I am simply done with scammers in this forum.

That's probably about 99.9% of this forum buddy.

Clf is going the safe route. It's safer and smarter to test over many spins than be lucky by short-term results. BTW, all are fools who think that a reason is more important than testing over tons of spins, because everyone's so called reason or reasons are mostly delusions, except for genuine ones, like having the ability to use telekinesis to move the roulette ball. I believe all progression is utterly stupid (it is like trying to beat math with math), but I could be wrong. If a system uses progression, then obviously you need tons and tons and tons of more testing.

To determine how many spins you must test, you have to calculate the probability of being ahead (and by how much) depending on how many numbers you are betting on and if you are using progression to see if you have a winning system. Or you can use some other math based on standard deviations. People can easily pass tens of thousands of spins by just flat-betting and getting lucky. I was wrong in an earlier post where I said that 5,000 spins flat-betting would be a valid test. This is not nearly enough. Maybe it is if you are significantly ahead in profit. Again, you would have to look at the standard deviation.