Roulette Red/Black Pattern Betting

Hi David...
I could probably test this method with random numbers if you like.
Although I am intrigued by your line about using a set of outcomes from 50 spins ago??
Anyway I have tested other methods ( mostly repeating numbers ) using programming.
Interested?
Best of luck
Dave

 

Dave, thanks for the offer, I really appreciate it. However, it has been tested enough (20,029 spins) by using roulette simulators which yield results close to an actual sessions at a real casino. At this point I have an other individual who is a member of this forum testing it. So far he reports that he is having the same results as I have had. We shall see. Thanks again for the offer.

You say: "My edge is a large enough number of people doing this and producing win to loss results that are demonstrably beyond the possibility of inaccuracy." That is an inaccurate statement in its self. You have data on lots of people that have failed and a few that have been successful. What does that prove, more people fail than are successful? Who the hell doesn't know that? And in knowing that, what is the edge this gives you? Not to do what the failures do and do only what the winners do. How profound. Do you know any consistent winners? Do you do what they do? If so, then I take it you are making an incredible living at playing roulette. If you are making an incredible living playing roulette, why are you wasting valuable time on this forum when every spare minute should be playing and winning. If you have such great advice to offer on how to be a consistent winner, let's hear it. Share your methods and let us prove if they are valid or not. Sorry to say, I have read every one of your posts on this thread and not one of them offers anything of any substance other than what everybody already knows. Maybe you should rename your handle to BSmotron.

I have decided to quit playing my system. I am ahead by $52,110.00. Therefore, I never eventually failed. I never experienced the so called long run. I defeated all odds. Analyze that and now your talking.

And don't give me: Well, if you would have continued playing, eventually...............BS.

 

LOL! No you're not, and no you haven't.

 

You know, thanks to you, I just now had an incredible revelation. I finally realize the brilliance of the statements made by all the roulette geniuses out there like you supposedly. I get it, I finally know what eventually fails means. I finally know exactly what failing in the long run means. It means some will play a 100 years to finally meet the long run and others maybe a couple of hours for their long run and everyone else somewhere in between Nobody out there, and I mean nobody, including you, BSmotron or whoever, has the data that applies 100% to everybody. Give me a break.

 

david would you share your strategy so i can try it out with 7 progression.

 

Mansi, I am more than willing to share this system with you down the road. Right now I have two others from this forum giving it a test. No sense in making it public to everyone until it is proven its self one way or the other. Give me your email address just in case. Thanks for your interest.

 

You have only come here to get validation? How many sessions will that take?

 

As many as it takes.

 

good luck

 

His bet selection is not any better than the usual bet selections for EC. The key to the El Brafado is the Martingale a threat to the bankroll and that rotten feeling by some gamblers losing several MAX martingales .


ND

 

I have tried every betting progression known to man. The best thing about the Martingale is every win you are ahead 1 unit. With the other type of progressions you may have to fuss around, up and down, back and forth 10 or more times just to get ahead 1 unit over your last highest profit. These type of progressions keep you in the game way to long at a risk of to many zeros showing up. These progression seem to offer less risk and and generally less profit also for the amount time played. Plus, they are not fool proof either, you can lose your whole bankroll with their use also. The downside of the Martingale progression is as everyone knows, it can generate a heavy loss quickly. But again, that depends on what your base unit value is and how many double up steps you take. I believe the best approach with a Martingale progression is developing (or using) a proven system that wins more times than it loses. For example, let's say you have tested a system that wins 3 times to every 1 loss using a 5 step Martingale. If betting a 10.00 base unit and you lose every decision, you lose a total of 320.00. If the system you use is fairly consistent at winning 3 to 1, you need to figure the amount you need to win per game every time you play. If the max loss is 320.00 you need to recoup that in 2 additional games played. 320.00 divided by 2 equals 160.00 is what you need to win every game you play. No more no less. The hit and run idea of making a few dollars profit and getting out will never work, you can never recoup the loses. Following is an excerpt from my Red/Black Pattern Betting System:

Money Management

1. Bankroll Required:

The size of bankroll required is determined by the Base Unit Value and the number of Martingale steps you are going to take. Of course, the more steps taken the better the odds are. However, the more steps taken, the bigger the risk of incurring a larger loss.

The use of a 7 step Martingale with this system has proven to be sufficient enough.

The bankroll required is calculated as follows: Total possible loss X 3. If you use a 10.00 Base Unit with a 7 step Martingale progression and lose every decision, you incur a total loss of 1,280.00. 1,280.00 X 3 = 3,840.00 will be required for your total operating bankroll. This was established because it is very, very rare to lose three games in a row.

Another example: if you use 1.00 as a base unit and use a 7 step Martingale and lose every decision, you incur a total loss of 128.00 X 3 = 384.00 will be required for your total operating bankroll.

2. Total Win Objective Per Game:

The amount to be won per game is calculated as follows: Base Unit Value X 50. Example: The Base Unit value is 10.00 and therefore 10.00 X 50 = 500.00 to be won every game played. This will recoup a 7 step loss of 1,280.00 by only having to win 2.56 future games at a win of 500.00 per game. 500.00 X 2.56 =1,280.00 recouped.

Another example: The Base Unit value is 1.00, 1.00 X 50 = 50.00 to be won per game. A 1.00 Base Unit lost to every decision using a 7 step Martingale incurs a total loss of 128.00. That loss is recouped by winning 2.56 future games at 50.00 per game. 2.56 X 50.00 = 128.00 recouped.


.3. How to play the system:

 

You need 50 net wins per session or 128 net wins in all to protect or balance a 7 in a row loss. Let's say that you can get that.

0.50
0.25
0.125
0.0625
0.03125
0.015625
0.007813

(.007813 * 128) = 1.000064

You have a 1 in 128 attempts chance to lose each time you run it as balanced.

OK, so this is mathematically a balanced method. Only your odds of winning are not 50 /50. So if mathematics is the trick you will lose. There must be a bet selection option in item # 3.

Imagine betting for 10 hours at a time for 50 net wins. And also knowing that the sequence of death will actually occur twice in many sessions. This is trying way too hard.

 

David Gregory ,



Thanks for your reply which included the size of the sessions bankroll .


ND

 

Correction:

"You have a 1 in 128 attempts chance to lose each time you run it as balanced."

You have a 1 in 128 wins chance to lose each time you run it as balanced.

So you will win 64 times on the first try. 32 times on the second try, 16 times on the third try, 8 times in 4 tries, 4 times in 5 tries and 2 times on 6 tries, on average.

So:
64
64
48
32
20
12
7
-------
247

It will take 247 attempts to get 128 net wins to balance on average. That's all day for one balanced cycle.

If you use virtual bets then it will take that number of virtual bets more.

 

I appreciate you taking the time to produce the above. First of all, when a loss takes place you may have accumulated a substantial amount of winnings at that point. You very rarely lose (if ever) the total 7 step loss amount. So far I have accumulated 20,225 spins, 201 games played, 173 games won, 28 games lost. That averages 6 games won for every 1 lost. Each game averages about 101 spins. The results are quick, within an hour, not 10 hours. You know, we can continue to say, ya, but, however, eventually, mathematically, probabilities, long term - to no end. Until the end, whenever that will be.

 

You are playing online to get 101 spins in an hour. That's even too fast for Rapid Roulette played in some casinos.

You claim 50 units won per session and 128 in a lost session. You need to play 2.5+ sessions to break even. But you are getting 5 won sessions for each lost session. And you are risking that on a somehow managed Martingale. Go ahead. Dazzle the world with your secret. I'm producing better than that with just guessing and flat betting. Why not blow up the whole world of gambling. Join in or you will be left behind. I'm proceeding in the full wide open with my secrets. You lay claim to 2 to 1 where 1 to 1 is magical in it's own right. I'm getting 3 to 1 and people are learning it. I know because of how many have watched my videos. You need videos man. They are the cool way to teach.

 

I may have been wrong about playing for less than an hour a game. I have never actually timed a game. It doesn't seem like more than an hour. It takes the average time of what ever playing approx. 101 spins more or less would take.

Give me the links to some of your videos, I give them a shot. Something to compare against.

 

For me the Martingale question in regard to David Gregory has been settled


ND



Nothing personal . Business is business .

 

They are in the Reading Randomness thread found in the Roulette section here. This is the Roulette section. The videos are me actually playing in my practice software. Others are using the free software too. I just talk and explain why I make bet selections.

 

Thanks, I will see if I can figure it out what you are doing there when I get the time. I read some of your posts in the new thread by I think Ion Saliu. I have read his articles ages ago and gave them all a try. None of them ever actually worked. I finally realized something about you that I have been misjudging; you are dead serious and as honest about this whole roulette thing as one can be. I would very much like to send you my system in whole. I believe that if anyone can put it to test to see if it's valid or not is you. I also believe that at first you will always have your doubts about any new system and that's to be understood. But I really feel that from the bottom of your heart. you really want to find something that offers just a little more edge if possible. I do not think this system can be programmed to run tests, there are many decisions made by observation. Give me your email address and I'll send it right off to you.