+ Register

[Gizmotron]

If you don't have a verified edge then we are basically playing a guessing and betting game.  Gr8 variance no different than mine or yours.

The trick to winning is allowing yourself the chance to win. That's the edge. Gr8player has been alluding to this concept for years.

If you have a bet selection method, like I have, you have a method that produces every type of swing in expected durations. These durations can be used against the casino. A duration of a losing streak can be defended against by betting only the minimum allowed. A duration of moderate effectiveness can be treated as the same as negative duration. When you get into a winning streak you must attack with your current attacking level of play. This is an amount based on your bankroll & MM.

You use the power of your bet selection to produce these waves of durations. You must know how to handle the losing streaks. You can't avoid them.

A wise player knows from experience what a win streak looks like and how often they generally occur in a normal session of play. Wishful thinking and magical belief makes a poor substitute for ambitious and blind guising. Yes, you only have a guess. It's what you do with those guesses that makes the difference. I control the flow of changes and how they have an effect on my bankroll. There is no guessing involved in that.

[gr8player]

Well said, Giz, and, even more importantly, well played.

The savvy player learns exactly how to play those "swings", as you call them, or "variances", as I refer to them.

Lastly, as to the term "guessing", that's a rather nebulous term that can mean vastly different things to different players.  I, myself, inherently hold a rather negative view as it refers to that term.  I suppose that is due to the fact that I do not, ever, never, "guess".  IMHO, there simply exists no room in this game for any guesswork, either at the tables directly or even as it relates to one's general, overall thinking regarding same.

To my way of thinking regarding this game, there exists only statistics.  Proven statistics, based strictly upon my (and only mine) method of play, both bet selection- and money management-wise.  I make adjustments to my play based ONLY upon those proven statistics, both inter- and intra-session(s).

(Sidenote:  As I close this post, I wish to make it very clear that while there are players....Jimske, yourself, and various others....that do prefer to use the term "guess" and/or "guessing", and I do not; that does not make me right or them wrong.  More than likely, it probably could all come down to semantics, different terms for virtually the same thing.  So I am by no means knocking anyone's usages of any terms; this forum, nor any forum, can never prosper in that scenario, for only the unrestricted use and application of anyone's verbiage....assuming that it is kept civil....can and will serve as the vehicle that keeps us all moving forward within this forum.)

Take care, and stay well.

[Jimske]

You can call it semantics, Gr8, but there is an important difference between an edge and guessing.  An edge is when you can identify certain events in the past and predict with certainty some positive expectation.  That's an edge.  If you want to call it an educated guess that's fine.  The problem I have with the term edge and "personal variance and statistics" is that it portrays to the uninitiated that there is a true mathematical edge.  If only they could have the "right" bet placement.  Nonsense!

Now asymbacc says he HAS an edge.  A predictable advantage from some past set of circumstance.  That's an edge!  Except it's still a mystery.  got to wait for the book I guess.

[Jimske]

Speaking of nebulous, Gr8, Gizmo here is the master!

The trick to winning is allowing yourself the chance to win.

I'm speechless!  IOW, you got to bet in order to win?  Profound.

If you have a bet selection method, like I have, you have a method that produces every type of swing in expected durations.

So your bet selection actually produces the future events, huh?  Okay.  Can't argue with this "fact."     

These durations can be used against the casino. A duration of a losing streak can be defended against by betting only the minimum allowed.

My favorite.  Has it ever ocurred to you that a streak can only be identified AFTER the fact?  Apparently not.

A duration of moderate effectiveness can be treated as the same as negative duration. When you get into a winning streak you must attack with your current attacking level of play.

Another beaut.  So what is your definition of a winning streak?  WIAR? % WR?   

This is an amount based on your bankroll & MM.

Well, finally some sense to this post!  IMO, the biggest downfall of gamblers is too high of a bet spread.  When you lose that big recoup bet you're stuck with some hard decisions and either gonna win a LOT of "normal" base bets (unlikely) or have to go deeper (you in trouble).

You use the power of your bet selection to produce these waves of durations. You must know how to handle the losing streaks. You can't avoid them.

A wise player knows from experience what a win streak looks like and how often they generally occur in a normal session of play.

You seem to consider yourself very wise.  How about giving an example of what a win streak looks like and tell us how often they ocurr?  I'll go first.  MoSun Shoe #779 WLWWWLWWWWWWWWWWWLWLL Quit at hand #48.  Unusual but it happens.  I think my most ever WIAR was 12 so this 11 IAR close to a new high.  Maybe I'll get another one sooner than 5000 more hours of play?     Interestingly enough that was only a 57% WR in that shoe.

Wishful thinking and magical belief makes a poor substitute for ambitious and blind guising.

Is it me or does this make no sense at all?

Yes, you only have a guess. It's what you do with those guesses that makes the difference.

Gizmo is coming back to earth - fortunately!It's a guessing game and a betting game.  Why?  Because that's how you defeat a random EC game.

I control the flow of changes and how they have an effect on my bankroll. There is no guessing involved in that.

Giz apparently stopped smoking the weed now.  Yes, you got to control yourself but you can't predict the outcome.

Perhaps it would be a lot easier to just sing:  "got to know when to hold 'em, no when to fold 'em"   Doesn't that about sum up your theories?

J

[Gizmotron]

Jimske, Thanks for letting everyone know what you think. I can't help thinking that none of what you have to say are actually questions but rather so much rhetorical posturing. I'm very glad that you are where you are at, as a gambler, and/or as an internet forum pest. I will never respond to such a demanding beggar if this is where you are really stuck. And I think this is where you ARE really stuck. I actually want people to fail at gambling. I need that for the casinos to stay in business. So thanks for gambling.

Gr8, after your comments regarding "guessing," I'm willing to interject what it is exactly that I do. I probe three levels of triggers to see what consistencies are revealed among 12 different sets of dozens with considerations of their sleepers or singles. My probing produces exact results. There are decisions to be made even though there are no guarantees of the outcome. My method handles the losses easily. So I'm actually probing the real-time flow of randomness. When I see what I like, I place attacking bets. There is actually no guessing involved.

[WorldBaccaratKing]

Jimske, Thanks for letting everyone know what you think. I can't help thinking that none of what you have to say are actually questions but rather so much rhetorical posturing. I'm very glad that you are where you are at, as a gambler, and/or as an internet forum pest. I will never respond to such a demanding beggar if this is where you are really stuck. And I think this is where you ARE really stuck. I actually want people to fail at gambling. I need that for the casinos to stay in business. So thanks for gambling.

Gr8, after your comments regarding "guessing," I'm willing to interject what it is exactly that I do. I probe three levels of triggers to see what consistencies are revealed among 12 different sets of dozens with considerations of their sleepers or singles. My probing produces exact results. There are decisions to be made even though there are no guarantees of the outcome. My method handles the losses easily. So I'm actually probing the real-time flow of randomness. When I see what I like, I place attacking bets. There is actually no guessing involved.

BWHWHAHAHAHA!!!

Please, go back under whatever rock you crawled out from!!! I will keep it clean but you're probing is BSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS. Real time, lol, your real time is what you JUST SEEN which is the PAST. So, now bet what you just seen and it changes, you now bet again, changed again. So, your entire way of playing is flawed like your mind is warped. You have as much of an edge as I do, ZILCHHHHHHHHHHH. In your little brain you may "think" you have one, but we all know that is BS.

Post your 3 levels of triggers and I would bet a good amount that within a day, it will be debunked and proven it is CRAPPPOLLAAAAAAAA.

I certainly will not hold my breath, like most others on here, you talk and talk and talk and provide 0000000000000000000000000000000 substance, A WHOLE LOT OF FLUFF YOU DO ENTERTAIN US WITH!!!!!

Now, it's time to carry on with lunch. I actually stopped eating because I was so compelled to respond to you utter nonsense! Carry on.............

[Gizmotron]

BWHWHAHAHAHA!!!

Please, go back under whatever rock you crawled out from!!! I will keep it clean but you're probing is BSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS. Real time, lol, your real time is what you JUST SEEN which is the PAST. So, now bet what you just seen and it changes, you now bet again, changed again. So, your entire way of playing is flawed like your mind is warped. You have as much of an edge as I do, ZILCHHHHHHHHHHH. In your little brain you may "think" you have one, but we all know that is BS.

Post your 3 levels of triggers and I would bet a good amount that within a day, it will be debunked and proven it is CRAPPPOLLAAAAAAAA.

I certainly will not hold my breath, like most others on here, you talk and talk and talk and provide 0000000000000000000000000000000 substance, A WHOLE LOT OF FLUFF YOU DO ENTERTAIN US WITH!!!!!

Now, it's time to carry on with lunch. I actually stopped eating because I was so compelled to respond to you utter nonsense! Carry on.............

More rhetorical posturing... Real-time depends on the results of the latest bet. Thanks for stating the obvious. You are good at it. I'm just guessing, but you seem to think that the unknown future is something that I'm oblivious to. I have stated for years that my bet selection method produces three types of characteristics; "works great, works flat, or works badly." I win because I play the results that I'm getting. I suspect that you need to be hand fed like all beggars do. Thank you for gambling too.

P.S. "I've noticed that in EVERY forum that I see you participate, that your main complaint is that nobody is telling YOU how to win."  I just love this comment regarding you. That defines "BEGGAR" to a T.

[Jimske]

Jimske, Thanks for letting everyone know what you think. I can't help thinking that none of what you have to say are actually questions but rather so much rhetorical posturing. I'm very glad that you are where you are at, as a gambler, and/or as an internet forum pest. I will never respond to such a demanding beggar if this is where you are really stuck. And I think this is where you ARE really stuck. I actually want people to fail at gambling. I need that for the casinos to stay in business. So thanks for gambling.

Not to worry, Giz, most people here already know what I think.  "Demanding beggar"  "stuck"  ??     You sure you read my post?  Maybe it's time for you to come back down to earth from Uranus?

LMAO.  Good fodder!  Every once in a while we get someone who comes in intimating that the casinos may close if they find out their exclusive knowledge!  Of course they go on for months saying nothing.  So sorry I'm not a one to assuage your ego.  You types are itching to tell the world your secret but . ..  you can't otherwise the game will be ruined!  hehehehehe. 

Hey, Giz, you really got to look up the word "nebulous" re-read your post and reference something that is not hazy, vague, cloudy!  May I suggest you get together with asymbacc.  Perhaps you could write a chapter in his new book.

Gr8, after your comments regarding "guessing," I'm willing to interject what it is exactly that I do. I probe three levels of triggers to see what consistencies are revealed among 12 different sets of dozens with considerations of their sleepers or singles. My probing produces exact results. There are decisions to be made even though there are no guarantees of the outcome. My method handles the losses easily. So I'm actually probing the real-time flow of randomness. When I see what I like, I place attacking bets. There is actually no guessing involved.

Ahaha!  That explains everything!  Finally willing after over 600 posts!!!!!!!!!!!!  (frankly I never heard of you until these latest)  What were you writing about Hero?  Giz, you are not obligated to explain your winning ways.  But if you say you will then . . . just do and quit beating around the bush!  It's so very tiresome.

When I see what I like, I place attacking bets. There is actually no guessing involved.

I love it!  Can't make this stuff up!  Making the obvious seem profound, Giz?  Confessional:  I do as well.  I mean why not?  If you see something you like, after all?  I used to have a thing for redheads.  I still do but I have to keep it to myself else you know who will lock me out!

I better stick with Bacc Attack!  Too funny!

[gr8player]

The problem I have with the term edge and "personal variance and statistics" is that it portrays to the uninitiated that there is a true mathematical edge.  If only they could have the "right" bet placement.  Nonsense!

Hmmm....strange, a player such as yourself who's hitting at a 52% strike rate calling the "right" bet placement "nonsense".

It's not "nonsense" to know which circle to put your money into, Jimske; rather, it takes a keen sense of the game to do so, especially if one's goal (and it sure should be) is to keep those strike rates as high as possible.

And the kicker is:  A bet selection process that will carry a better than 50% strike rate over the long term will, inherently, maintain rather tight variance statistics; so much so that the serious player just might be able to profit from the "movements" and their corresponding "corrections".

The funny thing is, Jimske, you probably play virtually the same way I do, at least, in many ways....it's just that you do it without labeling it or even realizing it.  But, trust me, Jimske, you're hitting at over 50% for a reason and you're adjusting your bet sizes for a reason....you don't want to call it variance play, fine....but you're doing something right, and that's no "nonsense", my friend.

Stay well.

[Jimske]

Hmmm....strange, a player such as yourself who's hitting at a 52% strike rate calling the "right" bet placement "nonsense".

It's not "nonsense" to know which circle to put your money into, Jimske; rather, it takes a keen sense of the game to do so, especially if one's goal (and it sure should be) is to keep those strike rates as high as possible.

And the kicker is:  A bet selection process that will carry a better than 50% strike rate over the long term will, inherently, maintain rather tight variance statistics; so much so that the serious player just might be able to profit from the "movements" and their corresponding "corrections".

The funny thing is, Jimske, you probably play virtually the same way I do, at least, in many ways....it's just that you do it without labeling it or even realizing it.  But, trust me, Jimske, you're hitting at over 50% for a reason and you're adjusting your bet sizes for a reason....you don't want to call it variance play, fine....but you're doing something right, and that's no "nonsense", my friend.

Stay well.

No right bet placement because there are many.  People, IMO, make a big mistake searching for the optimum bet placement.  I did for years (still fool around with them from time to time-they're fun).  Yeah, I know we do have similar plays from past discussions. 

I get I have a reason to make every bet and an expectation of what I want/need to see in the immediate next several hands or else a red flag goes up!  That red flag is information I use to improve gain or reduce loss.  But after the red flag I got no idea which way it will turn, therefore, a guess!  LOL

I played BJ for years until I was flat betted.  I never knew what any outcome would be due to variance BUT I knew what my edge was up to 2% every hand.  That's the difference between a guess and an edge.

If guys like asymbacc and gizmo got some definitive bet placement and bet procedure to win let them say it or just shut up about it.  I recognize you don't claim to have a verifiable edge and kudos to you for that.

If I knew how to show someone how to win without any guesswork at all I wouldn't say or else I'd just sell it to some high rollers for a million bucks.  They would too and not be on some gambling site mouthing off.

[Gizmotron]

Post your 3 levels of triggers and I would bet a good amount that within a day, it will be debunked and proven it is CRAPPPOLLAAAAAAAA.

Have at it Burger King:

Code Select Expand


|       X |       X |    X    |    X    |
|-------------------| X       | X       |
| X       | X       |    X    |    X    |
| X       | X       |    X    |    X    |
|       X |    X    |       X | X       |
|       X |    X    | X       |       X |
|    X    | X       |    X    |    X    |
|    X    |       X |    X    |    X    |
|    X    | X       | X       |       X |
|       X | X       | X       | X       |
|    X    | X       |       X |       X |
| X       | X       |    X    |    X    |
| X       |    X    |    X    |    X    |
|-------------------| X       | X       |
|       X |    X    | X       |       X |
|       X | X       | X       |       X |    25 -- W
| X       | X       | X       | X       |    1 -- W
| X       |    X    | X       | X       |    2 -- W
|    X    | X       |       X |       X |    19 -- W
|    X    |       X |    X    |    X    |    24 -- W
| X       |    X    |    X    |    X    |    8 -- L
|    X    |    X    |       X |       X |    20 -- L
| X       |    X    |    X    |    X    |    11 -- W
|    X    |    X    |       X |       X |    20 -- W
|    X    | X       |    X    |    X    |    16 -- W
| X       | X       | X       |       X |    10 -- W
| X       |       X | X       |       X |    9 -- W
|    X    | X       | X       |       X |    13 -- L
|    X    |    X    |       X |       X |    20 -- W
|       X | X       | X       |       X |    25 -- L
|       X |       X |    X    |    X    |    30 -- W
|    X    |       X |    X    |    X    |    15 -- W
|    X    |       X |    X    |    X    |    24 -- W
|       X |    X    | X       |       X |    26 -- W
|    X    | X       |       X |       X |    22 -- W
|       X | X       |       X | X       |    31 -- W
| X       |    X    |    X    |    X    |    11 -- L
|    X    |    X    |    X    |    X    |    23 -- W
| X       |    X    | X       | X       |    2 -- L
| X       |       X |       X | X       |    6 -- L
|       X | X       |       X |       X |    34 -- W
|       X |    X    | X       |       X |    35 -- L
|       X |    X    | X       |       X |    26 -- W
|    X    |       X |       X | X       |    18 -- W
|       X |    X    | X       |       X |    26 -- W
|       X |    X    |       X | X       |    32 -- W
|    X    | X       |       X |       X |    22 -- W
| X       | X       | X       |       X |    10 -- L
|       X | X       | X       |       X |    25 -- W
|-------------------| X       | X       |    0  -- L
| X       |       X |       X | X       |    6 -- L
|    X    | X       |    X    |    X    |    16 -- L
|       X | X       | X       |       X |    25 -- W
|    X    |       X |    X    |    X    |    24 -- W
|    X    |    X    |       X | X       |    17 -- L



[Gizmotron]

Ahaha!  That explains everything!  Finally willing after over 600 posts!!!!!!!!!!!!  (frankly I never heard of you until these latest)  What were you writing about Hero?  Giz, you are not obligated to explain your winning ways.  But if you say you will then . . . just do and quit beating around the bush!  It's so very tiresome.

My three triggers are not the basic -- if you see (this) then do (that) kind of mechanics. They are tests to see which trigger is offering the strongest characteristic of global effectiveness. I've explained in detail what I mean by the global effect. In fact I've written extensively, at this forum exclusively, how I take characteristics and apply them to my bet selections. I've gone on to explain how these characteristics show phases of opportunities. I have even delivered my practice software so that you can prove to yourself how good you are.

Attacking me does not make you any more impressive than no doubt you are impressed with yourself.

[Gizmotron]

Jimske -

If guys like asymbacc and gizmo got some definitive bet placement and bet procedure to win let them say it or just shut up about it.  I recognize you don't claim to have a verifiable edge and kudos to you for that.

If I knew how to show someone how to win without any guesswork at all I wouldn't say or else I'd just sell it to some high rollers for a million bucks.  They would too and not be on some gambling site mouthing off.

Bring me a Million-Dollar High-Roller, that closes the deal, and I'll put 10% in the closing Escrow for making that deal.

I have it. I will never share it here. It's dangerous knowledge that would wreck table games of chance. How do I know this? Because I can easily code it as an algorithm. And an algorithm is mathematical proof of concept. You don't know why I'm here. It's legacy, I'm going to die of heart failure. This forum is the only place I have disclosed any clues. It's almost all here. I have no tolerance for lazy backbiters. You are not fun. Winning is fun. Why don't you try it. The knowledge I have disclosed is the definitive work on gambling and randomness studies. I dare you to find a greater compilation of randomness characteristics with regards to Roulette anywhere on the internet. I'm just grateful that Victor has this forum still active.

[AsymBacGuy]

Now asymbacc says he HAS an edge.  A predictable advantage from some past set of circumstance.  That's an edge!  Except it's still a mystery.  got to wait for the book I guess.

It's not the past to influence the future, it's just the rules and the nature of the game which RESTRICT the possible outcomes.

as.
   

[Jimske]

It's not the past to influence the future, it's just the rules and the nature of the game which RESTRICT the possible outcomes.

as.
   

I get that and don't necessarily refute such.  It's just that, frankly, we've been hearing a lot about that but . . . where's the beef?