Juggler FINAL

[Turner]

Dominant Relation between a number(s) that defines the current cycle with the number(s) that define the previous cycle.

I have to say I dont play like this anymore
I tend to use whats happening rather than looking at past spins....but this isnt a bad way to play at all.
Ive mostly been looking at cycle lengths
It started with my hot cold sandwich but at the time I didnt know I was doing just that.
Sorry to digress Ignatus

[ignatus]

18/22 Games won

And that's an ~80% winrate. And that's the final stats for this one.

I think i will go on to something else right now,

[Priyanka]

I tend to use whats happening rather than looking at past spins....

I have always had an issue in understanding this statement.  Do you think you can give an example of this way of playing?

[Turner]

I have always had an issue in understanding this statement.  Do you think you can give an example of this way of playing?

bet  1,2,3,4,5,6 for 37 spins, adding + 1 to any number that hits.

[Rourke]

18/22 Games won

And that's an ~80% winrate. And that's the final stats for this one.

I think i will go on to something else right now,

If you have an 80% win rate, why go to something else? Do you hope of getting a 100% win rate ;-)

[Priyanka]

bet  1,2,3,4,5,6 for 37 spins, adding + 1 to any number that hits.

After the number hits and you add +1 for the next spin, at that moment in time when you are placing the bets are you not adding a chip based on past spin? Because that number came in the past you are adding 1unit right. That's the stuff I have difficulty in understanding.

[Tomla021]

yes that would be adding  chips based on previous performance ---looking back---hmmmm

[Turner]

yes that would be adding  chips based on previous performance ---looking back---hmmmm

I disagree. You are not basing your bet on previous spins.

[Tomla021]

well if you just won and go positive adding a chip, wouldn't you be playing on something that has happened ---something that is part of history already

[MrJ]

bet  1,2,3,4,5,6 for 37 spins, adding + 1 to any number that hits.

I have a very very decent method "somewhat" based on this and a way that Turbo played it.

Tweak tweak goes the bird.

Ken

[Turner]

well if you just won and go positive adding a chip, wouldn't you be playing on something that has happened ---something that is part of history already

I havnt looked at the marque. I sat at the table. I played 1,2,3,4,5,6.

You could argue I played a past number because 2 and 6 came out recently. But I dont know that.

if 6 hit, I had a chip on it. I didnt play six because of last spins. I just played it.

I know it won. The dealer left a chip on it and pushed chips at me. I can add a chip to the chip. I am not using past spins.

Surely thats clear. It my game and my numbers.

I havnt bet according to past spins. I was already betting them.

[Tomla021]

this argument wont go anywhere and is of no use but when you add a chip on 6 your using the board or history. To get to the first win you didn't use history.

[RouletteGhost]

I know turner probably doesnt want me to interject

But

When you bet 6 numbers i dont think it matters if you use the history board or not

You can bet it because it hit or bet it just because.

Doesnt matter. Same odds.

[Turner]

this argument wont go anywhere and is of no use but when you add a chip on 6 your using the board or history. To get to the first win you didn't use history.

I am just increasing on MY winning number. The key is in the word MY.

If you come to the table and see me piling up on 6, and decide to get a bit of the action, you are using past spins.
you play 6, and it hasnt hit yet

[Turner]

I have a very very decent method "somewhat" based on this and a way that Turbo played it.

Tweak tweak goes the bird.

Ken

Its not a system, just an example.
If you see 6 has hit twice on the marque, you dont know its hitting above average. You dont know the average.

you can only know what is happening to your bet selection in the subsequent cycles of 37, or 38