Just blaming people with the knowledge of maths offer no solution as they can prove themselves right again and again while you can not prove the same. Mathematics of gambling, the house edge, variance etc won't change for you, you need to change other aspects of the strategy that have been killing the player. Ironically, people like to redo fallacy based ideas than thinking something out of box. Martingale did not work 300 years back and won't work after 3000 more years.

@ Blue Angel,
            I have tried this with ophis tracker many times. No real benefit over millions of spins tests. We risk 35 units to win 1 unit and never know if we will get to win 35 units till a loss kills all. Long simulations prove this wrong. I have done this thinking your way, far early.

          Ball has no memory to either give any of the two left outs or leave them. This doesn't change the probability of the game.

Rather, you can bet any 35 numbers same way and expect the same outcome.
               No betselection proved to be better than all other in long simulations.

Ladies and Gentlemen,
           There is no need to be overexcited with this method. Audiokinesis was at -621 after one million placed bets in No Zero Roulette. It means, they have ignored the 10% house fees charged periodically by the casino for letting you play no zero roulette. Whenever one is in a net win 10% can be deducted in a given span and not after millions of spins pass. This makes things further horrible and lesser rewarding and the real net will be deeper in loss than they calculated so far. I assume there is a loss of atleast 5k if proper calculation is made. Same goes with Nick's tests. Ignoring House fees calculation is a blunder worth looking very seriously.

Betvoyager looks most balanced to me in all regards and I do not hesitate to play their RNG roulette and other games after Bayes confirmed that SHA-254 mechanism used by bv is un-parallel and absolute safe. Excellent table spread is another reason I can vouch for betvoyager.

15th Harsh Session:
                      142 Losses vs 120 wins


L
L
L
W
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
W
W
W
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
W
L
W
W
L
L
L
L
W
W
W
L
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
W
W

Good Job again, Janos,
                  Now check Harsh sessions #1 to 10 too the same way and publish reports with graphs.

If at one million placed bet you were at -621, it is still attacking the house edge and better than anything else tested mechanically and flat bet but not a winner system. Do you think you can better it with our own progressions?

@Auduiokinesis @Janos,

        What is the net you achieved in over 1 million placed bet? is it a 1 unit 2 unit play or entirely 1 unit game?
Have u calculated 10% house fees from net winnings too for playing no zero roulette? It is crucial.

Great Job, Audiokinesis @ Janos,
                  You have been my best student so far and a real hardworking guy. It looks great to see you using different tweaks to better things. You can definitely play better than most members/guests here but you need to polish your skills a bit more. Even I am doing a lot of work to make things as better as possible.
                Doing so much varieties of harsh sessions, you learn a lot of skills and graduate to be a sensible player. Anybody winning net profit over all these have positive chances to be ahead in real play.
                             

Nick,
      Winning so many placed bets(82,000), that too flat is kind of unseen for any mechanical way to play. I hope there is no serious error in coding giving false hopes. Too good to be true. Coupled with a better MM, it can earn much more.

Yes the MM is primary meant for EC bets and I consider that as the best bet too. However, one can modify the same for any other bet too.
I recommend playing the same at bv no zero roulette from betvoyager for obvious best expectations.

           Expectation to win depends upon the level of harshness one may need to face. If things are closer to break even, one can expect to win 10 units per 100 spins of betting.

I will ask if he/she is alright and if he/she needs help will call the floor manager too.

In a major breakthrough, I have redone the positive gambling module to be fit to be played in all over. I have realised that no trigger makes the game absolute safer and waiting for too remote triggers to bet is not so wise, in real play. Special care has been given to take care of too bad cases that will show more often than not in all over play but it is still doable.
                           Now, one can sit and play without waiting for any trigger or pausing anywhere. Ideal for real casino environment. Could be used in roulette as well in baccarat. The stop loss of -300 will still be applicable. I believe we can still surpass most of the sessions(even harsh ones) than not.

14TH HARSH SESSION:

                126 LOSSES VS 103 WINS.
L
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
W
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
W
W
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
W

QuoteAttached is what today's statistical testing has produced for me. Two different but similar VDW statistics used, both produced profits flat betting after 100,000 spins. However, the one on the right had about twice the profit and a Z-score of 2.5 with over 35,000 placed bets so I will use that one as the baseline to test future statistical anomalies.

100k spins doesn't matter but only placed bets does.
How much did it win flat bet?
OK, I see 200+ and 400+

so, if in 100k spins we generate this much units, do u think is good enough?

Can you simulate a few more sessions the same way?