HOW TO FIND A CONSISTENT WINNING ROULETTE BET

[HansHuckebein]

thank you very much for sharing your idea, jhm. 

[Ka2]

hmmmm, with all respect, but nobody seems to realise there where only 4 bets in total remember? So I think there's no point to deviate from that.

[Moccoman]

Hi KA2,

You mentioned that before but he doesn't refer to a 4 bet scenario (as in D1D2C1C2), only "To the best of my knowledge there are 4 winning bets in total to be found within the game" which is on page 3 of the site.

I believe that his bet placement changes each spin, "We know where to bet each and every spin of the wheel" also on page 3. This, to me anyway, doesn't sound like a bet like RD1C2 every spin.

Also, he deliberately emphasises the word "consistent" throughout the site, if the bet didn't change then why would he say that? Why not just say "the bet" or something similar?

Regards
Mocco

 

[pighead]

"May I explain by way of example? Our bet has shown on occasions to lose 6 in a row. So we need to multiply our session bank  3x6 = 18 (we round it up to 20) Therefore all the trustees always divide by 20. They have 20 bets of the same amount to use each session. In most sessions we never use more than 2 units from our bank before being in profit."


A CONSISTENT WINNING ROULETTE BET can lose 6 in row? 

[Ka2]

think about it, lose 6 times in a row, flatbetting. So the 7th bet you have to win all your money back, because if after the seventh bet you get another streak of say 5 losses, your total loss would be 10...

So the bet would have to be egineered, flatbetting, say example first you bet red, you loose, 2nd bet 2nd column, you loose. 3th bet street etc, etc, It have to be something like this, otherwise it cant be done, ever...

[pighead]

again, my point was as Charles said:


"I am going to tell you how they, all and I found what I call "a consistent winning bet".

We found it by looking at the "Game" not the "Odds", and used a great deal of "lateral thinking" in the research."

Looking at the game, not the odds..

[Carlitos]

Letts focus on the movements. He says that this is the biggest clue he can give. On the Question and answers page he says -,

It means that if you look at the results of the wheel, you will see      movements of results across the table. If you can find a bet to trap more winners than losers against the odds paid, you have a winning bet 

He also says, that with an little time and effort..... Meaning perhaps that it shouldn't be so hard to find out what the bet is.



So, must we look at the wheel first and then look for the same results on the table and see how, or if there are, any movements??







Carlitos 

[WARRIOR]

my thinking is what bet loses 6 in a row on occasion  if we take any 24 numbers  2 dozens i think  insde is better and try to create as close to the wheel as we can  using lines or what ever pick 12 numbers as a pillar and and the other numbers you will move them as they come up like a back and forth movement  just an idea

[Marven]

The only things that 'move' in roulette:

The dealer
The players
The chips

The wheel
The ball

Past results (in the form of runs and changes: streaks and chops)

The only things that 'move' in the roulette table:

The players
The chips

Past results (in the form of runs and changes: streaks and chops)

Regards,
Marven

[Marven]

As for bet selection, believe me guys it doesn't matter that much whatever you put on the table.

I have countless hours and tried countless bet selections and combinations of bet selections and they all lose flatbetting (even if they show positive results at first) UNLESS you start looking at and studying the 'runs' and 'changes' (movements?).

It was THEN when I noticed I could start making some difference.

I think maybe that is why he said 'movements' are the greatest clue he can give.

He also said that not everybody can see them, and that you might not see them at first, only if you look closely and think lateral; and I think this is true, not everyone is seeing these 'runs' and 'changes', even if they're ASKED to, that is a fact.

Regards,
Marven

[WARRIOR]

marven  what do you think would be the best bet for runs and chops  im ready to test anthing.

[pighead]

do you guys think he uses progression at all?  I guess he does..

[pighead]

Maven,

he also mentioned there are 4 winning bets. does it imply 4 types of "run and changes"?

[Marven]

marven  what do you think would be the best bet for runs and chops  im ready to test anthing.

I'm still experimenting mate. But I'm a strategy player, and I see a huge similarity between what he's talking about and what is used in strategy play. That's why I'm sticking here, it's fun to see such similarity and would be nice if it turns out the same.

I personally play Victor's Lw applied to the LD, the 5 lines, an EC method of mine, and a simple method where I chase 1 column.
I apply the Lw to ALL of these and somewhat take advantage of the 'runs and changes' (if you wanna put it that way).

As for bankroll management, I use Victor's 50% plan and I'm applying a few tweaks on it inspired by Charles' ideas (you can see them in the post I made in the MM section).

I'm not that experienced with all this yet, but I've been winning (sometimes more sometimes less, but it's been reasonably consistent so far).

If you're interested in strategy play, here are a couple of links you might find very useful:

The forum's strategy play section: nolinks://vlsroulette.com/situational-strategy-play/ (pay attention to Victor and Lanky's posts)

For info on dealing with the 'runs and changes'. Check out Victor posts here! ) nolinks://vlsroulette.com/gambling-and-roulette-related/figuring-out-the-%27train%27-concept/

Victor shares some words from Manrique here, very good stuff: nolinks://vlsroulette.com/vls%27-notes/manrique/

Good on ya mate,
Best of luck!

P.S. Buy a ton of coffee, you will need it.

do you guys think he uses progression at all?  I guess he does..

Absolutely NOT!

He mentioned many known progressions and said they are all a joke, and that a true consistent winning bet should win with flatbetting.

However, in his MM plan, he did recommend the approach of trying to invest more when you are on a winning run and vice versa, it has nothing to do with progressions though.

Regards,
Marven

[Marven]

Maven,

he also mentioned there are 4 winning bets. does it imply 4 types of "run and changes"?

Mate, if I understand him correctly, he means he knows of 4 ways of playing ('bets') that can win consistently, and he says there might be more, but those are the ones he knows of, among those he says his 'bet' is the most effective (i.e. the best).

As for the actual bets he places when playing his bet, (if I get him correctly) I believe it changes in terms of location. Each time he know WHERE to place a bet and WHY ===> the reason/strategy behind it is always the same: hence he calls it 'mechanical'.

Determining where and why we place a bet depending on a study of the current situation is called 'situational play'.

Example: we're playing the LD and we have this:
nolinkswLnolinksnolinksnolinkswLnolinksnolinksww
Trying to chase the L's here is the opposite of 'smart'.
It's the w's season and we better take advantage of it.

Regards,
Marven

[Marven]

-