How many sessions did you play so far and how many units won?

Why don't you agree that you have nothing to offer? I challenge you to put a workable method here that wins more and loses less in long run. We can test it and everyone will accept your "out of the world capacity" to recognize randomness and beat the game.  You can be a nice critique but not a randomness expert.

QuoteDuh. Gee, I wonder. Ever heard of "educated guess" or "reading randomness?" Have ever noticed in the past six years of these topics that there has never been a shill to taught its grand achievements? System players and system searchers are still in their infancy periods. Like all apprenticeship upbringing, there always comes that rebellious period where teacher and student conflict. Yes, the apprentice must stub his toe or smash his finger. Still, you don't let an apprentice massacre a perfectly good pile of lumber. You can't ask an apprentice to get it right just because you hand them the blue prints. Its the same with Roulette and gambling. I don't need advice from a neophite pseudo expert on systems.

There's a thread on this forum that involves heavy lifting, experience, and the desire to deal with things that really work. When you are done with your fantasy, why not take a look. Sometimes there are those that actually try to help and raise the children.

                                    Nobody needs your page long tutorials over how to read pattern or recognize  randomness because they are useless in real world. Can you please bother to mention a clean and unambiguous method that a person of ordinary world can think of playing? Come out with just one workable idea and let others post-mortem it with tests. You won't dare to show your expertise anywhere after that.

A system is merely someone's choice of playing anything. There can be no proof of its workability. I can see that there is a separate section in this forum, called "Test results" but most intelligent guys here, totally ignore that and keep on chit-chatting regarding one system with about half dozen topics, scattered all over the forum.

How is this challenge going now? Can superman please brief the start of it and the present condition?

Quote from: KingsRoulette on December 04, 2012, 04:12:42 PM
I want to add up something here. I feel that JL may be correct, as well. Let superman, speramus group, twisteruk and many others who are using it come up with their outcomes.  PB is basically, "random vs random" and martingale clubbed. One may get more wins than losses for sure, if he enters random sessions. There are many guys who play martingale of 5 steps after getting 5-6  virtual losses on an EC and they do not lose ever. Unless a particular pattern (that has not come up yet)emerges in that very moment, he can't lose 7 units.
             It is pertinent to mention here that a player playing PB may escape losing moments that comes up in data tests of a big data, while playing for real. Theoratically and mathematically no method can win but there are guys who are winning regularly from casino games for decades. I don't think that all who are winning with it or claiming to win with it are lying.

           Exactly, Bayes. I told the same thing. No one has right to prove or disprove any system. Those who are bashing it have not come up themselves with any winning idea. If there can be no winning idea and the guys who are sure of it, don't need to join this forum or any other forum.
             Can Spike and Gizmo suggest an ambiguous and better approach to play that will give better results, in all sessions that PB can't?  Mind it, I am not calling names or trying to defame anybody but to tell the truth. It is a hard fact that all of us are passengers of the same boat. If someone understand randomness or probability attached with this game, he will never claim that he has something that can work all the time or even most of the time.

Great going, Ralph. good luck.

Every money management seems to work, till it dooms. Nothing is perfect in this imperfect world of gambling.

Quote
For  recreational purposes only Play at your own risk

This applies universally to whatever way you gamble. Every so called "system" or "MM" is within the domain of "probable loss".

I agree, I missed that part and calculated wrongly. Actually, I personally use +2 and -1, starting with 1 as base unit and for your kind information, I am not an amaeture.

Quote from: spike on December 05, 2012, 02:03:35 AM
But in roulette, that's not really true. Random outcomes
constantly change, nothing is ever the same for long,
change is the only constant. Its dependable, you can
count on it.

And this is what drives system developers nuts. They're
in denial of this fact, they shove it to the outskirts of
their conciousness. Constant change and systems
don't mesh, they're water and oil. Until you accept the
constant change that's always unfolding, you'll always
be barking up the wrong tree.

I can't agree more on anything else.

QuoteA chop cannot hurt us W-L-W-L-W-L-W-LW-L . We can show  5 2 unit wins and 5 1 unit losses.

That is because:
WLWLWLWLWL will cause:
+1
-2
+3
-2
+3
-2
+3
-2
+3
-2
so 13-10=+3

I want to add up something here. I feel that JL may be correct, as well. Let superman, speramus group, twisteruk and many others who are using it come up with their outcomes.  PB is basically, "random vs random" and martingale clubbed. One may get more wins than losses for sure, if he enters random sessions. There are many guys who play martingale of 5 steps after getting 5-6  virtual losses on an EC and they do not lose ever. Unless a particular pattern (that has not come up yet)emerges in that very moment, he can't lose 7 units.
             It is pertinent to mention here that a player playing PB may escape losing moments that comes up in data tests of a big data, while playing for real. Theoratically and mathematically no method can win but there are guys who are winning regularly from casino games for decades. I don't think that all who are winning with it or claiming to win with it are lying.

Quote from: soggett on December 04, 2012, 03:15:31 PM
nice results man 

do you think you can take the albalaha's challenge for the number 3 in the zumma book?

http://betselection.cc/general-discussion/albalaha's-open-challenge-can-anyone-beat-the-worst/

it is the worst ever



and about the number you use, maybe the most hot - online casinos tell you what numbers are hot and what are cold so maybe that will help?

I don't think, it will work. It relies that sooner or later clusters come. While, number 3 in zumma has big gaps throughout 15k spins. Can anybody test it with tracker or any excel formula? I think, losses will be too big, that way.

QuoteIt is play one number only. Bet one until a hit. If down from starting bankroll then add a chip. Bet that until hit, repeate if on minus add a chip otherwise go back to one. Very simple rules.

Ok. it is basic leveller.