@ Steve

[TurboGenius]

I wanted to post a analogy that might help people see things differently - there's nothing 'new' here - but who knows, perhaps it will make people think differently about the game. (and maybe not).

Let's say there's a very large field and someone put out a grid of squares that fill the area.
They are all equal sized, etc etc.
Let's say there are 100 squares - for the sake of making it easy to picture. A 10 x 10 grid that covers the entire field.
Every day without fail a thunderstorm appears around noon and lightning hits one of the squares.
You have to decide every day for 100 days what square to stand in. (good luck with that - yikes).

So here is the reasoning we have to look at since the lightning strikes are completely random in nature....
We "know" that all 100 squares won't be hit by lighting over the 100 days. Ok - some scientist will say that it's possible - the odds of that happening can be worked out with math (and it shows this event to be damn near impossible so it's not even considered by you during your 100 day test)

Now you get a freebie on the first day - you get to see where the lightning hits and you don't have to risk anything. This isn't how roulette works - but for the sake of the analogy I'll use it.
You can chart everything and take notes if you want.... but you'll begin to realize a few things.
Any square that hasn't been hit by lightning is potentially a safe one to stand in... since we know that all 100 squares won't be hit in 100 days.
Any square that has been hit already is potentially a square that will have 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 hits on it over the 100 days.
So you can pretty much rule out those squares as being "safe" to stand in - the fact that they were hit once puts them in the category of "future likely hits" - while the opposite for the unhit squares applies as well... Any square that hasn't been hit yet - as time goes on - makes them even more and more safe as they are in the small group of squares that potentially won't get hit at all.
You can say that each day and each lightning strike is independent from the day before - and that is entirely true ! But the 100 days as a group will give you amazingly predictable results.
You'll see at the end that x amount of squares got hit, x amount didn't, x amount got 1,2,3,4 hits etc.
So you could use that knowledge before-hand to choose the best squares to stand in if you don't want to get hit !
It won't be perfect - you'll end up getting hit possibly even with your best choices, but as time goes on you'll be able to make better and better decisions. You'll avoid squares that have a hit (because they are potential multiple hit squares) and you'll choose to stand in unhit squares because they are potentially squares that will never be hit.

What I'm saying in roulette is the exact opposite - we know what's going to happen and where to bet because just like the lightning field - once a number shows, it's now a potential repeater.
And any number that hasn't appeared is to be avoided as a potential "sleeper".

In the field - if the lightning strikes weren't random - you would have only have to watch what square hit and then stand in it for the rest of the 99 days ! Because 100 days would mean 100 squares got hit.
Random is beatable (in more than roulette) because it's random - it doesn't end up being "every number hits 4 times in 4 cycles" type of game.. By avoiding the numbers that don't (or aren't going to) show up you can actually change the math of the game..

[ignatus]

What I'm saying in roulette is the exact opposite - we know what's going to happen and where to bet because just like the lightning field - once a number shows, it's now a potential repeater.
And any number that hasn't appeared is to be avoided as a potential "sleeper".

Thanks TG. now we can avoid many mistakes, and know what direction we should go...this is basic roulette knowledge. I believe this to be true, and all my more or less "successful" systems has been build upon repeters, AND clusters/repeating sectors hit on the wheel..i'll continue work in this direction from now on.

[TurboGenius]

The problem is mainly the "one spin" mentality.
Each spin is independent from the last spin - so in people's minds this means that a group of spins (session) is also just a bunch of single independent spins.
It's hard to see it as a "whole" - a session as being a "thing".
Like the lightning field - each day and each strike could happen on ANY of the 100 squares - that's not going to be debated by anyone I think.
But once you stop and look at it as a group of events - you suddenly have predictability inside of the random of each event.
Like the Geiger counter video I posted on the other forum - this applies to roulette like a glove.
Each click is independent from the last, they are coming in at random times and no one could try to pick one click on the counter and get it right. You'd be foolish to even try - it's random !
But the combined data as it comes in - the hundredths counts, the thousandths counts - amazingly predictable. Anyone could take that bet and say "In x seconds there is going to be a change in the value" and they would be right every time.
Just because a spin is independent from the last, and "random" - this gives us amazing predictability when it comes to the events as a "group" / session of events.
The problem with people who don't understand this is the single-spin mentality and they have to change that or else they will stay convinced that there's no solution.

[falkor2k15]

What I'm saying in roulette is the exact opposite - we know what's going to happen and where to bet because just like the lightning field - once a number shows, it's now a potential repeater.
And any number that hasn't appeared is to be avoided as a potential "sleeper"

TG, I think it's all one big misconception - possibly based on some propaganda by way of hired opposition against whatever the true method of beating roulette happens to be (Steve's computers?).

2 appearances/hits = a repeat, but I'm not sure why this #2 spot has such prestige attached to it? The sleepers can equally likely go to the #1 hit spot the same was as a repeater @ #2 spot can upgrade to 3 hits. Let's look at streets when there's an equal number at each level:

0 hit: 1,2,3,4
1 hits: 5,6,7,8
2 hits (repeat level): 9,10,11,12

You really think that 1 hitters or repeaters are in a better position than the 0 hit sleepers? Again, it's a misconception.

[goldrosen]

Yes falkor, couldn't agree more.. or we might be wrong? I don't know.. let's read below and let us all think again.

Any square that hasn't been hit by lightning is potentially a safe one to stand in... since we know that all 100 squares won't be hit in 100 days.
Any square that has been hit already is potentially a square that will have 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 hits on it over the 100 days.

Now read it again below after mixing two sentences.
Any square that hasn't been hit by lightning is potentially that will have 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 hits on it over the 100 days.
Still making sense to you? I don't know.

A square that has been hit once is potentially a square that will have 2 hits on it over the 100 days.
A square that hasn't been hit is potentially a square that will have 1 hit on it over the 100 days.
And now you decided to stand on square that hasn't been hit.

I'm really not sure and I don't know how to play roulette actually, just the lightning game seems fun to me here hehe.

PS: If any power people here see this and find it helpful, please lower my warning level..I don't know what I did wrong, thank you bery much and sorry for my poor English.

[rouletteKEY]

possibly based on some propaganda by way of hired opposition against whatever the true method of beating roulette happens to be (Steve's computers?).

I hadn't considered this

George Soros
The Russians
Julian Assange
Trump
Clinton
Obama

who could be behind this devious plot to discredit hit numbers?

I am going for Spectre...it's always the unseen unknown shadow organization in truly evil conspiracies of these magnitudes

[falkor2k15]

0 hit: 1,2,3,4
1 hits: 5,6,7,8
2 hits (repeat level): 9,10,11,12

If 5-8 were really in a better position than 1-4 then there would be more chance for 5-8 to hit on the next spin. The defense? "We can play to profit on the next event instead of the next spin..."--RUBBISH!!!!

There might be less streets involved in getting to the next repeat like there are less combinations that have a higher strike rate (double dozen vs. single dozen), but the cost/reward remains equivalent/comparable, so that all bet selections eventually end up @ break even (without the zero) or at a loss to the house advantage. That's why all sequences for all sections have an equal chance of occurring - playing for sleepers or repeats makes no difference as there isn't one desirable sequence over another to lean towards.

So it's all just nonsense, don't you all see! Steve is the voice of reason; he doesn't hide behind any smoke and mirrors regardless of his skepticism and lack of tolerance at entertaining BS.

[falkor2k15]

Any square that hasn't been hit by lightning is potentially that will have 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 hits on it over the 100 days.

You could try flat-betting those hot numbers only at the current highest level:

0 hit: 1,2,3,4
1 hits: 5,6,7,8
2 hits (repeat level): 9,10,11,12

Bet  9-12

0 hit: 1,2,3
1 hits: 5,6,7,8, 4
2 hits (repeat level): 9,10,11,12

Lose. Bet 9-12

0 hit: 1,2,3
1 hits: 5,6,7,8, 4
2 hits (repeat level): 9,10,11
3 hits: 12

Win. Bet 12.

0 hit: 1,2
1 hits: 5,6,7,8, 4, 3
2 hits (repeat level): 9,10,11
3 hits: 12

Lose. Bet 12

0 hit: 1,2
1 hits: 5,6,7,8, 4
2 hits (repeat level): 9,10,11, 3
3 hits: 12

Lose.

I tested that years ago before even Priyanka started promoting repeats... it fails like every other system.

[RouletteGhost]

Yes falkor, couldn't agree more.. or we might be wrong? I don't know.. let's read below and let us all think again.

Now read it again below after mixing two sentences.
Any square that hasn't been hit by lightning is potentially that will have 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 hits on it over the 100 days.
Still making sense to you? I don't know.

A square that has been hit once is potentially a square that will have 2 hits on it over the 100 days.
A square that hasn't been hit is potentially a square that will have 1 hit on it over the 100 days.
And now you decided to stand on square that hasn't been hit.

I'm really not sure and I don't know how to play roulette actually, just the lightning game seems fun to me here hehe.

PS: If any power people here see this and find it helpful, please lower my warning level..I don't know what I did wrong, thank you bery much and sorry for my poor English.

Your English mysteriously became good.

[RouletteGhost]

TG, I think it's all one big misconception - possibly based on some propaganda by way of hired opposition against whatever the true method of beating roulette happens to be (Steve's computers?).

Sorry but to be honest and not sugar coat anything? If I suspected anyone was trying to throw people off from a good method I would choose you, not TG

[Turner]

please lower my warning level..I don't know what I did wrong, thank you bery much and sorry for my poor English.

Your English seems fine, then all of a sudden its a fabricated poor english. Bery poor lol

You are moderated due to all the ridiculous hits in Rates towards specific people. Thats suspicious as it was just the 3 people Ken argued with.

You are not new, and are someone quite familiar pretending to be

You are staying on moderation. 

[nottophammer]

well done Turner