The more gambling videos i watch from other you tuber the more i realize you are RIGHT. the numbers don't lie. I will always remember a lesson taught to me in school. During the gold rush the true men that made money were the ones at the top and the people selling mining equipment, not the actual miners/laborers. Make a gambling book and put it up for sale pay for some promoters and watch the money come in
This inspired me to create a decentralized roulette crypto protocol. Basically there is a house pool and a better pool. If the house pool gets too high the house can lose money as the payout will increase to where it isn't a static payout like 35 to 1 for one. If the pool is too high then suddenly, the payout may be 70 to 1 and it will increase based on the per unit amount. It is an interesting project and then just charge a small fee per payout so that it is basically a way that gamblers can play a game. The math would need to be 100% down but it would create an engaging ecosystem if pulled off and have a am i human bot check every now and again so that someone can't simply use a bot to do it.
Many thanks, Michael. The late Martin Blakey explained Martingale in his book too. Interestingly, I meet a gambler who had made over $20,000 by walking around the casino floor at Crown in Melbourne, Australia and would bet on the opposite after about six or so appearances of one of the evens. He was honest enough to say his luck ran out and lost the lot. Exactly what Martin predicted in his book. I was at Crown the other night and there were about eleven reds in a row on one board. Probably the most I have ever seen.
Same happened to me. I started with $700 and built it up to over $5000 over the course of 3 months going about twice a week and starting with $100 units. I would wait for 7 of the same colour to appear before beginning to bet on the opposite colour. Then one sad day I lost it all when the streak continued to wipe me out. Of course the next spin landed on the opposite colour after all my chips were gone.
@@SeanVanDuzen Interesting. Martin also said that you are at risk of being on a long run of the same. Perhaps, gamblers would be better off by betting with the flow. I have often wondered if it works if you have a small progression and a sizable bank.....say just three bets post 6 reds etc. Martin Blakey in his book said it is difficult for the casino to defeat a player who has the patience and self-control to play one number. It worked for me ten times in a row. I would leave post winning 50 percent of my bank. Probably far too much. I'd take $2000 and leave after winning $1000. Not betting on the same number though. I was betting on Rapid Roulette, a screen version of real roulette broadcast throughout the casino. It is excruciating. For some reason, I seemed to lose my mojo. I was only going by intuition. I have done much research in an attempt to see if there is any pattern regarding one number. (not the same number though). There sort of is....lol
@@MrLeedebt I agree with the smaller progression and sizeable bank approach. I also like the hunting 1 number approach though I have not tried this yet. I’ve seen a couple UA-camrs demonstrating this and it eventually comes around, and I think a number in the hot numbers list or repeater from the recent board is a good place to start. Thanks also for mentioning the Blakely book. I will check it out!
@@MrLeedebt I was able to see your longer reply by going to my UA-cam notifications and it appeared there but I don’t see it here publicly. Maybe it’s buried in cyberjunk or a UA-cam update will make it appear publicly. I did reply in another comment. Thanks for letting me know to look deeper.
Whatever strategy you use, if you increase your bet you will lose on the long run, but if your bankroll is big enough and never increase or decrease bets, you can make some money consistently
i had a fun twist idea to the keefer.. using the labouchere on both red and black at the same time but instead of starting out with 2 units you start with 1 unit on a color. and than cancel the 2 outside numbers on the winning number and on the losing number just double !.
I bought a system strategy years ago on playing a street bet 16-21 using the Fibonacci sequence. Claim is you can make a living with it. Its ok if you use a target and stop loss. It can bust your bankroll. Hitting 6 out of 36 is a long shot.
I know all roulette systems fail eventually, but the biggest thing that has been missed, if you are betting 3 for red and 2 for black, you will lose 5 on a '0'.. just bet the difference between the bets.. in this bet 1 on red, the you only lose 1 unit for a '0'. essentially just bet the difference.
I would thing that after 1000 spins the house odds take over on most every system. What I am seeing here is that it ends up winning in the majority of cases within the first 100 spins. If you set a super conservative stop loss and are happy with making $20 or so in a quick session it looks like it might be the system for you. What is the best system that you have ever reviewed? I have watched a lot, not all of your videos and so far have not watched one that has a positive review. Guess I missed that one?
Roulette has a house edge of over 5% on double zero. Among the worst in the casino other then slot machine. If there was a great system out there it's either held secrete or there isn't any as nothing changes the odds. The house always wins. He does have a video of games he recommends with the best house odds.
You can loose 8 times in a row in one color and only make 8 units on the other side.Still a big lost unless you make enough profit before to cover the lost
Excellent video! Thanks Mike! Curious to see numbers on European single zero with “half back” on even bets using Keefer and increasing to 10 steps. I realize betting systems don’t work - but would like to see the numbers and the probability of walking away a small winner provided I don’t get a losing streak early on.
One should not bet both colours because it loses more money when the zero comes , placing the difference between the two bets on the larger side exposes less and wins/loses the same , Is this not obvious?
I can just feel that "financial freedom" from that 6 bucks you made! lol Bottom line is there is no such thing as a "system" for Roulette (as you have always said). Cheers, VT
Hey there are hundreds of systems...they just all fail over time LOL. i still can't get over the idea of placing bets on both red and black. it's so dumb. all you're doing is putting more money on the table to lose when the zeros hit. putting 10 on red and 20 on black has the same result as just putting 10 on black. JackAce is a great resource for testing out hundreds of systems and his criticisms of all of them.
This system is a. Bit flawed as is but I think it can be improved if you the original martingale progression with one starting at 2 units and the other starting at 1unit that way you will win exactly 1 unit profit for every spin played .now that might improve the maths part of the system but you will still have the issue of getting a string of one color in a row .and if that happens which it will he will loose the total amount of one of his bankroll.my take is a good roulette game player must have a few thing in place in order to have the slightest chance of a win .which is 1 a competitive bankroll is important about 25% .2. A very strong bet placement system,about 50% of you and the other 25% is attitude .discipline. With a lot or respect for the game ,this system is lacking in a few of the key elements,,so I agree with your assessment on this information.
That's just as much reason to use them as to not use them. You can't beat the house edge no matter what you do, so at the end of the day you're playing for entertainment purposes only and flat betting is boring as hell!
All u guys talking bout you cant beat roulette just because of the house advantage, if you pay attention to the game and betting options you can make steady profit when you know how 💯
@@seanylewl The problem is the Human Brain...Not the house having the edge! If i gave you 1k and also gave you a solid strategy. And i told you only win $20 dollars and stop lost is $200 go home your done for the day. Most people couldn't do it!
Hey Michael, have you done any videos on betting systems that can be applied to trading with an edge with positive expectancy? Ur I have a 51% win rate with a 1:1.1 Risk to Rewaed so wondering if increased odds make these systems more pfrofitable
It would be almost the same. Red for Banco and black (blue) for Punto. Although, 5% commission on Banco will complicate things a bit. Easist way is to neglect it, as you will not lose on Ties (green) as you would on 0/00 in roulette.
Good video. Not a system for me, but good to know. The eu wheel may be perfectly spaced, but the table is certainly not. Took me years to notice that Red is actually at a huge disadvantage since there is so many in column 3 thus you can much easier (cheaper) cover the majoriy of the blacks in column 1 & 2 with. Example you can cover more blacks with quads than reds. Is the 4 reds in column 2 a mistake? I assume there is books covering this. im just surprice how its technically cheaper to play on blacks.
It would be almost the same. Red for Banco and black (blue) for Punto. Although, 5% commission on Banco will complicate things a bit. Easist way is to neglect it, as you will not lose on Ties (green) as you would on 0/00 in roulette.
My question is what to do when long red or long black coming Sometimes 16 or 17 times same color coming it’s always make players toasted What will you do when you get this kind of situation?
That's only your experience. I've seen a checkerboard of around 10. If you take data from all roulette wheels everywhere, not just your experience or mine, you'd see it doesn't matter. It's random.
OMG don't ever play this reconstructed martingale. Cohorts' are not what you need to win. Playing alone is the way so long as you know the right way. Never play even money on a game that pays 35-1. And forget about the fact there's 38 numbers. Watch the bias of the wheel and you can beat this game. Real wheels only no automation games unless you figured them out. Good luck!
Hedging to avoid the devastation of losing your whole bankroll in one sitting, is suicidal because of all the green zeros on the wheel. Baccarat and craps, where the ties and 12 are pushes, would be less losing for the system. In terms of Roulette, I know waiting for 5 Reds or Evens in a row to begin betting the other side is not statistically helpful, because each spin is independent of the last, but there is a natural regression to the expected mean over time, so is that worth at least thinking of those pre-start 5 reds in a row, at least being worth statistically a half of one spin in terms of the expected regression to the mean table results? In other words, if a quarter had flipped heads 5 times in a row, is there not some small expectation, because of regression to the mean, that 1 of 8 of the next flips will come up tails, verses the expectation for one in 8 of the next flips to be tails, if the pre- start 5 flips had been all tails. Its just seems like, even though I was not yet betting, it is more likely that after 5 tails in a row, the quarter is more expected to flip 8 heads in a row, than a quarter that had just flipped 5 heads in a row, then flipping another 8 heads in a row. Is there some way to quantify this expectation? A Sports Handicapper might be running at a 55 percent win rate iver a week, but he will warn that, because of regression to the mean, he is likely to lose more in the days or weeks to come, to return to his normal yearly 53 percent winning record. We have no problem expecting a regression to the mean, with that Sports Handicapper, but ignore the concept, if we have just seen those 5 Roulette Reds in a Row? Of course, you critically better your odds on the 5 Pre-Start Reds in a row, if you are on a single zero Electronic Roulette Game. There would be as many Roulette Tables as Blackjack Tables in every American Casino, if they had not blown up the game with the 00 addition. Now the Venitician has a 000 Wheel too. Hope they remember to dust it off once a day. Lol
Ridiculous, how are 5 past flips going to effect the next 8 flips? The odds are exactly the same regardless of any previous outcome. Regression to the mean says the percentage from the mean will lesson, not the count.
@@joeyankosky9436 So if we were at a Baccarat Table in Vegas, and we just saw Banker hit an amazing 20 times in a row, you would be happy taking an Even Money Bet with me, when I say I think the Player will hit at least 3 out of 5, of the next hands. You would be completely comfortable betting on Banker to win 3 of the next 5,, even though in the same regression to the mean expectation, if you had just seen a lifetime 52 percent winning Sports Handicapper win 20 bets in a row, you would expect him to perhaps lose at least 3 of his next 5 bets, just to begin to revert to his mean winning percentage???
Because putting all my cards on the table, my experience is that when I am patient and wait for 5 Bankers or Players to hit in a row, and then Martingale the next 8 hands, I lose fewer times, than when I just ignore what had happened in the last 5 hands, and just jump in and Martingale 8 hands in a row. Common sense just tells us, it is slightly less frequent to get 13 Banker Wins in a row, than just 8. That's why 99 percent of the people in the world, if having just seen a coin flip 5 Heads in a row, would take heads for the next flip.
@@grandflasherb Yes, I would give you even money that the player would not hit 3 of the next 5 hands after 20 banker wins or no matter what the previous 20 results were because I would have a 13.33% advantage or for every $100 we bet you would lose $13.30 because the player will not win 3 of the next 5 hands %53.125 of the time, only %46.875 of the time, ignoring ties.
@@grandflasherb ...regression to the mean is percetage based, not win count based. Take a 10, 100 & 1000 trials for example. As the number of trials increases, yes, the standard deviation from the mean decreases percentage wise but keeps increasing count wise. 10 games,+/-3.16 games , 100 games +/- 10, and 1000 games +/- 31.6 is the standard deviation. So the percentage can regresses to the mean without the win count getting lower
This is just a dumb system. Why not offset the betting amount and only bet the side where you are betting more. That would eliminate the unnecessary betting of both red and black, hence when green hit, you're not taking a double hit by bettong on both red and black. The casino loves this system for sure, it just gave the casino better odds. In roulette the casino wins because of the added zero and double zero. But betting this system, you're losing more when the zero or double zero hits, giving the casino more odds.
Hahahaha See This 2dollar or 1 dollar on both and every spin you win no matter how much but if 0 not come maximum time onscreen you win and dealer think oh how he experinced always winner hahaha😁😂 but stratgy for online rouletts
No, It's a loosing system. After loosing 3rd bet when you increase it to 6 units the profit will be of 6 units and that is our loss as we already lost 6 units 1+2+3= 6 . So after winning on any bet after 3rd bet doesn't give you profit. It's an loss for us.
For all those whom need it, read it. I'm a sinner JESUS please forgive me for all my sins I know you shed your Blood for me on the cross at Calvary. Thank you JESUS for my salvation and for shedding they Blood for me. I love you JESUS. Romans 10:5/10 ct...❤️k JESUS Is Lord! Amen
What an uncreative 💩 system. I always enjoy being mentally stimulated by complex systems that try to delay the negative EV as much as possible, especially cascading-upon-cascading bet spreads. But this Keefer is making money to tell people about a useless simple martingale variant that any idiot who plays roulette has thought of, and then on a -5.26% coinflip to boot? I should make an ebook and charge 5 bucks for my casino advice, at least I have easy positive +EV advantage play angles one wouldn't really think of. 😂
yeaah you are only using simulator to leak a paid book to get traffic and video views. if i am the book writer, sure thing i will sue you 😂 what a great manner 😂 shame on you !!
Why are you upset with Michael? You're not the author of the book, are you? Does it make any difference if Michael makes a video on this system or if it is published as a free pdf? Well, the author has a right to be critical with Michael but for anybody else it's simply none of your business!
Lol you mix single zero and double zero stats dude. Your stats are false. Also, there are people who win. Not everyone lose. You think you lose, everyone lose? Come on man, I think this is easy to understand. You doing exactly what a shill is doing😂
No, Michaels stats are right. You will lose 2.70% of your overall bets on single zero wheel (1/37), or even 5.26% on a double zero wheel (2/38). Odds will not change, whatever betting system you use.
Great video as always. Love that there's a proper mathematician out there to debunk these charlatans.
The more gambling videos i watch from other you tuber the more i realize you are RIGHT. the numbers don't lie. I will always remember a lesson taught to me in school. During the gold rush the true men that made money were the ones at the top and the people selling mining equipment, not the actual miners/laborers. Make a gambling book and put it up for sale pay for some promoters and watch the money come in
Educated gamblers are so lucky to have Mike posting these videos.
Thank You Sir for exposing the scams that dishonest people are trying to peddle.
Just when I thought the "Holy Grail" was within reach😄
THE HOLLY GRAIL IS HERE ,ITS JUST NOT THIS LOL
Great video!!! Thanks for doing this and educating people Michael!
This inspired me to create a decentralized roulette crypto protocol. Basically there is a house pool and a better pool. If the house pool gets too high the house can lose money as the payout will increase to where it isn't a static payout like 35 to 1 for one. If the pool is too high then suddenly, the payout may be 70 to 1 and it will increase based on the per unit amount. It is an interesting project and then just charge a small fee per payout so that it is basically a way that gamblers can play a game. The math would need to be 100% down but it would create an engaging ecosystem if pulled off and have a am i human bot check every now and again so that someone can't simply use a bot to do it.
Many thanks, Michael. The late Martin Blakey explained Martingale in his book too. Interestingly, I meet a gambler who had made over $20,000 by walking around the casino floor at Crown in Melbourne, Australia and would bet on the opposite after about six or so appearances of one of the evens. He was honest enough to say his luck ran out and lost the lot. Exactly what Martin predicted in his book. I was at Crown the other night and there were about eleven reds in a row on one board. Probably the most I have ever seen.
Same happened to me. I started with $700 and built it up to over $5000 over the course of 3 months going about twice a week and starting with $100 units. I would wait for 7 of the same colour to appear before beginning to bet on the opposite colour. Then one sad day I lost it all when the streak continued to wipe me out. Of course the next spin landed on the opposite colour after all my chips were gone.
@@SeanVanDuzen Interesting. Martin also said that you are at risk of being on a long run of the same. Perhaps, gamblers would be better off by betting with the flow. I have often wondered if it works if you have a small progression and a sizable bank.....say just three bets post 6 reds etc. Martin Blakey in his book said it is difficult for the casino to defeat a player who has the patience and self-control to play one number. It worked for me ten times in a row. I would leave post winning 50 percent of my bank. Probably far too much. I'd take $2000 and leave after winning $1000. Not betting on the same number though. I was betting on Rapid Roulette, a screen version of real roulette broadcast throughout the casino. It is excruciating. For some reason, I seemed to lose my mojo. I was only going by intuition. I have done much research in an attempt to see if there is any pattern regarding one number. (not the same number though). There sort of is....lol
@@SeanVanDuzen Hi Sean, I left you an extensive replay about this and other strategies. it seems to have disappeared.
@@MrLeedebt I agree with the smaller progression and sizeable bank approach. I also like the hunting 1 number approach though I have not tried this yet. I’ve seen a couple UA-camrs demonstrating this and it eventually comes around, and I think a number in the hot numbers list or repeater from the recent board is a good place to start. Thanks also for mentioning the Blakely book. I will check it out!
@@MrLeedebt I was able to see your longer reply by going to my UA-cam notifications and it appeared there but I don’t see it here publicly. Maybe it’s buried in cyberjunk or a UA-cam update will make it appear publicly. I did reply in another comment. Thanks for letting me know to look deeper.
Thank you for another informative video. May I ask, what kind of software do you use for your simulations? Thank you again.
Whatever strategy you use, if you increase your bet you will lose on the long run, but if your bankroll is big enough and never increase or decrease bets, you can make some money consistently
i had a fun twist idea to the keefer.. using the labouchere on both red and black at the same time but instead of starting out with 2 units you start with 1 unit on a color. and than cancel the 2 outside numbers on the winning number and on the losing number just double !.
I bought a system strategy years ago on playing a street bet 16-21 using the Fibonacci sequence. Claim is you can make a living with it. Its ok if you use a target and stop loss. It can bust your bankroll. Hitting 6 out of 36 is a long shot.
I know all roulette systems fail eventually, but the biggest thing that has been missed, if you are betting 3 for red and 2 for black, you will lose 5 on a '0'.. just bet the difference between the bets.. in this bet 1 on red, the you only lose 1 unit for a '0'. essentially just bet the difference.
MAKE SENSE WILL LOOK INTO THIS THANK
My roulette system will never fail.
Well do tell us then
You make zero sense.
I would thing that after 1000 spins the house odds take over on most every system. What I am seeing here is that it ends up winning in the majority of cases within the first 100 spins. If you set a super conservative stop loss and are happy with making $20 or so in a quick session it looks like it might be the system for you.
What is the best system that you have ever reviewed? I have watched a lot, not all of your videos and so far have not watched one that has a positive review. Guess I missed that one?
Roulette has a house edge of over 5% on double zero. Among the worst in the casino other then slot machine. If there was a great system out there it's either held secrete or there isn't any as nothing changes the odds. The house always wins.
He does have a video of games he recommends with the best house odds.
Nice work, Mike. I always like these.
You can loose 8 times in a row in one color and only make 8 units on the other side.Still a big lost unless you make enough profit before to cover the lost
Excellent video! Thanks Mike!
Curious to see numbers on European single zero with “half back” on even bets using Keefer and increasing to 10 steps.
I realize betting systems don’t work - but would like to see the numbers and the probability of walking away a small winner provided I don’t get a losing streak early on.
Roulette only has two rules: 1. the house always wins 2. Never forget rule number 1.
Good video. What a grind. Far too much hassle to get excited about. Keep up the good work.
What is the difference between betting 6 on black and 1 on red instead of betting 5 on black? If you roll 0 you lose 7 instead of 5.
One should not bet both colours because it loses more money when the zero comes , placing the difference between the two bets on the larger side exposes less and wins/loses the same ,
Is this not obvious?
Every betting system is a loser in the long run.
If you could make money gambling casinos wouldn't exist
Good video, thanks for showing the 1000 spin results...it adds up;
Thanks for the video
I can just feel that "financial freedom" from that 6 bucks you made! lol
Bottom line is there is no such thing as a "system" for Roulette (as you have always said).
Cheers,
VT
Hey there are hundreds of systems...they just all fail over time LOL. i still can't get over the idea of placing bets on both red and black. it's so dumb. all you're doing is putting more money on the table to lose when the zeros hit. putting 10 on red and 20 on black has the same result as just putting 10 on black. JackAce is a great resource for testing out hundreds of systems and his criticisms of all of them.
How can get this book and price please
Why would you want it ??
Anyone who plays roulette knows streaks of 8+ for red or black are not uncommon
Nailed it!!!!! Thanks
what software do you use to analyse this?
Rule of thumb if they’re trying to sell it to u to make money instead of just being in the casino doing it making money, it doesn’t work.
The best comment of the section
This system is a. Bit flawed as is but I think it can be improved if you the original martingale progression with one starting at 2 units and the other starting at 1unit that way you will win exactly 1 unit profit for every spin played .now that might improve the maths part of the system but you will still have the issue of getting a string of one color in a row .and if that happens which it will he will loose the total amount of one of his bankroll.my take is a good roulette game player must have a few thing in place in order to have the slightest chance of a win .which is 1 a competitive bankroll is important about 25% .2. A very strong bet placement system,about 50% of you and the other 25% is attitude .discipline.
With a lot or respect for the game ,this system is lacking in a few of the key elements,,so I agree with your assessment on this information.
Thanks for the info Michael!
Hi Mike why can subtract say 3 on black with 1 on red and keep 2 on black alone. In this way u can reduce 2 unit loss when 0 or 00 comes?
What roulette platform are you playing on
This system could however be fun playing husband against wife. He on black and her on red. Winner takes the other out for dinner!
First comment!
Interesting system. I don’t follow any betting systems personally. At the end of the day, the house advantage can’t be beaten!
That's just as much reason to use them as to not use them. You can't beat the house edge no matter what you do, so at the end of the day you're playing for entertainment purposes only and flat betting is boring as hell!
All u guys talking bout you cant beat roulette just because of the house advantage, if you pay attention to the game and betting options you can make steady profit when you know how 💯
@@DarkJesterInsights Oh yeah, and where can I buy your book that tells me how to do this?🤔
@@seanylewl - Learn to be profitable: ua-cam.com/video/60OB6IWTMpA/v-deo.html
@@seanylewl The problem is the Human Brain...Not the house having the edge! If i gave you 1k and also gave you a solid strategy.
And i told you only win $20 dollars and stop lost is $200 go home your done for the day. Most people couldn't do it!
Hey Michael, have you done any videos on betting systems that can be applied to trading with an edge with positive expectancy?
Ur I have a 51% win rate with a 1:1.1 Risk to Rewaed so wondering if increased odds make these systems more pfrofitable
What does the system look like when you play baccarat like this?
It would be almost the same. Red for Banco and black (blue) for Punto. Although, 5% commission on Banco will complicate things a bit. Easist way is to neglect it, as you will not lose on Ties (green) as you would on 0/00 in roulette.
Good video. Not a system for me, but good to know. The eu wheel may be perfectly spaced, but the table is certainly not. Took me years to notice that Red is actually at a huge disadvantage since there is so many in column 3 thus you can much easier (cheaper) cover the majoriy of the blacks in column 1 & 2 with. Example you can cover more blacks with quads than reds. Is the 4 reds in column 2 a mistake? I assume there is books covering this. im just surprice how its technically cheaper to play on blacks.
Nice observation, ty
@@sithtrader7021 -- Learn to be profitable: ua-cam.com/video/60OB6IWTMpA/v-deo.html
i dont need the keefer roulette system
Martingale eventually and keefer doesnt work
the house welcomes those who think they got something that can beat the house long term,,, they're laughing all the way to the bank,,,
Eric Idle? either way - in Wizard I trust
Can you suggest a betting system for options trading?
Roulettewala Gameplay Is Safest Way To Make Money In This Field. He Came Live And Place Bet In Front Of People's
youtube.com/@roulettewala
Roulettewala Gameplay Is Safest Way To Make Money In This Field. He Came Live And Place Bet In Front Of People's
youtube.com/@roulettewala
how about trying this on Baccarat instead?
It would be almost the same. Red for Banco and black (blue) for Punto. Although, 5% commission on Banco will complicate things a bit. Easist way is to neglect it, as you will not lose on Ties (green) as you would on 0/00 in roulette.
“The only way to beat roulette is to steal money when the croupier isn’t looking.”
Camera is there
@Roll Not true. Roulette is a game of physics, therefore beatable.
@@kristofferkarlsson4260 that is a quote by Einstein
Why dont u just bet the difference between the two bets?
Say, you shaved?
Looks like he did.
I forced the lawnmower on the Caveman! TQ
Guess who he looks like I’ll give you a clue he had a ukulele and he was on the talkshows tiny Tim
@@davidmitalski4672:
The Caveman now looking exactly like the legendary King 👑 of Baccarat Christopher Mitchell! TQ
Yes, I got too many comparisons to the Unibomber. Now I'm getting them to Tiny Tim.
Nah I would stick with the classic martingale bet.
My question is what to do when long red or long black coming
Sometimes 16 or 17 times same color coming it’s always make players toasted
What will you do when you get this kind of situation?
Do whatever you want, the odds are the same either way. The ball and wheel don't have a memory.
I just play the color that comes in. I always see at least 2 colors in a row. I never see a checker board more than 5 spins
ua-cam.com/video/ytUD1VPdlkA/v-deo.html
That's only your experience. I've seen a checkerboard of around 10. If you take data from all roulette wheels everywhere, not just your experience or mine, you'd see it doesn't matter. It's random.
@@sppl - Learn to be profitable: ua-cam.com/video/60OB6IWTMpA/v-deo.html
My opinion?..Take your small wins, and don't play for long periods of time. They call it 'gambling ' for a reason!
It's when they got those losses he realized the best way to make money was to sell a broken system to gamblers. His only winning move.
The fact that the author did not employ CONTRA betting thus exposing both side losing when zero occurs exhibits stupidity.
i can't stand it when people can't differentiate money management with betting system (bet selection).
good
OMG don't ever play this reconstructed martingale. Cohorts' are not what you need to win.
Playing alone is the way so long as you know the right way. Never play even money on a game that pays 35-1. And forget about the fact there's 38 numbers. Watch the bias of the wheel and you can beat this game. Real wheels only no automation games unless you figured them out. Good luck!
Where's Caveman?
Not here anymore it seems!
@@justinsimmonds5674:
Caveman may have been abducted by Aliens 👽👽👽? Who knows? TQ
@@justinsimmonds5674 - Learn to be profitable: ua-cam.com/video/60OB6IWTMpA/v-deo.html
we will destroy them they said you can not win roulette system b/c of the house edge ,what if i tell you i won 10234 with out martingale
Hedging to avoid the devastation of losing your whole bankroll in one sitting, is suicidal because of all the green zeros on the wheel. Baccarat and craps, where the ties and 12 are pushes, would be less losing for the system. In terms of Roulette, I know waiting for 5 Reds or Evens in a row to begin betting the other side is not statistically helpful, because each spin is independent of the last, but there is a natural regression to the expected mean over time, so is that worth at least thinking of those pre-start 5 reds in a row, at least being worth statistically a half of one spin in terms of the expected regression to the mean table results? In other words, if a quarter had flipped heads 5 times in a row, is there not some small expectation, because of regression to the mean, that 1 of 8 of the next flips will come up tails, verses the expectation for one in 8 of the next flips to be tails, if the pre- start 5 flips had been all tails. Its just seems like, even though I was not yet betting, it is more likely that after 5 tails in a row, the quarter is more expected to flip 8 heads in a row, than a quarter that had just flipped 5 heads in a row, then flipping another 8 heads in a row. Is there some way to quantify this expectation? A Sports Handicapper might be running at a 55 percent win rate iver a week, but he will warn that, because of regression to the mean, he is likely to lose more in the days or weeks to come, to return to his normal yearly 53 percent winning record. We have no problem expecting a regression to the mean, with that Sports Handicapper, but ignore the concept, if we have just seen those 5 Roulette Reds in a Row? Of course, you critically better your odds on the 5 Pre-Start Reds in a row, if you are on a single zero Electronic Roulette Game. There would be as many Roulette Tables as Blackjack Tables in every American Casino, if they had not blown up the game with the 00 addition. Now the Venitician has a 000 Wheel too. Hope they remember to dust it off once a day. Lol
Ridiculous, how are 5 past flips going to effect the next 8 flips? The odds are exactly the same regardless of any previous outcome. Regression to the mean says the percentage from the mean will lesson, not the count.
@@joeyankosky9436 So if we were at a Baccarat Table in Vegas, and we just saw Banker hit an amazing 20 times in a row, you would be happy taking an Even Money Bet with me, when I say I think the Player will hit at least 3 out of 5, of the next hands. You would be completely comfortable betting on Banker to win 3 of the next 5,, even though in the same regression to the mean expectation, if you had just seen a lifetime 52 percent winning Sports Handicapper win 20 bets in a row, you would expect him to perhaps lose at least 3 of his next 5 bets, just to begin to revert to his mean winning percentage???
Because putting all my cards on the table, my experience is that when I am patient and wait for 5 Bankers or Players to hit in a row, and then Martingale the next 8 hands, I lose fewer times, than when I just ignore what had happened in the last 5 hands, and just jump in and Martingale 8 hands in a row. Common sense just tells us, it is slightly less frequent to get 13 Banker Wins in a row, than just 8. That's why 99 percent of the people in the world, if having just seen a coin flip 5 Heads in a row, would take heads for the next flip.
@@grandflasherb Yes, I would give you even money that the player would not hit 3 of the next 5 hands after 20 banker wins or no matter what the previous 20 results were because I would have a 13.33% advantage or for every $100 we bet you would lose $13.30 because the player will not win 3 of the next 5 hands %53.125 of the time, only %46.875 of the time, ignoring ties.
@@grandflasherb ...regression to the mean is percetage based, not win count based. Take a 10, 100 & 1000 trials for example. As the number of trials increases, yes, the standard deviation from the mean decreases percentage wise but keeps increasing count wise. 10 games,+/-3.16 games , 100 games +/- 10, and 1000 games +/- 31.6 is the standard deviation. So the percentage can regresses to the mean without the win count getting lower
wow i like this betting system i will try this thanks!
Demo accounts on Roulette are always giving more "winnings" than real money Roulettes on the Internet.
🤔
Why shake so much
This is just a dumb system. Why not offset the betting amount and only bet the side where you are betting more. That would eliminate the unnecessary betting of both red and black, hence when green hit, you're not taking a double hit by bettong on both red and black. The casino loves this system for sure, it just gave the casino better odds. In roulette the casino wins because of the added zero and double zero. But betting this system, you're losing more when the zero or double zero hits, giving the casino more odds.
Hahahaha See This 2dollar or 1 dollar on both and every spin you win no matter how much but if 0 not come maximum time onscreen you win and dealer think oh how he experinced always winner hahaha😁😂 but stratgy for online rouletts
Hit green 2 times in a raw you would lose everything 😂 there is not system to beat roulette!!! It’s simple!!!!
Keep believing that😂
@@ruanoosthuysen5002 prove me wrong 😂
@@bodybuilder2194 Is it impossible to win 1 unit a day for say 50 years?
@Body True, there is no betting system that will beat roulette. Though, roulette is a game of physics, therefore beatable.
I thing you do not know matematica differential
No, It's a loosing system.
After loosing 3rd bet when you increase it to 6 units the profit will be of 6 units and that is our loss as we already lost 6 units 1+2+3= 6 .
So after winning on any bet after 3rd bet doesn't give you profit. It's an loss for us.
absolutely its aloosing system
Yea, you are fighting just to break even.
Kds-
this is so confusing.
Must be a joke. Hahahaha
For all those whom need it, read it.
I'm a sinner JESUS please forgive me for all my sins I know you shed your Blood for me on the cross at Calvary. Thank you JESUS for my salvation and for shedding they Blood for me. I love you JESUS.
Romans 10:5/10 ct...❤️k
JESUS Is Lord! Amen
This is a pointless system you're just going to be breaking even
You cant win, dont waste your time gambling
Pure martingale..... You lose
It is a modified Martingale.
You won't win or lose hahaha no good strategy. You must stay in one color. You are in equilibrum....🤣😭 you are wasting time for nothing🙃🙃🙃
PLEASE CUT THAT WIG unless youre casting for the Sequel of Cast Away cuz u look like Tom Hanks character after living on the island for 5 yrs
Ha! I've got a way better system
What an uncreative 💩 system. I always enjoy being mentally stimulated by complex systems that try to delay the negative EV as much as possible, especially cascading-upon-cascading bet spreads. But this Keefer is making money to tell people about a useless simple martingale variant that any idiot who plays roulette has thought of, and then on a -5.26% coinflip to boot? I should make an ebook and charge 5 bucks for my casino advice, at least I have easy positive +EV advantage play angles one wouldn't really think of. 😂
(And yes I know the expected value comes true in the end, no betting method beats it in the long run.)
this method is a waste
yeaah you are only using simulator to leak a paid book to get traffic and video views.
if i am the book writer, sure thing i will sue you 😂
what a great manner 😂
shame on you !!
Why are you upset with Michael? You're not the author of the book, are you? Does it make any difference if Michael makes a video on this system or if it is published as a free pdf?
Well, the author has a right to be critical with Michael but for anybody else it's simply none of your business!
@@MusikPiratCH - Learn to be profitable: ua-cam.com/video/60OB6IWTMpA/v-deo.html
@@rbt4919 It's simply not working! :P
@@MusikPiratCH - Is just complex and hard to understand how to use it. But is working better then anything you found until now.
Lol you mix single zero and double zero stats dude. Your stats are false. Also, there are people who win. Not everyone lose. You think you lose, everyone lose? Come on man, I think this is easy to understand. You doing exactly what a shill is doing😂
No, Michaels stats are right. You will lose 2.70% of your overall bets on single zero wheel (1/37), or even 5.26% on a double zero wheel (2/38). Odds will not change, whatever betting system you use.
@@kristofferkarlsson4260 I don't care about the odds mate. When I walk into the casino, I take $500 and go home. I could not care about 1% or 2%
rubbish system
what a great video thanks...