a bit longer!
(its the engineer in me- sorry folks) :'(
Quote from: chrisbis on Nov 10, 06:06 PM 2010
U could freeze the water, and that would put a hole in it.
U could blow really hard, (really, really hard) and then you would have a hole in it.
U could drop/push a tube into water, then you definitely have a hole in it.
What am I doing here.....................
Showing you that things are possible, its only the impossible that takes a bit longer!
its the engineer in me- sorry folks) :'(
Very well said chris. Pessimists should leave the forum outrightly.
Quote from: albalaha on Nov 10, 10:21 PM 2010
Very well said chris. Pessimists should leave the forum outrightly.
Well not sure bout that Al.
Think Pessess keep Us all in check now and again
and maybe just maybe stop Us turning into full blown addicts.
I, like many I suspect, like a healthy mix of the two.
after all I live with a pessimal, but I still think she's gorgeous
and talented in many aspects,
and I keep her pessimism in check, like she calms my over Optimistic approach.
All
Had to laugh at "niggling doubts". I guess I've had them and just couldn't name them.
Not to defend Jordan or assume he needs defending, but I do understand his analogy. What he is referring to is the sticking of one's finger into water, withdrawing it and leaving a hole.
Will iron float? Of course not! Give me the iron that will not float, a hammer and an anvil and I will make iron float. We all know how. How foolish would we be to argue that point?
OK, I feel a pessimistic thought coming on, so I'll move on and try not to delete this!
Sam
Continue to try making a hole in the water.
U are just losing your time...and the proof is that no one of you has found anything that can win....
So all are empty talks.
Quote from: Jordan on Nov 11, 10:09 AM 2010
Continue to try making a hole in the water.
U are just losing your time...and the proof is that no one of you has found anything that can win....
So all are empty talks.
well, maybe that's your holly Grail Indiana Jones
Quote from: Jordan on Nov 11, 10:09 AM 2010
Continue to try making a hole in the water.
U are just losing your time...and the proof is that no one of you has found anything that can win....
So all are empty talks.
ill probably get into trouble for this ... but isn't jd the epitome of a "shit stirrer"?.
That being said. Don't you just love seeing messages of impending doom from the "2.7 edge in the LR", especially after you win and just snigger at it :P
Heck, im winning now with Tcd's method. Maybe ill just stop and avoid the long run coming to bite me in the ass :P
Hamsup ( having fun fun fun )