+ Register

[Still]

So, if i was a programmer/developer who was willing to deliver to moglizu a product that fulfills his exact specifications, i would want to ask a few questions, in order to provide moglizu with the exact tool he would want to carry into a B&M on his smart phone.  This is assuming the B&M will allow him to log spins into his smart phone while sitting at the table.   If not, there is still the possibility that with the phenomenon of personal permanence, he would be able to leave the table, log the number, get the calculations, and come back a few spins later, without missing a beat...due to the phenomenon of personal permanence.

Before i asked my questions, as a developer, i would simply remind my client that both of our time is valuable.  The sooner i get what i want, the sooner he gets what he wants.  I am guessing that RESPECT for the questions i may ask would translate into the FASTEST possible delivery of the money-making tool he can carry around in his pocket. 

If i was to ask three questions at this point, they would be:

  1.) What is YOUR definition of "deviation"? 
  2.) What is YOUR definition of "linearity"?

Nope, that's it. Just two questions.  That ought to do it, but if not, i can come up with a couple more...so that moglizu get's the tool he wants in his pocket as fast as possible.

I'm not asking.  I'm just saying, those are the kind of questions i would ask, if i was a developer trying to narrow down the specifications for the product a client was trying to acquire. 

For example, we all know what "standard deviation" means.  A series of red and black can "grow" away from a "mean", and become "imbalanced" in favor of red or black.  When measuring for the imbalance, i would want to know: What is the "look back" period?

This is all very very simple to solve, made hard only by miscommunication. 

[moglizu]

Hello people.
Some members are still wondering why I took the desecion to delete my topic.
I have already answered but I am starting getting used of you people that you do not pay attention so I will say it again.
Some members that understood my method tested and played and made money.
After this they sent me Pms by morivating/advising me to delete me thread because they didn t want for a lot of members to understand my method.
I just respected their wishes and I did it.

VLS told me that he understood my method from my 1st post.
The other members that understood my method , also understood it fast.

I see members that after all the explanation on me and Atlantis have not understood anything.

that's life. Some people are smarter than others.
it still makes no sense to me that after posted the exact rules , almost none (except 5 members) understood the method.

Instread of trying to be a predator and grab a winning method that some one posted , try to make-engineer your own method.
Do you have the brains to do so?

[Still]

Hello people.
Some members are still wondering why I took the desecion to delete my topic.
I have already answered but I am starting getting used of you people that you do not pay attention so I will say it again.
Some members that understood my method tested and played and made money.
After this they sent me Pms by morivating/advising me to delete me thread because they didn t want for a lot of members to understand my method.
I just respected their wishes and I did it.

VLS told me that he understood my method from my 1st post.
The other members that understood my method , also understood it fast.

I see members that after all the explanation on me and Atlantis have not understood anything.

that's life. Some people are smarter than others.
it still makes no sense to me that after posted the exact rules , almost none (except 5 members) understood the method.

Instread of trying to be a predator and grab a winning method that some one posted , try to make-engineer your own method.
Do you have the brains to do so?

I'm just a disinterested party, who, like several people on this site, has the ability to quickly program/develop a tool that allows you to track EC's, Dozens, Columns...whatever you want, the exact way that you want it.   

I'm not expecting any answers because as you have said, you have agreed with a small handful of people here,  to remove previous explanations, and now limit any further clarifications.

I'm not asking, but i do wonder who the three or four folks were who, having been given the idea, encouraged you to shut down the lines of communication that might lead to the enlightenment of those folks who may have been born with a few points fewer IQ?

Victor does not strike me as that kind of person.  Understanding it, he CAN give you a nice tracker in return. And so, you really have no more use for this thread. 

I am guessing that is why you posted in the first place (to get a tracker), since you don't seem to me like the kind of person who would get into an IQ measuring contest without a good reason. 

[moglizu]

The tracker is almost ready.

[Still]

The tracker is almost ready.

Ok, makes sense. 

Just for the record, correct me if i'm wrong: you came here and gave away some information, and then, the majority of those who did not comprehend it fast enough are now being characterized as trying to "grab" something from you...for asking questions?  In the meantime, should i understand that a few people here have literally grabbed the information for themselves, leaving the majority with vain questions? 

[moglizu]

I will explain the HOW this method of mine can lose.

The LINEARITY of my method is like having 4 different wheels in ONE.
When the bets are LINEAR (trigger) and points to the same bet (r or b) then by betting is like betting in 3 or 4( it depends of how many events had linearity in this spin) wheels that ALL have the same deviation of color .
IF 1 of them will win , then we are winners.

In order to lose , 3 or 4 different wheels have to continue the same deviation for long.
Even if this will happen the loss will be small.(flat betting)

1 or 2 wheels can continue the same deviations for hours... but 3 or 4 at the same time is hard.

So even if we are in a rare occasion while all 3 or 4 wheels are continuing the imbalance , if only 1 of them will wake up and go for the balance we are starting winning.

The advantage in my method comes straight from my original concept of the LINEARITY.

My primary tests showed profits. Then and only then I started playing my method in real casinos.
Over 2 years now I am making steady income.

But I know roulette is the devils game and even though my concept is solid and has a real reason to win, I am still waiting for the session from hell.

The point is to see in a long test with the sheet how many hell sessions can occur.
Are the wins lore than the losers in a 1.000.000 placed nets test.

This and only this will prove to me ( and none else) that my method is a winner... a long run winner .

so the 1st point in having a sheet of my method is for testing purposes .
The 2nd point is for playing all the 3 ecs at once .
This will give bets in almost every spin and the profits will be faster.

[moglizu]

""""you came here and gave away some information"""

NO.
I came here posted my hole method !!!!!!
I have said this 100 times but you never pay attention.
This is the reason why you did not understand my method.... because you do NOT pay attention.

[Still]

""""you came here and gave away some information"""

NO.
I came here posted my hole method !!!!!!
I have said this 100 times but you never pay attention.
This is the reason why you did not understand my method.... because you do NOT pay attention.

I'm a late comer here, having found out about it just hours ago.   My apologies for characterizing your whole method as some information.   Having given away your while method, are you saying that those who don't yet understand it are trying to "grab" it from you, while a few members here, behind the scenes, have literally grabbed the whole method from the majority of others?  Is that what has happened in the last few hours?

[moglizu]

The members that understood my method are clever+expirianced in randomness behaviour .
And a clever+experienced person that recognize a real original strong way to play roulette needs to know that the method is not gonna be played by a lot.( for protection reasons)

So all I did was respect their needs.
I can t blame them. They are correct.

[Still]

The members that understood my method are clever+expirianced in randomness behaviour .
And a clever+experienced person that recognize a real original strong way to play roulette needs to know that the method is not gonna be played by a lot.( for protection reasons)

So all I did was respect their needs.
I can t blame them. They are correct.

Ok, makes sense.  You did what you thought was right.  I'm not asking, but i do wonder who here was clever enough also to convince you to pull the plug before too many others found out.  I don't expect you to answer that, but i do wonder if those three, four or five will step forward and let us know who they are, and how long they've been operating this way. 

[moglizu]

they are clever .
They know that if they are gonna step forward you are gonna kill them with questions of how my method is being played.     

[Still]

they are clever .
They know that if they are gonna step forward you are gonna kill them with questions of how my method is being played.   

Yes, that's the most probable happenstance. For others,  it would be good to know who operates this way as "members" so they can avoid sharing with them anything that can actually make money, in keeping with the same code of ethics.  It would also save some other members time, not to waste reading any methods they propose, knowing they would never propose anything that would actually make any money. 

Anyways, thanks for what you did share, as long as you did share it, as well as for the latest addendums that might be helpful to the dullards left behind. 

[moglizu]

You can go to the other forum.
A person copy /pasted all my deleted posts.

I am still laughing.

[Still]

You can go to the other forum.
A person copy /pasted all my deleted posts.

I am still laughing.

Yes, we are clever too!

[moglizu]

If you name a copy/paste clever then yes you are.