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

News:

WARNING: Forums often contain bad advice & systems that aren't properly tested. Do NOT believe everything. Read these links: The Facts About What Works & Why | How To Proplerly Test Systems | The Top 5 Proven Systems | Best Honest Online Casinos

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

A very clever and extreme method - even money bets.

Started by ego, Dec 11, 02:29 PM 2013

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 7 Guests are viewing this topic.

Print
Go Down Pages1 2 3 ... 6
User actions

ego

Dec 11, 02:29 PM 2013
You know that 24 reds or 24 blacks show once during 1 million.
The extreme and nothing is due to happen.

This way i want to show you how you can place only 14 attempts covering 24 independent trails or a sequence of 24 as a pattern.

This is for fun.
Then main reason i post this is because its is pretty amazing that you can reduce 10 attempts covering 24 trails with only 14.

Here is the explanation.

We all know the principal of 1/3 where we clustering patterns into three outcomes / groups.
I come up with an idea how to cover all possibilities that not all 8 patterns / combinations will have a show.
That is a sequence of 24 trails.

Now i will try to explain how it is done.
First we will start with out colours and just look at the formations.

There is 4 existing formations.

XXX
XOX
XXO
OXX

Now no matter what formation show first i bet same will repeat with one single bet.

XXX
X

Here i would bet X next
Or if we hade following formation

XOX
X

I would bet O next
If no win then i get two different formations

XOX
XXO

Then next bet, the second bet would be betting that one of does two formations would repeat.
Then you wait to see what formation will match before you make one single bet.

If the formation starts with XO then you would bet for XOX
It the formation starts with XX then you would bet for XXO

Lets say we lose and get three unique formations.

XOX
XXO
XOO

Now you have only one formation left if not one of does previous three will repeat.
And we have only placed two single bets.

So now XX or XO will be dominating formation and with this example above it is two formation that start with XO.
So next bet would be for a change XO, the third bet.

XOX
XXO
XOO
X

Lets say will lose

XOX
XXO
XOO
XX

Then we would place our last bet that XXO would show.
This is a total of four single bets.

Now we lose them all and all 4 formation show.

XOX
XXO
XOO
XXX

Now if you do this with colours you bet as follows.

If the first color is Red then you bet first there will be black.
If not you then follow the march i describe above.

So that is a total of 6 single bets.
If you would lose you would get all 4 formation with the same colour.

RRR
RRB
RBR
RBB

Next would be playing Red as not black would show following the same march as i describe.
Does would be 8 single bets and a total of 14 single bets to cover the 24 trails or that all 8 patterns would have a show.

RRR
RRB
RBR
RBB
BBB
BRB
BBR
BRR

Denial of gamblers fallacy is usually seen in people who has Roulette as last option for a way to wealth, debt covering and a independent lifestyle.  Next step is pretty ugly-
AP - It's not that it can't be done, but rather people don't really have a clue as to the level of fanaticism and outright obsession that it takes to be successful, let alone get to the level where you can take money out of the casinos on a regular basis. Out of 1,000 people that earnestly try, maybe only one will make it.

ego

#1
Dec 11, 02:31 PM 2013
Quote2    2    1
2    1    1 LL
1    2    2 W
1    2    2 LW
2    1    1 W
2    1    1 LW
2    2    2 LL
2    1    1 LW
1    2    2 W
2    2    1 W
2    1    2 LL
2    1    2 LW
1    1    2 W
1    1    1 LW
2    1    1 W
2    2    2 LL
2    1    1 LW
1    1    1 W
1    2    1 LL
1    1    1 LW
1    1    2 LW
1    2    1 LL
2    1    2 W
1    2    2 W
1    1    1 LL
2    2    1 W
1    2    1 W
1    1    1 LL
1    1    2 LL
2    1    1 W
2    1    2 LW
2    1    1 LW
2    2    2 LL
1    1    1 W
2    1    2 W
1    2    1 W
1    1    1 LL
1    1    1 LW
2    1    1 W
2    2    2 LL
2    2    1 LL
2    2    2 W
2    1    1 LL
2    2    1 LL
1    2    2 W
2    2    1 W
2    2    2 LW
1    1    1 W
1    2    1 LL
1    1    2 LL
1    1    1 W
2    1    1 W
2    1    2 LW
1    1    2 W
1    1    1 LW
2    1    1 W
2    1    1 LW
2    1    2 LW
2    2    1 LL
1    2    2 W
2    2    2 W
1    1    2 W
1    2    1 LL
2    2    1 W
2    1    1 LL
2    2    2 LL
1    1    1 W
2    2    1 W
1    1    2 W
2    1    1 W
2    2    2 LL
1    2    2 W
2    2    1 W
1    2    2 W
1    1    2 LL
2    2    1 W
2    1    1 LL
2    2    1 LW
2    2    2 LW
1    2    1 W
1    1    1 LL
2    2    2 W
2    1    1 LL
1    2    2 W
2    2    2 W
1    2    2 W
2    1    1 W
2    2    1 LL
2    2    2 LL
2    2    1 W
1    2    2 W
1    2    1 LW
1    1    1 LL
1    2    1 LW
1    2    1 LW
1    2    2 LW
1    2    1 LW
2    1    1 W
1    1    1 W
2    1    2 W
Denial of gamblers fallacy is usually seen in people who has Roulette as last option for a way to wealth, debt covering and a independent lifestyle.  Next step is pretty ugly-
AP - It's not that it can't be done, but rather people don't really have a clue as to the level of fanaticism and outright obsession that it takes to be successful, let alone get to the level where you can take money out of the casinos on a regular basis. Out of 1,000 people that earnestly try, maybe only one will make it.

ego

#2
Dec 11, 03:11 PM 2013
 - LoL - this is still new for me and i discover its only 13 attempts covering 24 trails.
Correcting this topic.

RRR
RBR LL
RRB LL
RBB LL
BBB L
BRB LL
BBR LL
BRR LL

Wrong again i was thinking right the first time.
The last bet is to cover three bets.

RRR
RBR LL
RRB LL
RBB LL
BBB L
BRB LL
BBR LL
BRR LLL

So its 14 but still amzing.
Denial of gamblers fallacy is usually seen in people who has Roulette as last option for a way to wealth, debt covering and a independent lifestyle.  Next step is pretty ugly-
AP - It's not that it can't be done, but rather people don't really have a clue as to the level of fanaticism and outright obsession that it takes to be successful, let alone get to the level where you can take money out of the casinos on a regular basis. Out of 1,000 people that earnestly try, maybe only one will make it.

amk

#3
Dec 11, 05:54 PM 2013
I'm late I'm late I'm late! LoL

Turner

#4
Dec 11, 05:56 PM 2013
Interesting Ego

Believe it or not, If you look up something I did when I first joined here called "streaks and toggles" its similar in action

Continuously modifying your bet to fit the bill.

(BTW...you saying does instead of those stops me in my tracks every time lol)

warrior

#5
Dec 11, 05:57 PM 2013
I don't get it ego.

donik7777

#6
Dec 12, 05:43 PM 2013
What end of the story?

beretta28

#7
Dec 13, 06:09 AM 2013
So what?

I'm afraid it's an interesting curiosity,but useless.
In addition, the math negative expectancy is still the same and the personal permanence is not affected by your approach.

ego

#8
Dec 13, 06:46 AM 2013
RRR
RBR L
RRB L
RBB LL
BBB L
BRB LL
BBR LL
BRR LLL

LoL i reduce the bets down to 12 covering 24 independent trails.

You just bet the formation at first state with 4 bets.
Then you cover colours and no repeats for the next 12 outcomes placing 8 bets.
Following the march i describe.
Denial of gamblers fallacy is usually seen in people who has Roulette as last option for a way to wealth, debt covering and a independent lifestyle.  Next step is pretty ugly-
AP - It's not that it can't be done, but rather people don't really have a clue as to the level of fanaticism and outright obsession that it takes to be successful, let alone get to the level where you can take money out of the casinos on a regular basis. Out of 1,000 people that earnestly try, maybe only one will make it.

ego

#9
Dec 13, 06:49 AM 2013

I am so clever LOL  :twisted:
Denial of gamblers fallacy is usually seen in people who has Roulette as last option for a way to wealth, debt covering and a independent lifestyle.  Next step is pretty ugly-
AP - It's not that it can't be done, but rather people don't really have a clue as to the level of fanaticism and outright obsession that it takes to be successful, let alone get to the level where you can take money out of the casinos on a regular basis. Out of 1,000 people that earnestly try, maybe only one will make it.

ausguy

#10
Dec 13, 02:23 PM 2013
ego - In the real World where exactly have you been playing your clever method & how much money are you UP so far ?

teo

#11
Dec 13, 03:22 PM 2013
He don't play roulette,only experiments...so he said.

amk

#12
Dec 13, 04:24 PM 2013
Awesome ego.

Azim

#13
Dec 13, 10:45 PM 2013
Quote from: ausguy on Dec 13, 02:23 PM 2013
ego - In the real World where exactly have you been playing your clever method & how much money are you UP so far ?

Why do you like to question people about their wins and losses.  Just appreciate the fact that they are sharing their systems.
They aren't forcing you to play them.
With right tools and good money management, any gambling activity can produce a steady income.

warrior

#14
Dec 13, 11:06 PM 2013
Can someone  explaine how this works .
-
Print
Go Up Pages1 2 3 ... 6
User actions