Roulette Is anyone beating this game consistently?

Oh and Ken or Mr J of course


Love this place... full of Intrigues...

 

Let me simplify this for anyone. The picture below is of 160 spins all bet at $90 on red for each spin. So the question is, can you find the win streaks? I can. I can also find the losing streaks. I had no bet selection choices. They were as clear as day to me. What cracks me up is that people dismiss this simple method as crackpot. And then they go searching for some convoluted math based contraption of a trudge festival. OK, that's cool.

 

And we have Rheti. What the heck did he ever do?

 

Just a Learner, nothing more

 

And then gave it all away for free for anyone to have it without any holding back or secret other information to purchase. My one student paid and kept with it for two months every day. I thought it was clever getting someone that would not give up. And he did not give up. And, it was fun.

Giving it away in a self teaching thread was fun too. The best part is that probably one day it will be acknowledged that it is the easiest way to beat a casino. And those that rejected it will look like the experts that they are now. This is fun. The rejects make it the most interesting.

 

Gizmo,

There's a simple contradiction in y'r statement.. Go to a casino and get y'r money in a 3:1 way, every day. Cmon

after a couple of hours and having dinner,, do it the same way in the evening.

Shining Star...

 

The rigid 3 / 7 is to validate the method of exploiting the win streaks, nothing more. There is nothing stopping anyone from going after millions and wrecking everything.

Let's also look at more realistic numbers already being shown by myself and others. For every session that loses at 7 net lost bets and out, they have shown 4.66 won sessions at 3 net wins and done. This adds up to a 2 to 1 win to loss ratio, not 3 to 1. If I can be happy using $5 chips and making $90 bets with a $630 session bankroll then who cares what other people want or think that they need. I only care about validation and one day peer reviewed proof. Once that happens then let's see how far greed will get anyone.

 

Gizmo,

Let say a private banker is interested.... gives you 25,000 dollars to invest in y'r Randomness.

25 years pay back... 1000 a year.

Target : say 3% profit a month 750 euro, 2% for him, rest of you..

He will certainly has a claim when losing the money, but hey .........there's Randomness,

 

That's Easy

10 dollars 18 numbers = losing 180 dollars
3 winnings 180 *3 --------------540 dollars

after 3 days .... 3* 360 = 1080 dollars... you can pay off for 2 months...

the rest of the month you are Free....

 

Rheti, It's an intriguing idea. I was already offered $50,000 at 70% / 30% split. I would be at 30%. But I was not ready when that offer was made. I am now, and don't expect it. I was a builder and developer. I would poor through $50,000 each month. You must break this down. I know to not play more than two sessions per day and to take a couple days off each week. I also know that each week I would make 5 net won sessions from two per day after losses. This is doable. I also know that $25 chips straight up on numbers is all that is allowed in most Native American casinos where I play. So three net wins is $1350 per session won. So that would aggregate to $6,750 per week in profit if I just used $25 chips. My each session bankroll would be a $3,150. I would need say 5 times that to beat any string of bad luck, which is a protected amount using RR tactics anyway. So I would only need about $15,000 to go for it. If making around $6,000 per week I should be able to get a short termed loan done with interest in an easy 2 months.

I know going after a few bucks confuses just about everyone. But I'm not trapped by a mortgage, lawns and gardens to care for, pets to take care of. I get to go where I want and when I want. I don't need all that junk that most people think that they need to be a success. People do things because they are convinced that this is what society expects them to do. These are self inflicted expectations that almost never bring happiness.

So let's break that down to $5 chips and $90 to $100 bets. The bankroll drops to $630 and five times that is just $3,000. I live like a king with what I have. I don't have to chase an expectation from people that don't even exist. I have found a couple of casinos that allow $100 chips straight up.

 

Most casinos here (Holland) have a live performance to tables.. .minimum 1 euro ... max 50 euro.

But in a split second you are at the table (be prepared with chips of 5 euro) max 100 euro..

 

Same here. They crank up the table minimums at night when it gets busy. I know of one table that still has 25 cent chips and a $2 minimum bet. $1 chips with a $5 minimum amount is very common. $25 any way to a number is also common. So you can have $25 on a street bet and $25 on a split bet, and $25 straight up and they will pay all three bets if it wins.

 

[QUOTE=" still getting a 72% win rate [/QUOTE]


Nope, much higher than that now. Right around 85%. The better you get the higher it goes.

 

Nobody needs to validate chasing
patterns and trends, it's old as the hills. It could work if you have lots of time on your hands and never want to make any real money. But it's beginner stuff, it's what newbies do. That's why casinos put up the tote boards showing past results. They want you to see the trends and patterns, they want you to get sucked into betting them. What you think you're doing you aren't really doing. There are no rules that govern random outcomes. You've been sucked into believing your own hyperbole. And never forget that reading random is my concept, my phrase, and I'm letting you borrow it. Just so we're clear. Still waiting for all these students of yours to come to your defense, where the heck are they. LOL

 

MIA John-O aka Junket King .

 

In a pigs eyes.

Let's run a little test then. I first published a list of characteristics back at Gambler's Glen around 2006 or 2007. I have posted many types of these lists at VLS forums, Steve's forum, and also here. You can look all over the internet for disclosed characteristics of randomness from Spike. You won't find them anywhere. So when I published my first list of characteristics of randomness at Gambler's Glen Spike made a comment regarding it. He said "read the random." He was talking all about my work, work that he was clearly never going to share. He has never shared anything. He never came up with "singles on the weak side" a very common thing that I pointed out here in order for people to begin to see these trends in my charts with visual dexterity.

Here is what I wrote about characteristics during my double dozen days:

"On every spin I check to see if a new characteristic is forming or that any existing ones are changing. So I scan the chart. I can see a characteristic in approximately one third of a second.

Look for sleepers in the dozens and columns.
Look for singles, then doubles, triples, and larger in the dozens and columns.
Look for global effects for all this.
Look for perfect and almost perfect patterns in the dozens and columns.
Look for a perfect or almost perfect dominance in the dozens and columns.
Look for dominance in all of the even chance bets.
Look for sequences of singles, doubles, and triples and above in the even chance bets.
Look for perfect patterns in the even chance bets.
Look for sleeping zeros and wide awake zeros.
Look for any active attacked bet ending.
Evaluate the effectiveness of the current state.
Repeat this process after every spin and before every bet."

EC's
Now my first glance is looking for the strong side vs the weak side of each grouping in the chart.
Once I have identified a strong/weak side dominance I look at any patterns on the weak side?
Are there singles on the weak side in dominance?
Are there doubles on the weak side in dominance?
Are there a mix of singles & doubles in dominance on the weak side?
Is there a domination of continuous singles on both side anywhere? (chop)
Are there any huge one sided streaks?
Is there a swarm of streaks with very few singles on either side?
Are there any absence of singles dominating?

You should know what these are in the charts and be able to recognize them in just a few seconds.
You will build the skill to see the best ones and to get bets down in time. This is where this is all heading.

Now Spike claims this was his idea. Well where are the lists of characteristics over all these years on various forums? You won't find them.

Now for his claim that I'm only trying to teach people to use trends or patterns. Spike hasn't read the teaching thread. He is just assuming that he knows what's in it. I let him blab his head off so that you all would know what he assumes is in it.

Spike gets a thrill out of trolling the forums. He will just keep lying about what he thinks is in the thread. It's nothing more than fake news and he hopes he can come here and start trouble. Only this time he's without foundation. He has no evidence that he is the idea man behind Reading Randomness. But he is sure he knows what is in the thread. And he's made a fool of himself claiming my work.

Spike is scared to death to let you know his secret. He won't explain a single thing to you. He will just ridicule as many people here that he can. He lives for this. That is his great achievement in life.

So I would love to see a link to his characteristics of randomness and his version of the Effectiveness States. You can tell he is lying just from what he has already assumed.

This is pointless because Spike is a no content disrupter.

 

So, you are now claiming the Effectiveness States? Are the archives at Gambler's Glen still in existence from way back then?

Let's just cut to the chase. Spike thinks that Reading Randomness, the thread that is here, he's saying it's the same crap that John Patrick has published in his books. Only just about everyone here knows it is not just trend or pattern recognition and then somehow it is a claim that this recognition skill is all that you need. Normally you let a fool keep making a joke out of himself. And I predict that he will. He's missed the point so many times when it is right in front of him that I wonder some times how he functions. He does not know the simple point of Reading Randomness yet I suspect in his own words that he does it anyway. In fact he already said it and has no clue that I said it in other words way back in the days of Gambler's Glen. He says something like it works when it's playing your game.

This is the internet. You can go back and see when he first said that or something close to that. There is no other way to end this. Spike himself will want to prove that he said that way back then. If you want the exact quote then it's right here in this thread in his own words.

 

I can't claim it because I don't know what the hell it is. Must be one of your made-up terms when you pretended there are rules that govern random outcomes. There are none, zero. All you're doing is chasing patterns and trends like legions of people before you. Sometimes it works most of the time it doesn't work but you've jerry-rigged your results to make it look like you have something. I keep repeating, where are your students that you claim have learned this and are playing it. Please alert them to come here and defend you, this is getting embarrassing for you. And it's enough for me to know but I'm the one that coined the phrase 'reading random' and to know that you know that. And of course you predicted that I would come here someday and claim that it's mine because you know you stole it from me. If it had been my original idea why would I even care about it. It's just another stupid gambling phrase.

 

In fact I had a whole thread entitled Reading Random. If I could get into gamblers Glen I can prove it. You were enthralled with it and started using it like you're the one that thought it up. All you have to say is this was Spikes idea originally and I'll never bring it up again. But your giant huge ego will never let you do that. Just like your giant ego will never let you admit that's your system is all but unplayable in a real casino. I've never liked you, I've always thought you were a liar and a con man. And now I know it for sure.

 

I prefer you as a trouble maker that will never be able to do here what you do to all forums. It serves my purpose too. The more people you chase away from Reading Randomness the better it is for me. 300,000 views. Your thread had 20 or 30 views. People don't like you Spike. You still riding the gambling bus?

If the archives of Gambler's Glen are gone forever then there is the VLS forums. You were a shining example of what you are here there too.