• Welcome to #1 Roulette Forum & Message Board | www.RouletteForum.cc.

News:

WARNING: Forums often contain bad advice & systems that aren't properly tested. Do NOT believe everything. Read these links: The Facts About What Works & Why | How To Proplerly Test Systems | The Top 5 Proven Systems | Best Honest Online Casinos

Main Menu
Popular pages:

Roulette System

The Roulette Systems That Really Work

Roulette Computers

Hidden Electronics That Predict Spins

Roulette Strategy

Why Roulette Betting Strategies Lose

Roulette System

The Honest Live Online Roulette Casinos

(No subject)

Started by ego, Jun 02, 04:22 AM 2018

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

ego


This is not for everyone.
Assume you look at roulette with a different perspective.

With a bank account with interest, you get around 0.5% during one-year saving.
That is 5$ if you save and invest 1000$

That is sick and so bad and ridiculous that I don't have words for it.
And stocks are not much better.

Assume you invest in low-risk strategy folder on the stock market with 10% return on investment each year.
That is 100$ if you invest 1000$ during one year cycle.
And don't forget there are 30% taxes on the winnings, so you end up with 70$

That is sick and so bad and ridiculous that I don't have words for it.
But is roulette a better option?

Well, I cannot offer fast or quick money and not for sure easy money.
But I know a way that is much better then what the stock and savings account offers.

I find a way to Parachute for 10$ each day using a very clever selection method.
The selection method has a very high strike ratio and can even fail and you still win.
The reason is that I succeed to mix a random selection process with one mechanical selection process.

There are 356 days during one year and multiply that with 10$ you get 3560$
But I am conservative so after winning half the cost of the Parachute I would cut the unit size to half, regression.
Then operate with casino money and never risk to bust all the way back to scratch.
So around 2670$ as return on investment after one year.

This is how I play and like to look at roulette in the long term.

Cheers



Denial of gamblers fallacy is usually seen in people who has Roulette as last option for a way to wealth, debt covering and a independent lifestyle.  Next step is pretty ugly-
AP - It's not that it can't be done, but rather people don't really have a clue as to the level of fanaticism and outright obsession that it takes to be successful, let alone get to the level where you can take money out of the casinos on a regular basis. Out of 1,000 people that earnestly try, maybe only one will make it.

nottophammer

Quote from: ego on Jun 02, 04:22 AM 2018The selection method has a very high strike ratio and can even fail and you still win.

Keep it to yourself it's the HG
How do you win at roulette, simple, make the right decision

Bigbroben

Quote from: ego on Jun 02, 04:22 AM 2018

And stocks are not much better.  Depends...


There are 356 days during one year and multiply that with 10$ you get 3560$

You live on Mars?  Women are from Venus, men from Mars, I know...


I should dive into Parachute on day to see.

Is it at least fun to play?
Life is hard, and then you die.
Mes pensées sont le dernier retranchement de ma liberté.

ego


I apologize for my typing error, it should say 365 days.

Cheers
Denial of gamblers fallacy is usually seen in people who has Roulette as last option for a way to wealth, debt covering and a independent lifestyle.  Next step is pretty ugly-
AP - It's not that it can't be done, but rather people don't really have a clue as to the level of fanaticism and outright obsession that it takes to be successful, let alone get to the level where you can take money out of the casinos on a regular basis. Out of 1,000 people that earnestly try, maybe only one will make it.

Roulettebeater

Ego

Can you stop your egoism?
What’s the moral of the story from your long written text ?

Thx
A dollar won is twice as sweet as as a dollar earned

ego

I tell you what my Moral is.

First, I discuss the bank interest and return on investment for stocks. The reason is that you don't double your money during one casino visit or make several thousand each month. My point is to be happy with a modest return on investment during a period of a year playing. I have some assumptions that there is a lot of active players who want to win big and fast.  They don't succeed.

My moral is to use Score Card even when you play at home using online casinos. That to make a reality check where you chart and track your way to play so you can get back and change things or tweak and improve things. Also a sign for that you don't take winning money the easy way. I want to point out that it might be better to look at solutions as long term that gives a steady return on investment. That means you don't play one month and think you will win big and live like a professional without working.

I want to point out that we can trade with discipline using morning session, afternoon session, and evening session. Not playing nonstop or being compulsive and play like having working hours. For me, winning playing roulette is not the same thing as getting a return on investment. The first option is for gamblers and the second options if more an investment in the game itself to give a long-term return.

Should also mention that I want to highlight that the selection process is more like the lottery then static and mechanical selection process that random bits always find its way around and make the particular method bust.
So when I mention I use a random selection process I want to point out that we might have a better chance winning this game if we use some degree of random luck into the calculation.

It like winning the lottery if the method bust and not the other way around. I want to make that clear and I succeed simulate one full year.
Should also mention when there is so much flavor of different unit size with online casinos, someone could regress after winning 30% of the cost.
This element is based upon what makes me tick and win.

Have been having several methods other than the Parachute, but not succeed to come up with a random selection process that can be compared and become a lottery situation.

Note: I don't want to offend anyone and if I did I apologize.
Will update this topic with results.

Cheers
Denial of gamblers fallacy is usually seen in people who has Roulette as last option for a way to wealth, debt covering and a independent lifestyle.  Next step is pretty ugly-
AP - It's not that it can't be done, but rather people don't really have a clue as to the level of fanaticism and outright obsession that it takes to be successful, let alone get to the level where you can take money out of the casinos on a regular basis. Out of 1,000 people that earnestly try, maybe only one will make it.

ego


I can show the Parachute without the selection process:

EC   1   +1

Dozen   1   +1
Dozen   1   +0

Line   1   +3
Line   1   +2
Line   1   +1
Line   1   +0

Corner   1   +1
Corner   1   -1
Corner   2   +7
Corner   2   +5
Corner   2   +3
Corner   2   +1

Street  2   +3
Street  2   +1
Street  3   +9
Street  3   +6
Street  3   +3
Street  3   +0    
Street  4   +7
Street  4   +3

Split   4   +19
Split   4   +15
Split   4   +11
Split   4   +9
Split   4   +5
Split   4   +1       
Split   5   +11
Split   5   +6
Split   5   +1       
Split   6   +11
Split   6   +5
Split    6   -1

98 units
      
Single   3   +8
Single   3   +5
Single   3   +2
Single  3   +1       
Single  4   +31
Single   4   +27
Single   4   +23
Single   4   +19
Single  4   +15
Single  4   +11
Single   4   +7 
Single   4   +3
Single   4   -1       
Single   5   +31
Single   5   +26
Single   5   +21
Single   5   +16
Single   5   +11
Single   5   +6
Single   5   +1       
Single   6   +21    
Single  6   +15
Single   6   +9
Single   6   +3
Single  6       -2

211   units   

- - - - - - - - - -

Single   7   +27
Single   7   +20
Single   7   +13
Single   7   +6
Single   7   -1      
Single   8   +35
Single   8   +27
Single   8   +19
Single   8   +11
Single   8   +3   
Single   9   +35
Single    9   +26
Single   9   +17
Single   9   +8
Single   9   -1      
Single   10   +35
Single   10   +25
Single   10   +15
Single   10   +10
Single   10   -5      
Single   11   +4      
Single   12   +28      
Single   12   +16      
Single   12   +4         
Single   13   +27

429   units   

- - - - - - - - - -
         



Denial of gamblers fallacy is usually seen in people who has Roulette as last option for a way to wealth, debt covering and a independent lifestyle.  Next step is pretty ugly-
AP - It's not that it can't be done, but rather people don't really have a clue as to the level of fanaticism and outright obsession that it takes to be successful, let alone get to the level where you can take money out of the casinos on a regular basis. Out of 1,000 people that earnestly try, maybe only one will make it.

vladir

I think you should aim always for at least 0 (never negative...), even if you get a shorter progression...

With that said, I would try this with bet selection = last hit number, updating every spin.
"In God we trust; all others must bring data", W. Edwards Deming

ego

Quote from: nottophammer on Jun 02, 05:12 AM 2018
Keep it to yourself it's the HG

I don't believe in the HG and I will explain the method.

You track and chart 25 attempts.
The first or last single number that hits three times is your selection.

It does not matter wish one, that is totally random.
All numbers qualify except zero.

Now you look at the position of this qualified number on the table and parachute that location for 75 attempts.
That particular single number will hit within 75 attempts or at least it will be more common than rare.

You see if you take eight combinations with patterns of three using even money bets.
Then each pattern will repeat at least one hit playing the same previous pattern.
Because seven out of eight patterns have at least one match.

Same with one single number that has hit three times within 25 attempts.
Seven times out of eight you will see that single number to show within the next 75 attempts.

This means that the parachute method wins guarantee seven times out of eight.
But the parachute method also wins when the single number not show.
This is due to the widespread and multiplies locations being played.

So you place your bets towards the single number location at all times.
Another way to look at it - you risk your money once every eight sessions.

This is based upon binomial probability calculation.
A hit within 25 attempts with one single number had 50% probability to happen equally an even money bet.

75 attempts are the same as three even money bets of the same color.
I hope you get the picture.


Cheers
Denial of gamblers fallacy is usually seen in people who has Roulette as last option for a way to wealth, debt covering and a independent lifestyle.  Next step is pretty ugly-
AP - It's not that it can't be done, but rather people don't really have a clue as to the level of fanaticism and outright obsession that it takes to be successful, let alone get to the level where you can take money out of the casinos on a regular basis. Out of 1,000 people that earnestly try, maybe only one will make it.

vladir

That's an interesting approach. Thanks for sharing.
"In God we trust; all others must bring data", W. Edwards Deming

jekhb76

Very interesting ineed, but i don't really understand how to and wich numbers to select. Can you please Tell us More how to play this? Thanks.

vladir

Quote from: jekhb76 on Jun 04, 10:24 AM 2018
Very interesting ineed, but i don't really understand how to and wich numbers to select. Can you please Tell us More how to play this? Thanks.

I think he already answered that. Specifically:
Track 25 numbers.
The first or last single number that hits three times is your selection. 0 is not playable (because you can't parachute on 0).

My take is that you can simply track until you have a number repeat 3 times. That will be the pivot for your parachute play.
"In God we trust; all others must bring data", W. Edwards Deming

ego

Below you can see that number 21 hit three times within 25 attempts. For the next 75 attempts, you have a very high probability that number 21 will hit again. If not then the Parachute might win anyway.



As you can see so did not the number 21 hit again within 75 attempts, but the Parachute method won anyway.



Denial of gamblers fallacy is usually seen in people who has Roulette as last option for a way to wealth, debt covering and a independent lifestyle.  Next step is pretty ugly-
AP - It's not that it can't be done, but rather people don't really have a clue as to the level of fanaticism and outright obsession that it takes to be successful, let alone get to the level where you can take money out of the casinos on a regular basis. Out of 1,000 people that earnestly try, maybe only one will make it.

jekhb76

Quote from: ego on Jun 04, 10:59 AM 2018
Below you can see that number 21 hit three times within 25 attempts. For the next 75 attempts, you have a very high probability that number 21 will hit again. If not then the Parachute might win anyway.



As you can see so did not the number 21 hit again within 75 attempts, but the Parachute method won anyway.


Ok understand now.
Isn't it aslo An option to place a single unit on the number as well?

ego

This is how a short sample looks like, here you risk your own money once during nine sessions.

session 1 Parachute won and number won
session 2 Parachute won and number won
session 3 Parachute won and number won
session 4 Parachute won and number won
session 5 Parachute won and number won
session 6 Parachute won and number won
session 7 Parachute won and number won
session 8 Parachute won and number won
session 9 Parachute won and number loss

This is what I mean by lottery, you need to lose both target number and the Parachute method during the same time, they have to correlate.For example, you win eight or more sessions in a row and lose occasionally and during that specific time and situation, the parachute method has to fail. They both have to match and don't forget our random trigger produce very high strike ratio.

Cheers
Denial of gamblers fallacy is usually seen in people who has Roulette as last option for a way to wealth, debt covering and a independent lifestyle.  Next step is pretty ugly-
AP - It's not that it can't be done, but rather people don't really have a clue as to the level of fanaticism and outright obsession that it takes to be successful, let alone get to the level where you can take money out of the casinos on a regular basis. Out of 1,000 people that earnestly try, maybe only one will make it.

-