opinions please

[Steve]

Solitude,Diodoro

I dont know all of the names that were mentioned well, but these two are certainly not experts. If by diodoro you mean andruchi, he's a first class scammer. And solitude mostly just doesnt know what he's talking about.

[GARNabby]

A million dollars in one month? And you call others delusional. Learn to read before you comment.

Where did i write, "in one month"?

Whom, exactly, did i call delusional?

I don't know, would have to confer with the experts, but the inability to read well would seem like another symptom somehow?

[Robeenhuut]

I don't know all of the names that were mentioned well, but these two are certainly not experts. If by diodoro you mean andruchi, he's a first class scammer. And solitude mostly just doesn't know what he's talking about.

Hello Steve

Diodoro is not Andruchi. Its about sleepers in 2 sectors. And Raindrop method by JS was quite popular back then. I just mentioned them as an example of systems that seem 2 work in the beginning 

Regards

[Steve]

The raindrop is one of the biggest gamblers fallacies. It is very easy to prove it is ineffective and has been done many times.

It may have been "popular". Losing is also "popular". Methods that DO work arent popular because people like it clean and simple, but the real world is dynamic.

[iggiv]

"Methods that DO work aren't popular because people like it clean and simple, but the real world is dynamic."

u SAID it

[carpanta]

In roulette game the odds are what they are. We are not going to change them whatever we do.
You can apply witty fixed rules and smart progressions to whatever system you develope but in the end randomness will kill you with the same certainty night follows day.

Why a dynamic entity as randomness will be trapped along mechanical behaviour from our part?

Good news are randomn outcomes dont last long in the middle of the field. Unbalance will happen sooner or later. When that happens something is outracing while something is falling back or missing. That gives an edge while it continues to happen. Speculate, speculate and speculate we are left to. Nothing is granted then. It's a game (of luck?) after all.

I believe Rhythms and Tendencies of whatever events (variances) randomness produces can be tracked with proper tools (matrices). From there on one tries to catch up with them.
Not easy task at all. Timing will be subject to the right reading of results to produce more accurate bet selections.

As everyone know this issue is too complex to claim written on stone solutions. 

Cheers,
Carlos.

[ego]

I believe Rhythms and Tendencies of whatever events (variances) randomness produces can be tracked with proper tools (matrices). From there on one tries to catch up with them.
Not easy task at all. Timing will be subject to the right reading of results to produce more accurate bet selections.

But the ball has no memory and what impact does that have on rhythms and tendencies of whatever events - i tell you - you can play random against random and no other selection produce better result.

Casinos make billions and there is a obvious reason for that.
I know so many who try Kimo Li methods and guess what they end up with - empty wallet.

[carpanta]

Good luck with your approach to roulette game, Ego.

Thanks for reading and answering my post.


Cheers,
Carlos.

[ego]

Good luck with your approach to roulette game, Ego.

Thanks for reading and answering my post.


Cheers,
Carlos.

-

Thank you for understanding - so if you play systems you better quit playing roulette - easy.

-

Thanks for reading and answering to my reply.

[TwoCatSam]

I  know so many who try Kimo Li methods and guess what they end up with - empty wallet.

Long have I suspected the above.

Sam

[Still]

[spin... you can play random against random and no other selection produce better result.

I have heard something about this effect in a trading forum i frequent.

Where this might apply is to somehow add some random application to JohnLegend's latest solution. 

Until an actual edge has been found (if ever) what we can expect to do is shift the inevitable bust as far out (later) as possible, to one, three or five years. (Like holding back the river with a dike).  What i mean, for example, is, under normal distributions, a player should expect to lose almost every game of 50 spins, even more if 100 spins.  But, if busts can be spread farther apart, it may be possible to win 100 games before going bust. JohnLegend's system may accomplish this (we'll see).   Given a bankroll of $100 to begin with (no big deal if lost), this provides an opportunity to get started with not much, and, if lucky, grow a bankroll to $300, $1000, or $3000 before the hammer drops.  If it drops, oh well, $100 down the drain.  But it's a way to get a bigger bankroll for other games with better odds (with an edge).   The hammer could drop at any time, however, so that's where a little luck (and not too much greed) is needed.  With JohnLegend's current method, you'd need to lose 4 games before a $100 BR is busted (assuming unit of $1).  That's already happened to one participant.  it will be interesting to see if that hammer will be lifted, allowing him to get ahead for a while.  Someone else is down -8 chips after MANY games, when they ought to be down 50+ units.  So it may not be as bad as it seems.  I like that his system has a kind of stop-loss-limit where the bust can be controlled (or less emotional), unlike a flat-out martingale.

Of course, i could be completely wrong about all this, and it might turn out better (or worse) than expected. 

[TwoCatSam]

Random is truly the best predictor of random.  (My opinion; I have not been up the mountain!)

Still

Consider this:  You spend hours building your bankroll and the the hammer falls.  It's not the money that bothers me, but the time spent.

Geez, I could learn another song on the guitar in that time.

By the way, that was one good thing about the Code 4 variations--I had lots of waiting time to practice.

Nothing is all bad........

TCS

[Still]

Yes, there is the time consideration.  Allegedly,  there is a disadvantage to playing on RNG because many players feel there is some cheating going on there.  However, if that could be overcome, or isn't really true, then a bot could handle the time-investment issue.  I am looking for something i can bot-ize and run from a server-image i have running on Amazon Web Services Ec2.  That way i can close my laptop and relax, assuming the bot is well-programmed. 

[TwoCatSam]

Still

BV is a fair casino.

Many people won money with their bots.  BV changed the rules,  how you bet and several other things to cause bots not to work.

Lastly, it is easy to see when a bot is working.  They would just refuse to pay.

Until someone invents the human bot, bots will never work.  A bot must make mistakes and vary time time from bet to bet.  No human works at the speed of a bot, the BV knows it.

BV is fair.  Take your system there and play by hand.  Don't be greedy.

I'm in the USA and I can't play there, but if I could I would.  Dublin, too!

Sam

[vundarosa]

I have heard something about this effect in a trading forum i frequent.

Where this might apply is to somehow add some random application to JohnLegend's latest solution. 

Until an actual edge has been found (if ever) what we can expect to do is shift the inevitable bust as far out (later) as possible, to one, three or five years. (Like holding back the river with a dike).  What i mean, for example, is, under normal distributions, a player should expect to lose almost every game of 50 spins, even more if 100 spins.  But, if busts can be spread farther apart, it may be possible to win 100 games before going bust. JohnLegend's system may accomplish this (we'll see).   Given a bankroll of $100 to begin with (no big deal if lost), this provides an opportunity to get started with not much, and, if lucky, grow a bankroll to $300, $1000, or $3000 before the hammer drops.  If it drops, oh well, $100 down the drain.  But it's a way to get a bigger bankroll for other games with better odds (with an edge).   The hammer could drop at any time, however, so that's where a little luck (and not too much greed) is needed.  With JohnLegend's current method, you'd need to lose 4 games before a $100 BR is busted (assuming unit of $1).  That's already happened to one participant.  it will be interesting to see if that hammer will be lifted, allowing him to get ahead for a while.  Someone else is down -8 chips after MANY games, when they ought to be down 50+ units.  So it may not be as bad as it seems. I like that his system has a kind of stop-loss-limit where the bust can be controlled (or less emotional), unlike a flat-out martingale.

Of course, i could be completely wrong about all this, and it might turn out better (or worse) than expected.

-----------------
depends of what you were expecting....i'm already down 56u in 50 games

vundarosa