Quote: EvenBobQuote: SOOPOOHe finds these patterns at MULTIPLE online platforms and recognizes them in a few minutes! This concept is a farce.
In all seriousness how do you know if it works or not. You don't play roulette, you've never investigated it, you really know almost nothing about it. Yet somehow you think you can form an accurate opinion how about what I do. That's the real farce here. I can recognize the patterns in a few minutes because I've been doing it for such a long time. It really doesn't even take a few minutes it takes a few seconds, I can look at the outcomes and see what's going on in about 8 to 15 seconds would be my guess. Just like you have a certain expertise in your profession because you did it for 30 years. You can look at something in your profession and assess it in literally seconds when I couldn't do it in hours. If you make that claim how could I say it was a farce. I know nothing about what you do just like you know nothing about what I do. You are a really smart guy and why you go down these roads is a mystery to me.
link to original post
I know enough about roulette to know your claims are patently false. The reason I am not a roulette player IS BECAUSE I know enough about roulette! Last post today in your thread. If you want, you can have the last word!
Yet if I say I follow patterns and trends in roulette I'm told that I'm a freaking moron. Bob you dope they will say, don't you know that roulette is nothing but random outcomes? What do they think the outcomes in baccarat are, chopped liver? Nobody says a word about using patterns and trends in baccarat yet for some reason in roulette it's a fool's errand. Not hardly..
Quote: SOOPOOI know enough about roulette to know your claims are patently false.
link to original post
Obviously you do not because they are not false. You remind me of the Catholic Church telling Galileo they know more about how the universe works than he did when Galileo was doing all the work and the church was just guessing. Which is exactly what you're doing.
Quote: SOOPOOThe reason I am not a roulette player IS BECAUSE I know enough about roulette!
link to original post
No the reason you are not a roulette player is because you have not found a way to win at it. Same reason why I don't play craps.
What about these guys?
Roulette arrest trio keep £1.3m winnings
Roulette Clocking
I know when I see my son sleeping I cover him.
Best to cover the sleeping numbers with blankets.
After all those are the "cold" numbers!
The problem with that analogy is that Galileo, and his followers, ultimately had the evidence to back his claims. Where's yours?Quote: EvenBobQuote: SOOPOOI know enough about roulette to know your claims are patently false.
link to original post
Obviously you do not because they are not false. You remind me of the Catholic Church telling Galileo they know more about how the universe works than he did when Galileo was doing all the work and the church was just guessing. Which is exactly what you're doing.
link to original post
Quote: MDawgI'm just trying to figure out step by step what he is doing. Or at least, what he is not doing.
Step 1: Fabricate the truth
Step 2: Change your story when someone points out the inconsistency of it
Quote: SOOPOO. Nope. He finds these patterns at MULTIPLE online platforms and recognizes them in a few minutes! This concept is a farce. If there is a wheel biased IT AINT BIASED ENOUGH TO WIN 8 out of 10 times! Rant over….Quote: MoscaQuote: EvenBobQuote: SOOPOOWhat I can’t understand is if you found a way to take ‘free money’
It's not free, nothing is free, I worked my ass off to get here for the last 17 years. Here it is in a nutshell keeping it a simple as possible. If you study patterns and trends long enough they start to make sense to you and you see the same scenarios over and over and over and over because you're only working with 36 numbers and if you wait long enough these scenarios will repeat over and over. Sometimes nothing at all is happening and I can't see a bet to save my life. But often enough I see a pattern combined with other patterns combined with a trend where I know from lots of experience there's 80% chance the next outcome will be an even chance I can bet on and win. Just one unit, that's my goal at the online casinos, to win one unit per session. Of course that unit could be any size that you want. It's called making an educated guess, and no it's not a prediction. Even though I've read recently on other gambling forums that some are saying roulette is somewhat predictable.
Yes yes, 14 people will now say Bob you're such a moron independent events are totally unconnected to each other and they form no patterns. Which I agree with 100%. The patterns are all in my head, they're imaginary, my pattern seeking brain makes them up. And it doesn't matter if they're real or not real they can still be exploited. There are no rules involved, rules do not work with independent outcomes. All you can do is make educated guesses from a vast amount of experience looking at outcomes. And because there are no rules this way of playing is of no interest to 99.9% of gamblers. They want a totally rule-based system that tells you what to do every step of the way because it's easy if there are rules to follow. Independent outcomes cannot and will never follow rules, it's impossible. All I can do is say to myself I have seen this scenario before and this is the usual outcome 80% of the time. To bet one time to make one unit.
This does not work in a brick-and-mortar casino because I can't see enough outcomes in an hour which is all I have because that's as long as my concentration will last which is very very typical. Almost nobody is able to concentrate on anything for longer than an hour. It's why the casino gives a dealer's so many breaks because after 45 minutes to an hour they start making mistakes because their concentration is gone. At the online casinos I can see 90 spins an hour which is huge. So I see these scenarios where I can make a pet far more often then I ever would in a brick-and-mortar casino. In a B & M Casino I am forced to grind, I only have a 65 to 70% advantage and I have to make more bets and get more wrong to reach my goal. And it doesn't always work, sometimes all I can do is break even because all I've seen is 25 or 30 lousy outcomes in the hour I'm there.
Even with 90 outcomes an hour there are days when I don't see a bet, a couple times I've gone 2 or 3 days when I didn't see a bet but that's very rare. And yes I win every online session that I make bets in because I do not bet obviously unless the outcomes are favorable to me.
Let the pig piling of misinformation about roulette begin. You'll see what I mean just wait.
link to original post
So what you are saying is that you’ve trained yourself to spot a biased wheel. You and I had a brief PM discussion about this a few years ago (without you actually saying this of course). I figured that was what it was, because while the mathematics cannot be beaten, that is not the same as saying the game cannot be beaten.
I personally don’t have the inclination, nor the patience, to do that. Not even online. However, if someone was going to actually do it, the only way to succeed would be by taking small increments over long periods of time. Otherwise the play discloses the bias.
link to original post
link to original post
We will never know whether or not this is true, so that is not relevant. All I want is confirmation that that is what EB says he does.
You can get a 100% hit rate by betting black, red, and green, its simple really.
Quote: GandlerYou can get a well over an 80% "hit rate" by just betting red and black.
You can get a 100% hit rate by betting black, red, and green, its simple really.
link to original post
But you can’t win doing that. Bob says he wins
Quote: vegasQuote: GandlerYou can get a well over an 80% "hit rate" by just betting red and black.
You can get a 100% hit rate by betting black, red, and green, its simple really.
link to original post
But you can’t win doing that. Bob says he wins
link to original post
Except he says he wins by ignoring the zeroes as if they aren't there!
Hmmmm!
Quote: EvenBobAnd no I do not count zeros in my hit rate why would I.
link to original post
i.e. that he
Quote: EvenBobdiscount(s) the zeros.
link to original post
that come up in deciding what to bet next, and therefore also in his hit rate.
Is that the same thing as "winning by ignoring zeroes"?
Quote: EvenBobThe only way I could lose will be to get a whole lot of zeros and that's not going to happen. And even then I just keep playing till I'm one unit ahead. 80% hit rate means I get 8 out of 10 guesses right the first time. But it's not linear, I could get 15 in a row correct on the 1st bet and then lose the next three in a row. It doesn't matter, I'm going to win every session it's not possible to lose because if the outcomes are not playing my game I don't bet. I only make a bet when the outcomes are extremely favorable to what I do.
link to original post
Quote: EvenBobI think the most I've ever had to bet to make one unit was seven times and that's because the zeros screwed me up.
link to original post
In other words that zeroes could have but have not yet screwed up his winning.
I believe he also mentioned zeroes in this context:
Quote: MDawgI believe EvenBob stated that you exaggerate, such as by adding zeros to your dollar claims and length of time you were homeless. A number of others here have expressed the same sort of feeling that you claim with imprecision. But did he actually say that you lie?
link to original post
Quote: MDawg
I believe he also mentioned zeroes in this context:Quote: MDawgI believe EvenBob stated that you exaggerate, such as by adding zeros to your dollar claims and length of time you were homeless. A number of others here have expressed the same sort of feeling that you claim with imprecision. But did he actually say that you lie?
link to original post
link to original post
You think that’s a triple 0 reference or is Even Bob pushing the envelope and suggesting the first quad 0 wheel there?
Quote: MDawgI believe what he said was
Quote: EvenBobAnd no I do not count zeros in my hit rate why would I.
link to original post
i.e. that heQuote: EvenBobdiscount(s) the zeros.
link to original post
that come up in deciding what to bet next, and therefore also in his hit rate.
Is that the same thing as "winning by ignoring zeroes"?Quote: EvenBobThe only way I could lose will be to get a whole lot of zeros and that's not going to happen. And even then I just keep playing till I'm one unit ahead. 80% hit rate means I get 8 out of 10 guesses right the first time. But it's not linear, I could get 15 in a row correct on the 1st bet and then lose the next three in a row. It doesn't matter, I'm going to win every session it's not possible to lose because if the outcomes are not playing my game I don't bet. I only make a bet when the outcomes are extremely favorable to what I do.
link to original postQuote: EvenBobI think the most I've ever had to bet to make one unit was seven times and that's because the zeros screwed me up.
link to original post
In other words that zeroes could have but have not yet screwed up his winning.
I believe he also mentioned zeroes in this context:Quote: MDawgI believe EvenBob stated that you exaggerate, such as by adding zeros to your dollar claims and length of time you were homeless. A number of others here have expressed the same sort of feeling that you claim with imprecision. But did he actually say that you lie?
link to original post
link to original post
He's said a lot.of meaningless drivel.
For example only the zeroes mess him implies he has every other number covered. Why would the zeroes mess him up but not any other number he didn't wager. Unless he wagers all the numbers but a single number and zero(he said he plays single zero).
Of course wagering all but one number and zero would give him a one unit profit quite often perhaps more than 80%.
He also said he only makes one wager 80% of the time and flatbets but different amounts (try doing that one)
Quote: unJonQuote: MDawg
I believe he also mentioned zeroes in this context:Quote: MDawgI believe EvenBob stated that you exaggerate, such as by adding zeros to your dollar claims and length of time you were homeless. A number of others here have expressed the same sort of feeling that you claim with imprecision. But did he actually say that you lie?
link to original post
link to original post
You think that’s a triple 0 reference or is Even Bob pushing the envelope and suggesting the first quad 0 wheel there?
link to original post
Actually, I believe he did mention a precise figure. I believe he mentioned a “1000% exaggeration” factor.
Quote: darkozHe's said a lot.of meaningless drivel.
For example only the zeroes mess him implies he has every other number covered. Why would the zeroes mess him up but not any other number he didn't wager. Unless he wagers all the numbers but a single number and zero(he said he plays single zero).
Of course wagering all but one number and zero would give him a one unit profit quite often perhaps more than 80%.
He also said he only makes one wager 80% of the time and flatbets but different amounts (try doing that one)
link to original post
I believe you are much more familiar with roulette than I am. The extent of my experience was putting $100. on the same color every time I walked through the casino, pretty much having just turned of gambling age or close, and winning every time...until I didn't. And then losing a fair sum over trying to win a small sum (less than one unit) and pretty much never playing roulette again (the latter experience my one and only Martingale attempt - perhaps glad it failed so badly because it turned me off from trying it again - glad too that that casino's limit at that time was quite low).
Still, I don't think EvenBob's "even chance" bets involve covering lots and lots of numbers? More likely, mixing a 2:1 bet or something like that with something else to make it equivalent to a 1:1.
Quote: MDawgQuote: darkozHe's said a lot.of meaningless drivel.
For example only the zeroes mess him implies he has every other number covered. Why would the zeroes mess him up but not any other number he didn't wager. Unless he wagers all the numbers but a single number and zero(he said he plays single zero).
Of course wagering all but one number and zero would give him a one unit profit quite often perhaps more than 80%.
He also said he only makes one wager 80% of the time and flatbets but different amounts (try doing that one)
link to original post
I believe you are much more familiar with roulette than I am. The extent of my experience was putting $100. on the same color every time I walked through the casino, pretty much having just turned of gambling age or close, and winning every time...until I didn't. And then losing a fair sum over trying to win a small sum (less than one unit) and pretty much never playing roulette again (the latter experience my one and only Martingale attempt - perhaps glad it failed so badly because it turned me off from trying it again - glad too that that casino's limit at that time was quite low).
Still, I don't think EvenBob's "even chance" bets involve covering lots and lots of numbers? More likely, mixing a 2:1 bet or something like that with something else to make it equivalent to a 1:1.
link to original post
Well if you bet the first dozen (2:1) and the second dozen(2:1) plus the 25, 28 and 31 streets, you pretty much do what I just said.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: SOOPOOWhat I can’t understand is if you found a way to take ‘free money’
It's not free, nothing is free, I worked my ass off to get here for the last 17 years.
Sometimes nothing at all is happening and I can't see a bet to save my life. But often enough I see a pattern combined with other patterns combined with a trend where I know from lots of experience there's 80% chance the next outcome will be an even chance I can bet on and win.
It's called making an educated guess, and no it's not a prediction.
Yes yes, 14 people will now say Bob you're such a moron independent events are totally unconnected to each other and they form no patterns. Which I agree with 100%.
The patterns are all in my head, they're imaginary, my pattern seeking brain makes them up.
And it doesn't matter if they're real or not real they can still be exploited.
There are no rules involved, rules do not work with independent outcomes.
All you can do is make educated guesses from a vast amount of experience looking at outcomes. And because there are no rules this way of playing is of no interest to 99.9% of gamblers.
Even with 90 outcomes an hour there are days when I don't see a bet
, a couple times I've gone 2 or 3 days when I didn't see a bet....
And yes I win every online session that I make bets in because I do not bet obviously unless the outcomes are favorable to me.
Above are just a few of the meaningless drivel.
MDawg is an attorney. What would be his reaction to an opposing witness who stated "people claim what I testify to is just in my head and I agree 100%. It's all in my head, it's all imaginary but it doesn't matter if what I say is real or not."
Or "I make educated guesses but I don't make any predictions."
It's meaningless drivel that should be an opposing lawyer's dream.
Quote: unJonAgree totally with MDawg. This is a great thread.
Here are a couple questions of my own:
1) but you jumped in when it stopped and switched to something else?
Quote: unJon2) How many identifiable patterns do you tend to see?
Usually four or five major patterns or patterns within patterns. How many are there total? I see new ones all the time so I don't think there's an end to it. I know I read there are people who cannot see patterns at all even if you point them out to them.
Quote: unJon3) If you miss your first bet, do you play differently for the second bet, or do you wait just like you would for the first bet to find a new pattern?
That's exactly what I do
Quote: unJon4) Further to the above, if you tend to wait 10 (or however many spins) on average before a first bet, is it 10 (or however many spins) for subsequent bets or is it fewer?
Virtually playing the first 10 or 12 spins sets the whole thing in motion I don't need to do that again. It all comes down to either the outcomes are playing my specific game or they are not. They do something similar when counting cards in blackjack. They flat bet until the cards are playing their game and then they up their bets to take advantage of it.
Quote: BleedingChipsSlowlyMy question seems to have been answered already, but I will ask it directly; does your method depend on roulette results not being random?
link to original post
Results in roulette are always random 100% of the time.
Quote: darkozExcept he says he wins by ignoring the zeroes as if they aren't there!
link to original post
The zeros are simply an inconvenience they mean I have to make an extra bet to make up for the loss, big deal. Because I'm only trying to win one unit I can go long periods of time and never hit a zero.
Quote: MDawg
Still, I don't think EvenBob's "even chance" bets involve covering lots and lots of numbers? More likely, mixing a 2:1 bet or something like that with something else to make it equivalent to a 1:1.
link to original post
Even chance means any bet where you win the same amount that you wager.
Quote: MoscaSo what you are saying is that you’ve trained yourself to spot a biased wheel.
link to original post
Nope, I would not know a biased wheel if you pointed one out to me. Does not interest me in the least
Quote: MDawgOr are you not looking or expecting the ball to fall any particular place as in particular area of the wheel?
link to original post
I'm not concerned with the wheel at all. I never think about the ball and where it falls. I only concentrate on the trends and patterns it produces.
Quote: lilredrooster_I feel I need to state that I believe EB's strategy of trying to win just one unit per session is a sensible one for various reasons... I make only 1 bet per week - on Saturdays... my R.O.I. has improved dramatically since I have done thislink to original post
Having the goal of making one unit a session is an extremely strong position to put yourself in. It gives you a huge amount of control over the game you're playing. It's extremely short term and exposes your bankroll to the infinite bankroll of the casino a minimal amount. It is akin to a hit-and-run strategy which is the total opposite strategy the casino wants you to have. It forces you to play a very exacting and precise game, a goal-oriented game, it gives you a great deal of power over the game. You always feel like you are the one in control.
Quote: MDawgNext time the results fly by, maybe you could record them,
link to original post
A total waste of time, anything I post like that I will just be accused of making it up. Online casinos keep a log that you can see of every bet you've ever made. I could copy that and post it and I would be accused of fudging it somehow. Years ago I met somebody in Vegas at a casino and every time I won they said it was luck. Every time I made my goal they said it was luck. I had the feeling I could do this with them for weeks and they would still say it was luck. The only real way to prove something is for the other person to start doing it themselves and see firsthand that it works.
You said that in a B&M casino you ONLY have a 65-70% advantage. That would lead us to believe you have a higher advantage online. I think you have actually said so in the Bovada thread or somewhere.Quote: EvenBob
I assume that's because you have access to less history at a B&M casino than you do online.
How much of an advantage do you have when playing online?
That's true, however, most people would have a -5.26% disadvantage while doing that, Bob claims to be playing with a significant advantage above 65%... So that's really not what we are talking about here.Quote: GandlerYou can get a well over an 80% "hit rate" by just betting red and black.
You can get a 100% hit rate by betting black, red, and green, its simple really.
link to original post
Quote: AxelWolf[How much of an advantage do you have when playing online?
link to original post
You have got to be freaking kidding me. That was the entire purpose of this thread, that's why I titled it my Governor changed my life. Everything that you asked was covered in the very first post which you obviously did not even freaking read and you have the guts to come here with nothing but criticism when you don't have the vaguest idea what is going on. Just go away, quit posting in this thread.
I absolutely did read your first post.Quote: EvenBobQuote: AxelWolf[How much of an advantage do you have when playing online?
link to original post
You have got to be freaking kidding me. That was the entire purpose of this thread, that's why I titled it my Governor changed my life. Everything that you asked was covered in the very first post which you obviously did not even freaking read and you have the guts to come here with nothing but criticism when you don't have the vaguest idea what is going on. Just go away, quit posting in this thread.
link to original post
In your first post you never once said what percentage your advantage is, you said "80% hit rate" many times. It should be obvious that a hit rate and Advantage are 2 totally different things since one can have a 100% hit rate and still lose money with zero advantage.
You are claiming I didn't read your post, and yet, you don't seem to know what you yourself wrote. At the very least... you don't understand the difference between hit rate vs advantage.
And let us not forget, you told us to ignore that you ever said anything about an 80% hit rate. So how the F am I supposed to know what your advantage supposedly is based on your first post?
Quote: AxelWolf
In your first post you never once said what percentage your advantage is,
link to original post
Define what you mean by 'advantage'. You mean my edge over the casino? If I have an eighty percent hit rate that's pretty easy to figure out. This is why the zeros don't mean jack because my edge is so high
Quote: AxelWolfI absolutely did read your first post.Quote: EvenBobQuote: AxelWolf[How much of an advantage do you have when playing online?
link to original post
You have got to be freaking kidding me. That was the entire purpose of this thread, that's why I titled it my Governor changed my life. Everything that you asked was covered in the very first post which you obviously did not even freaking read and you have the guts to come here with nothing but criticism when you don't have the vaguest idea what is going on. Just go away, quit posting in this thread.
link to original post
In your first post you never once said what percentage your advantage is, you said "80% hit rate" many times. It should be obvious that a hit rate and Advantage are 2 totally different things since one can have a 100% hit rate and still lose money with zero advantage.
You are claiming I didn't read your post, and yet, you don't seem to know what you yourself wrote. At the very least... you don't understand the difference between hit rate vs advantage.
And let us not forget, you told us to ignore that you ever said anything about an 80% hit rate. So how the F am I supposed to know what your advantage supposedly is based on your first post?
link to original post
EB is confusing hit rate with advantage and profit.
80% of the time he wins first spin. That's his hit rate!!! (His terminology)
100% of the time he profits. Because the 20% of the time he doesn't hit first spin he plays until he wins it back!
He has also stated he imagines all this but it doesn't matter because it's still real. Saying imagined things are real AND you know it is imagined but you still claim they are real is the definition of lying.
I don't know about you but the last time someone actually confirmed to me he was a liar, it turned out to be his most truthful statement!
It's been long established you are supposed to quote at a minimum an entire sentence, please do so as this is at least the second time you haven't quoted an entire sentence since you have been back.Quote: EvenBobQuote: AxelWolf
In your first post you never once said what percentage your advantage is,
link to original post
Define what you mean by 'advantage'. You mean my edge over the casino? If I have an eighty percent hit rate that's pretty easy to figure out. This is why the zeros don't mean jack because my edge is so high
link to original post
One would think a seasoned gambler and someome that's been on multiple gambling forums for many years with thousands of thousand posts would know by now what is meant when asked that question.
Yes, "what is your edge over the house"... was/is my question.
No, it's not easy to figure out from your first post. One can have an 80% hit rate and have a much bigger advantage than 80% if you are betting anything with higher odds payouts and hitting that with an 80% win rate you would have a much higher edge over the house than 80%. Alternatively, they could have a much lower advantage than 80% How it is that you have a super duper holly grail betting SYSTEM but don't understand that is beyond me.
AGAIN, LET'S NOT FORGET YOU TOLD US TO FORGET YOU EVER SAID THAT!!!!!!
I'm guessing the amount you are actually getting is 2%, not 2.7% because I'm giving you credit for any extras you may get, even if you don't get any, ill give you credit for it.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: MoscaSo what you are saying is that you’ve trained yourself to spot a biased wheel.
link to original post
Nope, I would not know a biased wheel if you pointed one out to me. Does not interest me in the least
link to original post
Okay, thanks.
You never struck me as the metaphysical type, but there you have it.
It's probably very easy to get confused when you have a fictional advantage to defend.Quote: darkoz
EB is confusing hit rate with advantage and profit.
Not even guys like Christopher Mitchell claim 80% hit/win rates. Well maybe.
Quote: lilredroosterQuote: gordonm888
What EB has stated is that he uses a guessing (or hunch) methodology based on trying to observe patterns. This is what 90% of all the gamblers in the world do at one time or another. There is nothing wrong with that.
I agree that neither EB nor anyone else should be banned for stating what they believe to be a good strategy
𝘽𝙐𝙏 I believe that Mods should flag posts that state as fact things that are either impossible or if not impossible that are very hard to believe
I believe the Mods should place this warning sign next to these posts:
now, I would bet that most everybody can guess which BIG talker, BIG timer, other than EB I believe should have these signs next to his posts
.
link to original post
It’s not the moderators job to protect anyone from bad information.
The core userbase of this forum are generally very math/fact based, and do a really good job of debunking bogus claims. No moderator involvement is needed.
Putting up various warnings, throwing the threads in a purgatory folder, etc doesn’t help anyone. Something along the lines of the saying “sunshine is the best disinfectant”
Quote: darkoz80% of the time he wins first spin.
No I don't. 80% of the time I win the first bet not the first spin, I never bet the first spin.
Quote: darkoz100% of the time he profits. Because the 20% of the time he doesn't hit first spin he plays until he wins it back!
I never bet the first spin, what are you talking about, and yes if I lose the first bet I look for another bet and play till I'm one unit ahead. This happens a hundred percent of the time. Why is it so difficult to understand
Quote: darkozSaying imagined things are real AND you know it is imagined but you still claim they are real is the definition of lying.
What I said is even though the patterns are not real they can still be exploited. People exploit patterns all the time in baccarat and they aren't real either. True random outcomes cannot produce patterns. And you obviously have no idea what the definition of lying is, it seems to be whatever you want it to be. You seem to be hurting your brain trying to figure all this out, why don't you just give up.
I find it interesting that nobody has mentioned my post about baccarat players using patterns because we all know they do it. If you play Baccarat yourself you do it and you know you do it. How is that different than playing patterns in roulette. Why is one 0K and the other not okay. Now listen for the sound of crickets on this.
link to original post
Quote: AxelWolfIt's been long established you are supposed to quote at a minimum an entire sentence, please do so as this is at least the second time you haven't quoted an entire sentence since you have been back.
This is news to me I don't remember this rule being in place when I left here ten months ago. From now on I will quote entire sentences.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: darkoz80% of the time he wins first spin.
No I don't. 80% of the time I win the first bet not the first spin, I never bet the first spin.Quote: darkoz100% of the time he profits. Because the 20% of the time he doesn't hit first spin he plays until he wins it back!
I never bet the first spin, what are you talking about, and yes if I lose the first bet I look for another bet and play till I'm one unit ahead. This happens a hundred percent of the time. Why is it so difficult to understandQuote: darkozSaying imagined things are real AND you know it is imagined but you still claim they are real is the definition of lying.
What I said is even though the patterns are not real they can still be exploited. People exploit patterns all the time in baccarat and they aren't real either. True random outcomes cannot produce patterns. And you obviously have no idea what the definition of lying is, it seems to be whatever you want it to be. You seem to be hurting your brain trying to figure all this out, why don't you just give up.
I find it interesting that nobody has mentioned my post about baccarat players using patterns because we all know they do it. If you play Baccarat yourself you do it and you know you do it. How is that different than playing patterns in roulette. Why is one 0K and the other not okay. Now listen for the sound of crickets on this.
link to original post
link to original post
More meaningless drivel.
You don't win on the first spin, just the first bet.
Dude, your first bet is YOUR first spin.
If you think you count spins you don't wager then the first spin took place in the 1600's when they invented roulette.
Quote: EvenBob
What I said is even though the patterns are not real they can still be exploited.
C'mon MDawg what does your lawyer experience say about this quote?
Quote: AxelWolfOne can have an 80% hit rate and have a much bigger advantage than 80% if you are betting anything with higher odds payouts and hitting that with an 80% win rate you would have a much higher edge over the house than 80%.link to original post
Did you miss the part where I said about 14 times now that I only flat bet even chances? I never ever ever ever ever ever bet anything but even chances. Ever. And having an 80% hit rate is not the same as your edge. My edge is much lower than 80%. Can you figure it out or do I have to do it for you.
I find it fascinating that almost nobody is concerned with the nitty gritty of how to arrive at the decision of where to bet, almost everybody is nitpicking the dialogue and the math. Things that ultimately mean almost nothing compared to how you arrive at where to place your bet in order to win.
Quote: darkoz
Dude, your first bet is YOUR first spin.
link to original post
I'm being very patient with you because you're obviously clueless as to how roulette is played. When I go to a casino or play online the first spin is always the spin that happens after I start monitoring the outcomes. I never ever bet the first spin because I play virtually 10 or 12 times first to see if it's playing my game. If you keep doing this I'm just going to ignore you cuz I don't have time to explain every tiny little thing you don't understand.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: AxelWolfOne can have an 80% hit rate and have a much bigger advantage than 80% if you are betting anything with higher odds payouts and hitting that with an 80% win rate you would have a much higher edge over the house than 80%.link to original post
Did you miss the part where I said about 14 times now that I only flat bet even chances? I never ever ever ever ever ever bet anything but even chances. Ever. And having an 80% hit rate is not the same as your edge. My edge is much lower than 80%. Can you figure it out or do I have to do it for you.
I find it fascinating that almost nobody is concerned with the nitty gritty of how to arrive at the decision of where to bet, almost everybody is nitpicking the dialogue and the math. Things that ultimately mean almost nothing compared to how you arrive at where to place your bet in order to win.
link to original post
I’d love to ask those questions but was patiently waiting for you to answer my first round of questions.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: darkoz
Dude, your first bet is YOUR first spin.
link to original post
I'm being very patient with you because you're obviously clueless as to how roulette is played. When I go to a casino or play online the first spin is always the spin that happens after I start monitoring the outcomes. I never ever bet the first spin because I play virtually 10 or 12 times first to see if it's playing my game. If you keep doing this I'm just going to ignore you cuz I don't have time to explain every tiny little thing you don't understand.
link to original post
No, you said you do live online wheels. You are only observing the spins after you log on.
That you don't understand the wheel hasn't just been opened for you and you alone is mind boggling.
But hey you are seeing things that aren't there like patterns you say don't actually exist which you exploit.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: AxelWolfIt's been long established you are supposed to quote at a minimum an entire sentence, please do so as this is at least the second time you haven't quoted an entire sentence since you have been back.
This is news to me I don't remember this rule being in place when I left here ten months ago. From now on I will quote entire sentences.
link to original post
The important feature of quoting is that you not change the meaning of what was said when abridging the original post in your quote -that is, not change the meaning so as to misinform a conversation or to make someone look bad. IMO, the obligation to not misrepresent the meaning of a post in an excerpted quote is especially important when quoting other persons. I'm not sure whether we have ever suspended anyone for misrepresenting one of their own quotes, does anyone know?
Anyway, that does not entail a specific obligation to post an entire sentence, ex: innocuous quoting during a friendly discussion. Just make your quote fair.
I point out that this forum added a feature (about 18 months ago?) that automatically inserts a link to the original post when you quote; this is meant to discourage intentional mis-quoting.