Roulette More silliness from RouletteGhost & company

Gizmo ,

The 1-2- 2 is designed to commence after 1 , 2 - or 3 sleepers. BLACK the chosen dominant : R-R-R first bet B


How often does one expect that an EC will repeat itself ?


Wishing you Happy Winnings .


ND

 

Hopefully that JP didn't advise you to jump from the casino s roof... Coz you sheeps would have done it !

 

Gizmo ,

There is a time to play the 2-1- 2 up and pull or your 2-1 as long as one First bet is higher than the second one .

The 1-2-2 is just another bet selection . Worthwhile knowing .


ND

 

Yep. I wonder how many players know that getting just one net win at 2 units allows for that third net unit to come to them with no risk, if they win that second net win. Add to that, they have one in the pocket while going for that second win. It's genius. If you told yourself that you needed to make $600 a day from gambling, then all you would need is $200 units with this method of MM. I'm practicing in order to figure out the best bankroll based on $100 units. John Patrick got any advice for that? I'm seeing $800 as the almost never reached amount. You only risk money trying to get that first step, at $200 - 2 units. Some session are won by winning 3 first steps.

 

Gizmo ,


Patrick is an advocate to bring the proper amount to a casino. At a 2-1 scenario this would require to bring $ 9 ,000.-- to the casino divided into 3 sessions of $ $ 3,000.-- each .Win goal 10 % , Loss limit 25 %. Attempt to win 2 out of 3 sessions .



ND

 

John Patrick is a nutcase that should be completely avoided!

 

ND, interesting set of numbers. So if the win goal is 10% of bankroll. I remember reading that in one of his books. He brings a lot more than he needs, only allowing $750 of that $3,000 as a loss limit. This is somehow a kind of wow. I projected $1600 for $100 units, but willing to lose it all in a session. It's very close. My method is that a player should have 5 times their session amount as the full bankroll. For $800 a doubled come out bet would be $36 x's 2 = $72. Add to that the second step of $36 and you get $108. That gives you a bankroll that can take 8 net losses.

I'm still trying to find the sweat spot. The only at risk bets are the first step bets. In a fight to get that first net win, say at $72, If I lost that net ten times that would be $720.

This method is all about the battle for that only risked first step bet that is 2 units. A session can be over in just two bets, two spins.

 

Gizmo,

Here is one more MM to consider. If the first bet of 2 units brings you a winner then the net win of 2 units go into your pocket and not to be replayed.



Units for betting should be drawn from the Loss limit pile. This way one has always control over this section. That`s why the net winnings shall never be replayed. Replaying the net wins would change the entire arithmetic of calculation to begin with .


Do not forget the 3 Losses in a row if a session drsgs out.


ND

 

I get this one. I'm haunted by the fact that the single win, that one net win is enough. And add to that the logic that dictates from "the Loss limit pile."

"Do not forget the 3 Losses in a row if a session drags(sp) out."

I've mastered agility with what 3 losses in a row really means. I've always thought that John Patrick needed to go further in his understanding of effectiveness. Conditions change. 3 and out might just be good advice for the general public but it is far from a science. I've clearly made effectiveness a science. It's an asset in my skill set. I might as well use it. I came to these conclusions on my own. JP's good. But he never showed me the importance of his three and out. When I read about it from him I immediately thought it was a superficial axiom.

So, the big question for me is 1 enough.

And thanks for your input. Anyone can see how you are walking me through this. Really, thanks.

 

It has been also on my mind to have a mini war for 3 first net bets, or 1, 1, 1, as the method. I know that some net wins will be easy, like one spin, but that other net single wins will take 20 spins. That does not matter as long as I have an adequate bankroll. This tactic should cut down the size of the bankroll.

 

Have you ever noticed what the casino does when you hand them the cash at the table ? That cash goes into sealed box and is not used for payouts.


The casino action money is stacked in casino or table chips around the wheel .


Upon leaving the player is being paid from those casino chips . Another reason why a player cannot place a cash bet .


The only time I observed a cash bet was at Binions in Las Vegas when a player using the martingale received permission place $ 1,600 in cash on Red. Je won . It all began with the loss of the first $ 5 of that series.


Not any different than our loss limit pile of 25 % and the practice never to replay net winnings .



ND

 

I think that the cash cage is considered a harder target. I like that they keep track of the bank at the table. It's all on film. The boxes must balance against the table chips. Everything is checked in and signed for by multiple witnesses. It's a system to keep the dealers, guards, and even the cash cage honest. Everyone is being watched. It's all about the count.

I don't see where spending a little more than $3,000 to get $5 equivocates to bet big when you are doing good and bet small when you are doing bad, while always keeping in mind to quit while you are ahead. But yes, playing at a casino is challenging.

 

The best idea/results i've seen with a negative edge was a little negative progression 1 2 4 to get one unit and use this unit to play a scenario that you built.
For example (only an example you can build any) 1st dozen/ 3chips on 28-30 street/ 30chips on 14/ Max bet on black.

Of course you can lose but if you win you 'll be really ahead.

 

Oh, there it is! The key to gambling! Just quit while you're ahead!

Question: After you quit, how long must you wait before you can return to gamble more?
10 minutes?
1 hour?
1 day?
1 week?
Do you have to travel some place magical before you can return to gamble and win again?

 

Now you are challenging for Captain Obvious' job.

Let's take the edge test.

The "Edge" test:

1. Can you tell if you are free falling straight down, losing every bet, in a gambling session?

2. Can you tell if you have won every bet in the past 10 bets in a session?

3. Can you tell if you have won more than you have lost in the past 10 bets during a session?

4. Can you tell everyone that you can answer 1, 2, and 3 truthfully?

5. Can you admit that 1, 2, and 3 are questions about basic skill?

6. Can you put your head in a can and stand that 1, 2, and 3, can't be known?

If you can't answer questions 1, 2, and 3 then you really don't have an edge.

 

Gizmo,

Ask intelligent questions and you'll get intelligent answers.

Apply yourself.

 

Snowjob. Ask yourself if you should jump off a big cliff and answer it with a big splat.

 

Gizmo ,

Caleb was different on GG. What a change .


That Belgian arrogant Euro weenie *I am ignoring altogether.



ND

 

It depends. The better player you are in any game with a more systematic strategy, the more you can approach a game 24/7/365 because you are operating more on determined response to what the game is showing. If you are more discretionary, you are likely to burn up a lot of energy.

Also, most players actively manage variance to shift it in their favor, and if they play through a hot streak/ trend they will put in trailing stops behind. If you you set back enough into that stop then it is time to lock in a W.

 

Complete and utter bullshit! None of you, NONE can and are beating a negative game with ANY of that crap. If you DO NOT have a legitimate edge over the game, WHICH NONE OF YOU DO, you WILL LOSE!!!! I GUARANTEE THAT!!!!

That's why you people are ALWAYS on these boards and NEVER IN A REAL CASINO.