no news is good news..
It doesn't make sense to sell anything (not for one minute I believe there is any merit, other than just another individual consumed by gambling), certainly makes less sense to lower the price from 500 to 200.
If such a solution existed you would be in a casino, milking it for all it's worth, taking a break and traveling elsewhere and getting the local casino to pay for the trip. But common sense doesn't really exist does it with sellers, they will go to inordinate lengths to get you to part with a paltry $200, opening themselves up for flack and telling students they didn't pay attention in class, so long as they gt their hands on your $200.
This so called "knee-jerk" reaction is always justified, name one, just one system, pimped in the last two decades that has proven itself, just one will do.
Quote from: MarkTeruya on August 23, 2016, 12:08:42 PM
If such a solution existed you would be in a casino, milking it for all it's worth, taking a break and traveling elsewhere and getting the local casino to pay for the trip.
Yeah but Gizmo says he's in it for the fame, not the money. :o :-X
MT
When I taught before, for $500 I did it on chat, online, with it private, student to teacher, one at a time. That took about 35 to 50 actual hours being in a live chat with each student.
No why did I do that? I was mad. The ridicule and the banter online made me hit the ceiling. I was absolutely sure that knowing my secrets would not bring down the casinos because it was so hard to be a skilled craftsman of these methods. So I told the forum that I would teach ten and prove it.
I should really have charged $100,000 placed in escrow and released to me once I proved it actually was the way to win. But I was already winning. I just wanted to get something for my time. I know it's worth millions. I just don't need millions. I prefer to be one of those "captives set free."
This is as a major contribution to gambling as Ed Thorp's "Beat The Dealer" and card counting was when he published his book. One day you will see that.
Now look at card counting today. The casinos make more off the bad players that can't adjust for randomness in the short term, even though they are card counting. You only get asked to take your game elsewhere if you are good at it. Funny how they do that.
BTW, you asked for just one example of pimping a method that works. I give you Ed Thorp and "Beat The Dealer." He could have made millions too. But he had his big laugh and then went back to his academic life.
You might consider this for a moment. The challenge was to figure it out. My life is a vast ocean of accepting challenges and reaching fulfillment from taking them on in the first place. How do you put a price on that?
I have chosen to send a throng into the mainstream with the full knowledge of where they all got it. It's my version of my face to the crowd, an acceptable version of an entertainment concept. What makes it even more interesting is that you are here to claim it is nothing more than a hoax. That makes the story more interesting don't you think?
It should take years for this new simple method to get out there as wide spread knowledge. I will in all likelihood be gone by then.
So far , so good.
:)
Quote from: Jake on August 23, 2016, 01:09:57 PM
Yeah but Gizmo says he's in it for the fame, not the money. :o :-X
That is absolute BS, it is just a ploy to get some fool to send him $200. IF he was just in for the fame, he could pass it to somebody to stress test, but no, there would be no exchange of money doing that.
This method which he has had for years, is so great, he was selling off his US coins a few years back, now any sane person would automatically think. Roulette winning system, in need of cash, go to a casino, nope that would be too easy.
Plain and simple and this applies to
all systems sellers since the year dot and forever more (unless a new version of mathematics is invented). If any proven winning system existed, the LAST thing the creator would do, is broadcast the fact, secondly offer it for sale.
When is the last time you frequented a casino? How many consistent winners did you find? Where do you think these sellers originate from? They appear to help you cos' they are good natured, want to share their good fortune¿ Nope, they have been stripped bare by a casino and no longer give a damn who they con, because they feel hard done by themselves, that is the truth of the situation. How dense are some people?
QuoteBTW, you asked for just one example of pimping a method that works. I give you Ed Thorp and "Beat The Dealer." He could have made millions too. But he had his big laugh and then went back to his academic life.
He published a book and didn't go around hawking others for money. So where are these mystery students for yours? They must have had a significant internet presence before signing up, are we to expect strangers whom nobody recognizes to turn up in the next few days to give you their blessing?
@MarkTeruya makes some excellent points here
Steve - claims to have Roulette computers that beat the game long-term..........not 1 computer user has ever come forward to confirm this (which is astounding if you think about it)
Kimo Li - claims to teach a winning method to students................................not 1 person has come forward to confirm this
Albalaha - selling systems he claims beat the game long-term.......................not 1 person has come forward to confirm this
Gizmotron - claims to teach a winning method to students............................not 1 person has come forward to confirm this
.................fool me once, shame on you ........fool me twice.......well......... ::)
Thus far, it's not quite the feedback I [and others] was hoping for!
Putting it bluntly: I WANT FEEDBACK FROM ONE OR MORE OF THE STUDENTS ONLY.
What I don't want to read is more carping criticism from those who are not signed up.
If you are not a student of Gizmo's school then kindly stop posting in this thread.
Hi esoito,
Students, well at least students of mine, do not want to give testimonials unless they remain anonymous, because they are under a non-disclosure agreement. However, if you ask them to write to you privately, and give their testimonials, and not expose their identity, I am sure they would agree to give you the answers you seek about their experience in the school environment.
Perhaps, Gizmotron's students do not want to be exposed to the forum as well.
So, if you ask Gizmotron's students to write to you privately and post their experience, without giving away their identity, they may respond to you and you can post their comments.
Kimo Li
Quote from: Kimo Li on August 24, 2016, 06:17:25 AM
Students, well at least students of mine, do not want to give testimonials unless they remain anonymous, because they are under a non-disclosure agreement. However, if you ask them to write to you privately, and give their testimonials, and not expose their identity, I am sure they would agree to give you the answers you seek about their experience in the school environment.
I thought a non-disclosure agreement means that you agree not to disclose how to use the system, which isn't the same as giving a testimonial. And anyone can by anonymous on the internet. No one has to disclose their 'real' identity'.
MarkTeruya,
I largely agree with your post. My comment about Gizmo wanting the fame not the money was intended to be tongue in cheek.
I am also interested in Gizmo's school, so I am signing up to this thread for feedback from others (either public or private).
I have tested one of his concepts 6 years ago (http://www.vlsroulette.com/index.php?topic=16415.0), therefore I can do the same now.
Lupo,
I hope his system is better than betting on sleeping dozens. Are you happy to pay $200 for the privilege of finding out?
Maybe. I am very moderate in my purchases in general.
My concern here is that my time is quite limited due to work & family and I cannot spend many hours on studying, discussion boards, chats etc. I need to be sure it is put straightforward.
beyond bet selection Gizmo's method is attuned to the effective states of bet selection.
all bet selections encounter uncooperative variance, so refining them to hunt for cooperative variance can only help your cause.
whether you do that by charting or money management or both is up to individual preferences and skill sets.
in the end only two things work. Being right more often than being wrong, and betting more on winners than losers.
if you do both then you are good to go despite all the math..
I'm not a part of Gizmo's school but I applaud what he's doing by allowing his students to discuss and question openly amongst themselves and share experiences. I was not given that luxury as Kimo's former student. I was on my own and never able to discuss a thing with any other student. Kimo did mention he would connect me with others but that never happened for whatever reason. He claimed they did not want to help as they see roulette as a "solitary sport." That's a shame.
So where are these students?
Kind of reminds me of the bad old day when silly people sent Izak money for systems that didn't work and wrote it off due to embarrassment and being ashamed to request their money back, they would admit it behind the scenes, but never publicly. .
So esoito name me one system that has been sold that worked, which justifies not jumping to conclusions with "knee jerk" reactions! No need for the increased red font, this is a gambling site, not some school, lots of thread go off topic so chill out cobber.
Quote from: Kimo Li on August 24, 2016, 06:17:25 AM
Hi esoito,
Students, well at least students of mine, do not want to give testimonials unless they remain anonymous, because they are under a non-disclosure agreement. However, if you ask them to write to you privately, and give their testimonials, and not expose their identity, I am sure they would agree to give you the answers you seek about their experience in the school environment.
Perhaps, Gizmotron's students do not want to be exposed to the forum as well.
So, if you ask Gizmotron's students to write to you privately and post their experience, without giving away their identity, they may respond to you and you can post their comments.
Kimo Li
See......now Kimo is smart!
He thought of every angle before pulling this scam.
Wish everyone would put in this much effort..... :-\
Quote from: MarkTeruya on August 24, 2016, 12:08:45 PM
Kind of reminds me of the bad old day when silly people sent Izak money for systems that didn't work and wrote it off due to embarrassment and being ashamed to request their money back, they would admit it behind the scenes, but never publicly. .
Bingo! Just like no one would ever admit to being the victim of a Nigerian prince email scam, although amazingly some poor suckers fall for them.
QuoteSo esoito name me one system that has been sold that worked, which justifies not jumping to conclusions with "knee jerk" reactions!
Good question. The characters who promote these systems don't seem to mind the negative attention either. I suppose any publicity is better than none.
Quote from: Lupo on August 24, 2016, 08:27:26 AM
Maybe. I am very moderate in my purchases in general.
My concern here is that my time is quite limited due to work & family and I cannot spend many hours on studying, discussion boards, chats etc. I need to be sure it is put straightforward.
It's basically complete. You can just read it. Others have already asked enough questions that discussion has now dropped to examples of sessions and my comments of how and why I select bets that I do. So for the next several weeks I will be uploading sessions with comments and results for each spin in the sessions. I'm improving my practice software so that it too makes practicing my strategy easier.
The real point is, do you have time to go to the casino?
Quote from: TheLaw on August 24, 2016, 01:00:33 PM
See......now Kimo is smart!
He thought of every angle before pulling this scam.
Wish everyone would put in this much effort..... :-\
Agree totally, All avenues covered so he can't be discredited. Not the first to do so, (oh you didn't play it right, you misunderstood), even a moderator of this forum has a history of that behavior.
Quote from: Jake on August 24, 2016, 01:10:20 PM
Bingo! Just like no one would ever admit to being the victim of a Nigerian prince email scam, although amazingly some poor suckers fall for them.
Good question. The characters who promote these systems don't seem to mind the negative attention either. I suppose any publicity is better than none.
It begs the question why Iplayforaliving was given a free rein for so long, maybe esoito can answer.
In truth I always assumed VLS was above letting scammers on his site, but it appears not
Quote from: MarkTeruya on August 24, 2016, 03:46:44 PM
It begs the question why Iplayforaliving was given a free rein for so long, maybe esoito can answer.
In truth I always assumed VLS was above letting scammers on his site, but it appears not
Ditto. I came across a couple in the casino that bought the premium package from Iplayforaliving. Besides it being a losing system, hey were denied the training that they paid for. No replies or when he does, it's nasty.
Quote from: Jake on August 24, 2016, 01:10:20 PM
Bingo! Just like no one would ever admit to being the victim of a Nigerian prince email scam, although amazingly some poor suckers fall for them.
Exactly!
Quote from: Babu on August 24, 2016, 05:50:28 PM
Ditto. I came across a couple in the casino that bought the premium package from Iplayforaliving. Besides it being a losing system, hey were denied the training that they paid for. No replies or when he does, it's nasty.
I feel vindicated, as well as receiving a ban (thanks esolito) for saying as much at the time.
All anybody needs to do is grab a set of truth tables, spend some time with them (esolito), it will quickly prove there is no bet selection solution to the game of Baccarat, because everything resolves to a 50-50 state. There is no possible solution, not now, not ever, because mathematically it simply can not exist. So the next snake oil sales person that appears trying to sell / promote any Baccarat system, some of us feel justified to adopt a knee jerk reaction. No doubt the same applies to Roulette, but of course Gizmo is going to the the world's first since the history of the game, to prove everybody wrong, once he receives a few $200 payments (only $200??).
FYI esolito I loathe system sellers, because I know how hard it is to win in a casino, I am acutely aware of the tactics they will employ to trip up anybody who is ahead, can hold their own, does well. It is a difficult battle, while others winning or losing has no bearing on me, I applaud others winning, because casino staff are sharks and can be utterly despicable at times, the last thing I want is fellow players also ripping each other off. Hence my strong anti-seller stance I like to think I do have morals.
Quote from: MarkTeruya on August 24, 2016, 11:10:21 PM
... No doubt the same applies to Roulette, but of course Gizmo is going to the the world's first since the history of the game, to prove everybody wrong, once he receives a few $200 payments (only $200??).
Not only can my students and I beat the game of Roulette through skills that I've shared with them, I have completely confounded you regarding the worth of the same. You question why anyone would sell something worth thousands and thousands of dollars, something that I personally lost thousands and thousands of dollars learning in the first place. I'm the only one that can truly put a value on it. I chose $200 because I knew that teaching all the students at once would take far less effort than that I had to teach each one individually, like I did before.
What gratifies me most of all is that I have so much more to offer my students now then when before all I had was proof that there are trends that present opportunities.
I should have offered this sooner. If you were a student from the first ten, then I will let you in to see the big deal difference for $100.
Quote from: Gizmotron on August 25, 2016, 11:56:08 PM
Perhaps one day the HG will come from the law of thirds.
I thought You teach your students ... How to Play your "THE HG"
If the HG is not come OUT yet
:-( What can I say more :-)
Good Luck with the school...
with Respect
BETJACK
Quote from: BetJack on August 26, 2016, 02:04:13 AM
I thought You teach your students ... How to Play your "THE HG"
If the HG is not come OUT yet
:-( What can I say more :-)
Good Luck with the school...
with Respect
BETJACK
That deserves an honest answer. For me to be honest I must admit that most people here searching for a possible solution are skeptical of me actually already knowing one, let alone the actual holy grail.
So hear is the truth about the law of thirds, if you can handle it. The selection process, that includes moving from the existing two thirds to a new two thirds must make those moves based on conditional coincidences that are observable. The idea that a blind move based on a mechanical trigger won't ever be a holy grail. But a situational awareness method will work in combination with the law of thirds.
I chose a different kind of situational awareness to succeed at my exceptional version of the holy grail. I'm just suggesting that a law of third version could be constructed. So your assumption suggests a kind of hopeful, wishful thinking that I stumbled in my ignorance somehow and that you caught me in some proven deception. Sorry to disappoint you. I hope that I cleared that up.
I think that if Gizmo's method turns out to be a winner it won't be because of any superior bet selection, because I don't believe they exist. It's more to do with the progression. The probability of a win is about 65% and the type of staking used reminds me of Malcolm Maclean's My Mathematical Formula progression used on horse racing and sports betting. It's been around for about 40 years and is still being advertised online. It's quite a clever progression but only works if the win rate is high. You will have some small losses but eventually a nice winning run will come along and you'll clean up.
http://www.mymathematicalformula.com/
Quote from: Jake on August 27, 2016, 12:57:59 PM
I think that if Gizmo's method turns out to be a winner it won't be because of any superior bet selection, because I don't believe they exist. It's more to do with the progression. The probability of a win is about 65% and the type of staking used reminds me of Malcolm Maclean's My Mathematical Formula progression used on horse racing and sports betting. It's been around for about 40 years and is still being advertised online. It's quite a clever progression but only works if the win rate is high. You will have some small losses but eventually a nice winning run will come along and you'll clean up.
http://www.mymathematicalformula.com/ (http://www.mymathematicalformula.com/)
I have my decision making processes for bet selections. I've taught them, for the most part, to my students, depending on whether or not they actually learned them or not. So, I'm beginning work on the AI feature, that's Artificial Intelligence. I have proven to myself that random on random produces far more losing streaks. If I can get the software to perform as well as myself on bet selections then I will have mathematical proof that a Bayesian form of probability can be demonstrated as valid.
I found this comment written by the author:
QuoteDo I need to have patience, I'm a little bit greedy... I want to win lots of money tomorrow - Will your plan do that for me? - Probably NOT - I've written a lot on this subject over the years. The bottom line if you want to succeed in this game - You require PATIENCE - NOT to Bet on EVERY RACE - Be VERY selective with your choice - FOLLOW the rules contained in My Mathematical Formula when selecting your runner. DO NOT EVER EXPECT TO WIN MILLIONS OVER NIGHT - It's not going to happen and walk away from any advert you see promising such things.
Quote from: Jake on August 27, 2016, 12:57:59 PM
I think that if Gizmo's method turns out to be a winner it won't be because of any superior bet selection, because I don't believe they exist. It's more to do with the progression. The probability of a win is about 65% and the type of staking used reminds me of Malcolm Maclean's My Mathematical Formula progression used on horse racing and sports betting. It's been around for about 40 years and is still being advertised online. It's quite a clever progression but only works if the win rate is high. You will have some small losses but eventually a nice winning run will come along and you'll clean up.
http://www.mymathematicalformula.com/
Wow!!!........It's like someone designed a website specifically to look like a scam.
Only thing missing : "AS SEEN ON TV" ;D ;D ;D
Quote from: Gizmotron on August 27, 2016, 01:28:41 PM
I have proven to myself that random on random produces far more losing streaks.
But it doesn't achieve a higher win rate than expected, or does it? If it does, you don't need a progression.
@ TheLaw
Yeah it does look a bit "scammy", to say the least. Clickbank though, so you can always get a refund if not happy. :)
Quote from: Jake on August 27, 2016, 04:52:41 PM
But it doesn't achieve a higher win rate than expected, or does it? If it does, you don't need a progression.
As far as you know. When it all becomes clear to you someday, please look back at your question.
Reading randomness produces a higher win rate than blind selection using random on random. So how do you know that a progression is not needed? Please remember, you don't believe in "any superior bet selection."
Anybody can see that sharp progressions and parlays are being used here and it is not flat betting, in any manner. I did beat entire zumma 1600 shoes with a 3 step parlay but that doesn't win in long run, as usual and ends with loss. Gizmo is using a hybrid parlay and not relying upon any bet selection to win flat. It is apparent. Any bet selection with inbuilt edge doesn't need to use any kind of progression.
Quote from: Gizmotron on August 28, 2016, 06:36:08 AM
Reading randomness produces a higher win rate than blind selection using random on random.
Ok, so what is your win rate betting on two dozens if it isn't 24/37?
Quote from: Jake on August 28, 2016, 08:44:10 AM
Ok, so what is your win rate betting on two dozens if it isn't 24/37?
In the long run, my win rate is, HAPPILY, at the expected 61% or 64% rate. But please consider this for a moment: This was my signature here for a while, "Probability never tells you when a trend will occur." I have become a scientist and researcher regarding identification of typical and not so typical trends. My experience is in turning any continuing recognizable phenomenon into opportunity based on nothing more than the natural tendencies found in coincidence. Reading randomness is a skill and an effective tool. When I see people ignore it I am forced to laugh at the total irony of it all. It's like watching people walk past bags of gold laying at their feet.
This is one person's definition of a genius: "Being a genius is nothing more than someone discovering something that has always been the truth." They just do it first and some people hang the label on them. I'm smarter than average but in no way a genius. Most of this is from first making mistakes. As a builder I get the notion of "form follows function." As a recording engineer and musician I get the notion of "less is more." As a professional gambler I get this notion too: "Bet big when you are doing well and bet small when you aren't."
Quote from: Gizmotron on August 28, 2016, 02:33:47 PM
In the long run, my win rate is, HAPPILY, at the expected 61% or 64% rate.
That's all anyone needs to know. What does reading random mean if it doesn't result in an improved win rate? Nothing, that's what. What good does spotting trends do you if you can't do any better than someone who is betting randomly? You're only "good" at spotting and following trends if the win rate is better than the expected win rate.
So it's as I suspected. Your so-called advantage has to do with the progression, not the bet selection.
Quote from: Jake on August 28, 2016, 03:39:00 PM
That's all anyone needs to know. What does reading random mean if it doesn't result in an improved win rate? Nothing, that's what. What good does spotting trends do you if you can't do any better than someone who is betting randomly? You're only "good" at spotting and following trends if the win rate is better than the expected win rate.
So it's as I suspected. Your so-called advantage has to do with the progression, not the bet selection.
Read this:
QuoteIn the long run, my win rate is, HAPPILY, at the expected 61% or 64% rate.
In the short run my win rate is higher based on knowing when and where to place bets in the first place. You want a quantitative valuation that you can hang your hat on. BTW, that's confirmation bias that you are leaning on. It's the most common fallacy known to occur in doing research. Just because your brain is dedicated to understanding anything here by a win rate quotient, a predetermined conclusion I might add, you jump right to your conclusion like the man that first yelled Eureka!
It's not happening. Home-style don't play that.
Try to open your eyes and ears one time. Probability does not tell you when a trend will occur or for how long it will last. During those coincidental moments of opportunity, in the hands of a trained expert, you can outperform the statistical long termed average or expectation for a brief time if you select the correct bets. But YOU can't do that because you command the world and what you say goes as your current phase of awareness dictates.
Quote from: Gizmotron on August 28, 2016, 04:19:11 PM
In the short run my win rate is higher based on knowing when and where to place bets in the first place.
Gizmo, stop trying to pull a fast one. OBVIOUSLY, if you can CONSISTENTLY do well in the SHORT run then your long run win rate will be better than what's expected. If your win rate is as expected, as you admit, then the short runs in which you do better than average must be balanced by the sessions in which you do worse than expected. THAT MUST BE SO TO GET THE EXPECTED RATE.
You're trying to argue that 2 + 2 = 5. I don't think anyone's going to buy it. Please credit readers with some intelligence.
Quote from: Jake on August 28, 2016, 05:12:15 PM
Gizmo, stop trying to pull a fast one. OBVIOUSLY, if you can CONSISTENTLY do well in the SHORT run then your long run win rate will be better than what's expected. If your win rate is as expected, as you admit, then the short runs in which you do better than average must be balanced by the sessions in which you do worse than expected. THAT MUST BE SO TO GET THE EXPECTED RATE.
You're trying to argue that 2 + 2 = 5. I don't think anyone's going to buy it. Please credit readers with some intelligence.
I'm done trying to explain this to you. And to give you the credit that you are clearly asking for, what form of lower life intelligence could you agree best describes you? I don't want to insult you. So please consider something with a brain bigger than a peanut.
I can have an average win rate of 61% and still have a higher result average based on when I get my wins. Only you think that not changing your diapers for you means that I'm trying to be evasive. Listen bub, when I get my wins does not change the long term average but it definitely changes the outcome. Now please, use that 1 oz brain pan of a specimen of yours to see what I just said. ... and thank you for asking for credit regarding intelligence.
Gizmo, you haven't explained anything to me, it's me who's explained something to you, but you don't get it and seem to think that mere insults represent a counter-argument.
You're good at insults, but math? not so much. I'll try to explain it in simple terms so that you can understand. You're asserting that it's possible to win consistently in the short term and yet end up with the expected win rate of 24/37 = 0.6486 or 64.86% in the long term.
It's nonsense. Suppose you play 5 one hundred spin sessions and the number of wins is
67
66
72
70
68
So your average win rate over the 5 session is (67+66+68+72+70)/5 = 68.6% which is higher than 64.86%.
It's obviously the case that no matter how many short sessions you play, if in each of them your win rate is higher than the long term expected rate of 64.86%, then taking the average of them can't result in a win rate less than the lowest "score". A lot of short sessions add up to the long term, so your long term average must be at least as good as your worst short term score, which you say is better than the long term expected average according to probability.
Understand?
Remedial arithmetic, gads. That takes the cake. "according to probability"
Let's try insults for door number three Bob.
I see by your avatar that you are the south end of a north bound steer. So that "NO" circle, is that to suggest that you want everyone to stay out of your south end?
I don't want to wise you up as another pest used to put it.
Please, keep up the good job of protecting us all.
Quote from: Gizmotron on August 29, 2016, 02:32:33 PM
Remedial arithmetic, gads.
Apparently not remedial enough. ::)
Quote from: Jake on August 30, 2016, 08:55:54 AM
But you haven't shown that they're linked at all. Sometimes clusters continue long enough for you to profit, sometimes they don't. ...Unreal...
My goodness. Heresy from within your own world of real. You preach total disconnection from spin to spin and then you quantify and validate a notion of "clusters" in an argument to make some kind of convoluted impression. How convenient your world must be for you. I guess you are one of those young, propagandized, students that entered the first grade after 1980. These people are the rats in a maze experiment to cause a person to ignore objective critical thinking and to embrace subjective arguments. They have been classically trained to specifically ignore the truth, and that truth is just a tool to keep the establishment in power anyway. It's also refereed to as post modernism. You should attempt to redefine post modernism as an escape mechanism. Perform one of your pretzel logic back-flips for us.
Want to test to see if you are a trained tool? I Dare you to read "TELLING THE TRUTH" by Lynne Cheney
and then read: "The Velvet Monkey Wrench" by John Muir
Education in America has been hijacked to fulfill the purposes of 60's radicals that have pragmatically set out to overthrow the establishment by deliberately lying to it. They needed a generation that would be comfortable being lied to. You see, back in the late 60's these radicals discovered the teachings of a nineteenth century philosopher. He advocated that you could lie to a society in order to change it.
So I wonder if you are a classically trained tool. They took over from the first grade to undergraduate degree in the humanities departments of almost every school district and college in America.
Quote from: Jake on August 30, 2016, 09:06:36 AM
I'm glad to hear that there will be no selling allowed. But I think it's a mistake in what is supposed to be discussion forum for certain members to have their own little empires and the power to delete all posts that they don't agree with. I've never seen this on any other forum and it's weird.
It's one thing if you're trolling and abusing other members, in that case the admin should obviously be able to delete the offending posts, but deleting posts just because you disagree with someone goes against the spirit of what a forum should be about.
Try to look up the word obnoxious. Try to look in the mirror and see yourself in your command post uniform. Try to look up fundamentalism and don't leave out "Math Nazi." You think that we don't hear or can't hear your endless chanting, "Ze plane! Ze plane!" -- Tattoo; Fantasy Island. You represent a very small sect of society that thinks that a savior is needed in the world of poor delusional gamblers and so you are here to DRUM BEAT it into us like a traveling fundamentalist "Turn or Burn" preacher. We have seen your act. It's tired, there's absolutely nothing new, and actually, I doubt that anyone can hear you anyway.
My, you have been busy with copy & paste. Gizmo, try to stay on topic and come up with an actual argument or some data which proves that you win all your short sessions and yet still miraculously end up with a win rate right on expectation. You know, try to exercise a little of that critical thinking faculty you're recommending. You might have to brush up on some basics first though, so here's little reading for YOU (https://www.amazon.com/Basic-Math-Pre-Algebra-Dummies-Zegarelli/dp/1118791983/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1472563745&sr=8-1&keywords=arithmetic+for+dummies).
QuoteWe have seen your act. blah blah blah...
I love the way whenever someone's trying to put anyone else down, they invoke imaginary supporters, as if that actually means anything. I don't hear anyone else complaining about me, only complaining about you asking $200 for a roulette system. I don't blame you for being p*ssed off though, since I've already exposed your at best incompetence, and at worst lies. Your days as a seller are numbered buddy, better join some more forums if you want to pay the bills.
Quote from: Jake on August 30, 2016, 01:50:19 PM
My, you have been busy with copy & paste. Gizmo, try to stay on topic and come up with an actual argument or some data which proves that you win all your short sessions and yet still miraculously end up with a win rate right on expectation. You know, try to exercise a little of that critical thinking faculty you're recommending. You might have to brush up on some basics first though, so here's little reading for YOU.
OK, time to crack that thick bone located just above your neck and to let something in. This is a test of your intelligence. If I add up all the spins that I placed bets on, as if I were keeping track of every win and every loss, they would average out at 61% wins and 39% losses, as expected for the double zero American wheel. Are you with me so far?
I'm trying to example to you, per your request, showing you how I win more money by winning at moments that represent to me opportunity. And in actual practice and real play, they actually exist. At 61% vs 39% and flat betting I would expect to lose at the House's Edge rate. And that is what you are insisting must happen. Only I have been saying for years to bet bigger when you are doing good and bet smaller when you aren't. Once again your opinion being that I can't know when I'm doing good, or bad I guess for that matter. So, until you acknowledge that I can tell when I'm doing good and conversely bad, I can't reach you as a fellow human being on this planet.
QuoteI love the way whenever someone's trying to put anyone else down, they invoke imaginary supporters, as if that actually means anything. I don't hear anyone else complaining about me, only complaining about you asking $200 for a roulette system. I don't blame you for being p*ssed off though, since I've already exposed your at best incompetence, and at worst lies. Your days as a seller are numbered buddy, better join some more forums if you want to pay the bills.
Talk about imaginary supporters, do you ever bother to meet with yourself and do a check of what's real? I'm not " p*ssed off" as you just put it. I'm the happy owner of a successful online school with happy students. I could ask $20,000 and get it if I could close every sale in escrow after proving it works. But I had a far better idea. BTW, I've earned my $200 per student. I've spent far less time on these students than I did with the first ten at $500 each. My better idea is to, almost for free considering what it is worth, to give it away slowly. It's against everything human nature traps all of us into dealing with, unless you happen to be one of the captives set free. You see, I've looked into the mirror and checked with what is real. I'm giving away something that really works for what amounts to not much more than the price of two aggressive bets.
Now let's see how you do with that. You have been told what you have clearly asked for. It's a mathematical explanation that clears it all up. If this continues to go on as some kind of begging for the big secret then you will have to find someone else to give you your answers.
Quote from: Gizmotron on August 30, 2016, 03:37:05 PM
I'm trying to example to you, per your request, showing you how I win more money by winning at moments that represent to me opportunity. And in actual practice and real play, they actually exist. At 61% vs 39% and flat betting I would expect to lose at the House's Edge rate. And that is what you are insisting must happen.
Nope, I'm not insisting that must happen at all. You'd better do some remedial reading too. I said that you can't win flat betting in short sessions and yet in the long term achieve the expected win rate. It just doesn't make sense.
Seems like you're shifting the goalposts and pretending that's not what you said after all.
QuoteOnly I have been saying for years to bet bigger when you are doing good and bet smaller when you aren't.
Now that's something I can agree with. So you finally admit that your bet selection has no effect. It took a while, but we got there in the end. :)
Jake, you are really dense. You are the one that needs me to admit that my bet selections make no difference. That's your drum beating again. I think you must have a head ache. I don't care what you need.
QuoteSo you finally admit that your bet selection has no effect. It took a while, but we got there in the end.
I'm done engaging you. You don't know anything about gambling discussion.
You can own this thread and I don't care what you have to say. You don't listen, you draw conclusions that are not true. And when you are shown the truth you can't see it. Enjoy the sound of your own voice.
That's super. The refuge for those who have run out of arguments is abuse. That's being generous in your case because you never had any arguments to begin with, only ignorance, confirmation bias, and conflating cause with coincidence.
This forum seems to be nothing but a sink hole for the ignorant and desperate. The plain truth is rejected in favour of spammers and snake oil salesmen.