71500 euros in one year, thanks to Johnlegend

[Tamino]

Thanks Marvin, i was not selling something, not defending anybody, just trying to give some hope
to the members of this forum.

"Give some HOPE  to the forum." What  do you think  here is a congregation of downtrodden peasants?  Are you a politician running for  elective office ?

Matters  are reaching the  comical stage.

N.D.

P.S. Unsubstantiated claims   are what they are unsubstantiated ,. .

[Twisteruk]

Pilot

Can I ask how you played if one of the EC's lost ?

Did you increase ure stake on the remaining 2 EC's ?

Thanx

[Steve]

While you did use a proxy, your other IPs are as you said.

Understand it from my view... new member, proxy, big claim.. using a system that in my experience has no chance of working.

You say you are trying to give hope to people here. It should not be false hope or you do harm.

I don't know JL's systems, but I see RBRBRBRB everywhere in explanations. I also see talk of "you need to leave after winning". These are two major, major red flags for a system that doesn't work.

Simple facts, take or leave:

1. After any sequence of RBRBRBRBRBRBRBR or whatever, the odds of R or B next do not change. To test a system, test the working principle. In your case, you are looking for a specific events or group of events (RBRB or whatever) to follow another sequence of RRBRBR or whatever. If you find the "trigger" sequence before betting does not at all increase the accuracy of predictions, the system will not work long term.

2. If a system requires you to leave after a certain amount of winnings, this is not a system. People that think otherwise drive me nuts because the logic is backwards.

Consider this......

There are 10,000 individual players all playing a great system.... the system requires them to leave when they're up or after a short while of play. Let's say most win, and the results are:

9000: happy winners of $50 each, all convinced they have the method. Total won = $450,000, woohoo

1000 sore losers of $500 each. What bad luck... I mean the system "usually" wins, but these poor guys got a bad run of numbers. Total loss = $500,000

So the overall result was the casino earned $50,000.


There is talk on the other thread about whether or not you need a long term winning system to beat roulette consistently. Think about it..... to each of the individual players above, they play short term. But everyone combined is long term. Whether you are one of the lucky or unlucky guys is not up to you.

I strongly suggest rather than test systems over and over in their entirety, just test the working principle! For example, after RRRRRRRRRRRR is B more likely to spin next?

NO

Everyone needs to learn from the mistakes of others.

ThePilot, if you have legtimately won $80k or so, keep doing it. But I don't believe you are honest about this, and if you are, you would have either had extreme luck, or be playing with large bets and in the short term.

If you run some simulations betting just red, and play for 10,000 spins, sometimes you will have profited. Does this mean only betting red is a good system? . . .

Come on guys, look at the bigger picture.

If you learn from people more experienced than yourself, its like learning another life of lessons. A nice shortcut. I don't mean blindly believe others - too many people do that and don't think for themselves. I mean consider what others say and understand WHY they say it, then verify things for yourself.

The problem is someone explains something and why it is fact, many people don't UNDERSTAND it. that's why they play RBRBRBRBRBR etc..

For almost 20 years, sincerely I have been working with roulette nearly every day. And I have never, never come across a single person that has a system that legitimately wins (long term) with RBRBRBRB. There are winners and losers of every system. It doesnt mean the system is profitable.

There are real and valid working systems, but RBRBRBR is not it. Most people dont like the idea of advantage play like visual ballistics.... because you know, physics and all that "knowing where the ball will land" talk is all quackery.

[Twisteruk]

That said then this Forum shud be closed down and the door locked and bolted as it is a Systems Forum...
Oh well, move on ppl nothing to see here 

[Steve]

Twister:

1. The truth is not always popular. I see a lot of players wasting their time, and occasionally I try to help, but most dont listen so I leave them alone. People can develop whatever systems they want.

2. Most people think "systems" are RBRBRBRBRB. My "system" uses physics principles. It is a few steps beyond traditional "advantage play". The analysis part of it is 100% mechanical. Why should a "system" be RBRBRB??

[Twisteruk]

Twister:

1. The truth is not always popular. I see a lot of players wasting their time, and occasionally I try to help, but most don't listen so I leave them alone. People can develop whatever systems they want.

2. Most people think "systems" are RBRBRBRBRB. My "system" uses physics principles. It is a few steps beyond traditional "advantage play". The analysis part of it is 100% mechanical. Why should a "system" be RBRBRB??

Seriously, I always prefer the truth. Everyone here may be wasting their time but its their time to waste. People do develop Systems, thats what this Forum was built for.

Im sure ure right about your Systems. In fairness Ive watched ure Vids and yes you get results BUT imo in prime conditions. Ive been to Vegas Reno Atlantic City and ure phone sitting on top of the wheel imo just wudnt work "in the real world conditions" of a Casino. If it did you wud there now creaming Millions.

Im a great believer in each there own. You say that Pilot is a new Member ? He has been here longer than me.

Anyway we wont agree. I respect ure pov and lets leave it like that 

[amk]

"I mean consider what others say and understand WHY they say it, then verify things for yourself"


For me thepilot showed what is possible. We all know the odds.

[speed]

hi twisteruk, i just can not believe that You have 3000+ posts and still believe in hit and run.

by the way i don't try Steve RC but i know that phone not need to be on top of the wheel, it is just example in video.

[Steve]

In fairness I've watched your Vids and yes you get results BUT in my opinion in prime conditions.

Realistically my system beats 1/3rd of wheels with reasonable edge. More than enough? The computers will beat roughly the same but be much quicker. When I say beat, I dont just mean accurate predictions - I mean practicality of application too.

I've been to Vegas Reno Atlantic City and your phone sitting on top of the wheel in my opinion just wouldn't work "in the real world conditions" of a Casino. If it did you would there now creaming Millions.

1. Why on earth do you think it needs to be sitting on the wheel?

2. I have too many responsibilities in Australia, and computer play is not legal here. So part of how I make my money is by giving the computers for free to partners overseas who pay me part of their winnings. What is better... doing it myself, or having lots of others who do it for me?

Anyway everyone is free to believe whatever they want, and develop whatever methods they want.

[Robeenhuut]

While you did use a proxy, your other IPs are as you said.

Understand it from my view... new member, proxy, big claim.. using a system that in my experience has no chance of working.

You say you are trying to give hope to people here. It should not be false hope or you do harm.

I don't know JL's systems, but I see RBRBRBRB everywhere in explanations. I also see talk of "you need to leave after winning". These are two major, major red flags for a system that doesn't work.

Simple facts, take or leave:

1. After any sequence of RBRBRBRBRBRBRBR or whatever, the odds of R or B next do not change. To test a system, test the working principle. In your case, you are looking for a specific events or group of events (RBRB or whatever) to follow another sequence of RRBRBR or whatever. If you find the "trigger" sequence before betting does not at all increase the accuracy of predictions, the system will not work long term.

2. If a system requires you to leave after a certain amount of winnings, this is not a system. People that think otherwise drive me nuts because the logic is backwards.

Consider this......

There are 10,000 individual players all playing a great system.... the system requires them to leave when they're up or after a short while of play. Let's say most win, and the results are:

9000: happy winners of $50 each, all convinced they have the method. Total won = $450,000, woohoo

1000 sore losers of $500 each. What bad luck... I mean the system "usually" wins, but these poor guys got a bad run of numbers. Total loss = $500,000

So the overall result was the casino earned $50,000.


There is talk on the other thread about whether or not you need a long term winning system to beat roulette consistently. Think about it..... to each of the individual players above, they play short term. But everyone combined is long term. Whether you are one of the lucky or unlucky guys is not up to you.

I strongly suggest rather than test systems over and over in their entirety, just test the working principle! For example, after RRRRRRRRRRRR is B more likely to spin next?

NO

Everyone needs to learn from the mistakes of others.

ThePilot, if you have legtimately won $80k or so, keep doing it. But I don't believe you are honest about this, and if you are, you would have either had extreme luck, or be playing with large bets and in the short term.

If you run some simulations betting just red, and play for 10,000 spins, sometimes you will have profited. Does this mean only betting red is a good system? . . .

Come on guys, look at the bigger picture.

If you learn from people more experienced than yourself, its like learning another life of lessons. A nice shortcut. I don't mean blindly believe others - too many people do that and don't think for themselves. I mean consider what others say and understand WHY they say it, then verify things for yourself.

The problem is someone explains something and why it is fact, many people don't UNDERSTAND it. that's why they play RBRBRBRBRBR etc..

For almost 20 years, sincerely I have been working with roulette nearly every day. And I have never, never come across a single person that has a system that legitimately wins (long term) with RBRBRBRB. There are winners and losers of every system. It doesn't mean the system is profitable.

There are real and valid working systems, but RBRBRBR is not it. Most people don't like the idea of advantage play like visual ballistics.... because you know, physics and all that "knowing where the ball will land" talk is all quackery.

Could not agree more. Lets get example of a recent 8 on 1 offering by JL. I think that everybody agrees that each system fails in 1M spins. Turnover rate of 8 on 1 is around 1 game in around 100 spins so it would take  10000 games to go through 1M. JL and Twister went through combined 800+ games already. Lets assume that we have 10 players playing 1000 games each. Their combined balance at the end should be in the negative territory and they are expected to lose amount equal of HE multiplied by total of their bets. At no HE roulette there is tax on winnings to consider. In each game the amount of a bet ranges from 2 to 242  depending on which step of progression you finish so its difficult to estimate. The amount is not so important but if we take 2 steps on average on single 0 wheel its around 2000u. what's important is to illustrate the connection between larger and smaller sessions. We know that out of 10 players there will be at least one loser in 1000 games.  Its possible  that there won't be even single winner but there might be a few ones. Impossible to predict a possible breakdown.
You can not ignore the logic of it. 

Regards

[Twisteruk]

Pilot

Can I ask how you played if one of the ECs lost ?

Did you increase your stake on the remaining 2 ECs ?

thanks

Bump for Pilot

[subby]

Twister I think he just takes the loss and doesn't chase a recovery

[Twisteruk]

Twister I think he just takes the loss and doesn't chase a recovery

Yeah I thought as much but just wanted to be 100% 

[roulettefan]

@twister
i confirm this
he take the loss dont chase the recovery

progression 1,2,4
50 100 200

he say me he always recover his losses

[Twisteruk]

@twister
i confirm this
he take the loss don't chase the recovery

progression 1,2,4
50 100 200

he say me he always recover his losses

Ok thanx for that 

Im playin 1,2 on the 2nd and 3rd outcome