+ Register

[Bally6354]

I thought I would start a poll on this after reading one of XXXV's posts.

The poll lasts for 10 days and you can only see the results after you have voted.

Don't be shy and post up your vote and thoughts if you wish.

cheers


p.s. This poll does not take into account any form of Visual Ballistics or using any kind of Device.

[Bally6354]

I voted no.

It is possible to have a consistent winning Roulette system.

I will list some of my thoughts.

•   You can't win betting every spin. (You need to be able to identify when the permanence is going against everything you bet)
•   You can't win just betting the E/C bets. (A winning system needs to be varied in the approach)
•   You can't increase your stake after a losing bet. (It makes no logical sense to increase your stakes when your predictions are wrong)

The great thing about Roulette in my opinion is the odds on offer for the streets, splits and single numbers. Unlike Baccarat where you can only win at 1/1 or BJ where you may get lucky hitting a few splits, roulette offers the opportunity to win big in just a few spins if you are correct with your predictions.



cheers

[Bally6354]

Here is a good analogy,

Many years ago, I was at Catterick racecourse and a friend of mine introduced me to Mary Reveley who was one of the better trainers at that particular time.  We had a 5 minute chat and I will always remember her telling me that I wouldn't find many of her winners in the formbook.

It was a good lesson to learn early on my gambling life. You need to apply filters to sort out the wheat from the chaff and roulette is not that much different in my opinion.

I agree with XXXV about looking under the surface to see what you can find. In fact, there are quite often more 'elegant patterns' than you can shake a stick at going on. But you won't be aware of them if you limit your approach to just one particular type of bet.

There are many games going on within games depending on how you look at things. Some of those games will be throwing up an unequal level of distribution which can be taken advantage of in short bursts.

We can't change the odds, but we can decide when to bet, where to bet and how much to bet. It's important to think positive and look for different angles that can deliver a quick knockout punch and not get bogged down in the 'long run'.

cheers

[XXVV]

There are many games going on within games depending on how you look at things. Some of those games will be throwing up an unequal level of distribution which can be taken advantage of in short bursts.

We can't change the odds, but we can decide when to bet, where to bet and how much to bet. It's important to think positive and look for different angles that can deliver a quick knockout punch and not get bogged down in the 'long run'.

cheers

Absolutely quintessential advice. Essence of roulette. Short Cycles. Cluster small groups, strands, streams of spin outcomes rather than see as individual separated spins. Then look for the connections one level down, like the myriad network of roots below the surface. That is where the power is.

[wannawin]

The fact that there are people who do not have a winning system does not mean that all people of the world do not have it, it means that the single person has not yet obtained the winning system.

Moreover, one does not need a winning system at 10 trillion spins with downturns lasting millions of hands. One needs a playable winning system in manageable sessions winning more than it loses while one is playing in life.

[esoito]

I voted 'no' -- it's not impossible, based on my experience.

In fact, discerning and thoughtful readers of posts on this forum should have already discovered that for themselves! Several keys to the bank exist on this forum alone.

Consider this:

You can't beat roulette but you can make consistent profits with a winning system.  I've done it. Others have done it.

Thinking laterally, a winning system can involve several systems in combination -- a form of diversification.

For those needing one, here's a winning system on a spoon:

On the forum there are several methods capable of delivering quite a consistent profit in just a few spins.

Identify say, 3 or 4, and then play them consecutively, stopping each on a profit.

There's more, but those pointers should suffice for the surprising number who voted 'yes' a winning roulette system is impossible.

[As an aside, although the poll is about roulette there are winning systems for other 'disciplines' as well.

For example, many have learned how to consistently and profitably lay horse race favourites. Jon Burgess is a well known expert.

Others make regular profits with their horse race and sports trading systems on Betfair.

A winning system exists involving free bets offered by online bookmakers. Mike Cruikshank has nailed it.]

[Gizmotron]

.A system  no, a method yes.

[Mike]

I voted YES, a winning system is impossible. I'm not sure what the difference is between "making consistent profits" and "a winning system". If you have achieved one then you have also achieved the other, have you not?


The tough questions are never answered. How can it be possible, in a game of independent trials, to know when a number or group of numbers is going to hit higher than expectation? No one is denying that any system will have short bursts of wins, the question is, how do you know when they are going to occur?


You cannot compare roulette played this way to horse racing or sports betting, because the latter are potentially beatable, but roulette systems as such are not, because the odds are fixed and the expectation is negative. No amount of skipping spins, manipulating stakes or following patterns will change that. So why is it always claimed that there is some kind of "loophole"?

[Sputnik]

.A system  no, a method yes.

System or method, same thing.
Guessing or feeling and mechanical system/method, same thing.
If you can not out guess 50/50 then is no better then mechanical methods/systems.

[Sputnik]

I voted YES, a winning system is impossible. I'm not sure what the difference is between "making consistent profits" and "a winning system". If you have achieved one then you have also achieved the other, have you not?


The tough questions are never answered. How can it be possible, in a game of independent trials, to know when a number or group of numbers is going to hit higher than expectation? No one is denying that any system will have short bursts of wins, the question is, how do you know when they are going to occur?


You cannot compare roulette played this way to horse racing or sports betting, because the latter are potentially beatable, but roulette systems as such are not, because the odds are fixed and the expectation is negative. No amount of skipping spins, manipulating stakes or following patterns will change that. So why is it always claimed that there is some kind of "loophole"?

But i would like to know for how long you can win?
I mean if i can pass 800.000 trails using a test with 12 step fibo and win.
Then in real life i would never have time playing 800.000 trails but i assume i would win.
Who know if the bad strike of 6 STD will hit me during my life time, is no way to tell.
So at the end of my life i quit playing and won, then i can say i had luck to win overall.

[BEAT-THE-WHEEL]

roulette beatable.
Everyone knows that worst EC =69RED in 200 spins.
Try to bet that with divisor 1/69, and u will get a profit at the 69th hit..or just try with HP set at 69th win, that's '1follow by137 zeroes' .

[Mike]

I mean if i can pass 800.000 trails using a test with 12 step fibo and win.

Is this a one-off test or can you do it every time?


@ BEAT-THE-WHEEL,


What do you mean by divisor, and what is "HP"?


So are you saying that if there at least 69 wins in 200 spins then you will always end in profit?


I don't believe it but I'm willing to test it.

[Dr. Mabuse]

To  the well prepared nothing is  impossible .

[esoito]

Definitions of System

(We all need to be singing from the same sheet!)

   
• A group of independent but interrelated elements comprising a unified whole
• A complex of methods or rules governing behaviour
• A procedure or process for obtaining an objective

[Bally6354]

Definitions of System

(We all need to be singing from the same sheet!)

   
• A group of independent but interrelated elements comprising a unified whole
• A complex of methods or rules governing behaviour
• A procedure or process for obtaining an objective

Sounds good to me!