VdW

[maestro]

sorry i am wrong ...

[Malvador]

Winkel, please could you explain in a little bit more detail what you mean?

Also when you say meet at least one win-
does thjs always happen?

[Malvador]

I've tried to apply with winkels method... It does not seem to work? Am I understanding it wrong? Can someone clarify this? Pri have you had any luck?

[DoctorSudoku]

Second:

Don´t use EC´s to bet. Use LW. You will see, you can transfer almost every betselection to VdW.

e.g.: You bet EC. choose HL. Your virtual betresults are LWLW.. You expect a L on attack!
next AP you had results  HLHL in spins. Normal VdW tells you to bet on H in spins. Attack-AP tells you you will Lose. So bet on Low instead!

Ever since I read this post yesterday, I have been bothered, especially, by the last few concluding sentences. By arriving at the conclusion that he has listed above, the poster is on fairly shaky grounds.

Let's say you are betting EC's, like say HL. After a sequence of four spins, you may get something, like HLHL. Applying VDW, for the very next spin, you would bet High for the completion of the 1, 3, 5 AP.

But in mathematical terms, it is still a 50-50 bet between High and Low (obviously, we are excluding the zeroes in this discussion).


According to the poster, if instead you had been virtual-betting the above HLHL sequence, you might have ended up with a W-L registry that says LWLW. So now you want to go for the 1, 3, 5 AP by betting the very next spin  for whichever side was giving you the Loss -- namely, High.

But , obviously, you don't want to get a Loss (you want to win !), so you will bet for the side that would ostensibly give you a W -- which means you will bet for Low.

Acoording to the poster, this will give you some kind of an advantage.

But why?

Mathematically speaking, it is still a 50-50 toss-up between High and Low !

[Scarface]

Ever since I read this post yesterday, I have been bothered, especially, by the last few concluding sentences. By arriving at the conclusion that he has listed above, the poster is on fairly shaky grounds.

Let's say you are betting EC's, like say HL. After a sequence of four spins, you may get something, like HLHL. Applying VDW, for the very next spin, you would bet High for the completion of the 1, 3, 5 AP.

But in mathematical terms, it is still a 50-50 bet between High and Low (obviously, we are excluding the zeroes in this discussion).


According to the poster, if instead you had been virtual-betting the above HLHL sequence, you might have ended up with a W-L registry that says LWLW. So now you want to go for the 1, 3, 5 AP by betting the very next spin  for whichever side was giving you the Loss -- namely, High.

But , obviously, you don't want to get a Loss (you want to win !), so you will bet for the side that would ostensibly give you a W -- which means you will bet for Low.

Acoording to the poster, this will give you some kind of an advantage.

But why?

Mathematically speaking, it is still a 50-50 toss-up between High and Low !

Yes it would still be a 50/50 chance using high/low or win/loss.  The most troubling thing I see is the progression.  If the AP doesn't hit in the first 6 bets, then that's alot to recover from

[Baelog]

Play only the 9 anomalies. Avoid the mutual bet after spin 6. Use AP 1,2,3 to ride the streaks. Restart after a win or 2 losses.

[RouletteGhost]

I totally understand the concept

But we do not know where the AP will form

So how do you use it for the game? At that point it's a guessing game

[Nickmsi]

Hi RG,

"But we do not know where the AP will form"

Yes, we do know where the AP will form.

It will form on the 3rd spin, 4th spin, 5th spin, 6th spin, 7th spin, 8th, spin or 9th spin.

If you play RB, then it absolutely has to form on one of those spins.

That’s the beauty of a Non Random system, it "has to" rather than "hopes to".

The question is how do you harness this information into a profitable system.

Check out what Winkel, Baelog, Malvador suggest. Give it a try.

Cheers
Nick

[RouletteGhost]

So a 7 step Marty should never lose?

(Not including zero)

[Nickmsi]

Not quite, you still have the Mutual Bet to consider.

See what Baelog said about the Mutual Bet.

Nick

[Malvador]

It is quite easy Priyanka.

First:
There are 16 possible APs.
10 of them end with 2 possible results. All these Aps are longer than 6 spins!

So bet only the APs 123 234 135 345 246 456.
If you bet one of those and it lost, stop and start again.

Use the Power Martingale 1 3 7 15 31. These 5 Steps will meet at least 1 Winner AP.
And it breaks the 50:50 because you will win 1 unit per bet, not only 1 unit per attack!

Second:

Don´t use EC´s to bet. Use LW. You will see, you can transfer almost every betselection to VdW.

e.g.: You bet EC. choose HL. Your virtual betresults are LWLW.. You expect a L on attack!
next AP you had results  HLHL in spins. Normal VdW tells you to bet on H in spins. Attack-AP tells you you will Lose. So bet on Low instead!

Can someone explain this please...

[3Nine]

Hi, what is there to explain if it needs a martingale? 

[Malvador]

Hi, what is there to explain if it needs a martingale?

3nine, if it's simply a matter of time, knowing that the event is 5 spins (at most away) then Marty isn't a problem, he seemed pretty confident in his understanding. I just felt like I was missing something.

Maybe the assumption that a flat bet advantage is possible is what is stopping me from advancing... In all pris videos she never increased her stakes (per se) but she is also keen on stitching (2 flat bets) which is basically the same as putting 2 units on one spin.

The way I see it is increasing your bet by any type of progression is basically playing multiple games.

[RouletteGhost]

With vdw you are guaranteed an arithmetic progression

I just don't understand how it helps with roulette. You need to know where it will form

According to Wikipedia the 9th outcome will close an AP. But the outcome can either be B or R

[3Nine]

3nine, if it's simply a matter of time, knowing that the event is 5 spins (at most away) then Marty isn't a problem

The waiting game will not work.