Roulette Ask Me Anything About Betting the EC's (Even Chances)

He won’t, he’s got the delusional mirror glasses on. Don’t waste your time on future replies to a dysfunctional self inflicted suicidal frontal lobotomy practitioner. Lol.

 

Thanks for a caring number of posts that HOPEFULLY more intelligent readers will get the full value of the information you provided as to why a Marty is not the holy grail, the fool you have addressed your well intended information to is of course ,no big surprise here ,still as belligerent as ever.
He has no grace to at least acknowledge your effort other than “his” still misguided assumption that you support his Marty endeavours , with some luck he will miss judge the angle of the frontal probe and put himself out of harms way permanently.
Cheers

 

Oh. My. God.
Complete amateur, please stop embarrassing yourself, please stop posting you are leading newbies astray. Shame on you. Shame.
Please go to a real casinoverse sooner than later, please.

 

Maybe a bit harsh.

I think he is genuinely wanting to understand and improve his game because he has something that "seems to be working". Obviously there is an element of defending what he has but that's pretty normal and expected.

He has asked if his results are extremely lucky and my calculations on this thread suggested yes.

I'm not getting any sense that he isn't open minded and willing to look at other approaches.

 

Just for an example in my database (1 million real wheel spins) has the following count of streaks for the patters EO/OE and EE/OO -> Longest streaks found 16 and 15.

 

I will only beleieve you if you can give me one shred of a difference. Live casino play, live online play, whatever, does Black follow Red? Does Red follow follow Black? Are there streaks of Red? Are there streaks of Black? Give me an exact difference between live online play and rng's regarding outcomes and nothing else. Will you see this playing live? BBRRBRB or BBBBBBB, RRRRRR, BRBRBR BBRBBR. If you see any outcomes like that live, my strategy will work exactly the same. You make statements just to sound like you know so much, but NEVER back them with anything at all. If you can tell me what the exact difference is, then that would be something to consider. If you cannot, you're just spouting your know nothing bs as usual. Again, what is the difference? Back your statement with something. I have viewed thousand of documented actual roulette wheel outcomes,I see no difference at all. There are those on this thread who back everything they say, and I believe them because their statements are supported. This thread is 122 pages long, point me to one statement you have made that you have backed with facts other than the Martingale is a doomed prospect.

 

Got it , will do. Now shut the hell up.

 

Those are not radical results at all, just the normal probabilites. I see those outcomes all the time.

 

Just what the hell do you mean by RADICAL results on a real wheel. I think you do not know what that word means. Other than Red and Black showing up iclose to a 50/50 dispersion, and the 37 numbers, what is radical? Let me explain radical to you. Every now and then, the colors come up blue, orange, pink, yellow. And every now and then the numbers 39 orange, 40 pink, 41 yellow show up. Now that would be considered radical. However, If just red and black appear in a random fashion, there is nothing radical about that at all. Let me put the word radical in a sentence for you so you might understand it true meaning. Spike is a radical know it all. Get it now?

 

I am willing to listen to and try other approaches. The few I have tried, do not come close to the results I am getting. Why am I not lucky with those also?

 

I wasn't trying to be any radical. My point was just to show an example from a real roulette (sample size 1M) that you're able to see for example 10 spin long EE/OO streak ca. every xx days (if played continuously 24/7).

This sheet can show somebody something about these streaks.

 

xx ~ 7,5 days

 

I'm sorry, I owe you an appolgy. I thought Spike submitted that and I was replying to him. Yeah, some things to learn about streaks from that.

 

No problem. Anyway my script has a bug. So the calc is utter crap Gonna fix it...

 

Just out of curiosity, how did you realize your script had a bug? Did the stats not look right to you?

 

Punkcity, Punkass or whatever. Who are you anyway other than the foulest mouth I have ever heard. Give me one good reason I should listen to anything you say. Take the cuss words out of your sentences, and they are only two words long, nothing coherentat at all. Give me something positive you do and let me try it. Or are you like Spik, all talk (all cuss words) and no show? You are a bigger joke than me, at least I reveal what I do and you can take it or leave it. Let's hear your strategy if you have one. Maybe you don't, maybe you have never even played a casino game in your life. What do you have on YouTube I could watch? You mentioned a couple of guys that have some real class, you obviously have not learned a thing from them.

 

Perhaps the first and only dedicated student that was personally coached by me for two months, two hours per day, and expected to do practice sessions on his own will validate Spike's statement a little. In the first month he was guided and went from losing at around a 45% win to loss result to a 66% win to loss result. Then for the next month he demonstrated a 66% take away percentage where he won 4.66 times at three net wins for each lost session at seven net losses. This produces 14 net win gained to 7 net lost units, all flat betting. These values tend to be duplicated by others that have not been personally guided, but have only read the RR thread. That is mathematical. For anyone to use the 3 / 7 flat betting and getting to 66% then it means that they are in fact a skilled player at this method. There are far better strategies for using this. Lungyeh suggests using 20 times your base value bet while in a win phase. That's a guy that uses $20,000 for the bigger bets. And he came up with his own version of RR all on his own. One day the mathBoyz will be explaining with math why it works instead of trying to imply with math why it can't work. It will be fun to see how they deal with such a monumental change in direction. They have done this before. John Nash showed them equilibrium. At first they said no way. Then later they realized that he changed everything. It was nothing more than something that had always been the correct all along. It just took time to validate it and understand it.

 

40 years of coding from the age of 16 will create you a some kind of special skill (subconscious) where you just know everything is not just right with the code So you just go and do some checks from another point of view to see if it's ok.

 

I'm somewhat puzzled. You said you already have a million bucks.

 

Was it? It's not a waste of time getting people that act so high and mighty on the record. They are nothing more than sailors standing on the dock and jeering at the three small ships and yelling at them that they are about to sail off the edge of the world and die.