DNA OF ROULETTE SYSTEM: Your opinions, please

[MyTHOS_R]

Is there anybody in here that HAS FULLY UNDERSTOOD the wagering methodology suggested by Don in his book, using the diagonal observations, HAS APPLIED IT AND HAD POSITIVE RESULTS?... ANYONE?

...Because this book is starting getting more difficult to follow and read than studying Nuclear Physics! And an appeal to Mr Colonne: Don, would there be any chance at all that you could incorporate the diagonal observations wagering criteria and betting triggers into the software, so that we can all apply and test its effectiveness?

Thanks in advance

[albalaha]

Actually, there is no method at all. If u r lucky, u win, otherwise lose. Even 100 more tweaks in this method would not yield any profit.

[esoito]

Actually, there is no method at all. If you are lucky, you win, otherwise lose. Even 100 more tweaks in this method would not yield any profit.

Documentary PROOF of that statement would be far more convincing than just one more negative opinion to join your previous list of negative opinions.


"If you are lucky, you win, otherwise lose."

An enlightening statement. I never realised that can happen.

[albalaha]

Numerous testings have strengthen my this negative opinion. Any lucky fellow who is winning insane with this?

[albalaha]

With my experience, studies and researchworks, I can conclusively opine that no flat bet method in the world can sustain in most of the sessions and achive the target of "Win more and lose less". Had it been possible roulette would have become an investment than speculation, that too with least risk. Dozens and columns are fictitious group of numbers and have no relation with each other; be it real wheel or RNG. The way he is suggesting to play dozens/columns with flat bet has to fall flat itself.

[malcop]

Numerous testings have strengthen my this negative opinion. Any lucky fellow who is winning insane with this?

Well I must be insane, then just for the fun of it I played hybrid on Vegas Roulette, on William Hill, played five sessions and won 4 lost one with a gain of +23 units, now I am not silly enough to think wow this is going to keep on going, and it could have been total luck, but isnt all gambling based on luck!

The truth of the matter is no one has fully tested any of these methods even with the inside wagering have they so for people to post negative comments I think very silly.

But talking about negative comments, I have emailed Don on more than one occasion now that I and members on this forum find his instructions very very hard to follow not for hybrid and the macro/micro they are quite straight forward, but this SBS method I have given up, and I have said to Don on more than one occasation this having two links and updating them at the same time is not a good idea, and why can't he just incorporate in the same software, to make it easer for people to use. 

Until Don makes the whole process of SBS more users friendly no one will test his new method, and why should they, wast time on something that may or may not work!  At least if the software did it all for the users then they could quickly decide if this was for them or not.

Thanks

malcop

[vundarosa]

"The truth of the matter is no one has fully tested any of these methods even with the inside wagering have they so for people to post negative comments I think very silly."

---------
Maybe because few have understood how to play the methods (or at least me). I tried to make heads or tails of it and only found my own tail.... Every time Don comes up with a new modification he address with little clarity which throws people off...So, when more modifications are made, I just wait to see if someone who understood the new concept posts a clear explanation....


vundarosa

[malcop]

"The truth of the matter is no one has fully tested any of these methods even with the inside wagering have they so for people to post negative comments I think very silly."

---------
Maybe because few have understood how to play the methods (or at least me). I tried to make heads or tails of it and only found my own tail.... Every time Don comes up with a new modification he address with little clarity which throws people off...So, when more modifications are made, I just wait to see if someone who understood the new concept posts a clear explanation....


vundarosa

I totally agree with you I only understand as far as Hybrid, anything after that is a total mystery to me, I'm sure if I studied it long enough I would understand SBS but why should I spend time on it if I have so many questions about how to apply the method!  So like the rest of you I wait for Dons response, also I have no intention of playing any method where I have to have up two links and update the results twice that to me is a total waste of time!

Even with Hybrid there is an otption to update two links at the same time, but that is time consuming to and over complicated to say the least, it should all be part of the same program, surley it cannot be that hard to do it?


Thanks

malcop

[MyTHOS_R]

Well, guys, I agree with the point of view that all this is a work in progress. But for how long? And formost with what kind of proggress? By creating a brand new book with a different title every 3-5 months? I mean, I greatly admire the courage of Mr Colonne and his nephew, it takes a lot of guts to carry on all this effort. However, they should, at some point clearify the way of betting and make it easier and easier, NOT HARDER AND HARDER to follow, read and understand. The final wagering method does not even have examples of how to bet for every diagonal observation, just theory, really difficult to read. I mean, what is the whole meaning of PERFORMING SUCH A GREAT PROJECT, IF IT IS SO HARD FOR PEOPLE TO APPLY? What is the meaning of creating 3-4 software versions (in order to simplify things), when it comes to a necessity to alternate or even to jusy choose between them (depending on what... your character??) during the sessions?

And to be more substantial, than just "criticizing" the whole project and effort of Mr Colonne, I've come up with my own version of using DNA!

After a lot of testing, I have noticed that the HYBRID version of software is highly effective when it sugessts 2x wagering (on dozens OR columns). To be more specific, I realized that at least one  suggested bet of 2x during a session or at worst case, during 2-3 consecutive sessions DOES find target. Ofcourse this DOES NOT GIVE US AN EDGE, WHEN WE FLAT BET. However, I thought that a single success every 8-10 bets is ENOUGH to make a profit, if you use and exploit a simple progression for dozens (or columns),  like the well known... 1-2-3-4-6-9-13-20-30-45-67...


And for anyone who could not follow me so far... My betting method suggests:

Whenever a HIBRID session starts, DO NOT WAGER UNTIL YOU HAVE A 2X SIGN. AS SOON AS THERE IS A 2X SIGN, BET WITH 1 CHIP THE DOZEN OR COLUMN SUGGESTED. If you win, target achieved. If not, wait for next 2x trigger (dozen or column-your call-I have to go with Mr Colonne's spirit, you see)! SO, WITH NEXT 2X TRIGGER, YOU BET AGAIN 1 CHIP ON THE NEW DOZEN (OR COLUMN). If you win, target achieved. If you lost, wait for next 2X SIGN bY HYBRID SOFTWARE (in the current session or the next one!) AND BET 2 chips-3 chips-4 chips-6 chips-9 chips etc until the HYBRID software succeeds to find target. And this happens, every 4-5 suggested 2x bets (after a "rigorous" teting). That means that you'll often find yourself in the 4th-5th step of the progression ladder.

Despite the fact, that we all know, that a successful progressive bet, should ALSO win when it is flat, and despite the fact that I HATE progressive betting, I have the feeling that THIS ONE might work, since it is involved in a method that exploits the law of third and continuously monitors the conditions to fullfil this law, withinh a group of upcoming numbers, THROUGH A HIGH-TECH, MATHEMATICALLY BASED EQUATION!

I invite everyone in testing this BRAND NEW METHOD of DNA! ;-)

[malcop]

Hi MyTHOS_R,

That is very intresting, I have noticed the same thing about when we have 2 chips on a colulmn and dozen one if not both ususaly hits, quick question when the system tells you to reset you start the process over again?

One thing I was thinking was about inside bets, my thinkng was to only place inside bets when when had the same triggers that MyThos_R suggested, but instead bet inside once we can establish what all the correct bets would be for inside betting.

Just a thought

malcop

[albalaha]

I do not want to participate in any debate anymore over it. The system and bot and the terms like "DNA", "micro", "macro", "hybrid" etc. do look very promising but it is very hollow so far in my testings. It just failed to deliver any consistency.

[MyTHOS_R]

Hi there Malcop.

I say it clearly ("you bet the next 2x trigger in the current session or one of the next ones")
If this progressive system works, it will work just because 2x bets have a really high rate of occurence between sessions. So, this means, that we continue our progression from exaclty where we had lost the previous time, targeting to come up on our bankroll, with the next successful 2x bet. To clarify even more, let's say you were playing a 2x bet in a session and you lost. You played once more 2x session and you lost that one too. Let's assume you meet a third 2x trigger in the same (1st session). You bet 2 chips (3rd step of the progression ladder) and let's suppose you lose this again and the HYBRID session ends. You continue monitoring with HYBRID and as soon as you enter a new session with it AND have a 2x trigger again, YOU CONTINUE BETTING WITH THE NEXT STEP OF THE LADDER, WHERE YOU LOST THE LAST TIME, THAT IS 4TH STEP: 4 CHIPS. And so on...You do not care about the sessions exits and entrances. You just care ONLY ABOUT THE 2X TRIGGERS.

Clear?

Ofcourse, you could also apply this with straight numbers (also with an apropriate progression)...

[malcop]

Hi there Malcop.

I say it clearly ("you bet the next 2x trigger in the current session or one of the next ones")
If this progressive system works, it will work just because 2x bets have a really high rate of occurence between sessions. So, this means, that we continue our progression from exaclty where we had lost the previous time, targeting to come up on our bankroll, with the next successful 2x bet. To clarify even more, let's say you were playing a 2x bet in a session and you lost. You played once more 2x session and you lost that one too. Let's assume you meet a third 2x trigger in the same (1st session). You bet 2 chips (3rd step of the progression ladder) and let's suppose you lose this again and the HYBRID session ends. You continue monitoring with HYBRID and as soon as you enter a new session with it AND have a 2x trigger again, YOU CONTINUE BETTING WITH THE NEXT STEP OF THE LADDER, WHERE YOU LOST THE LAST TIME, THAT IS 4TH STEP: 4 CHIPS. And so on...You do not care about the sessions exits and entrances. You just care ONLY ABOUT THE 2X TRIGGERS.

Clear?

Ofcourse, you could also apply this with straight numbers (also with an apropriate progression)...

OK got it now, better to ask and look silly than to totaly get it wrong 

I was thinking that 6 point divisor for your idea would work quite well.

I have attached a excel tool for the 6 point divisor for anyone that is intrested


Thanks

malcop

[vundarosa]

"After a lot of testing, I have noticed that the HYBRID version of software is highly effective when it sugessts 2x wagering (on dozens OR columns). To be more specific, I realized that at least one  suggested bet of 2x during a session or at worst case, during 2-3 consecutive sessions DOES find target. Ofcourse this DOES NOT GIVE US AN EDGE, WHEN WE FLAT BET. However, I thought that a single success every 8-10 bets is ENOUGH to make a profit, if you use and exploit a simple progression for dozens (or columns),  like the well known... 1-2-3-4-6-9-13-20-30-45-67...

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

It also seems to work with the Macro version...i'm testing with chosing the doz when the software suggests betting both doz & col as it appears to be be a better hint than the col hint... when however the col hits, one would be taken to the higher steps on the prog.

by the way, the macro version does not ask for resets after its started a valid wagering trigger?!....(so far no)

and which one is more accurate on the hints?!

vundarosa

[MyTHOS_R]

Yes, it is also succesful with MACRO software.

Test-test-test... if you come to a progression step higher than 10, report, in other words a non-occurrence of target hit after 10 CONSECUTIVE 2x BET SUGGESTION by the software it will be a little bit disappointing but we have to consider the possiility of occurence.

Another idea would also be to flat bet TWO dozens (or columns) every time we have a 2x trigger, the one that is suggested (2x) and one of the other two (whichever you want, it does not matter, as we just do it only to cover a bigger surface of the table and to have a higher possibility to win, IF THE SUGGESTED 2X dozen DOES NOT HIT). Or, we can apply the same but NOT FLAT BET. PLAY THE 2X DOZEN (OR COLUMN) AND ONE MORE, WITH 4 STEP PROGRESSION (1-1, 3-3, 9-9, 27-27) AGAIN WHENEVER YOU HAVE A 2X TRIGGER).

THE THING IS, Mr Colonne has provided us with a strategy with a high advantage rate, claiming that it is based on patterns, laws and mathematics governing roulette. IF, I stress, IF this strategy gives us INDEED an advantage against the wheel (like the advantage that a visual ballistic method or a computer using method give to a player), THEN AND ONLY THEN we can exploit it with a short-term progressive method, since I see that most of us have come to the common conclusion that DNA seems to have a SHORT-TERM success. THIS SHORT-TERM (meaning a group of spins within whom the DNA condition are met) is ENOUGH for a player to gain ONE unit. And ONE unit is ENOUGH, if you know what I mean...
Any suggestions and further ideas are welcome.