For players who have good progressions on simple Chances games. And who would like to try them on other chances.
So follow me:
With simple Chances, here you have to win each spin. Otherwise on the second spin = refund of the stake.

Column and Dozens.
here the 1st winning spin = +2 coins
2nd Winning Spin = +1 coin
and on the 3rd = refund.
So if the player wins each 1st spin, of course over a limited period of time, he will win a lot of money, while with simple Chances, he will have to be patient to win at least series of 2 spins in a row.
Of course also, in the 3 spins for the attempts to refund. So here you will never be able to have such a series of 18 or 20 spins. Why not series of 6-8 spins, beyond that it will really become a case of being amazed.

For the sixain: The sixain is half the number of dozens, or 6 numbers in full. Or 6/37.(To play on Column,here you need 3 coins to bet on six number from top or bottom from Column so as 3-6 9-12 15-18)
So here with the 1st spin Winner = +5 coins (to 1 coin bet with 3 coins = 15 win with half column Bet.)
With the second winning spin = +4 coins
With the 3 winning spins = +3 coins
With the 4th spin Winning = +2 coins
With the 5th spin Winner = +1 coin
and with the 6th = refund of the stake of the 5 previous attempts.
So here you will see even fewer big series, yes it happens up to a 3, even 4, but after that, it would only be spins which we do not see happen for dozens or even 25 years. So doubles of sixains yes it's common during an evening, triplet, a few evenings only, the quartet, this one already belongs to the strokes of luck that we all dream of which happens once a fortnight or even a month.

Afterwards comes the square, i.e. 4/37 numbers. Here whether it is 0-1-2-3 or 1-2-4-7, it is counted as a square. Or +8 coins paid for each 1st spin won.
Or +7 coins for each 2nd spin won.
Or +6 coins for each 3rd spin won
Or +5 coins for each 4th spin won
Or +4 coins for each 5th spin won
Or +3 coins for each 6th spin won
Or +2 coins for each 7th spin Won
Or +1 coin for each 8th spin won
and the refund of the last 8 lost spins is won at the end of the 9th spin.

So I take the example of the Wells progression, which was nothing other than a progression Against d'Alembert.
The d'Alembert in simple chance = 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10
And the Wells = 10-9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1

Which therefore also means that here by playing its progressions on one of the other chances and games.
Dozens = 3 times more capital for the game
and for the sixain = 6x more than for the game on simple luck.

So yes, like beginners who start their games, with the d'Alembert, yes here I can only advise you, but only in Gain, the loss version, here it will quickly take you to hell.

This is therefore for simple chances, to play d'Alembert as a gain, therefore having a capital or Bankroll of 25 coins. and starting with 1 coin, yes here you can test your luck during 25 spins at 1$ or 1€ at the table where the minimum bet is 1 coin for 1€ or 1$.

So to play on dozens or columns, here your 25 pieces will quickly transform into a minimum of 75 pieces as Bankroll.
And for the Sixains game = 150 coins minimum bankroll.

So for d'Alembert, here we have several possibilities to play it.
That is: 1-1-1 for the dozen or columns, therefore on 3 spins to try to win.
or in 1-2, where we increase by one coin from the moment we win in the next 2 spins, and on the 3rd attempt, we try a round of 3 again, if there, in the next 2 spins we win , we therefore increase to 3, but if during the next 3 spins we lose, we go down by 1 coin. This second way on the progression of d'Alembert, yields more in terms of winnings than the primary version, and here therefore, whether you win 3 spins in a row, or only 1x the first spin, and 2x the 2nd spins, you will have always won the minimum or the room for increased.
As I mentioned, luck is limited in his games, so no hope of long streaks forming. And here I always talk about playing only on 1 single dozen or column, to play 24 numbers or the 2 dozen, of course always following the favorites and the mediums, in terms of output, such on 12 spins, there are 8x 1st dozen and 4x the 3rd dozen, so here yes it is a case of the 2/3 law, or again on 20 spins with 13x 1st and 7x second dozen, once again it is according to the law of 2/3 , so yes here you could go up and win d'Alembert's 10 winnings.
Of course also a dozen that she is frozen, she will continue to do her sleep as the bear, all the long where her temperature is low, but after she wakes up, the do will change quickly, and here she can also quickly become during the next 10 spins as favorite, or for the next 20 spins only as a replacement for the old Medium release. and the old medium, she will take up the torch, to let this time, the old favorite, let herself freeze, so a bear's sleeping.

It must also be obvious that if we play on 2 dozen, if we increase by +1 with the gain, we must deduct -2 for each loss.
Example +1+2+3+4-5+3+4+5-6+4+5+6
whereas if there would be this kind of negative progression.
+1+2-3 =0 +1-2= -1 +1+2-3 =0
there you won't even have to try any further, with 2 dozen bet, it will quickly take you to hell, where you will only be able to climb back up with difficulty. Because this kind of sign, are warnings, which when we don't respect them, it's like with a car, when we burn a first orange light, then a second, and the third turns red, and it This is where the car and even worse can lead to deaths, just because we did not want to respect the traffic lights.
Here you will always have to win at least 3x before losing 1x. But from the moment it turns into 2 spins won 1 lost, it's better to pass your turn, and wait to see what happens.
The signs can be like that turned green = -20 in output difference.

So yes, here I will try my luck, and I will continue to play. But with only -5 or -10 here the gap is not yet well seasoned with the right vinegar, and the right aromatics to have good taste, to please the customer, such here me, yes I would not try my chance.

And for beginners, yes here I only advise them to play when a dozen has not come out with a gap of -20, even to wait for the dozen that was frozen to come back in force. Such after 23 spins, it was missing, wait until it came out 2x if the 2x were in 3 spins, ok, on 6 spins, nope not yet.

I am interested.

Available for sale a full-fledged Uber from :.roulette-computers.com, also upgradable to two-player environment and in almost new condition. Used only once in land-based casino, but it works equally fine for casino streamings. Bought in 2013, but, due to later governmental regulations, I almost have had no occassion to play for the last 6-7 years. Steve agreed to support you in the sequel. Price: 2700€.

* Will send photos privately.

I've made a fast iq test for lazy geniuses.

Ok, agreed

I currently have an operations spreadsheet where I divide the wheel and monitor 6 sectors and what strategies they are bringing. It has been very profitable and I can be exposing it in this discussion group.

I've come to the conclusion, after many years of trying, that discussions by email are fruitless. It doesn't matter the topic - anything that is conceptually complicated just cannot be adequately discussed by the exchange of emails. Or chat groups - basically anything that uses the written word.

Why is this? I suppose there are learned tomes somewhere to be found but I believe it is quite simple. Everybody thinks differently and conceptualizes differently. Not to mention general IQ differences. So the chance of a concept, when an explanation is attempted by the written word, is next to impossible to convey properly and fully.

How does this come about? Well, obviously English may not be a person's native language as a starter, so as a discussion unfolds words that are used are not checked along the way. And even if it is, a person's cultural background affects how we form concepts abstractly, so I might think I have explained adequately but the reader may have formed a completely different understanding and I will never know. Not to mention that words themselves are not mathematical symbols and so lack specificity of meaning. And finally - ego. Honestly, I've dealt with some real assholes over the years, and in a couple of cases I just had to terminate discussions due to the affect it was having on my mental health. Ignorance and arrogance is everywhere my friends.

Anyhow, I'm retired now and have a bit of time on my hands and have revived my interest in the game somewhat and would like to engage the brain again by entering into some meaningful discussions - just for fun and the mental challenge really. However I have decided that I will not do it by email or chat groups or the like this time. It would have to be in proper discussion - real time. With people willing to actually speak together in group discussion. Anonymously of course. It is the ideas that are important, not the identities. I don't care who you are, where you live, or what you do. I want to learn from your knowledge and experience and perhaps even expand that for you, too, with the input from myself and others.

So - how could that work? Well - there would have to be some rules and some structure I guess. I do have some ideas but we do not need to expound those right now. Initially, I would prefer if the discussion were limited to the concepts of RedDwarf (RRBB) and expansion of opportunities such as - well - let's wait to talk about specifics until we are set up shall we? And we would need to find a suitable time for everybody - this will be difficult given that we probably have a whole bunch of different time zones, but we should at least try. Once a week perhaps? Or ad hoc? Again, for discussion.

So would anybody be interested in taking part in such a group? Obviously there would be a period of setting it up and discussing the "rules of engagement" and so on, and to this end I would suggest that I create a private chat group somewhere where we could discuss the concept together in peace - a text-based chat group to start with until we have the rules ironed out. Hopefully such a thing exists somewhere that we can use. Initially I would be the boss - somebody has to be, right? But once established and operating it could be any of the members frankly - it does not have to be me. Expressions of interest can be sent to me privately by PM and if we get enough interested parties then I'll set up an initial private chat group to discuss how we could make it work.

Finally, I should say that this is all just a concept at this time. We may not be able to defeat the inherent difficulties of creating such a thing and it all may fall apart. That's OK - I just want to give it a go and see where it leads.

I'll give it 2 weeks for responses and then close the door. Thanks for listening and best regards to all for 2024
Rog

Anybody else? Last chance. I will put this message up on the general discussion board as well and see if anyone wants to respond. I'll give it 2 weeks and then call it.

follow with another coming from journal or news.
To andrée Citroen, here is nothing say, if this was on Roulette game, or on Baccara, because Citroen, play all two game.

QuoteGeneral Ludendorff one day won 150,000 francs, but Sarah Bernhardt lost a million. André Citroen broke the bank three times in one evening.

And this coming from publish edition news "La rampe" from August 1.1934

Quoteat the bac table there are fewer entertainers. Mr. Citroën is content to pass, sighing, between the tables. He only plays mentally. Mrs. Citroën has a blond smile in her black dress.

Suddenly we wake up. An Austrian that no one knows, a Mr. Simon Salleis, suddenly plays a Banco of seventy notes. Mr. Louis Bréguet remains there. And naturally, once again fortune favors the bold, The unknown Austrian withdraws without a word a wad of banknotes to make jealous all those who gain nothing through the sweat of the brow, to justify all revolutions, have never hadn't seen that in a long time.

But the unknown Austrian did not stop there. he took twelve tickets won at baccarat and placed them on a number on the roulette table. Then he returned triumphantly to continue his happy streaks at the bac. While he was drawing nines, at roulette his twelve tickets had produced babies on their own by spontaneous generation or by automatism, and happiness never comes alone.

the proof, Mr. Rénier justified, that roulette is not an intelligent game is that it is in no way necessary to play it yourself to win. It's a machine.

The prettiest women immediately surrounded the unknown Austrian. But he ended up believing that the unknown Austrian did not like pretty women, because he did not choose any to share his happiness.

There are several ways to lose money at roulette: First there is the learned gentleman, who uses mathematics, "statistics, zero probability laws and a system which does not manage to have a winning number.

There is the jaded and the resourceful who, between
monstrous figures like stock market quotations, admits: Me. I always put it on red, I have a secret And there is the one who consults sleepwalkers and who got the wrong magnetic current. There is the one who, having them closed, sticks a pin in the little paper given to her, trusts in chance and loses again.

But the only truly sure way to win at roulette or at bacara is to play with other people's money.

We associate ourselves with a rich gentleman. He advances the bets. If we lose, you have nothing to do with it. If we win, we claim half of the profits, as an associate.

it is the sporting method used by all pretty women who are not used to providing for their own expenses.

What is not in the shade is the little Normandy sun. He competes unfairly at roulette. While the pretty women were innocently watching the arrival of the London-Deauville plane, this little sun distributed. tans on the nose. blows on the buttocks, blisters on the shoulders. And the society columnists, who had already announced "that the hale would do less this year were well caught.

But, out of spite, the society columnists began to learn how to play roulette.

...\shadow, naturally.

Maryse CHOISY.

And for André Citroen, his highness Aga Khan and Zographos the Greek, they of course, like André Citroen, had lost 15 million in one evening. They therefore played at private tables, where there was no betting limit.
Zographos had a rule, which he never broke, that of not playing for more than 2 hours, and in this period, he could win or lose. for him it played no role.