QuoteThe pickSecond and third column.24 numbers 12 low and 12 high numbers, 12 Red and 12 Black, 12 Odd and 12 Even.A lazy  and easy way to play .   

Very innovative and unique. Indeed.

Where are all so-called mathematicians and system authors who have filled many forums with lots of "systems" and "money management" rules? There are many guys who have written dozens of them.
             All these so called systems are workable in "favorable" cases only. If your betselection gets favorable, you will win with flat bet as well. What is the merit of these systems? They all bleed dry if a little adverse situations come and if adverse starts running little harder, you would lose what you can never recover.
               If anyone can work out this, it would guide and help all to fight with randomness in real world situations.

QuoteIn a nutshell, the author says to look at the second newest spin and bet the pocket & two neighbors on each side *5 numbers* on the opposite side of the wheel (19 neighbors from the second newest spin value)

This proposition doesn't hold good in real world and you can't extract profit by this with even slightest consistency.

I am the author of Cracking PI Cracking Random. I have worked extensively with Zumma's System Tester. There is a near precise flat bet advantage: .08333 over the 15k trials. I discuss it in my site: CrackingPi.com. I'll answer any questions you may have.

Quote


Please read over my challenge once again and if you understood it, try to play number 3 and beat it with any well-defined method.  

rouletteforum.com
rouletteforum.net
roulette30.com
rouletteplace.com


I do have a small forum:http://www.albalaha.lefora.com

Hey Mervin,
        These things won't work. I challenge all the system writers to show a single way where you can play and win a session like it.
If nobody can do that, it is time to think whether you have actually gained anything from reading so-called "systems" spread over hundreds of systems for sale or freely available on various sites or discussion forums.
                                    Do not think that it is just a challenge to beat number 3 of zumma. Any betselection may have same fate as 3, be it a static one or a number that is being chosen by any hypothesis. Number 3 of zumma is merely an indication of getting worst probabilities on your chosen betselection. How will you cop that?

Casinomeister is a good one but not very fair regarding ranking. Actually, it is an affiliate site for promoting casinos through referral links (which earns it commission too).

These concepts will be proved as kindergarten by this data.

No progression that is ever written on any forum or in any system sold for money can do anything but losing on this data. Fake system sellers reverse engineer Zumma book to find suitable way to bet and prove they can beat it but what about beating such consistently bad bet selection?

If you win 15k spins betting number 3 as your sole bet selection, it proves that you have a strategy that can work in adverse conditions.
    Only a very strong and stable method can work on this. All Kindergarten stuff will fall flat here. This is litmus test of any system.
           Any taker?

My open challenge: http://betselection.cc/general-discussion/albalaha's-open-challenge-can-anyone-beat-the-worst/ will show mirror to people who create  so-called "systems" on the fly.

Victor,
             American Roulette has inbuilt double disadvantage to players with comparison to European. I have reverse engineered zumma to bring in the worst option. If someone can beat zumma with this betselection (playing number 3 only) with a well-defined system, he will be the best system creator of the world and he will be able to crush maximum possible sessions without any fear of losing money.

QuotePotentially an interesting challenge.I hope you get some takers.

               I can see that even the most famous (so-called successful too) methods are still moving around Gamblers' fallacy and Martingale while they are proven failure concepts, in long run and they are bound to lose more and win less if you keep on playing those. I don't believe those who are still at kindergarten level can ever dare to even think of beating this. I would be the happiest person if someone proves me wrong.
            That is why I said, I am not butterfly because there is no nectar available.

Anybody can play and win in sessions where his betselection either appears averagely or with minor temporary variance. Can anybody dare to win a perpetually under performer number?

If you are aware of Zumma Testers's book of American Roulette having 15k real spins, here is an open challenge for all those who say they are system creators.

In the attached sheet, I have marked the wins/losses of number 3 in entire 15k trials. It is pertinent to mention here that number 3 has won only 329 times i.e a hit rate of only 45.59 spins/Win.

I openly challenge that no one can beat it at last being under a reasonable limit (bankroll wise and maximum bet used wise). Will anybody ever beat it and prove me wrong?

Since I am not member of any other forum apart from this and mine, I request Victor and others to carry my challenge to other forums as well.

I think 37.