Thing is that i am tired of your off-beat comments. And almost every time you try to destruct others opinion, thinking that you know better. Then you brag about illusional achievements. I have shown you once... I have no interest to show you again. You are always trying to phish out some idea or concept, but the real problem is that you can not cope with them.
For Your Information i do play daily at a live table and i make double paycheck of my day job every month. I do it for fun.
I remember at some other forum the stuff you shared... speaks for itself. As for your so called HG, people had to pay for it. So in the terms of a sharing community your "dark" commentator position equals nothing.

So from my part the case is closed, and your past behavior with others, doesn't get you in the good graces with me too. So from me you get Zero.
Cheers.

i wish you the best of luck.

if you want to pay for it...

Quote from: Albalaha on April 02, 2013, 07:43:31 AM
     We are not attending kindergarten classes of gambling. Are we?

Is this your question?
FYI. I am not Buddy. Again you must be mistaken me for someone else.

Quote from: Albalaha on April 02, 2013, 05:20:54 AM
... No progression, that has been created since the game itself was created can make you an absolute and perpetual winner.
           

The (in)famous martingale progression is mathematically a winner. The table limits came as an additional rule to prevent its use.
There are others... Ralph explored another "mathematically safe" way @ one of his threads.


As for bet selections, from my research some perform better than others.

The author states that in order to bet more when you're winning and less when you are losing, you can adopt the following:
raise one unit when you Loose and bet the same amount when you Win until you break even or ahead.
It would be foolproof if there were not table limits...

http://www.youtube.com/embed/DpVfF4U75B8
something i consider nice electronic music. =)

You seem to understand something beyond what i just wrote. Read it again.
Pick up the bots and the trackers. Get any winning session flat bet. Then apply regression up&pull to it. then compare.
Cheers

when it loses, it all loses the same. But when flat bet wins, regression wins more risking the same.
Seeking for proof? Just test it and see.
Cheers

bad electronic garbage.

thank you very much 

May you disclose the MM suggested here? I am interested. Or PM me?
Thanx

The logic of the maths is simple enough. Flat betting tends to even out. Capitalizing on the good sessions with regression is the way to go. But we still have to be ahead flat prior to attempt regression to boost winnings. It is the same path as this Victor discussion is taking: http://betselection.cc/general-discussion/the-'holy-grail'-should-be-realistic/msg12555/#msg12555
it is worth a look into.
Cheers

Were that edge comes from?


You can get ahead and exit while you are there. You can even hold up a lifetime getting away with it. Maths & Prob. dictate it will balance somehow.

The thing i find about no-zero roulette is that the algorithm of randomization for Even Chances is the same as for any combination of 18 numbers. That being so, the variance and the distribution presents more extreme than the arrangements of pockets in the physical wheel.