HOW TO FIND A CONSISTENT WINNING ROULETTE BET

[JHM]

I also think we maybe put to much info on this thread?

I don't think so Ka. I think we have just started. More people are joining and more open thinking in the thread.

This is only the beginning mates.

When is this group for testing and research starting? and will it be a section on this forum?

Redhot,

It's more a study/testing club. All thoughts that come through here which look promising will be tested there for example.

[redhot]

Redhot,

It's more a study/testing club. All thoughts that come through here which look promising will be tested there for example.

Thanks, I got the email from pighead after i posted, just wondered what the progress was

[WARRIOR]

has any one tried betting a basic bet like red even comes out bet red odd  that follows run and changes just a suggetion

[WARRIOR]

how many of you no about the monty hall parodox, door number 1 2 and 3 really old tv game read up about it. it does not aplly to a casino game because you can not switch a bet  but in the game you could. the contestent picks a door then the host  opens the door with cow in it, then host says  to the contstent if they want to switch doors because one them may have a car  behind it . it could well be that the first door they pick is a car. think of the  psychology behind that. now when i think of roulette game door number 1 2 and 3 what would give me the contestent ,an advantage unlike the game i can pick 2 doors  that would give me the most advantage .and i no that most of you are going to say its convetional  but the bet comes from uncoventional thinking  .thinking is one thing and a convetional bet is another i dont think is the same  ,so my conclusion is colums 1 2 and 3  i get to choose 2 out of 3  thats the difference between the monty hall, and roulette, im going back to the 2 dozen betting because nothing else give more wins then losses and losing 6 in a row ,i think i have tryed every thing .i could be wrong but betting the most red 1 and 3 and the most blacks 1-2 gives me an advantage , the convetional bettor either bets the same all the time ,or looks for patterns . unconvetional thinking  is move from bet to bet that gives the most advantage  . he say its simple  i think were making way to complicated  there for not getting any sleep over this  life is to short for that .anyways all best  let me no what you think.

[Marven]

Tino,

Conventional or not, we've been testing all kinds of things mate, they all seem to fail eventually.

I tried your two columns bet for about 500 spins and it ended with -22. I'm trying to incorporate other bets with it, like backing the dominating black or red within the columns being bet, etc.

So far nothing interesting in the results.

Cheers,
Marven

[WARRIOR]

so where do we go from here marven beacuse i think im almost done with this.

[Marven]

Keep looking. Try new things.
There are many directions in this game, and much more than 3 doors.

I really don't want to be limited by Charles' clues. He found his own bet, why don't we find our own? Why shall we try to read his mind for the rest of our lives?

This threads name is:
HOW TO FIND A CONSISTENT WINNING ROULETTE BET

And not:
Let's find CHARLES' bet.

Right now, I've been working on two new methods.
The first is a systematic sector method for trapping any potential dealer signature. But the tracking is a bit hectic so I'm gonna need a programmer to code a tracking program for me (I will post a request later).

The second one deals more with the random appearance tendencies of 37 numbers. The theory sounds good but I'm still working figuring out the bet selection for this, and I suspect I'm going to need a programmer as well.

Both will have to use flat-betting. No crazy progressions in my books.

I will share anything that shows promise.

Besides we're gonna have to work in a more organized way if we want to effectively work together.

Cheers,
Marven

[ernesto]

Hi Tino!

Maybe I'm wrong, but if we can't exclude a small group of numbers to the next bet we have to cover more winners than looser from 37 numbers. But if you looking the whole table you can't found any bet or bet combinations on the table what cover more winner than looser and play more.
I think the odds are perfect when you want to bet against 37 number.
Maybe the movement can tell us which group of numbers have to cover and win 10 times and loose only 8 times, for example.

What do you think, guys?

ernesto

[ernesto]

I tried your two columns bet for about 500 spins and it ended with -22. I'm trying to incorporate other bets with it, like backing the dominating black or red within the columns being bet, etc.

So far nothing interesting in the results.

Marven!

I got exactly the same result with a few hundred spins from Weisbaden. With color, dozen, cloumn etc.
I tried combine after BB (runs) or RB (changes) and nothing positive results.
It is still an "odds bet".

ernesto

[WARRIOR]

marven i no that roulette has more then 3 doors  you can  add as many doors as you want the pyscology behind it is the same all the best tino.

[MATTJONO]

hi everyone id like to put my view on what i would like to do, and would like to work but have not rearly tried and tested i want it to be something that can not be tested of 1,000s and 1,000s of spin tests i think we should have a certain amount of things to look at. i find it hard to explain.

example;

i log online at the casino at 8pm i record results until there are 30spins 30mins then work out certen things to look at.

25
22
11
26
6
30
14
22
15
0
33
31
11
16
27
24
6
12
5
23
27
29
15
32
27
28
19
10
2
28
35

1.we look at a judgment only made from you at that time.  my pick would be (11,27,34,35,36,28,2,10,19,15,5,25) 12 numbers i would pick and  i would also have 6 chips on a dozen or colum of my choice i would play the 1-12colum because it hit least just of my choice.

now do a totaly new bet a differnt 12 numbers each time from you judgment and whatever colum dozen you want of choice
this means if your colum or dozen comes out you will be even with the chance of you haveing a number coverd as well making you be up +36
if just the number comes out i win £36 - £18bet = +18

if i lose do the same next spin using another £18 with a chance to be -18 or +0 or +18 or +36.


i think this could be good because of the way i have chocen my numbers id expain the reson for the numbers if any wants to know why i picked the numbers at that time of choice if i looked at then now it would be a diffent choice my instinct.


basickly we need JUDGMENT  +   backup sort of bet

[MATTJONO]

i cind of thing thats more of a gamble but if we stick to the 18 chips used per spin we will have a stop loss per session and a target win  e.g win 18 or lose 18

[Marven]

Hi MATTJONO,

Interesting input mate.

basickly we need JUDGMENT  +   backup sort of bet

That's called strategy play.

I would say:

JUDGMENT + backup sort of bet + EXPERIENCE

That could make a very powerful formula.

Regards,
Marven

[lucky_strike]

Hi i just have one question.
Do you think it exist an consistent static winning roulette bet?

Cheers LS

[Marven]

Hi i just have an question.
Do you think it exist an consistent static winning roulette bet?

Cheers LS

Hi Lucky,

If you mean static in terms of table location (i.e. statically betting on location X on the table), then I think not.

If you mean a static bet that relies on gambler's fallacy, or static/mechanical following of patterns, then I think not.

I try to keep an open mind, though, that there might be a manufactured bet that can effectively take advantage of randomness.
It is true that past spins don't matter because of the random nature of the game, but I personally haven't for example seen 36 spins with only 9 numbers showing. Have you?

It is random, true; but I can't stop noticing that there is some 'order' regulating and balancing that randomness in the form of manifesting 'tendencies'.

So I leave a possibility that there MIGHT be a static method of betting that uses that 'order' to beat randomness.

Easier said than done though. There are still huge chances that a static bet can never beat this game.

Regards,
Marven

[Marven]

-