The next number out is 16 RED, EVEN, LOW, 2ND DOZEN, 1ST COLUMN.

[attachimg=1]

Place 1 chip on all these locations.

[attachimg=2]

The next number out was 11 BLACK, ODD, LOW, 1ST DOZEN, 2ND COLUMN.

That was a loss of 3 units and so what you would do now is to add a chip to any winning bet and replace all the losing bets with 1 chip on what is currently showing.

The next number out is 9 RED, ODD, LOW, 1ST DOZEN, 3RD COLUMN.

[attachimg=1]

This does not take the game into a new profit.

So once again, add a chip to all winning bets and replace all losing bets with what is currently showing.

The next number out was 3 RED, ODD, LOW, 1ST DOZEN, 3RD COLUMN.

[attachimg=2]

This takes the current game into a profit.

'CEH' did explain on his pages that the bet was simple and he warned not to get caught up on all the 'patterns' nonsense.

Maybe what I am showing here is a step in the right direction.

cheers

sputnik ...nonsense i completley agree[smiley]aes/angel.png[/smiley]

Quote from: Bally6354 on October 13, 2013, 11:55:15 AM


Maybe what I am showing here is a step in the right direction.

I'm afraid no because it needs a progression.

cheers

hans

Quote from: HansHuckebein on October 13, 2013, 04:02:11 PM
I'm afraid no because it needs a progression.

cheers

hans

The point is, there is no member of this forum who can flat betting.
If some one say they can, then they lie.


[mod] Steady on... That last sentence is unacceptable. You don't KNOW that for certain. To say otherwise is pure arrogance. Just because you might not be able to do something does not mean that others can't !! [/mod]

Any  long time experienced player should know  by now  that this  system by CEH is  an overkill and a  piece of stuff.

I assumed that we  have more  experienced  roulette players here on board  as  evidenced by their  remarks to be  able  to spot  this stuff.

Sorry to to say they are still in the amateur league.

Nathan Detroit.

Quote from: HansHuckebein on October 13, 2013, 04:02:11 PM
I'm afraid no because it needs a progression.

cheers

hans

Yes...but the increase is only on winning bets looking to trap a run.


cheers

there was no increase of bet size during a session...however in any session the betsize may change in size for the session only...but the actual size of the bet remains constant throughout each individual session..that was the criteria for his bet..now i think he said he split his bet into 20 separate bets....and did he mention he sometimes lost 9 bets in a row..but no matter as such is his bet selection he always came out ahead...so if he lost 9 bets out of 20 what odds was he choosing to come out ahead every game...maybe a small loss in 30 sessions...

Hello Sputnik


Well in reply to your sweeping statement I can reply with my own.


I bet only flat staking on two bets I use professionally.


First the WF3* which I have openly shared on this Forum. Please refer 'Total Roulette'. Rate of earning moves between +0.10 up to +0.50 units per spin.


Second the SSF* bet which is private but can be played up to 5 sets live and earns at a rate 5 to 7 times faster than *WF3*.
That is also and essentially fundamentally played flat. By playing progression it is way too volatile but by flat staking, the overlay rules and stops are such that the bet is a CWB variety, as is WF3*. Then by applying 'smart controls' such as taking suitable profit when offered ( knowing the bet characteristics you know when you are 'ahead of expectations'), or stopping at suitable loss limit, or pausing, or finding suitable triggers to start.


All this is fact, based on hard work and many many years of work, and yes even indirectly, or by default with help from CEH.


There is a wonderful excitement in treasure hunting and think the swiss scammers thrived on our gullible natures over a ten year period. I am sure there are dozens of bets to be explored but I do recommend flat staking, or as Bayes has so eloquently stated 'beating variance' by use of a well modeled short stop progression.


Hope that helps. XXVV

Very thoughtful, Bally. 

Some of us appreciate your efforts and time.

Thanks esoito

I don't expect what I mentioned to be an exact carbon copy of the 'CEH' bet. However I did try to follow the gist of it.

This idea does not seem that bad on the limited testing I have done.

[attachimg=1]

This one is just a brief test I did this morning before I head off to the casino.

I completed several longer tests yesterday and all but one showed a decent return with no scary drawdowns.

The losing session was a grind. (-50 units in 200 spins)

cheers

Bally, Sputnik,

You both are right. I will tell try explaining why.

First, Sputnik, you are absolutely right in saying that betting just even chance is no worse/better than betting multiple locations. Consider it this way, there are four people sitting on the table. Each betting on one of the betting positions called out in the 4 unit bet. For the CEH method to end in profit, the collective sum of all these 4 people has to end in profit. And common sense says that it doesn't. There will be days when they will end in profit and there will be days when they will end in loss. There will be days when all four people will win and there will be days when all four people will lose. It just doesn't make any sense and you are spot on Sputnik.

Now coming to your question on flat betting Sputnik, I don't want to comment much on it as I know people who win absolutely flat betting. There are four forms of flat betting. One is flat betting in the true sense of flat betting, second one is flat betting in terms of units, but moving the betting positions, like parachute bets. Third is where you bet a progression 1,2,3,4, but on the progression loss, you move back to 1,2,3,4 again. Similar to your 1,2,2 method. You are flat betting 5 units. Fourth form is flat betting a session. Where you go to a session with a fixed pot of money or fixed Bank roll and you try to make profit or loss. The fixed bank roll/session Bank roll forms your flat bet. I have seen people practice all 4 forms and I have seen people both win and lose out of it.

Now Bally, eventhough Sputnik is right, your method is winning because, you are controlling your progression and balancing it using the wins from others. The biggest battle you have to do in roulette is the battle of your own mind. It is very hard to win that battle. You have tried transferring that battle to the wheel, by betting on multiple locations and the win or loss on one location controlling the totall number of units on the other location. That way, you are always limiting your progression, using a mixed bag of results.

You will get the same result even if you just chose one position and try catching a run with a positive progression, but controlling the positive progression with a rule of resetting after lets say 3 wins in a row and not when you are in a new bankroll high. This way you will control your positive progression and keep getting runs which you can capitalize on.

few more spins....

[attachimg=1]

It is unusual to lose all 5 bets and any kind of run can quickly produce a new high!

Anyway, I will stop with this here. Anyone who wants to test it will do so. I don't want to distract from the thread.

But it would be good for others to share their ideas and maybe we can harvest our own CWB.

cheers

Quote from: Pockets on October 14, 2013, 10:24:42 AM

  The biggest battle you have to do in roulette is the battle of your own mind. It is very hard to win that battle. You have tried transferring that battle to the wheel, by betting on multiple locations and the win or loss on one location controlling the totall number of units on the other location.

That is a very insightful way of looking at it Pockets! I never really thought of it like that. But of course....you are right!

We mostly beat ourselves at the roulette table. Thank you for your suggestion. [smiley]aes/thumb.png[/smiley]

Great posts guys! It looks like the main problem with understanding CEH's bet is his noobish terminology.

Quote from: 6th-sense on October 13, 2013, 07:09:07 PM
there was no increase of bet size during a session...however in any session the betsize may change in size for the session only...but the actual size of the bet remains constant throughout each individual session..that was the criteria for his bet..now i think he said he split his bet into 20 separate bets....and did he mention he sometimes lost 9 bets in a row..but no matter as such is his bet selection he always came out ahead...so if he lost 9 bets out of 20 what odds was he choosing to come out ahead every game...maybe a small loss in 30 sessions...

He plays 18 or less numbers? So he plays EC alone, dozen alone, column alone. It's some kind of planned minigame. Is it possible that he switches bets (bet types) on a trigger (or loss)?

Quote from: Pockets on October 14, 2013, 10:24:42 AM
Bally, Sputnik,

You both are right. I will tell try explaining why.

First, Sputnik, you are absolutely right in saying that betting just even chance is no worse/better than betting multiple locations. Consider it this way, there are four people sitting on the table. Each betting on one of the betting positions called out in the 4 unit bet. For the CEH method to end in profit, the collective sum of all these 4 people has to end in profit. And common sense says that it doesn't. There will be days when they will end in profit and there will be days when they will end in loss. There will be days when all four people will win and there will be days when all four people will lose. It just doesn't make any sense and you are spot on Sputnik.

Now coming to your question on flat betting Sputnik, I don't want to comment much on it as I know people who win absolutely flat betting. There are four forms of flat betting. One is flat betting in the true sense of flat betting, second one is flat betting in terms of units, but moving the betting positions, like parachute bets. Third is where you bet a progression 1,2,3,4, but on the progression loss, you move back to 1,2,3,4 again. Similar to your 1,2,2 method. You are flat betting 5 units. Fourth form is flat betting a session. Where you go to a session with a fixed pot of money or fixed Bank roll and you try to make profit or loss. The fixed bank roll/session Bank roll forms your flat bet. I have seen people practice all 4 forms and I have seen people both win and lose out of it.

Now Bally, eventhough Sputnik is right, your method is winning because, you are controlling your progression and balancing it using the wins from others. The biggest battle you have to do in roulette is the battle of your own mind. It is very hard to win that battle. You have tried transferring that battle to the wheel, by betting on multiple locations and the win or loss on one location controlling the totall number of units on the other location. That way, you are always limiting your progression, using a mixed bag of results.

You will get the same result even if you just chose one position and try catching a run with a positive progression, but controlling the positive progression with a rule of resetting after lets say 3 wins in a row and not when you are in a new bankroll high. This way you will control your positive progression and keep getting runs which you can capitalize on.

So is CEH actually "flatbetting" not flatbetting? End on a double win - WW or double units size? It smells on MM to me.