Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
Genuine winner roulette system and computers
Forum Login
Login Name: Create a new account
Password:     Forgot password

Roulette Forum | www.RouletteForum.net    Main Message Boards    Roulette Challenges  ›  Genuine winner roulette system and computers Moderators: Administrator Group
Users Browsing Forum
No Members and 1 Guests

Genuine winner roulette system and computers  This thread currently has 159,327 views. Print
37 Pages « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ... » All Recommend Thread
lanky
October 17, 2008, 4:45pm Report to Moderator
Still in Diapers
Posts: 34
[quote][Either way, Lanky you will see whatever you need to see, but if the wheel being used will be an issue, we should wait for my Mk7 Huxley wheel to arrive - we can do testing on both. Bago will say the Mk7 used voodoo magnets or something or that it wasn't in a real casino so it doesn't count. I was originally told the mk7 would arrive late October, and I'm waiting for actual dates for arrival. Perhaps to start though, I'll send you a DVD of a roulette computer test that isnt published on my web site. I'll send an email about this. It will at least get the ball rolling with validation of my claims./quote]

Hi Forum.

Steve has since contacted me by Email to which I replied with My mailing Address.

If it will help with the Test being seen as even more Impartial then I think it is a good idea to wait for the new wheel to be delivered.

I have told Steve that it would be OK but that I need a 2-3 weeks notification time frame so that I can make arrangements from My end.

OK Gang everyone is now up to date with what is happening .
If there is any thing further that develops We will keep You all posted as the test gets closer to being done.

Your Friend.

Lanky.


Logged Offline
Reply: 45 - 551
Roulette physics system Roulette computer devices
Ronjo
October 18, 2008, 8:49pm Report to Moderator
Medium Member
Posts: 243
Quoted from Steve
I have contacted Lanky but he hasnt responded. If anyone knows him well enough, or if they know Kelly or someone else that is appropriate, please encourage them. I too would like this sorted out, but I dont have the time to go chasing it down every day. In particularly people like Kelly would only need to see some of my system material to know the system is legit, as Kelly is familiar with visual ballistics which are just a part of what I teach. I'd prefer Kelly to come as he is better known but Lanky would be welcome too. Anyone else here interested to visit me with airfares/accomodation paid? The demos will be recorded but your face of course wont be shown. I already have audio from many demos available, especially of the hybrid and each go for a few hours but before they are released I need to spend censoring the audio. With this proposed public challenge I want to make virtually all of it freely available.


Hi Steve
Have I misunderstood you,as you have said above that if  anyone interested to visit you with airfares and accomadation paid.I apologise if I have misunderstood,unfortuantly my budget will only allow me to travel in February next year.Anyway Steve I wish you all the best with your project.

Regards,
Ronjo.

Logged Offline
Reply: 46 - 551
Steve
October 20, 2008, 6:59am Report to Moderator

Administrator Group
Posts: 2,668
Hi Ronjo, sorry for the misunderstanding. I only agreed to pay costs for one person, but anyone can attend if they pay their own way.
Logged
Site Reply: 47 - 551
lanky
October 20, 2008, 9:12am Report to Moderator
Still in Diapers
Posts: 34
Hi Forum.

This was from Kelly over on Victor's Forum.

Lanky:

What is it exactly Steve is going to show ? What will be the MO for convincing the people present ?

Since I ain`t going I can tell you though what I would note from the spins apart from comparing his predictions with my own predictions.

1. Wheel speed.
2. Predicted number.
3. Strike number and strike diamond.
4. Top/middle/bottom strike of diamond.
5. Final number.

If I get these data, I can make a model that relates prediction, scatter and outcome into a model where we see amount of lucky hits and predicted hits and the tilt level of the wheel and also the scatter.

There are several scenarios. He might produce a session with hardly no hits, but actually good predictions but bad luck. Or vice versa, poor predictions and lots of lucky strikes. Or something in between. From the data above, you can mix and cross match a lot ot things and get some surprising but straight forward information. The downside is, that it actually takes quite an amount of data to build a proper model and people usually gets careless and bored during such a session and misses the strike number, (Strike Number is the number passing below the diamond as the balls strikes this diamond).

A simple prediction versus outcome number gives a very weak analyse. You can make a simple cross scheme where you have P as the predicted number and the outcome number as "+3" meaning it landed 3 pockets from prediction. That IS a part of the analyse, but only a fraction.

Now, as I would rather NOT be involved with ANY of the computer vendors on the scene I would rather stay absoloutely out of it. The history of the 3 vendors is long and filled with mudthrowing and web spamming against each other. I won`t be a part of that.

But feel free to ask if you have a question or you need something to look for.
Logged Offline
Reply: 48 - 551
lanky
October 20, 2008, 9:14am Report to Moderator
Still in Diapers
Posts: 34
My Reply to Kelly's Post.

Hi Kelly.

Mate this is a quote from Steve on His Forum.


Quote
In particularly people like Kelly would only need to see some of my system material to know the system is legit, as Kelly is familiar with visual ballistics which are just a part of what I teach. I'd prefer Kelly to come as he is better known but Lanky would be welcome too.

As You can see He wanted You as the main Tester & I could attend if I wanted to.

Kelly I am quite happy to stand aside for Either You or Victor to be the one that gets their Expenses paid to do this with Steve.

You are both  much more experienced with this type of advantage play then I am.

If You or Victor takes Steve up on it I will play a backseat roll to You or Victor & I will pay My own expenses to get there.

It would be great if We could Meet.

Your Friend.

Lanky.  

Logged Offline
Reply: 49 - 551
Steve
October 20, 2008, 4:03pm Report to Moderator

Administrator Group
Posts: 2,668
Lanky, I read on VLS that Kelly doesn't want to get involved. Thats ok. My primary goal for arranging all this is to dispel myths and absolute rubbish from various people like Mark Howe, Forester, and the occasional 'young' player like Bago who didn't understand what they were doing. You dont need to be a roulette guru to know fact from fiction if you see me in person - you'll see everything you need with your own eyes. Ultimately the ideal person needs to be well known on forums, with at least a moderate knowledge of roulette so you understand concepts I'll present you with. Most of all, the ideal person needs to be trusted by others, which is why you fit the bill.

There are many examples of 'dispelling myths' but one is: you'll see Forester's different diamond test, and you'll see the results are quite the opposite to what Forester claims my computer achieves. You'll also see how my 'paper system' works - of course not all of it (not even players see that), but more than enough for you to know it is legitimately effective. If you understand enough about roulette, shortly after explaining what my methods consist of, it should be quite clear my methods are legitimate. Many of the principles will not need demonstration, only some may depending on your level of experience.

I plan to publish an itinerary of what we'll cover, which includes very specific false claims to refute. Any reasonable person would know who has been lying, and who has been honest. I don't aim to humiliate anyone who spread false information, for whatever reason. My only intention is to let the truth be known.

PS - Someone on VLS asked how a computer can be used wrong. Well you can test on a PC's skipping DVD player as Bago did (he ignored my advice not to do this), you can use the wrong settings for different types of ball deceleration, you can completely misunderstand how a feature is used, and the list goes on. The computer is just a tool and nothing more, and it needs correct use.
Logged
Site Reply: 50 - 551
lanky
October 23, 2008, 12:19pm Report to Moderator
Still in Diapers
Posts: 34
Hi Forum.

Iwonder & I spoke on the phone for 2 hrs+ Yesterday about the upcoming Challenge.

He is a great bloke with no BS in Him.

He is a very hard working successful Family man that works long hours.

Seeing as though it looks like Ronjo won't be coming Iwonder agreed to participate in it with Me.

He has agreed as I have that it can be filmed as long as there is no face shots.
(although in my case it would be good to hang over the Fireplace to scare the Children away from it)

I think this is the best course of action as that way it can then be seen as be being totally impartial Report back to Both Forums by the Two of us.

And seeing as it would involve about 4 hrs per day Iwonder would prefer that the Challenge took place on Sunday & Monday as that would help Him with His Work & Family Commitments.

I have agreed to this as well as long as it can be arranged by Steve on those days.
If not then it will have to be on other Days.

We will await Your reply on this Steve.

OK so now everyone is up to date with what is going to happen in the future.


Your Friend.

Lanky.
Logged Offline
Reply: 51 - 551
Steve
October 23, 2008, 11:08pm Report to Moderator

Administrator Group
Posts: 2,668
Hi Lanky, thanks.

1. I dont mind people knowing I'm sending you a roulette computer for testing, just as long as you dont reveal the details of it to anyone. You are probably going to have quite a few people that will contact you to suss out information, but you must keep answers direct and brief - even better perhaps you can write a summary of findings and leave it at that - this way, no accidental leak would occur. We can sort our how we should present your findings later - in a way that gives enough information, but not too much. People like Mark Howe will probably try to suss out information under fake names. For example, with the different diamond test, by all means state how close predictions were to each other and how many seconds before the ball falls were predictions made - this says nothing about features though. You can also verify that I didnt just send you a computer loaded with only a few numbers, like Forester said I probably did in my video demos because he didn't want to believe he's wrong. Sorry Forester, you and the people you have lied to (and they believed you) are in for a surprise.

2. No problems with Iwonder. As per my email I'd just like to speak with him first. Iwonder please contact me via email and specify your phone and best time(s) to call.

3. Sunday-Monday is fine, I'm flexible.

To everyone following this: I'm still waiting for word about exactly when my Huxley Mk7 wheel will arrive. We need the new wheel for the in-person demos, and we cant make Lanky's bookings until the wheel is sorted out. So for now, I'm sending a computer to Lanky so he can test and report back. I have no doubt what Lanky will report will be enough to convince many people already, but this is just the first part. I'm not jumping the gun with your opinions Lanky, I am just confident with my computer.

On a final note, I'm really very pleased to be doing this and it should have been done a long time ago. Unfortunately many of you believed blatant lies about me, from others who put egos and business before truth. \Those that know me here but prefer to stay out of it are right to do so. Arguments lead to unintentional release of secrets and you are best to just get on with the job. Also Kelly, rest assured while I'm spending time on all this, my players are out making money. You can make a lot more with teams than just playing by yourself. Speaking of which, always looking for more partners (serious players): http://www.roulettecomputers.com/partners.html
Logged
Site Reply: 52 - 551
Steve
October 27, 2008, 7:30am Report to Moderator

Administrator Group
Posts: 2,668
It appears Mark Howe is now posting at VLS under fake names. He's clearly not wanting this challenge to proceed and is trying everything possible. He is obviously "John" on VLS going on about the fact that I have a conviction against my name. It is all explained in detail at http://www.genuinewinner.com/rentech.htm - how is it relevant to my company, my technology and the competence of my staff? It's not. When you lie about my technology, you are also lying about my staff who are extremely good at what they do. I supect Moccoman is also Mark Howe. After his prepared speech about how I'm a con man, he said:

Quoted Text
"So Lanky, you should be "pulling the pin" on this real quick and don't get conned by his smooth talking."


What are you afraid of Mark? Is claiming I'm just a "smooth talker" really how you explain obvious truth I state? If all the rubbish you've said about me is true, then wouldn't this challenge only help you? Yes I'll show Lanky your computer too, but that's not why he's coming. I dont think there's a person on any of the forums that doesn't know about the Rentech case but it is not going to stop validation of your competitor's technology. What's next Mark? Do you suggest that when Lanky receives the free test computer I'm sending him, he should he just promptly return it? Of course you are afraid of what he'll find.

Kelly, you said:

Quoted Text
"The Cammegh wheel has at a certain speed an effect that causes the ball to stick at the strike number. 0.05 sec. slower or faster, the ball will just travel on past the strike number."


Correct Kelly. Every wheel tends to have at least one "sweet speed range". My computers can isolate to specific wheel speeds, or give the optimal prediction for the specific wheel speed. Idiots like Bago and Forester claim it doesnt deal with different wheel speed which is completely backwards. Sure my computers can use the standard scatter graph too, but it is nowhere near as 'capable'. Without it, as with Mark's and Forester's computer, on many wheels you would get near random predictions, as Barnett found with Forester's computer (and this is assuming the computer correctly predicts rotor strike point). Forester's computer doesnt even have an in-built scatter chart. Forester's computer doesn't even correctly predict the rotor strike point - he does an estimation based on when a ball speed is reached which is not good enough for many wheels. Even the estimation is often not good enough because no wheel is perfectly level. According to Forester, the zaps were best, of course until he made FFA - Forester claims whatever he is doing is best... until he changes it. There are many problems with Forester's computers and I could go on forever. He is so egotistical that truth goes out the window. Kelly if you saw what my computers do, you would understand just how full of it people like Bago and Forester are.

Now as for Bago, I know you are young but your personality is bordering on a sociopath - not everyone on the forums know you as well as I do. You are disliked on forums because of your poor and very immature attitude. Is it plain immaturity or an actual mental condition, who knows but you often sound an awful lot like Mark Howe. A few of your points are addressed below:

Quoted Text
The test would be on 300 spins with no differenciation between wheel speeds, we only note what number is below the striked diamond or the number striked directly by the ball, and the final number. Why this test little moron?. Because Stefano's computer does not deal with different wheel speeds. Why? Because it has only one jump graph (ball scatter) whatever the wheel speed you clocked. If the wheel speed is at 2sec or at 6sec, and you get the predict 10, enter the final outcome, let's say Zero, then in your graph you will have a bar chart at +18. Stefano's computer does not have any accuracy to determine ball scatter from one precise wheel speed, it MIX them, exactly as my test. And again, my test would show a BEST 1 in 25 hit rate if you would have played the peak on modern level wheels, AND WITH 100% ACCURACY OF KNOWING WHERE THE BALL STRIKES THE ROTOR!.
So it is impossible with a button switch used by a human to achieve a 1 in 15 hit rate on modern wheels. This is a very big lie, we smell the affiliate promotor who wants to catch fishes who do not know the game.


Actually Bago, you can isolate wheel speed if you like which is a feature that has always been there, or you can use the feature that selects the optimal prediction based on wheel speed at ball fall time - it can be set automatically or manually. 1 in 15 on a Starburst is certainly not out of the question. Really I dont know how many times you can make an idiot of yourself.

Quoted Text
Oh and should I add a big proof from his ebook instruction that Stefano's computer is completely obsolete when wheel speed varies like in Casino environment? "You should ideally not use more than TEN values. This is because the smaller the wheel speed range, the more spins that are rejected, but the better the scatter pattern will be, and the more accurate predictions will be. What does it mean? It means that Stefano judges that using more than TEN values in the wheel samples would give completely random predictions. If the computer would have been accurate with wider wheel samples, he would have said: use not more than 20 wheel samples, but no, he wrote TEN. Let's see what is the wheel speed interval when you are using TEN values: Let's take a wheel speed that is very common in Casinos, 3sec:
3000-3000-3033-3033-3100-3100-3167-3167-3200-3267 That's it, you are playing with a wheel speed that must be between 3sec and let's say 3,3sec, otherwise, every predictions are rejected. That's how Stefano instructs you on how to apply the computer successfully. I guess he never played in a real Casino with it, because if he did, he would have never wrote this. Tightening to this point, you will get a 1 in 10 predictions. Let's say you are using the computer for 8 hours in the Casino, 40 spins an hour, 320 spins in 8 hours, you will have at the end of the qualification (meaning to know the ball offset comparing to prediction only possible with an EARPIECE), you will have 32 values in your ball jump graph. WOW."


Bago, what about this are you finding difficult? Let's say you had a wheel that spun 3000 - 4000MS per revolution, and using 10 values you isolated to 3000 - 3500MS. That would mean you get predictions about half the time, but when you get them, they are more accurate. Do you really want to use the computer on EVERY spin, or is that just stupid and likely to get you noticed by casino staff? But let's say you wanted to get 100% of predictions - simply use a larger range. Wow, that was really, really hard. Fair enough if you cant understand more complex features, but you didn't even understand this extremely basic feature.

Now let's say you wanted to get more predictions but rotor speed was critical - ie if you didnt want to isolate wheel speeds, and you wanted the computer to find the relationship between strike point on the rotor, wheel speed and offset - the computer does that either manually or automatically. But there's something else before that - the ball is not necessarily going to strike the rotor where the ball reaches a certain speed. You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about - or maybe you do, but just don't have the honesty to admit you were wrong. Even so, being a "grown-up" means putting the truth before being "right", but you remind me of a child stomping his feet.

Quoted Text
I don't care at all if your are the owner of this small house, or another owner is renting it to you, or you rent yourself this house. It really does not change the fact that you are not a multi-millionnaire in assets or making 400,000$/year. Thanks for the page though, it shows that this house is rented for 450$/month, as if a multi-millionnaire would buy this sort of small houses and make only 450$ a month, what a joke.


If you didn't care, then why publish it in your post? Because you tried to embarrass me, but only embarrassed yourself so now you backpedal and say you don't care. Also Bago, it is $450 per WEEK, not month, which is at the upper end of the scale for rental properties. How many properties do you own Bago, or do you still live with your parents? Actually not that it's relevant, I earn more than the stated figure - as I said it was only one revenue source. Good for you if you find it difficult to accept I dont care.

As for your dealer signature claims, YES dealer signature is part of what I teach. But as Theo pointed out it is only one of the modules, and I advise against using it because there are better ways to beat roulette. You never had the other modules because you never bought my system Bago. Other modules also cover VB with a stopwatch, thumpers etc not that you had any idea about it. All you had about my system was a free pdf that is floating around and that's all you were ever going to get because you are incredibly far from a trustworthy person. I'll cover all this with Lanky anyway.

Bago, I'm really done responding to your stupid comments. You are progressively getting angrier and more aggressive each time I correct you. Every time you post absolute rubbish indicating you really dont know what you are talking about. Even Kelly recognized how you twisted information and said "This is just another example of how you can twist a correct example into something negative.". I'm not sure if you are genuinely stupid, or just latching onto anything you can use to manipulate people. I think it is actually a combination of both. Do you have any concept of how much your own stupidity has cost you? Obviously not. Bago, the bottom line here is Lanky is going to see it all for himself. People are going to take his word over yours.

PS - Bago you signed your post:

Quoted Text
LOLOLOL. Bago, the truth exposer at your service.


My word, you are a complete utter dickhead Tony - that's the best way I can describe you and we really should say it as it is. It is not just your age because I know many people your age, and they don't act anywhere near like you. I'm really looking forward to this challenge. When people on forums constantly type rubbish like "LOLOLOL", such people don't usually have anything valuable to offer - just like Mark Howe - I think he wore out the L and O keys on his keyboard. Being embarrassed will not make you laugh Bago, and typing LOL wont convince people otherwise. Sorry if you are being made a fool out of, but you really did bring it on yourself. When I embarrassed Mark, it was not intentional - I was just defending myself. It only made him try harder, and it ended up embarrassing him more - he just didn't know when to quit and kept trying to get the better of me. Mark ended up accusing me of ruining his life but like I told him, he did it all himself - all I did was defend myself. I'm not interested in attacking anyone, just making truth known, and if that embarrasses people for lies they've told, too bad, it is not my doing. I have tried to make peace with you, Forester and even Mark, but all three of you are complete dickheads who are not interested in the truth.

Quoted Text
I am exposing you so easily and freely that you can't stand it so you need to lie more and more, saying ridiculous statements that make everyone laugh?


Who's "everyone"? You and Mark's 101 fake names? The fact is most "reasonable" people, even those that are skeptical after all the rubbish that has been spread by morons, probably appreciate that I'm stepping forward for an honest validation of my claims. I dont need to do this, but I want the truth to be known. The reason you and Mark are attacking me for merely stepping forward are varied. You both have something to lose from me being honest. As was said previously, instead of having a "we will see" attitude like the adults here, you attack me like a child. Mark is even trying to convince Lanky to avoid visiting me which is needless to say pathetic and cowardly. I suggest everyone that has lied about me cop it on the chin and take it like a man, which includes you Bago, Forester, Forester's blind followers who actually believed him, players I've banned and wanted revenge, Mark, and his 101 fake names. Coolpaddy said it well as below:

Quoted Text
Bago, You are just a very angry individual - your use of foul language, lies and insults to, and about myself and those other members interested in the truth betrays your lack of real conviction. Steve is willing to have his system tested by a real expert. That is what this challenge is all about. There is real confidence and courage in his initiative. You are sadly lacking in both of those qualities.


Thankyou Coolpaddy.

Lanky, I'll send you the computer today or tomorrow. The instructions are being updated and should be finished by the time you receive the computer.
Logged
Site Reply: 53 - 551
Steve
October 29, 2008, 1:43pm Report to Moderator

Administrator Group
Posts: 2,668
Lanky, the computer is on it's way sent overnight express, so will be there tomorrow. Have a play around with it at your leisure and get back to me.
Logged
Site Reply: 54 - 551
Vincent
October 30, 2008, 7:28am Report to Moderator
Guest User
How will you present the results, a 5 hour a test video?
Logged
E-mail Reply: 55 - 551
Steve
October 30, 2008, 10:51am Report to Moderator

Administrator Group
Posts: 2,668
Vincent, what results do you mean? There will be a lot of different parts to validations of my claims. We'll just take it as it comes. Something like a 5 hour video test is INSUFFICIENT proof. Why insufficient? Because success or failure can be put down to luck. For any effective "test", it needs to be over a larger amount of spins. So how is this remedied? A few ways, but mainly validation of the actual working principles, and details of exactly where the player gets their edge. As just one example, I will explain and demonstrate how at least three of the custom variant patterns occur. Lanky and Iwonder of course wont see 'everything' (not even my players see 'everything'), but they'll see more than enough to know whether I actually know what I'm talking about, or if I'm plain full of it.

If you mean specifically how results will be presented so everyone knows fact vs fiction, that is yet to be decided but we'll have at least:

1. Statements from Lanky and Iwonder that will address numerous claims from people like Forester, Bago and Mark Howe. Then people can see just how 'liar liar pants on fire' these people are.

2. Video/audio of the meeting with Lanky and Iwonder.

I wont need to demonstrate Howe's and Foresters computers and explain the limitations, and compare them to my computers, but I will anyway. Mark Howe's computer is absolutely pathetic - it is very clearly a scam. Forester's computer has merit, but has a lot of major problems he either lies about, or really just doesn't know. We're not going to spend much time on them though.

Regarding validations, as it turns out, we're starting with just sending a computer for testing to Lanky.

Additionally, I just spoke to Iwonder (the other person who will meet me), and I'm sending him a computer too. The main claim I want Lanky and Iwonder to validate is: when testing the computer on the same spin repeatedly, after the initial sample, virtually all predictions are within a 6 pocket arc. Once the computer has fully learned the ball, virtually all predictions are within a 3 pocket arc. On the occasional spin, a prediction will be outside the arcs for reasons like a few bad clicks, but they'll at least be very close to within the arc. Once this is validated, then all of Forester's claims are clearly refuted. Also Bago's (Tony) claims will be refuted too, and since Mark Howe just copies what Bago and Forester says, his false claims will be refuted too. Such a simple test, and a simple principle, but it has very big implications. Who knows what these three will say as an excuse. Bago has already said rubbish like I'll probably bribe them. Forester has said I would probably just load the phone with only a few numbers which is just as stupid, because Lanky and Iwonder were not born yesterday and can do whatever tests they want.

To Forester, Mark and Bago, I have no intentions of embarrassing you, only clearing my name of your, well, bullshit claims. Anyway so it's all starting with the roulette computer, but we'll cover the roulette system (no electronics) in time too. Validation of the system is a bit more involved though, and that is best done in person. Of course the computers will be covered again in person, and it will be filmed (video/audio) will be free to download.
Logged
Site Reply: 56 - 551
lanky
October 30, 2008, 3:05pm Report to Moderator
Still in Diapers
Posts: 34
Hi Forum.

Its 4.pm Thursday here now.

I have just recieved the package. (no instruction etc)

I may be busy for th next day or two and won't be able to test this thing yet.
But by Sat or Sun everything should be OK.

Steve ring Me please so I can get this thing to charge stage.

Lanky.

Ps..I have no interest in what Mr.Howe or Mr.Forrester does or has.(I am not there to test their things)
As far as I am concerned this will be strictly about what Steve has or does not have that works or does not work.

Logged Offline
Reply: 57 - 551
Steve
October 30, 2008, 3:09pm Report to Moderator

Administrator Group
Posts: 2,668
Lanky, I emailed you the instructions. Check your PM.
Logged
Site Reply: 58 - 551
lanky
October 30, 2008, 3:34pm Report to Moderator
Still in Diapers
Posts: 34
Hi Steve.

We have a problem.

Read Your Pm Mate.

Lanky.
Logged Offline
Reply: 59 - 551
37 Pages « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ... » All Recommend Thread
Print

Roulette Forum | www.RouletteForum.net    Main Message Boards    Roulette Challenges  ›  Genuine winner roulette system and computers

Thread Rating
There is currently no rating for this thread