DNA OF ROULETTE SYSTEM: Your opinions, please

[esoito]

Hmmm...thanks for all the replies.

It's starting to look as though the author's claims, versus users' opinions, are poles apart!!

If the software eventuates it will make thorough testing a lot easier...

[Bayes]

I had another email from Don, enclosing the very latest Vegas Buster! 

This version of the system is for inside numbers.

[malcop]

Hi All,

This is the reply I had from Don this morning after asking him when he will be creating the software for his "DNA of Roulette" system.

"Try out my attached latest book "Ruin the City of Las Vegas" which does not have any calculations and meant for continuous inside wagering. The returns are five times more and it outperforms all internet casions as well on all modes of spinnning. The original data tables are now available in my website :.neworiginalthinking.com. for the first time.

Most importantly, provide me with feedback on this new system which is much more user frinendly and five times more effective than the earlier system, in regard to return on investment.

Please conctact me if you need any clarifications. One small inquiry, which country are you from?

Best Regards and Best of Luck

Don"

This guy is pretty sure of himself, I have not looked at this yet has anyone here looked yet?

Thanks

malcop

[esoito]

"...has anyone here looked yet?"

Yes.

I looked at it. Scratched my head. Looked at it again.

And then swore at the language used to explain his steps.

Why can't the man write in clear, simple English?

If he'd provided some examples I might have understood his explanations better.

Frankly, I gave up trying to understand it.

Hopefully someone can explain it more simply than he is able to!

[malcop]

"...has anyone here looked yet?"

Yes.

I looked at it. Scratched my head. Looked at it again.

And then swore at the language used to explain his steps.

Why can't the man write in clear, simple English?

If he'd provided some examples I might have understood his explanations better.

Frankly, I gave up trying to understand it.

Hopefully someone can explain it more simply than he is able to!

That's funny you said that, I replied to his email by asking could he give step by step examples of him playing a session for both his systems, so that we could understand the correct way to play his systems.

I do think the problem is a language problem, and he is making the classic mistake in both his manuals, making the assumption that everyone understands what he is saying without giving lots of working examples.

[esoito]

Yes, a "language problem" indeed, Malcop.

Both his tortured syntax and extensive footnoting suggest it is more an academic paper than a man-in-the-street exposition of what is, basically, The Law of The Third.

Hopefully he'll rise to the occasion and offer you some examples you could share here...maybe he will...if there's a  z  in the month...

Let's not hold our breath.

[malcop]

Yes, a "language problem" indeed, Malcop.

Both his tortured syntax and extensive footnoting suggest it is more an academic paper than a man-in-the-street exposition of what is, basically, The Law of The Third.

Hopefully he'll rise to the occasion and offer you some examples you could share here...maybe he will...if there's a  z  in the month...

Let's not hold our breath.

I'm in the process of studying the data sheets that come with both systems from his website, slowly I think I'm getting it, once I'm 100% sure I got it I will post my findings here.

Their is quit a lot of info in the data sheets that comes with the ebooks, and with a little study of the sessions played, should not be to hard to figure things out.

[esoito]

@ Malcop

How do you interpret his phrase "distinct numbers" ?

It's a key term that he didn't seem to define very clearly (well, not to me he didn't)

[malcop]

@ Malcop

How do you interpret his phrase "distinct numbers" ?

It's a key term that he didn't seem to define very clearly (well, not to me he didn't)

Hi esoito,

I interpret "distinct numbers" as numbers that have not come up, this is how I figured it out.

I noticed that when I looked at the data sheets at the end of each session for DNA I noticed the title "DISTINCT NUMBERS / FIRST 24" next to that was a figure like 17, 18, 19 or 20 ect.

So I thought that must be the "distinct numbers" he refers to in step 1, to confirm this I wrote out 0 to 36 on a piece of paper, then went back to the top of the sheet and crossed of the numbers that came up in A1 to A24 which equates to spin 1 to 24, then I counted the reaming numbers on my piece of paper and noticed that the numbers left related to the "distinct numbers" that the author talked about.

Once I figured that out the rest just sort of fell into place, I then got three pieces of paper and labelled them as per his instructions.

I have not done any testing yet I will be doing some today.

Hope you can follow how I interpreted his instructions.

30 years of wading through computer technical manuals  

Thanks

malcop

[esoito]

Thank you, Malcop.

That's very kind to go to all this trouble explaining. You did it very well.

A shame the author couldn't be more explicit...

Anyway, your testing will be interesting.

And -- as an aside -- I wonder if he will continue his software, given that he seems to think this method is more profitable.

[malcop]

Hi esoito,


I don't think he will be doing the software it would have been done by now!

This is a email from him today

"DNA of Roulette involves mathematical inputs to detect the winning streak emerging. However, Ruin the City of Las Vegas is less complicated and there are no calculations involved except counting.

So, my advise to you is to go for that. In fact you seem to have got tired in understanding the DNA of Roulette. Do not bother.

Best Regards

Don"

He seems to take offence very easily by someone wanting step by step examples of a played session, I pointed out to him that if he could provide that he would have a wider audience of people tying/using his systems, needless to say I'm still waiting for his response, I won't be holing my breath!

Thanks

malcop

[esoito]

Oh dear. He's seems to identify so closely with his creation that any overt or veiled criticism of it he takes personally!

It's a fairly common phenomenon.

I'm not surprised about the demise of the software.

Anyway, onwards and upwards with testing his latest offering. I look forward to your thoughts.

[malcop]

Hi esoito,

I'm verry sorry I made a mistake, I had only been up about 20 when I made the post on my interpertaion of the instrucions, and it was 04:20 in the morning  


Here Is what I think is the correct way:

"STEP 1:
Observe the last 24 consecutive spin outcomes and identify the distinct numbers by marking them on the reverse side of a recording card (Card 1)."

Our last 24 spins whent like this:

First: 29, 5, 36, 26, 22, 29, 12, 20, 29, 9, 6, 11, 32, 26, 33, 25, 4, 14, 33, 14, 9, 2, 4, 3 :Last

Our Distent mumbers that we mark on the reverse side of (Card 1) would be First: 29, 5, 36, 26, 22, 12, 20, 9, 6, 11, 32, 33, 25, 4, 14, 2, 3 :Last

Note: at first I thought that if a number repeated like the 29, 9, 33, 26, 4 and 14 that they were excluded but then that made the numbers used not the same as Dons, I have noted that sometimes my count is out by one compared to the data sheet, I put that down to an error on the sheet.

"STEP 2:
Observe the last 11 consecutive numbers from the numbers used in Step 1 and identify the distinct numbers by marking them on the reverse side of a different recording card (Card 2)."

Based of our 18 numbers we put on the reverse of (Card 1) we now use the last 11 of those numbers to mark on the reverse of (Card 2) which would be First: 9, 6, 11, 32, 26, 33, 25, 4, 14, 2, 3 :Last

Once againg sorry of any confusion caused.

Thanks

malcop

[malcop]

Here are emails I had from Don this Morning, they helped to clear up all my questions about the system.

I find if a system creater is willing to talk and help with questions it gives me more confidence in the system, does not mean it is a longterm winner just that the creater has faith in his/her system and at least that is a start.

Email 1:
"Thank you for the feedback. All what you require is just one page elaborating on how to do it. What we do here is we identify the (distinct) uniuqe numbers present among the last 24 spins and repeat wagering only for that set of numbers for the next 13 consecutive spins. Then we repeat the process.

In order to ensure continuity, at the outset, we mark the unique numbers present among the last 11 numbers on a seperate card and the new unique numbers occuring during the 13 consecutive spins mentioned above to the second card. So, by the time we finish the first 13 spins, the second card will indicate the unique numbers among the last 24 consecutive spins (11+13=24) to commence wagering for the nexst 13 consecutive spins.

As the second session commences, from the 3rd spin and onwards (we mark the last 11 consecutive spins in the second session), we start marking the third card and add the new unique numbers occuring during the second session onto the third card. So by the time you finish the second session, you are ready to commence the third session comprising the next 13 consecutive spins using the third card.

And it can be continued until you decide to quit. Please study the data sheets in my website.

Best regards and best of luck.

Don"

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

Email 2:
"Hi Don,

Our last 24 spins whent like this:

First: 29, 5, 36, 26, 22, 29, 12, 20, 29, 9, 6, 11, 32, 26, 33, 25, 4, 14, 33, 14, 9, 2, 4, 3 :Last

Our Distinct mumbers that we mark on the reverse side of (Card 1) would be First: 29, 5, 36, 26, 22, 12, 20, 9, 6, 11, 32, 26, 33, 25, 4, 14, 2, 3 :Last

Have I got the above correct?

Thanks"

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

Email 3:
"Why not all the interested players come down to Colombo for a holiday. It is one of the best and cheapest destinations. I will teach all of you everything.

Best Regards

Don"

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

Email 4:(this was in response to Email 2, I had made a typo and entered 26 twice for the numbers to wright on the reverse side of Card 1)

"You are absolutely right, except for you have repeated 26 twice. So, you will be wagering for this set of 17 numbers for the next 13 consecutive spins.

However, if you are an online player, refrain from wagering on the auto-spin mode and resort to the live spin mode. Sri Lanka's MGM casino has a online live spin mode so as the london based Smart Live Casino.

The system works well on computer simulated programs, provided that the casino is reliable.

I cannot explain as to why the returns are low on (still positive) on the auto-spin mode.

Best Regards

Don"

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

I Found it intresting what Don said about using the auto spin mode when playing RNG, that would have been the logical thing to do, set it up for 13 spins, glad he pointed that out.

Hope this helps.

Thanks

malcop

[flukey luke]

Malcop,

Maybe I am misreading it, But I think what Don is saying is that playing on live wheels and trusted RNG is fine, but to avoid the auto wheels (they are the 'real physical wheels' but without the croupier) It is interesting he says this. I have personally thought for a while now that these auto wheels are a completely different kettle of fish compared to anything else.
One thing I have noticed in a lot of testing is that sleeper systems tend to go wrong very quickly. However, if you think about it, Don's system is based on the law of the third, so if sleeper systems do not perform up to scratch, law of the third methods should be great.
So either something is wrong here or we are both paranoid after getting negative results.
One thing that I always like to take into account is that the casinos don't generally do anything to favour the player. A lot of these type of machines are slowly creeping their way in the door of casinos. It maybe mostly to do with cost effectiveness, however, my advice would be to avoid these machines if you possibly can.