Royal Panda roulette

Author Topic: Growing/Evolving as a Roulette Player.  (Read 6262 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

MickyP

Re: Growing/Evolving as a Roulette Player.
« Reply #45 on: March 08, 2019, 03:21:23 PM »
Have a sexual departure Septic tank.
« Last Edit: March 08, 2019, 03:29:41 PM by MickyP »
 
The following users thanked this post: mr j

Greek

Re: Growing/Evolving as a Roulette Player.
« Reply #46 on: March 08, 2019, 03:27:14 PM »
Another 8 Roulette Professionals in the offing  ;D

"But wait! There's more!"
Ignorance is not an excuse. A closed mind is a stagnant mind, such a shame.

 
The following users thanked this post: mr j, MickyP

scepticus

Re: Growing/Evolving as a Roulette Player.
« Reply #47 on: March 08, 2019, 11:23:19 PM »
It is said that  only about 1 % of Bettors  make a living  from Roulette . Judged by the number of claims  here they are all members of this forum !  ;D
 
The following users thanked this post: GIAJJENNO, Stratege

Trilobite

Re: Growing/Evolving as a Roulette Player.
« Reply #48 on: March 09, 2019, 05:45:33 AM »
IMO it would be nowhere near 1%.

 
The following users thanked this post: mr j, Third

MickyP

Re: Growing/Evolving as a Roulette Player.
« Reply #49 on: March 09, 2019, 07:05:04 AM »
Many years ago I played for almost 2 years semi professional, meaning 3-4 times a week. In all that time think I lost my bankroll of $1850 three times. My average take home was $400 per visit...you do the maths.

No, I will .. $400 x 3.5 visits per week x 90 weeks - $5550 = $120450.

No one ever bothered me, EVER. In fact the casino gave me loads of comps worth thousands of dollars.

For a major casino $120,000 loss over two years is not even chump change.

Now if you say your taking $120,000 per night, then you might need to introduce some covert actions, but more likely they will invite you upstairs to the penthouse gaming floor, and even offer to fly you in on the private jet.

Trilobite, you gave an sample of your playing history above and I thank you for pointing out the basics of how it's done. In the following post Third asks about the chip size which is a valid question to ask.
To simplify the dispute about my monthly target gain I will simply talk about units. In my case a unit is ten Rand (R10) so my daily bankroll is 200 units and the daily profit goal is 90 units (45% of the daily bankroll) I play up to about 8 sessions a day and each session has a win goal. Most of the time I will exceed the win goal by a few chips and the excess wins add value to how I solve or spread loss recovery into the overall plan. I have discussed this on the forum in the past so players are free to look it up.

The Holy Grail story has caused much heated debate on the forum and I personally do not believe that those who use the term all define it in the same way. The term is used very loosely to define a method with an above average win rate.

PMS talks about getting to the point of playing continuously, even using a tag team so play is not interrupted. We have been down this road too and to better understand this concept a visit to the Dobbelsteen thread will reveal some truths.

Septic is the village idiot or the headless chicken who has no grounds to offer opinions on how to make money from roulette. He is a recreational player (the type PMS refers to that simply mess around at the tables). The 9 blocks introduced to roulette by Septic is actually designed for soccer betting. To date there is not one player using the 9 blocks with success, not in roulette or any other casino game. I don't know if any success has been recorded betting soccer with the 9 blocks.
The players who do earn an income from the game have put in many hours/days/weeks/months/years of hard work and have lost their bankrolls on many occasions but have steadily improved their approach to minimizing losses where gains outweigh losses on a consistent basis. This does not happen overnight.

The Kavouras bet is posted on the forum in its basic form. Kav has studied and put together an advanced use of the basic structure that according to him will educate people on how versatile the method actually is. This work and effort comes at a price from a reputable source, Kav himself.
Sharing is okay to a point but comes a time when not sharing becomes the standard. Why is this? Many different reasons but more common is the manner in which people who would share are treated on public forums.

It is for each player to read, study and research their own approach to roulette. Handouts with pretty promises and false guarantees is what makes a loser.

 

MrPerfect.

Re: Growing/Evolving as a Roulette Player.
« Reply #50 on: March 09, 2019, 04:17:48 PM »
 There are few reasons to not share all.
1. It may be so obvious that really interested player will figure out by himself.
2. These who are unable to figure out by themselves , probably,  wouldn't be able to implement anyway.
3. You never know who reading forums, so it's not wise to educate your enemies. 
4. Sharing is good when not only results are shared,  but workload as well...
5. Someone can absorb only that much as his mind capacity allow. .. there are things that require higher thinking ability to be replicated and implemented. ..
 List goes on....
 
The following users thanked this post: MickyP

mr j

Re: Growing/Evolving as a Roulette Player.
« Reply #51 on: March 09, 2019, 05:55:24 PM »
I love #3
 
The following users thanked this post: MickyP

Stratege

Re: Growing/Evolving as a Roulette Player.
« Reply #52 on: March 09, 2019, 07:20:04 PM »

Mr. MickyP, you already told me that if I contradicted you, that I will lose my "congregation"! Your defensive organization comes quickly, does that mean you have few technical arguments against my knowledge? You say to me "You sell yourself as a man of deep knowledge and you are a weak opinion of how you perceive the game". I speak within the limits of the knowledge of serious authors for 100 or 200 years and my own research. I'm not exaggerating anything. But on the forums, many members say they are able to earn a huge%. This is suspect because the chance with these players loses its definition completely and they do better than all the mathematicians who seek notoriety by publishing a way to win. 300 or 400 years ago, the nobles and the rich already hired mathematicians to defeat gambling. For 300 years (and still now) mathematicians have their students work on roulette. There are some interesting leads but the profits announced on the forums are very much higher, these profits are huge, exceptional, incredible, gigantic ... but is it really serious when we realize that these people often have difficulties to talk about simple and consistent roulette techniques? I am not looking for the congregation towards me, I am trying to confront my knowledge and thus to confront the knowledge of others (if this knowledge is true). Only realism is important (this in courtesy). I therefore seek to question the limits of each, and mine too. This is having a research spirit. Roulette is a technical field, all experienced members must be capable of a technical explanation without replacing it with incivility.

I must excuse myself to mr j. The quote: "This thing of" relying on roulette to pay your bills "is unhealthy." Is from MrPerfect (February 21, 2019, topic "1k to 30k challenge 2019). But two contrary opinions ! But two contrary opinions!

For the concept of goal gain, mr j, I say to mr j that this isn't my opinion. It's logic and financial objectivity. But there may be special cases (camouflage strategy, psychological comfort ...). Besides Marigny had a goal gain of a single chip (of huge value). He preferred to go home without playing a second attack. He preferred to return in the day for this second part. If I understand Scepticus, Mr. MickyP wins 9 x $ 2000 in 20 days! With d'Alembert! Here is a MrPerfect message (topic "Progression vs flat betting", page 1) "Progressions should not be used to make money! They are tools to amplify your win, not the tools to achieve it ... it's simply a dead end. 300 years people try, 300 years casinos prosper. 300 years of misery for punters ... They call it entertainment ". In this same topic, Rinad asks for a comparison between flat bet / progression. MrPerfect can not answer, it seems? I then answer precisely with numbers to this question. The result is that d'Alembert is inefficient on a truly winning method (mathematical demonstration)! I then ask Mr. MickyP to explain why he finds an advantage with d'Alembert / flat bet? We all learn something with his little mathematical demonstration (since he advocates the study of mathematics to win roulette, so it's easy for him). Thank you in advance for this historical demonstration. To meditate on your answer "Remember, when posting, you affect the opinions of those who will read it ... protect them from both, your mistakes and casino malice." (Quote from MrPerfect in the same topic).

Mr. MickyP, please also name me by my pseudonym, and stop abusing the Scepticus nickname in a rough way. I grant you that aggression is one of the signs of depression, know that people are reading you, think of your "congregation". According to you I can lose a "congregation" but not you with your excesses? In reality, you lose access to the depth of things, access to the phenomena of life and nature (and roulette). For your information, I have never played on a virtual roulette, I do not use the electronic roulette (not trust, and then it leaves an imprint).

But tell me, you presented the loss as a fatality to, one day, find a hypothetical winning method. Is it because one of your mentors said on this forum to have lost a lot in its early days? You say again recently that the player loses his funds several times before finding his winning method ! According to you, a danger is predictable but beginners must accept it (psychologically it's sado-masochism)! I rather advise players to invest in a cheaper way, by buying books from mathematicians, engineers, good scientists (even self-taught), who worked on roulette. Players will save time and money because they will learn that it is useless to go to a table to lose bankrolls, believing that this is called gaining experience. This is not my opinion, because I practiced several very different methods without losing. The most I lost was 10% of an initial bankroll (so not enough). I admit that players have difficulties to find good books, we must look, a bit like looking for a winning method.

Mr. MickyP, try to build an answer that can grow you and others. Don't neglect either that we can all learn a lot, even from our opponents or "enemies". It is ultimately a path of recognition and respect. Any deterrence or incivility process does not demonstrate that you understand and control what you say. Thank you !
« Last Edit: March 09, 2019, 07:39:03 PM by Stratege »
 

Trilobite

Re: Growing/Evolving as a Roulette Player.
« Reply #53 on: March 09, 2019, 10:41:56 PM »
Sorry Third, for slow response. Yes, my base bet was $5 chips, or at least $5 table minimum, but sometimes I would jump on a $10 table minimum. I was playing 3 numbers with 2 progressions, soft & hard. But its ancient history and I don’t play that system any more.
That particular system bucked the trend of playing for win goals, or stop losses, or time outs, or targets. It was set up more like a tennis match, with a game-set-match formula. Come what may I had to see the match out. It’s a challenging format for sure. There was nothing stopping me calling it quits early though if the need arose.
For the record, I don’t agree at all with mickyP that Scepticus is the forum village idiot. In fact I’d put myself and a few others well ahead of him for that accolade.
« Last Edit: March 09, 2019, 10:44:34 PM by Trilobite »
 
The following users thanked this post: Third

MrPerfect.

Re: Growing/Evolving as a Roulette Player.
« Reply #54 on: March 09, 2019, 11:21:53 PM »
@Strategy. ...reply for post above. 
   Sometimes l simply can not be bothered to answer qwestions that do not deserve the answer.
    Progress or flat bet... it's all same. Difference starts for what you use it.
 If you use progressive betting to rase bankroll,  then it's fine.... but no progression will make players day if his bet selection is negative.
   I firmly believe  ( based on experience ) that player has to find advantage first and think how to explore it ( how to bet) later.
 
The following users thanked this post: MickyP, Third

MickyP

Re: Growing/Evolving as a Roulette Player.
« Reply #55 on: March 10, 2019, 12:25:45 AM »
Stratege (PMS), your condescending attitude will not reign me in to respect you or Septic who has the same attitude.
I asked you not to address me as Mr MickyP but as MickyP (my forum pseudonym) but you simply ignored my request. Live with the new name.

I mentioned once that I don't use the Martingale progression at all but do use variations of the D' Alembert progression in some of my methods and Septic misunderstood as usual and thinks I use it with everything I do. Speak to the village idiot and sort it out between the two of you.

I never said you contradict me but I did say you contradict yourself. Big difference PMS.

Why is it that aiming to win 45% of a daily bankroll over an average of 8 sessions is unattainable in your books? It about 11/12 units per session or about 6% per session. Unless you are playing the 9 blocks this is easily attainable.

The reason why mathematicians are still working to find a solution to CONSTANTLY winning at roulette is because they are looking for a mathematical solution only and can not work out how to deal with variance to give them the results they seek. They want the Holy Grail.

I have adopted a policy of not sharing but will still start or join conversations like this thread I started and will encourage players to develop their own game and work at improving it on an ongoing basis.

PMS, save your sermons for someone else; I'm not buying crazy today.

Trilobite, your opinion of Scepticus is noted. My opinion of him came about from his own stupidity.

I hope I have answered or addressed all the points directed at me.
 
The following users thanked this post: mr j

Stratege

Re: Growing/Evolving as a Roulette Player.
« Reply #56 on: March 11, 2019, 07:29:23 PM »

MrPerfect, your speech is well founded. The real concern of the player is to find (or buy?) A selection that gets a positive expectation. Without this benefit all progressions eat a bankroll. I will not talk here about the type of progression that can win even more with a winning method, because that's the demonstration I'm asking MickyP. But if he cannot answer, I will answer this very simple technical question.

MickyP, you say that you do not use Alembert's progression but only variations for some of your methods. My question therefore remains relevant. How do you justify using variations of the d'Alembert, since I mathematically demonstrated that it was losing money on a winning method ? I repeat, your demonstration will be historic. Thank you for making us understand this mystery.

We can still doubt your honesty when you say that the player must analyze his daily sessions and modify his game, this is called "tweaking" his method. In reality, any modification of a method played can be a "disaster" for the bankroll. A method that has been validated must be played without change. Research at home, for improvement, is not aimed at immediate practice but a new validation over time. To omit this fundamental detail in order to transform it into a "high-risk change" is still in this "sadomasochistic" register. Are you aware of the number of spins that need to be analyzed to change a method? It's so huge on the straight up, that rare are the players who test enough to validate a benefit. So, to start a study again, to improve or not its method is still a job that sometimes takes years.

In reality, you talk to the losers of roulette, they can change every day the way they play, they will always lose 2.7% or 5.4% on the straight up. You project yourself into what you are, a forum is a reflective mirror, others discover sooner or later your reality hidden or real on the wheel.

I do not elevate my experience to standard, scientifically study roulette requires not having a passion for the game. I reason like a scientist because roulette requires it. The problem of saying that one must go through the loss of one's funds is still fraught with consequence. Maybe you are talking about your addiction? To make the habit of playing knowing that we will not win statistically is to leave the reason to be drifted to his impulses. It's a dangerous path. Few players return from this fatal adventure. They lose the taste of the effort; the game becomes a distraction. This path then does not allow patience and lucidity to make relevant tests for hundreds and thousands of hours.

But still, you say you have several methods that earn 6% on average. It's a huge performance. It is obvious that you know very few roulette techniques, so you are talking about a direct% earned on roulette. We will usually find 1 or 2 or 3% with heat. So, some chips gained a day. A bankroll on straight up then makes 1500 units here. The profit is very small. It is therefore necessary to use techniques to increase the profit and decrease the units to the bankroll. But you do not know these techniques. Your speech is regularly at your true level: analyze each day his spins, perfect forever. I'm talking about techniques and peripheral strategies to multiply a small advantage caught in a Hazard fault. We must stop talking about a breathtaking advantage, not to mention the techniques that amplify a small advantage. I'm not saying that we cannot get 15 or 20% on the straight up. I know it's possible, but impossible without a technical level.

I repeat my question : can you justify the usefulness of a variation of the d'Alembert ? This would prove that you have "tweaked" your methods! Thank you for your historical demonstration. It is in the discomfort that we progress the most! As you say that the player must constantly search and question, you have luck, Stratege is tonight on this forum for you !

MickyP, I used "Mr." to talk to the man behind your nickname. This man who transforms pseudonyms wants to put himself above some. Also, I was trying to engage the man behind your nickname to make more convincing demonstrations. The problem with you is that you are constantly running away from talking about things that are not directly related to the subject: roulette. The reason is that you want to prevent people from realizing that you only have a lot of imagination but no consistent argument about roulette (except phrases that we find on all forums and that can apply to any game of casino). Thank you for respecting people and refocusing your speech on roulette and its techniques (if you really are the specialist you claim to be).
« Last Edit: March 11, 2019, 07:42:08 PM by Stratege »
 
The following users thanked this post: TheGenner, scepticus, Third

Third

Re: Growing/Evolving as a Roulette Player.
« Reply #57 on: March 11, 2019, 10:50:37 PM »
Are you aware of the number of spins that need to be analyzed to change a method? It's so huge on the straight up, that rare are the players who test enough to validate a benefit. So, to start a study again, to improve or not its method is still a job that sometimes takes years.

Years of winning?  I'll take that! :D
 
The following users thanked this post: Stratege

Rinad

Re: Growing/Evolving as a Roulette Player.
« Reply #58 on: March 12, 2019, 02:32:15 AM »


   Drama queens some of you are.  can this forum ever speak sens about roulette ever ????

           a big Jar of humility needs to be poured on some heads.

  hope you grow up fast, God help us!!!

  Rinad

     
 
The following users thanked this post: scepticus, Stratege

scepticus

Re: Growing/Evolving as a Roulette Player.
« Reply #59 on: March 12, 2019, 02:47:23 AM »
IMO it would be nowhere near 1%.
I think you missed the smiley face , Trilo  ;D   
and your IMO is wrong too !   It is certain that it is nowhere  near 1%  though you were right to question it !