Trolls  add to the bottom line of a forum. They are just as  valuable as any serious poster.If one does not care for a troll`s post just ignore  it

Mike, thank you for your very well thought out and coherent reply. We are discussing tangentially the same ground that the two camps of probability have been arguing about for more than 100 years.

QuoteDo you think it's only possible to calculate the probability of a sequence of outcomes only if each is not independent?

I'm not suggesting that at all. It never goes to a state where each spin is not independent. I'm saying that a coincidence of randomness some times presents a state of opportunity irregardless of the over all probability and the odds for an independent spin. Knowing the odds has nothing to do with opportunity recognition. Furthermore, the odds can't predict the outcome of the next spin.

QuoteIf you were making a bet on whether 24 numbers would hit over the next 37 spins, then it has more legs.

I agree with that statement Mike, by the way, are you Michael Sackleford?

QuoteGive me ANY system based on the law of the third and I'll show you it's no better than betting randomly.

Mike

Could you please check the attachment?

QuoteI'm saying that a coincidence of randomness some times presents a state of opportunity irregardless of the over all probability and the odds for an independent spin.

Gizmotron

If you perceive it as mere coincidence, then you are just lucky when you are winning, thus you possess no skill of ''reading'' randomness as you claim.

In order to be valid what you are claiming for years, there have to be consistent tendencies instead of coincidental random events.

Coincidence suggests luck/random, consistent tendencies suggest reliable patterns.
So Gizmo, you cannot claim any skill unless there is something more than random coincidences.

@ Blue_Angel,

No I'm not the Wizard of Odds. Different Mike.

Thanks for the system, I'll get back to you later with the results of my tests.

Quote from: Blue_Angel on September 04, 2016, 09:48:22 AM
In order to be valid what you are claiming for years, there have to be consistent tendencies instead of coincidental random events.

Coincidence suggests luck/random, consistent tendencies suggest reliable patterns.
So Gizmo, you cannot claim any skill unless there is something more than random coincidences.

I agree with this. If Gizmo's strategy attempts to take advantage of 'coincidences' then results should be no better than expectation. Only if it identifies and exploits consistent patterns can it claim to get results BETTER than expectation.

Quote from: Mike on September 03, 2016, 02:42:39 PM
Give me ANY system based on the law of the third and I'll show you it's no better than betting randomly.

It is my experience that if that is true of mindless Law of Third based systems, it is not true of opportunity exploitation's derived from coincidences that are based on randomness recognition methods. It can easily be shown that while betting randomly will produce phases of extreme success or demise, the effectiveness states that I suggest need to be watched, that those conditions will not occur at the same time that coincidence based opportunity bet selections occur. Furthermore, It is my experience that because coincidence based opportunity bet selections are not mindless activities and that betting randomly is, that I see better organized opportunities in those characteristic states of effectiveness, in the opportunity based choices. It's just what I have seen when I build sims that makes me say this.

Quote from: Mike on September 04, 2016, 11:17:40 AM
I agree with this. If Gizmo's strategy attempts to take advantage of 'coincidences' then results should be no better than expectation. Only if it identifies and exploits consistent patterns can it claim to get results BETTER than expectation.

That's it in a nut shell. That is all that I'm claiming that it does. It's a skill of identification of conditions and strategic caution. My playing experience tells me to calculate risk based on what is currently happening to my session at the table. You need to jump in in order to see how the water is. You have to know that you can adjust to what ever the conditions are. That includes both bet selection and how much each bet's amount should be. It's a teachable as well as a learnt skill. To more clarify this. It will go through times where it gets results "BETTER than expectation," nothing more than that. It won't do this BETTER condition all the time, consistently,  and I'm not attempting to claim that is does.  I hope you are beginning to see that I'm executing a skill based on experience and craftsmanship. The probability statistics don't have an effect on these conditions, limitations, or decisions.

Quote from: Blue_Angel on September 04, 2016, 09:48:22 AM
Gizmotron

If you perceive it as mere coincidence, then you are just lucky when you are winning, thus you possess no skill of ''reading'' randomness as you claim.

In order to be valid what you are claiming for years, there have to be consistent tendencies instead of coincidental random events.

Coincidence suggests luck/random, consistent tendencies suggest reliable patterns.
So Gizmo, you cannot claim any skill unless there is something more than random coincidences.

Wow, so you possess the skill to define what I'm suggesting for years is an advantage. Doing so gives you what? You have nothing. I'm sort of impressed by how impressed you are with yourself though. That's somewhat entertaining.


Try this: "there have to be consistent tendencies instead of coincidental random events." Does it ever occur to you that both exist at the same time and that magic Elves are never the cause of these coincidences that can be easily observed to the trained eye? I've dealt with mathboys for years that there can't be a cause for patterns or trends to exist and that they never predict any future results. So I always classify opportunities as coincidence. I can claim skill no matter what you say I can't do.

Quote from: Gizmotron on September 04, 2016, 01:21:40 PM

Wow, so you possess the skill to define what I'm suggesting for years is an advantage. Doing so gives you what? You have nothing. I'm sort of impressed by how impressed you are with yourself though. That's somewhat entertaining.


Try this: "there have to be consistent tendencies instead of coincidental random events." Does it ever occur to you that both exist at the same time and that magic Elves are never the cause of these coincidences that can be easily observed to the trained eye? I've dealt with mathboys for years that there can't be a cause for patterns or trends to exist and that they never predict any future results. So I always classify opportunities as coincidence. I can claim skill no matter what you say I can't do.

The cause for patterns is randomness and random consists of all the unknown variables.
If we knew all variables which affect every outcome there would be not random, thus just a lack of knowledge.
The true nature of randomness is that there is no random at all, quite paradox but true, only because of our gap of perception exists.
Perception evolves as knowledge grows.

Quote from: Blue_Angel on September 04, 2016, 01:49:03 PM
The cause for patterns is randomness and random consists of all the unknown variables.
If we knew all variables which affect every outcome there would be not random, thus just a lack of knowledge.
The true nature of randomness is that there is no random at all, quite paradox but true, only because of our gap of perception exists.
Perception evolves as knowledge grows.

Try starting with this, this makes me a mathBoy I guess, there are no variables that effect any outcome. You might be talking about physics though, but I don't think that you are. Nothing causes randomness to occur other than chance. I suspect that you have some kind of magical belief regarding the unknown.

Quote from: Gizmotron on September 04, 2016, 02:09:47 PM

Try starting with this, this makes me a mathBoy I guess, there are no variables that effect any outcome. You might be talking about physics though, but I don't think that you are. Nothing causes randomness to occur other than chance. I suspect that you have some kind of magical belief regarding the unknown.

You may assume what you want.

Quote from: Blue_Angel on September 04, 2016, 02:20:45 PM
You may assume what you want.

I'm beginning to form the opinion that you are at least a borderline Troll. 

Quote from: Gizmotron on September 04, 2016, 02:52:37 PM

I'm beginning to form the opinion that you are at least a borderline Troll. 

You may assume what you want.

One more thought:

On can leave Dodge City but there is  no escape from Trollhatten

Borderline Troll or Patrol I don't give a dime!