@ turbo

[cht]

Of course you can't. Why stop at 37 spins? 

That explanation is just basics. Why not go till that 4th hit ? Why not put mm on it ? And most importantly...Why Bet them all ?

Why not throw in VB ? 

[Lucky7Red]

Denzie way, Denzie way, Denzie all the way  ♫  ♪ ♫♪♫♪♪♪

[Steve]

I've known lots of guys like that, girls too.

That's a bit harsh. Rightly or wrongly people come to their own understandings about what they know and it's usually not nothing.

Time to pull your head out your arse then.

I'd say that's least sure. I've known many knowledgeable and sophisticated individuals who are arrogant. You yourself display a lot of arrogance in your postings.

Taotie, I think you've misunderstood me. I'm saying I try to avoid having a firm opinion on something until I know more information.

I've known many knowledgeable and sophisticated individuals who are arrogant. You yourself display a lot of arrogance in your postings.

Arrogance inevitably contributes to ignorance, because it makes you discount other possibilities because you think you know you are right. I was not saying knowledgeable people cannot be arrogant. Compare a humble an open person vs an arrogant and stubborn one. Who would likely be more receptive to the truth?

I understand sometimes I may appear arrogant, but it's confused with something else. Say an obviously inexperienced player says they win with something like the martingale, and I explain why the winnings are not sustainable. Then they take offense and accuse me of trying to censor the HG. I'm confident that the player really has no idea what they're talking about, and that may come across as arrogance. I know roulette very well. And I know the typical stages of misunderstandings because I've been through them myself.

I dont believe it's arrogant to remain staunch when someone tries to tell you 1+1=3

his point was that by the time it happens, you will have WON so much money that you just wont care... that's what playing repeaters helps you achieve: winning more than you lose long term.

That's still fallacy. He does not appear to understand the sequence of 37 numbers in 37 spins happens as often as any other sequence. None of that has any bearing on the odds of the next spin. No odds change means nothing has changed.

I do agree with enough spins all possible combinations will occur. But I'm damn sure they won't occur every day or every month or not even every year. In fact they spread out far enough to make some money in between.

How can you "make money in between"? What matters is the odds of the next spin, and the disproportionate payout. Can you give a specific example of the odds changing?

If the odds dont change, and they are still 1 in 37, then how has anything changed?

[MoneyT101]

How can you "make money in between"? What matters is the odds of the next spin, and the disproportionate payout. Can you give a specific example of the odds changing?

If the odds dont change, and they are still 1 in 37, then how has anything changed?

The thing is the stats of thousands of spin show that all 37 numbers wont show up and i think the most that have shown up is 31..... which means there were 6 repeats.  just one of those repeats going to 3 or 4 repeats within that 37 spin cycle would have made a possible profit.

Denzie has created a system around this information.  Yes he will lose because anything can happen but based on the math that we cant change!

roulette cant give you all 37 numbers back to back to back

[Steve]

roulette cant give you all 37 numbers back to back to back

That's like saying you'll never see this sequence:

26
15
10
18
33
30
27
15
26
14
11
23
2
23
12
31
15
8
2
35
35
9
36
12
31
11
5
31
22
27
30
26
30
26
0
18
27

If you see enough spins, you'll find it happens just as often as 37 numbers back to back.

[maestro]

That's like saying you'll never see this sequence:

no it is not...cannot have 37 numbers with no repeat<else anyone can beat the game>

[nottophammer]

no it is not...cannot have 37 numbers with no repeat<else anyone can beat the game>

yes M be KTF all the way, but thick.slick Steve dont see this

[Steve]

Ok notto and maestro, and anyone who agrees with them...  I can very easily prove you're wrong. If i do, then you agree to run naked up and down your street. Twice. Deal? Lets see whos thick notto.

[Steve]

Another thing. You can both apologize to me, if i demonstrate you're dead wrong.

If im wrong, then well you name it 

[maestro]

then you agree to run naked up and down your street. Twice. Deal? Lets see whos thick notto.

i already done that twice...

[MoneyT101]

Another thing. You can both apologize to me, if i demonstrate you're dead wrong.

If im wrong, then well you name it 

I have been so busy I haven't had time to look.  But I think I remember someone ran a simulation at the forum.

I'm not saying a game cannot happen.  But very rare to happen.   If you think about it; it's based on math

After a certain amount of numbers the odds shift from one side to the other.(repeat vs unique)....So the possibility for a repeat increases.  Yes any 37 number are possible


But if you have a list and your tracking.  37 spots as the numbers come out.  Your chances of getting a repeat before 24 unique numbers are high because a shift happens

So it's not that a rare game won't happen.  It's just if you have a good method  based on the idea and the math behind it.  You should come out a ahead

Somehow turbo and denzie created a method and it's not perfect but they win.  Turbo proved it using parx!  It's not easy to get into the top 10 even if you have a large bankroll.  You still have to win!

[RouletteGhost]

yes M be KTF all the way, but thick.slick Steve dont see this

Ok ok ok

Notto I have one question for you does KTF (+1 -1 on the 25 Unhit) work for you and has it consistently worked for you over the past year?

Please a yes or no will suffice

[Steve]

Iits still not being understood fully. Its exactly as rare as any other combination of numbers.

And parx is a terrible place to test. I explained the parx math. Unfortunately I havent seen anythung to indicate turbo has anything that works. But what we do have is his claims that show contradictions he isnt even aware of, and typical musunderstandings. I dont have anything against him but the whole parx thing was very misleading. Check my posts about parx math.

[Steve]

ps how many people here play say 2000 spins per year? Its about an hour in the casino, every week.

Of those who said yes, how many of you have won over 2000 spins? How many have lost? It would be roughly the same proprtion of players with a 1+ win rate on MPR.

How many times can you win with random bets and progression in 2000 spins? Test on rx.

My point is most players will have lost. A few will have won. So for the average active player, even a year of profitable play is NOT proof your system works. Read :.roulettephysics.com/roulette-strategy/ and the part about the illusion of having a winning system.

I dont mean to be a negative nancy. Im just trying to help. But Id rather sound negative and be honest, instead of smiling and lying.

[cht]

If the strategy does not win on typical play schedule at least 100% of investment every week, I won't waste time with it - that's my yardstick.