HOW TO FIND A CONSISTENT WINNING ROULETTE BET

[moch]

Thank you Zeus for coding the system. I was not at the computer for a while.

I am testing another system that seems not to lose as well.

I was reading the Monte Carlo anecdotes. Interesting.
This is the author's system, page 78. It's good. I advise to read the article.
This system is ingenious. Traps the runs and the changes.

I have spotted a flaw, when a loss comes and the number of bets is odd and greater than 1 (i.e, 3) system usually fails here. I am testing and trying to solve this problem. May be by waiting 1 spin or by reversing the order of the bet at that moment. I.e if next bet would be for the jump, would bet for the run again. Will keep you posted.
I also will code an RX system for testing purposes.

System

You wait until one colour appears, and then
commence playing first for a sequence of colour,
and then for a change of colour; in other words,
you play first for the run and then for the
intermittence. The result of this ingenious way
of staking is that it makes it difficult for them
to beat you.
For if there is a run on the colour, you win
every alternate bet, and consequently win one
unit every two coups. For example, if when
you go to the table Red appears, you first play
on the Red for the run, and then on the Black
for the intermittence. If it runs six times, the
stakes are as follows :
Red (no stake)
Red (play i for the Run and Win)
Red (play i for the Intermittence and Lose)
Red (play 2 for the Run and Win)
Red (play I for the Intermittence and Lose)
Red (play 2 for the Run and Win)
Total result of three wins and two losses : A win
of three units.
If, however, the table is intermittent it suits
you just as well, and the stakes are as follows :
81 G
Monte Carlo Anecdotes
Red (no stake)
Black (play i for the Run and Lose)
Red (play 2 for the Intermittence and Win)
Black (play i for the Run and Lose)
Red (play 2 for the Intermittence and Win)
Black (play i for the Run and Lose)
Red (play 2 for the Intermittence and Win)
You also win every alternate coup and can show
as total result three wins and three losses : A
win of three units.
If the table gives you what is known as
'coup de deux' :
Red (no stake)
Red (play i for the Run and Win)
Black (play i for the Intermittence and Win)
Black (play i for the Run and Win)
Red (play i for the Intermittence and Win)
Red (play i for the Run and Win)
You win every bet, and can show a result of one
unit per coup.
If the table gives you runs of three ('coup
de trois ') :
Red (no stake)
Red (play J f r the Run and Win)
Red (play r f r tne Intermittence and Lose)
Black (play 2 for the Run and Lose)
Black (play 3 for the Intermittence and Lose)
Black (play 6 for the Run and Win)
Red (play i for the Intermittence and Win)
Red (play x f r the Run and Win)
The net result is that you win three units for
seven coups played.
If the table gives you first four Red and
then four Black ('coup de quatre') the result
82
is much better ; for you win five units for seven
coups played.
The only combination that you have to be
afraid of is that you may land on to a ' coup de
deux ' at the wrong moment. You would then
lose every bet in succession, for example :
Red (no stake)
Red (play I for the Run and Win)
Red (play I for the Intermittence and Lose)
Black (play 2 for the Run and Lose)
Black (play 3 for the Intermittence and Lose)
Red (play 6 for the Run and Lose)
Or worse still if it commences with one Red :
Red (no stake)
Black (play i for the Run and Lose)
Black (play 2 for the Intermittence and Lose)
Red (play 3 for the Run and Lose)
Red (play 6 for the Intermittence and Lose)
In any case, however, the chances that the
player will happen to hit upon this combination
at the wrong moment seem fairly remote.
The author recommends the player to have
thirty-six pieces, which he will divide up into
three separate capitals of twelve pieces each. If
he lands on to an adverse '
coup de deux ' and
loses one capital, he must re-commence with
another capital of twelve ; only instead of continuing
to stake in the ordinary course, he should
commence staking on the same chance, on
which he has just lost his stake of six pieces.
83
Monte Carlo Anecdotes
The result of this will be that if the runs of two
continue, he will be on them in the right place,
and will commence winning every coup. For
example :
Red (no stake)
Black (play I for the Run and Lose)
Black (play 2 for the Intermittence and Lose)
Red (play 3 for the Run and Lose)
Red (play 6 for the Intermittence and Lose)
Black (play I for Intermittence (not Run) and
Win)
Black (play i for the Run and Win)
Red (play I for the Intermittence and Win)
Red (play I for the Run and Win)
The three capitals should be kept in one
pocket, and all winnings stowed away either in
another pocket, or in a small bag kept for the
purpose.
The player should leave the table if at any
time he is a net winner of ten units. If not, he
should continue until all his three capitals are
exhausted, when as a rule it will be found that
he has at any rate a small balance to the good.
The three capitals will usually afford him at
least an hour's play.

[pighead]

HI Zeus,

thank you for the code and effort.. I just tried it and get mixed results..

@PH
You are trying to beat the odds not the game as Charles says.

I disagree with this one.. I think it is the other way around: it is against the odds if we are looking for a a flat bet keep winning in long run.

If Charles need to qualify a table before placing his bet, it seems to me his bet won't work in long run and certain conditions.

PH

[pighead]

Guys,

By reading the webpage below:

Taking advantage of the randomness is the only way you can beat roulette. Look at the game...not the maths.
A winning bet takes care of the maths automatically

There is a way to take advantage of randomness within roulette. When I found it over fourteen years ago I did not realise that that is what I had actually done. I had arrived there from a different direction. I am much wiser now.

I had found my bet as I have mentioned before, from the movements on the table (not the wheel) I did not have enough knowledge at the time to realise I was using the randomness to full effect.

There lies the greatest clue I can give you. I had by default found the answer to randomness by finding a bet that was able to use the "Runs" and the "Changes" to advantage. You need both. One without the other is a recipe for disaster.

Betting in any game where randomness governs, any fixity is guaranteed unprofitable. Roulette is truly random. Do not be fooled by "reading" past results and believing you have spotted a pattern you can rely on.

Randomness throws up some very funny results sometimes. If for instance, you won 10 points on 31 occasions and lost 10 points only 1 in 31 sessions this would be a winner.

BUT...if an idiot was to put ALL his winnings on that one losing session.....     Now you know why you must have a winning bet AND the professionalism to handle it.

Another thought here:

in order to take a advantage of randomness, what we can do is to randomly pick 4 numbers out of 37..we all know that is a well-known "hit and run" strategy and we will win 8/10 spins for sure  mostly..what are they If we pick 4 numbers based on the moves on the table.

PH

[pighead]

Just saw Charles closed the job application. Do we have a winner in our forum?

PH

[JHM]

Ph,

What do you mean by his application?

[Marven]

Ph,

What do you mean by his application?

Mate, he meant the job offer he posted in his website.

Strange... why don't he use a progression, what do you think?
'cause if he has "bet" that gives him an advantage progressions DO work long term!

Also "its been known to lose 6" maximum, so it's stupid not to use progression.

There could be a reason. Such as:
He's flat betting with big money, as big as the table limits allow, and thus he wouldn't use a progression for obvious reasons.

Personally, if I had such a bet that wins flat-betting, I would still NEVER use a progression, and flat bet with high stakes instead.
Stupid or not, I believe that would be a smarter and safer move.

Regards,
Marven

[pighead]

Sorry guys.I meant the job application..

[Wally Gator]

moch,

I've read this many times and have tried it out.  It's ok, but that's about it.  You lose alot with it.  I'd be very interested in your modifications after your tests.

Thanks, Gator

[New Ken]

WOW, you guys are incredible. I just got back to this site since over the weekend, and I can see and feel the effort made...


Concerning the suggestion I made about following the "code" of the last number spun (that you people so kindly considered investigating!)...

REDHOT said:

"Only one spin, when number 5 came after 24, did all five of the sections change.

Charles talks about, "I discovered something about roulette that should happen more often...a lot more often, but did not!" Maybe it is something like this?

What do you think, can you see the 'Movements' in the results above?"

May be worth exploring, hmmm?

( HEY, AND IF OL' CHARLES HAMPSHIRE HIMSELF IS LOOKIN' ON...MAN, YOU OWE ME SOME SLEEP, I TELL YOU...!)

NEW KEN!!

[New Ken]

Now, when Charles formulated his bet after "discovering something that should happen more often but did not", he " did some tweaking" and---

---decided on the time and session needed.

So, maybe that too should be looked at a bit closer...There's a time and session, perhaps, needed for a profit??

NEW KEN

[redhot]

From charles original site of oct 2007:

"Having said that perhaps I had better explain the fact more fully about my bet never losing. Individual bets during a session of bets do lose. I play and bet to a formula for a set session each time. So it would be correct to say that I never have or would expect to lose money playing a session. My sessions are approx.2 hours duration. I always finish with double win. NEVER on a losing bet."

A sessions lasts approx. 2 hours

hmm....

[Marven]

That could vary from 76 to 110 spins approx.

Regards,
Marven

[Marven]

"I always finish with double win. NEVER on a losing bet."

This should tell us that he COULD go up and down during a session. The trick is to quit when up and never when down.

HEY, AND IF OL' CHARLES HAMPSHIRE HIMSELF IS LOOKIN' ON...MAN, YOU OWE ME SOME SLEEP, I TELL YOU...!)

Hahahah you cracked me up New Ken.

Regards,
Marven

[Lanky]

Tino emailed charles asking where to bet inside or outside and charles replied inside.

Now that amazed me.

What happened to betting 12 and winning 8=20 return , or betting 15 and winning 10=25 return.

How can that be done betting inside .??

Lanky.

[ernesto]

The trick is to quit when up and never when down.

If it is a consistent winning bet he don't need to quit when up, in the next 50-100-200 spins he can reach higher up and so on, because it win more than loose.
Maybe quit when he reach his goal.

I always finish with double win.

Finish with double win? Two wins in a row? Or Double bankroll?

ernesto

[ernesto]

-