Everything Reversed system

[RouletteExplorer]

We all know that betting the less dominiand(Ecs) with a progression for the balalance to come is a proven loser !

But why is this happening?
Simply because roulette has proven over so many years that it doesn't know anything about balance ! And even if the balance will come for sure in let s say 1.000.000 spins, we will not be there to win, because we will have left a lot earlier ! LoL
Roulette is full of abnormal (non balanced) results ESPESIALLY in the short term results! And this is what we should take advantage of !

So I did something CRAZY !
I did the exact opposite of every system that needs balance to win !

I bet all the ECs. Exept IF some of them were EQUAL...e.g. RED 8  and  BLACK 8 =then NO betting on RED/BLACK.

THE SYSTEM
So in the 1st spin of a new session I bet all the 3 Ecs that hit.
e.g. No 13 : I bet 1 chip on LOW 1 chip on ODD and 1 chip on BLACK.
If we win 3 or 2 of the 3 bets we are + .... So we start a new SESSION. Every session ends when we are + .
If we lose its because the 2 or all the 3 lost. so that means that now all the Ecs or the 2 of the 3 are EQUAL.
If all are equal we wait for the next spin and  then bet the MOST DOMINIAND with as many chips as the diference is.
e.g. If the RED 10 and the BLACK  14 = we bet 4 chips on BLACK .(most dominiand)
IF EVEN is 12 and Odd 12 = NO BET on even/odd
and we do the same of LOW and HIGH

When we win we ADD chip on the winner(because the deference is bigger)
When we lose we MINUS chip (because the deference is smaller)

With this way we are taking FULL advantage of the unbalanced short term results that roulette is doing ALL the time !

I tested 40 sessions and all were winners !
The biggest down in a session was only -38 chips
The longest spins for comming in a profit was only 41.

As the balance is comming we do not have to afraid of anything because we are betting LESS chips !

If zero hits , we continue our play.

I think this idea hasn t been tested before. If yes then sorry I didn t know .

If you like the system please test with me and let s post our impressions.
thank you

[RouletteExplorer]

If mr.ore likes the system and has the time maybe he can program it  .

[buffalowizard]

I'm afraid I don't understand what you're going on about. Could you post a small example of spins to highlight your method?


Many thanks


Buffalo

[atlantis]

Hi RouletteExplorer,

Nice idea. Obviously will work better on a nozero (or single zero with le partage)
A quick test on wiesbaden numbers:
+117 in 68 spins. Max drawdown was 54u
High numbers were winning/trending spectacularly with big gap in the H/L even chance.

A.

[RouletteExplorer]

thanks atlantis
When u were playing were you doing resets on the sessions after every new + ?

Everything would go better in a roulette without a zero  . I just like playing only in real casinos

[atlantis]

thanks atlantis
When u were playing were you doing resets on the sessions after every new + ?

No. Should I have done? That sounds like the best/safest idea though

A.

[RouletteExplorer]

Yes my friend.
I have already posted that after every new + in the BR , we must start a new session from the start.
That means that with the next number we are starting again betting only 1 chip on all 3 ecs.All the previous numbers don t count after a new + .

[RouletteExplorer]

Buffalo
Do You know the ECs system that you are betting the Ecs that have left behind with so many chips as how many times they have left behind?

This system is exactly the opposite.

[RouletteExplorer]

High numbers were winning/trending spectacularly with big gap in the H/L even chance.

Exactly ! this thing is happening all the time....so this is saving us when the other Ecs are hitting equal.

We must become unbalanced just like roulette....
Like Bruce Lee once said : Be like water......LoLoLoLoLoLoLoLoLoLoLoLoL

[iggiv]

sorry to disappoint u  but this stuff is not new and was tried before.

think of it this way: u play some fixed roulette numbers each time one of them hits (18, 18, 18). it can't work with randomness. randomness will not let u go on winning with this kind of stiff patterns.

in reality randomness is balanced (on a long run of course). that's why those patterns won't win.
it may be not a bad method though on a condition that
1) hit and run
2) combined with other kinds of hot trend playing

[RouletteExplorer]

I don't know if it has been tested before exacty as I posted the system.
And we don't care about the balance in the long run...we just care about the unbalances that are happening all the time in the short run....and this is why we do resets after every new + .

Everytime is gonna make balance because something was left behind(so we were winning and reseting the session) we will also win because in order to have a balance in the long run, new unbalances must happen (so we will be also winning)  .....

Too good to be true?
we can t see unless we test

[iggiv]

well, i wish u happy winnings anyway. but randomness will not let those stiff patterns win on a long run. though combination with other stuff could be good

[RouletteExplorer]

Combinations aren t working...because we don't know WHEN to change the pattern.
But if u read above u will see that with the system the changes are being traped !!!!!!!!

Unbalance will make the ballance in the long run.....we traping the unbalances we are always up.

[iggiv]

the idea itself is not bad at all. the old idea of hot trend playing is not bad. it is just that using it with limited stiff patterns only won't work

[iggiv]

take it easy bud. go on with your testing. if u win on a long run-- i won't be upset believe me. but i don't think u will. don't hold your breath