Just trying to help RG.
We find roulette interesting thats why I am here. Would never get negative only realistic.
I think the moving target should be the method we play not just a moving target within one method.
There are hundreds of methods on different forums. Play them all only once for a short time then never again.
The 1,2,3 concept was looked at extensively with CODE 4 (4 wide pattern 1,2,3,3 ect in all forms instead of 1,2,3), PATTERN BREAKER etc etc
CODE 4 will 100% fail longterm, but I am willing to gamble that I can win 100? units with it, but then never play the method again.
All methods when tested "longterm" will have many stretches were they win above average. When we start playing a method or testing a method and it is winning nicely we feel confident that we can play this method for years to come but this is not realistic unless it has been tested over a vast amount of spins and proven without a doubt to be so.
I think 90% of the time we play or test a method for the first time it will do just fine over ?500 spins perhaps ?2000 but inevitably wins and losses will average out, this is the name of the game.
I am just saying play a method for a short amount of time or until you lose a certain amount then never play the method again.
I think we might just come out ahead.
If anything, as you say, at least we are playing : )
We find roulette interesting thats why I am here. Would never get negative only realistic.
I think the moving target should be the method we play not just a moving target within one method.
There are hundreds of methods on different forums. Play them all only once for a short time then never again.
The 1,2,3 concept was looked at extensively with CODE 4 (4 wide pattern 1,2,3,3 ect in all forms instead of 1,2,3), PATTERN BREAKER etc etc
CODE 4 will 100% fail longterm, but I am willing to gamble that I can win 100? units with it, but then never play the method again.
All methods when tested "longterm" will have many stretches were they win above average. When we start playing a method or testing a method and it is winning nicely we feel confident that we can play this method for years to come but this is not realistic unless it has been tested over a vast amount of spins and proven without a doubt to be so.
I think 90% of the time we play or test a method for the first time it will do just fine over ?500 spins perhaps ?2000 but inevitably wins and losses will average out, this is the name of the game.
I am just saying play a method for a short amount of time or until you lose a certain amount then never play the method again.
I think we might just come out ahead.
If anything, as you say, at least we are playing : )