Roulette Vaddis Holy Grail

We established that for repeaters, for instance when you test to cover for 10 numbers that it can trend in wins.i.e.
10 | W
10 | W
10 | W
10 | L
11 | whatever outcome comes

But Sleepers are different, they would trend like this

10 | W
11 | W
12 | W
13 | L
13| whatever outcome comes

You see it is increasing the '# of numbers' to cover as it wins, there's way to just force it to get stuck at 10 for the rest of the cycle. And if it keeps winning it will only trend with 10 to cover and you will later realize that it sort of includes singles as well. But unlike repeats these could carry losses in between trends, but If you just test you will see it produce weaknesses.

 

Hi Rol! Today is Wednesday, and I can at least do a little of this. Although there is already so much written here and I can’t keep up with it all. Again, I spent a lot of time reading all this, although as I wanted right away, I had to respond immediately to what I read today. Now you will have to read all this again and answer and ask, more precisely. Moreover, yes, English is also not my native language, so I still have to translate it correctly in order to understand.
I wanted to talk about a lot of things, but since there’s already a lot of stuff here, it just won’t work. Therefore, you will have to speak straight to the point, basically. Let's go as orderly as possible.

Quote above. About these 24-12-13. Here on the forum we call it the law of the third, or LOTT for short. Feel free to use this, basically everyone here will understand what we’re talking about.
What you say needs to be checked - of course, I checked this 10 years ago, when I started studying Vaddy. Everything fits together. BUT, as you found out with Timothy, it is most likely 14 to 10 for 37 spins. And Vaddy also seemed to write such numbers at the beginning. I agree.
Regarding what you say, you need to ask - why is this happening? I thought about this during the first few months of the study. I even remember lying before bed and asking myself this question. And visualizing in my head, I came to the conclusion that if there were more repetitions in 37 spins, then we would always just bet on repetitions and win. The opposite is the same - if it was less, then we always bet on singles and would also always win. And I thought that this was just some kind of perfect balance created in the roulette itself.
Before Vaddy, I didn’t know about this at all, I tested all sorts of crap. And this was also many years before Vaddy. But as for the fact that I thought that this was a certain balance in roulette, and answering your next question - what kind of “god” is this, later, only 6 years later, when I found out about Turbo, which I told you about - I found out and realized that it was random. This is exactly how it works, and roulette itself has nothing to do with it. Therefore, this “god” is most likely random.
And in future messages you wrote that Vaddy left hints about randomness, but I didn’t notice them there at all, or at least I didn’t even have any thoughts about what randomness is and how it affects roulette. Therefore, as you said, it was not possible to find out anything with those tips from him. Because I didn’t even understand what he meant. But like I said, I never doubted that it was real. You can see from a person what he is like, but he did not pretend to be a clown, like 99% of those who “found out”.
But, unfortunately, I didn’t go further than this - I mean beyond the fact that I just thought that this was some kind of roulette balance, and then I didn’t know about random at all. Although of course I tried to find out, because Vaddy was constantly talking about LOTT. But I generally didn’t understand much about roulette, let’s put it this way. This is how my brain works. I'm slow-witted. This is the specificity of my brain, as well as the disease. And only thanks to Turbo I learned that LOTT is Everywhere! Actually everywhere! In all aspects, all possible choices, LOTT will always work. For example, I even wrote to Trubo then that he simply blew my mind with the fact that, let’s say from the first cycle there are 37 spins, out of 12 (on average) repetitions that fell out, in the second cycle 2/3 of these repetitions will drop out. It’s the same with sleepers, singles, and everyone in general. So why didn't I expand - I said. But also for one more reason, which I wanted to ask about later.

 

Sorry, it reduces as it wins, so the correct 'table' is:

10 | W
09 | W
08 | W
07 | L
07 | whatever outcome comes

 

Listen! I really want to ask you this question? I don’t know, will you answer honestly or not? But based on what I have already read further, there I will, by the way, ask a similar question - tell me honestly - this whole topic is really about specific numbers in roulette that you always choose, such as about this family from Spain (by the way, I watched the movie), who picked numbers because of an imbalance in the wheel? Well, that is, there are always the same numbers on which you will always win because of their location and balance, but let’s bet at a certain time, or is that not so? I honestly think the numbers will always be different, as Vaddy said, and in my own tests. Just who knows?!))

 

Yes brilliant, I may have missed some points, but I will read again and take my time to reply but first impression: you haven't quite asked the MOST IMPORTANT QUESTION yet. You've asked why and got an answer, now the very urgent question: HOW DOES LOTT DO IT? HOW is the key word. In 37 spins, 12 repeats. Yes I simply just got lost in my head, I was remembering stats of another cycle length I've recently been studying. But I am glad Tim went ahead to confirm, something I appreciate greatly with anyone I discuss things, I go check your facts, you check mine and we help one another. Okay so u get 12 repeats, when do they happen? At the beginning of the cycle? in the middle? at the end? Statistically, the math says it happens quite often at the beginning but is that ideal? when you have so many numbers to cover? You have to figure the best way of taking advantage of it because it is always happening. What's the perfect number of numbers to cover, because these repeats could cluster or appear wide apart, but you have a limited 37 spin cycle to try exploit them.

 

Platton, good to see back btw man.

And thanks for the advises. I have made up my own words and concepts in my head b/c I have been alone in this for so long.

Thanks once again.

 

sorry whats wrong with me today:

 

This is probably one of the MOST important posts for me! Probably because of this question that I want to ask you about your answer to my question before about sleepers, and will be to some extent the answer to all these questions that you asked in this post, so I will not answer them now.
Since you answered me that sleepers are important, but at the same time you wrote some things that, when I read this for the first time a couple of days ago, I wanted to write to you - thank you very, very, very much! And this gratitude remains the same in any case. But then I was a little overwhelmed because I was very confused.
And therefore a VERY important question for me:
This

AND this

Are you saying that sleepers are very important, but at the same time, they cannot be combined with repetitions?????????????? Either replays or sleepers are used separately for betting?????????

 

"Statistically, the math says it happens quite often at the END, but is that ideal? when you have so many numbers to cover?"

correction. at the end, not beginning when we talking about repeats

 

They exist separately yes, but as I said if you play either one alone, you will drawdowns that would feel like you're gambling but if you somehow find a way to play both then when one is resting, the other one is pushing.

And I just said something else today about playing 'Sleepers' in a way that it fixes the # of numbers covered and later you will realize that it may sometime win when a 'Single' hits

 

I am also very glad to see you, and that you are so active, and really help us to think differently, and in general to think at least somehow about this. Because after so many years of testing and failures, my whole body is starting to shake, just thinking about this testing, lol)) But you give sooooo much inspiration! Thank you for this!
And yes, about being alone - you’re spot on! Perhaps many of us here are all like this. Personally, in my entire life I have no one to talk to or chat with about this. But on the forums they don’t really talk like that. Basically everyone is being smart and then they send you away. With the exception of Turbo, some guys who found using his method helped, and still sometimes help, on the forum. And yes, this is loneliness))

 

Even in a cycle, it isn't like they are both always available for play, they take turns. I will end up spilling beans. That's in the same cycle.

Here's a question: Do you want it all, the whole method or are you still happy with crafting your own understanding.
I will teach it to you for free, not only that. I will test it together with you and at the end sum it up into the 3 set of instructions.
We'll even break it down using Vaddi's hints, I will show you data and corresponding hints fron Vaddi. All FREE of charge.

 

I know bro, and the people I mentioned who just come to forums to discover loopholes, don't know how much we've been through. They are mostly those with negative salty disrespectful comments. man, just the thought of running texts weakens my body too.

 

I never been part of an online community. It feels great to finally discuss my work with someone because you know we are crazy to 'normal' people. I can barely stay away and I want to help, i know what roulette students go through but these forums must be properly filtered so only the right people remain.

 

Thank you very much for the answer! But he confused me even more!
I asked this because I was in the middle of trying to figure out a way to play both of them at the same time! Which is basically what Vaddy said at the end! This is exactly what I was trying to find. I also tried to find the same thing using the Turbo method, when I saw that repetitions can sleep for a long time, that I need to look for a way to bet on sleepers, as Vaddy wrote.
But now I don't understand? You speak separately, but at the same time, as I understand it, I will still come to the conclusion that I need to bet on both of them? Damn, I'm even more confused, what should I test? lol)))

 

Lol I understand. Do this first, study them separately first:

Study repeaters first b/c that's the easiest to test

Then study Sleepers after, in that 'creative' way I suggested. If its hard for you to think it up, I am ready to give it to you but perhaps in the inbox. Its a BIG give away, the missing piece.

Remember Vaddi supplies hints after he was done with his analysis so he can pile everything as one.
Good that you realized that b/c that's exactly what I noticed. I think in one of my replies i mention "Do you believe that repeaters will always dominate the closing stages of a cycle just because there's always more numbers to cover at the end.?"

i then suggested to go check this, there you realized that it quite doesn't always dominate, so how 'in the creative' manner create a sleeper test that will take advantage of sleepers dominating.

 

Of course I want to go through this. But let's not rush into revealing any important aspects. Despite everything, all your selections are really interesting, although they are not very clear yet. Even though I don’t think well, numbers have always attracted me. I just don't have time yet. Kuos started doing something, I read it several times. It’s not very clear yet, but in general something is forming in my head. By and large, I definitely remember that I also watched the sequence of repetitions at the end of the series. At least there were some ideas in this regard. But there is not enough understanding to investigate this correctly.

 

Aim for simple sense whilst you think about it, think mathematically too. There is a way, absolutely. I am afraid I've always been a bummer with language, numbers are my thing, Math is the only thing I ever excelled at in school. But I find it hard to sometimes explain even the simplest of things, more especially in english.

Man, I really do love you spirit Lol. Keep it up man you're going VERY far. I thought that's why people are involved with roulette, to jog their minds. It is advertised as a gambler's game, not? Why are some searching to make money and not understanding.

 

Damn it, I agree with you! I'm really interested in testing and studying this myself. I agree that this needs to be explored in order. And damn, what you write, I already had some of this in my head. You just need the right direction for the test. Start from the beginning, but with a large amount of knowledge that I have. Thank you!
P.S. Regarding the mail - you can’t send it here - they erase it right away. And they can put you in a ban. Almost impossible. And it won’t be fair to other guys who have also been suffering for many years. we understand them in the same way, and neither understand it. I also want to share tests when I do them, although right now there won’t be much time. And you are running very fast. So, I still have to keep up with everyone. But I think we will all contribute!

 

Okay yes I agree. Though I did plan to make a video just showing step-by-step how I researched it and then show final results. Is that a good idea?