Basics - that no one wants to hear

[MrJ]

I'll re-word it >> A method that does NOT involve unhit numbers OR numbers that are
hot (semi-hot, already hit)?? We are betting on *ONE* of these two concepts. What is a THIRD option NOT involving what I just said?

Ken

[ddarko]

Give me an example or two how this is not correct >> I said it before, we are either betting on already hit numbers (for whatever reason) OR we are betting on unhit numbers (for whatever reason).

Ken

Because you don't when hot becomes cold or when cold becomes hot.....

If you not looking for whatever bet you making to become hot or cold, you possible open another avenue.

I haven't cracked it or anything, I just think it may make you look at different ways/possibilities to bet.

Like Spike said (something along these lines) use past spins in a different manner, make them into something else ?

For example, (and this doesn't work as far as I know) say your betting dozens, use columns past spins as a guide ?

That kinda thing 

[ddarko]

I'll re-word it >> A method that does NOT involve unhit numbers OR numbers that are
hot (semi-hot, already hit)?? We are betting on *ONE* of these two concepts. What is a THIRD option NOT involving what I just said?

Ken

Sorry didn't see this, pls see my above post.

I guess I'm trying to say don't seek out a number/EC/Dozens/Column/street etc that is hot or cold, find another reason to
bet what your betting....

I'm probably not making a lot of sense, but Hey that wouldn't be the first time......

[MrJ]

I've been doing this now for over 3 decades - that said...

There are some major problems lately with the mindset of people who work on systems/methods.
From what I've been reading, this almost covers everyone as well - I'm not sure why.

I'm just going to point some things out, probably no one will agree with me - but if you think about it, you'll understand - and if not, 30 years later you'll agree with me lol.

Roulette - where the next spin has nothing to do with the last spin, the numbers aren't pulled from the list of numbers after they show up - not like balls in a lottery machine, each spin is independent from the last.

1) "Trigger"
Waiting for something to happen before betting is a waste of time.
There is no even that somehow signals what the future event will be.

2) "Virtual bets"
"NOT" betting for whatever reason, and then trying to use that info on future
spins is a waste of time. If you have a system/method that works - by "not" betting -
you are losing out on winning spins. If your system/method doesn't work, then you
are only prolonging the time that it loses. There's no value in "not betting", this falls into
the same boat as triggers. So "not losing" because you didn't bet on a virtual spin isn't winning.
And not winning because you were not betting on a spin where you would have won is
also not winning, it's a waste of time.

3) "Leaving the casino/table after 'x' happens"
Stopping and leaving the casino when "X" happens - either in profit or loss, or some event happens
doesn't change the long-term. A player who goes into a casino using this type of play can keep a total of their spins over a year, while player "B" can play the same number of spins nonstop and they will have equal results. The next spin after your 'rule' tells you to stop and leave could be the one that puts your loss back into a profit, or vice-versa. So nothing is accomplished.
"If you're ahead - stop" is probably the best advice. or "If you've lost your bankroll, go home".
But some "trigger" that happens and you feel it's time to stop or change tables - simply isn't logical.
By stopping and leaving, you can prolong a loss or prevent a further win - both don't change because you stop and come back next week.

These are just the first 3 obvious ones that recently seem to appear in every method, and I understand that those who believe in them won't just stop thinking that way but I'm telling you that you have to change how you look at the game.
Roulette is a math game, it's as simple as that.
Math - doesn't change in any way whatsoever - triggers, virtual play, stop loss/leaving doesn't change math - nor does anything else you can come up with when it comes to creative bet amounts or timing your play.

I'm not anti-system, I'm just the opposite - but people should know that this is math, nothing more.
The house edge is there regardless of 1, 2 or 3 above (and others) and that can't be avoided unless you understand math and how it can be used in your favor regardless of the edge the house has. None of the 3 above help with that.

Thanks for reading.

3) "Leaving the casino/table after 'x' happens"
Stopping and leaving the casino when "X" happens - either in profit or loss, or some event happens
doesn't change the long-term" >>> Over the long term? I agree but we still need a certain point as to WHEN to leave if we are getting our a** kicked. Myself? As I said, two gross wins in the hole and I'm out the door.

Ken

[MrJ]

"find another reason to
bet what your betting" >> I'll pick ANY method, mine for example. Completing a street. Lets say I am betting on the 4, 11, 21 & 35. I look back at my stats (assuming I have everything jotted down).

I see the 4 and 21 have not hit in the last 150 spins (we'll call it unhit) and the 11 and 35 have both hit twice in the last 25 spins (we'll call it already hit). There is no third option, regardless if its a column, street, split etc.

Ken

[ddarko]

There is no third option, regardless if its a column, street, split etc.

I was using columns dozens etc to describe when somebody maybe betting.....

Yes, we are betting either hot or cold numbers but I guess what I'm trying to not to bet said numbers
because they are hot or cold......

Looks like we disagree, not a problem 

[MrJ]

I 100% understand your point, honestly I do. I'm only saying, WE ARE unknowingly betting in this manner.

Regardless if its PART of the method or not, it cant be avoided. People can be non-believers in cold numbers (or columns) and they dont know they are betting on cold numbers. People can be non-believers in hot numbers (or columns) and they dont know they are betting on hot numbers.

Ken

[MrJ]

Hit or unhit....cold or hot, not many choices after that.

Ken

[ddarko]

I 100% understand your point, honestly I do. I'm only saying, WE ARE unknowingly betting in this manner.

I also get what your putting across 100% 

Maybe this is the difference, (from what you have posted) you ARE knowingly betting a hot or cold number.

I'm saying bet them UNKNOWINGLY for a different reason, that reason, no idea yet 

but maybe just maybe that reason, whatever it is, could just make the difference !!!!

[button]

I disagree with almost everything Turbo said except point 2.  Roulette forms patterns, some easy to follow others not so easy.  Every spin maybe independent, but patterns happen and waiting to see the pattern can be important.  This is a trigger. 

Leaving on a win is an important event.

[Turner]

I agree with Turbo...

For me, its about truly understanding the word Random.

If you did understand it, you wouldn't do any of Turbos 3 points.

[MrJ]

I agree with Turbo...

For me, its about truly understanding the word Random.

If you did understand it, you wouldn't do any of Turbos 3 points.

I concur. I think a person either agrees with all 3 or disagrees with all 3.

Ken

[TurboGenius]

"For me, its about truly understanding the word Random.
If you did understand it, you wouldn't do any of Turbos 3 points."

Nods. I agree.

"Leaving on a win is an important event."
No, only mentally - It feels nice to walk out ahead. Aside from that, it doesn't affect anything.
You could stay and keep winning, you could stay and lose what you were ahead - the act of leaving doesn't change the math and the next visit is just going to continue basically where you left off.... which makes the act of leaving when "x" happens irrelevant. It does feel good to leave ahead though, like I said - it just doesn't benefit the player.


"Rare event. If the trigger is a rare event it has merit
2 3 then 4? Good trigger"

The problem is that an event seems to be rare when it isn't. It's only how you see it.
If the spins come out #21, #21, #21, #21 - you could post the math showing this is a rare event.
BUT - it's exactly the same odds as seeing #21, #0, #13, #2 - which in your mind looks random and
not a rare event at all. So if you wait for #21, #21, #21 - the odds of the next spin being #21 is exactly the same as the next spin being #2 (from both examples). I hope this helps.
I understand that it takes a while to get to this point lol.
The hard thing to take in is that there is no such thing as a rare event in a game where each spin is independent from the last.

[GLC]

It's true that after the 1st 3 numbers have hit, the 4th is not a rare event.  But if you predict that the next four numbers are going to be 21, 21, 21, 21, you can call that a rare event but to fully capitalize on it you have to start betting from the beginning.  The same with 21, 0, 13, 2.  You can see that predicting that the next four spins will give you 21, 0, 13, 2 is the same odds as predicting that the next 4 spins will be 21, 21, 21, 21.  A martingale is what comes to mind to fully capitalize on predicting that the next 4 spins will be any four numbers you can think of.  The problem with a martingale is that the accumulated amount you'd have to bet is more than you'd win on all the winning runs.  It's always going to be the case because the payoff is skewed for the casino.

It's like I have said a jillion times.  If there are numbers that if spun will cause you to lose, eventually enough of them will hit close enough together to take back all your winnings plus a little.

That's why I like to use my even chance progressions playing Blackjack.  With smart play, card counting and a mild progression, I have a much better chance to win than with roulette.  Also, in my opinion, it's a more exciting and entertaining game.  No offense to those of you who love roulette.

GLC

[Kattila]

I've been doing this now for over 3 decades - that said...

There are some major problems lately with the mindset of people who work on systems/methods.
From what I've been reading, this almost covers everyone as well - I'm not sure why.

I'm just going to point some things out, probably no one will agree with me - but if you think about it, you'll understand - and if not, 30 years later you'll agree with me lol.

Roulette - where the next spin has nothing to do with the last spin, the numbers aren't pulled from the list of numbers after they show up - not like balls in a lottery machine, each spin is independent from the last.

1) "Trigger"
Waiting for something to happen before betting is a waste of time.
There is no even that somehow signals what the future event will be.

2) "Virtual bets"
"NOT" betting for whatever reason, and then trying to use that info on future
spins is a waste of time. If you have a system/method that works - by "not" betting -
you are losing out on winning spins. If your system/method doesn't work, then you
are only prolonging the time that it loses. There's no value in "not betting", this falls into
the same boat as triggers. So "not losing" because you didn't bet on a virtual spin isn't winning.
And not winning because you were not betting on a spin where you would have won is
also not winning, it's a waste of time.

3) "Leaving the casino/table after 'x' happens"
Stopping and leaving the casino when "X" happens - either in profit or loss, or some event happens
doesn't change the long-term. A player who goes into a casino using this type of play can keep a total of their spins over a year, while player "B" can play the same number of spins nonstop and they will have equal results. The next spin after your 'rule' tells you to stop and leave could be the one that puts your loss back into a profit, or vice-versa. So nothing is accomplished.
"If you're ahead - stop" is probably the best advice. or "If you've lost your bankroll, go home".
But some "trigger" that happens and you feel it's time to stop or change tables - simply isn't logical.
By stopping and leaving, you can prolong a loss or prevent a further win - both don't change because you stop and come back next week.

These are just the first 3 obvious ones that recently seem to appear in every method, and I understand that those who believe in them won't just stop thinking that way but I'm telling you that you have to change how you look at the game.
Roulette is a math game, it's as simple as that.
Math - doesn't change in any way whatsoever - triggers, virtual play, stop loss/leaving doesn't change math - nor does anything else you can come up with when it comes to creative bet amounts or timing your play.

I'm not anti-system, I'm just the opposite - but people should know that this is math, nothing more.
The house edge is there regardless of 1, 2 or 3 above (and others) and that can't be avoided unless you understand math and how it can be used in your favor regardless of the edge the house has. None of the 3 above help with that.

Thanks for reading.

***Roulette - where the next spin has nothing to do with the last spin***

I say ...roulette where the next spin( s ! )  has much to do with the last(s ! ) spin(s) .
If you use them (last spins) like a *map* or *LWs* from where you can choose the direcction you will move,
then its makes sense.   Also its makes sense to use triggers and virtual bets , why not use enter and exit points
from real play ? Why i should bet each spin? to lose more than win ?  Why not try to avoid bad runs and win more
then lose ?
About the rare events i don t care , i don t follow such an events, but i follow events that i know will occur.
Roulette has limits, just try to put some order into chaos.

cheers