Quote:WizardThanks for making this easy on me. Nuke.

Now we'll never know the details

of his system. Thank god..

Quote:caralarmIf Charles says to protect the winning bet with your life, then what are you and Charles blabbing on about?

As long as I'm careful, I can "blab" all I want. The truth is that there will never be too many professional players because it is simply a "fact" that most people won't put the effort into discovering or creating a consistent winning formula.

People expect great things, like wealth, to come quickly. I know there are many viewers of this thread now, but eventually, people will give up and stop searching. I suppose this is nature's way of "weeding" the wrong types of people out.

Another tip: overthinking can be a real problem. The consistent winning formula is simple; only common sense is needed. If you have been spending too much time on this puzzle, take a break for a while, and completely take your mind off of it. Get into some hobby or other activity to occupy your mind.

Quote:caralarmyou cannot beat rng casinos. Their software is designed to beat the player. Maybe you can win in the short term

This is the essence of all discussions about quitting when ahead. Yes, you can "win" when you play negative expectation games, but you cannot "beat" negative expectation games.

The essence is knowing the difference between winning and beating.

Quote:toughI'm talking about consistently winning more sessions and units than losing. This is all very simple. For example, if I win 6 out of 10 sessions (on no zero or any roulette), using flat bets, after hundreds of thousands of sessions, this would obviously be a consistent winner.

I have a "system" that does that. It's called, "Flat betting on an even-money bet on a single-zero roulette wheel until either you are 4 bets ahead or 12 bets behind." It wins 66.41% of the time.

In case you're interested, the probabililty of being +W in a session before -L where all of the bets are even-money bets of 1 with winning probability p is:

(((1-p) / p)

^{L}- 1) / (((1-p) / p)

^{W+L}- 1)

In single-zero roulette, (1-p) / p = 19/18; in double-zero, it is 10/9.

Quote:AlanMendelsonThis is the essence of all discussions about quitting when ahead. Yes, you can "win" when you play negative expectation games, but you cannot "beat" negative expectation games.

The essence is knowing the difference between winning and beating.

I want to understand your terminology Alan. Let's say you go to a casino 10 times during the month, playing a -EV game. Of those 10 trips, 3 were so calling winning days for a total of +$4600. The other 7 days resulted in a loss of $7600.

Did you "win" playing negative EV games? Did you "beat" the casino?

Quote:kewljI want to understand your terminology Alan. Let's say you go to a casino 10 times during the month, playing a -EV game. Of those 10 trips, 3 were so calling winning days for a total of +$4600. The other 7 days resulted in a loss of $7600.

Did you "win" playing negative EV games? Did you "beat" the casino?

You're not even close, but thanks for trying.

You used the word "loss." Does loss mean you beat a game?

Maybe this will help: You can win innings in a baseball game but not beat the other team.

Another example: a boxer can win rounds but not beat his opponent.

In the nine times I won, I averaged $30 in wins for a total win of $270.

My one losing session cost me $300, but the really important thing is that I proved my system will win more often than it loses.

If I can continue this, I'll have the greatest system ever, one that wins 90% of the times I go to the casino.

This seems pretty foolproof. Time to up the stakes.