0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

*

ignatus

  • 3000+ Posts Member !!!
  • 5520
  • Rated: +209
I want to know, please, for those who play for REAL

*How big is Bankroll you play with
*What is your stoploss
*What is your wingoal

"Focus on predicting wheel sectors where the ball is expected to land" ~Steve

*

sugtips

  • 100+ posts Member
  • ***
  • 224
  • There's a will, there's a way.
  • Rated: +9
I want to know, please, for those who play for REAL

*How big is Bankroll you play with
*What is your stoploss
*What is your wingoal

bankroll +350u or +1500u
stoploss -100
wingoal +100
If you think you can, You can. If you think you can't, you are right.

*

Bettingking

  • 100+ posts Member
  • ***
  • 145
  • Roulette Forum .cc | Member
  • Rated: +20
It depends on the system I am using but I dont enter casino with an amount less than $800

bluediamond2013

  • Member
  • *
  • 7
  • Member
  • Rated: 0
Hi im a new member but have been looking throughb this forum for a few months now so i thought id join. I play online roulette pretty much every other day.
I have been trying out different systems on this forum. I have been playing with £500 over the last 2 weeks and now ive lost £460 and left with £40 as of now.

I like your posts ignatus i have beem using some of your systems but my problem is cashing out when i winning. I hit a losing streak and end up losing.

At the moment i am currently playing with neighbour bets.

*

ego

  • 1000+ posts member!
  • *****
  • 1470
  • Rated: +47

I would use John Patrick's money management methodology or Brett Morton - if you search forum you should find topics about them.
If not spend your 40 to buy books from both, see it as future investment.

Problem is that most players don't do what the suppose to do.

Take 3K bankroll - then you split the 3K bankroll into three parts and bring one to the casino, that is 1K.
Now you decide how much to risk for each game, lets say 200 and give you 5 games.
But we are not done yet, you need to sett loss limit and win target, so assume you have 50% loss limit, that means you can only play and touch 100 for your session and this size determine what kind of unit size you should play.

The good news is that you will go home with 500 if you lose all 5 sessions.
Now if you bet using 10 you will get 10 bets down, if you use 5 minimum you get 20 bets down, if you use 1 you get 100 bets down.

So if you flat betting you can use 10 or lower bets and if you are going to use a progression you end up having a base bet around 1.
That would probably mean you can not play ordinary wheels with to high minimum size, so you have to do with air ball machine.

Do you see the reality most members missing - your base bet would be 10$ or 1$ with 3000$ bankroll.

This is the difference between fact and fiction systems on this forum, most system use progressions with very much money at risk where you would need 10,000 to 30.000$ bankroll to play, if you are going to follow money management rules.

Cheers
Denial of gamblers fallacy is usually seen in people who has Roulette as last option for a way to wealth, debt covering and a independent lifestyle.  Next step is pretty ugly-
AP - It's not that it can't be done, but rather people don't really have a clue as to the level of fanaticism and outright obsession that it takes to be successful, let alone get to the level where you can take money out of the casinos on a regular basis. Out of 1,000 people that earnestly try, maybe only one will make it.

cht

  • 1000+ posts member!
  • *****
  • 1320
  • Roulette Forum .cc | Member
  • Rated: +95
I want to know, please, for those who play for REAL

*How big is Bankroll you play with

8-12 units

*What is your stoploss

8-12 units

*What is your wingoal

8-12 units or lesser if the number of spins(roulette) or shoes(baccarat) is reached.

You will only be as clever and as stupid as the roulette "experts" on forum.

cht

  • 1000+ posts member!
  • *****
  • 1320
  • Roulette Forum .cc | Member
  • Rated: +95
I would use John Patrick's money management methodology or Brett Morton - if you search forum you should find topics about them.
If not spend your 40 to buy books from both, see it as future investment.

Problem is that most players don't do what the suppose to do.

Take 3K bankroll - then you split the 3K bankroll into three parts and bring one to the casino, that is 1K.
Now you decide how much to risk for each game, lets say 200 and give you 5 games.
But we are not done yet, you need to sett loss limit and win target, so assume you have 50% loss limit, that means you can only play and touch 100 for your session and this size determine what kind of unit size you should play.

The good news is that you will go home with 500 if you lose all 5 sessions.
Now if you bet using 10 you will get 10 bets down, if you use 5 minimum you get 20 bets down, if you use 1 you get 100 bets down.

So if you flat betting you can use 10 or lower bets and if you are going to use a progression you end up having a base bet around 1.
That would probably mean you can not play ordinary wheels with to high minimum size, so you have to do with air ball machine.

Do you see the reality most members missing - your base bet would be 10$ or 1$ with 3000$ bankroll.

This is the difference between fact and fiction systems on this forum, most system use progressions with very much money at risk where you would need 10,000 to 30.000$ bankroll to play, if you are going to follow money management rules.

Cheers
Good post ego.  :thumbsup:
You will only be as clever and as stupid as the roulette "experts" on forum.

*

Tinsoldiers

  • 100+ posts Member
  • ***
  • 174
  • Member
  • Rated: +19
*How big is Bankroll you play with
*What is your stoploss
*What is your wingoal
20 units bank roll. 
No stop loss.  No win goals. Just play along betting flat. All money management rules that I have seen so far either will elongate your time of vanishing the bankroll or inherently assumes that you have a winning method.

*

ego

  • 1000+ posts member!
  • *****
  • 1470
  • Rated: +47
I would not say you are a dork as i would never offend you, but next time you can add something to the discussion and not just ramble about nonsense.

- - - - - - - - - -

Math Professor Posted 03/20/06
John Patricks Forum Board

- - - - - - - - - - 
 
Someone quoted John Patrick as saying I don't win much but I don't lose much either.
Now he was critical of this statement but there is a reason for it.

We who have lived with gambling all our lives understand the relationship between what we win and what we lose.

The Equation is simple enough .
Magnitude of profit is usually a function of magnitude of wagering.

One of the most common failures in gambling is progressive betting.
Several small wins are satisfying but  when the next small win does not happen and it turns into a progression which often recovers the day but sometimes results in ruination.

Giving up on a progression is hard because losing can mean the erosion of several days work.

The gambling flaw is inherent in this.
Christopher Pawlicki highlighted this fact.
The equation for winning small returns often calls for a progression .
The progression  ultimately however snatches away the prevous wins.

 For example 20 + 20 +20 +20 +20 has been achieved with 50 + 100 + 80 + 120 + 100  The final destructive act is a 100  that does not recover .
Even without a progression 100 absorbs the 5  sets of 20 + wins.

 I call this the 20/100 flaw.

20 is therefore 20% of 100.
A good result by any standards.

In order to control the erosion of previous wins the ratio of win to wager
needs to be as close to parity as possible.

 Say 80 + 80 +80 +80 + 80  with 100 + 100 + 100 + 100 + 100

If the 100 goes then we still have nearly 4 days work intact.
We can walk away and get them again another day.
Not many gamblers can achieve 80%.

This is the flaw.

There must be plenty of gamblers here who understand this but any replies should be better than 3 and out .
The math does not work.

- - - - - - - - - -

JOHN PATRICK Posted 03/20/06
John Patrick forum board

- - - - - - - - - -

excellent point but go back to your opening paragraph and it is not clear ............You said      "he was critical of this statement ................"

I THINK you meant he was CRITIZIED  for this statement ...............

and you're right..................there were a couple of people who laughed at it as meaning I was content with small wins..........adn that ALL I wanted to do was lose a little each day.........

I am glad you picked up on what I really meant by saying that (naturally) I would like to win more, but I am more interested in holding losses down.........

and THAT point that you made about people who do NOT gamble every day , not realizing this is the total and complete point I try to embellish in their minds every day............

Someone else (I think it was Rick K., a few days ago), also touched on that fact .................how really hard it is to win..........and that you HAVE to somehow, someway, condition yourself to win small to ensure you don't lose big ..........to be able to stay alive in this journey called gambling..........

 You showed the SERIES you use ..........

 What is the LOSS LIMIT and WIN GOAL you advise...........(percentage wise)

- - - - - - - - - -

Math Professor Posted 03/20/06
John Patrick forum board
- - - - - - - - - -

" What is the LOSS LIMIT and WIN GOAL you advise...........(percentage wise)"

Well that is my question to everyone ! 
What I am doing here is highlighting the problem we have with the percentage we go for.

The greater the difference between the amount we wager and the amount we accept ,as a win ,the more of a problem we have.
Lets say (as you have stated) that 5% is a professional aspiration. So we wager 100 for 5 .

That might seem reasonable but look at the result say over 5 days.
+ 5 +5 +5 +5 +5 = 25 . that's great we are winning 5 each day and we haven't lost. Now on day six we wager 100 and bust out !

We are now - 75 !   

We were going up and down with our 100.
But then we hit a bad spell and it eroded to 0.

The problem here is that we often have to go down to nearly zero
to make the continuous flow of 5's.

if our 5 day win was +60 +30 +20 + 120 +40  and this can be achieved with 100 and the 100 busts after 5 days we have .
won +170.  (270 - 100) .

 I often work on 100 or 70 from 200. That is I am prepared to lose 200 for these great returns and if I can manufacture 70 od chips every day with a wager of 200 chips then I am going to survive if the cumulative value exceeds 100 after bust out.

What I would like to know from yourself is what your wager is in relation
to what you accept for that session and how do you overcome this flaw.

This is where Pawlicki is making the case that the crash will come and steal away your cumulative gains. Its the problem that haunts all gamblers.
Gamblers ruin.
Denial of gamblers fallacy is usually seen in people who has Roulette as last option for a way to wealth, debt covering and a independent lifestyle.  Next step is pretty ugly-
AP - It's not that it can't be done, but rather people don't really have a clue as to the level of fanaticism and outright obsession that it takes to be successful, let alone get to the level where you can take money out of the casinos on a regular basis. Out of 1,000 people that earnestly try, maybe only one will make it.

 

Popular pages: