Conclusion

[Winner]

Physics is the only way to win long term and even then like Steve has said many times the conditions have to be right .
So all the systems don’t work .

[Roulettebeater]

Physics is the only way to win long term and even then like Steve has said many times the conditions have to be right .
So all the systems don’t work .

roulette has a prebuilt edge for the house. that means there is no way to come ahead in the long term.
physics's law of motion can tell you where the ball is gonna leave the rim, although the bounce of the ball is  chaotic and unpredictable!

[Bigbroben]

I do not agree that physics is the only way, it shows that physics is the only way and I will show that it is not the only way, nor the best ...

Alright!  You will!

Will you explain also?

[Winner]

I do not agree that physics is the only way, it shows that physics is the only way and I will show that it is not the only way, nor the best ...
[/quote
Doubt it sorry

[Steve]

Ball bounce is not so unpredictable. Almost always its predictable enough.

Physics may be the only way, because its the study of the physical variables. Its like saying science works.

But it may not be the only approach that works. The problem with roulette is odds vs payout. Who knows maybe precog, or fractals. Its still increasing accuracy of predictions. Progression makes no difference.

Passion, ive seen nothing from you that would indicate youve increased accuracy of predictions. But id like to be proven wrong really.

[Steve]

Passion, I've seen lots from you. But it has all been nonsense. Most recently just talk about you having the HG, quoting theories that are incorrect, and you not understanding.

If you actually had been reading what I write for years, the only way you'd be unaware of proof I publish is if you're not particularly bright.

Im not trying to offend you passion. I'm not trying to be nice either. It is just is how it is.

[Winner]

There’s a lot of guys here that test system and they all proved over the years that payout /table limits  will alwys be the issue.

[Winner]

There’s a lot of guys here that test system and they all proved over the years that payout /table limits  will always  be the issue. Systems will lose but you can always make lunch money .

[Bigbroben]

I sense bitterness filtering through your words.  What happened?

[Winner]

I sense bitterness filtering through your words.  What happened?

No bitterness far from from it I’m a realist. Trust me over ten years playing for lunch money it works haven’t lost yet

[Winner]

Here I’ll prove it but I won’t get into how I play my way is no one else’s way .give me 36 numbers and I’ll make my lunch that is guaranteed.

[daveylibra]

How can you prove it without saying how you play??

[Winner]

How can you prove it without saying how you play??

It’s an outside bet nothing complicated.

[Winner]

A small test where only physics can achieve ...
In case some of you have not caught it, it's dyksexlic 100%, although it's with progression, I'm trying to make it totally flat, but it's complicated ...
I know that for many this will not be anything, I just wanted to contribute some graphics so that it looks like it behaves, soon I will look for someone to rx for code and execute 2m balls.
only a small contribution to make it look like I wanted to say dyksexlic with 1 / n sinx = 6, it seems that every 6 balls of average usually have reward ...

I heard of this  dyslexia guy years ago his system bet for repeats .i don’t remember anything else

[Roulettebeater]

AI heard of this  dyslexia guy years ago his system bet for repeats .i don’t remember anything else

i saved over than 3 millions real spins in one container and i ran complex analytics on repeaters.

Result: hit rate obtained was exactly equivalent to the hit rate of non repeaters.

Conclusion> repeaters lose over the long run