How To Win at Roulette | AVOID THESE MISTAKES - Part 3

[Steve]

Why's it impressive?

Does it do this every time, or just sometimes?

The bankroll barely moves off 500 for a long time, and because of luck.

You really haven't understood anything I've said. Do you actually want to know the truth?

I know some people won't understand with some parts of my videos and websites, but you've been doing this a long time ignatus and the truth is constantly in your face.

[ignatus]

Why's it impressive?

Imagine you havent had you "holy grail" then, a Positive trend Flat for 20 000 spins IS impressive. I have done millions of trials, and MOST betselections cant keep a "postive trend" Flatbet even for a couple of hundred spins... :/

TEST2

[Steve]

Could you show 100k spins please?

What you're seeing is a segment of "better than average" spins at the start.

And the bankroll "lasts" so long because of the very low stakes.

That's all.

See my video woth 100k spins, see what i explain about the 10k parts.

[RayManZ]

Imagine you havent had you "holy grail" then, a Positive trend Flat for 20 000 spins IS impressive. I have done millions of trials, and MOST betselections cant keep a "postive trend" Flatbet even for a couple of hundred spins... :/

TEST2

But what if you start at spin 12000. Thats why 1 test of 10000 is not going to help you. What if you walk in at the wrong time. That could and would happen. Maybe not for you but for someone else.

Maybe you dont play 1mil spins. But all the people together using your system will. Some will be lucky and start at the right time. Some wel be unlucky and hit a run from hell. On AVG it will be 2.7%

That is what Steves tries to tell you.

[winforus]

Ignatus, I can’t understand how can you be a programmer and not understand such basic logic?

Besides being so deluded, you very much lack open-mindeness and are extemely stubborn.

Why don’t you test and contemplate what Steve has been teaching in the videos? Is there a possibility that a guy who has studied Roulette for over 20 years and who is a winner, is right?

Everyday you have been posting a new losing system, you even claimed you found a HG - but what do you have to show for it? You haven’t won a penny - and asking for donations.

[ignatus]

not understand such basic logic?

WELL I DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW A BETSELECTION COULD PROFIT FLATBET OVER 1 MILLION SPINS, EVEN WIN FLATBET 100 000 SPINS WOULD BE HILARIOUS....eh...

[Austria]

Nevertheless, as a beginner, I would like to say the following in defense of Ignatus:
You can make profit with the simplest methods if you just break even if you win / lose.
The RouletteMaster and K6 are proof of a nice win on the 5c table.
There is no need for sector triggers ect. to run after something that goes bankrupt after 10000000 ..... spins.
HOTZONE 17 and Last18 are still fun with 5c.

[winforus]

WELL I DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW A BETSELECTION COULD PROFIT FLATBET OVER 1 MILLION SPINS, EVEN WIN FLATBET 100 000 SPINS WOULD BE HILARIOUS....eh...

If it can't profit with flat bet over 100k spins - then you know it's a losing system. And you are right - it can't profit, due to the odds and payouts, which is how casino makes billions.

Which is why, there is no point in using progression - as all you are doing is taking a loan with a high interest rate and once the variance evens out - you will be losing much more than with flat bet.

What conclusion can you make? If your system does not improve the accuracy of predictions (thus changing the odds in your favor), then it's a losing system. Some players may win with it short term, but more players with lose with it, which is how casino makes money.

This is what Steve, and experienced players have been telling you for a long time.

[ignatus]

If it can't profit with flat bet over 100k spins - then you know it's a losing system

Well that is also absolute BS. A system that will profit flatbet for a Couple of thousand spins is Enough to be Profitable. Show me a Flatbet system that shows profit after 100 000 spins, if you please..ey?

[winforus]

Well that is also absolute BS. A system that will profit flatbet for a Couple of thousand spins is Enough to be Profitable.

What good is it for system to be profitable for just 2000 spins?  For 5 people it will be profitable and for 8 people it won't be profitable - meaning that majority of players using that system will lose.

Due to luck, some players will win, but more players will lose - meaning it's a losing system and it needs luck to win.

Show me a Flatbet system that shows profit after 100 000 spins, if you please..ey?

It doesn't exist and never will - because all systems that do not increase the accuracy of predictions, are LOSING.

This means that all "systems" are losers - and there is no point for you to waste anymore time developing more losing systems.

You are better off using your time and effort into developing an approach that would increase the accuracy of predictions.

[gizmotron2]

It doesn't exist and never will - because all systems that do not increase the accuracy of predictions, are LOSING.

Now I know what is in your head zombie.

I don't need to "increase the accuracy of predictions." I just need to wait for my accuracy in identifying coincidences that are working in my favor.  50 sessions without a lost session. I'm disintegrating the notion of 4.66 wins at 3 for each lost session at 7. You can check each spin, each bet placed, and every result.  Proof can't get any better than this.

[Joe]

Ignatus' idea of a great system seems to be : 'It sucks less'. 

What's really bizarre is that he seems to agree with the 'mathboys' that no system wins in the long-term, but he codes it anyway. I suppose there is a kind of twisted logic to it in that if he knows no system wins long-term, then there isn't any point in running the program for a million spins. The solution is to cherry-pick a nice winning  streak, post it here, and declare triumphantly that it wins in the short term - and if that's not good enough for you, you're an idiot. 

[ignatus]

declare triumphantly that it wins in the short term

Well, who is the "idiot" first you can show me a system that profits over 100 000 spins FLATBET (Goodluck with that!) Also, about my systems, ANY SYSTEM that i have created so far, that has a consistent "winrate" over 50% THAT IS a PROFITABLE system (with the right money-management) that is.... I create/test systems for fun...and i will continue to do so. UNTIL i have found what i am looking for, so far, i have not. found what i am looking for OK

[winforus]

Now I know what is in your head zombie.

I don't need to "increase the accuracy of predictions." I just need to wait for my accuracy in identifying coincidences that are working in my favor.  50 sessions without a lost session. I'm disintegrating the notion of 4.66 wins at 3 for each lost session at 7. You can check each spin, each bet placed, and every result.  Proof can't get any better than this.

Before calling someone a "zombie", check your own head.

You are not using a typical "system" - and anyway that you put it, for you to win in the long run, you would have to increase the accuracy of your bet selections. My post here was addressing typical "system players", which based on my observation, you don't belong to. So before making judgements and going defense mode - actually understand what is talked about.

[winforus]

Ignatus' idea of a great system seems to be : 'It sucks less'. 

What's really bizarre is that he seems to agree with the 'mathboys' that no system wins in the long-term, but he codes it anyway. I suppose there is a kind of twisted logic to it in that if he knows no system wins long-term, then there isn't any point in running the program for a million spins. The solution is to cherry-pick a nice winning  streak, post it here, and declare triumphantly that it wins in the short term - and if that's not good enough for you, you're an idiot. 

Couldn't have said it any better.