+ Register

[Gizmotron]

Everyone advocating randomness has stated clearly that it takes lots of experience. Experts at just about everything have experienced changes in the form of Neuroplasticity. People have a natural inclination to seek optimism from the unconscious mind. They are prone to ignore negative information while adapting positive results from optimistic situations. It's not easy to adapt a method derived from experience gained from randomness. First you have to overcome yourself in many ways. Using randomness to beat Roulette is the same as learning a difficult art form.

[The Crow]

Randomness is driven by a force which has many facets, shapes, and sizes. What you say? A simple toy, kaleidoscope, depicts many wonderful patterns which of course is different, depending on the viewer.

Roulette is the same thing. The numbers paint a wonderful picture. It's never the same. Random bets are never the same as well. When the two are combined, something magically happens, you win.

I know everything about roulette. More importantly, I know nothing about roulette, which makes me either delusional or real.
Now that's random.

TC

[AMK]

Haven't read all the posts yet, sorry : )


Some great posts.





From what I have seen, if you want to play roulette for real it is best to formulate a game plan (this might take a while : )


Most likely this approach will not consist of methods which have passed 1 million spins.


However, they will be solid.


You need good MM as Superman highlights.




You either one day want to play roulette or you don't.


If you do, have a monthly BR which you can afford to lose, build from this.

[Gizmotron]

TC, my play is very simple for me. By experience I'm aware of the current state of conditions and opportunities that are occurring. I base these conditions on fabricated formations, that by coincidence alone, form in my imagination. My fabricated characteristics of randomness allow me to see associations where none actually exist. Much the same as a person seeing familiar figures in cloud formations. I use my imagination to find situations that work. The wood, metal, and ball of the Roulette wheel don't seem to mind. The mathboyz seem to think that this process of using coincidence is some how a violation of scientific properness. 100% of the time they try to debate me by changing the subject or ignoring my position. They always chicken out. They always have, and they always will. It's in all the archives of all the forums. So we get this endless and pointless argument that never ends. It almost always boils down to shoot the messenger. I know that I'm right. I know that I have clearly explained it. Sometimes most of the people really are ignorant.  I dare you to pull your silly putty trick.

[The Crow]

TC, my play is very simple for me. By experience I'm aware of the current state of conditions and opportunities that are occurring. I base these conditions on fabricated formations, that by coincidence alone, form in my imagination. My fabricated characteristics of randomness allow me to see associations where none actually exist. Much the same as a person seeing familiar figures in cloud formations. I use my imagination to find situations that work. The wood, metal, and ball of the Roulette wheel don't seem to mind. The mathboyz seem to think that this process of using coincidence is some how a violation of scientific properness. 100% of the time they try to debate me by changing the subject or ignoring my position. They always chicken out. They always have, and they always will. It's in all the archives of all the forums. So we get this endless and pointless argument that never ends. It almost always boils down to shoot the messenger. I know that I'm right. I know that I have clearly explained it. Sometimes most of the people really are ignorant.  I dare you to pull your silly putty trick.

What do you mean by silly putty trick? Sounds like your method is dealing with your sixth sense, which by the way all of us possess. I am in tune with your vision. I see why you cannot give me an example. You actually have to be in the "zone."

The method I posted wins all the time, but it's monotonous. You average only 500 units per hour. However, being in the "zone" can yield 1000 units in a few spins.

TC

[Sputnik]

 
I think all contribute in there own ways ... some is not so spot on the subject... and some don't have a clue what they talk about... and some others just hang around and being protecting of nothing to be protecting about... that pretty much sum it up with a forum with low standards ...

[Bayes]

No one in here or on any other forum have a real winning system.

How can you possibly know that? 

Saying "if they did, they wouldn't be a member of a forum" assumes that every member of a roulette forum has joined only because they're looking for a winning strategy and don't already have one. While that may be true for most members, you can't say that you know that it's true for ALL.

[spike]

How can you possibly know that? 

Saying "if they did, they wouldn't be a member of a forum" assumes that every member of a roulette forum has joined only because they're looking for a winning strategy and don't already have one. While that may be true for most members, you can't say that you know that it's true for ALL.

I'm on forums because it keeps me thinking about roulette
all the time. Its that simple.

[Albalaha]

No one in here or on any other forum have a real winning system.

                This issue was raised by Esoito too that many of us are merely butterflies, moving from forum to forum, looking for a panacea. I answered that I am not a butterfly at least because there is no nectar available on all such spaces (I feel that). The problem is not that people do not have winning systems but rather a winning system is not shared by most. Yet, you may get a spark that can lead to big fire. I believe that if you can analyse things in larger prospective, you have only two options in gambling:
1. To never go for it and save your hard earned money; or
2. Create a feasible way of gambling where you have fair chances to win
          I preferred later and I do have winning systems, not just one but many.