OK, please understand I was on a roll back then.  I did not know about trends and anomalies like I do now or I would have known I was riding a high wave.

My bet was $5 on any EC and I started with a $300 bankroll.  It seemed that I never went very far until I had my 50% winners and stopped.  I got a real mix of ECs--no long runs on any one.

Also know that back then I had a little money.  I would not bet $5 today as a starting bet.  No way..  I would bet dimes!!

You may play this for a week and think you've found the key to the mint.  Around that time would be a good time to shelve it for a while.  As John Legend always said, the boogey man is just around the corner. 

So I guess now I'm touting "hit and run"!!    Where's me rum?   

Sam

Good luck if you try it, Buff!

Norman Squire wrote a book and stated the "Split Martingale" would always work if you could make it eliminate two losses for each win AND if you got half as many wins as you do losses.  That is--50 losses and 25 wins works.  So if you believe in "regression toward the mean" you should consider this "regression half-way toward the mean".  Beware of the ever-increasing bet size.....

Squire said the problem was that too man wins before any losses threw the system out of kilter.  Or whack.  Whatever....

Each win must cancel two losses and if you get a ton of wins before any losses, well the system fails.  I discovered a way to eliminate that.

We must define a "game".  A game is when you lose two in a row on any EC.  Until you lose two in a row, you have no game.

So we begin..................

First we write on our line the figures 1 1.  Just do it...  Now, randomly pick any EC.  Throw a dice or use Random.org or whatever.  Say red........  Bet red and if you win, you have failed to start a game.  Pick another random EC.  Keep doing that until you have lost two in a row.  Now you have a game!!  And you bet on the same EC.  Why?  Because it has NOT wasted wins trying to achieve two losses which will be eliminated with one win.  (Wordy!!)  Anyway, your wins came on another EC.  It could have been another human betting those ECs, not you!!

The object now is to recover the two lost units.  You add the left and right 1s and get 2.  Bet two.  If you win, game over.  Select another random EC.  If you lose, line is 112 and next bet is 3.  A win leaves a 1 alone as you cross off the left and right figures.  We'll address that 1 later.

You continue until one of three things happens:  1.  You have an even number and clear the line completely; 2.  You have an un-even number and leave a middle number.  (This goes in the "fridge"); or 3. You run out of money, BV cuts you off, or you dirty your undies.

It is very, very rare to have a situation where you do not get half as many wins as losses.  Usually this will happen very quickly.  Now, the clearing of the line does not win any money; you only win when you win on the first attempt at the EC.  This will happen enough to make it worthwhile.

Now, suppose you have a middle number left over:  1 1 2 3 4, the 2.  That becomes a "leftover" and goes in the "fridge".  That number may sometimes be something like 17 or 22 or more.  The leftover that goes into the "fridge" must be eaten.  And it cannot be eaten alone!!  It must be "piggy-backed" onto a new bet.

Remember, we have a 2 left and we want to eliminate it with no bet!  We tack it on the next time we start a line:  not 1 1, but 1 3.  We have added our 2 leftover to the second number in the line.  Since it was going to get bet anyway, there is no extra bet needed.

Squire did not go into this; this is pure Sam.  You must maintain the "one win cancels two losses" paradigm throughout the trot or the system will not work.

Now, suppose your "fridge" has a large number--17.  You do not want 1 18, so you eat the leftovers 3, 4, or 5 at a time.  1 1 4;  1 1 5; 1 1 6.  Keep deducting your withdrawal of leftovers from the fridge until it is zero.

Now.........mathematically, this worked for me.  I'm sure there are those who will point out a fallacy and I appreciate them doing so.  My goal was $100 per day and I made that goal for a long time. 

I also instituted a new thought I called "earning your next bet" for when things got really, really bad.  And they do!!  THEY DO!!  Be aware of that.

That's it.

Try it at your own risk.

Sam

http://betselection.cc/methods%27-results/a-test-of-%27the-ball-drop-system%27-using-the-twocat-supertracker/msg11423/#msg11423

Silly me.  I already posted the video.

I liked ignatus; liked reading his posts.  One thing about him--you knew where to bet be it good or bad. 

Frankly, I was hoping PA would tell us something about the Kimo Li method or system or whatever it might be.  I've been looking at it for years and still can't see anything.

I thought if he took it number by number, we might understand.

Sam

Not that kind of ball!!

If a person says they can do X and someone asks them to do it, can they say no?  If they do the doubts will arise.  "Aye, mate!  If ye culd do it, ye wuld."

So they always find a reason as to why they cannot even try.  I knew he would do this from the get-go.  I find no fault with the fellow.  He did his best.

I am back to my "Ball Drop" system.  Normy wrote the software for me.  I'll try it a while.  If I have any success, I'll post.

Sam

OH, lighten up...........

Everything I've every tried has failed yet I keep plugging away.

It's not how many times you get knocked down; it's how many times you get up to fight again.

Sam

Vic

A guys goes to center court and puts a basketball through the hoop for $20,000.  Now, he has made more money at basketball than nearly every person in the world.

He has played his Martingale and won.

Now, let's see him do it again.  And again.

I'm coming back to Ralph:  It's all luck.

Sam

esoito

If she sends it to me free, I'll have a look at it but I'll not pay for anything more.

Her ideas are so poorly presented one cannot understand what she's saying.  Well, I can't anyway.  I would not even ask Nick to try to write a sheet for it because I like the guy.

When you say, "look at the last two or three", you've lost me.  Which is it?  Two or three?

I have the feeling these systems of hers are so difficult to understand, no one can truly test them.  But I could be wrong...

Sam

Weddings

I get your point.  You have beaten the game.  I salute you.  You choose to keep secret the method you use.  I respect your decision.

What I do not respect is a bunch of bloviation with absolutely nothing to back it up.  If this thing is so great--AND YOU WANT TO PREACH ABOUT IT--then show us how it works.

Sam

Greetings!

You say all this hooey from Kimo Li works.  Well, let's prove it to the world.  You have written 10,000 words trying to explain this to the forum.

I challenge you to do this:  Tell me exactly how you would bet on UNKNOWN numbers, and I will log onto Dublin or SmartLive (your choice) and make a movie playing EXACTLY as you say to play. 

I have the books and I can look up what a "star" is again, but I'd rather you put it into your own words so there is no mistake.

What say you?

Sam

6

I cannot disagree with a thing you said.  I can only quote Robert Browning:  "Ah, but a man's reach must exceed his grasp or what's a heaven for?"

So we plod along......

Sam

I will freely admit I have had systems I thought were infallible.I was wrong.I have had systems that worked for so long,I thought they would never fail.I was wrong. 

Years ago I studied a system while my wife was undergoing physical therapy.  Sitting in the car,I did 5,000 spins, 100 at a time.  (OK, some I did at home.)  This system never failed to produce a profit.I then went to CasinoWebCam and played the system.I took $300 to over $3,200 before they discovered I was an American and shut me down.I also tried this system at several other casinos and it worked.

I thought this system was the be-all and end-all.  It wasn't. 

It seems to work best on a John Huxley Starburst wheel.  Dublin has one through their associate.  When I got an account at Dublin,I tried the system.  It failed.

So if you can do 5,000 dummy spins and win and then actually win $2,900 and have something fail, what is there?  When you can win money at three casinos with a system and then have it fail, what is there to say? You were on a lucky streak?

All I have learned in the past seven years has not brought me one inch closer to winning long term.

I don't know where that "follow him" statement came from or if it was about me but if it was--take some friendly advice:  Don't follow me!

[Moderator's Comment:  To stop you thinking you're going nuts (LOLOL) the 'follow him' was part of an abrupt reply from one member to another in one of the posts that has since been deleted.  So relax -- no need to change your medication after all! ]

Sam

Quote from: Marshall Bing Bell on December 10, 2013, 12:13:39 AM
My apologies to Wannawin for adding fuel to the fire.

If I play roulette on a daily basis and always leave the table with some profit, and I do so for 20 years or more, and then I retire to live out my remaining days with an accumulated fortune at my disposal, would you say I have beaten the game of roulette?

Or did I only win because I knew when to leave the table?

MBB

Are you saying:  "Hypothetically I did x, y and z.", or are you saying you have actually done this? 

I read you saying you have never left the table a loser in 20 years.  Are you making that as a factual statement?

Just curious.....

Sam