random vs random outcome

[Vicardo]

The problem with betting progressions is what happens when things dont work out? You wipe out your bankroll.

[huskerdu]

Ok, playing real roulette at a land based cazino visual ballistics can increase the accuracy of predictions, but playing online cazino, since flat betting is based absolutely on luck, there is no other way of betting except progressions, or not?

My verdict is :
Bet selection: random against random
Progression: a very light negative progression or a very heavy positive progression .

I'm working on it after my last Vaterloo  and the outcomes look positive so far

[ddarko]

since flat betting is based absolutely on luck,

How did you come to this conclusion pls huskerdu ?

[huskerdu]

1. Bet selection:
Every system I've tried so far has failed because it was based on some rules, or facts, or laws, or matrixes,  or ''wait for .. and then .. bet on ... ''  or whatever we can imagine that lead us to start our bet. Or not? And on the long run, after earning some units and hoping that we had found something real good, sudently every logic rule has  wiped out with our money.
We said to aourselves: It can't be happen. But it happened. So I said to myself: Why to crash my mind to find a logical way of betting. Randomness is like hell. So roll a dice, flip a coin whatever you like, and bet the outcome and let the roulette trying to beat you. so you don't have to be with headache to think what to bet, e.c. black or red? I stopped thinking. Just random.
2. Money management or progression:
All negative progressions have lead us to ''sudden death'' Or not? There is a time when all rules collapse (see note 1.) and all negative systems come to the limit where you give up. So if you want to use a negative progression my opinion is to be as much as light and not agressive in order not to loose all our bankroll. And I say if we want to use negative progressions, because many of us have it in our nature to increase (in many ways) our betting when we loose, in order to take back our looses. On the other hand positive progressions have the advantage that we controll our bankroll and if we are lucky we can heat a big win. And if we use a strong positive progression we increase the opportunity of earning a lot or at least counterpoise any previous loses. 

[ddarko]

@husker du

1. how about playing 2 methods & alternating between them, or something like that. That would also be fighting "random V random" wouldn't it?

When you do flat betting you are putting less money "at risk" than any of your suggested progressions.

Re 2. You appear to be going for the "boom or bust" theory, regarding your progressions, hope you have the balls and blood pressure tablets for that.

Whatever you decide good luck 

[huskerdu]

@ ddarko

1. 2 methods & alternating between them in the same session or use different systems in every session? I have tried in the same session using different systems but the losts of the one systems couldn's overcome the winnings of the other. But it was a good try.

2. I really don't like the ''boom or burst'' theory,  I've been there and have been burst I think a flat betting is been used when you see for ec. 30 blacks and 10 reds, so you say for the next 30 spins I flatbet on reds. Sure I have tried this kind of flatbett with disaster.

3. Having read the book ''Thirteen against the Bank'' I'm experimenting on  betting on both ECs (the one bet on blacks and the other bet on reds at the same time, positive progression both) with Reverse labouchere. It fits to my that I've bored of thinking what to bet. Interesting resalts so far, without loosing my bankroll.

[huskerdu]

thanks for your wishes, I don't know how do you get with roulette, wish you good luck too   

[ausguy]

husk - re your EC betting such as red & black. As you say you are up to betting 2 units on red & 3 units on black & if zero hits the you lose 5 units for that spin. I've seen system sellers/scammers on you tube demonstrating these very same flawed plays.

If black had have spun up then it would have been +3 W for black & -2 L on Red = +1 net. If Red had spun up it would have been +2 Red & -3 for Black = -1 net.

In the past this type of betting has been discussed on the forums. The better way to play this is by differential betting, that is you only bet the higher amount of the difference between the 2 options . You should only play many of your bets on paper/or your bet sheet.

What then does all this mean ?  Any Red & black amount being if each the same amount is a futile bet as any win is cancelled by the loss. If Zero is not bet on as an insurance bet bet then the risk is that both the Red & Black bets are lost & given to the casino. Equal amount bets should not bet on for obvious reasons.

Using the 3B & 2R bets again for my example, plus on paper calculations, we can see that the differential calc. directs us to place a 1 unit bet on black only.  If zero hits then the loss is -1 unit instead of -5. If black hits then it's the same as 1st shown at +1. If red hits then we again get the same as 1st shown at -1.

So as you can see for a far less outlay & loss risk we achieve the same value result.

[ddarko]

@ ddarko

1. 2 methods & alternating between them in the same session or use different systems in every session? I have tried in the same session using different systems but the losts of the one systems couldn's overcome the winnings of the other. But it was a good try.

2. I really don't like the ''boom or burst'' theory,  I've been there and have been burst I think a flat betting is been used when you see for ec. 30 blacks and 10 reds, so you say for the next 30 spins I flatbet on reds. Sure I have tried this kind of flatbett with disaster.

3. Having read the book ''Thirteen against the Bank'' I'm experimenting on  betting on both ECs (the one bet on blacks and the other bet on reds at the same time, positive progression both) with Reverse labouchere. It fits to my that I've bored of thinking what to bet. Interesting resalts so far, without loosing my bankroll.

1. I don't have the answer  but basically I'm trying to say some way, get on the winning trend & off the losing one. Swap RB for OE Swap playing for the run to playing for the chop etc etc etc.

2. Sorry you lost that way but I don't think that's down to the flat betting part.

3. I've read that as well If you run with that your going to need another "partner in crime"

@ausguy

well put as always dicksucker mate  LOL

[ati]

For a while, I thought that a good way to win is to play many systems at the same time. I've spent many hours testing and playing different methods, but all of them lost eventually. I played a method where I bet on three EC's, double dozens, double columns at the same time. So basically it was 5 systems in 1. It failed. When 2 out of the 5 losing, the 3 winners cannot cover the losses. I tried many other variants, and non of them works. Betting on both red and black with whatever progression would lose as well. Even on no zero wheel.
The problem with outside bets is, non of the bet selections make sense. Good example when 10 red hits, one thinks red is hot that's the way to go, the other thinks black has to come next. I tried to play random outside bets with the same progression and money management can be found in systems, and it produced the same results. Sometimes win, sometimes loss.

[ddarko]

Good example when 10 red hits, one thinks red is hot that's the way to go, the other thinks black has to come next.

How about going with the mantra, NOTHING is "due" or "not due" 

[kingsroulette]

Never play Martingale. It is the surest way to lose all at last.

[huskerdu]

when I was a little child () I was waiting to see more blacks than reds and then (gambler's fallacy) I used to bet on reds with negarive progression and  sooner or later,  a disaster used to come.
Now that i've grown up () , I play based on the fact that one of the BLACK or RED will increase its outcome. And I play positive progressions on that fact. Small looses when the B & R are equal and good wins when one of them starts to growth.
So I'm going with not against Gambler's fallacy. B and R cannot be eual. One of them will start to overpass either from the beginning of the session either during session. So if I play both with positive progression, one of them will  give me positive results which will surpass the negative results of the other side. Simple or do I miss something?

[ausguy]

"Simple or do I miss something " ? Unless you're playing BetVoyager no zero you have ? To me it seems that differential betting (DB) calculations are not a factor in your betting ?

Why outlay more money than you have to when DB allows less outlays for the same returns ?  Also what about any zero hits on any 37 or 38 pocket wheel ?

I feel you didn't comprehend what I was getting at in my other post a few back @ 9:57am today ?

[huskerdu]

Why BetVoyager don't let you bet on both Blacks and Reds? Something ''Holy Grail'' is hiding behind it? I'm trying to catch it. Think about it.