Maybe there is still HOPE!

[albalaha]

I openly challenge all those who claim to know VB. It does not work. Come online with any live dealer roulette and play it 100 times. Even if you predict neighbours (5 consecutive numbers on a wheel) 25 times correctly out of 100 times before "no more bets" announced, I would openly declare you my master.

[ego]

First of all no one claim to master any-one - the point is that i agree to that 5 in 100 make it and it works - i assume the lack of fixed ââ,¬â€œ flexible ââ,¬â€œ stiff ââ,¬â€œ fluctating ââ,¬â€œ fuzzy ââ,¬â€œ hybrid using more then one dominant deflector is above most of pepole - any one can learn to predict the correct turnaround and bet before NMB - but not many know how to use the deflectors and rotor wish calibrate and give you for exampel two high probability areas.

Why would any one try to master you as you are a free person to a certan degree - sure you have more then 37 degree of freedom with your toughts and ability to learn - is a question about time and effort.
Is just not true but more difficult then the past and its more fun to master then to master a individual at this forum.

How come that some one would make a challange and prove you wrong - you would not learn any-thing from it at all - it would only be talk about the size of the wallet wish is not intressting at all.

[MrJ]

"I'm starting to think Mr.  J is right.   If you're going to play roulette, play with a few numbers and with a heavy progression. >>> I base this mainly on a ton of testing/playing for ALL combinations. Meaning, alot of numbers bet, no progression...flat betting. Few numbers with flat betting and few numbers with a progression. Alot of numbers with progression etc.

I might be flexible a bit in terms of not using a 'LARGE' progression but I won't budge in terms of how many numbers. 1-4 max, thats my opinion. Flat betting? Sure why not but no more than 4 numbers. I play a GREAT method (it is posted) using flat betting only, it works VERY well. Ken