1

##### Roulette Strategy Discussion / Re: Are Some Bets Worse Than Others?

« Last post by**Fyodor**on

*»*

**Yesterday**at 11:03:22 PMMr Dobbelsteen, "two or three numbers has a very large DTOP"-What exactly does that mean?

I am unfamiliar with some of your terms, re explaining your POV.

I have read very complex articles and strategy descriptions in these forums, and do not understand most of them, to be honest.

All I know, for sure, is that covering fewer numbers gives me the best possible return, the least stress, and a satisfactory outcome.

And Reyth, if you would like to play a single number or split exclusively, why don't you?

And how do you describe that as "additional cost"?

And a single wager "split"-I could not do that.

I sort of understand you regarding the continuity sequence of the layout, as I regard the wheel (number) sequence, but, for me the wheel sequence allows a zone cover, similar to a near-neighbour wager on a "racetrack" layout.

The only way to secure a "splits" wager, is to fill in and cover the intervening number.

There are only three positions on the wheel where that happens naturally, and nowhere on the layout.

Like watching a real horse race, but with roulette there is only one "horse" to watch.

Even though we all know it will win, the question is, did you/me/we/everyone/anyone back it to win?

Mr Dobbelsteen is correct when he says there are an infinite number of systems for roulette, and, in my opinion there could be more than that (I know around one hundred), but I find the simplest solutions to be the most effective.

I am unfamiliar with some of your terms, re explaining your POV.

I have read very complex articles and strategy descriptions in these forums, and do not understand most of them, to be honest.

All I know, for sure, is that covering fewer numbers gives me the best possible return, the least stress, and a satisfactory outcome.

And Reyth, if you would like to play a single number or split exclusively, why don't you?

And how do you describe that as "additional cost"?

And a single wager "split"-I could not do that.

I sort of understand you regarding the continuity sequence of the layout, as I regard the wheel (number) sequence, but, for me the wheel sequence allows a zone cover, similar to a near-neighbour wager on a "racetrack" layout.

The only way to secure a "splits" wager, is to fill in and cover the intervening number.

There are only three positions on the wheel where that happens naturally, and nowhere on the layout.

Like watching a real horse race, but with roulette there is only one "horse" to watch.

Even though we all know it will win, the question is, did you/me/we/everyone/anyone back it to win?

Mr Dobbelsteen is correct when he says there are an infinite number of systems for roulette, and, in my opinion there could be more than that (I know around one hundred), but I find the simplest solutions to be the most effective.