### Topic: ACETF BET  (Read 19807 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

#### XXVV

• Moderator
• Posts: 1694
• Gender:
• Legio XX Valeria Victrix LVX
##### ACETF BET
« on: January 18, 2016, 04:29:57 am »
• This will upset some readers. A year ago it would have upset me.

In order to help myself and others on this quest, I am going to extract and publish notes taken from the W3M website archives mainly written by CEH but also from contributors to the message board. Several of these entities were evidently CEH masking.  Much of this was an elaborate hoax and we all, with that benefit of hindsight, the principle so beloved of roulette theorists, understand and see the manipulations so clearly now. However the twist I am attempting to explore is that, despite much reasoning aside, there indeed was a CWB principle - why not?  When you read the following passage, it seems quite plausible - just set your preconceptions aside, and go on a theatrical journey. Relax and let your imagination flow. Much of the journey, or at least the preparation for the journey is a mental game. That game is to be prepared that such a bet is possible. It is not magic, unfair, or fraudulent. It is a way of setting aside the mathematics of roulette and not denying the odds, but instead working with randomness within the game and the short cycle patterns and sudden ruptures within that natural flow. So the object of the exercise is to observe and catch/ trap/ the runs and changes, and take advantage of a possible aberration within one of the many variable flows.

This may involve some reverse logic such as noting some results that appear to lose more frequently sometimes than one would expect. ***

Find appropriate promising bets that are on the way to a winning bet- not yet stable and reliable enough to be consistent winners, but in the right direction.
'Then analyse one variable of the several - this is what will do it'.
'Trapping the runs and trapping the changes quickly enough (not all) but at better than the odds rate will make you a winner'.
'Take advantage of the randomness is the only way you can beat roulette.'
'Look at the Game, not the maths, A winning bet takes care of the maths automatically.'
'Our bet is a simple trap bet....a bet that traps enough winners to give every session a very good profit.'
"...finding a bet able to use the 'runs' and the 'changes' to advantage."

***the way to deal with this problem therefore is to reverse the bet.

This is a concept I have applied to my D+C Reverse Bet which was published on Roulette Forum about 6-7 years ago. If anyone is interested in this it can be accessed on the archives, and in one or two cases I sent the toolkit #2 and toolkit#3 to some readers who requested this - free -lol.

In this instance I do not want to go back into my past work but if you would like an attachment sent to you with directions and some clear worked examples (you WILL have to do some work) then please send me a PM.

In the past year thanks to Gizmotron there is also the appealing overlay that the independent game on zero ( as a safety net) can use the principle of 'substitution' by a cold or hot number, or also 0 and 00 on the US wheel.

The Loss Bet is exactly that. It is a reverse bet because it efficiently and simply reverses the usual D+C play which can lose in streaks ( more than you might expect).

Well there is quite a lot of detail in there -more than you might expect. Enjoy.

#### greenguy

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 256
##### Re: ACETF BET
« Reply #1 on: January 18, 2016, 08:31:50 am »
• Why after all this time and all the turbulent water under the bridge due to the fact that the whole w3million website was a professionally orchestrated scam to acquire money through deception would you believe there was any merit in the all smoke and mirror drip fed clues?
There’s nothing there sir, except possibly another swindle….

IMO, the fact that you continue to endlessly persist with this old chestnut is not doing you any favours.

If you are going to keep posting old CEH related matters, then I hope at some stage you will include the piles of foul and disrespectful language, and abusive accusatory statements published for extended periods by this individual, who by your efforts it would seem had something better to share.

#### XXVV

• Moderator
• Posts: 1694
• Gender:
• Legio XX Valeria Victrix LVX
##### Re: ACETF BET
« Reply #2 on: January 18, 2016, 06:57:23 pm »
• Thanks for the replies. There are fewer than expected and you have all been remarkably polite and restrained although clear. This time last year and I would have returned a broadside at anyone daring to reference Charles and this bet. So thanks for commenting and I will return comments.

@GreenGuy.

Yes there were mountains of obnoxious, disturbed, colourful (literally), petty, foolish, worthless, false trails, and worse in this fellow's litany of publications including his early ( quite perceptive actually) offering to the founders of Google. Let's hope Charles bought some A shares at that time. One of my cousins in Canada was one of the first workers in early Google, and hinted to me early on so at the very least I have always been amazed and deeply interested by the Google, now Alphabet work.

Regarding the review of this material over the years - it has done me considerable favours, and my colleagues, by separating out the rubbish from the worthy principles and examples within. Yes for several years I was livid with rage over being scammed, but even that motivated me to push on with extremely rewarding research, some of which I have openly shared, including the Reverse Loss Bet mentioned.

I note both you and The Law have not requested this. Perhaps you have already seen and assimilated the Reverse Bet principle. Nevermind, this is your choice, and of course as we always say, you do not have to read my posts if they upset you, and of course if you are reading in the 'guardian' role that some here play, you will find nothing to ring alarm bells. I simply am searching for truth. Amongst such a swampy forest as the W3M site that is no easy task but in my opinion by hauling out and re-examining what is worthwhile, with an open mind, there can be some valuable surprises. However you may disagree.

Fundamentally, through the work of others, I have changed my opinion, and now I do believe there are various elegant CWB models, and there may be one or two that are capable of further refinement in the engineering sense. Yes it is a search and quest.

It is very silly to suggest I re-publish the rubbish - that is filtered out. We all acknowledge the state of mind of the original author must have been 'confused' at times. We need to move on to what is worthwhile and I am advocating that there is worth in prospecting.

#### XXVV

• Moderator
• Posts: 1694
• Gender:
• Legio XX Valeria Victrix LVX
##### Re: ACETF BET
« Reply #3 on: January 18, 2016, 07:14:38 pm »
• @ The Law

Thanks for your comments and interest. Yes I plead guilty to being an attention seeker myself, as I seem to be always writing. Hopefully there is some merit and some worth at some level within -lol. Of course it is because I enjoy the form, and I am always searching, curious, or have something to share.

Serial publishers of unworthy systems were slammed by CEH, and to be fair, he only ever talked about the ACETF bet, although secondaries were discussed in the chat forum and then the PPPC bet. So it was not a matter of multiple bets although some of the material Simon discussed such as the Pairs Bet were examples of ABWAB, but rarely offered anything but some practice in thinking a little differently.

The principle though that particularly interests me here is that of  a differing 'thought pattern' - a fresh way of looking at material. Also if you believe something is possible that makes research much easier rather than researching without hope.

Your proposition that 'old systems' have 'failed' ( or we would be using them today) is flawed because the very best methods are private, and as we have stated many times it would be suicidal for us all if the rules of roulette were changed because too many had found winning ways to beat the casinos. I have said many times that no professional would release the full details of a successful bet, but nevertheless would encourage research and those genuine few who are prepared to work and practice toward a more perfected application of specialised knowledge.

Thank you for contributing here.

#### XXVV

• Moderator
• Posts: 1694
• Gender:
• Legio XX Valeria Victrix LVX
##### Re: ACETF BET
« Reply #4 on: January 18, 2016, 09:07:44 pm »
• Time to add some further notes on this Quest. Hidden amidst the simple words are some great ideas you know. The idea of 'trapping the runs and changes' is in a way what I do with my own cluster analysis private bet. Because I work at a sort of 'submarine level', ie below the surface,  it seems that the short cycle behaviour can easily be read and I see that clusters, ie runs of 2 elements/ components can last 3-7 spins although very rarely extend further. Thus knowing the usual distribution curve profiles of the bell curve ( reference the work on Full Time Gambler) it is most likely you know where is the most effective location where to attack for change in the run. That is core of my bet.

Back to ACETF Bet Selection BS

'...find a bet that is a consistent winner...an engineered bet with condensed instructions for ease of play'.

MM
.''...in an adverse sequence with our bet accept +3 to close the session'. (In my view +0 is a win against the house anyway).

1.  '... as we experience a lot more sequences that favour us, we take advantage.'

2. '...never increase or decrease your bet during a session.'

#### XXVV

• Moderator
• Posts: 1694
• Gender:
• Legio XX Valeria Victrix LVX
##### Re: ACETF BET
« Reply #5 on: January 19, 2016, 12:40:21 am »
• @The Law

I was very polite in my first post to you, and your style of response is well known for its multi colour and linear block emphasis

You fail to grasp a really important principle, and I am not the first to mention the principle of privacy when it comes to sensitive and valuable intellectual property - ie a technique that consistently wins against the casinos.

As in much life experience, 'balance' needs to be applied, between apparent poles.

Here we have on one hand OPEN/OPEN SOURCE and on the other extreme CLOSED/PRIVATE

If the Casino is aware of a player using a method that consistently takes their expected profit they will ban that player and will also monitor the technique from camera records. Similarly bookies do not tolerate consistent winners.

Therefore it is necessary to be discrete, and if there is a CWB or winning technique it should be used sparingly if this is your local casino, or if used frequently and professionally it is wise to spread play over  short cycles in a wide number of locations. I have known of several roulette players who do this, and of course the BJ teams always rotated or disguised their play as it became literally very dangerous ( read the books by Ben Mezrich).

To be totally open and freely share all knowledge with anyone will result in roulette being banned or changed from its present format.

To be secretive and offer nothing to the genuine seekers for knowledge would be selfish and unacceptable.

So it is necessary to strike a compromise, and every player will have a different approach. I have repeatedly stated that hints, and vague offerings are infuriating and worthless unless there is substance that can be verified.

How can you verify?  Only by direct experience and live play testing. I do that and have done so for 25 years.

I know that filtering the information from the hundreds of thousands of words on the W3M website archive and the PPPC website/ forum, it is possible to generate an outline, and several possible paths. I also know that the principle of 'runs' and 'changes' and the trapping of such is a key winning technique which I use daily.

So there we go. I am delighted to be an attention seeker, and hopefully do provide at least a little value to some. Long ago I found out that it is impossible to please everybody all the time.

#### horus

• Full Member
• Posts: 155
##### Re: ACETF BET
« Reply #6 on: January 19, 2016, 01:06:43 am »
• XXVV, it's appreciated that you start threads and try and get some kind of discussion on roulette going, but lately every one of them seems to very quickly go away from the subject matter and then revolve around your 'private bet' which you say you have no intention of sharing.
I don't see why you need to mention it in just about every thread you start. Frankly speaking, it becomes rather boring and repetitive.

thank you.

If you fail to know, fail to prepare, fail to plan and practice, then know full well that you are knowingly preparing and planning to lose. What you don't know and don't do will be your undoing.

#### greenguy

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 256
##### Re: ACETF BET
« Reply #7 on: January 19, 2016, 04:54:40 am »
• ...(In my view +0 is a win against the house anyway)...

For roulette system players I would agree.

A great accomplishment, but can't really take it to the bank.

#### XXVV

• Moderator
• Posts: 1694
• Gender:
• Legio XX Valeria Victrix LVX
##### Re: ACETF BET
« Reply #8 on: January 19, 2016, 05:21:27 am »

• @ The Law - your posts elsewhere usually end in sarcasm or negative judgmental comments missing the bigger picture. You have contributed nothing constructive to this thread and your posts will be deleted.

@ Horus - oh dear - what more do you want?  Sorry to disappoint you again. This thread is about a CWB. My bet is NOT a CWB but has a significant edge but because of greater variance than a tight and elegant CWB it sometimes loses. The ACETF bet, if it exists, did not end a session with a loss because of simple strict BS +MM. Read the details I am providing. For those who happily PM'd me I have sent attachment with a clever Reverse Bet. This thread is not at all about my bet but of course there are overlaps where runs and changes are caught. For those who have the ears to hear this is so significant in the context of a strict outside table bet that uses very few chips, and aims to attain no less than +0, usually no less than +3, and more usually ending in a double win on at least +10 units, out of a 20 unit RB.

Where is your constructive contribution and work on this topic. If you are not bothered, why read, and more to the point why be so disrespectful to me? Your post will remain. As a roulette researcher it is helpful to maintain an open mind on possibilities. In the 30 years in studying roulette I have frequently been forced to take a fresh look at what I had earlier wrongly assumed.

Anyone else want to complain yet offer nothing?

Yes this is a Forum context, and constructive exchange is welcome noting this is actually a Blog section so that there is no point at all in posting  disrespectful and silly material that does not move the research forward. As I have stated so many times, I use this format to 'think aloud' and in part to share progress, if you are smart enough to realize what is unfolding.

A perfected CWB is actually the ultimate roulette bet, and there is no better Quest.

My research suggests the CWB exists and when correctly engineered ( ie removing surplus) it uses very few chips in very few spins and flat stakes with a small RB.

If you cannot imagine the possibility of such, then do not bother participating. Fundamentally with some of these posters, they want all the benefits, yet actually suggest or contribute nothing.

That is why one of my favourite contributors is Gizmotron who always adds value.

#### XXVV

• Moderator
• Posts: 1694
• Gender:
• Legio XX Valeria Victrix LVX
##### Re: ACETF BET
« Reply #9 on: January 20, 2016, 12:35:35 am »
• More notes from W3M et al....

"A consistent winning bet...found by looking at the 'Game' not the 'Odds', and used a great deal of 'lateral thinking' in the research.

'Our bet is 'automatic'...we know where to bet each and every spin of the wheel....we know that individual bets do not matter win or lose...because we know that we will have enough winning bets to return profit....'

'There are a few bets that can be engineered from 'certain movements'....some have a very small risk factor, ranging to a bet like ours with a proven no risk factor at all.'

'Make a list of every 'move' that can happen'...check out the possibilities of each 'move'....if you have not found the right ones...you must look again....they are there....the payoff is huge.'

#### XXVV

• Moderator
• Posts: 1694
• Gender:
• Legio XX Valeria Victrix LVX
##### Re: ACETF BET
« Reply #10 on: January 20, 2016, 12:49:35 am »
• Here is a sequence that might surprise you and it relates to an exchange between Gizmotron and CEH.  It comes from a section on the W3M website 'Roulette Thinkers Page For Professionals'. In my records it is dated 27/12/2009 but that is merely my page 27 copy date, so was published earlier.

This is titled ' So here are ways to read randomness' .

CEH responded ...'I can tell you that the ACETF bet was found by me because of my interest in 'clustering analysis'....'I know for a fact that Gizmotron's post is correct...Where I differ and the ACETF bet we use differs, is that by 'default' I found a way to convert this clustering into a  trigger bet that beats randomness...not all of the time, but enough to give us a consistent profit per session.'

Here is an edited transcript of Gizmotron's article...

'....I have presented real world arguments that many...have failed to address on the topic of randomness. I specifically pointed out 'Clustering Analysis' as areal subject of science.'

'So here are ways to read randomness...

'You can read if a group of numbers are hitting in  dominate type of series. An example of that is dozens hitting as singles. Do you know what that means? Do you need that spelled out for you? Here are a bunch of numbers hitting as singles : 1,13, 25. 2. 14, 26. 3, 15, 27 etc ... ( 1 is table doz 1; 13 is doz2; 25 is doz3). In this example you read past spins as 1,2,3  1,2,3   1,2,3 etc.  Now anyone can see that this is an example of singles....It's also a repeating pattern....Can you see the repeating pattern?  If you can then you are reading randomness.

'Can you read dominations in randomness? Can you chart twenty past spins where you can see one of the three table layout dozens not hitting in the past twenty past spins? If you can you are reading randomness.

'....Having a method for bet selection that works come from experience and the knowledge of what to look for. I get that from reading the randomness that flows while I play.

'.....Triggers are mindless rules of system builders.'

(Obviously CEH disagrees over the use of a 'trigger'.  I use triggers all the time in my private bet metholology as that identifies and catches/ traps change. However as in recent posts by Gizmotron the concept of 'prospecting' for Gold in the landscape is a great metaphor as you know the signs of what to look for.)

#### Gizmotron

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1487
##### Re: ACETF BET
« Reply #11 on: January 20, 2016, 05:14:08 am »
• CEH responded ...'I can tell you that the ACETF bet was found by me because of my interest in 'clustering analysis'....'I know for a fact that Gizmotron's post is correct...Where I differ and the ACETF bet we use differs, is that by 'default' I found a way to convert this clustering into a  trigger bet that beats randomness...not all of the time, but enough to give us a consistent profit per session.'

OK, anyone that has followed my usual gibberish for the past month knows that I discovered something suggested by Spike as much as 4 to 7 years ago. I mentioned it as a secret trigger here just a while ago. It sort is a trigger. It's not perfect. But it kicks butt a lot of times. Like anything in randomness, you have to adjust to the flow. No, I won't tell my secret. I'm sticking to Spike's mantra, "never wise up a sucker." I think of it this way, never wise up someone who not only has not paid their dues but that would wreck the game of Roulette if they acquired this information without earning it. We all know what Thorp did for 21. Spike's not talking. I'm not talking. Just let it be known, there are ways to take advantage of randomness. One day we will be RAP, Randomness Advantage players.

You all should know something. My comments have always been evasive and scattered on purpose. I wanted the entire world to know that I told you all how it works, long before it will be validated as scientific proof. It' all here but spelling it out, blurting it out, like some kind of unintelligent that loves yelling Gold! Gold!, there's gold in these here hills.

"...IT'S AGAINST THE LAW TO BREAK THE LAW OF AVERAGES."

#### XXVV

• Moderator
• Posts: 1694
• Gender:
• Legio XX Valeria Victrix LVX
##### Re: ACETF BET
« Reply #12 on: January 20, 2016, 08:28:06 pm »
• Now this interaction with Gizmotron is exactly what I am seeking and is a higher purpose of this Forum. It need not be complex or difficult, but instead lots of apparently scattered insights that have real worth when collected and added, to push forward. I do not mean to embarrass or intimidate those who have posted but you might like to note the ancient advice - if I cannot comment constructively I shall remain silent.

Life really is a Quest, and of course your attitude to life experience is expressed ( shown) by what you say and do, and how you do it.

This ACETF bet whether it actually exists or not is a metaphor. Coming out of the searching, the time spent researching and testing, will be fresh insights and recall CEH stated he found the bet by default anyway, ie by accident or by an accidental path, or serendipity, or 'luck'.

As I stated elsewhere, you make your own luck and this will be the subject of a future thread called LUCK.

I have already personally put together a recent post by Gizmotron, Nathan Detroit, some research on penultimate cycle spins, and in live testing observed some very good results although relatively unstable yet. More on this to follow. Other observations from readers are welcomed or is just really just 1 in 1000 who make the progress, and the rest just follow?

#### XXVV

• Moderator
• Posts: 1694
• Gender:
• Legio XX Valeria Victrix LVX
##### Re: ACETF BET
« Reply #13 on: January 29, 2016, 09:08:06 pm »
• When things go quiet it is a good sign because then you know that there must be activity that is time consuming. Indeed this is the case with the work on the CWB variations, amongst which the ACETF was one.

As research has proceeded and my reading list and connection network expands, it is becoming more and more likely that these bets exist and that the clues provided over the years were sometimes (in hindsight) very clear. It is also of major importance that the bets remain veiled and not open because their efficiency and effectiveness would simply cause roulette to be closed as a casino option.

My goal is to define the formula for at least one of these during the year ahead, and at this time I am on the track of three variations. CEH always mentioned five, and perhaps more.

What to do at the end of the year with the sum of knowledge is an important decision.

#### XXVV

• Moderator
• Posts: 1694
• Gender:
• Legio XX Valeria Victrix LVX
##### Re: ACETF BET
« Reply #14 on: March 08, 2016, 09:29:42 pm »
• Several months since my last report in this study.

I can tell you that these bets exist, and that the only way to access this knowledge is to be prepared to work, and to allow if alone, several years of study. If you are fortunate to work with colleagues this may accelerate your progress. There is vast material to be mined, and yes a lot of nonsense and false leads from some, yet from others remarkably helpful clues once you see things, even partially, from another perspective.

I have total respect for the very few that have taken this path, and my personal opinion is that this research and application is for a valid purpose. I have seen at first hand from myself, and others, bets that can overcome house edge and negative expectation. The essence though is to find such a concentrated and effective efficient bet that the term CWB can be applied where by definition the variance is so controlled that a small RB can enable consistent growth session by session.

My own private bet to which I often refer is crude by comparison in my view now, with too much variance, and further work in engineering is required. I think I know the BWAB focus where this can be achieved and curiously, and to the annoyance of some readers who have fixed views on such matters, this is in the realm of 'gamblers fallacy'. I have a focus now on an area of 'recovery after loss', and with suitable criteria applied and with a carefully selected window of play selected by empirical testing, the relative regularity of three closely spaced hits in response to an earlier delay, is the opportunity where I can really pull the curtain , and draw a circle around an energy field where  a re-balancing of energies in the ecart occurs more than 92% of the time. The missing 8% need not bother and need not be chased as flat staking tips the scales in sufficient reliability.

This theory still requires a year of work in my view but has the makings of an effective bet.

However my total admiration goes to a bet that can be applied, spin by spin, after a short observation period, and achieves consistently a rate of return in excess of +10% edge. Do such bets exist?  Is this a fantasy wish, a fallacy, a trick, a deceit? That is nothing to do with me, but after years of reading and research I am convinced these exist, in several forms.  All the material to search through and filter, is out there. It just depends where you look and how you look, and with an appropriate attitude of respectful healthy scepticism, not naive belief.

It puts into perspective recent activity on this forum in roulette.

I have had to learn a lot of lessons this past few months, and emerging from it will be a more mature view.

Best wishes to those who search.