Holy Grail by Winkel open for discussion.

[nottophammer]

Madi
try these #'s from steve multi player, made+250 on repeats at spins 26,27,28.
MPR load of rubbish to me, seems its software giving #'s and pays out cheapest where can.
21
35
19
22
26
19
30
32
13
12

24
18
16
30
34
3
25
14
24
20

28
4
33
36
9
24
28
25
24
32

27
23
35
20
5
27
15
10
34
30

[Turner]

Winkel should be ashamed to be promoting
this nonsense.  Clearly he's learned nothing
in the eight or so years since he revealed
this ridiculous theory at VLS.

This is just a personal attack. Im sure there are more people want to listen to what Winkel has to say than listen to you attack him without being provoked.

I am one, for sure.

I have put you on moderate for a few post. Hopefully you were just a bit drunk or something.

[Normy2000]

I am one, for sure.

[Rolletti]

And can you give me a reference to anyone who's used your idea to make consistent profits?  Seems that
anyone who's tried it has given it up as useless.

Did not give up. Make profit for more than 6 month. Not every session is a winner but every week is in profit.

R.

[Ross]

Did not give up. Make profit for more than 6 month. Not every session is a winner but every week is in profit.

Good for you.  But the important number is how much you win
on a winning bet and how much you lose on a losing bet.

[Ross]

With reference to Winkel's claim that I don't understand
GUT I wonder how I was able, in 2008, to write this
programme:



You can download it here: link:://tinyurl.com/h467jwz

GUT is simply a complicated way of betting on unhit numbers
(a view I expressed at VLS in 2008) which is still true.

[winkel]

With reference to Winkel's claim that I don't understand
GUT I wonder how I was able, in 2008, to write this
programme:
....

GUT is simply a complicated way of betting on unhit numbers
(a view I expressed at VLS in 2008) which is still true.

If you had understood you would have more than 2 graphs.
And only "betting on unhit numbers" isn´t true, was never ever true and will not be true.

look at these possible crossings to play:

[Ross]

If you had understood you would have more than 2 graphs.
And only "betting on unhit numbers" isn´t true, was never ever true and will not be true.

look at these possible crossings to play:

If you want more graphs click the buttons
"2 Hits", "3 Hits" etc.

[winkel]

If you want more graphs click the buttons
"2 Hits", "3 Hits" etc.

so you confess your claim "only unhit numbers" is wrong.

[Ross]

No, my claim is correct.  You're just looking at a
different line.  If you're comparing numbers
with two hits with numbers with three hits
you're betting on numbers which haven't hit
three times.  If you remove one hit from each
you looking at the difference between one hit
and two.  (Just move up to the next line.)  If
you deduct two hits from each you doing what
I said - betting on unhit numbers.

BTW turn off graphs by clicking again on the same
buttons.

[winkel]

No, my claim is correct.  You're just looking at a
different line.  If you're comparing numbers
with two hits with numbers with three hits
you're betting on numbers which haven't hit
three times.  If you remove one hit from each
you looking at the difference between one hit
and two.  (Just move up to the next line.)  If
you deduct two hits from each you doing what
I said - betting on unhit numbers.

BTW turn off graphs by clicking again on the same
buttons.

You are joking! How can you say 18 times hit vs 19 times hit is betting on unhit numbers, because you say it is equal to no hit vs 1 hit.

with that logical equipment you can´t beat roulette. Neither do you recommend your software.

[Ross]

I think that anyone thinking of using GUT
to play roulette should have a look at
this first:

link:://:.vlsroulette.com/index.php?topic=3938.0

Clearly proves that it doesn't work any better that expected i.e -2.7%

[RouletteGhost]

at what point anywhere was a claim made that GUT in any way, shape, or form overcame the expected 2.7%?

[winkel]

Clearly proves that it doesn't work any better that expected i.e -2.7%

You did forget to mention that I said: If it wouldn´t end -2.7% we couldn´t bet this strategy.

It is not a system that you are figting. It is a strategy. It just tries to avoid losses.
KonFuSed did bet every crossing that appeared.

Take this example:
The first crossing to bet is 17 17.
Earliest spin to appear is
20 singles to get 17 20
3 repeats to get 17 17
this means earliest position is after spin 23

spin 24 bet and loss
spin 25 bet and loss
stop

the latest position for 17 17 is about at spin 45

21 times 17 17, we bet only 2 of them.
any 17 numbers will appear with a probability of  17/37 against 20/37

Imagine we would play 3700 times this crossing.
We should win 1700 times and lose 2000 times
We lost already 21 times.
Now the chance to win has changed to 1700 wins to 1969 losses!

What is now our probability?
Did KonFuSed check this in his test?

BTW: What makes you so angry about GUT? Why don´t you take your energy and hate to fight Martingales, EC-Bets, Waiting for x-Bets?
No one is forced to bet with this GUT. Everyone is said to test it test it test it and has to learn how to handle.
It is for free and is open for discussion and comments.
Why this hate?

[RayManZ]

The only thing that the test proves is, that if you bet alle the crossing you will end up with a 2.7% loss.

BUT, with GUT you don't bet every crossing. Only if the crossing s more likely to hit. Fast trot vs. slow trot. What has already hit? ect.

If you think that the test proves anything you don't understand GUT at all...