I have a very serious question to make.
What can someone think if he has found a consistent winning flat bet that matches 100% with Charles win 3 mill scammer clues?
Meaning that has tested 30 sessions of 100 spins and almost all passed the test.(letting 1-2 sessions to end up with just a loss of less than 10 chips).
Would that mean that Charles actually has a winning bet?
And if so , why to scam all those ppl and take their money of the PPPC club?(I was not one of them)
I would be glad hear some opinions.
Thanks
Razor
I'm so glad you opened this up again!!
It is apparent from your post that you have done just what you describe. My hats off to you. However, I did not know there were "clues"; I only heard one--something that wins more than it should.
Now, Razor, a few of the guys will make fun of you or tell you to forget the whole Charles thing. Follow your own drummer.
Now, a request: Could you post the clues? I'm sure you have them and it would save some of us the footwork of finding them.
And if you found the answer, make some money with it and let the rest of us find it for ourselves.
TwoCat
.
QuoteI have a very serious question to make.
I have a very serious answer to make.
.
Start gambling.
Buy a new car and new house.
Quit working and live high life, just walk in to any casino in the world and rob them.
Travel around the world and see new things and meet new people.
Eat good and tasty food and get your self a younger girl friend.
Good Luck
Thanks for the answers ppl.
But what I am eager to hear is IF Charles had the bet WHY he stole ppls money?
Quote from: Razor on October 08, 2013, 02:38:40 PM
Thanks for the answers ppl.
But what I am eager to hear is IF Charles had the bet WHY he stole ppls money?
WHY he stole peoples money? Because it`s there. Suckers are born every minute. The line of suckers is getting longer waiting to be fleeced.
ND
... perhaps it was hoax all along..... how do you know he has an "Real Consisting winning bet"??
Only when you know for sure that he has an consisting winning bet you can ask the question as you did, but do you know 100% he has it??
It seems that in your question you kinda belief or want to belief he has....
Carlitos 8)
Carlitos I suggest you to read my first post.
This CEH ( Charles) has an Army of scammers working for him . This is well known on the internet`s roulette message boards. Razor are you one of them?
ND.
I m in this forum for a long time.
If i was a scammer I would have acted a long time ago.
I just asked a simple questions for the ppl that were familliar with Charles , because from my point of view it doesn t make sense.
Quote from: Sputnik on October 08, 2013, 01:45:51 PM
.
I have a very serious answer to make.
.
Start gambling.
Buy a new car and new house.
Quit working and live high life, just walk in to any casino in the world and rob them.
Travel around the world and see new things and meet new people.
Eat good and tasty food and get your self a younger girl friend.
Good Luck
I did all you mentioned...but you wouldn't believe...even that gets boring...no more challenge,
no more travel, no more every day play.......BUT....I know the reason and that is the main thing.
Bloody years.
Finding satisfaction in fishing squids down the sea those days....lovely.
I m glad that you have a winning way for roulette Flatino. [smiley]aes/beer.png[/smiley]
.... that's what i did amigo. however they way you put it is as if you really belief the bet exist...
I am on this and was on others forums from the past a long time.... i was around when the whole thing started with w3m and CEH.....
If he had the bet, If Santa Claus really exist..... its all an big " If " :)
Carlitos 8)
@razor
the question you asked is a question I've asked myself ever since. and I must admit I've haven't found an answer, yet. maybe a scam, maybe this, maybe that or maybe the other ... so for me it would be guesswork.
if you've solved the puzzle my sincere congrats to you. with all the material I have collected about it through the years I have not been able to put the pieces together. but I still think it's an interesting subject.
this is just my own opinion and nothing more. :-)
cheers
hans
What can someone think if he has found a consistand winning flat bet that maches 100% with Charles win 3 mill scammer clues?
Meanning that has tested 30 sessions of 100 spins and almost all passed the test.(letting 1-2 sessions to end up with just a loss of less than 10 chips).--------Said the sharp one!
Razor
Have YOU tested 30 sessions of 100 spins each and came away with only two losers flat betting?
If so, are you going to tell us how you did it, or is this just a post for a pure answer to the question? If it is, ND is right, there's a sucker (like me) waiting with a credit card!! If you found hundred dollar bills lying about, would you not stoop to pick them up?
Would you at least give us the clues?
Sam
2catsam has anyone asked you for your credit card?
In my opinion Charles has the bet he was talking about.(At least this is what my testing showed).
The only reason that I can think of that Charles stole the money from the idiots was that he gave them one final lesson before he disappeared...
And the lesson was "Never pay anyone for a CWB even if it is me"(by me I mean that he was referring to himself)
He had worn everyone about it before in his site...didn't he?
Remember?
He had also mentioned 1 million times that he hates lazy ppl that are not searching for the bet and they want everything easy and ready.
I trend to believe that these were the ppl that he aimed by taking their money.
As for me...I am gonna start playing the bet from tomorrow on land based Casinos.
Even If i will lose it s only 50 chips br.
I have cracked my head searching for this bet for about 4 years now.
I haven t played roulette since I started exploring the bet.
Finally the formula I have found(with the help of RX) is matching Charles criteria 100%.
Its time to let myself play.
Ps. Nathan I do not think that Charles had an army of scammers.
I believe that he was alone in this.
Simon and Charles and every other name he had mentioned it was the same person.
All high clever ppl are alone and have no friends because they feel that everyone is above them and they are making them tired.
... so why are you asking us your question..... as you are going to find it out yourself..... by playing the bet....
I wish you succes with it..... but do not tease us here unless you have something for real to share....
Ps, its almost christmas time...... lol... :)
Carlitos 8)
You see carlitos I have already told you to re read my 1st post.
You think all this time that the question I made is "IF the CWB of Charles really exist"
I never asked for something like that.
I am telling you again that all i asked is "WHY he scammed all these ppl if the bet really exist"
If you can t understand a simple straight question then I asure you that you are unable to find the bet.
Hi razor,
Are you talking about the "boffin's bet"?
I have always thought it might prove a consistent winner if applied to all 3 EC's at the same time- and just play the "bet within a bet" at level stakes...?
Good Luck,
A.
... " If the bet realy exist ", but you do not know whether the bet realy exist or whether your bet which appears to have passed the test which CEH mentioned is the same.
For that to know you must know the CEH CW bet.
To answer your question, yes he wanted to teach people an lesson, however that does not proof that the bet exist or not exist.
You belief by finding your CW bet that passed the CEH criteria therefor is also the CEH bet, your bet can be totaly different and pass the CEH criteria at the same time....
An simple question for you Razor, do you know or have the CEH CWB??
Carlitos 8)
Ok now my final post.
Not everyone is able to find the bet and this for sure.
It needs huge of dedication and a brain that is full of observation.
The bet can not be found without the help of the RX software..this is because the RX flashes the doz-col-B-R-O-E-L-H of the last spin and is a huge help in finding the bet.
Sure it can be found with pen and paper but it s a lot harder and maybe will never notice what is going on.
For the ppl that need help from me...
Find a way and read again all the pages of win3mill.
Every page has clues...even the little ffunny stories has clues in them.
Go in GG forum and find the posts of the person named "Shikamaru".
He was charles and he have fundimendal clues for the bet...clues that never been published in his site.(such as the bet is 4 chips on every spin and that the bet includes a Doz and a COL ...INCLUDES ...it s not the hole bet)
You should really focus on the formula that contains 3 bets and find out when you alter bets in order t TRAP THE RUNS AND THE CHANGES! Ringing a bell???
Forget systems that includes probability based on maths...every math educated person has tried beating the game with it and none could and will ever be able to.
On every spin observe...observe the movements...ringing a bell??
Read charles site so many times that if someone would ever ask you to re right it from scrach you should be able to do it.
unfortunatelly the bet can t be found if someone doesn t have the ability to observe EVERYTHING and know how to adapt.
The person that is gonna find the bet must be able to think very analitic...even in his personal life.
Copy/paste in a word doc the posts of "Shikamaru"...they are vital!!
Finaly Charles was so right when he was telling that the person that will find the bet ...he will have so hard time and dedication to find it that he will never share it with nobody.
I did my duty and helped some ppl in here that I know they desearve finding the bet....just a 2% of the ppl in any forum.
If they will accept that the bet really exist they will find it one day...
I was fighting by my own without knowing if the bet really exist and when I saw Charles scamming ppl my faith had colapsed...
But I was lucky not to give up because I had already found the formula and the only thing that was missing is to arrange the 4 chips correcty in order to make the bet a CWB.
I would have found the bet 1 year before but a simple mistake in playing the formulas wasn t letting the bet to pass the sessions tests...
Today I found out what the mistake was!
It was the zero.....and what you do after it....Remeber Charles saying "Zero is a loss".....it was a major clues because it affects the formula...
I hope I helpled some ppl in here...
I know that 99% of you do not beleave that I am telling the truth but I really don t care.
All I care was to say to you that the bet really exist because so many years I cough blood in order to find it and the best ppl to share this thing is with the ppl that had also searched for the bet and that they know Charles story.
Thank you all for the beautifull jurney you helped me make all those years of exploring roulette.
ps. Atlantis Boffind bet has nothing to do with Charles bet my friend...you are confused.
Carlitos I said that the bet maches the creteria of the clues of Charles...not only the testing creteria.
You are NOT reading anything correct.
..... one of the clues CEH had given was that he never placed more then 2 chips at the same time, maybe other forum members can correct me if iam wrong, and yes Shikamaru has given clues on the GG forum saying that the bet exist of 4 different betts....
I wish you all the best, i also spent 3 years searching this bet :thumbsup:
Carlitos 8)
Quote| hikamaru | Posted: 09-Jun-09 [color=aa0000]21:24[/color] | | | | (http://www.gamblersglen.com/tzimages/_master/post_edit_icon.gif) (http://www.gamblersglen.com/cgi-bin/teemz/teemz.cgi?board=_master&action=editpost&forum=Roulette_Message_Board&topic=7807&entry=26) | Edit (http://www.gamblersglen.com/cgi-bin/teemz/teemz.cgi?board=_master&action=editpost&forum=Roulette_Message_Board&topic=7807&entry=26) |
[/q]| | | | | (http://www.gamblersglen.com/tzimages/_master/viewprofile.gif) (http://www.gamblersglen.com/cgi-bin/teemz/tzprofile.cgi?board=_master&user=shikamaru) | Profile (http://www.gamblersglen.com/cgi-bin/teemz/tzprofile.cgi?board=_master&user=shikamaru) | |
| yes an EC bet ALONE is better odds then a column bet ALONE. ALONE meaning not part of an engineered bet and ALONE meaning not part of an exactly planned session following an exact formula that you created.
However when a column bet is combined with other bets, 3 other bets to be exact, and when it is part of an exactly planned session following an exact formula you have created, then you now have created the dream odds and its definitely better than the EC bets.
When I said to try to CREATE a bet that includes a dozen or column or maybe both that is exactly what I wanted you to do. I did not say to include or exclude the even bets or to use the column and dozen combo. All I said was that you need to create a bet that INCLUDES a column, a dozen, or maybe even both. The word INCLUDES means that the column, dozen, or column dozen combo is not the whole bet, but just part of it. |
[/td][/tr][/table][/td][/tr][/table]
Razor, you can stay if you want here on this forum, nobody is sending you away.....
Carlitos 8)
Razor
Lighten up, Bro! I never said you asked for a credit card. I was referring to that Carrie thing I bought for $24. ND pointed out what a sucker I was and I was just agreeing.
Good thing you found the bet.
Sam
My personal take on this topic is that there is more to it than just a simple " What If ?? heading.
ND
Quote from: Marshall Bing Bell on October 08, 2013, 08:14:00 PM
Bye Bye now, Viper.
perhaps he admires and wishes to recreate the rip off rather than the system
I guess his whole point was a backhanded way of saying......I found it and I ain't gonna tell!
I say bully for him!
Sam
Again, same topic, but different member.
During all years you always see does who gave up and make a topic about how they quit.
Many do it telling us they find a bet and become a lier, when they still had the choice to be honest.
I seen at least 30 topics with the same manner.
No one of does 30 members find the HG ,,, that is just silly ... it does not exist ...
Cheers
..... its the same drill all over again.... but perhaps he is trying to give some clues... this one i found intresting
Quote[size=0px]The bet can not be found without the help of the RX software..this is because the RX flashes the doz-col-B-R-O-E-L-H of the last spin and is a huge help in finding the bet.[/size]
....
Carlitos 8)
Just a general observation:
It is not what one sees but what one thinks one sees.
ND
Hey Carlitos . . .
No need for RX as I have a Tracker that shows the Dozen, Column, and EC for the last number spun.
Hope this helps . . .
Nick
Thanks, Nick.......
Trere is also this one.
Thanks, Normy........
that's sounds great Nick and Normy :applause:
Carlitos 8)
Hi!
I found this on Gamler`s glen.
agesta
Yes it is quite a joke.
Here it is [Drum Roll]
The basic bet is bet penultimate on all even chances.
So that is the spin before the last one
eg. RB Next bet is red, LH bet Low, OE bet odd.
Place that bet for minimum table amount, that is the no win no lose bet.
That just helps to keep you at the table.
The real bet is this.
This is the bet that you play for the big bucks.
After 2 or more of the same and then a change eg. RRB or BBBBBBR
then bet for another change, ie. opposite to the last outcome.
If you win the bet, bet again same as last decision, so RRRBR >>>NOW BET R.
Again this is played on all even chances.
********That is it*****
Feel free to try it, it is fairly safe but has just as much chance of losing as it does of winning.
It is a big steaming pile of dog stuff just like Charles Edward Hampshire or whatever his real name is.
ACETF my behind. 3 million a year my behind. Charles you behind.
*********
"Charles" does sell this bet, contrary to what he would have you believe, to get hold of it, besides paying him 3 grand you also have to pledge a minimum of £104,000 per year to the ACETF? What a great man!
The Link!
http://www.gamblersglen.com/cgi-bin/teemz/teemz.cgi?board=_master&action=opentopic&forum=Roulette_Message_Board&topic=8193 (http://www.gamblersglen.com/cgi-bin/teemz/teemz.cgi?board=_master&action=opentopic&forum=Roulette_Message_Board&topic=8193)
agesta
Thanks Agesta :applause:
Carlitos 8)
that is not a consistent winning bet as i see it
This the Boffins bet. And no it's not a CWB!
QuoteMeaning that has tested 30 sessions of 100 spins and almost all passed the test.(letting 1-2 sessions to end up with just a loss of less than 10 chips).
" Almost passed the test ", thus, it did not pass the test as it lost. Not by much but CEH clearly said, it must passed the test and it will come out as an winner....
Then again, not bad performance i must admit. I do not think you have the CWB bet but if this one only loosses 1 or 2 perhaps the winning ones can make up for these 2 small losses.
Carlitos 8)
Fun topic ---easy fun read.... : one of shikamors statements is if a zero comes you only lose half your bet... could be a lead in this whodunnit......and I love his comments on health I m doing his cider vinegar thing!!!
Make a little room gents, i'm boarding this madman's train without shame. I spent lots of time on this puzzle bet never achieved the 29/30. I'm ready to spend a little more before i throw the towel and board the short bus. First question : Where is the puzzle? I was reading it in realtime, so many changes, deleted pages, offtopics, badmouthing and raving. Lot of stuff i forgot and what i saved died with the hard drive of my old PC. There is wayback machine but many holes in there.
Is this what we are looking for:
[size=78%]http://betselection.cc/6th-sense/roulette-gears-and-cogs-the-world-of-roulette/msg20247/#msg20247 (http://betselection.cc/6th-sense/roulette-gears-and-cogs-the-world-of-roulette/msg20247/#msg20247)[/size]
I would be very grateful if 6th-sense could share this book with forum and join the discussion.
My thoughts on the bet later.
[/size]
ok my new guess is that there is some correlation to betting a dozen or a column depending on what the 3 ec's are doing?---time for a cup of coffee!!! off to casino in the morning, work work, work--im getting sick of those casinos . I need a vacation on an island with no casinos on shore!
Problems:
1) Bet construction
2) Movements
3) Formula
4) Reason
1) Bet construction - 4 chips, engineered bet, very interesting part where it mentions "opposite bet", "bet has 2 parts"
Does every bet has it's opposite bet? You play 1 EC. What is opposite bet? EC again... same bet so to speak... opposite trigger is another thing, right? But - you play 1 dozen - opposite bet is different bet - 2 dozens
My wild guess would be 2 different bets, switching according to triggers:
Something like 1 DOZ + 1 COL + 2 EC vs 2 DOZ + 2 COL + ???
yes graildigger that's what you are looking for.....i have only the manuscript in word docx form..i spent a lot of time doing that file and am not willing to put the docx here...the book itself is in book form is on kindle store i did have it available for free download for five days and that's up now.
..i got to wait another 60 days before i can do that offer again. ...it doesn,t say in there anything about columns and dozens that came about separate from the site of win3million.....
Quote from: Tomla on October 11, 2013, 02:28:14 PM
ok my new guess is that there is some correlation to betting a dozen or a column depending on what the 3 ec's are doing?
This is what I was just thinking as well!
Maybe we could add a list of any clues we can think about and then keep adding any new ones we find.
Ending on 2 wins seems like an important clue to me. It makes it sound like the bet is very streaky. The MM techniques which CH suggested would also validate this.
If we are looking to trap a bet and watch the carpet movements.....then I think the LOW / HIGH may play an important role in the bet. I can't imagine the RED / BLACK or ODD / EVEN as meaning much if it is something combined with the DOZENS / COLUMNS.
LoL....maybe the clue was in the name 'CH'. HIGH and COLUMN C. Who knows?
cheers
it was charles edward hampshire.....column ..even..high lol
Quote from: Razor on October 08, 2013, 06:39:36 PM
The bet can not be found without the help of the RX software..this is because the RX flashes the doz-col-B-R-O-E-L-H of the last spin and is a huge help in finding the bet.
Sure it can be found with pen and paper but it s a lot harder and maybe will never notice what is going on.
[size=78%]On every spin observe...observe the movements...ringing a bell??[/size]
[/size]
Movements of dozens and columns . Visual movements across the carpet? Left, right, up, down, diagonal? 9 of them as i understood reading other forums. AA AB AC BA BB BC CA CB CC?
Something happens less then it should. In movements of dozens and columns, or maybe EC behavior? Where does the trigger come from?
I've thought a lot on this. Remember, the wheel selects numbers only. Those numbers just so happen to fall within a dozen, column and so on.
Now--if something did NOT happen as often as it should, that would mean some numbers are not getting hit as often as they should. As to movements, I'll have to study on that one. Maybe that's it, but I can't see it at first blush...
Example: If column A and B did not switch enough times, that would mean one column is being hit more than the other. That is, one group of numbers, say 2-35, is hitting more than it should.
Am I wrong?
Sam
Good guess Tomla, could it be that EC's show up in every dozen and colum within x-amount of spins?
Meaning, dozen 1 red, after an fews spins dozen 2 red, then again after an fews spins dozen 3 red, other EC"s etc.....
TwoCatSam, there is merrit to what you are saying, some dozens and or columns do show more times. But mostly gerneral speaking 2 dozens and columns at the same time...
Does anyone here has the " Old Clue list " from CEH website W3M?
I think it says that he placed no more then 2 chips at the same time.
Hahaha..... very nicely thought Bally, however be not surprised of you would to be right on that one, but then it would be " CEH, Column, even, high ".
Carlitos 8)
there is no clue-list, I'm afraid. the clues are spread and hidden all over the w3m pages.
cheers
hans
Yes there was an clue list and i had one but lost it due to an pc crash..... lol...... ps, the clue list are the clues spread on the w3m website gathered together....
Carlitos 8)
but this list was not published on w3m, was it?
"some dozens and or columns do show more times."........he said.
Carlitos
Could you elaborate on this? Because if this were the case, we would just bet those columns/dozens.
Sam
Not as an list, but spread around the pages of the website, like i said the list are all the clues from all the pages.
Well has it not appeared to you that some times coloumn 2 or 3 ( or for that matter any other column together with another column ) appears more times together, but you have to see which do appear more times, its like pattern, so it can be that column 1 and 2 appear more times mixed with the column 3, it goes around.... its almost the same when 3 or 5 reds come, column 1 and 2 can come 3 or 4 times mixed with column 3 etc....
I hope iam explaining myself good, do not want to give you false hope....
Carlitos 8)
you have to remember that results in a tracker is like climbing the rungs of a ladder i posted rpro tracker on other site a long time ago but it will not allow me to upload here as the site says its too big...but columns and dozens are shown properly as well as other stuff and you notice its likes climbing the rungs of a ladder a misstep on one side but not the other...well not too much anyway
Just throwing a few random thoughts into the ring (along with my hat).
Clues that I have gleaned:
1) 4 chips.
2) 4 locations (a column plus 3 others is what I think was stated - but that could have just been an example).
3) euro wheel only. (Pretty sure I read somewhere that it doesn't work on American wheel - although maybe that was just "doesn't work as well" and so doesn't defeat the increased number of losses due to 2 zeros).
4) Le partage makes little difference to final outcome (again, I think I read that in Shik's comments).
5) Zero is considered a loss wrt the formula.
6) Objective: trap runs and changes.
7) symmetry (or lack thereof) seems to be important.
8] EC's are included - in fact I suspect it is ONLY EC's, columns and/or dozens.
9) something occurs less frequently than it should.
Some random thoughts relating to the above -
If you want to trap a run of High's or Low's then you would bet 3rd or 1st dozen resp.
If you want to trap a run of Black or Red then you would bet Col 2 or 3 resp.
Odd/Even is perfectly symmetrical in both dozens and columns so these are probably not included in the bet - unless they are used for some sort of independent purpose.
The above traps are not perfect - you could still lose because the run just happened to be avoiding the area of your trap - but this is not unexpected because I think the goal was 29 out of 30 successful games so even in perfect circumstances, when the gods of gambling are toying with you, you could still lose.
Trapping changes is just the opposite of the above - but still with HL or RB only. So, for example, to trap a change from H to L you would bet 1st dozen, and so on.
So the question then becomes - what are the rules around going for the runs or the changes? Has there been any mention of whether or not you bet continuously or wait for a condition to be fulfilled? Perhaps the essence of these rules relate to clue 9.
See next post for a few thoughts on the philosophy expounded that "something occurs less frequently than it should".
Bryan
So - here's a quote from My Keynes. His Treatise on Probability has been mentioned before but how many of you have actually looked at it - even just to the referred chapter? It's not that tough if you just ignore the math and try to grasp the meaning.
Anyway - 2 quotes follow.
the actual frequency in a series of trials of an event, of which the probability at each trial is less than 1/2 (i.e. 0.5), is likely to fall short of its most probable value more often than it exceeds it.
and
it is sometimes worth the statistician's while to bear in mind this appreciable want of symmetry in the distribution about the mode or most probable value
He is saying that "the dispersion about the most probable value, even when the conditions for the applicability of Bernoulli's Theorem in its non-approximate form are strictly fulfilled, is unsymmetrical".
So there is some good support for the assertion that something happens less frequently than expected - i.e. falls short of its most probable value MORE OFTEN THAN IT EXCEEDS IT. Note, however, that this refers only to "probabilities less than 0.5" so EC's, INDEPENDENTLY, are insufficient. However, in the table provided in the document which shows the calculated value of the excess delta there are some entries for a probability of 1/4 (i.e. 0.25) and this is very close to the combination of 2 EC's. How convenient!
Another important principal from the Treatise is "the difference between the two probabilities being a maximum when n = 1, constantly diminishing as n increases ...". So if you are trying to capitalize on this principal then SHORT games are more favorable than LONG games. Again, mathematically proven (as far as anything is "provable" in maths - remembering that the whole area of probability is still referred to as a theory).
Final quote, which is a specific example, to assist with understanding.
Thus it is easily found that in 100 sets of 4 trials each, where p = 1/4, the actual frequency is likely to exceed the most probable 26 times and to fall short of it 31 times.
Food for thought?
Bryan
Sam and Carlitos, you three cats have some great perspective on this matter!
Only thing that actually would surprise me is along those lines because we assume that all bets are equal.
Well they are equal on their own, column A will not show less times than B or C in the long run, I'm sure of that.
Had same thoughts (they look close enough to me) on this like Carlitos.
What's with combos? Runs?
Is some run less possible then others? ABBABBAABBA vs BCCBCBBCCCCBB vs ACCAACACAAACC ?
Do some appear less, are they shorter on average?
There is also something i was interested in my studies, clean runs - ABABABAB / BCBCBC .... betting against the order, against the pattern. Maybe this is somehow related.
"and to clear things up i didn't give the bet away instead i gave a clue that would lead you to it after much deduction. i narrowed down the bets that could be used to only 8 and then i gave them my play by play (down 3 units, down 2 units, up 2 units, etc. and the corresponding numbers, from a real wheel by the way and whether it was american single 0 double 00 or euro)
it makes a big difference whether it is an american or a european wheel as the numbers are arranged in a totally different manner. the fact that you get half back on even chances when it lands on 0 hardly affects anything.
if you don't know the significance of narrowing down the bets to only 8 possible choices then you know nothing of the holy grail. but at least you have the grail."
8 possible bets, that's a big clue. Also look the loss and gain unit wise. I think the bet is designed for european wheel. Maybe the reason of why is something happening less is in the carpet vs wheel problem. He says "the fact that you get half back on even chances" - even chances - plural? Or one at the time but sometimes you use R/B and other times E/O or H/L...
Hello Graildigger,
You are right on that one. When looking in the long run columns will show not less or more then other columns, perhaps with an few small difference.
Anyone can see that in the permenanzen. However when looking at an few spins could be slight difference.
Anyone with enough roulette playing experience will see that sometime some columns combines with other have the upper hand, and it changes etc... no big deal or secret.
Sqzboz, good posts!!
But i do not think the CEH CWB is in the ABBABBBAA thing.
CEH said, it was through default situation that he found the bet.
So what's an default situation in roulette??
When all possible betts are clear to see?? Like number 25 come up, red high oneven, but the opposite is, black even low.
And what's this riddle has to do with it, some guy called Werdna, ( or in the opposite writting Andrew, believed to be CEH ), posted this also on the old VLS forum,
If friends have the answer how many by your side?
If pages could be read would they be your guide?
An occurrance it will happen maybe once or twice
The balance on your side you'd think that would be nice
Should there be a minus there may well be a plus
Working on your own means there is no us
-----------------------------------------------------------
Carlitos 8)
QuoteAs a pure example only, three spins of roulette for an EC can give 8 different combinations,two with the same chance and 6 with the two chances mixed..that's a ratio of 3 to 1 which is equal 75/25
Above quote from the CEH message board.
25
ROH
BEL .... and then sort out all combi's.
that's the bet within the bet.
Example, number 7, R O L,
ROL
ROH
REL
REH
Opposite
BEH
BEL
BOH
BOL
Carlitos 8)
Graildigger, its only European wheel for sure. Thus, 1 zero.
Carlitos 8)
Thank you Carlitos for those 2 posts. It was so long time ago that i forgot about the poem and this example from CEH.
They completely change my perspective on the bet. "Look for the opposite in everything you find".
First and fourth verse are very important.
About formula - it looks like the bet could be very precise like a clockwork... X number of placed bets in every Y spins
Graildigger, thank you also for your posts, it made it all clearer to me :applause:
that's the only thing we have to figure out, how to place the bets and in which way....
You could be right on this clockwork idea :thumbsup: Its the difference between night and day...
Carlitos 8)
Quote from: Graildigger on October 12, 2013, 11:48:34 AM
it looks like the bet could be very precise like a clockwork... X number of placed bets in every Y spins
I agree that there *could* be some kind of trigger ... after so many misses of a certain combo of a particular state then begin to bet that combo when the next trigger forms...
A.
Hi Graildigger,
I call this "THE LAYOUT FACTOR" (TLF)
An EC + column (refined and revised) strategy for single 0 real casino roulette or single 0 live online roulette and based on the arrangement of the roulette colours on the table layout.
When you look at the table layout you will notice that:
The 1st Column has an equal number of Red and Black numbers, but the 2nd Column has 4 Red and 8 Black, while the 3rd Column has 4 Black and 8 Red numbers.
This is the rationale or reasoning influence behind this betting gambit.
Patience and tolerance will be required at times.
What to bet
=======
There are 2 bets involved.
The first bet is on the RED or BLACK even chance
The second bet is on the 2nd OR THE 3rd COLUMN. (2/1 chance)
When you bet Red then you must also bet an equal amount on the 2nd Column.
When you bet Black then you must also bet an equal amount on the 3rd Column.
Note:
Whether you bet Red and the 2nd Column or Black and the 3rd Column, you are covering 18 plus 8 for a total of 26 numbers out of 37 at the cost of only two units. That's covering 18 of a colour plus 8 of the other color and doubling up the coverage on 4.
When only the correct colour comes up, the bet returns even money so you get the spin for free. When only the column hits you make one unit profit. When the colour and the column both hit then you make three units profit.
When and How To Bet
=============
Selections are decided by the COLOUR of the DECISION BEFORE LAST (DBL)
In other words the penultimate or preceding number to the last number hit.
The ZERO is ignored. Only use the results before the 0.
If the colour of the DBL result is RED then the bet to be made is an equal amount on RED + the 2nd COLUMN.
If the colour of the DBL result is BLACK then the bet to be made is an equal amount on BLACK + the 3rd COLUMN.
These betting "movements" are to be followed correctly at all times!
Flatbetting only.
Now for the trigger rules:
Only bet on RED + COLUMN 2 when so indicated if the last THREE or more appearances of Red DID NOT also hit the second column as well!
Only bet on BLACK + COLUMN 3 when so indicated if the last THREE or more appearances of Black DID NOT also hit the third column as well!
That means it will not be continuous betting all the time - there will be automatic stop and start betting points for each colour combo. If a colour trigger applies and only if the DBL is that colour then betting will commence on it. Bets will cease on a qualifying colour after it hits (whether it was bet upon or not!!!) until the 3 miss qualifying trigger for that colour re-qualifies again...
Well this is my idea. I'm sure GLC could come up with a good cyclic progression if needs be too.
Will show example next....
A. :)
I don't believe in this.
That it should be better selection then just using red and black.
It is easy to prove your point if you argue against my assumptions.
Pick any advance selection using multi locations.
Aim just to win +1 unit or break even +0.
that's it.
Then we can compare results.
If you argue you can flat betting, then +1 and +0 should overcome -1 -2 -3 and so on ...
You can pick any loss limit you like.
I do the same using red and black as they come with out any fancy or advance selection method.
And i claim i will get same results or even better results, then you can achieve using multi selection.
There is no underlying advantage with the layout, is just voo-do stuff ...
#spun +/- times missed bet
=================================================
8 +0 b1
6 b0
34 r1
25 r2
21 r3 r+c2
7 w+0 +0 r4 r+c2
14 w+3 +3 r0
12 r1
28 b1
8 b2
1 r2
18 r3 r+c2
9 w+0 r4 r+c2
11 w+1 +4 b3 r+c2
5 w+3 +7 r0 b+c3
36 w+1 +8 r1
34 r2
26 b4
4 b5 b+c3
7 L-2 +6 r3 b+c3
10 w+0 b6 r+c2
1 w+0 r4 b+c3
5 L-2 +4 r0
8 b7
35 b8 b+c3
10 w+0 b9 b+c3
34 w+1 +5 r1 b+c3
6 w+3 +8 b0
12 r2
7 r3 r+c2
8 w+1 +9 b1 r+c2
19 w+0 r4
+9pts
Remember, it's just an IDEA of what the CWB (if it exists) might or could be like.
A.
>:D Sputnik,
I am in full agreement with your statement: " with the layout, is just voo-do".
Then again it is October. the month of the spooks . It`s no wonder that this spook " CEH" made a comeback at this time of the year.
>:D
HAPPY HALLOWEEN !!!
Trick or Treat?
ND
.
[smiley]aes/vampire.png[/smiley]
Bit of voo-doo might come in handy if you get freaked out by some bad ju-ju. Gimme that JD and coke! O:-)
>:D
voodoo...anyone really take a look at the table?.....remember there was a few references to it and thinking outside the box...every cross section of dozen and column has at least 2 of the same group numbers except dozen 2....and cross section doz3 col 1.....16 numbers...also all lines are the same except lines 4...and 10....could doz 2 be the main trigger ..and the 4 bets placed on double street 1...single street 3...split 26/27...and 1 unit on quad...32.33.35.36......just a thought all triggered by doz 2
Quote from: 6th-sense on October 12, 2013, 06:24:51 PM
voodoo...anyone really take a look at the table?.....remember there was a few references to it and thinking outside the box...every cross section of dozen and column has at least 2 of the same group numbers except dozen 2....and cross section doz3 col 1.....16 numbers...also all lines are the same except lines 4...and 10....could doz 2 be the main trigger ..and the 4 bets placed on double street 1...single street 3...split 26/27...and 1 unit on quad...32.33.35.36......just a thought all triggered by doz 2
Sorry to say it again, but i think that is nonsense ... my opinion ...
I had a read through the w3million pages again this morning just to see if anything grabbed my attention.
Here is something that kind of fits the bill and I have not really seen it mentioned anywhere before.
So the first number out is 4 BLACK, EVEN, LOW, 1ST 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's a profit of 2 units and now you would reset and go again.
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. :thumbsup:
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.
Quote from: Graildigger on October 14, 2013, 06:56:42 PM
So is CEH actually "flatbetting" not flatbetting? End on a double win - WW or double units size? It smells on MM to me.
From w3m.com:
"Nothing complex, simply commonsense. If your bet does not win on straight level betting...your bet is no good....go back to the drawing board.
May I explain by way of example? Our bet has shown on occasions to lose 6 in a row. So we need to multiply our session bank 3x6 = 18 (we round it up to 20) Therefore all the trustees always divide by 20. They have 20 bets of the same amount to use each session. In most sessions we never use more than 2 units from our bank before being in profit.
Ie. If we use a playing bank of £10.000 for a session we have 20 bet units of £500. For each bet.
You can now see that you must "Fit" your bets to the weakest part of your bet. All very simple. Do not be fooled by complexity. Keep everything simple and safe."
cheers
hans
This was one of the smartest bits of advice from CEH - "fit your bets to the weakest part of your bet".
Study of the bet characteristics, ie the results spread and outcome distribution criteria, is the way forward. The weakest parts can be identified as for example whether to a bell curve or a decay curve, and to trap the bet results over the spread of bets so as to be most effective.
This has to do with efficient bets.
Flat staking applied to a decay curve for example is ideal where the initial bets can have maximum impact.
A stop loss needs to be arranged to determine the extent of practical efficiency and thus determine the worst case loss.
Or even worse the multiple losses that could result unless key rules are established.
Once that worst case loss is established over large sample tests, the degree to which the bet size is handled can show how quickly a loss can be recovered.
The rate of recovery from loss is key to progress, as is the frequency of most effective hits as early as possible.
Hope that fits into this mix.
XXVV
Hello again.
I have played a lot of sessions in my 2 Casinos (Land based) and I have managed to double my chips value.Now more profit will come .
I had the curiosity to read what happened to the topic that I posted with the help I gave and it was a nice surprize to see that most of the members are not negative in searching for the winning bet except the old full of negativity ND.
ND the fact that you can t find the bet doesn t mean that it doesn t exist.
I will help some more you people.
1) Carlitos once again you are not remembering the clues that CHE gave and you are making people confused in here with the wrong posts that you are posting.
CHE had clearly stated that from 30 sessions the 1 or 2(the most) is allowed to lose less than 10 chips in the end.(10 chips is nothing) So my bet is correct because this is how it performs.
30 sessions only 1 loss
30 sessions 2 losses
30 sessions NO loss.
This is about how it should perform.
2)sqzbox all the clues that you have gathered are correct
3)The triggerd of the bet are NOT on the Ecs...very importand
When CHE was telling movements on the carpet it is so easy to understand that it not the Ecs...
4) Do not care what the movements are doing on the inside bets...the triggers are not on the inside bets
5)The bet is very simple to be applied. With a little trainning you knwo where to bet in a sec...but you do not have to do any trainning because as you are testing the bet to see if it s the right one..the trainning is happening.
6)The bet does not have 2 parts... It has 3.
I said so many times to read the clues and read them correct..I alaso said to read the shikamaru s clues and he clearly started that the bet has 3 parts.
7)Only with RX is easier to SPOT the movements ...the hard part is to spot the correct ones because on every spin a lot of movements are happening.
RX not only will help you find those movements but it will also make your life easier in testing the bet.
Knowing what is the last doz or col or Ecs can t help you because only 1 spin is NOT a movement.
Only the flashing thing that RX has is helping in spoting the movements.
8) The last and most importand clue.
Find the formula...find where to change from the part 1 to 2 and to 3 ... it is obvious that a loss will make the part to change.
Thanks for the nice Pms that you sent me people but I will not answer to any of them.
In fact if i will ever post again it will also be in public like now.
6)The bet does not have 2 parts... It has 3.
I said so many times to read the clues and read them correct..I alaso said to read the shikamaru s clues and he clearly started that the bet has 3 parts.
7)Only with RX is easier to SPOT the covements ...the hard pasrt is to spot the correct ones because on every spin a lot of movements are happening.
RX not only will help you find those movements but it willa also make your life easier in testing the bet.
Knowing what is the last doz or col or Ecs can t help you because only 1 spin is NOT a movement.
Only the flashing thing that RX has is helping in spoting the movements.
When you say that 1 spin is not a movement could you clarify that further? Is it 3 spins as in a full cycle for either dozen or column? Or is it more?
3 parts? hmmmm now this gets me thinking....does this mean it is more of a parachute bet where the 3rd part is where all 4 bets are up at the same time to cover more of the possible runs/changes?
Thanks again for any help you provide and may your good fortune keep up with you
I think it is not nessesary to post this but a lot of stupit ppl are on planet so :
DO NOT GIVE ANY MONEY TO ANYONE THAT CLAIMS HE HAS THE BET!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
IF SOMEONE HAS THE BET HE DOES N.O.T NEED ANY MONEY FROM ANYONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
HE IS ENTERING IN A CASINO AND HE GETS THE MONEY HE NEEDS.
Quote from: Razor on October 16, 2013, 08:36:19 PM
I think it is not nessesary to post this but a lot of stupit ppl are on planet so :
DO NOT GIVE ANY MONEY TO ANYONE THAT CLAIMS HE HAS THE BET!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
IF SOMEONE HAS THE BET HE DOES N.O.T NEED ANY MONEY FROM ANYONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
HE IS ENTERING IN A CASINO AND HE GETS THE MONEY HE NEEDS.
I have a request. Can you play at any live dealer and proceed to play your system. Show us your consistent withdrawal as a proof? Its always ppl saying they have the winning bet but there's no proof its all talks.
there is no winning bet. it's nonsense. it doesn't exist. Whatever is winning now will lose soon. Any stiff pattern. But that does not mean, that it's impossible to win in roulette.
Of course there's no consistent winning bet. The very idea is ludicrous. This guy razor is having a bit of a giggle at your expense!
Give it up folks, concentrate on other speculative activities like poker, trading or sports betting, where the odds aren't fixed and the expectation isn't necessarily negative. :thumbsup:
Are we speaking of a bet that never loses? I mean, it wins every spin and makes money?
OR
Are we speaking of a bet that always has a chip in the right place. It wins something every spin but may actually lose money as other chips are down, too.
OR
Are we speaking of a bet that may lose five out of ten spins and still produce a profit?
What the heck is a "constant winning bet" anyway??
TwoCat
hi razor could you give us a 100 spin sample with the profit at the end?...or how many wins or losses...or is this asking too much
Ding dong, Marshall. I believe you shot the answer right at us!
Letts do an recap of this,
- Triggers on the movements are no EC's or inside numbers.
- The bet has 3 parts. Probaly, EC's high and low and Red and black, dozens and columns.
- How is the bet being played? At least 1 EC in combination with an dozen or column? Or are all the chips being played at the same time. As CEH have said on his website, most of the times no more then 2 chips are being used before being in profit.
- Dozens and columns are the trigger for the movements?
- And, every spin there is an trigger and an bet, so these movements must be seen within 2 or 3 spin results even if RX is being used to discover what it is that moves.
QuoteDO NOT GIVE ANY MONEY TO ANYONE THAT CLAIMS HE HAS THE BET!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!IF SOMEONE HAS THE BET HE DOES N.O.T NEED ANY MONEY FROM ANYONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!HE IS ENTERING IN A CASINO AND HE GETS THE MONEY HE NEEDS.
Note how " not " is being written here, " N.O.T. ", what does it mean, " not odds the ", " the odds not ".Ps, letts keep this forum and threat clean of words like " stupid " etc.... you may not agree with someone but it is no reason to start swearing.Carlitos 8)
It s funny asking me for proofs because I m not here to sell anything.
Do you beleave it? FINE ... You don t beleave it? Also FINE.
2CatSam from the comments and questions you are making here it is obvious that you haven t read a single page of Win3mill...so you shouldn t even participate in this topic.
If you will ever take the time and the parience to read them(I doubt) then we can speak again.
For the ppl that are searching for the bet:
Open RX and inset a spin file of real Casino spins.
Spin and observe the movements that are happening on the dozens and on colums( I ain t gonna say particularly look on the Doz or look on the Col...I have already said enough...it s your bussines to find what the triggers and formula is)
Observe of a movement that is NOT happening as much as it should(Ringing a bell?)
Then try to trap this by trapping the opposite(Ringing a bell?).
When you are testing you will realize that the 3d part of the formula must me played in order to make the consistent losses(at some point of the playing) ,consistent wins...and then part 1 or 2 again.
The hard part is the 4th chip where to be placed...but when you will have found the formula with more work you will find where this 4th chip must be placed.
With just the 3 chips you will have found a bet that is not winning but its not losing either(RINGING A BELL?????)
This simple means that in every 100 placed bets you will be close to 0 (+5 or -5 in the end etc.)
And with the adding of the 4th chip you will have a winner(Ringing a bell???)
Charles clues were so specific and when you will find the bet you will realize that every single clue was bits of the puzzle that will have a real meanning when you will have solved the puzzle.
Good luck.
Ps . Carlitos once again you have everything wrong.
Charles never said " most of the times no more then 2 chips are being used before being in profit.".
He said most of the times no more than 2 placed BETS(meaning 2 betting spins) are being used before being in profit.
These mistakes of urs will make you never find the bet..sorry.
Read all the pages and shikamaru clues again.
Razor, I just want to say "thank you" for taking the time to explain things. I really appreciate it.
cheers
hans
My challenge with this topic still stands ,,, if some one dear to argue against it ...
Let me remind you ... you can not win +1 or +0 to overcome the attempts doing so ... at least not as many times as i can ...
Simple math when it boils down to flat betting ...
Cheers
2CatSam from the comments and questions you are making here it is obvious that you haven t read a single page of Win3mill...so you shouldn t even participate in this topic.
If you will ever take the time and the parience to read them(I doubt) then we can speak again.
Sorry about me. I'll take your advice and butt out. We don't need to speak again.
Sam
Quote from: Razor on October 17, 2013, 02:56:54 PM
It s funny asking me for proofs because I m not here to sell anything.
Maybe not, but you are dropping hints. Why? and isn't there a rule about that in this forum? there is at vlsroulette.com.
Mike, there is so many wannabes and pros in one place, so you never know who lies.
Based upon my many year of experience so have i spot many lier's at this forum as with others.
My opinion.
Quote from: Razor on October 17, 2013, 02:56:54 PM
(Ringing a bell?)
Only bell that rings in this game is the
bell curve... There is no any mystery, tips and tricks or woodo you are trying to plant here...
Every bet selection has its own bell curve, so no one is better than any other concerning that...
It is all matter of overcoming very high variance with some progression(s) in the end. Lowering the variance is very challenging task to do, but if you don't find a way how to do it, you can overcome it with very monstrous bank and clever MM like Mr. Flatino is doing for example, but of course it would bring certain doze of stress. (would you believe? :) )
Drazen
You are the man Razor! Thanks for help and understanding!
Ok, i have some ideas. I think playing 2 dozens until a loss or X number of spins (on Xth spin usually comes the change) is part of the bet. Other part is probably to soak part of losses if change comes earlier. So combo could be 2 dozens + 2 EC or maybe 2 DOZ + 1 COL + 1 EC.
Quote from: Graildigger on October 17, 2013, 08:41:26 PM
You are the man Razor! Thanks for help and understanding!
So combo could be 2 dozens + 2 EC or maybe 2 DOZ + 1 COL + 1 EC.
You are correct.
But without the formula , this betting sheme means nothing at all.
ok again razor could you give a spin sample with the end profit target?
Quote from: Razor on October 16, 2013, 04:43:26 PM
Thanks for the nice Pms that you sent me people but I will not answer to any of them.
And we're supposed to take your word on that?
I assume that this forum is owned by Steve H. because his ad is here. There is a rule in the other forums that no member is allowed to post hints and clues to any supposed 'holy grail', because of the possibility that said member is scamming via private messages. It works like this:
The member posts that he has the holy grail, or hints strongly that he has it, and also gives clues. Inevitably, other members will pm him asking for further details, at which point our scammer asks for money...
Nathan, you are correct. There is no way to make long-term profits from casino games (apart from certain methods of advantage play which are becoming increasingly difficult to use effectively). Anyone who suggests otherwise is either a scammer or ignorant of the math and how it works. But it seems that even the moderators here are unwittingly giving credence to the possibility that a 'holy grail' is possible, as evidenced by the comment addressed to Sputnik in a previous post on this thread:
QuoteSteady 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 !!
This is like saying that you don't KNOW that 2 + 2 = 4. Maybe, with a lot of hard work and experience, you could make 2 + 2 = 5!
Or perhaps, a one-off payment of $29.95 to some internet vendor will do the trick!
Bottom line: it's impossible to multiply a negative number by a positive number and end up with a positive, which is what every system tries to do. That's not being 'negative', it's a simple mathematical truth.
To suggest otherwise panders to gullibility, desperation, and ignorance.
[Edit: Mike -- Go and read through XXVV's section and then you'll better understand why Sputnik was pulled up for his sweeping statement about flat betting (and the comment was nothing to do with grails, by the way). Furthermore, the forum is NOT owned by SH. As a newcomer you seem very eager to post criticisms (and assumptions) rather than
carefully feel your way, which is what most newcomers do. Moderator]
As far as I know , your assumption is wrong on Steve--so know what Mike?
This forum is owned by Victor.
Yah, an spin example would be nice Razor.........
Carlitos 8)
vls is the one that was stabbed by steve--so your safe
To all the people who have posted in this thread advising us that there is no way it can be done, and so on, yada yada yada - I'd like to say thanks very much, you may now leave and feel very satisfied with yourselves that you have saved us so much time and effort and protected us from a fruitless search. Your job is done!
Great! Now that they are gone - how about the rest of us who quite enjoy the search and are happy to waste our time on it get down to some specifics and leave opinions out of it.
I am sure I read in one of Shikamaru's posts that the movement he was looking at was specifically in the columns. May be wrong - but anyway that is what I have done, although I have looked at the dozens as well. Can't see anything. I've produced a list of spin-by-spin results on columns and dozens for a series of 100 spin samples. It all looks pretty much as expected to me. The data also shows the movement from the last spin to the new one for each spin with a summary of the movements at the bottom. It all fits to the expected distribution. I don't see anything that I could consider "less than expected".
Has anybody else done anything similar? Or looked at it in a different way to what I have done? Be specific - what exactly have you examined?
Dozens or columns, they are no different in terms of the movements. It will be easier to find a winning bet if we accept the fact that roulette is truly random.
Don't count on statistics (probability & expected value) to beat this game. This is where everybody fails.
Good luck.
[Edit: Mike -- Go and read through XXVV's section and then you'll better understand why Sputnik was pulled up for his sweeping statement about flat betting (and the comment was nothing to do with grails, by the way). Furthermore, the forum is NOT owned by SH. As a newcomer you seem very eager to post criticisms (and assumptions) rather than carefully feel your way, which is what most newcomers do. Moderator]
I'm not aware that I've posted any criticisms or assumptions. The assertion that roulette cannot be beaten by using patterns and progressions is neither - it's a FACT. As to Sputnik's comment about everyone being a liar if they claim to win flat-betting, that's not quite true. It could be that they're lying OR just haven't tested their system over enough spins.
There's an overwhelming pattern in all these roulette (and casino game) forums. It goes like this:
1. create a system which seems to win.
2. test the system and ask others on the forum to help test it.
3. test it some more.
4. discover that it doesn't win, after all.
5. goto step 1.
And I'm afraid trying to reduce the variance won't help. It's an attractive idea: if you can't reduce the house advantage then try to stop the long losing runs; makes sense, right?
Unfortunately it can't be done, because the variance is inextricably linked to the house advantage. They follow each other, so you can only reduce one by reducing the other (which is impossible because the house advantage is mathematically fixed).
The formula is this:
Fixed odds + negative expectation = long term losses
I've had a look at XXVV's posts and I see nothing there but long-winded waffle, I'm afraid. It's that kind of thing which can seduce the newbies into a long search which WILL ultimately result in disappointment.
However, I'm not naive; I know that there are vested interests here. There's money to be made exploiting people's ignorance and gullibility!
Steve H. may not own the forum but he certainly has a stake in it, otherwise why the ad? I only brought him up because in the other roulette forums he owns there is a rule that a member should not post 'hints' and clues. If someone has (or thinks they have) a winning system then they should just post it in its entirety. What's the purpose of dangling a carrot? is it just a way of getting attention or trying to control other members? Better to have a dedicated section for system sellers like at vlsroulette, then at least the process is transparent and the seller can be asked to demonstrate that the system works as claimed.
Folks, I'm not here to merely be negative. All I'm saying is: stay away from negative expectation games. There are plenty of other avenues of real speculation (playing roulette, baccarat, craps etc isn't speculation, it's pure gambling) where you can find a real edge.
On the other hand, if you're a gambler, knock yourself out. Just don't kid yourself that you can make long term profits.
i didn,t realize we were testing any system razor has given?...he hasn,t given one...only an idea one exsist.....plus its our own time and effort given by some of us who likes a challenge..even if it does not exist you learn a lot just by looking...you should try it..after all why are you here?
Has anybody else done anything similar? Or looked at it in a different way to what I have done? Be specific - what exactly have you examined?
yes some of us are...i,m positive its the group numbers..your looking at it with the same eyes all the time...you need a different perspective...what could the three movements be...could it be 3 separate group numbers ie red odd black odd..red even as an example..what do the actual dozens or dozens and column chase if not the 4 number groups...the formula is based on this i,m sure...there are only so many combinations with 3 individual number groups you can make...now what happens most with these combo groups on the 4th spin?.....that is the key t o the formula...razor looks like he,s giving no more help...so what combination with a doz col...and 2 other bets do you use? to capture or trap what is going to happen on the 4th spin...
remember razor said it can be seen in rx...and gave this as an example...
CEH said that he found 4 CWB. I try to focus on the one shikamaru spoke and Razor found. Other bets probably include 2 columns. One CWB at the time gentleman, LOL!
Razor said to look for movements of the dozens first without focusing on EC triggers yet (DISCLAIMER: that is how i understood it). What CEH said:
" [size=78%]Roulette produces random results:[/size]
1. Roulette series results
2. Roulette mixed results
3. Roulette cross combination results
I could go on and on, but understanding those three will lead you to finding a consistent winning bet. There are only a few that will give you a profit return to secure your wealth for life. Some are of course better than others in percentage returns. Professional players or city money dealers will know that even a small but consistent margin can make a fortune if exploited regular.
Lets continue with proven facts like this. Lets deal with each of those "killer" traps.
[/size][size=78%]SERIES RESULTS:[/size]
Because roulette is random it means that anything can happen and at anytime within the parameters of the game. Because it is random it throws up colours, numbers, dozens, even bets, and blocks in short and longer series. This results in a "pattern" that you may recognize . A good lesson to look at these patterns, because it will teach your brain how to think about roulette.
However you will not find a consistent winning bet within any of the series simply because you will never know when the change comes. This kind of bet is often touted by the roulette system sharks. You will lose...twice.
MIXED RESULTS:
These are the kind that jump all over the table or wheel. Look closely and of course you can see patterns of a kind too. Ie. abccbaabcabcdca ...etc. Same rules as above apply.
CROSS COMBINATION RESULTS:[/size][size=78%]This is probably the area where there is the most confusion, and perfect for the sharks to sell you a system. There is no such thing as "Cross combination results" They are simply past results that anyone can say...look at how many reds followed high etc.etc. It is wide open to impress you with what's looks clever.[/size][/size][size=78%] [/size][/size][size=78%]I have to cover this stuff because so many "experts" and "sellers" all over the Internet use this.[/size]
[/size][size=78%]They are all traps you use, and lose. You have to set your own trap that consistently traps more winners than losers. Only correct knowledge can help you find one. Proceed slowly. "[/size]
1. Roulette series results[/size] 2. Roulette mixed results 3. Roulette cross combination results
he actually said to understand them...but they were useless...it was to give you an idea how to think about roulette...re read the page it was on 8)
As for dozen/column movements i was looking into last 2 dozens (LD) ----> 123 - play 2 and 3 and jump dozens (JD) ----> 123 - play 1 and 2.
Now i expected to see a dozen sleeping more often. Dozen can sleep 20+ spins but it looks like in most cases dozens hits within 3-5 spins. Could be my imagination...
[Edit: Mike -- Go and read through XXVV's section and then you'll better understand why Sputnik was pulled up for his sweeping statement about flat betting (and the comment was nothing to do with grails, by the way). Furthermore, the forum is NOT owned by SH. As a newcomer you seem very eager to post criticisms (and assumptions) rather than carefully feel your way, which is what most newcomers do. Moderator]
---
Dear Moderater ... don't make assumptions and lie about my stand point of view in public, keep does opinions for your self.
I was not making a sweeping statement about flat betting, no one has prove they can flat betting with method and results, if they did i can show why it does not work.
So do not speak about criticisms and assumptions when there is a lie claiming flat betting a negative expectation into positive expectation.
Mike don't waste you time reading XXVV's section ...
What is respect about, well i can not respect some one who claim they can flat betting.
Because they can not show how it is done, they just end up to claim they can out guess negative expectation, so boring, so why waste your time read what they reply when you know is nonsense ...
Quote from: Graildigger on October 19, 2013, 07:33:05 AM
As for dozen/column movements i was looking into last 2 dozens (LD) ----> 123 - play 2 and 3 and jump dozens (JD) ----> 123 - play 1 and 2.
Now I expected to see a dozen sleeping more often. Dozen can sleep 20+ spins but it looks like in most cases dozens hits within 3-5 spins. Could be my imagination...
Hi Graildigger,
Maybe you're right. I remember Gizmotron posted something similar a while back... Here it is:
Quote
Here is my Very Rare to Kill Progression. It's was inspired by reverse engineering the crackpot Charles Scammer Hampshire's spoof of an idea he called the Zone. His only problem was he actually had something a real player could make use of. He didn't even know it. So I thought about it for fifteen minutes and turned his lame idea upside down and inside out. Guess what? It really works. After thousands of spin tests it has held up as a winner. It does this because the pattern or sequence it takes to kill it is so very rare that it tends to work. Charles Scammer never noticed that feature even in his own spoof of a Holy Grail he has been harassing forums with.
It uses 4 steps. It avoids the zeros. It's completely rule based. It has a few wait points that usually resolve in just a few spins.
The point is to bet on the two dozens or columns that did not hit last. It's almost that simple. The other point is to wait for the next single to occur in the dozens after the last repeat.
So if d1 (dozen 1, 1 to 12) hits you bet on d2 and d3 for the next spin.
If d1 hits again then you lose. You now wait for d1 to stop hitting. As soon as d2 or d3 hits you have a single in series. So then you start step two of the four step progression. I takes a perfect set of repeats and singles to kill this progression.
Here are a few spins tracking the dozens and the columns at the same time.
| 1 2 3 | L M H |
| X | X | -- 23 -- 1
| X | X | -- 24 -- 2
| X | X | -- 33 -- 3
| X | X | -- 23 -- 4
| X | X | -- 1 -- 5
| X | X | -- 11 -- 6
| X | X | -- 25 -- 7
| X | X | -- 9 -- 8
| X | X | -- 36 -- 9
| X | X | -- 35 -- 10
| X | X | -- 28 -- 11
Here is a stretch that kills it. It happens in the dozens beginning at spin 122.
| 1 2 3 | L M H |
| X | X | -- 6 -- 120
| X | X | -- 28 -- 121
| X | X | -- 29 -- 122
| X | X | -- 34 -- 123
| X | X | -- 35 -- 124
| X | X | -- 12 -- 125
| X | X | -- 9 -- 126
| X | X | -- 11 -- 127
| X | X | -- 2 -- 128
| X | X | -- 19 -- 129
| X | X | -- 17 -- 130
| X | X | -- 19 -- 131
| X | X | -- 32 -- 132
| X | X | -- 33 -- 133
|---------------| -- 0 -- 134
| X | X | -- 6 -- 135
The progression is 1,1 - 3,3 - 9,9 - 27,27. You place a bet on each of the dozens that did not hit last.
The cost is 80 units if you lose. You win everything back plus 1 unit on any win inside the four steps.
---MAYBE PROG CAN BE CHANGED or just flatbet? - ATLANTIS---
The thing that makes it work is that you never place bets on any repeats after the first repeat is discovered. So runs of repeats don't take out your progressions. Only the exact sequence of repeats after singles, four directly in a row has the power to break this progression.
For the sake of clarity here are step by step instructions.
d1 hits on spin 1. Bet 1 on d2 and 1 on d3 for spin 2.
d1 hits on spin 2. Don't bet on spin 3.
d1 hits on spin 3 Don't bet on spin 4.
d3 hits on spin 4 Bet 3 on d2 and 3 on d1 for spin 5.
d1 hits on spin 5 Bet 1 on d2 and 1 on d3 for spin 6.
d2 hits on spin 6 Bet 1 on d1 and 1 on d3 for spin 7.
d3 hits on spin 7 Bet 1 on d1 and 1 on d2 for spin 8.
I generally lose one time in 300 spins betting both dozens and columns independently for each spin. That's typical too. Once in a while you get two losses. And once in a while you get no losses. With both progressions going on at the same time you tend to win about 20 units for every 30 spins.
If this is a holy grail system then three or more losses must take place most of the time for it not to be, in 300 spins that is. On a five dollar minimum table this should cost $400 for each loss. So a $1200 bankroll would be considered minimal to try it.
There are some refinements not mentioned regarding the zeros. I just did not want to cloud the explanation at this time. I'd hate to be blamed for changing this after the fact. That's what Charles Scammer does. He's a liar. Some how he gets his jollies for leading people on. I just don't want to be in his low class. So there it is, now go change the world forever. Just remember I thought this up. To all those that think it won't change things just watch this gold rush.
The zero:
1.) I wait two spins after each zero, to see if a new single appears.
2.)Caution: When zeros start hitting within ten spins of each other or when they repeat.
3.) I run 300 spin tests. But I would end with 25 to 30 units. as a good goal. A loss is 80 units. Maybe winning 80 is a good idea.
A.
Quote from: Francis on October 19, 2013, 02:06:41 AM
Don't count on statistics (probability & expected value) to beat this game. This is where everybody fails.
What else is there?intuition? precognition? psychokinesis?The biggest mistake is NOT to count on probability and expected value. It tells you all you need to know (which is, that you can't beat the game). It's not a question of a 'challenge', because given that the wheel is fair and balanced (and you can be sure that casinos make every effort to make sure that this is the case), then it's a LOGICAL IMPOSSIBILITY to create any system based on patterns and progressions which will reverse the house edge. To repeat, it's a LOGICAL impossibility, just like it's absurd and illogical to try to find a way to make 2 + 2 = 5. [smiley]cps/noway.gif[/smiley]It's actually pretty hilarious, if you think about what all you 'grail hunters' are trying to do here, and it's because you don't understand simple logic and basic math.This is NOT the case for sports betting, poker, or trading because the odds and expectation cannot be calculated mathematically, so you have a chance of putting the odds in your favor, even if it's only using arbitrage.Just 'believe' in the math; it could save you years of wasted time and effort.
Hi Graildigger,
I was thinking almost the same but i would play the last hit dozen plus the dozen that did not show as the only dozen not to show.
Permanenzen vom TB AS1 vom 19.10.2013
24
1 play dozen 1 and dozen 3.
2. Win.
In case that an dozen hits 2 times in an row like, 24 19, play the dozens that did not show. Or sometimes play dozen 2 and pick an dozen which came inn the last time and is not showing now.
One has to see how the game goes also.
Quoteintuition? precognition? psychokinesis?
Has been discussed before....Carlitos 8)
Quote
It's actually pretty hilarious, if you think about, what all you 'grail hunters' are trying to do here, and it's because you don't understand simple logic and basic math.
This is NOT the case for sports betting, poker, or trading because the odds and expectation cannot be calculated mathematically, so you have a chance of putting the odds in your favor, even if it's only using arbitrage.
Certainly. I always win more on the horses than I ever do on roulette. With the horses you've got a chance; it's not so "random". You get a run for your money too. :)
I make money on the horses - always in profit at end of week. I will win or break even. If I lose it will be won back... I play most days and know what I'm doing. Though I say it myself I'm pretty hard to beat. :) :)
As regards roulette - would sure be great to have a surefire and foolproof winner. But I don't rely on it or need it. It's fun trying to fathom ways to beat it.
A.
Carlitos, I was being facetious about precognition etc.
And where did that avatar come from? I didn't upload it. It's kind of appropriate though, because you have to fight to get the truth heard. I'm well aware that most people here will think me arrogant. Mine is just one opinion among many, right?
WRONG.
In the hundreds of years since these games have been invented, there has not been one shred of evidence that any gambling system actually works. It's because they literally CAN'T work. Anyone who tries to persuade you otherwise is long on rhetoric and short on logic, and is probably trying to pick your pocket.
Quote from: Atlantis on October 19, 2013, 11:10:02 AM
As regards roulette - would sure be great to have a surefire and foolproof winner. But I don't rely on it or need it. It's fun trying to fathom ways to beat it.
A.
Atlantis, at last, a voice of sanity!
I agree, it can be fun playing around with systems, but I'm sure that there are many here who sincerely believe that roulette and other NE games can be 'cracked', given enough time, effort, and ingenuity. Sadly, it's not the case.
I recommend learning how to write computer programs, then you'll quickly see that no system can win, and, you'll have learned a useful new skill. :thumbsup:
Totally agree with Razor, to find the bet you have to be very analytical as well as always thinking out of the box.....beat the game not the odds....stop thinking of the odds...much clues have been given by Razor if you don't have the bet you are just not thinking in the right direction. Go back and read more carefully.
Good luck
Quote from: Mike on October 19, 2013, 11:19:23 AM
I agree, it can be fun playing around with systems, but I'm sure that there are many here who sincerely believe that roulette and other NE games can be 'cracked', given enough time, effort, and ingenuity. Sadly, it's not the case.
Oh it is, sir! [smiley]aes/martini.png[/smiley] Excatly due to what you have said!
Regards
Drazen
Was this the thread I was supposed to stay off of? Can't remember... Can't even remember who scolded me..... Oh, well.....
Mike
Thanks for enlightening us.
Atlantis
Many thanks for posting that thing from Giz. When he first posted it, I couldn't make sense of it! Last night I had an attack of vertigo and spent fourteen hours in bed. This morning that mess makes perfect sense!! Can you beat that??!!
Sam
.... i think you saw the light, Sam :thumbsup:
Carlitos 8)
I ran into these stats from Esoito on other forum:
http://www.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=3269.msg29704#msg29704 (http://www.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=3269.msg29704#msg29704)
Also what about dozens vs doublestreets (lines)? Showing of 3 dozens vs showing all 6 natural lines... any difference? I noticed some members ask for all lines or all doz/col to show before testing their bets. Educational purpose?
Quote from: Drazen on October 19, 2013, 12:05:43 PM
Oh it is, sir! [smiley]aes/martini.png[/smiley] Excatly due to what you have said!
Regards
Drazen
Drazen, care to explain?
I'm looking forward to your explanation of how it's possible that 2 + 2 = 5!
Vagueness and obfuscation is rife in the world of roulette systems, and anyway, most people don't really know what they're doing. The starting point is usually something based on the gambler's fallacy. Hey!, THIS pattern might 'work' - give it a try! (otherwise you're just being 'negative'). :P
There are literally billions of possible roulette systems, and you can't see the wood for the trees without some kind of overarching principle like probability and mathematical expectation, which cuts through the myriad possibilities and gives you a clear answer - NONE of them can work.
But ignore expectation and you're doomed to (perhaps) spend your life looking for something which cannot exist (and never realizing that it cannot exist)[smiley]cps/thinking.gif[/smiley] Incidentally, the fact that so many systems are possible makes a nonsense of any number of hints or clues that might be handed out to eager sycophants, especially since the 'guru' has made it clear that anyone who comes up with some plausible piece of the jigsaw won't have it either confirmed or denied by him (otherwise he would simply have posted the whole system in the first place). The 'guru' must on no account give away the whole system, otherwise he will lose his position of power and influence, added to which, if the system in its entirety is posted, it will then be tested or simulated and found to be a loser, just like any other system ever devised.
This post by Mike said it loud and clear. It is mature and contains the right ingredient of common sense.
.
It is not how much one wins but how LITTLE one loses. This is the reality of any casino game.
=
Enjoy your stay at B& M casinos just as much as I do. Those palaces are built for recreation not as a full tme or part time business venture.
Nathan Detroit
xqzbox and graildigger you will find the bet one day if you will put a lot of time in it.
Even Carlitos showed big development
Razor,
If you care to answer.....
if you walked up to a brand new table (no prev number history) and you observed the first spin being 25.....would this string produce 5 losses in a row after that appearance?
25 ....first spin observed
14
36
17
17
10
Or am I not close?
Ask yourself these questions.
If there really exist a bet that consistently win, would you share it with your friend who have consistently doubt you and even mock you for wasting your time looking for one? Would you not be afraid that the bet might allow too many people to win in the game that the casino change the rules of the game or even remove the game from the casino?
If one would not share such a bet with even his close friend, why would anyone want to reveal his betting secret to strangers in the forum like you and me? ???
Good questions, Francis. :thumbsup:
Anyone want to bet on the replies?
The first rule of Fight Club is: You do not talk about Fight Club.
The second rule of Fight Club is: You do not talk about Fight Club.
If I had this mythical CWB I would just get on with using it.
My main problem with CWB is yes someone may develop what they think is a very good bet selection, but there is no way to prove that their CWB is exactly the same as Charles CWB bet.
So no matter how good the OP's CWB bet may be, without confirmation from Charles that his CWB is the same as the OP's then how can you say you found it.
For me it is very simple would you take a test/exam without knowing that there was a way of checking your answers are correct?
Answer: No you would not!
This is a bit like asking the question "What's the meaning of life?"
Ask Ten people and you will get Ten different answers depending on their life experiences.
But the answer you give is irrelevant because there is no way to prove or disprove your answer.
Thanks
malcop
Quote from: Mike on October 19, 2013, 02:57:45 PM
Drazen, care to explain?
I'm looking forward to your explanation of how it's possible that 2 + 2 = 5!
I actually did, dear Mike. If you will go through my last posts you will find it there. So as first ascent from my real play...
You are stuck with expectations in this game... But as I see that isn't biggest problem in this game..
Imagine you are playing red and black and somehow you have mystery bet selection which can obtain ideal sequence going LWLWLWLW all the time... That is called variance. Now tell me, if zero would interfere by its probability (1/36) from time to time, would you care if you would apply any negative progression and wouldn't even care about it? I assure you, you wouldn't ;)
So question you have to ask is it possible somehow to lock down certain number of losses in next x spins after some point? Yes.
Next question would be due to what and how that would be possible?
First of all due to randomness limits, (randomness has its limits you know?) and one phenomenon you can use in randomness which is scientifically provable of course and it is called regression toward mean. Maybe you have heard of?
Unfortunately you can't ideally reduce variance as in the example I gave, but even if you manage to reduce it by some part you are at very good postion to "crack" the game.
Then comes final and also very important part for that "cracking". How you will deal and profit from that reduced variance?
That is what you have to do with progression(s) and money management. It will need some practice and testings, but it can be found what works good enough. [smiley]afb/comfort.gif[/smiley]
That is how I spoted things and it works for me (and some others too)
Regards
Drazen
......maybe i have seen the light too..... :)
Carlitos 8)
Some people can't be convinced of a way though roulette...even when you explain it clearly and with examples
Some people, because of their failures, don't believe it is possible to beat roulette, turning to bitterness and ending up in attacking anyone who seems to have the answer.
Some people don't believe in god
Some people believe in UFOs from other planets.
All you can ever do is present your case. If you want a club or society to follow you as a Messiah, then that's a different thing you are trying to achieve
If you like roulette, and think you have the way, and no one listens...you still have your winning idea or theory.
If you drop it, because you were lampooned or ridiculed, then like I said, that's a different thing you are trying to achieve.
QuoteOk, i have some ideas. I think playing 2 dozens until a loss or X number of spins (on Xth spin usually comes the change) is part of the bet. Other part is probably to soak part of losses if change comes earlier. So combo could be 2 dozens + 2 EC or maybe 2 DOZ + 1 COL + 1 EC.
But that means we would use 5 chips while only 4 chips are being used with the 3 part bet, if I'm correct.....
Carlitos 8)
Quote from: Atlantis on October 19, 2013, 10:47:01 AM
Hi Graildigger,
Maybe you're right. I remember Gizmotron posted something similar a while back... Here it is:
A.
Its good to see the big picture. I can see many 4 series of single doz
I wouldn't of formed the same idea as gizmo by looking at these results....not saying his wrong, just saying I don't see it here.
@Malcop,
Exactly the point I made in my previous post. There is no way to confirm that you have found the CWB (even if such a thing were possible), and I can't see how razor knows that he has it.
@Drazen,
I know about variance and regression to the mean. Could you post exactly what you're doing please? and how long have you been playing this way? and with what results?
@Turner,
I assume your last post was directed at me. You're making a few assumptions there, and Sam made the same; he assumed that I must be 'bitter and twisted' because I was never able to find a 'way through' roulette, as you put it. But I have to repeat that this is merely a personal attack and is totally beside the point. If you're going to attack anything, attack the math - the argument that roulette cannot be beaten.
Are you aware that there is a watertight argument that no winning system is possible?
Many members are vaguely aware of something called the 'house edge', but it seems to be something that never applies to them!
Let me try another tack; don't you find it a little odd that in the 300 years or so since roulette was invented, a consistently winning roulette system has never been demonstrated? Furthermore, don't you find it a bit curious that highly educated professional mathematicians are, in your view and many others, completely wrong?
Please could you direct me to where I can find the solution clearly explained with examples?
@Drazen,
Although I don't have details of the way you play, it seems that it hinges on being able to reduce the variance sufficiently so that you can use some kind of progression and not get into deep water with it, am I correct?
You may not have noticed my previous post where I said that variance is tied to expectation. In other words, you cannot reduce the variance without also reducing the expectation (in other words, the house edge). If you want a demonstration of this, let me know. But I'd be interested to know your results to date, nevertheless.
Quote from: Mike on October 20, 2013, 07:37:41 PM
Turner,
I assume your last post was directed at me. You're making a few assumptions there, and Sam made the same; he assumed that I must be 'bitter and twisted' because I was never able to find a 'way through' roulette, as you put it. But I have to repeat that this is merely a personal attack and is totally beside the point. If you're going to attack anything, attack the math - the argument that roulette cannot be beaten.
Are you aware that there is a watertight argument that no winning system is possible?
Many members are vaguely aware of something called the 'house edge', but it seems to be something that never applies to them!
Let me try another tack; don't you find it a little odd that in the 300 years or so since roulette was invented, a consistently winning roulette system has never been demonstrated? Furthermore, don't you find it a bit curious that highly educated professional mathematicians are, in your view and many others, completely wrong?
Please could you direct me to where I can find the solution clearly explained with examples?
@
Mike,
You have me wrong. I wasn't really aiming it at you.
I don't believe in HG or CWM
I do believe you can win more than you lose. I do.
You have to see your losses as part of your bad luck. Bad luck = HE and random
Importantly, you have to forget making a living out of it. by becoming a pro gambler, you don't change anything other than your exposure to HE and Random.
Give me any system, and i will give you a set of losing numbers.
Even if you think they are silly like RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
0RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR or 22,1,22,1,22,22,22
If they can happen they will.
Now it gets silly...sorry
I believe random has limits....and you carry your own permanence around with you.
You should note the numbers you expose yourself to and make a judgement on them.
Not in testing...just live numbers as you observe them
I started recording my numbers and backward engineer them to decide what I will play.
Now you think Im a nut and can disregard all I say from now on lol
Quote from: Mike on October 20, 2013, 07:37:41 PM
I know about variance and regression to the mean. Could you post exactly what you're doing please? and how long have you been playing this way? and with what results?
What I do in basic is to wait strong deviation (like z-score not before 3.0 ) and then enter in the play betting for "correction". That "correction" doesn't mean that I expect that underrepresented events will catch the difference in the short term, nor I actually even need that.. Nothing but average hit rate or even less than that with MM I use. And that is what RTM says : if a variable is extreme on its first measurement, it will tend to be closer to the average on its second measurement...
But of course we must be aware to far end of a bell curve which is z score about 5.28, and when in roulette something can happen, it WILL happen. That is the law of probability. Those are so called "black swans" (named by Nasim Taleb) or very rare statistical events. You must be aware of them and have a plan in your MM how to dodge them when they visit you. And they will. I showed on forum some time ago one example where in 28 spins on EC-s I had only 2 wins.. Nasty one... But you know that after that it can't go much more against you , so on the same side it is good opportunity for nice blitzkrieg ambush :)
So MM is very important part. Even with so nice BS, you will see that isn't enough to have some predetermined (stiffed) progression or plan of staking... It is much wiser to start slowly and raise you stakes depending on the situation. The longer the sequence over which the deviation occurs, the safer it is to be more aggressive in your staking.
I haven't lost as yet and I started as I shown on forum.
And at the moment I use software tracker for that purpose, made by Bayes form this forum. But in the future I think I ll made one custom made for myself.
Hope this helps.
Drazen
Nice Drazen ...
I stopped YEARS ago trying to convince others regarding my VIEW, the best way to play roulette. These days? I could careless how others play, way too many other things going on in life. If someone wants to only play the red numbers because red is a pretty color.......let them.
Ken
mrJ
I agree. I don`t care if someone wants to play the GREEN(s) Happy Winnings !!!
What did Rhett Butler say to Scarlet O`Hara : Frankly , ny dear, I don`t give a damn.
>:D HAPPY HALLOWEN>
Quote from: Turner on October 20, 2013, 08:18:01 PM
I do believe you can win more than you lose. I do.
Importantly, you have to forget making a living out of it.
Turner, you can't have it both ways. If you win more than you lose - CONSISTENTLY (ay, there's the rub), then why can't you build up your bankroll over time so that eventually, you ARE making a living at it?
Quote from: Mike on October 21, 2013, 07:25:38 AM
Turner, you can't have it both ways. If you win more than you lose - CONSISTENTLY (ay, there's the rub), then why can't you build up your bankroll over time so that eventually, you ARE making a living at it?
I think i answered that. You would expose more money and time to the HE.
I don't win consistently do I ?..because I lose some days..I just win more than I lose.
Turner,
It doesn't make sense. If in the long term you win more than you lose (taking account of the days when you lose), then you surely must be winning consistently. This means you must have an advantage, in which case playing more often won't expose you to the HE.
On the other hand, if you find you lose if you play more often, it means you don't have an advantage, and you can't be winning consistently - it's a temporary run of good luck.
Quote from: Drazen on October 20, 2013, 08:27:54 PM
I haven't lost as yet and I started as I shown on forum.
Drazen, I looked at your recent posts and couldn't see anything about how long you've been winning. Do you keep records of your play and can you give me a ROI and the number of actual bets you've made?
Or something like
total staked x 100% / total returned
Quote from: Mike on October 21, 2013, 12:45:51 PM
Drazen, I looked at your recent posts and couldn't see anything about how long you've been winning. Do you keep records of your play and can you give me a ROI and the number of actual bets you've made?
Or something like total staked x 100% / total returned
Sorry Mike I don't record such stats. When I sit at the table I am only concentrated to win the session. Every session is for itself and every session is new and different fight.
If all that isn't enough, I can't nor have intention to prove you otherwise that long term winning on roulette is possible. Sorry.
Drazen
People
The house edge of 2.7%=an annoying mosquito.
Variance=a hungry alligator.
"When you're up to your butt in alligators, you don't swat the mosquitos."....Unk
Mike is correct on one thing: If you constantly build your bankroll, you must be beating variance or, if you must, the house edge. Now, how obvious is that.
I'm pretty much done with all this stink!
Sam
Quote from: Drazen on October 21, 2013, 12:52:09 PM
Sorry Mike I don't record such stats. When I sit at the table I am only concentrated to win the session. Every session is for itself and every session is new and different fight.
If all that isn't enough, I can't nor have intention to prove you otherwise that long term winning on roulette is possible. Sorry.
Drazen
some time ago i looking in your all posts too, but didn't found how you are playing.
Maybe you have a time/wish to show us more about your game style?
You can find one way among others at roulette cc ...
Bayes made a software based upon this methodology ...
The first one who spook about it and wrote about the original by Marigny is me ...
Quote from: Biagle on October 21, 2013, 02:18:05 PM
some time ago i looking in your all posts too, but didn't found how you are playing.
Maybe you have a time/wish to show us more about your game style?
My friend I tried to explain that several times here and in the thread where I shown my progress when I started... I can't tell you do everytime exactly this and that and you ll be fine. Unfortunately it isn't so straight forward and simple.
I understand that some lazy non sayers are just waiting for someone who says that is winning consistently, but without some set in stone rules, to argue with him...
You must understand that maybe "blur" of my explanation is coming from part where money management and progression(s) are. They are closely correlated with betselection and they are made on "the fly". Nothing too strict or set in stone. It is dynamic. They are made at the moment of playing depending on the situation with the bet. Most simply said it would be to bet more as deviation is more stretched or stronger.
As betselection I use "correction" or regression to the mean after strong deviations on different bet selections on outside EC-s (DBL, FTL, but series, singles and some other things when I recognize too). I use software tracker made by Bayes from this forum for that purpose (you have it on RF.cc. I gave the link somewhere in the past posts)
And that is pretty much it. Now thing is that one would need to spent enough time with this, to see what are the worst scenarios and how to deal with them. That is the time and place where you need to search best suitable money management and practice your play.
For that purpose I was again using one Bays-es tool, which BTW I consider most brilliant piece of software for roulette that exists out there. It is called "sequence analyzer" (you have it on RF.cc too) with which you can actually "create" and deviation on any bet selection you need and play as many spins after that as you want... So with that I was practicing play countless times and Iearned how to row a boat on our random sea...
Regards
Drazen
Quote from: Drazen on October 21, 2013, 03:08:00 PM
I understand that some lazy non sayers are just waiting for someone who says that is winning consistently, but without some set in stone rules, to argue with him...
Another snide remark directed at me? When I actually hear a real argument instead of evasions and personal attacks, I'll leave it alone.
And FYI, I'm doing quite well sports betting, thanks.
Sam, you're the one creating the stink. Calm down, it's bad for your blood pressure.
Drazen,
What you have to realize is that no matter how you select your bets, it doesn't change the variance. You can wait for 12 standard deviations from the mean if you like, it won't make any difference to the standard deviation of your actual BETS, over time. Your apparent success to date is due solely to your progression.
I did some work on this myself. What I found was that no matter how you selected your bets, the pattern of wins and losses on the Even chances was exactly the same as Red vs Black or any similar bet. That is to say, half the time you get single wins, one quarter of the time you get two wins in a row, an eighth of the time you get 3 wins in a row etc, and exactly the same for losses and consecutive losses. Do you realize the implications of this discovery? it means it isn't possible to reduce the losing runs. If you could reduce your longest losing run to say, 7 in a row, you could clean up. But that, in turn, would mean that your expectation had changed (i.e.: the house edge would be reduced), which is not possible. So my simulations showed exactly what the theory predicted.
But no doubt you'll discover this for yourself, eventually. I really hope you don't lose too much in the meantime (sincerely)...
WEALTH was not created by gambling. That`s the truth .
What is fiction are the posters` claim of winnings.
The bullsheet is knee deep.
Mike said it as it is.He also knows what he is talking about.
Forget those damn spread sheets in a real casino. They are a ridiculous piece of stuff at those busy places.
Nathan Detroit
Sports betting Has always been the easiest thing for me to win at consistantly. Casino stuff has worked awesome also but after awhile I know that I can get beat on a miscalculation or other things. And Im actually getting a little bored sitting in casinos...but hey what can you say. Casinos Im going to cut down to 1 or two days a week---Too many floozy gals, drinks , greed etc And on the whole Im not against those things : ) but other stuff is fun also
Live B & M casinos and " floozy gals, drinks " is heaven . The rest is just window dressing.
Enjoy.. Let the others worry about variances. I know of a cat who lost 1/4 of One milion Dollars playing
Baccarat constantly babbling about variances.
More and more people are seeing the light what casino games are for: To line the pockets of the operators.
ND>
So Mike...youve made your point. Its been observerved. I can't disagree with most of what ypu are saying.
What is your goal here....to educate us all in things we already know?
We all wake up ...smell the coffee and quit roulette?
Your only wrong assumption is that everyone here are blinkered.
I know it's a neg exp. Game. I know the HE and what it means
People just like talking here...and sharing the best ways.
I know drinking can kill you. I still drink
Just tell us what you want us to do
Lets get honest here....
Quid pro quo.....
Im Turner. I've never had another name in forums.Always Turner.
Your turn......
Quote from: Mike on October 21, 2013, 05:17:24 PM
You can wait for 12 standard deviations from the mean
Certainly I can't.
Anyway, I ll take only the best whishes from here. Thanks
Good luck to you too Mike.
Drazen
.... letts stay focussed on the topic....... thanks :thumbsup:
Carlitos 8)
Yeah - me too. I don 't know why these missionaries have to come along and hijack our perfectly fine chat. We know the maths and we don't care! We're having fun just chatting away and having our little dreams so just leave us alone!
Marshall Bing Bell,
I notice it says 'bearer of the Holy Grail' under your avatar. Do you get many private messages from members asking you for it?
Razor wrote:
Quote
As for me...I am gonna start playing the bet from tomorrow on land based Casinos.
Even If i will lose it s only 50 chips br.
I have cracked my head searching for this bet for about 4 years now.
I haven t played roulette since I started exploring the bet.
Finally the formula I have found(with the help of RX) is matching Charles criteria 100%.
Its time to let myself play.
Hi Razor,
Did you begin play and have you still got your 50 chips??
A.
Iam also genuine intrested Razor whether you managed to make more chips, loose or did you break them even.....
Carlitos 8)
Playing everyday.
I think that's called a non-sequitur..
huh
Yep, I Googled it..
Yep
Yah.... and.... chips down or up, or even??
Carlitos 8)
What kind of question was that?
When I say I play everyday how can I be down?
The life time BR is only 50 chips.
The bet passed the 30 sessions test as it should so how can it not do the same while playing?
Nothing can pass the 30 sessions test flat bettinf if its not a CWB.
If you're winning good for you,and may you win for a long time .warrior
That's good news. Carry on the winning, Razor. :)
I hope you will keep us all apprised of your results (good or bad) and update with your progress of your secret CWB.
How many spins you play on average a session? R U flatbetting or using a progression? I think might be hard without some kind of mild progression..
Atlantis.
Atlantis, if i remember it right the CWB is without progression....off course i can be wrong on that....
Carlitos 8)
Quote from: Razor on October 08, 2013, 06:39:36 PM
Ok now my final post.
Ah-ha!!
It was NOT the gentleman's final post after all. (See post 185.)
I will ignore the scolding about the credit card and ask the question again: What is a "Constant Winning Bet"? Seriously, people, if you don't know what you're looking for, how will you know if you have found it?
Does it win every bet placed; never loses even once in a century?? Oh, sure!! I'll smoke that; just light it up for me!!
Or does it just win more than it loses?
If it simply wins more than it loses, many people have it!! Yep, they do!!
EDIT: I do not mean the bet wins more decisions than it loses. I mean it wins more money that it loses. It loses forty units and wins fifty. That sort of pie.
Sam
Please, no further scolding.
[mod] Excellent questions.They deserve a straight, unequivocal, unambiguous and enlightening reply.One without bluster, evasion, obfuscation -- and scolding. It's fast approaching put-up-or-shut-up-about-a-CWB-time... Why? Because this forum is not about hints, drip-feeding and strewing breadcrumbs. Or about the "look at me, mum, no hands" brigade who enjoy bragging without sharing. [/mod]
That thing Normy posted has won more than it loses for days and days and days. More trots; more money. Is it the "Holy Schmoly"? To quote the immortal bard: That is the question.
Sam
Guys and dolls, this is basically " The Holy Grail ",
ROL
ROH
REL
REH
Opposite
BEH
BEL
BOH
BOL
.... as being said by Graildigger and Shikamaru.
The only thing is how to work out the order of appearence. These are the 8 possible bets, however if you look at them they cover all the numbers on the carpet.
Shikamaru said, i narrowed it down to 8 possible bets, and how to trap 7 losers.
So could it be that one scratches of 7 combinations in order of appearance and then bet the remaining combination of numbers?
I have seen Red Even High 23 times without appearance so even with progression one would not make it, i think.
Carlitos 8)
Anyone............
What does it mean to "trap a loser"? Does that mean that--for some reason--RHO cannot win? Would you put your neck in the Guillotine and bet that statement is true. I feel you would eventually bleed a little.
Someone educate me: What does it mean to trap a loser? And how would one trap SEVEN??
Sam
Quote from: TwoCatSam on November 02, 2013, 03:00:05 PM
Anyone............
What does it mean to "trap a loser"? Does that mean that--for some reason--RHO cannot win? Would you put your neck in the Guillotine and bet that statement is true. I feel you would eventually bleed a little.
Someone educate me: What does it mean to trap a loser? And how would one trap SEVEN??
Sam
Yes. I would also like to know exactly what "to trap a loser" means too...
Possibly it means that the way you place the bet ensures that it will not be a total loss of chips. In other words there cannot be a complete losing spin where all bets are lost; there is a guaranteed return - sometimes a losing return, sometimes level return, sometimes a profitable return....
For instance 5 bets @ 0.7:
If doz 1 and 3 were last dozens to hit then NO BET.
If doz 1 and 2 OR 2 and 3 were last dozens to hit then bet those 2 doz + the last 2 columns to have hit.
If betting doz 1 and 2 then also bet EC HIGH @0.7
If betting doz 2 and 3 bet then also bet EC LOW @ 0.7
Also place each time a bet of 0.1u on ZERO
Total bet= 3.6
Returns:
======
0=level (3.6)
EC only = 1.4
col only = 2.1
doz only = 2.1
col or doz + EC hit = 3.5
col and doz hit = 4.2
col+doz+high/low EC = 5.6
A.
Dear Forum,
It has been ages since I last posted. I am still interested in finding a winning bet but almost gave up.
I came accross this topic and manage to read Shikamaru's post in GG.
He did tell the below story:
[reveal]".....junket king and turbogenius were the first ones to strike at me for supporting charles, and quite quickly like in 3 hours or less.
i think a day or so after that, loadsamoneyalf agrees with them. of course when i first joined and posted i left out the fact that i knew the bet.
i waited till three weeks later to drop the hint that i know the bet.
spike, loadsamoneyalf, gilly, turbogenius, and junketking all pretty much went silent, probably due to shock. then all of a sudden on the same day crappy himself comes crawling along to ask me for help. oh yeah alan and rob were also against ceh.
let me tell you that when i saw that he registered on june 9, 2009 he immediately became a source of endless entertainment. with the five fools who went silent and now the same exact day i mention knowing the bet we have a "newbie" interested in my bet.
what a coincidence. couldn't be that crappy has around 7 different aliases could it? i mean its just a coincidence that the other idiots are silent and now there are some newbies....."[/reveal]
I believe there are clues in the story.
spike, loadsamoneyalf, gilly, turbogenius, and junketking = 5
crappy, alan and rob = 3
"...the following events were not a coincidence..." "....what a coincidence. couldn't be that crappy has around 7 different aliases could it? i mean its just a coincidence that the other idiots are silent and now there are some newbies...."
Regards,
NoBody
EC cycling
...... wow Mr. Nobody i think you have read my post..... :o
Carlitos 8)
Quote from: Carlitos on November 03, 2013, 07:21:00 PM
...... wow Mr. Nobody i think you have read my post..... :o
Carlitos 8)
Lol...long time no chat bro...
Still looking for the grail? If there is a grail..with our efforts...we will find it... If there is no grail..yeah...it was fun looking for it... :thumbsup:
So..back to the CWB...
Let me post the questions:
- What is the trigger to bet?
- What to bet? (How many bets? How many units?)
- What happen if the bet loses?
- What happen if the bet win? (are we in profit? if not, what do we do next?)
- How to end the session?
Quote from: NoBody on November 04, 2013, 10:12:49 AM
- What is the trigger to bet?
- What is the trigger to bet?
- The trigger of the bet are NOT on the Ecs
- Do not care what the movements are doing on the inside bets...the triggers are not on the inside bets
- Knowing what is the last doz or col or Ecs can t help you because only 1 spin is NOT a movement.
Summary1:
The trigger is "movement" of Doz/Col or Doz & Col (must be more than 1 spin)
Quote from: NoBody on November 04, 2013, 10:12:49 AM
2. What to bet? (How many bets? How many units?)
2. What to bet? (How many bets? How many units?)
- bet is 4 chips on every spin and that the bet includes a Doz and a COL ...INCLUDES ...it s not the hole bet
- You should really focus on the formula that contains 3 bets and find out when you alter bets in order to TRAP THE RUNS AND THE CHANGES
- RX flashes the doz-col-B-R-O-E-L-H of the last spin and is a huge help in finding the bet.
- Only the flashing thing that RX has is helping in spotting the movements.
- On every spin observe...observe the movements
- RX is easier to SPOT the movements ...the hard part is to spot the correct ones because on every spin a lot of movements are happening. RX not only will help you find those movements but it will also make your life easier in testing the bet.
- Open RX and inset a spin file of real Casino spins. Spin and observe the movements that are happening on the dozens and on columns( I ain't gonna say particularly look on the Doz or look on the Col...I have already said enough...it's your business to find what the triggers and formula is)
- Observe of a movement that is NOT happening as much as it should
- Then try to trap this by trapping the opposite
- the formula - arrange the 4 chips correctly in order to make the bet a CWB
- The bet does not have 2 parts... It has 3
- The hard part is the 4th chip where to be placed...but when you will have found the formula with more work you will find where this 4th chip must be placed
- With just the 3 chips you will have found a bet that is not winning but it's not losing either
- However when a column bet is combined with other bets, 3 other bets to be exact, and when it is part of an exactly planned session following an exact formula you have created, then you now have created the dream odds and its definitely better than the EC bets
- All I said was that you need to create a bet that INCLUDES a column, a dozen, or maybe even both. The word INCLUDES means that the column, dozen, or column dozen combo is not the whole bet, but just part of it.
- i narrowed down the bets that could be used to only 8
- The life time BR is only 50 chips.
Summary2:
4 chips = 4 places = Ecs + Col + Doz
Flat bet
(3 chips = even – no win no lose, 4
th chip = win)
3 spins = profit
Quote from: NoBody on November 04, 2013, 10:12:49 AM
What is the trigger to bet?What to bet? (How many bets? How many units?)- What happen if the bet loses?
- What happen if the bet win? (are we in profit? if not, what do we do next?)
- How to end the session?
3. What happen if the bet loses?
- You should really focus on the formula that contains 3 bets and find out when you alter bets in order to TRAP THE RUNS AND THE CHANGES
- "Zero is a loss".....it was a major clues because it affects the formula
- Find the formula...find where to change from the part 1 to 2 and to 3 ... it is obvious that a loss will make the part to change.
- When you are testing you will realize that the 3d part of the formula must be played in order to make the consistent losses(at some point of the playing) ,consistent wins...and then part 1 or 2 again
- This simple means that in every 100 placed bets you will be close to 0 (+5 or -5 in the end etc.)
And with the adding of the 4th chip you will have a winner - i gave them my play by play (down 3 units, down 2 units, up 2 units, etc)
Summary3:
If Zero hit = loss
3 spin in total
Part 1, 4 chips
Part 2, 4 chips
Part 3, 4 chips (profit)
4. What happen if the bet win? (are we in profit? if not, what do we do next?)
- You should really focus on the formula that contains 3 bets and find out when you alter bets in order to TRAP THE RUNS AND THE CHANGES
- Find the formula...find where to change from the part 1 to 2 and to 3 ... it is obvious that a loss will make the part to change.
- When you are testing you will realize that the 3d part of the formula must be played in order to make the consistent losses(at some point of the playing) ,consistent wins...and then part 1 or 2 again
- This simple means that in every 100 placed bets you will be close to 0 (+5 or -5 in the end etc.)
And with the adding of the 4th chip you will have a winner
Summary4:
Total 3 part (Part 1, 2 and 3)
3 spin (Part 3) = 100%
5. How to end the session?
- 30 sessions the 1 or 2(the most) is allowed to lose less than 10 chips in the end
- no more than 2 placed BETS(meaning 2 betting spins) are being used before being in profit.
Summary5:
1 Session = 3 spins
Why have you not consider a double dozens OR double columns bet?
Clearly if it got to do with movements on the table layout, it is safer to have a double dozens OR double columns bet.
Quote from: Francis on November 04, 2013, 10:37:35 AM
Why have you not consider a double dozens OR double columns bet?
Clearly if it got to do with movements on the table layout, it is safer to have a double dozens OR double columns bet.
Yes..you are right... the bet doesn't limit to only one dozen or colomn...it could be 2 dozen or 2 column + ECs..
Regards,
NoBody
Quote from: NoBody on November 04, 2013, 10:17:28 AM
- i gave them my play by play (down 3 units, down 2 units, up 2 units, etc)
Does anyone have this and if they do can you post it up please?
edit
I edited my last few posts because frankly speaking......it's a load of nonsense! [smiley]aes/wink.png[/smiley]
Common sense and a bit of critical thinking regarding the clues in this thread will tell you why no such bet ever existed.
.....and for that reason! I'm out.
If CEH loses 6 times in a row,it must be DS or Line Bet bcause the DS payout is 1 to 5.
In post #189 Sam asked some very pertinent questions about this so-called CWB that remains shrouded in mystery -- if it exists at all, of course.
The major question is: what is meant by a Consistent Winning Bet?
Interesting to note nobody has seriously attempted to answer that and his other questions.
As he asks, if you don't know what you're looking for then how will you know you've found it?
Without a general agreement on what a CWB really is, then participants here are probably simply moving the deckchairs around on the Titanic.
[It might be easier to find a CLB...]
Quote from: esoito on November 04, 2013, 10:25:24 PM
The major question is: what is meant by a Consistent Winning Bet?
As he asks, if you don't know what you're looking for then how will you know you've found it?
I think at least these two questions are clearly answered in the originial w3com pages. :)
cheers
hans
Quote from: esoito on November 04, 2013, 10:25:24 PM
In post #189 Sam asked some very pertinent questions about this so-called CWB that remains shrouded in mystery -- if it exists at all, of course.
The major question is: what is meant by a Consistent Winning Bet?
Interesting to note nobody has seriously attempted to answer that and his other questions.
As he asks, if you don't know what you're looking for then how will you know you've found it?
Without a general agreement on what a CWB really is, then participants here are probably simply moving the deckchairs around on the Titanic.
[It might be easier to find a CLB...]
Dear esoito,
I know what you mean. But if you put yourself in the person shoe who has the CWB, you will understand. Actually we should be thankfull that CEH, Shikamaru and Razor gave us these clues.
Quote from: Razor on October 31, 2013, 06:32:40 PM
What kind of question was that?
When I say I play everyday how can I be down?
The life time BR is only 50 chips.
The bet passed the 30 sessions test as it should so how can it not do the same while playing?
Nothing can pass the 30 sessions test flat bettinf if its not a CWB.
If the bet you have can pass 30 sessions test (flat bet), then it is a CWB
Regards,
NoBody
Hi Razor,
Do you actually play sessions of 100 spins? If not how many spins on average? Also, do you have a set target goal?
Thanks,
A.
Like many others, I have joined the PPPC club of Charles w3m.com.
I followed the instructions and sent him 700$US to become a member(back in 2010.)
I never hear from them again, except a few short email says : we are very busy,etc.....
I decided to write to him, explain that I have trust him and his works, the 700$US is what I have save
to join the club, and my family is not a well to do class of people.
He returned the money back to my account, not all,but 90% of it. He also enclosed the CWB and told
me :The bet works well if I am a pro and apply rules.
If you all interested, i will post the CWB tomorrow, because after 2 years, I didn't understand it.
It wins most of the time but not CONSISTENT like a CWB.
JonVermeer.
i,m interested maybe it could clarify something that no one else seems to...be interesting to see if its the same bet another member got at the same time...i look forward to see if its the same bet
that would surely be great and help a lot. :thumbsup:
thanks in advance and cheers
hans
Quote from: Jonvermeer on November 05, 2013, 09:02:38 PM
Like many others,I have joined the PPPC club of Charles w3m.com.
I followed the instructions and sent him 700$us to become a member(back in 2010.)
I never hear from them again,except a few short email says : we are very busy,etc.....
I decided to write to him,explain that I have trust him and his works,the 700$US is what I have save
to join the club.and my family is not a well to do class of people.
He returned the money back to my account,not all,but 90% of it.He also enclosed the CWB and told
me :The bet works well if I am a pro and apply rules.
If you all interested,i will post the CWB tomorrow,because after 2 years ,i didn't understand it.
It wins most of the time but not CONSISTENT like a CWB.JonVermeer.
Suckers are born every minute. How do we know if that poster of CEH army is credible?
FIRST time poster..
Deny those scammers any money. Let them starve.
Quote from: NathanDetroit on November 05, 2013, 10:12:33 PM
Suckers are born every minute. How do we know if that poster of CEH army is credible? FIRST time poster..
Deny those scammers any money. Let them starve.
Exactly ND
Am I some psychic medium who sees dead people, or does no one here see the ridiculous 1 post ponies who turn up to shill the con men.
Suppose the present company accepted...and is genuine perhaps: but don't you all even suspect?...or even get suspicious?
Would that get in the way of getting your CWB...or HG...or pan of gold in the river?
As long as Jonvermeer doesn't make any moves to start wanting $$ then all should be well.
It will be interesting to see what s/he posts (assuming that happens, of course.)
A clue....wouldn't we at least of heard of anyone who had subscribed to CEH through the forums all the way back to Vics place or GG? recognize them...know their name? Huh?
The CWB is like the Loch Ness monster. But there is a law against harming the monster.
Quote from: TwoCatSam on November 05, 2013, 11:20:01 PM
The CWB is like the Loch Ness monster.
LoL....
The time to start getting worried is when a new poster called 'Big Foot' turns up with some clues!
Funny enough....the name Vermeer rings a bell....but not from the forums.
He might have posted in some of the Q+A pages on the CEH pages.
Don't ask!! I have a long memory.
Look guys I was one that contacted CEH from the start the guy gave nothing away
This guy on GG this sham whatever is name is, is not the same person, and razors bet is built on this persons concepts.
There is nothing CEH posted on his web sight saying this or anything else's.
The only time CEH said anything to me in an email was when I ask him where the hell am I looking inside or outside bet , like Twocatsam said how do we know where to find something if we don't know where to look.
CEH response to me was that it was INSIDE bet! That's how he wrote this.
Did I find this bet? Hell, yes did -- I made 3 million. Dream on until someone shows me proof of this it will never be believable.
The only person to to have won 50 million from a Las Vegas casino was a whale from Australia, and that you can find proof of this CEH no proof what's so ever .
Let him post this " CWB " bet that he has gotten in return of his payment.
Lot of people were hoaxed at that time, i talked to someone from Canada who claimed to have made money transfer and never saw anything that looked like the CWB.
A lot of people claim to have the CWB bet, but build this bet around their own ideas.
Somehow they want to implement their own ideas into it.
Its like they are jealous or something or have an ego thing and at first they show off that they have the CWB bet and then start talking about their own bet etc...
I am interested Jon, so if you can and will, post the bet.....
Carlitos 8)
@JonVermeer
First of all..............may I welcome you to the forum, [smiley]welcome/smiley-welcome.gif[/smiley], and I hope you able to enjoy your stay here.
You have obviously been keeping tabs on the forum prior, and I can see you know some of the players involved in the whole W3M scam.
All we ask, (and I say this as a Roulette interested person, not just as a Mod), is you present what you have in a subjective and honest manner.
Any and all of your words/threads will understandably be subject to intense scrutiny, as well as some ridicule.
Its the nature of the beast............or the Monster, as Sam rightly points out.
What would be wonderful, is for there to be an understanding of what the supposed CEH bet was, how it has morphed
and what its become.
So.........Jon V, do your best at showing something of substance, and worthy of further discussion.
The process should be relatively painless, and I know the Mods will adhere to our side of the deal,
and remove/edit anything that turns out to be unsavoury.
I look forward to your forthcoming posts.
Chris [smiley]welcome/handshake.gif[/smiley]
When I posted last time, I think I have made a mistake.
I wrote:
If you all interested, I will post the CWB bet tomorrow."
I should write:
If you all intersted to see and learn, I will post the CWB bet tomorrow for free to all who want to study about it.
After all of these years of believing, trusting, studying, following I just want to give up, and find some other worthwhile ventures for myself and my family.
and if you are reading this, Charles, Simon, or Helen or Elizabeth or whoever in your well-planned-organization, especially Charles, you told me: "NOT to reveal the bet, that will be very foolish indeed"
I have to say that I truly admired your vast, solid knowledge about the Roulette-game, your great advices on page 7, your info on page 3, and of course your website, PPPC club, Simon your son's forum that was able to fool
a lot of people.
I have kept the promise that I will not reveal the CWB to anyone even with my family members for 3 years, but after all the time and efforts and labor, all I have is just a shattered-dream, a sophisticate-gamble-bet that you refused to explain more clearly even though I have asked over and over.
When posting the bet, I will not feel guilty AT ALL.
I feel good and feel clean.
What's good in it if I keep the bet unknown and bury with me in my grave?
Whoever smart, brilliant enough to benefit from the bet, that is his/her rewards.
Me?
I have had enough.
I'm more than interested. :thumbsup:
thanks and cheers
hans
Quote from: Marshall Bing Bell on November 06, 2013, 09:00:17 PM
Hello Jonvermeer.
Welcome to the forum.
Thank you for your decision to reveal the bet that CEH gave you all those years ago.
I hope you follow through with your announcement, and if you do… suck on it Razor!
What I don’t understand, and I’m not specifically talking to Jonvermeer here, is that there must be more than one individual who received some form of bet from CEH? And if so, why have they ALL until now upheld the nondisclosure policy for this bet, when the policy was drafted by a crook who indiscriminately stole a lot of money from many people? A man who set up the whole affair with intent to steal through deception?
Maybe CEH`s " enforcers" have kicked the bucket.
[mod] OK, JVM. That's enough of the breadcrumbs. It's now time to post it. A bit of cut'n'paste shouldn't be too hard to do. [/mod]
Let's see what this jvm guy has to say
its all a tad dramatic, don't you think
Quote from: Jonvermeer on November 06, 2013, 08:13:05 PM
If you all interested to see and learn,I will post the CWB bet for free to all who want to study about it.
Sure Jonvermeer, waiting to hear more. What was it you did not understand that you wrote asking for more info - but didn't receive clarification? Perhaps there are some on this forum that can work on and supply the missing pieces of the puzzle you require?
A.
Well it seems like Jonvermeer has decided against the reveal of the CWB after all of that!!
We've seen it all before, of course, and as a healthy sceptic I am naturally not surprised or disappointed for such to be the case this time either.
Hope you had some fun, Jonvermeer.
A.
Quote from: Atlantis on November 09, 2013, 08:55:41 AM
Well it seems like Jonvermeer has decided against the reveal of the CWB after all of that!!
We've seen it all before, of course, and as a healthy sceptic I am naturally not surprised or disappointed for such to be the case this time either.
Hope you had some fun, Jonvermeer.
A.
Exactly right A. Saw this coming. Seen it a million times.
it's a shame the chap from Wichita could not see through his intention.
Maybe the alien race know only as CEH finally got in touch, with ALL the W3M bet instructions?? [smiley]aes/dont_know.png[/smiley]
..... maybe he is writting the bet down so that he can publish it here..... lol..... by the way, the fact that he hasn't been around for an few days does not mean that he left the building or not.... he just hasn't been around.... that's all....
Carlitos 8)
Hilarious! [smiley]aes/lol.png[/smiley]
It's funny and sad at the same time that you all need a bet to be given into your hands and start making fortune from it.
Instead of waiting for a CWB to be published (this will never happen), you should test and observe to find it for yourselves.
So lazy...so hopeless so stupid....these kind of ppl will never find a bet because they don't deserve it.
Typical post by one of the scammers guild.
Roulette is a recreational activity and the scammers know it but won't admit it. It's a too profitable flim-flam ....
Their credo: We give you illusions but no solutions. ( For a steep fee)
That's a positive reply to razor, the SCAMMER.
Quote from: NathanDetroit on November 09, 2013, 04:36:06 PM
That's a positive reply to razor, the SCAMMER.
Well, I agree there is something sinister about all this.
Why on earth would anyone bring up this nonsense after all these years??
Razor, you need a hobby. Even better, a job.
That's why I said to razor on his thread to keep winning with his bet because I seen these kind of threads for a long time , like I said the proof is in the pudding ,you would not be on here saying you found this bet if you had a super bet that's wins constant ,you would be very silent and never bring it up,the intentions here are right out deception and us guys that have been here for a while no it.
Quote from: Razor on November 09, 2013, 04:18:14 PM
It's funny and sad at the same time that you all need a bet to be given into your hands and start making fortune from it.
Instead of waiting for a CWB to be published (this will never happen), you should test and observe to find it for yourselves.
So lazy...so hopeless so stupid....these kind of ppl will never find a bet because they don't deserve it.
Razor we don't all need a bet, I for one I have many bets that I can play for passing time not for making millions ,dream on if you think that this is real,think again if your A Whale in the the world ,and have the billions to make a million in Vegas, won't be a problem most guys are on here for social event, and talk about a game the enjoy,when guys like you and all the other fellas come here and bring up this win 3 million bull s h it we been there done that,proof is where it's at ,casinos are still around even with this super betting bull sh I t theory of w3 m ,big SCAM period and I for one would never pay for something like w3m ,I feel sorry for gullible people .
Spot on Warrior.
These "everyones a dic.khead' posters come and go....like a storm.
Razor is Viper if i understand it correct and also known as Masters of pockets.
Seems that this kind of members come with many different names.
[mod] I think this particular thread is worn out -- threadbare, even. Time to move on. And for those wanting a real CWB take a serious look at XXVV's work. He even shares his strategy. Why reinvent the wheel? [/mod]