Anybody can play and win in sessions where his betselection either appears averagely or with minor temporary variance. Can anybody dare to win a perpetually under performer number?

If you are aware of Zumma Testers's book of American Roulette having 15k real spins, here is an open challenge for all those who say they are system creators.

In the attached sheet, I have marked the wins/losses of number 3 in entire 15k trials. It is pertinent to mention here that number 3 has won only 329 times i.e a hit rate of only 45.59 spins/Win.

I openly challenge that no one can beat it at last being under a reasonable limit (bankroll wise and maximum bet used wise). Will anybody ever beat it and prove me wrong?

Since I am not member of any other forum apart from this and mine, I request Victor and others to carry my challenge to other forums as well.

Potentially an interesting challenge.  I hope you get some takers.


And their prize will be (select any one):


1  title deeds to your house

2  50% of your income for the next 10 years

3 A world trip with you in a shared cabin


Go on...Say 'yes'   

QuotePotentially an interesting challenge.I hope you get some takers.

               I can see that even the most famous (so-called successful too) methods are still moving around Gamblers' fallacy and Martingale while they are proven failure concepts, in long run and they are bound to lose more and win less if you keep on playing those. I don't believe those who are still at kindergarten level can ever dare to even think of beating this. I would be the happiest person if someone proves me wrong.
            That is why I said, I am not butterfly because there is no nectar available.

Interesting one here Al.

Albeit some folks claiming to /rock/ the 00 wheel.
I've heard it enough: it's just one extra number... 

Seems the casino math guys disagree.


It DOES make a huge difference... In the casino there are no zeroes to the left

Victor,
             American Roulette has inbuilt double disadvantage to players with comparison to European. I have reverse engineered zumma to bring in the worst option. If someone can beat zumma with this betselection (playing number 3 only) with a well-defined system, he will be the best system creator of the world and he will be able to crush maximum possible sessions without any fear of losing money.

So--confused as usual--we bet only on the 3?  All by its lonesome?  Can't be part of a split, street or anything else?

Sam

If you win 15k spins betting number 3 as your sole bet selection, it proves that you have a strategy that can work in adverse conditions.
    Only a very strong and stable method can work on this. All Kindergarten stuff will fall flat here. This is litmus test of any system.
           Any taker?

You mean to bet nonstop on number 3 i guess.So if playing flat bet definitely a loss due to frequency of hits,but if with progression that is another story.I didn't go through 15k spins.But i bet(no pun intended) at one time number 3 didn't show for 100+ spins even 200 maybe.So it's a challenge really 
Maybe like Winkel once post a thread on an old Forum,just play the progression.

No progression that is ever written on any forum or in any system sold for money can do anything but losing on this data. Fake system sellers reverse engineer Zumma book to find suitable way to bet and prove they can beat it but what about beating such consistently bad bet selection?

Even bread winner progression 1 2 3 4 5 etc.. or 111 222 333
But i was thinking in the line of playing 111 till you play 35 times then 2 for 35 times,on a win go back 35 times.Just an idea

These concepts will be proved as kindergarten by this data.

Is there a way to try the last concept please for 15k,i will really like to know how bad it fails
bet 1 unit for 35 spins,if loss bet 2 unit for 35 spins etc..but on a win go back 35 spaces.But one problem though eg. 2 units at 33 spins a win we go back 35 spins,we go at 1 unit bet at 34th spin.We take from there,we don't regress bak to the beginning of 1 unit if you understand what im saying.

Hey Mervin,
        These things won't work. I challenge all the system writers to show a single way where you can play and win a session like it.
If nobody can do that, it is time to think whether you have actually gained anything from reading so-called "systems" spread over hundreds of systems for sale or freely available on various sites or discussion forums.
                                    Do not think that it is just a challenge to beat number 3 of zumma. Any betselection may have same fate as 3, be it a static one or a number that is being chosen by any hypothesis. Number 3 of zumma is merely an indication of getting worst probabilities on your chosen betselection. How will you cop that?

I am the author of Cracking PI Cracking Random. I have worked extensively with Zumma's System Tester. There is a near precise flat bet advantage: .08333 over the 15k trials. I discuss it in my site: CrackingPi.com. I'll answer any questions you may have.

Welcome GM2

Hope you enjoy around and have a prosper stay