• Welcome to #1 Roulette Forum & Message Board | www.RouletteForum.cc.

News:

Almost every system has been tested many times before. Start by learning what we already know doesn't work, and why.

Main Menu
Popular pages:

Roulette System

The Roulette Systems That Really Work

Roulette Computers

Hidden Electronics That Predict Spins

Roulette Strategy

Why Roulette Betting Strategies Lose

Roulette System

The Honest Live Online Roulette Casinos

An Idea that I had a lot of time before...Can we make it any better?

Started by RouletteExplorer, Aug 27, 04:35 PM 2011

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

RouletteExplorer

Before a lot of time I was exploring how Randomness is acting on the Ecs.
  I knew that by just betting the EC that has left behind (flat bet) couldn t work ,because in Roulette the quantity doesn't balance all the time.(maybe it is balancing in 1 million spins but we can t play all those spins in 1 visit)
  So I decided to get deeper into randomness.
Exept the quantity of an EC , there is something more...there are the runs and the changes of an Ec.
e.g.. RRRRRRR = Runs     RBRBRBRB = changes.
  So I desided to COMBINE those 2 things.

HOW I DID IT

I was recording on a papper the Quantity of the EC (How many REDS and how many blacks) and I was also recording the How Many runs and how many changes it was making...
  So I decided to do this:
Everytime that for e.g.. the Reds were behind(so that means that I had to bet on red for the balance) I was also watching the runs and the changes that I had till now....so IF the last spin was RED and the RUNS were behind that ment that the Reds and the Runs were both behind....so I has 2 factors that were telling to bet on RED(because the last spin was red and the RUNS were behind)
So in this situation I was betting 2 chips(in this example on RED)
Now IF the quantity and the Runs/changes were conflicting ,then I was betting 1 chip on the bet that was more behind....e.g..
If the Black was behind with the deference of 5 and if the runs were behind by 7 , them if the last spin was RED , then I ws betting 1 chip on the RED...because   7(run/changes) -5(quantity)= 2 of the runs/changes. So the Runs/Changes were overcoming the quantity and I was betting what was bigger.....

So IF Quantity + Runs/Changes were not conflicting I was betting 2 chips
     IF Quantity + Runs/Changes were  conflicting I was betting 1 chips to the factor that was bigger.

This didn t work as it should....

Do you have any other idea of how to make it better???
If not then it was just a post of my idea that can trigger more ideas of that kind of play  :)
What we need is new thinking...

Nathanael

Thanks for posting.

New ideas here worth thinking about.
Don't think that because your system has never lost, it can't lose.  Always be prepared for the worst.

-