Dyksexlic

[Joe]

OR or XOR ?

"or not" implies XOR. ;-)

[psimoes]

That word game may be easy to apply to roulette. Fill the wheel with 37 different words and each time the outcome forms the beginning of a phrase you just bet all the words / numbers that don't grammatically fit.
Ex if something like SHE USED TO appears, you would bet on words such as
LIVES, BUYS, DRESSED because those don't fit.

[Blueprint]

Betting what doesn't fit.  Now, that's interesting.

[Joe]

The thing is, it's not hard to invent any crazy mapping of the numbers to something else, like letters, but why should it work? What possible correlation could there be between them?
This is what I find frustrating about roulette systems and forums (or rather, I used to, now it just makes me roll my eyes and shrug); hardly ever is any guiding principle or justification given for why the ideas might work. Thinking out of the box is all very well but all too often it seems like it's pursued as an end in itself.

[Nimo]

The thing is, it's not hard to invent any crazy mapping of the numbers to something else, like letters, but why should it work? What possible correlation could there be between them?
This is what I find frustrating about roulette systems and forums (or rather, I used to, now it just makes me roll my eyes and shrug); hardly ever is any guiding principle or justification given for why the ideas might work. Thinking out of the box is all very well but all too often it seems like it's pursued as an end in itself.

Sometimes I don't question why something works, or why it doesn't.  I understand the physics behind aerodynamics,lift and thrust, but am still amazed an item 100 tons heavier than air is flying me off to a beach somewhere.  I don't question why it works, I know it does and use it to my advantage. 

I have a basketball betting system that on paper should never work, the mathematics would say I should have lost  almosr every single time.  The record of this system over the years is 407-13.  Thirteen losses and 407 wins.  It has nothing to do with the way a normal handicapper would look at the game.  I don't question it, I just pocket the profits.

[psimoes]

I´m not saying it works. I just found It surprising no one in that thread guessed what the OP was trying to say. But it´s nonsense. It would be like IF 5, 7, 11 APPEAR IN A ROW, BET THAT 13 WON´T HIT NEXT. OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. I don´t believe in systems  anymore.
Unless you sell systems online. That´s a money maker. Guaranteed. 

[The General]

The thing is, it's not hard to invent any crazy mapping of the numbers to something else, like letters, but why should it work? What possible correlation could there be between them?
This is what I find frustrating about roulette systems and forums (or rather, I used to, now it just makes me roll my eyes and shrug); hardly ever is any guiding principle or justification given for why the ideas might work. Thinking out of the box is all very well but all too often it seems like it's pursued as an end in itself.

We agree.  System players can never seem to state why a system should work. 

[psimoes]

I can think of a few bogus theories, but I don´t want my competitors to know about them.

[Gandhi]

He always won in a cycle ..
I think he was very similar to vaddis in his thinking

Dyslexic was a one cycle winner but had a large bankroll that would make sure he won it

He always said he would win on a repeat even if it came in on the 37th spin

So he just used a negative progression until a repeat and had a massive bankroll to do it?

Also it's funny how PassionRouletta now talks and riddles like he's the master of Dyslexiks method but before it was Vaddis way was the be all and end all lol.

[6th-sense]

So he just used a negative progression until a repeat and had a massive bankroll to do it?

Also it's funny how PassionRouletta now talks and riddles like he's the master of Dyslexiks method but before it was Vaddis way was the be all and end all lol.

I don’t think he did no..he talked about placed bets ..held bets..and other bets  wasn’t progression but different bets with certain amounts ..depending where that bet was .maybe a bit like NIMO is doing ..

[luckyfella]

The lenght of the cycles you are talking about is variabel ?

The length of the cycle has to be based on math
The very concept of the jargon 'cycle' is based on math

Dyslexic gave his perception of cycle
It is not the complete math itself

People after him introduced their concept of cycle

The question is, are these versions of 'cycle' based on math ?
If they are not based on math, then it is some voodoo nonsense

This brings us back to the start,

Do you understand the math of 'cycle' ?

I am afraid almost all of you don't properly understand it
Or has a vague understanding at best
Therein lies the problem

We can only gain the edge based on proper math, that's a fact

The casino has the house edge
Your edge must overcome this house edge to give you a net positive edge whose number is viable

[luckyfella]

AP players CLAIM that they are able to make PREDICTIONs of future spins with the use of the physical aspects of the game

I am sure you have read or watched videos about that
The casino has asset/property protection protocol updated to deal with the latest scam, may not be this roulette game
The casino wield the untimate weapon against AP players, the ban
It is a losing game, no doubt about that

How did phil Ivey win his millions playing baccarat ?
Edge sorting

Go figure the rest
Stay sober

[Steve]

Like i said, its easy to win. The real problem is avoiding detection. Its not difficult to avoid detection. Its difficult for surveillance staff to determine who's an AP before theywin too much.

I dont claim to beat roulette. I beat it. 

Im one of many. People who don't believe roulette is being beaten focus on approaches like repeaters. They dont have AP experience.

[-Katalyst-]

@Steve - I get that these concepts are not for everybody - so in that respect I can see your point of views when you & Caleb point out 'noobs' etc following blindly - *each to their own
- they don't have to point out word for word their way but what 6th/Nimo and a few others on here are graciously sharing is actually good for paving the way for those so called 'noobs' 

*there is only one way...?  - sure this is your experience - nothing wrong with that - but quite limited to think that there is only one way
**there are people making good money from this game without the direct use of AP or VB - to argue otherwise shows your hand - it’s all conjecture on here anyway!

But heh! - you guys are right with whatever you'll say 

[Steve]

but what 6th/Nimo and a few others on here are graciously sharing is actually good for paving the way for those so called 'noobs' 

I'm not entirely sure what they are sharing specifically, but most information by members is incorrect and harmful. Thats why we speak up.

*there is only one way...?  - sure this is your experience - nothing wrong with that - but quite limited to think that there is only one way

Again I dont think MY way is the only way. I just encourage everyone to try NEW methods, and understand why particular approaches dont work. Im trying to save people time and effort, but it seems some people arent really interested - they just want to do their own way regardless. That's fine, but it becomes a problem when they mislead other people. There's always two sides. The other side (my side) explains it all, and its up to the noobs to take responsibility for their own learning.

**there are people making good money from this game without the direct use of AP or VB - to argue otherwise shows your hand - it’s all conjecture on here anyway!

Maybe, for a while. Even random bets can win. And add progression, then you can win for a while longer. But winning from luck and progression is very different to a real advantage.

But heh! - you guys are right with whatever you'll say

See now you're getting it