Hi Guys & Gals
Well I've been lurking around the site for a while, and have yet contributed to the cause.
So to get things rolling, I've created an " IDEA " and not a system per say.
However you use it...is up to you.
I created an excel sheet ( Libreoffice calc ) which I will NOT be sharing cause my excel programming SUXS big time.
So as to not embarrass myself, I leave it up to the forum gurus to program a BEAUTIFUL sheet that can be shared.
I must say that this IDEA is for RNG only.
I'm pitting Random vs Random. ( I think )
Step one is to create a 6X6 grid.
Step two is to create a button so we can put 36 numbers in that grid and change them at will.
Now having done that, we can see in our grid that we have 4 sets of 3X3 grids. So 4 sets of 9 numbers.
Step 3 is to setup the stats for those 4 sets of 9 to see how many hits we have per set.
Then we logon to our favourite online casino and start introducing numbers into our excel sheet.
We will see the stats start to change as per those numbers.
Now usually we will see on let's say our first 12 numbers, stats like 4 4 3 1 ( meaning set 1 hit 4 times, set 2 hit 4 times, set 3 ... 3 times and set 4 ... 1 hit only. )
Now the fun begins.
Press your SORT button that you created so we can rearrange the 36 numbers into new positions in the grid. This will create 4 new sets of 9 numbers.
The STATS will change for these new sets.
I keep pressing till I get STATS like 7 3 1 1 where there is a set with an overall advantage to the other sets.
My strategy is to play 18 numbers ( two sets ) from the new sets which is like playing an EC game.
I chose the two highest sets 7 and 3 and play these two sets with a marty or whatever progression you prefer for your EC game.
As you can see by looking for sets that have unfair stats ( not evenly distributed ), we are bringing random to the table and not the other way around.
We are finding sets of 9 numbers that are tailored to the numbers that hit.
I hope everyone gets the jist of this IDEA. And also that some NICE forum member with excel skills will create a sheet and share it for the forum
I think this is a NEW idea cause from all my years in the Forums I've never seen this.
Good luck to all and enjoy.
Buffster
In the spirit of friendship and harmony I want to tell you about some things that are true of the game of Roulette, as it pertains to randomness. It is impossible to avoid the sequence that kills. You can create the most complex set of instructions, to create the most diverse set of selections and level of bets, and none of that will protect your system from running into the sequence of death. The only way to beat Roulette is to win more than the balance point of your bet technique. It would help if you know what balance point means.
Quote from: Buffster on March 14, 2013, 06:49:19 PM
I keep pressing till I get STATS like 7 3 1 1 where there is a set with an overall advantage to the other sets.
My strategy is to play 18 numbers ( two sets ) from the new sets which is like playing an EC game.
I chose the two highest sets 7 and 3 and play these two sets with a marty or whatever progression you prefer for your EC game.
Hi Buffster, welcome to the forum. I'm assuming you're the same Buffster who used to post at GG in days of old?
Can you explain a little more what you mean by "overall advantage"? I'm assuming this means an imbalance and that you're basically betting on "hot" sets?
cheers.
Buffster, What an ingenious aspect of using your imagination. I congratulate you on taking the discussion of randomness forward.
I let sequences of positive associations come to me, because they are identified as states of continuation. These associations are in the form of fabricated characteristics that only exist in my mind, a kind of working syntax. But you have blown the lid off of everything. My years of experience tells me to capitalize on moments that appear to be continuing opportunity. That can be trends, the absence of trends, and pattern formations. But you have taken the meaning of groupings out of groups. You just bang away to find the grouping that fits the recent past the best. I love this.
I'll build an app that does this, but it will bang away until it hits a configuration that fits the seven / three scenario with just one button click. You have found a way to beat Roulette by throwing out the basic weakness of the human mind. Now the focus can be on effectiveness after one step. The world just changed. Did you notice it?
Now that the lid is blown off, I'll add these features to the steps. A configuration for patterns, singles, and dominance must be built. I can now build my software, a validation of concept, in a fraction of the time. Thank you for this giant leap forward.
Hi Bayes
Yes, I'm Buffster from GG with TG and Ken and all then rest. I've always been around but wasn't participating very much.
As for overall advantage .... I'm not a MATH guy but I'm assuming ( oh oh ) that if I find 4 sets of 9 numbers that one set is hitting way out of order compared to the other. There must be some advantage to this. Please correct me if I'm wrong. What I'm saying is if we're playing with only 4 original sets of 9 and there all hitting without any noticeable difference than what's stopping us from finding 4 other sets that will fit our situation better. That will be conforming to the hit numbers.
That's the only way I can explain it Bayes.
Thanks for the interest.
Buffster
In the spirit of friendship and harmony, Gizmo, could you
please explain what a balance point in roulette is. Thanks
in advance.
Hi Gizmotron
I know there is always that sequence from hell. There is no going around it.
But I'm glad to see this IDEA sparked something in you that may change the way we play roulette.
Just to clarify things a bit more... I'm not necessarily playing repeats...the 4 sets of 9 also contain numbers that haven't hit yet. So the set that is hitting more than others could be due to only 2 or 3 numbers from that set having hit repeatedly. Making this set stand out. So we play these numbers hoping that the set keeps on hitting. ( I play two sets of nine ... the two sets that have the best stats. )
Also the 7 3 1 1 scenario is not a magic numbers stat... but only an example ... the stats could also be higher 9 2 1 0 lets say.
If you can apply this to other locations on the board ... wonderful
Keep the juices flowing
Buffster
Quote from: spike on March 14, 2013, 08:03:11 PM
In the spirit of friendship and harmony, Gizmo, could you
please explain what a balance point in roulette is. Thanks
in advance.
As you say, the best balance point is for even chance bets. It pays 1/1, you must win one out of two bets to balance. I hope I can at least assume that you understand me so far. It takes two bets to have a balance point for all even chance bets. In this case this is equivalent to 18 numbers selected, any 18 numbers per bet.
All 1/2 bets, bets that pay two to one, that's any 12 numbers have a balance point
also.
Continued...
Any time you bet on two dozens, any 24 numbers selected, it takes three separate spins to reach a balance point. You must have two wins for every loss in order to balance.
Quote from: Gizmotron on March 14, 2013, 08:32:49 PM
As you say, the best balance point is for even chance bets. It pays 1/1, you must win one out of two bets to balance.
This has to do with the layout and not random. Random
doesn't know what a balance point is. Its always seeking
to balance itself, but never achieves it. In fact, the farther
you take a stream of random numbers, the farther away
from balance it gets.
"""In fact, the farther
you take a stream of random numbers, the farther away
from balance it gets."""
I don t agree with this.
Spike, I get what you are saying. I think that playing on balance as an expectation is a fallacy. You can use it as a bet selection, but it will never work in a predictable way that makes you win more than you lose. My version of balance point is purely about the money. If you flat bet on even chance then you need to win one of two bets to break even. So my definition of balancing comes from breaking even.
Perhaps I should stop using balance point.
Quote from: Razor on March 14, 2013, 08:59:40 PM
"""In fact, the farther
you take a stream of random numbers, the farther away
from balance it gets."""
I don t agree with this.
it's a fact. The farther away you get from the start,
the closer it gets percentage wise, but further apart
the actual numbers get. Its impossible for roulette to
ever balance itself. It has something to do with the
law of large numbers. Ask Bayes..
Quote from: Gizmotron on March 14, 2013, 09:09:41 PM
I think that playing on balance as an expectation is a fallacy.
It never balances and even thinking that way
when playing is a minefield.
I don't know what Bayes might say but I do know this. Everything shifts on a kind of law of thirds. It's a constantly moving target.
A programmer doesn't need a grid. You just need four populated lists. These lists can be comma delimited and sorted by display. I can use them to filter back twenty to thirty spins, searching for any global effects, and also filtering back 10 spins to find the best 18 numbers. This process of eliminating table configuration and pet groupings is brilliant for my needs. I just let the hot opportunities come to me. I guess I now have thousands of groups instead of just 20.
Hi Gizmotron,
I am curious how you would choose bet selection while at a live table without all of your sorting tools and filtering. You need some kind of reference. If not by grid, then how?
I use random against random, stream of consciousness if you will. Do you do the same? or are you changing your groups as you play?
TC
TC, my casino won't let me even use a cell phone at the table. But there is no stopping the on-line gambler. With one button click I would get 18 numbers, all sorted. It would take no more than two seconds. I'd have a list like this:
2, 7, 11, 13, 14, 17, 19, 23, 24, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36,
By sorting the list from low to high, by possibly breaking it into several lines, it is quick and easy to set the bets in time.
Interesting. When you do play live, do you play random like I do?
TC
Quote from: The Crow on March 15, 2013, 04:36:24 AM
Interesting. When you do play live, do you play random like I do?
TC
Why don't you tell us all how you play.
QuoteI don't believe in past numbers. So I take a picture of a wheel, cross out 12 numbers randomly, divide the rest of the numbers into two groups of twelve with the zero in one which makes is 13. When a numbers comes in one of the groups, I bet the other group, one unit per number. I use a progression of 1, 2, 5, 7, 9 - stop loss.
Crazy, but it works for me.
TC
I did.
How do you play?
TC
Hello . . .
Stef and I updated Buffsters tracker with a "Spin" button that will instantly re-sort the numbers into the different sections allowing you to make a choice of bets.
Buffster has authorized us to release his tracker but unfortunately, it contains a "macro" which is not an allowable file to be uploaded into the forum.
So any of you who wish to have this tracker, kindly send me an email at nickmsi@aol.com and I will be glad to forward it to you.
Thanks and enjoy . . .
Nick & Stef
Quote from: Nickmsi on March 15, 2013, 04:31:31 PM
Buffster has authorized us to release his tracker but unfortunately, it contains a "macro" which is not an allowable file to be uploaded into the forum.
Tell me the extension for me to enable it. :cheer:
Cheers!
Hi Vic . . .
The extension for this file .xlsm
Thanks
Nick
Hi Nick, thanks for the sharing.
Kindly try again :thumbsup:
Vic has fixed the upload problem.
Attached is Buffster's Excel Tracker updated with an easy "Spin" button to get the numbers re-sorted.
Simply input the numbers in Column A (Yellow) and when you have enough just click the "Spin" button to resort Column E and then make your bet selections.
You will need to have your macro "enabled" for this to work. If you are not familiar with enabling the macros then:
Click on the "Developer Tab" along the top of Excel. It is between "View" and "PDF".
Then Click on Macro Security
Then Click on Macro Settings
Then Click on Enable All Macros.
Enjoy . . .
NIck & Stef
Quote from: spike on March 14, 2013, 09:12:38 PM
It never balances and even thinking that way
when playing is a minefield.
It never balances and that's how it can be exploited. Of course there will never be the same amount of triples as singles. Singles will always out number doubles. Doubles will always out number triples etc... This is balance in a perfect random sequence. You know what to expect, and this is how it can be taken advantage of. Whenever a particular sequence is showing 'un-balance' like tons of triples, and longer streaks, i know that a correction is right around the corner. Those can be the most profitable times.
Quote from: ll l lll ll l lll on March 17, 2013, 03:28:30 AM
Singles will always out number doubles.
Hi II I III II I III
When you say the above, would you clarify your thinking for me?
If it goes
R
R
B
R
R
we can see 2 doubles and a single...my question is...
R
R
B
R
B
R
R
Lets take the B R B part. Is that three singles or is it a triple because it's a series?
Thanks in advance.
Quote from: Blood Angel on March 17, 2013, 11:07:31 AM
Hi II I III II I III
When you say the above, would you clarify your thinking for me?
If it goes
R
R
B
R
R
we can see 2 doubles and a single...my question is...
R
R
B
R
B
R
R
Lets take the B R B part. Is that three singles or is it a triple because it's a series?
Thanks in advance.
BRB is 3 singles. In my opinion the only way anyone can play this way is with practice. You need to be able to see what you have, anticipate what might be coming, and know when and when not to bet. Every bet is a guess, but with experience you can come out on top flat betting. You have to look at the entire history, the past 16-20 spins to make a decision. A truly random stream will have pretty even amount of switching with more singles than doubles, more doubles than triples, more triples than 4+, etc...
When the stream is not showing true random, you can wait, and with practice get proficient at when the correction may be coming. If you are correct, those can be the most valuable times. You only have to get a little more than half of your bets correct. Even if you are breaking even at 50%, your still doing better than just about everyone else.
Your short example above shows 4 singles, 2 doubles and 1 quad. A fairly typical random sequence. You can be cautious here with singles as the next few bets because theyve already shown what you would expect in that short sample.
Thank you, I really appreciate your straight forward reply.
Here's an updated version with the results sorted.
Buffster
Quote from: ll l lll ll l lll on March 17, 2013, 03:28:30 AM
i know that a correction is right around the corner.
Or not. You must spend a lot of time waiting
in a real casino, because 'corrections' in whatever
form certainly don't obey a timetable. You're
doing what many players do, you've identified
a sequence of events that you have a small edge
on and you patiently await those events to manifest.
Much like Gizmo's method on dozens or his Global
Whatchamacallit. This can go very fast playing actuals
on a computer, and take many hours in a real casino
betting real money, even playing more than one table.
I love waiting for times when Spike contradicts himself without knowing it. This is one of those revealing moments. The most common occurring condition is a mix of singles and doubles, with a salting of a few triples. This is the ideal conditions being used here. Now Spike clearly states that you will do a lot of waiting to get to those ideal conditions. These conditions are the same conditions that I ignore. I deliberately seek everything above triples swarming and any repeating patterns of anything. So according to Spike's statement below, He is admitting that the conditions I prefer are frequent enough as to cause long waits for those that prefer these most common occurring conditions. Now watch the great debator wiggle out of this one. He complains that I have to wait forever while he does not. He admits to sitting out bets, that he gets his preferred sequences within 60 spins. Now he says this:
And another thing. It's called global effect. You can't tell everyone what something is if you, yourself, can't see it. That would be the blind attempting to lead the blind. Thank you Spike, for exposing your true self and your very limited capability to read randomness.
Quote from: spike on March 17, 2013, 02:07:53 PM
Or not. You must spend a lot of time waiting
in a real casino, because 'corrections' in whatever
form certainly don't obey a timetable. You're
doing what many players do, you've identified
a sequence of events that you have a small edge
on and you patiently await those events to manifest.
Much like Gizmo's method on dozens or his Global
Whatchamacallit. This can go very fast playing actuals
on a computer, and take many hours in a real casino
betting real money, even playing more than one table.
Quote from: spike on March 17, 2013, 02:07:53 PM
Or not. You must spend a lot of time waiting
in a real casino, because 'corrections' in whatever
form certainly don't obey a timetable. You're
doing what many players do, you've identified
a sequence of events that you have a small edge
on and you patiently await those events to manifest.
Much like Gizmo's method on dozens or his Global
Whatchamacallit. This can go very fast playing actuals
on a computer, and take many hours in a real casino
betting real money, even playing more than one table.
Your not paying attention and didn't read carefully. I didn't say that is the whole picture, that is only part of it. When a correction does come I am ready to take advantage but by no means am I waiting for it. In the mean time, i am playing within the typical pure random stream of singles, doubles, triples, etc... i can play inside a typical random stream for long long periods, and if im not winning, im breaking even, which is what most players can't do. When the variance is in my favor with my bets, i win.
Marshall, please make note that in this thread "balance point" refers to a break even point, like in two even chance bets, you must win at least one of the two to balance, to break even.
Marshall, I have noted in other threads that there is a balance point for three step martingales and two to one bets as well. There is no rule that only even chance bets can have a break even point.
Many people refer to randomness with the concept of correcting, or in another word, balancing. Years ago I suggested that there is a baseline value for the point at which randomness can have a standard averaging point. That that point can be the statistical average of probability, and that it is only a selection made and not a real point. Anyone can use fixed, baseline values in order to see variations from an imagined norm. But as Spike says, there is no normal position of randomness, just not in those words.
Many thanks 11 1 111 11 1 111, Spike, Gizmotron,
Ironically I believe ("know") that all 3 of you are successful roulette players. It would make it easier if everyone saw this and tried to work together instead of against. This could lead to an even more effective playing style for everyone. It looks like 11 1 111 11 1 111 is ahead of the game and incorporating these different angles already.
However, it could very well be that this way of commenting is the best and only way forward.
For dedicated researchers and players alike it is more encouraging to see a sense of trying to understand anothers way of playing : ) I think each one of you is looking at the game in the right way.
There does not just have to be one way, a combination is always stronger.
To TC
"The method I posted wins all the time, but it's monotonous. You average only 500 units per hour. However, being in the "zone" can yield 1000 units in a few spins."TC
This is from another thread but which method are you referring to?
Here's one of my trade secrets : Most of you know that I prefer the dozens and columns, as well as any inside groupings that I also favor. But for the sake of explanations I use the dozens as an example. Whenever there is a sleeping dozen there are the two other dozens that are mostly active. Very rarely there are two sleeping dozens. So when one of the dozens sleep you have two choices to find the winning dozen. That means you have an even chance to win a two to one payoff. The same thing holds true for stretches of singles. Think about it. While a certain condition holds true, continues, there exists a mismatch in the payoff. Think about that for system builders.
Thanks you for sharing how you play Giz.
Could you try and show any visual examples? They are really useful and ofcourse different from describing them in text.
I tried but did not think I would give an example which did justice.
Its difficult from my perspective.
Quote from: Gizmotron on March 18, 2013, 09:18:31 PM
Very rarely there are two sleeping dozens. So when one of the dozens sleep you have two choices to find the winning dozen. That means you have an even chance to win a two to one payoff. The same thing holds true for stretches of singles. Think about it. While a certain condition holds true, continues, there exists a mismatch in the payoff.
It would be interesting for the aspiring member to chart those moments in a timeline, using this information with the ultimate purpose of attacking at the most benevolent times for the selection.
Some say there is no "timeline" in the game (the 1-spin-wonder side), but if we were to at least pretend there are better and worse times (concentration of hits / dispersion)... Who knows, knowing this information on when there are more favorable conditions for your groups as well as identifying when they are underperforming might be more beneficial in the short term for the player than scattering chips, using the same technique as the casino: pumping more and more time and bank until it evens out.
This particular technique reminds me about Guerrilla Warfare manrique mentioned:
"Since ancient times, formal and gigantic armies, were defeated by much small, less equipped armies. From African liberation wars and insurgencies in Latin America and other Third World countries, we began to talk of guerrilla warfare. Small armies in small highly skilled and specialized commands, giving accurate shots in moments of greatest weakness of the opponent. Strokes that occur one after the other resulting in the weakening of the enemy to the point of finishing his resistance and even reverse the balance of power through the attacks, continuous and systematic against their defenses.
The main features of these attacks, beyond that of surprising, is the condition for prompt withdrawal, quick jabs, which produce the greatest loss in the opponent with as few casualties as possible on our side. Hit and removal, if possible without casualties. Like water breaks the stone, this leads to Guerrilla War adversary -though we attack him in his own field- to a point that is not at all suitable for him, since there is not much he can do other than what already does.
We may change, he can not. That's a big advantage."
Quote from: VLS on March 18, 2013, 09:57:17 PM
Some say there is no "timeline" in the game (the 1-spin-wonder side),
If there was a timeline to random outcomes, they wouldn't
be random. They wouldn't be used in casino games if they
were at all predictable. One thing I never forget or lose
sight of, people far smarter than most of the people on this
forum have been trying to figure this out for a few hundred
years and none of them ever did. Just because you have
access to computers doesn't mean you're any better than
those old guys. All it means is you come to the same conclusions
they did much faster. What took them 5 years might only
take you six months. But the conclusions are the same, nevertheless.
AMK, all you need to do is use my practice software. It creates these charts. There are many features for isolation and discussion. Just pump out 150 spins. You are almost guaranteed to see some long sleeping dozen or column sections. Same goes for singles.
Quote from: spike on March 18, 2013, 10:35:26 PM
If there was a timeline to random outcomes, they wouldn't
be random. They wouldn't be used in casino games if they
were at all predictable.
The game is a 1-spin-only game to you then. I get it.
Quote from: spike on March 18, 2013, 10:35:26 PMWhat took them 5 years might only
take you six months.
6 months of processing power today can actually do a
tad more...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law)
[attachimg=1]
Peace. :)
Quote from: VLS on March 19, 2013, 12:59:42 AM
6 months of processing power today can actually do a tad more...
6 months was to make a point. It could be 6 nano seconds.
And the point was, these really smart dedicated men did the same
research that's done today and came to the conclusion there is no
timeline and random cannot be predicted.
This is not an evil thing. It just makes us look elsewhere.
for the answer.
Quote from: spike on March 19, 2013, 01:52:35 AM
This is not an evil thing. It just makes us look elsewhere.
for the answer.
It's all good :thumbsup:
Quote from: Marshall Bing Bell on March 19, 2013, 02:02:04 AM
You mean answers.
Actually, I don't. Sorry. Answer stands by itself.
Quote from: spike on March 19, 2013, 07:20:03 AM
Actually, I don't. Sorry. Answer stands by itself.
On this forum, context has consequences. When Vic suggested that someone should chart results in a timeline, (an obvious continuous sequence of spins,) Spike went off saying there is no timeline in randomness. This is Spike being Spike. He loves to make you follow red herring trails. All a timeline is, is a continuous set of past spins. All Vic was suggesting was people should look to see how often sleepers & singles streak together in the dozens & columns. All old Spike wants is for people here to think that randomness only works for him. Don't be fooled by his debating techniques. He loves to change the subject. It takes actual work to stay on topic while he is around. Want to see a trend? Look how many times he has attempted to take words and phrases out of context just in this thread alone. He has yet to deal with his obvious contradictions. Spike knew he made a mistake on that one. So he's back plugging along with his same, tired out, debating style.
Quote from: Gizmotron on March 19, 2013, 04:03:23 PM
All a timeline is, is a continuous set of past spins.
No, that isn't a timeline. A timeline is just what the word
says it is. A line to establish when certain events occur in
correlation to other events so we can determine if there
is a pattern to these events that we can exploit to our
advantage. Smart men have been looking for this since
roulette was invented. They never found it because it
doesn't exist in random outcomes.
Spike- " Smart men have been looking for this since roulette was invented. They never found it because it doesn't exist in random outcomes."
That's Spike's entire argument. He says his kind of randomness works and that using trends and patterns don't work. This, from the same guy that is clueless regarding the concept of the global effect. I'm sure that if he could explain it, that somebody else wrote about it hundreds of years ago too. Randomness only works for Spike. What he does was never written about in the past. He's the genius that does not have to explain or prove anything. Yet he reserves some self imposed righteousness that he alone is worthy. Spike does not know that patterns & trends are in fact opportunities. It's in everything that he says. He can't produce any gambling literature that has as extensive a discussion of my randomness concepts discussed at this forum. His claims are just words without substance. He won't back up any of his claims.
Quote from: Gizmotron on March 19, 2013, 08:51:49 PM
Spike- " Smart men have been looking for this since roulette was invented. They never found it because it doesn't exist in random outcomes."
That's Spike's entire argument. He says his kind of randomness works
There is no 'his kind of randomness', there's only random.
Just one kind, it doesn't belong to anybody. It stands by
itself, accept it or don't, it will continue without you.
AMK , as per your request:
| A B C | 1 2 3 | -- ## -- Line
| X | X | -- 35 -- 1
| X | X | -- 5 -- 2
| X | X | -- 21 -- 3
| X | X | -- 35 -- 4
| X | X | -- 22 -- 5
| X | X | -- 5 -- 6
| X | X | -- 2 -- 7
| X | X | -- 33 -- 8
| X | X | -- 4 -- 9
| X | X | -- 2 -- 10
| X | X | -- 10 -- 11
| X | X | -- 12 -- 12
| X | X | -- 23 -- 13
| X | X | -- 21 -- 14
| X | X | -- 25 -- 15
| X | X | -- 13 -- 16
|---------------| - 0 -- 17
| X | X | -- 6 -- 18
| X | X | -- 10 -- 19
| X | X | -- 22 -- 20
| X | X | -- 8 -- 21
| X | X | -- 28 -- 22
| X | X | -- 6 -- 23
| X | X | -- 36 -- 24
| X | X | -- 5 -- 25
| X | X | -- 5 -- 26
| X | X | -- 1 -- 27
| X | X | -- 4 -- 28
| X | X | -- 13 -- 29
| X | X | -- 12 -- 30
| X | X | -- 10 -- 31
| X | X | -- 28 -- 32
|---------------| - 0 -- 33
| X | X | -- 16 -- 34
| X | X | -- 3 -- 35
| X | X | -- 34 -- 36
| X | X | -- 32 -- 37
| X | X | -- 34 -- 38
| X | X | -- 36 -- 39
| X | X | -- 9 -- 40
| X | X | -- 13 -- 41
| X | X | -- 30 -- 42
| X | X | -- 6 -- 43
| X | X | -- 12 -- 44
| X | X | -- 36 -- 45
| X | X | -- 8 -- 46
| X | X | -- 17 -- 47
| X | X | -- 16 -- 48
| X | X | -- 24 -- 49
| X | X | -- 25 -- 50
| X | X | -- 28 -- 51
| X | X | -- 6 -- 52
| X | X | -- 15 -- 53
| X | X | -- 27 -- 54
|---------------| - 0 -- 55
| X | X | -- 36 -- 56
| X | X | -- 1 -- 57
| X | X | -- 11 -- 58
| X | X | -- 34 -- 59
| X | X | -- 23 -- 60
| X | X | -- 26 -- 61
| X | X | -- 36 -- 62
| X | X | -- 15 -- 63
| X | X | -- 32 -- 64
| X | X | -- 31 -- 65
| X | X | -- 14 -- 66
| X | X | -- 20 -- 67
| X | X | -- 5 -- 68
| X | X | -- 4 -- 69
| X | X | -- 31 -- 70
| X | X | -- 8 -- 71
| X | X | -- 1 -- 72
| X | X | -- 9 -- 73
| X | X | -- 32 -- 74
| X | X | -- 17 -- 75
| X | X | -- 23 -- 76
| X | X | -- 28 -- 77
| X | X | -- 34 -- 78
| X | X | -- 10 -- 79
| X | X | -- 22 -- 80
| X | X | -- 1 -- 81
| X | X | -- 24 -- 82
| X | X | -- 13 -- 83
| X | X | -- 36 -- 84
| X | X | -- 1 -- 85
| X | X | -- 31 -- 86
| X | X | -- 13 -- 87
| X | X | -- 2 -- 88
| X | X | -- 35 -- 89
| X | X | -- 18 -- 90
| X | X | -- 7 -- 91
| X | X | -- 20 -- 92
| X | X | -- 33 -- 93
| X | X | -- 20 -- 94
| X | X | -- 15 -- 95
| X | X | -- 4 -- 96
| X | X | -- 19 -- 97
| X | X | -- 15 -- 98
| X | X | -- 6 -- 99
| X | X | -- 29 -- 100
| X | X | -- 20 -- 101
| X | X | -- 13 -- 102
| X | X | -- 35 -- 103
| X | X | -- 7 -- 104
| X | X | -- 7 -- 105
| X | X | -- 3 -- 106
| X | X | -- 3 -- 107
| X | X | -- 34 -- 108
| X | X | -- 23 -- 109
| X | X | -- 17 -- 110
| X | X | -- 7 -- 111
| X | X | -- 8 -- 112
| X | X | -- 35 -- 113
| X | X | -- 30 -- 114
| X | X | -- 36 -- 115
| X | X | -- 15 -- 116
| X | X | -- 27 -- 117
| X | X | -- 32 -- 118
| X | X | -- 2 -- 119
| X | X | -- 16 -- 120
| X | X | -- 16 -- 121
| X | X | -- 21 -- 122
| X | X | -- 35 -- 123
| X | X | -- 18 -- 124
| X | X | -- 16 -- 125
| X | X | -- 9 -- 126
| X | X | -- 24 -- 127
|---------------| - 0 -- 128
| X | X | -- 26 -- 129
|---------------| - 0 -- 130
| X | X | -- 13 -- 131
| X | X | -- 28 -- 132
| X | X | -- 21 -- 133
| X | X | -- 2 -- 134
| X | X | -- 36 -- 135
| X | X | -- 9 -- 136
| X | X | -- 7 -- 137
| X | X | -- 8 -- 138
| X | X | -- 4 -- 139
| X | X | -- 8 -- 140
| X | X | -- 8 -- 141
| X | X | -- 30 -- 142
| X | X | -- 1 -- 143
| X | X | -- 29 -- 144
| X | X | -- 22 -- 145
| X | X | -- 19 -- 146
| X | X | -- 26 -- 147
| X | X | -- 17 -- 148
| X | X | -- 36 -- 149
| X | X | -- 1 -- 150
In my example above, there is a very nice display of the global effect. I wonder who can see it?
Quote from: spike on March 19, 2013, 09:34:27 PM
There is no 'his kind of randomness', there's only random.
Just one kind, it doesn't belong to anybody. It stands by
itself, accept it or don't, it will continue without you.
There is most assuredly "your kind of randomness." You think that sitting out spins is a necessity. If a person makes a bet for every spin, that makes them a fool. You are clearly saying that there are segments in the stream of spins that are useless, or ineffective, other than avoiding them. Again stating that if used it would be foolish. That is as clear a case of evidence that you use a kind of randomness that suits you as there ever could be. There is opportunity from everything that happens. The anti-trend is information too. The absence of a streak is reading randomness too. The win streak as well as the losing streak & the I don't know streak all happen because of every characteristic found in randomness. That includes every form of anti-characteristic that also relates to reading randomness. You, Spike, advocate a specific type of randomness. Yours is a limited kind of randomness that allows you to present yourself as superior, as the sole possessing author of your kind of dogma.
Quote from: Gizmotron on March 20, 2013, 06:04:31 PM
You are clearly saying that there are segments in the stream of spins that are useless,
I'm not clearly saying that at all. Why should I bet
if I don't have an advantage? I have no interest
in breaking even anymore when I'm not winning, so
betting every spin is a waste of time. There no my
random or you're random, there is only random.
The point is to get out of the casino as soon as possible,
not dawdle around..
Spike, you don't have an advantage at times because you don't see one.
Quote from: spike on March 20, 2013, 07:33:00 PM
I'm not clearly saying that at all. Why should I bet
if I don't have an advantage? I have no interest
in breaking even anymore when I'm not winning, so
betting every spin is a waste of time. There no my
random or you're random, there is only random.
The point is to get out of the casino as soon as possible,
not dawdle around..
What are you afraid of Spike? I thought you could win every time you go to the casino.
I don't need to be lectured by someone with both limited knowledge and limited experience too. Just because you've done the same thing for years does not mean that you have a vast amount of experience.
I'll say it again. There is opportunity from everything that happens. I know, because I can teach a computer to look at just about everything available to the outside bets on the layout. These are the same groupings monitored in my play and practice software. That process is a method of going out and finding information and choosing the best thing to bet on.
What I like about Buffter's idea is that it uses the premise of having a computer go out and find a grouping, and having the program bring back a set that has performed in a dominant state of continuing. It might be fun to power test it with millions of spins.
Quote from: Gizmotron on March 20, 2013, 07:48:20 PM
Spike, you don't have an advantage at times because you don't see one.
I always have an advantage at all times. Its just
some times are better than others. Again, the
point it to spend as little time making your goal
as possible, not to make as many bets as you can
when you're there.
My goal is always paramount in my mind, how to make
it in as few bets as possible. The last thing I want is
for the pit to say "Here comes that guy who bets and
bets and always leaves a winner." I want to get in and
get out before they hardly know I'm there.
First you have to learn how to win, but that's only half of it.
Now you have to learn to get away with it in the casino.
Quote from: spike on March 21, 2013, 12:20:57 AM
My goal is always paramount in my mind, how to make
it in as few bets as possible. The last thing I want is
for the pit to say "Here comes that guy who bets and
bets and always leaves a winner." I want to get in and
get out before they hardly know I'm there.
First you have to learn how to win, but that's only half of it.
Now you have to learn to get away with it in the casino.
And you do this with a pad and pencil and still write whatever you do down?
Quote from: ll l lll ll l lll on March 21, 2013, 01:33:21 AM
And you do this with a pad and pencil and still write whatever you do down?
Depends on what I'm doing that day. Sometimes
I just use the board. I never sit at the table, ever.
And no its not hit and run, just because you don't
sit there with the other chumps doesn't mean its
hit and run.
Quote from: spike on March 21, 2013, 01:40:33 AM
Depends on what I'm doing that day. Sometimes
I just use the board. I never sit at the table, ever.
And no its not hit and run, just because you don't
sit there with the other chumps doesn't mean its
hit and run.
If you can in fact do it just looking at the board, why not just stick with that? Visually looking at the board is clearly easier and less of a pain in the behind than writing things down.
Quote from: ll l lll ll l lll on March 21, 2013, 01:49:35 AM
If you can in fact do it just looking at the board, why not just stick with that? Visually looking at the board is clearly easier and less of a pain in the behind than writing things down.
Because I never want to do the same thing twice
at the same casino. You never want to become
pigeon holed for always making the same bets.
Guess why.
That's a good read there Marshall. Spike is definitely showing off his paranoia side.
Spike, thank you for showing me this. You have made my day. Heck, my week.
Quote from: Marshall Bing Bell on March 21, 2013, 06:04:13 AM
What makes you think these guys are out to get you so bad?
They are always looking for consistent winners, no matter
what the amounts. I've established online relationships
over the years with three full time casino suits, one of them
is even head of surveillance in his casino. A good pit person
won't care about a low level consistent winner, somebody in
roulette who takes them for 4-5 hundred a week. The trouble
is, only about half of any casinos pit are competent. The
ones who aren't are usually ex dealers who are so jealous
of winners, and who sweat the casinos money to such a degree,
they see the boogyman everywhere.
If you aren't a consistent winner, someone who walks away
with the casinos money every time you visit, don't worry about
it. It doesn't concern you, its above your pay grade. For those
of us that do it, staying under the radar is a constant concern.
The best thing is to take trips to places you rarely visit, where
they don't know you. But playing local casinos, where most peoples
action takes place, is a different story entirely. Take Ken as an example. He's a long term winner, but hardly a consistent one. His
casino tolerates him because he loses big amounts occasonally,
and its hard for them to track his play. If he won every time he was
there, they woud have dumped him years ago.
..............it is exactly as SPIKE explained in the above post. You can win big amounts but you are expected to lose big amounts
Sharp wise guys find a cluster of casinos to rotate among them.
N.D..
.
Quote from: spike on March 21, 2013, 02:08:15 AM
Because I never want to do the same thing twice
at the same casino. You never want to become
pigeon holed for always making the same bets.
Guess why.
How many casinos do you regularly play at? No matter how many different techniques you use, surely they have seen you many times before and could easily see you are a consistent winner like you fear.
Like Dr. Mabuse, The Gambler , different disguises are a must in this situation. Be creative.
Tsi-Nan- Fu
N.D.
"The suspension of disbelief," look it up. We have it all. You can go from magical beliefs to magical tricks in a blink of an eye around here. Don't forget to keep your eye on the ball.
[attachimg=1]Hello All,
Gizmo download your software today for the patterns. This was after 2 days looking at the dozens after reading this thread. Fine piece of work. Thanks.
The doz/col - it's amazing how the pattern ABCABC or 12312 ect shows up when the singles show up. Then when the streak of the non arrival col/doz arrives the xxxx is seen. (A bit awkward to explain). Anyway played online at a B&M casino - did Okay but could of done better. The trend is your friend as they say.
I have included todays numbers. I think everyone would of done OK. Streaking for fun
Cheers. Roll on tomoz.
Hello geoff365,
Welcome to the forum : )
Could you please explain the method as you see it, would be great!
http://www.google.nl/imgres?q=the+muppet+show+roulette+pictures&biw=1280&bih=685&tbm=isch&tbnid=OV85nTooFPQvHM:&imgrefurl=http://robot6.comicbookresources.com/2009/08/good-bye-rex-mundi-and-hello-again-kevin-smith-and-king-city/&docid=43dHssJzZWMC1M&imgurl=http://robot6.comicbookresources.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/muppet-show-tpb.jpg&w=400&h=619&ei=x9KfUZL-O6H80QX39IGwAQ&zoom=1&ved=1t:3588,r:6,s:0,i:99&iact=rc&dur=180&page=1&tbnh=200&tbnw=129&start=0&ndsp=19&tx=70&ty=114 (http://www.google.nl/imgres?q=the+muppet+show+roulette+pictures&biw=1280&bih=685&tbm=isch&tbnid=OV85nTooFPQvHM:&imgrefurl=http://robot6.comicbookresources.com/2009/08/good-bye-rex-mundi-and-hello-again-kevin-smith-and-king-city/&docid=43dHssJzZWMC1M&imgurl=http://robot6.comicbookresources.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/muppet-show-tpb.jpg&w=400&h=619&ei=x9KfUZL-O6H80QX39IGwAQ&zoom=1&ved=1t:3588,r:6,s:0,i:99&iact=rc&dur=180&page=1&tbnh=200&tbnw=129&start=0&ndsp=19&tx=70&ty=114)