Banned for using Charles Edward Hampshire bet

[swanson]

How can the casino ban a consistent winning roulette player. I feel that they would lose far more money by doing this. The winner can just retaliate by revealing the winning bet to even more people causing the casinos to lose more money.

Why is Charles worried about losing control over his bet if he sells it, yet doesn't seem to care about the fact that someone can find it and tell others?

[huskerdu]

How can the casino ban a consistent winning roulette player.

There isn't any consistent winning roulette player.
But if there would be any chance to be such a player casinos wouldn't ban him for the bellow reasons:
1. They will lose their reputation
2. Casinos don't care if there is a "consistent winning player, because people will see that there is a "consistant winnin player" , so they'll believe that they can earn a lot of money playing roulette,  so that it will lead more people to play roulette, so this will lead to more customers to the casinos, which means more victims, which means more earnings for the casinos.
Consistent winning casino players have been only in cards (based on counting cards so they had an advantage play on the game), like Nick the Greek and John Taramas (both Greeks) who earned some millions.
Nick the Greek won and lost over $500 million in his lifetime. He himself claimed that he went from rags to riches over 73 times.  Near the end of his life, he  was near-broke and playing $5 limit draw poker games in Gardena, California. When asked by a fellow player how he could once play for millions and now be playing for such small stakes, he replied, "Hey, it's action, isn't it?" He died poor in 1966.
John Taramas in the decade of '80 earned some millions at Î'lackjack. Nowdays  he is playing online Poker and he earns about 3.000 euros per month, but half of them are from sponsors.

Anyway, If at the random game of roulette there was a posibility of any kind of advantage play (like counting cards) maybe there could be a consistent winning player somewhere out there.

[swanson]

Casinos don't care if there is a "consistent winning player, because people will see that there is a "consistant winnin player" , so they'll believe that they can earn a lot of money playing roulette,  so that it will lead more people to play roulette, so this will lead to more customers to the casinos, which means more victims, which means more earnings for the casinos.

Thank you for your reply.

I agree and disagree with you, depending on whether or not a consistent winning formula would be completely revealed, its ease of use, and its profitability. The casinos wouldn't care if people knew there was a consistent winner, but don't know exactly how the player is winning. On the other hand, the casinos would care a great deal and everything would have to change if the consistent winning formula was completely revealed, is easy to use, and gives the player a huge advantage.

Card counting is hard and only gives the player a slight edge, yet the casinos ruthlessly fight it. The casinos probably do make money off the fact that there probably are people who get sucked into attempting to beat blackjack and end up losing money, yet they still fight card counting ruthlessly.

[Roulettebeater]

First we need to make sure that his method wins at all ?


link:s://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=9533.0

[Clf7]

You had luck and you won more than you should in a longer period time(it depends from casino, in smaller ones it can be quickly) so they found an excuse to ban you, its common in some online casinos.Your method its not a winning one, you had simple luck for a longer period of time. In online casinos if you have a winning method you play only two ways:

1) Small game so casino doesnt give a f*ck
2) Or enter the table with a big BR and win in a short time period Big , so casino thinks that you were only lucky.
-And Play only in serious online casinos

[swanson]

You had luck and you won more than you should in a longer period time(it depends from casino, in smaller ones it can be quickly) so they found an excuse to ban you, its common in some online casinos.Your method its not a winning one, you had simple luck for a longer period of time. In online casinos if you have a winning method you play only two ways: 1) Small game so casino doesnt give a f*ck2) Or enter the table with a big BR and win in a short time period Big , so casino thinks that you were only lucky.-And Play only in serious online casinos

Why would you only read the headline, assume I was talking about myself being banned, and take time to reply to something I wasn't even saying? I never said anything about being banned or me being banned from the casino.

[Clf7]

Why would you only read the headline, assume I was talking about myself being banned, and take time to reply to something I wasn't even saying? I never said anything about being banned or me being banned from the casino.

Oh sorry buddy, ofc you are right, i readed it while scrolling on the page, when i was at the metro station.My fault 

[Steve]

1. The ceh bet is bullshit. It never existed.

2. If you win too much, casinos either ban you or change procedures to make you lose. So the key is avoiding detection.

[Roulettebeater]

1. The ceh bet is bullshit. It never existed.

The ceh bet is bullshit and only Swanson believes it

You can’t argue with a dick***d

[Steve]

If everyone quickly learned from each others mistakes, imagine how quickly we'd progress.

I'll release the first of a series of videos soon, which hopefully better help people. I've already written it all, but some people prefer videos. Already the facts are irrefutable. The problem is some people either dont care, or are stupid.

[Clf7]

If everyone quickly learned from each others mistakes, imagine how quickly we'd progress.

I'll release the first of a series of videos soon, which hopefully better help people. I've already written it all, but some people prefer videos. Already the facts are irrefutable. The problem is some people either dont care, or are stupid.

Good initiative steve 

[swanson]

@Roulettebeater, Firstly, I never said I believe it. I am open to it being possible.

@Steve, How can one claim to be openminded, yet totally dismiss Charles?
I guess I can see reasons why, like no leaks, no real proof, etc. There's no real proof of telekinesis, yet it exists, so why can't something like a consistent winning formula exist?

I know telekinesis exists, because I have done it several times. I am not strong enough to move something like a roulette ball, though.

Roulettebeater, if you are calling me a dick***d, you are actually the one who is a dick***d, as I haven't even really argued about anything.

[Steve]

Swanson, I've said it all before and dont have time to repeat it. If you dont want to listen, dont.