How to win at Roulette

[Sentinel]

I am starting this thread to illustrate how I have been beating the game of Roulette for 11 years now. I have two strategies that I use the first one I will go into depth about is my bread and butter strategy. It has long proven itself to me. And was first formulated 11 years ago after intense analysis on the behaviour of the dozens section in roulette. It is called THE ZONE.

Basic rules...
(01) A dozen must not be hit for four consecutive spins to qualify.

(02) If a dozen is hit four times consecutively causing twin qualifiers, the bet is void UNLESS one of the dozens lost its two previous games.

(03) Staking plan to cover the spins 5---8 is as follows 1,1,2,3

(04) I advise you start with a bankroll of at least 200 points.

(05) You ideally should wait until there has been a losing game before you commence betting.

(06) Your goal ideally is one win per session

(07) I would advise you to play no more than three sessions per day

(08) As your bankroll grows so does the value of a point.

Okay there are some spectacular phenomenons this strategy throws up. The two extremes make it as close to a GRAIL as I have yet seen in roulette. It has a strike rate never lower than 66% per 100 games, and can go as high as 80% You can win more than 15 times in a row with the zone. But its power comes from what I am about to tell you. And this may be the most important sentence you EVER read regarding GAMBLING/ROULETTE. THE ZONE RARELY LOSES MORE THAN 4 GAMES IN A ROW. Yes you just read correct. You could go years without ever seeing the following 11,9,18,10,14.Especially if you limit yourself to 3 short sessions per day as I DO. What this represents is a virtual LOSS limit. Of course someone could say 30 reds or blacks is a virtual limit. But you could spend a very long time wating for it. Its unworkable.

With the ZONE, you get losing sequences like say 11,12 or ocassionally 09,17,10. even four losses in a row happen from time to time. But Five. NO ,I have been hit by one 5 loss in 11 years and seen two others, and thats from 10s of thousands of games played. If you follow this strategy EXACTLY as I advise over the coming weeks I assure you, you will BEAT THE GAME OF ROULETTE. As I have done for eleven years now later I will post the results for three sessions played today.

The quality you need above all else is PATIENCE, without it you don't stand a chance of beating roulette. And what do most human beings lack? If you have the right qualities and follow what I will impart on this thread I absolutely assure you, you will never consider ROULETTE unbeatable ever again...

 

[Pulver]

Why is this s**tt allowed in the skill section?

 

[Sentinel]

what is skill?

Got a better strategy? I'm ready,

 

[Da_Gambla]

Why is this s**tt allowed in the skill section?

Since there is no skill in roulette possible (you are not playing against other humans), I guess no roulette related articles should be in this section?

Almost every roulette player relies on some sort of `system`, whether it's a number/sequence system, a wagering/money management system, or a hybrid of both.

What exactly offends you about his post? He's not selling anything that I can see...

- Keith

 

[petro]

There is no skill involved in roulette.
Nor are there any strategies for the game.
Place your bet and cross your fingers is the only way.

 

[Sentinel]

Well said I am revealing what might be thè the best betting strategy ever devised. FOR NOTHING, the open minded who want to learn something will at least test it for themselves,the sceptics who are closed books will instanstly dismiss,if they didn't know of it or create it themselves it can't be any good.If I even show one open minded person roulette is beatable ive done my job...

 

[Sentinel]

There is no skill involved in roulette.
Nor are there any strategies for the game.
Place your bet and cross your fingers is the only way.

So now explain how I win everyday for years without crossing my fingers.

 

[Da_Gambla]

Well said I am revealing what might be thè the best betting strategy ever devised. FOR NOTHING, the open minded who want to learn something will at least test it for themselves,the sceptics who are closed books will instanstly dismiss,if they didn't know of it or create it themselves it can't be any good.If I even show one open minded person roulette is beatable ive done my job...

Systems and strategies are welcome in roulette, as it breaks up the monotony. They only become harmful when marketed in such a way as to make someone believe they are unbeatable.

If you flip a coin, you have a 50% chance of it being heads or tails. If it is heads, the next flip does NOT increase in odds in favor of tails. No matter how many times you do flip heads, the next flip is still a 50% chance. That's because the coin does not know that it was flipped, nor does it know how many other coins in the world were flipped, and ultimately when it should land on tails.

Dozens in roulette also have no such memory. Any outcome in roulette is sheer luck, no matter what anyone says. After saying that, I'm also human, so when I do play roulette, I do use strategies and systems designed to help keep me in the game, money-wise. Money management strategies are valid in any gambling situation, and roulette is no different.

Playing dozens in roulette is absolutely no different than flipping a 3-sided coin. Each flip has no idea what the previous flip was, so the odds have not changed for the next flip. Period.

Many `systems` prove profitable over short games. Getting out while you're ahead is a good system for any game. Good gaming decisions made by you, when luck has shone on you, does not mean your system `beat` the game.

I am not offended by anyone posting roulette strategies, as long as they are not linked to a site that then tries to sell something marketed as 'guaranteed to win'.

- Keith

 

[hobbithumper]

"system"

As with any roulette system, I always ask the following, simple questions:

1) Define the word "random"

2) Explain how your "system" works in relation to the proper definition of "random".

3) Look up the actual definition of "random" in a dictionary.

4) Apologise for wasting everybody's time.


Next, how to beat "heads or tails", an expert's view.

Seriously, unless the wheel is not random, previous spins have no memory, every spin of the wheel is a new spin. Beating roulette means a +EV spin. Don't beat yourselves up, you believe you are right, we believe we are right, meanwhile the casinos keep spinning the wheel and laughing. The only way to win at roulette is own a wheel & bring in people who believe they have a system. I'll take house edge over patterns in a random sequence every time.

 

[Sentinel]

RESULTS FOR 25/01/11
SESSION 1=QUALIFYING GAME LOST 13
BET 1,1,2=WIN AT SPIN 7.=2 POINTS PROFIT

CLOSING BALANCE 324 POINTS

 

[petro]

So now explain how I win everyday for years without crossing my fingers.

Your chances of winning at roulette "everyday for years" is 0%.

Good lucky convincing anyone otherwise.

 

[Sentinel]

As with any roulette system, I always ask the following, simple questions:

1) Define the word "random"

2) Explain how your "system" works in relation to the proper definition of "random".

3) Look up the actual definition of "random" in a dictionary.

4) Apologise for wasting everybody's time.


Next, how to beat "heads or tails", an expert's view.

Seriously, unless the wheel is not random, previous spins have no memory, every spin of the wheel is a new spin. Beating roulette means a +EV spin. Don't beat yourselves up,


you believe you are right, we believe we are right, meanwhile the casinos keep spinning the wheel and laughing. The only way to win at roulette is own a wheel & bring in people who believe they have a system. I'll take house edge over patterns in a random sequence every time.

Yes so random its unable to produce a losing streak of more than four once every several thousand games I play.You are thinking for yourself, im not trying to guess I already know the way to win you cannot prove Im wrong, because that requires some actual effort.

 

[LaHutti]

Random ?? ... That's somewhere in Russia, right ?
I thought only the casinos played the "random card", when someone tells them, that their games are not fair ...lol

 

[Sentinel]

Your chances of winning at roulette "everyday for years" is 0%.

Good lucky convincing anyone otherwise.

I'm willing and able to prove it ur too lazy to find out I'm right all it will require is a little self testing on your part WHAT ARE YOU SCARED OF.?????

 

[Pulver]

If you have found a way to turn sand into gold/beat the roulette wheel, why are you not the richest man on earth?

I have a friend that tried to convince me that he had found a way to beat the roulette wheel. He had found it on an ebook he said, and it worked, because he was up thousands. I tried to explain to him basic mathematic concepts to proove why he was wrong. And as I also explained to him. If someone found a way to make gold out of sand, why would they make an ebook about it and put it on the net? That would make gold worthless.

My friend did not wan't to hear what I had to say. But suddenly he stopped talking about is moneymaking roulette system. About a year after he admitted to me, while drunk, that he was wrong and that he had lost the money eventually.

Roulette is not a beatable game in the long run. You talk about taking short sessions. The roulette wheel has no memory. All your play is to be considered as a lifelong session.

You seem like you have made up your mind, and I wouldn't bother arguing with you if it were not for the fact that you are posting in the skill section, and making it sound like roulette is a moneymaking machine for other readers. Casinomeister is a respected forum, and I know that readers on here rely on things that are written. If "wronglearning" like this goes unsaid, people can be potentially burned.

Roulette can be fun, and I play it myself from time to time. But it is important to remember that the house has an edge, and that every single spin is an independent action. There are no system that can beat roulette in the long run.

 

[Sentinel]

Pulver put everything you think you know about roulette to one side for a moment,I don't want you OR ANYONE to take what I say as the gospel I WANT YOU TO *TEST* IT for yourself and then come back and see if you can tell me its no good roulette can't be beaten.Are you up for that,? Why am I sharing? Because the zone is for the small percentage of people who are disciplined and patient. And that means very few,the question is are you scared to find out mathematicians are wrong?

 

[Da_Gambla]

Yes so random its unable to produce a losing streak of more than four once every several thousand games I play.You are thinking for yourself, im not trying to guess I already know the way to win you cannot prove Im wrong, because that requires some actual effort.

Ok friend, we are trying to be reasonable with you...

You posted a 2 PART `system` or strategy.

Part one is number (or sequence) selection.

and

Part two is what to do if part one wins.

Part two is known as 'snipering' a win. If you win a few quick wagers, run with the money. This is VALID, and valid for ANY game, not just roulette. It's called discipline, and has nothing to do with part one.

Part one is NOT valid, and this is FACT. Tying the success of part one to part two does not make part one any more successful. If you apply ANY sequence selection system to part two, you will have some short-term successes.

Here's the flaw in everything you've posted:

1. If your sequence selection (part one) was truly successful, it wouldn't require part two. You could play it over and over and over again, and you would never have to stop. Why do you have to stop? Because over a longer time period, it would eventually lose. Any sequence selection system fits right in here, yours is NO different. Because of the nature of roulette, almost 100% of the sequence selection systems are based on the invalid ideal that something that hasn't happened over x number of spins is 'due'. This is 100% factually untrue.

2. If this strategy was so successful, after 11 years of using it, you would be an independently wealthy multi-millionaire, and would not bother posting this to a Forum full of completely random strangers.

3. If this strategy was so successful, and after posting it for so many random strangers to use, eventually the game of roulette would have to cease to exist, because it was found to be beatable over a lifetime. All the casinos in the world cannot afford to pay all of us this many millions of dollars worth of wins.

You, my friend, have failed. While I found your original post entertaining and full of value for a casual roulette player looking to relax, by trying to sell it as a 'holy grail' just plummeted your integrity to a sub-zero place amongst a Forum full of some the most professional gamblers you are likely to ever run into. Grats on that...

- Keith

 

[Da_Gambla]

Pulver put everything you think you know about roulette to one side for a moment,I don't want you OR ANYONE to take what I say as the gospel I WANT YOU TO *TEST* IT for yourself and then come back and see if you can tell me its no good roulette can't be beaten.Are you up for that,? Why am I sharing? Because the zone is for the small percentage of people who are disciplined and patient. And that means very few,the question is are you scared to find out mathematicians are wrong?

Why do you need Pulver, or anyone at CM to 'test' your system? You have tested it for 11 years. Using this, as your logic to why you have posted it, is illogical.

Mathematicians may be wrong on some things, this is not one of them, or this game that has existed for this long, would not exist further. The fact that the game not only survives, but thrives, proves mathematicians have this one nailed. You really picked the wrong forum to be trying all of this hogwash...

- Keith

 

[Sentinel]

Keith, what is the biggest failing amongst gamblers? You are trying to get me out of here I understand that,I already know THE ZONE is the best strãtegy ive ever seen in roulette, you cherry picked parts of my posts in an attempt to discredit me. But heres the clincher not you EINSTEIN or any mathematician on this planet can explain why the random game cannot producè a streak like this more than once every several thousand spins for the dozens 11,13,14,20,16 and that is what makes the zone as close to a grail as you will ever see. And yes I make my living from it. Research it properly bub and come back to appologize..

 

[Pulver]

Keith, what is the biggest failing amongst gamblers? Your trying to get me out of here I understand that,I already know THE ZONE is the best strãtegy ive ever seen in roulette, you cherry picked parts of my posts in an attempt to discredit me. But heres the clincher not you EINSTEIN or any mathematician on this planet can explain why the random game cannot producè a streak like this more than once every several thousand spins for the dozens 11,13,14,20,16 and that is what makes the zone as close to a grail as you will ever see. And yes I make my living from it. Research it properly bub and come back to appologize..

If that is your take on things I suggest that you open an account with 32 Red or Ladbrokes, ask for your limits to be increased by 100 times and then you can break them using your system and become a very wealthy man.

If it all goes wrong, we tried to warn you.

 

[Sentinel]

Pulver this is what you can't digest one no casino will allow that ive been bullied in real casinos before once they know that you've got them like keith they want you gone in a hurry. You won't believe me because ur brainwashed by mathsheads,thats why I keep saying prove to urself the zone is great. But after greed the average gamblers next failings are lazyness,lack of discipline the train of thought is its gambling,why should I have to work that hard. I've studied and played this game for 15 years.My ultimate goal is to prove that mathematicians missed something.

AND IN FACT ROULETTE, CAN BE SYSTEMACTICALLY BEATEN, and I will by the time I'm. Done...

 

[Da_Gambla]

AND IN FACT ROULETTE, CAN BE SYSTEMACTICALLY BEATEN, and I will by the time I'm. Done...

Only been 11 yrs, how many more, you figure?

- Keith

 

[funeral979]

LOL

These roulette threads always make me laugh.

To be honest, I have been gambling for about 12 years, and I never wagered one penny on the game of roulette, online or at a B&M. It just doesn't interest me. I have to wonder though, why is it that these roulette system threads pop up on here from time to time? You never see the foolproof craps systems....or baccarat systems...its always roulette.

I suppose they are a really passionate bunch, and I guess you have to admire that somewhat....

But as another poster said earlier, if any casino game was beatable, it wouldn't be on the casino floor today, and you wouldn't be here telling us about it...

 

[Da_Gambla]

LOL

These roulette threads always make me laugh.

To be honest, I have been gambling for about 12 years, and I never wagered one penny on the game of roulette, online or at a B&M. It just doesn't interest me. I have to wonder though, why is it that these roulette system threads pop up on here from time to time? You never see the foolproof craps systems....or baccarat systems...its always roulette.

I suppose they are a really passionate bunch, and I guess you have to admire that somewhat....

But as another poster said earlier, if any casino game was beatable, it wouldn't be on the casino floor today, and you wouldn't be here telling us about it...

It's a relaxing game, it's not for everyone.. hehe

This guy doesn't like me breaking down his `system` into the various parts for individual scrutiny, because he knows that any scheme of this sort is only as strong as its weakest link. He is trying to promote the strongest link, the wagering progression and win snipering.

If he left that part out, and just came here to discuss the probability behind the selected wager(s), he would have already been hauled out to the dumpster. It is, in this way, that these shucksters can then throw out any claims of losses by anyone who tries the scheme. He will say 'you didn't wager right', 'you quit too soon', or 'you didn't quit soon enough'. The whole success depends on the luck of the win, and the timing of entry and exit. This then provides about 3 too many variables for this to be awarded the title of 'holy grail'. It is what it is. I had some fun, and now we wait for the next system genius to roll on in... :lolsign:

- Keith

 

[Sentinel]

Keith what are you worried about? You are far from exposing me as some. Charlatan of.ROULETTE All of you anwser your own ? You have to actually run a. Winning strategy. Before you can make a change,with brainwashed jaded people like you that's never going to happen,I do realize that.


I will.garner change in a few open minded over time.PEOPLE who actually Can be bothered to do some testing on pa to find out if I'm telling. the. Truth or not. Never said anyone has to play. Real money. I myself proofed the zone on paper for over a year.THE WEAK link is humans themselves...

 

[funeral979]

Keith what are you worried about? You are far from exposing me as some. Charlatan of.ROULETTE All of you anwser your own ? You have to actually run a. Winning strategy. Before you can make a change,with brainwashed jaded people like you that's never going to happen,I do realize that.


I will.garner change in a few open minded over time.PEOPLE who actually Can be bothered to do some testing on pa to find out if I'm telling. the. Truth or not. Never said anyone has to play. Real money. I myself proofed the zone on paper for over a year.THE WEAK link is humans themselves...

I hope you proofed your zone better than you proofed your post.

 

[Sentinel]

As the months roll by slowly but surely a few of you will start to realize the ZONE really. Has the strike rate and loss limit to turn consistent profits,that over time ammount to a formiddable bankroll that even a 5LOSS cannot destroy...

 

[hobbithumper]

Gene - is that you?

www.timecube.com

The similarities are striking, both make equal sense.

Once more, please define the word "random" which you are so keen on using, simple request, often ignored. Please.

 

[Da_Gambla]

Look, no one is trying to convince you to stop using : ominous music IN : THE ZONE : ominous music OUT :

As fellow gamblers, we applaud anyone who is successful. As community members, we feel the need to provide ACCURATE information to counter whatever exaggerations or over-exuberance that tend to leak into forum posts. There's a lot of new people trolling through the posts here who need balanced information.

You're speaking to someone who has been playing roulette for well over 10 years. I live 3 hours from Laughlin and 4 hrs from Vegas (with a good tail wind). I am also a computer programmer, so I've played live for real money, and I've developed testing platforms for various strategies. I have an entire system ready to go live in a few months. The difference is, I freely tell people that predicting numbers, or groups of numbers is a worthless endeavor unless you wish to use such `systems` for pure entertainment, and/or a lack of any good numbers or groups on your own.

What I'm trying to say is, if we just analyze your selection process, it's no better than.. say... lining a cat box with a roulette board graphic and playing whatever number your cat craps on. Just being honest here. Probability includes the chance that you WILL WIN. If probability smiles on you, and you walk away before you dump that profit back, you're a smart gambler. That doesn't mean your system worked, or my cat's droppings are the holy grail either.

I didn't come here to disrespect you. It's just that after a few people started adding information to keep things in perspective, you grew louder with your 'ZONE' chant. It got a little weird. That's when we worry you might actually believe your selection process is actually working, versus the reality that your money management is doing the real work. We get concerned with people who start showing delusional signs. Like saying mathematicians have it all wrong... lol.. that was a good one.

Ok, well, you'll be fine. Just walk slow and drink plenty of fluids. Good luck with : ominous music IN : THE ZONE : ominous music OUT :

- Keith

 

[Sentinel]

Keith the selection process is no good? You show me another strategy with a minumum strike rate of approx 66% that has a losing limit rarely breached. Im WAITING...

 

[Da_Gambla]

Keith the selection process is no good? You show me another strategy with a minumum strike rate of approx 66% that has a losing limit rarely breached. Im WAITING...

Please do not put words into my posts that never existed - that's bad.

What I said was, (and it's only one post above your misquote), your selection process is no better than [insert any other selection process here]. I also said that according to probability, any selection process will produce a winner, but it is based on luck. That's fact, and we're not going to argue it. A person's beliefs can ignore facts, and that's what you're choosing to do here for your argument's sake. You believe your selection process has some sort of relevance to the outcome, but it does not. You're arguing beliefs, and I'm siding with facts (as they are inarguable). Anyone who tries to argue with a zealot bent on their beliefs will end up as frustrated as we are at this point. Another fact is, zealot beliefs > facts, no matter how backwards and counter-productive that may be.

Every time you see your selection hit for a win, your belief system is reinforced further, and you become further deeply embedded into the "Gambler's Fallacy" of thinking a random event has become 'overdue', due to it not making an appearance over x number of events.

At some point, you simply will have to come back down to Earth and calm down. Dozens are not special. You can apply the same logic to any other groupings, just adjust the algorithm for the increase or decrease in number of numbers in the group, and you will have similar results.

On one hand, I consider you a bit over exuberant about random events being anything but random. You've gone one step further and suggested that a sub-set of random events is even less random than the other random sub-sets within the game. We're quickly leaving the realm of zealot and approaching bloody mad. There's nothing further to discuss here, lest we just end up repeating what's already been bantered.

Good day, sir

- Keith

 

[Sentinel]

Session 1 =QUALIFYING GAME DOZEN 3 SPIN 10

BET 1=WIN SPIN 5 =2 POINTS PROFIT SESSION OVER

CLOSING BANK= 388 POINTS

The value of waiting for a losing dozen before you start is that 80% of your wins will come on the first game. Again a statistic no detractor,sceptics whatever can challenge with a comparable strategy.

Add to that by waiting for that losing game I have already negated 25% of my virtual losing limit of 4 consecutive games.Them you start to understand why I enthuse over this strategy so much later I will go into depth about how we address the worst outcome the strategy can deliver.

I will also talk about superior money management and why less is more.

 

[Sentinel]

Session 1 =QUALIFYING GAME DOZEN 3 SPIN 10

BET 1=WIN SPIN 5 =2 POINTS PROFIT SESSION OVER

CLOSING BANK= 388 POINTS

The value of waiting for a losing dozen before you start is that 80% of your wins will come on the first game. Again a statistic no detractor,sceptics whatever can challenge with a comparable strategy.

Add to that by waiting for that losing game I have already negated 25% of my virtual losing limit of 4 consecutive games.Them you start to understand why I enthuse over this strategy so much later I will go into depth about how we address the worst outcome the strategy can deliver.

I will also talk about superior money management and why less is more. BTW Keith luck doesn't even enter the equation,PERCENTAGES/STRIKE-RATE For find something that consistently delivers a high enough strike rate and common losing limit, and you have the game of ROULETTE tamed. That is EXACTLY WHAT THE ZONE DOES.

 

[Sentinel]

The zone and money management...

Session 2=QUALIFYING GAME DOZEN 1=09

GAME 1=1,1,2,3=WIN TWO POINTS PROFIT SESSION ENDED

Session 3=QUALIFYING GAME DOZEN 3=14

GAME 1=1,1,2=WIN TWO POINTS PROFIT SESSION ENDED

CLOSING BANK =392 POINTS

Okay I am on a good run at the moment the last 3 days have been all winners in the first game. Experience tells me this won't go on for much longer which leads me to the subject of MONEY MANAGEMENT.

Although another member on here who stated his opinion will never see eye to eye with me on the solid consistency of this strategy. I do agree that MONEY MANAGEMENT plays a big part in its success.

But make no mistake about it, if the STRIKE-RATE didn't exist within the selection process no money management will make it a winning strategy. They go hand in hand. Even more important is my confidence in taking my staking to its highest level when that fourth losing game does eventually hit.

Far from cherry picking the strong points of the strategy to try and lure any win hungry people in. I will tell it to you EXACTLY as it is, and how it pans out week by week. You will see me have losing sessions (Yes I do have them) And you will see how I cope with them. I see them as minor set backs. I can have a losing day overall but I have yet to come out of a week without profit.

And tight money management is key to this fact. Without it even a WINNING STRATEGY can and will lose or at best under perform. I cannot stress that enough.

LEVEL 1 STAKING 1,1,2,3

LEVEL 2 STAKING 2,2,4,6

LEVEL 3 STAKING 4,4,8,12

LEVEL 4 STAKING 8,8,16,24--(Only required 5 times in eleven years)

Above is the staking system employed after each losing game. I seldom have to go beyond level 3 and haven't needed to for 3 weeks now.

The levels aren't designed to recover the whole loss just a percentage of it. The reason being winning far outnumbers losing with this strategy. I know over time all losses will be recovered. How good is the loss limit? It is a phenomenon in my opinion, if you consider that in the 11 years I have played this strategy I have only suffered ONE FIVE LOSS. And witnessed two others (one on an RNG incidentaly which I advise you to avoid at all costs, they certainly are not random in real money mode)

For every 5 or more loss you will have several 100 patterns like this. 11,13--------09,12,11-------10,11,09,18. Contrary to the belief that what happened before has no bearing on what will happen in the future, things in reality simply don't pan out like that. REMEMBER THE LONGER THE WAIT, THE SOONER THE CHANGE. If for example you were to wait for six reds in a row before betting on black And it took 14 spins in total to hit black. You are closer to winning than if you bet on black after another black. There are several virtual limits in roulette. The problem is most aren't usuable in a working everyday strategy. You simply wouldn't get enough play.

That in my opinion is what sets the virtual losing limit for the ZONE apart its only 4 games but very solid and consistent. I say to anyone studying any strategy to beat anything. Don't worry how often it wins be concerned how often it loses. That is what makes or breaks every strategy.

If anyone is curious or interested in knowing anything about this strategy I will be more than happy to ellaborate on it. It has worked for me for 11 years now. Thats why I don't accept it can be just luck or good money management. Its not that simple. All elements must perform to deliver one powerful compound. If you really want to beat the devils wheel. Just try it on paper or computer program. And you will know I am telling you the truth. And mathematicians have missed something in roulette. Its called a virtual limit. Even a game as ramdom as Roulette has a level which it simply cannot pass too often...

 

[Nifty29]

The only ZONE this joker is an expert in is The TWILIGHT ZONE.

Time to get back on the meds buddy.

 

[all4greed]

The Zone, the Zone, oh yeah I remember now...

 

[LaHutti]

This is getting kinda old......

 

[jod5413]

I think his Mom might have called him in for lunch and a nap.

 

[Da_Gambla]

[..snip..]Above is the staking system employed after each losing game. I seldom have to go beyond level 3 and haven't needed to for 3 weeks now.

[..snip.. and then..]It has worked for me for 11 years now. Thats why I don't accept it can be just luck or good money management. Its not that simple.

You have perfected this over 11 years... the was even before 9-11. 11 years is a REALLY long time. But you are just now putting together 'test runs' and analyzing 3 weeks of data. Oh, and you want others to start testing it, too...

Some things are just a higher level of LOL than others...

I do not understand your persistence on this boring web forum. You should be partying with Charley Sheen and his porn chicks in Vegas. You are indeed, the Magic Man. Nostradamus! :notworthy A true Rock Star.

To everyone else, please waste no time in getting in as much roulette as humanly possible, as soon as possible. The game will have to be retired due to this flaw that says it's the only random number game that is ultimately predictable.

- Keith

 

[rouletteguy]

A;right I'll step in here (with a name like rouletteguy I must know somthing right)
Sentinel your over selling it your strike rate isnt' 66% it's 33%, 66% would be if you covered 2 dozens and it would only be 66% over a long term situation short term it could be 0% or 100% because of random variance. It's really a simple system as far as systems go. I'm glad your excited and winning, I love it when people win.
Where my problem lies is with the newbie who comes on here with a saved up 200 dollars and a dream to make it grow by gambling and going bust on your " close to the holy grail" system. I've lost a fair bit of cash playing single dozens and wouldn't do it ever again but go for it as long as your luck holds.

That being said I employ strategies myself and a well designed one does IMO help to win more frequently. There is nothing wrong with designing them and putting them into practice to see how well they perform.

THe main problem is if you did (which you don't ) have a 66% success rate then 34 out of 100 people are gonna go bust if they use the zone. then they're gonna be pissed (at you) your gonna spend a tremendous amount of time blah blah blah ing about how they did somthing wrong they're gonna bash you and your crap system to no end and really............what did you accomplish?
Sure didn't convince alot of skeptics your system is awesome did you?
Which is what your trying to do now.

Go join a roulette forum I use the same name (rouletteguy) at a few of them.
There we test and re test many roulette strategies, with many players doing the exact same strategy on numerous wheels.
Yours has been tested.............. it went bust for many...........try somthing new.

 

[Sentinel]

Roulette guy 66% is the minumum number of games won per 100 the strike rate is normally nearer 80% no one will lose if they follow my advice you will lose if you deviate from it. GET GREEDY.

 

[Sentinel]

YKeith you say you're into number crunching,isn't it about time to find out if I'm telling you the truth about the virtual t

You have perfected this over 11 years... the was even before 9-11. 11 years is a REALLY long time. But you are just now putting together 'test runs' and analyzing 3 weeks of data. Oh, and you want others to start testing it, too...

Some things are just a higher level of LOL than others...

I do not understand your persistence on this boring web forum. You should be partying with Charley Sheen and his porn chicks in Vegas. You are indeed, the Magic Man. Nostradamus! :notworthy A true Rock Star.

To everyone else, please waste no time in getting in as much roulette as humanly possible, as soon as possible. The game will have to be retired due to this flaw that says it's the only random number game that is ultimately predictable.

- Keith

Keith do the test and then come back and tell me if I'm lying or not,there was a person like you on another forum I posted on when they actually quit ridiculling me went and did some testing,they had to admit I had something,Even though they wouldnt have the discipline to apply it themselves.Its not easy to follow day in day out Keith but,it can be done.

 

[3mptyseat]

@Sentinel

Keith, what is the biggest failing amongst gamblers? You are trying to get me out of here I understand that,I already know THE ZONE is the best strãtegy ive ever seen in roulette, you cherry picked parts of my posts in an attempt to discredit me. But heres the clincher not you EINSTEIN or any mathematician on this planet can explain why the random game cannot producè a streak like this more than once every several thousand spins for the dozens 11,13,14,20,16 and that is what makes the zone as close to a grail as you will ever see. And yes I make my living from it. Research it properly bub and come back to appologize..

TY so very much. It's been awhile since I peed myself bc I was laughing so hard. Do you take narcotics? BC, much like roulette, u may experience short term improvements and success, but long term, ur mos.def. gonna lose...

And no one wants you out of here... You are hysterical, stick around.

 

[Da_Gambla]

YKeith you say you're into number crunching,isn't it about time to find out if I'm telling you the truth about the virtual tKeith do the test and then come back and tell me if I'm lying or not,there was a person like you on another forum I posted on when they actually quit ridiculling me went and did some testing,they had to admit I had something,Even though they wouldnt have the discipline to apply it themselves.Its not easy to follow day in day out Keith but,it can be done.

It's not my job to 'test' every Roulette theory brought to my attention by every delusional idgit on the planet. I have kids, a job, a life, and many other interests outside of gambling.

I never said your system doesn't work for you.

I test whatever I want to test when something INTERESTS me. This does not even qualify as interesting. It's boring. I'm not here to argue it's potential for entertainment. I argued facts as it relates to odds and probabilities. My number one argument remains: Dozens are NOT SPECIAL. They do not behave differently than any other combination of roulette numbers. Period.

You obviously have no idea how much time is involved in actually doing a thorough test of a touted system. To sit and heckle someone into testing your particular bullshite system is about as freaking rude as you could get.

Naw, bro... I think I'll pass on doing any testing at all on this. I have enough life experience to be able to predict the outcome in my head, and that suggests I don't waste any -actual- time going much further. A snipering system can win big, it can lose just as badly. It will do exactly what it's supposed to do: intoxicate those that believe, to the point of trying to force it down other's throats, and then bleeding them dry with a couple of surprise bad runs.

Enjoy your life, ok? It's short.

 

[De Beuker]

What I'm trying to say is, if we just analyze your selection process, it's no better than.. say... lining a cat box with a roulette board graphic and playing whatever number your cat craps on. Just being honest here. Probability includes the chance that you WILL WIN. If probability smiles on you, and you walk away before you dump that profit back, you're a smart gambler. That doesn't mean your system worked, or my cat's droppings are the holy grail either.

Ok, well, you'll be fine. Just walk slow and drink plenty of fluids. Good luck with : ominous music IN : THE ZONE : ominous music OUT :

- Keith

I dont play roulette much, but this thread is hilarious!

Keith, I'm going to play your catbox system tonight, I'll let you know the outcome.
I feel my cat is going to make me rich!!
Thanks!

 

[Sentinel]

It's not my job to 'test' every Roulette theory brought to my attention by every delusional idgit on the planet. I have kids, a job, a life, and many other interests outside of gambling.

I never said your system doesn't work for you.

I test whatever I want to test when something INTERESTS me. This does not even qualify as interesting. It's boring. I'm not here to argue it's potential for entertainment. I argued facts as it relates to odds and probabilities. My number one argument remains: Dozens are NOT SPECIAL. They do not behave differently than any other combination of roulette numbers. Period.

You obviously have no idea how much time is involved in actually doing a thorough test of a touted system. To sit and heckle someone into testing your particular bullshite system is about as freaking rude as you could get.

Naw, bro... I think I'll pass on doing any testing at all on this. I have enough life experience to be able to predict the outcome in my head, and that suggests I don't waste any -actual- time going much further. A snipering system can win big, it can lose just as badly. It will do exactly what it's supposed to do: intoxicate those that believe, to the point of trying to force it down other's throats, and then bleeding them dry with a couple of surprise bad runs.

Enjoy your life, ok? It's short.

EXACTLY THE POINT, there are no surprise runs,you know the loss limit is nearly always that number 4.Again you are scared of finding out as number one you then have to admit you were wrong and mathematicians have overlooked something.I am persistent that's how I conqueered the game in the first place, I am not going anywhere until one decent person with some backbone actually does their homework.THEN, PASSES COMMENT.

 

[Da_Gambla]

Again you are scared of finding out

Yes, shaking in my boots. Making money generally scares anyone.

as number one you then have to admit you were wrong

The worst that could happen is, I'm wrong? I'd think the millions that are getting away from me would be the worst. I don't get to party with you and Charley in Vegas...

and mathematicians have overlooked something.

Mathematicians have had these basic concepts under control for hundreds of years, yet they overlooked the fact that Dozens in roulette behave differently than all other random events... hookay.. I'll have whatever you're smoking.

I am persistent

No, no, no... you're extremely annoying. There's a big difference. Every gambler who has gone bust was persistent. That's not necessarily a good trait in this hobby.

that's how I conqueered the game in the first place, I am not going anywhere until one decent person with some backbone actually does their homework.THEN, PASSES COMMENT.

This is a respectable Forum full of extremely intelligent and experienced gamblers from all walks. You're not going to find anyone with that much idio... err.. backbone, to sit and test your little system that you have already tested for 11 years.

You still have refused to answer why it needs testing after 11 years. You refuse to answer lots of things. That's typical of a scammer. The only thing we're waiting for is the link to your website with more 'sure win' techniques, or the multiple alt Forum logins you've probably created to come start responding to your own posts.

You really came here thinking we are all this gullible? REALLY??

- Keith

 

[Sentinel]

It needs testing Keith because until someone independant of me sees the phenomenon for themselves you will never be able to divorce your thoughts from the layout and the usual maths thinking.You keep highlighting the dozens, I never said the virtual limit was unique to the dozens.That is just the section it was discovered on it may work in other areas too.

I don't think many of you are even grasping what I'm saying here judging by the responses.I was warned I would get this kind of response.Anytime you challenge peoples comfort zone its going to happen.You need to think outside the box or in this case the layout.All the usual arguments about house edge,randomness,laws of probability have no bearing on this phenomenon.The question is who is openminded. Enough to see it.

 

[Da_Gambla]

It needs testing Keith because until someone independant of me sees the phenomenon for themselves you will never be able to divorce your thoughts from the layout and the usual maths thinking.

Why the concern for my thought process? Shouldn't YOU be making tons of cash with your system rather than sitting here camping/posting on a Forum? You're not only delusional, your frankly a bit priority-challenged. I've never met a person who was so willing to sacrifice their time making money to reprogram my way of thinking about the laws of probability. You are such a nice guy... I really don't deserve this... :: actual thought: where the $#^& did I sign up for this?? ::

The question is who is openminded. Enough to see it.

:: yawn ::

No.. actually, the real question is, why do you insist on shoving something down our throats that we have pondered and already dismissed as not worth our time? You were given a suggestion to go seek out Forums dedicated to roulette systems. You ignored that.

And I have to wonder why...?

It might possibly be that you are afraid of people who dedicate their time to these things, and maybe we at CM aren't quite as sophisticated as they are?

Hmm?

Can you politely piss off now, and just go make money already? Every roulette 'holy grail' system author (and really.. since your system isn't new at all, I use that term in the most loose sense possible) gets 15 seconds of fame on a professional gambling site. You've exceeded that. If you need further responses to your nonsense, please PM me for my Paypal account. I charge by the hour.

Take care now...

- Keith

 

[Nifty29]

This guy is living proof that taking annual vacations at Los Alamos, Three Mile Island and Bikini Atoll are damaging to your health.