Gizmotron's .Pysuedo? EC,66.66%win 33.33%lose

[SWEET]

Thanks to Gizmotron's,

According to Gizmotron's,
in double dozen bet.
we could, mathwise,
apart from green zero,

33.33%win +3.
33.33% win 0.
33.33% lose -3.
thus, without green consideration,

in layman's term, there's no edge, but, 'high'-expectation,
that

66% will either win,
+3, or 0,

33% will
losing -3,
thus the FALLACY,
that 66 vs 33.

so how to bet?
in oversimplified eg.
A bet 1
B bet 2
C bet 3unit.

so, you bet dzA wont hit
,you placed 1u, on dzA.

you bet dzC will hit, you placed 3u on dzC.

placed 2u on dzB, to neutrealise
the staking...of 6unit.

if dzA hit
win +2, lose-5
=-3.

if dzC hit.
win+6, lose-3,
profit=3.

if dzB hit,
win +4,lose-4,
profit=0.

thus mathwise,

apart green,
66.66% to win+3
33.33% to lose-3.
is this a fallacy!!???
if this not fallacy, then very soon casino will ban roulette. hahaha!

[winforus]

Have you looked at Gizmotron's results? The guy has 13 resets + currently a losing record on RS (he tried to prove that RR works). In his last post, he also admitted that "reading randomness" doesn't work.

You should focus on learning from people who actually win.

[stranger90]

The 33% where you lose -3 cancels the +3 you win with the other 33% and green slowly digs your hole, the 33% where you don't win or lose anything can't be counted, isn't it obvious?
You can try 1 million version of bets, none will work! The game is designed for them to lose!!!

[gizmotron2]

In his last post, he also admitted that "reading randomness" doesn't work.

Reading mathZombies is more fun.