Whether he can do it or not is not really the point.

The point is that he is not required to show proof to you or anybody if he does not want to.

That goes for anybody and I was just using Spike as an example.

There are more than a few people on this forum who claim to be able to win. I don't really care if they can win or not. I wouldn't think bad of them for not showing me.

cheers

Calling people liars is a harsh word Sputnik (deluded maybe  )

I agree with Spike here. The casinos are the ones who pay you out for proving it and that's all that matters.

no offence intended! 

p.s. I voted yes by the way.

Quote from: Sputnik on March 10, 2013, 12:24:42 PM

I like when you use the word strategy.
I have the same opinion that some one should note what is current happining, what is current present, then decide what and how to play and always take in caculation what a small change might be and adapt or follow the wheels current states.

Hello Sputnik

Well I definately find that works much better and it has the ability to throw up some nice consecutive win sequences in short spaces of time in my opinion. This is what I particularly like because more often than not, it allows me to hit the road without getting involved in a long drawn out game.

Quote from: TwoCatSam on March 08, 2013, 04:38:52 AM
____________________________________________________________________________________________________


So what Macau is say to me is this:  Switching systems--often and among many--keeps you on the good trot of numbers.  Using the same system over and  over will find the bad numbers.

The thing is to get away from the 'system' mentality and think more in terms of 'strategy'.

A strategy can incorporate many different systems and concepts. This is where I think the sum can be greater than the parts.

Experience has shown me that there is a good run happening somewhere with enough consistency to make a profit. Experience has also shown me that you will lose your a** if you can't adapt quickly enough with the flow. This kind of player intelligence has to be learned at the tables in my opinion. You learn quicker from real losses.

What I see a lot in the casino is the player rushing up to the table and start playing his favourite numbers straight away with no thoughts of watching for a few spins to get an idea of what's going on. I learned my lesson about this several years ago.

A friend had shared a bit of software with me which he said was great on Baccarat. It involved using a negative 1-2-3 step progression. It worked great for a week and I thought it was going to make me a lot of money.

Disaster struck in the form of the 'terrible two's'.

BB
PP
BB
PP
BB
PP
BB etc....

This thing seemed like it could handle everything that was thrown at it until it ran into the terrible two's. I did not even notice it until I started looking at why my bankroll went up in smoke. I thought how could a 4k system be so flawed in one respect. But this is what happens with systems. A clever strategy could have worked around this and limited the damage to a degree. The terrible two's ran throughout the whole shoe. It may have won somebody else a fortune.

cheers

Watched this last night and thought it was great.

http://youtu.be/219YybX66MY

One of the best books I have read is Edward De Bono's 'Parallel Thinking' (His whole collection is great reading material)

He suggests we shift from Socratic thinking - the search for truth- to De Bono thinking - design forward for value.

Those problems that can be solved by analysis have been solved. Now the rest can only be solved by 'design'.

Accept possibilities without judging and lay them down in parallel.

Accept both sides of a contradiction and lay them down in parallel.

Then design forwards from parallel possibilities.

My view is that our Western thinking system based on analysis, judgement and argument holds a lot of us back. It is evident reading the roulette forums that this is the case.

It's a bit of an old cliche but there is definately more than one way to skin a cat.

cheers

Good luck in your new challenge John. 

It is my belief that you should stick with what is happening.

Look at this pic...

[attachimg=1]

Each number should have roughly appeared 3 times by now.

10 of the numbers which are circled have either come 0 times or 1 time.

That's nearly a third of the numbers.

And yet the 7 and 8 combined have appeared 17 times.

This runs throughout the game and not just on the surface like in the pic.

This is why most people lose. It is the variance and unseen variance which kills us.

Only a very few locations are performing better than average when taking different factors into account. This is not a bad thing because it means you don't have to scatter lots of chips around the table. Of course there are no guarantees, however you don't need to hit every spin playing just a few locations and just a small winning run is enough to take you into a healthy profit most times.

So diluting the whole game to a few spots which are performing well is far better in my opinion than playing 18-24 spots which are displaying sleeping tendencies in one form or another.

cheers

Quote from: Gizmotron on February 28, 2013, 04:22:56 PM
I've been on the same topic for the past six years.

That's the way if you ask me because you then have a thorough understanding of what you do and it's there for good assuming roulette does not suddenly dissapear.

There is no joy in playing something where you sometimes have that feeling that today might be the day that the method will come unstuck and it's then back to the drawing board. These type of things are more or less just a quick fix.

6 years is a long time to really get to know something very well.

My hat goes off to anyone with that kind of persistence and they deserve any good fortune that may come along.

The information age is great for many reasons however it has its downsides.

Too much information swimming around and it can easily lead to running around in circles.

That's what I see a lot on gambling forums.

A more productive way may be to take an idea and just solely concentrate on that one idea alone. Even if that means (god forbid) spending less time reading everything else.

It's good to just let a concept sink in and wait for the ideas to flow.  That is not going to happen overnight and I am serious when I say it could take months.

I think it's a good way to go through the process of finding what you are looking for rather than allowing your brain to regurgitate the same information over and over without really getting anywhere. Quality over quantity springs to mind. The answers will definately come if you give them time and don't have a mind cluttered with 101 different ideas running around.

cheers

My three favourites:

Thirteen against the Bank (Norman Leigh)

How to Win at Roulette and Blackjack (Roy Ward Dickson)

Monte Carlo Anecdotes (Victor Bethell)

I like them for the way they are written as well as the information about roulette play.

This is a good thread.

It's not the system that gives you the advantage, rather the permanence. This is what you need to attack. It's one reason why online casinos restrict players from the live wheel but still allow them to play the more balanced RNG.

cheers

Quote from: Marshall Bing Bell on February 25, 2013, 10:57:20 AM
Pity this thread fizzed out.

100 or so crazy ideas might had really led somewhere.

I am still looking at it however I have not had that much time.

It did lead to the idea for the 'second cycle' thread. (although I am sure that idea is not a new one)

Great replies! Thanks.

Imspirit has a very interesting site with a lot of good reading.

A lot of experienced players don't agree with what he wrote however.

Ian Harmer (sethbets) was the original author of 'Turnaround' and then went on to develop his 'Target Betting' strategy.

He has a site and a blog where he explains his concept in detail.

sethbets.com

targetbetting.blogspot.com

My opinion is that a smart method needs to have a smart betting strategy as well to get around the edge consistently.

Ideas like this win 15% / lose 40% of bankroll never made any sense to me.

Let's say you have a 200 unit bankroll...

You lose 40% in session 1 = 80 unit loss. You have 120 units left.

You lose 40% in session 2 = 48 unit loss. You have 72 units left.

You win 15% in session 3 = 10 units win. Happy days. Back to 82 units.

It's not my idea of a winning strategy at all. In fact, it's a very negative approach.

You are not giving any positive variance a chance to rapidly increase the bankroll.

Roulette is not always a grind and you have to take advantage when the opportunity presents itself. Don't limit the wins. Limit the losses.

cheers