Roulette The Turbo Thread

That's a good post, and I have an example for you that validates your theory.

Every once in a while, not often...but every say few months, someone will come into an Igantus thread and just shit all over him, lol.

I shouldn't laugh, because I like what Ignatus does and enjoy testing his methods, but every so often someone just comes in and blows him the fuck up.

And it's not a well known poster usually, it's someone who has maybe six posts to their name.

And you know instantly what happened. They tried an Ignatus method and lost, and are now bitter as hell hahaha.

But yes, to your main point, you can see people being all over the map when it comes to TG for the reasons you listed. I recall an RF member named Denzie, was entertaining to me, but abrasive to some, feeling he had figured out TG's bet selection for his main method.

For a good while, he did well with it. But as Steve or Caleb often say, it won right up until it didn't. He disappeared shortly after, I have no idea if he's now winning or losing, but it's an example thay may fit what you're speculating about.

Regardless, people will decide for themselves, just present your information in a critical manner that isn't biased or abusive and the message will get through. Have faith in what you're saying in other words, don't endlessly repeat it just because TG the televangelist is on a run.

 

Look last time, i don't remember his member name, but he was talking about Steve precognition and that it was bullshit.

Well, i couldn't say anything about it, because everything hasn't been written about our brain (that's why he probably chose that way), i can only refer to what he said /done before to give a trust or not. But the way itself cannot be closed definately.

Here, it is about a math way. Everything has been written yet and it doesn't let any place to any holygrailer... just to variance expressions, as always.

Again, i guess now you've seen our posts enough for it to be in your brain, at a time and once you'll realize that we were just trying to save time, personally i lost few years to get that, but i saw that some lost all their life into fallacies. It's up to you...
You can choose to keep it up, it won't change anything for me, but as Dr Sir said, a sucker is born every minute so we got to keep it up also. Hopefully you got the ignore button bro.

If you need some books, even some chapters in book i can point them to you, don't hesitate.

 

true, and to be honest, sometimes i say to myself, am i that dumb, that something so simple just can't be understand, by neither one of us?. i'm not a beginnner in this game, some might think i am, but i'm not. i won thousands, but lost just as many. i can build a system around his basics and win 500 sessions in a row, and then suddenly, boom, bye bye wishfull thinking.

 

Sharp that's perfect, that an extremely good example of what I'm trying to convey. Excellent.

If TG has a thread in which you feel he's talking about a basis of play that's factually incorrect, point it out using any information you feel is valid in the same way a math professor would to a student (last time I checked math professors don't say students are narcissistic sociopaths in class after the student claims to have solved an unsolvable equation...not that you've done this Sharp, but others have in TG threads lol), and explain why you feel it's incorrect.

Once that's done, walk away and let your body of work speak for itself.

 

but if there is something we can't get our heads around doesn't mean it is true or not. i can't say that a system won't work, unless i know the ground rules to play and test it.
i have a degree in cosmology, so i don't have to tell you how many times i came across things that were impossible to our brain and yet it turned out possible.

 

Actually that's not always true. Proof of concept matters.

 

So for example if i say you'll see that one day 1+1 will make 3, would you let a place for a trust? Answer Honestly please.

 

do i think that roulette is beatable? yes 100%
do i havs the 100% solution? nope.
i'm i confident that i will find the solution one day? yes i am.

it's all about believe, true, false isn't important. believe is.

 

yes, because it's how you look at it.
i can put a yes it's true 1+1=3 and it would also be math based.
again, how do you look at the question will present the awnser

 

let's say a husband and his wife having sex, and she gets pregnant. now their family is representing 3 persons.
husband (1)+(1)wife=3 (husband+wife+baby(3)

 

again, how do you present a question is how the awnser will be formed.
1 can present 1a (1) the second 1 can present 1b (2). then it will be a simple math based (1a=1)+(1b=2) 3 sol. (1+1=3)

 

i can make a more diifucult math based solution, but you know what i mean.
and yes, i have learned at school also that 1+1=2 we all have. but i also learned that an awnser isn't always that simple.

 

It is only beatable by Bias/VB/precognition*/quantum* solution. But nothing else to me. As i can see you give me a yes, so anyone could bring you anywhere. It's a bit same if i ask you if God exists... Some will say yes some no but do you think it's more likely than God created Humans or that Human created God... Personally i choose the second option

Let me introduce what i think about something. A progression will never make a system getting an edge if flatbetting there is no edge. First are you agree with this or not?

I have a fork of spins flatbeting that he can try to beat (he uses to say "not enough spins" reason). Will he give an honest try and give an honest report?

 

Honestly if Turbo had what he claim, as one member said, he would be more famous than Kim Kardashian... This is not logic, it is more likely there's a hic somewhere. Still it doesn't mean he can't live all his life positive with a progression, but what worth for him doesn't worth for anyone, it is just your position on the Gauss curve, mostly everything is a Gauss curve in life.

 

wel

first, i don't believe in god, i believe in the darwin principle, but that's the science in me i guess.
funny in a way, cause i was raised by the bible.

 

second i don't agree with you sorry.
what doesn't work with flatbetting can work with a progression or visa versa. or none of the above. progressions are only bein' used by me anyway when i know what the outcome will be, then i make more profit in shorter periods of time. when i'm not sure about the outcome, i would never use a progression. so if turbo knows 100% that he will win by lets say spin 240 all the time at most, then he can play with a progression.

 

Ok to me this is wrong also but, there's also a fork for progressions, it would have been shorter with flatbetting. Jerome has better skills than me in math to determine it with a progression according to the number of number bet. Let's wait and see. If the number is not the same every spins, we could maybe make a mean and determine the fork also, this in order to claim the game is beatable.

When you'll see the sample of spins needed, you'll understand why so many people can think they got the grail. It could last an entire life... Still as i said, a progression can make you last longer but can make you also lose quicker, you cannot decide where you'll be on the Gauss curve.

 

Here you are right, but the reason for changing amount for bet must be not lost or win in previous spins
Here is the same as in Blackjack - we bet more when we know that is something good for us and bet less when that isn't...

 

@Benas If you have a negative edge system, a progression will never make it suddenly a positive edge system. Well that's my opinion.

 

agree, good point.