TurboGenius When does it lose ?

@Nathan,
Denzie is very smart guy and he was one of first guys who understood Turbo's method 2 or so years back


BUT you always seemed to me as mysterious guy. For you I still don't know if you play dozen/column or EC bets, but on other side I don't understand your connection with AP ways as is VB.

 

to be honest...I came a long way...I guess we all start with ec...especially red/black coz it's visual(geez, I remember I used to play the star system and thought I was rich looooool....but for now and the future I'm pretty sure I'll go with straight up bets/inside numbers or splits or anything that happen to have my selection I wanna play ..... I do have it but I know it's only words that's why I not try to get to much involved here......SHOW PROOF !!! Why ? To who ? A bunch of strangers

But yeah....there's enough info here to make it work. It might take some time to that eureka moment......if it doesn't come , take a few months of and come back with a fresh state of mind

 

According to your logic .. you (would) prefer an environment where your posts to whichever degree of revealing or re-veiling (advice, suggestion, nudging in the correct direction) they are .. would be appreciated, & the constant public forum general behaviour (naysaying, misdirection, ignorance) is non-existent.

Have you ever thought about giving guidance so to speak in a private forum - a closed workgroup of several individuals .. that resonates with the above .. & the input (can be) is case-sensitive; casting the roadblocks from where individuals are .. to the spot where is required to be to perform optimally ?

That's the reason I wished to exchange contact details in the first place

.. & that brings me to your modified quote now turned to you

You're more than welcome ..

 

If you look at Gigi's thread I posted the type of help I will give as example. I can give more help if there's room for it especially where there's active conversation that touch on more topics.
https://www.gamblingforums.com/threads/gigis-hr-tests.21346/page-4

But private forum takes up too much time.

I have to make clear I don't have all the answers. I'm still learning and gathering more knowledge everyday, like everyone else. I just know enough to give help mostly where to search and the mistakes you make.

I read your posts, mails and threads. Your is the most sensible, thinking and researching effort I've seen. So you've done a good job yourself that other members can learn from. Keep going, I know it's difficult, Ofc it's difficult but you're almost there. Or perhaps you're already there to some degree, that's my assessment from what I read.

And I believe all of us don't want to profit those aggressive naysayers at the same time. So we are restricted to write things or give direct answers at times.

For the rest of the readers, yes there's possibility to design a winning systems bet. I'm not the only person who wrote this. And there are many "ways".

 

Notice there are very few winners who actively give help on forums. Why?

Because there's always this accusation that we are scammers in disguise. See the problem now?

 

@Luckyfella what would be most welcome right now, for me, is a tutorial or crash course in math the relevant as it pertains to roulette as a solution to get to godspeed real quick --

not by going through countless reference books & (video) courses bit-by-bit in a linear way topic-by-topic (I prefer seeing the whole thing =deduction, abstract mind + then simple clarifications of whats not grasped yet =induction), also not instructed by someone (some random course instructor who theorizes but not aware of its end application, not as module even less as whole) who doesn't have an idea of its successful proper application & scope, purpose -- most likely resulting in moths upon months of studies at which end still not knowing what to do with all the tools & their significance overall - but in a reverse starting at the end


as a brief that quickly draws the relevant & essential connections & its significance, the whys -- from the point of application wholistic way .. as the most important; .. then optionally going into hows.


having the background parsed & territory already walked; if you can think of how this can be achieved or even offer such a brief, that would be also more than welcome

 

Specific for you, study this graph what it says. Then figure out and do lots of testing where you find this similar characteristic that can be exploited. You just need to find one.

 

predictive statistics vs statistical mechanics vs predictive statistical mechanics; or all one & the same?

 

But that calculator and excel and all the math libraries on the planet must be wrong because MJ says so

The world can't be having 3 flips of a coin having 1, 2 or 3 wins. Those possibilities have to be excluded so MJ feels better. We can't be winning on combinations like HTH, THH, HHT or HHH because MJ says it's against the rules of probability.

What a shit show

 

My fantasy ideal scenario for roulette for years has been bet once win and get out. On a bad day bet once, lose, bet again win, bet again win, and get out. I am not and never have been a gambler. I don't even like gambling. I like winning. I look at it like it's a business. I am only there to make money. Why would I want to stay there one minute longer than necessary. What a waste of time.

 

My fantasy is no cheating online casino that pays, no banning and allow autobot betting, allow waiting for trigger.

If this is the case, I take the online live casinos to the cleaners while sipping tequila on my yatch with my accountant reporting the daily takings.

 

Luckyfella,

I agree with you, things go out of hand sometimes on these forums. I to sometimes go a bit sarcastic, thats because its a heated discussion sometimes and I test ideas that are presented here, and return the results as facts. I'm getting bashed than as well as being a naysayer, mathboy or what have you. So then yes I take it up a notch sometimes to far. (being overly sarcastic)

For that I sincerely apologize! To you and to others!

You see I'm not an AP guy either, I'm not in Dr. Sir anyone team, and I totally disagree with him on AP play!

I'm however a math guy and try to find exploits by math. I however could not find things in all these years (many times I thought I had it though, so I always keep a tiny window open.)

I thank you and others for your efforts of trying to help others, it makes you the better man!

 

Ka, you know I know exactly where you stand. I know you better than anyone else.

No, you got it wrong.
I'm not the better man in the manner you think.

I know enough math.
Far from expert level.
I wrote clearly my background.
I've always been transparent.

I'm no genius. Far from it.
I worked hard to get to this level today.
With the help from the best roulette veterans - the best minds working TOGETHER 24/7.

Credit don't belong to me alone. No way.
We don't compete with each other.
We trust each other completely.
Good times and bad.
We failed millions of times,
But we got up to try the million plus one time.

And yes we worked with what's found on forums plus our own bit.

I shared it freely.
And more I have to you.
Because I know how hard it's for you guys. Ofc I know.

Stop this repeated naysaying nonsense.
This activity won't help you.

You're a good coder.
You know enough math.

Start reading carefully.

Best is to work TOGETHER.
That's how we get here.

I wrote the qualities why we are the better men.

 

And none of it will tell you when a win streak will start, how long it will last, and when it will end. Math is worthless in that regard. Oh. my favorite part. "You can never know what a win streak is." Yet for some crazy reason the pit boss never misses a chance to observe anyone winning big. In fact everyday people with no gambling skills at all tend to gather around just because they like the farts. And for some reason it's the guy winning big. Go figure. Math is worthless unless what you are searching for happens to occur at the same time as a win streak. You guys use math as a baseline to see what you hope to find. I did that a million years ago. It was my first characteristic of randomness. It was all the way back in my hottest three numbers phase that goes all the way back to 1995.

 

I figured out a way to do that. I found a way to lower the overhead, travel, and get comped things that are worth getting comped at. I even make enough money off the one win to lose $100 at Craps, playing for the required hour. Yep, I'm switching over to one net win. That's got to be interesting. Pop in to the Roulette table and get my gambling money to lose at the Craps table. Get my overhead paid and travel for free. Hahaha. The casino will see it as them winning all the time. Only I will be winning all the time. I wonder if 1 net win will always win? It all depends on bankroll and size of bets. With enough room to maneuver it might be easy to win all sessions.

 

Yep, this could be good. I caught a sleeping dozen and a zig zag working and walked with one net win at R-Sim.

 

Amazing to see so many people have found a way to beat roulette. At the moment all we have are claims. The last 10 years all we have had are claims.

Why is everyone here congratulating each other when there is yet to be a demonstration of any of these claims?

I give up. This forum is funny. Enjoy your claims without demonstrations.

 

I don't get it. Is there a demonstration police? Not in Washington DC that's for sure. Why does a method of play have to be proved to you? How about death. Do you need proof that you will one day die? That system almost works perfectly for everyone. I wrote the RR thread so that you could prove it to yourself, just because examples are not enough. I plan to prove all this. When it is all too late you will have all the proof that you want. I'm sort of counting on that being sort of like death.

 

Ever seen " Was I whacked with that system last night at the casino".

Only winners are on forums . How strange that casinos are still open .

 

Thats the paradox now is it not unfortunately. We could never do that because of the consequences.