Roulette More silliness from RouletteGhost & company

The rules of MPR are there for all to see if you can find them.

I'll help a bit by posting rule number 1.

Rule 1) No Ken's allowed.

 

Sheep tracker, boy are you one of those born every day, that is born to be sheared.

 

Can't you see my style? The one who'll shear me isn't born yet.

I know why you say that when i check out your look... you must be jealous

 

A good one from Andre Chass: "If I show more than that the casinos will remove the baccarat tables.

I'll no longer be here in this forum anymore...

Cheers"

Reminds me of someone but for the Roulette tables lol

 

Bago ,


Are we roulette players doomed too ?



Casino winners taking home the last chandeliers from the casinos . Adelson , Wynn ,and Icahn on food stamps .



Just awful .

 

It's not that you're doomed it's just that you cannot chose where you ll be on the gauss curve. µ is the expected result (-2.7%) where you can see there s the more player. So of course you will see some players that despite what they do are in +2 or +3. And those ones will make the rest of the flock dream and believe that it is possible. But you cannot decide where you will be on this curve.

 

Yes, the day Turbo releases his ebook, then you won't be able to play Roulette anymore, or the Casino would need to add more Zeros and lowering the payout to still be in business but Turbo said even with those countermeasures the HolyGrail would still win because you can't prevent this random game to produce repeaters even with more numbers so sadly yes, only fun on toy wheels after that.

 

Bago ,


Some of us have formed our own opinion about Turbo .I do not even bother reading his posts dating back to the days at Gamblers Glen .


ND

 

Hi Nathan,

I understand, the weather was colder there, nowadays it is warmer here thanks to the hot numbers!.

 

Change of climate . LOL .


ND

 

So Hot Number climate change is a hoax.

 

I wonder if TG's magic trick works on a $5 minimum tables where $25 is the highest limit? That's a narrow band. I have a logical progression that I just made up that goes from $5 to $15 and covers 71 spins. It tests out fine, if you use a hot number guessing system. But that discussion is subjective at best. Still, I like ken's elimination method. I wonder what Ken could come up with for just one number bet at a time?

 

Guessing involves Luck, we need something mechanical!

 

Bago, what if guessing is a skill? The first time I heard about it in gambling was a claim of an "educated guess." Let's say that guessing is a pure form of luck and nothing more. I will stipulate that. Now for the skill part. Is it possible to know if you are in a good luck streak or a bad luck streak? If those things are not knowable then you are right. If those things are knowable then I am right. Now is that logical or is it a fallacy to try to know the conditions that luck happens to be occurring in? What do you think?

 

We already discussed it and I told you for me, there is no way to know if you are at the beginning of a long streak or if the streak is short. I choose to bet Red and I feel lucky: outcomes: R I am lucky, R hmm luck is right here with me B,B,B,B,B,B,B,B damn the streak of luck was short I should have stopped after the second RED!. Now I could have had R 10 times in a row! BUT I DONT HAVE A TIME MACHINE GIZ!.

 

I suggested the notion of a skill. I've been trying to say that you don't need to know how long a streak will last. You just have to know that some will last only one spin, some will last a few spins, some will last a long time and some will not continue when you bet on them. It's just a guess and it's just luck if it continues. We agree on that much. But I'm also saying that it's a skill to get in on the streaks that last more than one continuation. The skill might be a form of MM. A session is, let's say, bad luck. You keep betting on streaks that have all just ended. That happens. The point is, as a good player, can you live with that. Do you know that not all sessions will be bad luck? The point is to take as much as you can from the casino during good luck sessions and to give the least amount during bad luck sessions. To me that is sort of mechanical. It could even be broken down into rules based on results. It just takes a smart mechanic.

 

Gizmo ,

Bago

JP 1-2-2 system for Roulette EC ONLY . It`s in his book .


ND

 

ND, I assume 1-2-2 would be $100 - $200 - $200?

Step 1: bet $100,

On win, Step 2: bet same $100 + ($100 from previous win) = $200. $100 at risk for two bets.

On win, Step 3: Pocket $200, bet $200 from second step win. $100 net in pocket profit after step 2 win (including paying back buy in)

Net result from 3 steps winning = $500 (including paying back buy in)

Right?
--------------------------

Now look at 2 - 1, $200 - $100.

Step 1: $200,

On win, Step 2: Put $100 in pocket (including paying back buy in). $100 at risk for one bet only. Bet $100 from winnings.

Net result from two steps winning = $300 (including paying back buy in)

--------------------------

I believe that it is much easier to get one win at a little less than 50%, ending risk, than it is to get two wins at a little less than 25% at the point of ending risk. Add to that that if you lose the third step with 1-2-2, three step system, you only have $100 in your pocket. That's 12.5% to win three. I think 2-1 is better than 1-2-2.

 

JP has hewn this 1-2-2 in stone.


If you win the first 1 unit bet the series is over and you wait for another opportunity .

If you lose that first bet you next bet will be 2 units. if you win that bet the series is over.


If you lose that second 2 unit bet you go to the last 2 unit bet . If you win that bet you are only 1 unit down for that series. Then wait for another opportunity


If you lost that third bet this will terminate this session.



Then you move to a second session with a bankroll of equal size . Ditto the third bankroll.

Object : winning 2 out of 3 sessions .


It is what it is 1-2-2 . No buts , no ifs.





ND



PS. 2-1-1 is not even on the books.

 

Interesting. My method is 2-1, just two steps. I'm not a fan of a three step negative progression. Even though the last step is a repeat of the second step. I like JP's up and pull idea. I made that my own.

I play a game of war. I don't end a session on a first step loss. I fight for that first step net win. All those years playing Even Chance with Spike and Gamblers Glen taught me that I can get to net 1 win almost every time I play. And I do too. I would think that almost everyone can get to a 1 net win point in their even chance betting sessions. It's near 50/50 on the first bet, or any single bet for that matter.

If I have the winner, one unit, in my pocket, then the second bet is a house's money bet only. Now each time I try for it I still have 1 unit in my pocket for each first bet won in the session.

Did John Patrick ever talk about 3 units as being enough?

Perhaps that needs more of an explanation? I'm living on Social Security. I'm an old crusty, retired real estate builder, amateur computer programmer, musician, recording studio engineer, designer & builder, and poly extreme athlete. Those are the big items. I've struggled for years with all this gambling stuff on the single notion of knowing when enough is enough.

$300 per day is enough. Three net win units of $300 is more than enough. I can travel around in my RV and hit on casinos when I need to. I'm retired. There are casinos all over the USA that offer free bags of gold to anyone that knows how find them and to pick them up.

If you test the waters before you jump in, you won't hit bottom with your face. If your effectiveness is running "LUCKY," just needed to tweak the mathBoyz, then you can reach for the simple to achieve magic three. You then go have a great meal and head back to the RV campsite. If you stumbled on to a global effect then you stick around and explode in a massive win streak that the casino will be scratching their heads about for weeks. Then you go back to be a happy camper. I see a great global effect at least once every ten (2 to 4) hour sessions. Nobody can stop them from happening. Only you can stop you from seeing them.

Thanks ND. I really needed to see "Up & Pull."