DNA OF ROULETTE SYSTEM: Your opinions, please

[malcop]

The reason for having results outside the specified limits is that I applied common sense in the testing.

For example a session starts and performs mostly in the negative then it gets with great amount of trouble to +7 for example, I exited immediatelly. Also some sessions were at +7 then a complete +8 win on the 4 bets came and it resulted in a +15. The session which is at +31 showed only wins in the whole session that's why I pushed it until first loss.

Also, 99% of negative sessions were exited after reaching around -10 from the session highest point - if I got to +5 then I lost to -4, exit. that's why all the sessions are not at -10 or -13 because I applied this rule for the session highest point. Surely you would agree that it is better to win +4 then lose 10 units and exit at -6 - not a complete loss of session bankroll.

I will wait for a confirmation for the updated program and test the 50 data sets again. I will also attach in the post of my next testing an Excel spreadsheet with my 50 spin data sets with 50 sub-sheets. That way you can confirm on the results for yourself.

HI sekuritati,it
Thank you for your update, I think you have the right idea you used you common sense and good judgement to determine when it was a good point to exit the session, no amount of manual rules could help on that manner.

The thing is the more you play a system/method the more you get to understand the strengths and weakness of the system/method you are playing, and only then can you be in a position to fully take advantage of what is going on during your session.

I think the way you played is the correct way to play and you should continue to do so.

Thanks

malcop

[malcop]

Hi All,

Latest update from Don.

---------------------------------------

Dear Philip,

First and foremost, I wish to express my gratitude to Mr. Sekuritati. I am making rigorous observations for our final run on Saturday. With this topological approach based on three previously identified trends that freqeuntly occur, the present software commences wagering with 2 possible starting points. However, we see that there are 2 other starting points that could trigger commencemenet of wagering. Also, we are reexamining the present strategy switching methodology and improve it.

I have already observed the floor and the ceiling level exit points. At floor level, the exit shall take place upon the NCG dropping by 12 or more from the peak value reached, if the NCG is less than 10. The exit rule for the ceiling level is if NCG is to exit after incurring a loss of more than 5 from the peak value reached, upon NCG becoming greater or equal to 10. These two features will be incorporated into the software program.

The CIH (capital required for one session) will be raised from the current level of 13 to 15 back again.

For the time being I request the players to observe the emergence trends and take the decisions manually, if they are using the RCLV system, as the emergence of trends is clearly visible to the naked eye, which had never been the case with the DNAR system.

Best Regards

Don

------------------------------------------

Thanks

malcolp

[albalaha]

It is the result that matters at the end. If someone is at net loss after playing 50 sessions, the method has some inherent problem and not playable at this stage. The speculation of winning 20 out of 30 sessions proved wrong so far. However, we must wait till the final and conclusive method comes on saturday. I personally believe that no flat betting method in the world can succeed in long run. I will be happy to be proved wrong by Mr. Colonne.

[malcop]

Hi All,

Latest update from Don.

-------------------------

Dear Philip,

Finally, Dulan and I were able to come up with something very reasonable. The new software yielded +136 on the original data set obtained from the Bellagio Casino in Colombo and a +141 on the original data set obtained from the Smart Live Casino (SLC) - Live Spin Mode. In addition, the RNG data obtained from the SLC yielded a +56. However, inexplicably, the Auto Spin data obtained from the SLC yielded only -8 at the end. The four original test data sets I used in the experiment are uploaded on my website for anyone to check it themselves.

Now, we need Mr. Sekuritati to use the new software package and report the final outcome with the failure rate. The faiure rate for our data is around 2 to 3 out of 10. The new RCLV system still uses the flat bet of 15 chips and 4 chips per spin.

Please upload this e-mail to inform the members of the discussion forum, about the new RCLV system and their feedback would also be greatly appreciated. The latest manual pertaining to the system is also uploaded as well.

Best Regards

Don

---------------------------

Thanks

malcop

[albalaha]

A total failure.  I started playing with 10 cent bets in betvoyager no zero roulette which can be the most safe place to try any outside bet system/bot. I started with a bankroll of Euro 5.03 and lost 16 units finally. The worst aspect of the bot is, never in the entire session, my bankroll even rose to +1 unit of my initial bankroll. Stop these nonsense bots, which tries to fool us by predicting future. Here is the screenshot of my session:

[attachimg=#]

[albalaha]

See screenshots of my session at betvoyager no zero roulette and RCLV suggested bets:
[attach=#]
[attach=#]

[albalaha]

I am totally convinced now that this does not and can not work for gain. If someone ever wins through it, consider yourself to be lucky. It is not the quality of this system which can win more and lose less.

[sekuritati]

Session   1   -13
Session   2   21
Session   3   17
Session   4   -12
Session   5   7
Session   6   14
Session   7   -15
Session   8   -2
Session   9   -12
Session   10   -14
Session   11   16
Session   12   6
Session   13   1
Session   14   8
Session   15   14
Session   16   -13
Session   17   7
Session   18   -3
Session   19   5
Session   20   -3
Session   21   7
Session   22   -12
Session   23   2
Session   24   -13
Session   25   -12
Session   26   -15
Session   27   16
Session   28   2
Session   29   14
Session   30   8
Session   31   13
Session   32   43
Session   33   9
Session   34   7
Session   35   9
Session   36   4
Session   37   14
Session   38   7
Session   39   2
Session   40   8
Session   41   23
Session   42   -12
Session   43   7
Session   44   2
Session   45   0
Session   46   4
Session   47   6
Session   48   5
Session   49   18
Session   50   12
-------------------
End profit: +207

[albalaha]

Earning 207 units from 50 sessions is still not good by any parameter. One session usually lasts for 20 spins. So, u are earning 207 units while playing 1000 spins and risking 4000 units averagely. While, I played it earlier and this time, I never felt that it has any potency to be a winner in long run. Playing this system has no merit but you count on your luck only.

[malcop]

Hi All,

Latest update from Don.

-------------------------------------

Dear Philip,

After a rigorous exercise, Dulan and I managed to outperform the Auto Spin Data Sample also and enhance the bottom line of the RNG Sample. Now the faiure rate is 3/10 maximum for all four types of data samples. However, we strongly recommend the players to use the Live Spin Mode either in Real or Internet Casinos, as the bottom lines are significantly higher than Auto Spin and RNG. Also, there is a switch at the bottom of the right end of the display to switch on the RNG/Auto Spin Mode, if a player needs to use it.

I saw one player posting a screen shot of a data sheet and commenting that the system is a total failure. Nobody can come to such a conclusion without testing at least 30 sessions, which is a fundamental assumption in Statistics. Also, we made some minor corrections in the program and I strongly advise the players to use the following link and access the system once, rather than relying on a link saved in Favourits in the internet browser.

The link to the page is as follows:

link:://:.neworiginalthinking.com/arc/rclv/arc.html

I humbly request the players to patiently test the System RCVL without getting into premature opinions, as the returns are attractive enough on Live Spin mode and the system is quite simple that a person with a basic mathematical aptitude can use it in the real casino without a computer.

Also, it is noteworthy to mention that what we consider as the gain / loss is the value of the NCG column corresponding to the first EXIT instruction. If anyone is testing a seris of samples such as Mr. Sekuritati, that is the value that must be stated as gain / loss. By copy to Mr. Sekuritati, we request to examine the 50 data samples again and post the net result to the forum.

Dulan is now preparing for a major examination and I cannot disturb him until 15th May. However, as of now, the system is bug free, as per our observations, that the players can use it confidently.

We strongly encourage user feedbacks through the discussion forum, after putting a reasonable effort to test the System RCLV. Most importantly, they must specify the mode of spinning.

Best Regards

Don

-------------------------------

Thanks

malcop

[malcop]

Look guys, I'm just keeping you all updated with Don's emails this is not the same method that was first posted.

I have no opinions on this system, for me it is very simple use it don't use it, you know the way it will go for one person they will have great success with it for another the will not, that is the way with any system/method because when it comes right down to it your luck on the day will play a huge part on your success or failure.

Isn't that what gambling is all about!

So if this is not for you then just walk away, and find something that suites your style of play.

[malcop]

Hi All,

Latest update from Don.

------------------------------------------

Dear Philip,

As the arena gets heated up with comments, I thought of putting my sentiments into writing to explain my objective. First and foremost, I am not a gambler and only a researcher / expert on strategy optimization.

In my life I have seen many people who are addicted to gambling and got themselves financially ruined. So far in Sri Lanka, I have never come across a single gambler who has won. Many people come to relax and enjoy the life in the Casinos and they all leave empty handed on many days when they run out of luck.

As the System RCLV now yielded a +207 on 50 sessions with Mr. Securitati's data set with 14/50 failures, I gained enormous faith in the system because it is highly consistent with my observations on 30 sessions on a prorata basis.

Anyone who wants to use the System RCVL must define winning as making a reasonable profit in regard to the capital investment made, time spent and the risk associated with the system (relative frequency of failure). The interpretation of risking 4000 chips and gaining just 207 is completely wrong. The investment per session is only 15 chips and keeping the relative frequency of failure in mind, he must start with an initial investment of 15 x 5 times =75. Also, the player will lose the entire captial of 15 chips only in one or two out of the 14 sessions that have yielded a loss. The other losses are marginal. So, 207 / 75 is a 276% Return on Investment. The time spent for 20 spins is around 1 hour in the casion, therefore the total time spent is just 50 hours. So, by spending 50 - 60 hours and gaining 276% on whatever the investment amount is quite a high return from a gambling perspective. Also, if someone was playing with 10$ chips, +207 is a 2070$ income on an investment of 750$. 

Simply, the system is meant for people who like playing roulette as a past time hobby and who can be happy with reasonable returns. It is not meant for the gamblers who make wagering decisions on gut feel and just thrive only on luck. However, such professional gamblers also can get higher returns at their level of expectation by using System RCLV by wagering inside, of course with a higher risk. Instead of wagering for Dozens and Columns, If they wager inside for specific spins as elaborated in the downloadable book,  they still can be guided by System RCLV. Is not it better than relying on gut feel?

Please post this to the forum.

Best Regards

Don

-----------------------------

Thanks

malcop

[albalaha]

This system is trying to fight with RNG or randomness by predicting flat betting which is just not possible. When we play two dozens and two columns together(most of the time), our chances to hit a winner is extremely high and chances of a miss is extremely low in every attempt of ours, so if we get to a point in any session where a profit of 10-12 units shows by playing 4 units each time, I don't think, it is very meritorious. This can not make a long time winner. However, I appreciate the exit style of the author which is very clever. The total winning of 207 units playing 50 sessions, i.e. 4 units net profit per session, seems wierd to me because this much chips we place in every spin of ours.
            My open challenge to all such system/bot writers:
1. No one can predict future outcomes
2. Flat betting has to lose sooner than later because of house edge;
3. what the system is trying to do is to try luck only, if you are lucky, you win a session, if not lose. There isn't anything like consistancy in winning or even losings. The author's claim of winning 20 out of 30 sessions is baseless.
        Let it be tested further by other guys and give a fair and transparent report here. I am no one to give any verdict on anything. I am just giving my opinion.

[malcop]

Hi All,

Latest update from Don.

----------------------------------

Dear Philip,

I wish to provide a small clarification on the three points stressed by Mr. Albalaha. Both Systems DNAR and RCLV are not based on luck. It is based on the Theory of Chaos presented by Edward Lorenz, which states that as an event is being repeated, eventually a pattern emerges and the Law of the Third, of which the mathematical equation is discovered by me. System DNAR is based on two such patterns and System RCLV is based on three such patterns identified by us, which emerge from time to time and then holds over a reasonably long period of time in 2/3 sessions. There is a great deal of logic behind both systems and what we do is tracking the emergence of respective patterns with numerical analysis and switch on to another, when another strategy emerges. The player does not see any of these observations made by us in regard to patterns and their behaviour based on hundreds of observations made over the years. So, it shall not be undermined as a System based on luck, as the relative frequency of failure is only 3/10.

The second point is that the disadvantage arising from the house edge is already factored into the system and incorporated in the program. The net outcome is inclusive of occurence of the zero as well. So, the house edge has not been able to neutralize the surplus generated by the system over 50 data samples of Mr. Sekuritati.

Now, I do not see the possiblility of anyone making a loss of capital if 15 x 5 = 75 chips are used at the outset and if the System RCLV is used. Now, I see the confidence increasing as the number of visitors / users in the forum is rising sharply. Also, within the next few weeks I will put in an effort to further improve the bottom lines and the failure rate with a few new lines of thinking.

Please remember that 21st century is meant to change the existing hypotheses.

Best Regards

Don

----------------------

Thanks

malcop

[albalaha]

Theory of chaos and law of third are very old excuses of losses in roulette. Even if they exist, it is difficult to yield any profit from it. What u are seeing as patterns of dozens/colums are merely illusions. Remember one basic thing- any RNG or real wheel produces a single winning number everytime and not any dozen/column which are vaguely defined groups of numbers having no logical relations with each other be it on wheel or in RNG.