Here is the first one:

There's a tricky bet for having a 36-number layout coverage and yet win +1 unit on a hit:

How can it be? Targetting #19 as the only number to leave open, the bet goes like this:

3 chips go to number 0
72 chips to low (Covers 1 to 18 )
48 chips to 3rd dozen (Covers 25 to 36)
16 chips to corner 20/24 (CVovers 20-21-23-24)
4 chips to straight-up number 22

If any number other than 19 is spun, you win +1.

You need a table with "Le Partage" rule for this bet to work.


Testing the validity of this bet with Roulette Xtreme.

First you need to enable Le Partage:


Then proceed to test the winning bets:

At a straight-up win, we win 4 x 36 = 144 chips, minus 143 chips layed = +1



At the corner, we win 16 x 9 = 144 chips, we lost 143 chips layed = +1



At the dozen, we win 48 x 3 = 144 chips, taking in to account 143 chips layed = +1



At the even chance, we win 72 x 2 = 144 chips, substracting 143 chips layed = +1



If Zero shows up, dealer returns us 108 chips as payout for it, then takes away losing chips: while from the 72 chips layed at low by "Le Partage" rule enabled at the even chances dealer takes 36 and we get 36 chips back. As we won 108 = 108 won + 36 chips back = 144 chips - 143 layed = +1 unit profit even when zero hits! Positively letting only 1 out of the 37 numbers as a loss, and winning +1 unit at 36 numbers.





It is important to notice at regular Roulette without Le partage, you have a net loss of 35 chips when zero hits so we really need this Le Partage splitting rule:





Of course, the downside is losing spin costs 143 chips. But for doing that bet your REALLY have to do next spin and want the very least numbers against, this "tricky bet" can do.

Also you can mathematically split all the bets in half to win +0.5 instead of +1... but the problem is the Zero. The dealer won't be too fond of you splitting a chip in two to bet 1 and a half on zero

Okay. So in 3million spins you won 105000 units.

that's 1 unit every 29 spins. It had a max Drawdown of 8000+.

At BV you can do about 3-4000 spins a night so that's a 103-137 units a night.

Now if you play with cents that's 1Euro for a whole evening. 80Euro drawdown for 1euro.

So to make this remotely worthwhile it would have to be played with euros meaning you need a 10000euro bank.

Everyone said the Holy grail would be expensive but i think that's a bit insane.

What is step 2? If I knew what was required I would start a thread in that direction, people offered a lot of "information" as opposed to what was really necessary. I will see what I can do with combinatrics in the mean time, maybe start a poll for us with 5 possible methods/systems, if people will even partake I don't know.

He posted his system YOU don't HAVE to play it. Now get off his back.

[Edited by Moderator]

Quote from: Superman on January 11, 2013, 08:37:17 AM
Probably BUT it wouldn't work programmed as you should/would be using too many different bet sizes at different points of the game, you, that's YOU not a bot, need to be thinking while you play, free spinning past bad clumps, deciding when it looks good to dive in etc etc etc

But that's then what im saying. A method was apparently found where it could be PROGRAMMED for a million+ spins. So did he program it to foolow the game or work of triggers. that's the question

Quote from: soggett on January 11, 2013, 06:00:29 AM
I don't think you understand
1 unit can be $1, $5, $50
if you say you made 1000 units - that means if you used $1 as a unit value you made $1000 and that is 1000 units
if you used $50 as a unit value you made $1000 and that is 20 units
see the difference?

a units is not the same as a $
it is to make calculations easier

so what are you using as a unit value?
and please in the future if you are using units do it right, it is confusing (you can make $1000 using $1000 as a unit but it would still be just 1 unit)

Thank you

Quote from: ignatus on January 11, 2013, 04:39:53 AM

I'm just playing for fun at DublinBet....

Okay but do you use $0.5? So you would have won $500?

What size unit do you use? As making 1000units with 1unit would mean more than making 1000 units with 50units.

Vic, Just wanted to be a nuisance! It looks like the only way to do well in this game is to follow what is happening as the game unfolds. Something I haven't paid much attention to. Although it seems we lost track of the initial post, would this all be programmable to a certain degree?

You want to thank Vic for it? Good think I started the topic, posted the graphs and a story of a possible winner. Thanks Vic.

Another system that won't "lose"?

Quote from: Gizmotron on January 09, 2013, 10:30:27 PM
Just look at this. There is a domination of columns 1 and 2, while at the same time there is a domination of the black. And if you check the numbers hit you can quickly see that the (6, 15, 24, 33) black numbers in column 3 only hit once. This is obviously a great example of one set reinforcing confirmation in the other.


| A B C | 1 2 3 |  | B  R | L  H | O  E | -- ## -- Line
|---------------------------------------|  - 00 --  1
|   X   | X     |  | X    | X    | X    | -- 13 --  2
| X     |   X   |  | X    | X    |    X | --  8 --  3
| X     |     X |  | X    | X    |    X | --  6 --  4
| X     |   X   |  | X    | X    |    X | --  2 --  5
| X     | X     |  |    X | X    | X    | --  1 --  6
|   X   | X     |  | X    | X    | X    | -- 13 --  7
| X     |   X   |  | X    | X    | X    | -- 11 --  8
|   X   | X     |  | X    |    X |    X | -- 22 --  9
|---------------------------------------|  - 00 -- 10
|     X |     X |  |    X |    X | X    | -- 27 -- 11
|   X   |   X   |  | X    |    X |    X | -- 20 -- 12
| X     | X     |  | X    | X    |    X | -- 10 -- 13
| X     |   X   |  | X    | X    |    X | --  8 -- 14
|   X   | X     |  | X    |    X |    X | -- 22 -- 15
|---------------------------------------|  -  0 -- 16
|   X   | X     |  | X    | X    | X    | -- 13 -- 17
| X     | X     |  |    X | X    | X    | --  7 -- 18
| X     |   X   |  | X    | X    |    X | --  2 -- 19
|     X |   X   |  | X    |    X | X    | -- 35 -- 20

1  X
2  XX
3 
4 
5 
6  X
7  X
8  XX
9 
10  X
11  X
12 
13  XXX
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20  X
21 
22  XX
23 
24 
25 
26 
27  X
28 
29 
30 
31 
32 
33 
34 
35  X
36 
0  X
00  XX

So the way i understand YOU play, you would now bet all black numbers in col 1&2, for greater profits?

He said he found the "solution" in 1993. Do we think there was 1.5 million spins worth if live data available?

Sam I have never studied real wheels to take any note of how it made a difference I've always been an RNG guy.

Okay gizmotron.

It was just fascinating to me that he tested it via simulation.

Which means it must of been mechanical or atleast partly so, his triggers or MM that allowed it to be programmed.
Maybe looking at the 0 wheel we're actually letting the casino off easy, maybe if we put all our effort into the 00 wheel we might be onto somthing else.

Sam would it make a difference? if it was simulated using RNG numbers and not real spins i doubt it would matter if it spun in any direction as RNG, as you know, has no direction. But then as they state in the thread why 1.5million and not 1mil or 2mil? So maybe it was real spins and therefore direction matters.

I guess there is just too much missing info.