@ turbo

[Steve]

Sorry i thought passion said that, my mistake. But if you're just quoting turbo, then it illustrates another of his contradictions.

Turbo, passion, dyk etc all make incorrect statements without understanding why they are incorrect.

[Irish88]

Who has said that plays cold numbers?
What is explaining and giving the right way, is what happens with the numbers, if you do not know how to understand that, it does not make sense that you try to understand other things, first focus on understanding that and then you can understand the rest.
What Turbo says is totally true and is simpler than it seems, the problem is that people already want it in writing and step by step and that is not going to do Turbo, nor Eddy, nor I, is logical.
You have to read everything that Turbo and Eddy are publishing, they are giving more information than they should, once you understand that information, you will get that spark to understand everything and because it plays the repeated, it is something logical and mathematical.
By the way, it works totally flat, but it's very slow, it's better with progression to quickly maximize profits.
Forget about the four who are "experts" and take Turbo case that is making it clear and almost on a platter, he says a truth like a house, the rest are only "cheating winners".

regards

Ok maybe coldest numbers was the wrong term. Has Eddy not mentioned that he plays the furthest back double street? Lines? He waits for the last line to hit, then waits for some other trigger and plays that line.  All the talk about - std of deviation. The belief Is those numbers that are at a -std of deviation has to come back to average or +. That is what they have been saying?

[Steve]

Passion, ive read and understood turbos clues. The problem is he's incorrect. If you don't understand it, it's your problem.

If your tests so far are positive, it wouldn't be the first time initial testing of a losing approach was ok. Over the years we've seen many people like you who don't understand basics, but claim to have the hg. Then eventually they and their followers learn better.

[Mako]

Ok maybe coldest numbers was the wrong term. Has Eddy not mentioned that he plays the furthest back double street? Lines? He waits for the last line to hit, then waits for some other trigger and plays that line.  All the talk about - std of deviation. The belief Is those numbers that are at a -std of deviation has to come back to average or +. That is what they have been saying?

It's interesting Shaun, because like all of Turbo's concepts, it's based in something we've all seen....but is it real.

How many times have we said "greens always come in groups". And on the surface, they do always seem to come in tight windows, after being absent for too many spins.

In testing you see "cold" things heat up and hit more often than they should.  My question is always is it something we can exploit and benefit from?

In the 1-5-25 philosophy that so many of us have done well with over time, you see things "heat up" so much that you assume it's fact.

Eddy isn't a liar, Gordon can likely attest to that.  But he has been misled previously, losing dramatically after winning hundreds of sessions in a row,  So who knows.  But I do believe that he's playing what he says he is, and so far, his results are what he says they are.

I don't know if it will last, but I believe he's not just talking to talk over there for no reason.

[Steve]

Passion, far more testing has been done, by experienced people, which clearly shows turbos theories dont work. Even in this thread i explained the proper testing to prove it, the problems with turbos theories, and his actual system from his explanations.

Youre wasting your time. But at least others can read back what i wrote on this thread.

[ozon]

Today I tested the basic assumption.
I chose coldest number, waited for first hit, start betting for 5 hits more, when that number hit 6 time, always end session. Flat bet
I played 70 sessions in the RX and I finished the game almost on zero
The highest point was +503 units, but the last few sessions resulted in a drop to +37 units.
On average, the session counted over 300 spins, so I played well over 20k spins.
if I have time to check I will be playing after this trigger only first 36 spins.

[Steve]

You cant do proper testing MANUALLY unless you have months to waste.

Use proper software and do years worth of testing in seconds. Then you'll know if an approach increases the accuracy of predictions.

For example, check all the numbers that have hit once in a 37 spin cylce. Then see if those numbers will hit more frequently than others in the near future. Do the same with numbers that hit twice in 37 spins.  This is super old fallacy. the ones who test properly quickly move on. The ones who don't test properly waste months testing manually, and only after they've wasted time do they come around.

Anyone interested in turbo's theories need only test the above principles. You'll find the chances of any number spinning next or anytime soon DON'T CHANGE. Still 1 in 37. The "turbo followers" can argue all they like with their short term tests.

If you don't know why an approach must increase accuracy of predictions, and think money management changes anything, you're way behind.

[jekhb76]

I told myself, not ever to return to this god forsaken place, but here i am  and i know i will be spit upon once again, but so be it.
why am here? because steve is still opperating his secret roulette divices somewhere in a very dark basement  no just kidding. I'm here to open all you're eyes. but you need to put some effort in it, to see that there is indead a way to beat this game from hell.
Guys, you can check and test as much spins as you want, but the results will always and i repeat, stay always the same.
Please open you're eyes and don't let other fool you're thoughts.
Every roulette number, any locatiom for that matter will always return to their average point, giving enough spins.
You will never see a number or a location drifting further and further away from it's average point. it will always decreases in spins, to move closer and closer to where it should be.
Everyone on here that is saying that it won't are just lying and a. don't get it and didn't test this, or they are trying to prevent you from winning.
it's just like testing the Minimum interval colum in Rx, every location wil and i repeat wil, return to a MI of "1".
don't tell me that i'm wrong, because i'm right. test it, and you'll see that after millions of steve's spins, the results will always be the same.

Have a nice day.
j.e.

[Steve]

Every roulette number, any locatiom for that matter will always return to their average point, giving enough spins.

You are not understanding this:

No they dont. If you start at a standard deviation of 2, from this point with new spins, the standard deviation could be +2,0,-2 or whatever. Expecting a balance is super old fallacy.

How can you expect people to take you seriously when you have such a huge oversight?

What you are saying is basically the same as betting the color that has spun least until you have profited. IT DOESN'T WORK, and neither does the theories you are peddling.

[Steve]

Yes passion, i have read and understood everything turbo said. As i said before, the problem is his understanding is incorrect. Obviously you don't understand his mistakes either.

For example, the intervals is basic probability. Random does not have limits. The amount of possibilities increases proportionally to the amount of spins. The end result is the odds are still 1 in 37.

You don't even understand basic probability. Im not going in circles with you. You're way behind but acting like you're ahead of everyone.

[Steve]

Passion, like jek, youd benefit from reading the responses from the more experienced members on this thread. Even on one point, the holes in yours and turbos claims are gaping wide. But like him, you'll dodge all the logic and correct math, and cite your own version of reality.

[-Katalyst-]

There’s not one guy here that can show how to make Living at roulette  other then Steve.

Well in that case it must be quite a sad world then 

What you are saying is basically the same as betting the color that has spun least until you have profited. IT DOESN'T WORK, and neither does the theories you are peddling

No he is not! - it could be looked at a multitude of ways. This might be your gig (and I do appreciate it), at the same I do also know what I’m talking about 
-and as stated previously, nothing to sell or disclose - so you, Caleb and the other professors won’t need to protect any of the ‘newbies’ from my 2 cents   

**To the forum runners that are looking,
anything of value is rarely served in its entirety on a platter for all to digest - if it was it wouldn't be as valuable! ....and often would be overlooked. Time/costs/energy needs to be traded and then some -  It is this phase that prepares you for the "lucky" success ahead 


@PRouletta - with what you claim to have, am still amazed that you haven't gone and made the moola that you are seeking on here - a few members have given you sound advise about how to take your concepts to the fruitful stage ............?

-BEST WISHES-

[Steve]

Well in that case it must be quite a sad world then 

You're part of what makes it the way it is. And your last post offered nothing but talk.

No he is not! - it could be looked at a multitude of ways.

Like?

This might be your gig

That has no effect on math or reality.

Unless you have something that proves experienced members wrong, or passion/turbo right, youre just adding clutter to the conversation while complaining about it.

[-Katalyst-]

Wah! I'm shaking here - big grandpa daddy has spoken with such authority! 

@Steve - have you found anybody that has met you on your $100K offer for the HG.....?
- you really think somebody would disclose what they have for what little you offer - your kiddin right!? 

@ Winner - you really think that your Uncle Steve is the only one making money - well my point in the previous spray was alluding to the fact that one would have to be naive at best to think that people that are successful at this would actually come on here and drop their game in its entirety for all to see

Let's get this straight - everything on here is "talk" - all your BS talk about base maths and it's limits is exactly what it is - basic!
Yes the maths is what it is ....Yes Yes - I’ve heard it all too and then some  - pls


“multitude of ways”

Like?

- well you seem to know it all - you figure it out!   



- and not 'clutter' or "complaining", just highlighting to those interested that there are ways - the time and energy needs to be invested
 

It’s your gig - so you can have the last say,  regarding certain things yeah 
- the rest doesnt really mean Shxt!

[Steve]

More dribble. Dont waste everyones time.