Roulette a VERY good repeater (hot) number method from Ken

I put us members in groupings, right or wrong, its what I do. Better than Turbo? No, but far behind? No.

I know Gizmo was only joking.

We should learn from each other but ONLY TO A DEGREE. Rely on each other? No.

Get some helpful advice? Hell yes.

Ken

 

Yes, I was only Joking. The best teacher is yourself. In the end you must know the lessons.

 

Cambiar a español
So, this fantastic Ken method can be improved, right? I have seen both ways, I think I know what Turbo does, but it is that so many different jeopardizes the understanding, hopefully Turbo will also say a few words soon and among all guide me in the best way, I've been years and I need to get something that gives me benefits , many years of learning and I think I already deserve that someone more experienced give me a good push
For that reason I trust you fully, I know that they are people who know and know how to do it but there are many words like Turbo, and many different things that make you doubt.
At least you two have put something quite clear and sure that you can do better as they say and really people really appreciate it.
I hope you can continue to help me by telling me to see or practice, for example Gizmotron try to give me clues and that helps me to try harder and harder, I hope that Ken and Turbo also give me a little bit of them to reach your level, if I get it , I respect you and do not share it with anyone ...
regards

 

Yes.

 

Cambiar a español
Is it possible that you reference me? How can I improve? Progression? Less numbers? See difference between successes? Only play the most out? ...
I would really appreciate it, look at this I promise that if I manage to get what you do and earn money, I'll send you a ham of 5jotas, jejej.
Thanks for answering Ken, it's a pleasure to be able to talk with you and try to help me.
regards

 

OK, this is a joke. It's a joke because it will start a monster debate. I'm going to base it on 50/50 bets and the Martingale progression. It's a gift to Turbo. He will actually try to turn it into a system, I believe.

It's based on the idea that a perfect unlikely pattern can only lose if it hits exactly at the single same moment that it is used. That it is only used once for that exact moment.

For example, using red and Black numbers to create a perfect sequence, r B r r B r B B, to represent an 8 step Martingale progression. The trick is to have 100 different 8 step progressions, ones that include no-bet steps too. Now you pre-assign a time to use each unique sequence. It only gets used once during any session, and at a specific beginning of each progression attempted. The chances of matching perfectly an exact sequence at an exact moment is unbelievable. It's not the same as just blindly using the martingale over and over until the sequence of death is crashed into, like it always does. Here is another example, just in case you don't get it. You pick an exact moment to bet on 8 reds in a row to lose. If a single black comes up then you win the Martingale.

As usual, the concept will need the ubiquitous explanation until the rules are totally understood. So I'll try one more time. You pick 50 unique sequences of death in advance. Then you use them in a row. You start a new sequence after each win. Your sequences can include no-bet blank spaces too. Now, sequence of death Martingale streaks are rare enough. But a selected pattern to be used once and at a specific moment would make the rare event almost impossible to mach up.

Anyone can use Roulette Extreme to check it out. It might be close to mathematically impossible to lose also. It would be better to just research this than to answer the sophistry of Snowman that is soon to follow. He has a calculator stuffed up his south end and a single mantra etched across the the pathways of his cranium. He doesn't need to think about it because his world is already a known fact.

 

Gizmo,

You're attempting to side step probability by observing it. It's a waste of time. It doesn't work. You can't step outside of the odds or change them by making up streaks to play against. Claiming that you can is ludicrous.

The house payoff will still be short of the probability of winning.



It's just more gambler's fallacy nonsense.

 

Only you can claim anything and have it be more ludicrous. You are a perfect sequence.

 

Here is the hypothetical arithmetic: You do get that point don't you Caleb? Try to keep up. You need to read everything. It's boring to keep you on track. It's like you had a stroke and you have never been the same since. Only that must have happened more than 12 years ago.

The eight steps: 5, 10, 20, 40, 80, 160, 320, 640 to win $5.
If you lose it will cost you $1275, that's 255 wins at a $5 starting point.
At 30 spins per hour you will need 255 wins to balance out any single loss of the full progression.
With an average of 10 wins of the progression per hour it will take just more than a full day, (that's 24+ hours for Snowman,) to break even in case of a loss.
If you don't lose, you will make about $500 per day at 10 hours per day.

This is only a hypothetical method presented for discussion for people that can read. Trolls can go.

 

Sir Ayone es demasiado predecible. Jajajaja.
La verdad que no entendí muy bien lo de las 100 progresiones en secuencias de 8.
Sé que el contador Geiger habla de secuencias de 8-16 y que eso tiene k ser el supuesto rango de repetición de números, pero no sé cuáles numeros.
Aveces hay muchos...

 

I'm not big on progressions but for a reason that goes BEYOND what others will argue.

(at a B&M casino).....those last 2-3 steps, MIGHT be unplayable in real time conditions. Getting TALL stacks down on time and having the proper chip amounts especially when not divisible by 5.

I'll see a step such as $688 (lol)
Soooo, I need blacks, maybe a few greens, nickels and/or dollars? Not sure what the rule is at other casinos but here, you cannot use three house colors at the same time. Of course the people doing their thing on paper do not take that into consideration.

Ken

 

I was thinking of that too. You have $1 Roulette table chips, like salmon or magenta colored chips that say "Table 2" on them. To keep them happy you use them for each spin. Once you get to $40 you either stack two full stacks on top of each other, just to piss off the rule following dealer, or you place them side by side. So you use your table chips for singles and you use house chips, $5, $25, and/or $100 also to make up the single place bets on any of the outside 50/50 bets. You can also place them on different spots if they won't allow multiple stacks.

You can also just use $5 table chips. 1 chip, 2 chips, 4 chips, 8 chips, 16, chips, etc... You can base all this on the lower half and upper half where you can put stacks on the inside and outside. It's just a matter of being prepared.

 

Back when I did progressions, I did everything by 5s. That way, no issues with pit or stacks getting knocked over etc.

Ken

 

So the how is easy enough. But the question is, should anyone actually use it? I know that it must fail, but maybe that is about as true as a Geiger counter. I mean, it can only lose at an exact moment in sequence. Like, it can only lose on the 236th spin of a 300 spin session. For that matter, you could have 300 unique 8-step sequences already with you on a printed list. Nobody knows exactly when a progression ends so you just keep track of each spin in the session and match it up with that 8 step sequence. Perfect obfuscation, that's what it is.

 

So here we go:

I used this, to get this:

High, No Bet, No Bet, High, High, High, High, High, Low, Low,
Low, High, Low, High, Low, High, High, High,
Low, High, No Bet, No Bet, No Bet, Low, High, Low, Low, High, High,
Low, Low, Low, High, Low, Low, Low, Low,
Low, Low, Low, High, Low, Low, High, Low,
Low, Low, High, High, Low, No Bet, Low, High, Low,
Low, Low, Low, High, High, High, Low, High,
High, Low, Low, Low, Low, High, High, Low,
Low, No Bet, Low, High, Low, Low, High, Low, No Bet, Low,
High, High, Low, High, High, Low, High, Low,
Low, High, Low, Low, High, No Bet, High, High, Low,
etc...

I can make 300 unique randomly created sequences that must be started at an exact spin point. Each sequence must happen exactly the way it is printed for it to lose. It must start exactly on that spin that correlates to the line number of these lists.

Code:

on mouseUp
   put "" into field "mainText"
   repeat with i = 1 to 300
      put "" into zing
      put 1 into numSteps
      repeat with x = 1 to 20
         put random(38) into hNum
         if hNum < 19 then
            put "Low, " after zing
            add 1 to numSteps
         end if
         if hNum < 37 then
            if hNum > 18 then
               put "High, " after zing
               add 1 to numSteps
            end if
         end if
         if hNum > 36 then
            put "No Bet, " after zing
         end if
         if numSteps > 8 then
            exit repeat
         end if
      end repeat
      put zing & return after field "mainText"
   end repeat
end mouseUp

 

Gizmo,

If you have an edge, then why on earth would you use an up as you lose progression? Up as you lose progressions are a fool's folly. They are very inefficient, and mathematically they make zero sense. Mathematically it's much better to use an up as you win progression based on betting a percentage of your bankroll.

Because the initial bet must be small, the player can't win much. It also makes no sense to risk so much money just to win one unit. Mathematically it's a stupid thing to do!

Using an up as you win progression the player's initial bet can be much larger, enabling the player to win vastly more money, and the player doesn't have to risk nearly as much.

 

Hey all!

I got an 100$ casino bonus for free but as you can guess it had an _ridicilous_ roll-over requirement so it took me into a mission of reading about roulette systems - trying to find systems which would minimise the variance and leave me with a fighting chance to cash out some money out of 100$ which I was able to pump up to +300$ with slots at first.

What I learned was that there's no long-term system to beat the roulette just by itself but then againafter I had some moderate success in my 8 day mission and +10k spins later it made me think that with proper bankroll management and with proper exit strategies it might be a possibility to make money from roulette.. but then again, I'm not sure, I might just have gotten lucky etc.

After dabbling with the most popular roulette betting strategies I was forced to only use flat betting strategy because it was the only way I could automate 100x spins at a time because after day 1 I realized that clearing this bonus is going to be a marathon and there's it's not fun playing roulette for 10-15 hours a day. I was playing french roulette because of the 'la partage' rule which lowered the house edge and I was betting only on red/black, odd/even, 1-18/19-36.. even money bets.

My "methods" that I cooked up was based on 'the law of averages' (I'm not sure if it's true but kind of makes sense to me) and the statistics that I got from the table. The table showed the past results and hit percentages of the last 500 spins. I tried couple of methods, one was betting what was hot, for example if 1-18 was hot (over 52% for example) and 5 hottest numbers had 3 numbers from 1-18, I made the conclusion that it might be smart to flat bet 1-18 for 100x spins and check again. This method seemed to stay within normal deviation range, overall I was losing money but slowly enough that I was thinking I might have a shot of clearing this bonus with some money on my pocket.

I started to use my other method after a few days and this is what kind of opened my eyes to the possibility that if law of averages is true in the realm of roulette wheel it might be a possibility to make money IF you enter and exit correctly and use proper bankroll management.

So I started to bet on a section which hasn't been hitting well over the 500 spins statistic I got from the table. The average percentages for even money bets were pretty much 48% on average which kind of makes sense with the 1.35% house edge on french roulette with la partage rule. So if I saw that for example RED was hitting only 43% over the course of 500 spins, I would start betting on RED assuming that law of averages should even it out eventually. If all the even money bets were hovering around the 48% on average I would just choose 1-18/19-36 based on which had most hot numbers hitting and most cold numbers not hitting.

After I switched to this method of flat betting a section which was hugely under-performing statistically I noticed something which kind of made a bit of an believer of the law of averages and that there might some truth in hot/cold streaks.

Slowly but surely I was now actually making money instead slowly but surely losing money and it wasn't just a one trick pony. I was testing this out for many days and noticed that always at some point the lesser trend would eventually atleast go up to it's average 48% while the hotter trend was also coming down to 48% obviously. Then I would either look for other trends which were really unbalanced and bet on that or just keep flat-betting with my voodoo 1-18/19-36 method until another unbalanced trend came up. While I was betting on 48% averages I was slowly losing money on average but once I found an unbalanced trend and bet on that, I would make money. I do understand that flat betting against 1.35% house edge, you shouldn't be making money in the long run which is why I was quite amazed because at one point I peaked at over 500$ (starting with bit over 300$).

My main goal was just to clear the bonus with minimal risk but my brief experience with this "method" kind of gave me confidence that raising my bet size when I found an big unbalanced trend and lower the bet after it would go back to average percentages would have been a smart thing to do.

Then again, I wasn't (and still ain't) sure if I was just getting lucky and didn't want to take unnecessary risk because any money is big money for me currently. I was able to clear out the bonus at 470$ which means I made a profit of around 150$ dollars just simply flat betting roulette well over 10k spins, which shouldn't really be possible with standard deviation even if you are on a hot streak. I was observing the statistics every 100 spins and I was able to get a kind of a big picture how my actions were affecting my bankroll. For example if I would have just chosen to just flat bet on RED for those +10k spins, I would for sure not shown profit.

I felt it's necessary to share this long story in order for me to grasb if I understand the ideas shared on this topic fully?

Am I correct in my understanding that Ken's "method" shared on this topic is based on the assumptions that hot trends/hot numbers do happen and there's a possibility to make money from those trends/hot numbers SHORT-TERM if one understands the importance of bankroll management and entry/exit points?

Nice to 'meet' you all.

Edit: And please do notice, I might be just talking out of my ass as I'm not sure if there's a long term possibility to beat house edge even with good bankroll management and exit/entry points. It sure is a fun topic to experiment on though.

 

Why is that in quotations?

Ken

 

There is NO law of averages. That's gambler's fallacy stuff.

 

My first GIF. I'm practicing (lol)