Whazzuuupppp....

[Maui13]

It's been so long, I decided to re-introduce myself  - Literally years...

Howdy to some of the old and familiar faces and also Hi to the new folks!

Wanted to get my hands a bit dirty again so was just scanning through, decided to test my login credentials and BOOM - they still work. Happy to be back and hope everyone is still doing great!

Ciao
Maui

[romano0327]

Hey Maui, welcome again

[Maui13]

Thanks man 

[Steve]

[Maui13]

Hahahaha @ Steve! 

[Gandhi]

Whazzup Maui,

whats your favorite simplest way to play?

[Maui13]

Howzit Gandhi

Honestly, I like Double Dozens - and there are 2 specific methods that I will touch base on in the coming week.

I just want some feedback from the other guys re certain things. I'm also looking for someone to run some RX tests.

I don't want then to beat 10 billion spins, because realistically no one sit in a casino that long. Max session no more than 1000 bets.
If the RX can consistently dish out + results, then I'll explain in detail to everyone. Hope it's worth the wait 

[Steve]

I don't want then to beat 10 billion spins, because realistically no one sit in a casino that long.

If you had lots and lots of players that used your system, and you all played 10 billion spins COMBINED, would the majority of players profit or lose?

And what would determine who won or lost?

[Maui13]

Steve - I truthfully believe that majority of players would win.

So to answer your question - for the long haul, majority would come out on top. ( if the bet and progression work as planned )

What percentage would the majority be? That I cannot say.

[Steve]

If the RX can consistently dish out + results, then I'll explain in detail to everyone. Hope it's worth the wait 

Then this is the way forward. But do you think testing lots of spins is a good idea, or not necessary? After all it would clearly determine if most players would win or not.

[Maui13]

Mmm... I think your question might have 2 possible answers.

1. Longer, more spins would determine if the system can dig itself out

2. And more shorter sessions would increase success rate of more players? ( i think -  question to myself )

[Steve]

1. Longer, more spins would determine if the system can dig itself out

More testing is always better than less.

2. And more shorter sessions would increase success rate of more players? ( i think -  question to myself )

1,000,000 players playing 10 spin sessions is the same as 1 player playing the same sessions.

[nottophammer]

Did you give right E-mail.

[Firefox]

You can judge most methods quite quickly simply by asking how that system predicts the next result. If the prediction  is no better than standard chance ie random, then the method is doomed to failure due to the substandard payout. Predictions based on whether a number/result has occurred or not in the past 0-100 spins are generally no better than random.

If the system uses a negative progression then it is also doomed to failure, but a big failure usually in the medium term to long term, while it generates short term profit, (Short term up to 1000 spins. Medium up to 20000. Long greater than 20000 (in rough terms))

So testing is always useful to verify, but if any of the above features are present, the writing is already on the wall.

[Maui13]

Did you give right E-mail.

Yup - replied