I can not help thinking that people never publish everything they know.
I was reading other websites and it is clear that the first thing people think is that just going to let winning to get out of the forums.
This means that everything that is posted in all forums is what does not work. After people try and it is a no go, then decide to publish.
Or perhaps you have posted all that you know?
Please give your opinion. I have no holy grail, but I want to know what others think.
Thank you very much.
I'm sure that most people believe that a real HG should never be widely available. In fact it would be foolish to share such a thing. That's exactly why I did it. It's published right here at this forum. I'M counting on human nature. People are too sceptical to believe what's right in front of their faces. There's also the fact that very few are ready to see it. Most people want an easy solution. Until they are prepared to give up on any easy way, they have very little interest in finding the very thing they are looking for. And for that, most of them will be too late. It's not personal. I haven't done this to tick off a few beginners. This is about proving the mathboyz wrong. The price for doing this is in a way it's own reward.
Well,
Most of the people gathered on different gambling boards are big time losers. They join all forums with the unrealistic hope of getting a panacea some fortunate days.
One of the grail which I tested to beat more than 10 million spins, is in the shape of a bot that Ophis has created is shown here:
http://betselection.cc/ophis'-mst/holy-grail-randomness-can-be-beaten-even-in-the-longest-run/ (http://betselection.cc/ophis'-mst/holy-grail-randomness-can-be-beaten-even-in-the-longest-run/)
I respect but do not support the intention of not publishing the best that anyone has.
If I had a holy grail I would publish it. What bothers me is the fact that people see the forums as a gathering of people stingy with knowledge.
Comments like that if I won, I would not be in the forum. I am leaving because I learned to win. I read things like that in many other places of discussion.
It is a sad attitude. But I suppose that it is human nature as you say. Those who leave because they won they return with their tails between their legs. With another user. Or with the same user very ashamed. Would not it be better not to leave in the first place? Even as a winner. Better to stay and share with other tips and help people succeed.
In your particular case. Thank you for sharing and set the example.
QuoteThere's also the fact that very few are ready to see it. Most people want an easy solution. Until they are prepared to give up on any easy way, they have very little interest in finding the very thing they are looking for.
That's THE problem, no interest in studying what random is sending, wanting the easy a-b-c method, there isn't one - period !
QuoteIt is a sad attitude. But I suppose that it is human nature as you say
You should maybe look at it a little differently wannawin, IF an a-b-c type method did exist then providing the world with
wait for this
then do that
if lose - do this
if win - do that
would kill roulette for good so you could almost respect the holder of such a method for keeping it quiet, as if you work hard enough eventualy, with hope, you too at some point may see it and when you do, the game is still there to use your years of study to earn with.
QuoteI can not help thinking that people never publish everything they know.
From what I have seen on the forums over the last 5 to 6 years there is only a handfull who 'say' they/we are able to win each session, I say they/we as I am one of them, Bayes knows what I do and I know what he does, we are almost playing identically one of the differences is the stake size being used, Bayes plays higher values than I do but he has been doing it longer than me, Gizmo, in my opinion, seems to do very similar, we are lead to believe, and I don't doubt it, that MrJ wins too, now he only plays live wheel, Bayes and I play RNG at BV not sure about Gizmo.
I've explained as much as I can on the forum regarding series, singles and other events, I've also sent detailed replies to the many PM's I get, the recipients have always come back with thanks and gratitude to the process I use, the main factor is al always MM if you can't get that right you're 70% down already, the simplest way I can put my play is, you need to understand your PERSONAL win/loss flow, how often are you correct or how reliable are your 'triggers to bet' mentally storing the length of L's and building your MM around these findings, we are still constantly developing our triggers to bet, without this knowledge you're flying blind and still hoping for that a-b-c method that isn't going to be found but thres always hope, I would love to be able to bot a cash cow but I can't even get my play into code as you could say a lot of it is gut, my win ratio is probably only 30% - 35% the rest is how much I bet which depends on what I am used to in my WL mental picture.
@ wannawin, regarding your coding teaching thread, learning to code is a good thing but you will get the same outcomes as we who already code do, which means you'll be learning coding to be dissapointed so I would only recommend learning it for the love of it not to hopefully find a HG, you can just leave that to those of us who already do and give the results to the forum.
Then there's those members who do post their whole winning a-b-c method, JohnLegend for example, full of enthusiasim, but so far in the JL challenge, of which I am responsible for monitoring and reporting the results, well, in almost 5 months he's DOWN approx £300 in the red. So your only gripe is that a reliable a-b-c method 'could' be out there but is being held very close to someones chest, if you can change your mindset into believing it isn't then you can clear your mind and accept you have to keep looking until YOU find what works for you.
Quote from: Gizmotron on March 27, 2013, 05:01:46 PM
I'm sure that most people believe that a real HG should never be widely available... That's exactly why I did it...
??? ??? ??? ???
Great thread wannawin!
Albalaha, I have not read your HG thread or this thread completely yet, just glanced over them, but many many thanks for starting it. To all who say Al is not for real, Ophis does not play around : )
If someone does have a HG then it is their choice to share or not, either way they are not obligated to do anything.
A HG will always remain a HG published or not, rare to be used : )
Quote from: spike on March 27, 2013, 08:14:26 PM
??? ??? ??? ???
Very simple Spike. I'm running an experiment in human nature. Heck, even Victor is suggesting a Randomness 101 kind of talking points. No. 1, I don't need the money. Nobody in my family believes I can win whenever I go in a casino. Of course, none of them ever go in casinos. So I have a pallet full of skeptics telling me what I can't do. The mathboyz are the primary targets. My goal is to send a throng against their never ending, drown of fundamentalist dogma. I really don't care if it over saturates the casinos with effective players. I don't care what the casinos are freeked out over. I don't care if you get discovered. I'm only interested in showing the mathboyz that they are wrong.
Giz,
To make a point is a difficult undertaking.
To enjoy your winnings is easy ; )
Thanks and I always appreciate everyone's time and help!
Quote from: Gizmotron on March 27, 2013, 08:30:40 PM
Nobody in my family believes I can win whenever I go in a casino.
Really? What's wrong with them. Don't they know you
published the HG here? That's why I had all the question
mark emoticons in the previous post, where is that post
where that the Grail is in, I missed it. Do you have the
link?
If I am making 1000 euro per month playing roulette for the past several years then the only reason I would post on the forums is to enjoy conversations with players interested in my approach.
Quote from: spike on March 27, 2013, 08:39:38 PM
Really? What's wrong with them. Don't they know you
published the HG here? That's why I had all the question
mark emoticons in the previous post, where is that post
where that the Grail is in, I missed it. Do you have the
link?
Spike, what you want does not concern me. Randomness is not your exclusive domain. It never was. Your 72% contribution has never passed a peer reviewed process. My version of reading randomness will. You and your concerns are irrelevant. You are nothing more than a minor irritation. I've been dealing with the mathazoids for so many years, you are nothing but a bunch of hot air. BTW, you know where every word I've said at these forums are. Don't play unintelligent.
Quote from: AMK on March 27, 2013, 08:20:43 PM
To all who say Al is not for real, Ophis does not play around : )
Phoenix after further development evolved into bot generating 0.26u/spin with 2500 bank.
...
other words... having 500euro im tripling this this per month... +a bit more.
---
people here are not interested in HG.
All they want is to search for it their entire live.
Project Phoenix will not become public because of this attitude.
And i can't be bothered with support.
Quote from: Gizmotron on March 27, 2013, 08:56:10 PM
you know where every word I've said at these forums are. Don't play unintelligent.
I don't remember in what thread you posted your HG
and I wanted a heads up, that's all. How about it?
If you consider an HG to mean a system which ends in plus, even in the longest stretch, you can refer to the HG topic in Ophis' section. More than an easy to use method which u like to play manually, it is a pure bot stuff. It has beaten more than 10 millions data, having sessions like one with 3 million, two 1 million data and various hundreds of thousands of data available to me as well to ophis from our personal collections, various forums and gambling sites. A few hundred thousands of data were given to us by "magoo" which were beaten gracefully without ever getting irrecoverable losses.
I don't think that there is anybody else who can match with this HG bot, at least not known to me. If anybody knows any other stuff of that level, please let us know. The HG is still being improved to make it a far better winner with lesser drawdowns.
Quote from: spike on March 28, 2013, 01:12:11 AM
I don't remember in what thread you posted your HG
and I wanted a heads up, that's all. How about it?
I can be wrong but I do not think it is a single post but a summary of several given over time.
Like everything in life we have to put some effort. Reading it does not cost money. Effort is made by the interested person as it is usual.
Quote from: Albalaha on March 28, 2013, 02:08:45 AM
having sessions like one with 3 million, two 1 million data and various hundreds of thousands of data
Unfortunately I do not think there is much interest in a system that spends up to 3 million draws to end a session.
I suppose it is as you say and is only usable by bots. The greater the session length the greater the chance for the casino to detect it nonetheless. Sessions with millions of sets surely attract much more attention in casino audits.
Please receive many omens as I hope the casino will not detect your system and you can make lots of money then show the forum all the screenshots of wealth.
Greetings and abundance. Walter
I am busy into improving the bot further with adding more stuffs as I am not satisfied with the existing average winning per spin. It is not true that it can be played only upon very big sessions. Ophis, as said, is already using it, for weeks, in continuity.
Off course not, only an fool will do that :-X
Might give some hints here and there.....
Carlitos 8)
Just what are the distinguishing characteristics of a HG?
Until that's clarified posters will all have different concepts of what we're supposed to be publishing! (Or not publishing.)
Victor has offered some suggestions and a robust debate has ensued.
I suggest you take a look if you haven't already: http://betselection.cc/general-discussion/the-%27holy-grail%27-should-be-realistic/ (http://betselection.cc/general-discussion/the-%27holy-grail%27-should-be-realistic/)
... well something that wins and makes you an profit.....those who have enough experience will notice the Holy Grail when they see it.... ;)
Carlitos 8)
What i we *ind the "Holy Grail" is a lot o* work?
Superman has it and he can't bot it. Maybe he makes enough to make it worthwhile.
I get bored. *all asleep.
Sam
(I'll get my eph back soon.)
QuoteWhat i we *ind the "Holy Grail" is a lot o* work?
I agree, a lot of work it is.
QuoteSuperman has it and he can't bot it. Maybe he makes enough to make it worthwhile
I wouldn't call what I have a HG, it's too much effort in concentration and when it's struggling to recover it works on your mind very heavily. In my opinion a HG should have a higher win rate than the odds dictate, which would allow flat betting to avoid the hard grinding that is emotionally draining.
A grail will never be ABC
Its adapting to the current conditions you are faced with whilst at the same time watching for change
but I can't get it right lol >:( >:( >:(
Quote from: D1 on March 29, 2013, 06:19:15 PM
A grail will never be ABC
Yes it will. It will be the compilation of experts, taking my writings from this forum, and the source code written in xTalk, the only speech oriented syntactic language, and taking all of it to explain in common terms how it works and why it works. None of that will happen until the proof is delivered.
Quote from: Gizmotron on March 29, 2013, 06:36:29 PM
Yes it will. It will be the compilation of experts, taking my writings from this forum, and the source code written in xTalk, the only speech oriented syntactic language, and taking all of it to explain in common terms how it works and why it works. None of that will happen until the proof is delivered.
EXACTLY !!!
that's why it will never be ABC
Quote from: Gizmotron on March 29, 2013, 06:36:29 PM
Yes it will. It will be the compilation of experts,
:zzz: :zzz: :zzz:
[mod] A deliberately provocative post. He's been warned before about deliberately baiting Gizmotron. So now he has to wear the consequences. [/mod]
......nobody says that the HG would be easy....... you may need to work for it....
Carlitos 8)
Quote from: D1 on March 29, 2013, 06:52:59 PM
EXACTLY !!!
that's why it will never be ABC
To me, what I said, is as simple as ABC. Reading source code is no more complex as simple arithmetic is. If you know the language and the compilation of very simple processes then it can be done easily. What I meant to say is that so called intelligent people will explain it to those uneducated folks who have not educated themselves.
Well I agree with you there Giz
that's me one of the uneducated
Quote from: D1 on March 29, 2013, 10:01:37 PM
Well I agree with you there Giz
that's me one of the uneducated
Well some really smart person will explain to all of us. Turning mathematics on its ear will be fun to watch.
Gizmo, how about setting up a separate web site or blog for all this? it would be nice to have it all in one place and you could put the URL in your signature. You could give examples, upload your tracking software etc. As it is, all your posts are scattered in different sections and forums and not that easy to find. Just a suggestion.
Good idea. I'll second that.
I've previously got a bit lost trying to locate all those random bits'n'pieces.
You could look at Weebly as a possible free host.
Quote from: Bayes on March 30, 2013, 08:33:29 AM
Gizmo, how about setting up a separate web site or blog for all this? it would be nice to have it all in one place and you could put the URL in your signature. You could give examples, upload your tracking software etc. As it is, all your posts are scattered in different sections and forums and not that easy to find. Just a suggestion.
First off, the suggestion is flattering. I have it here for one very good reason. It's in the hands of those that want it the most. It's in the hands of those that reject it. No one will be able to say sure, he kept to himself before he wrecked it. You do realize that the full release of a working application, coupled with a very simple to understand explanation will have the potential for a wide spread result. I have a good use for that result.
And there's also an extra benefit. There's poor Spike. He's like the court clown at the gathering of the mathboyz. That will be the moment when these forums take on a whole new perspective. Imagine having documented coverage of the flat earthers during the realm of Columbus. Only now we have it all in their own words. And we have the resident bone head for amusement sake. It's all good.
Moderator's comment: The poster has been sanctioned for posting an inflammatory and insulting comment that clearly violates the forum rules.
It's time the two of them stopped behaving like a couple of fractious children and showed adult maturity.
Either will automatically mute themselves if there is any more of this unseemly behaviour in future .
Quote from: Bayes on March 30, 2013, 08:33:29 AM
Gizmo, how about setting up a separate web site or blog for all this?
Good idea. I would love to see all this stuff
he constantly alludes to as 'being here', all
the stuff he claims is the Grail, and which
and which I can't find, I'd like to see him gather it
all in one thread so he can just refer to that
thread from now on.
Spike, perhaps someone will feel sorry for you and assemble something. Victor has his own method that is very good too. There are others here that have versions of randomness and guessing too. I had no trouble finding their contributions. I really don't see the difficulties. I'm sorry Spike, I'm very busy working on something more important.
Quote from: Gizmotron on March 31, 2013, 01:11:58 AM
Spike, perhaps someone will feel sorry for you and assemble something.
Yes, something would be better than nothing,
which is all I can find now. With every post, I'm
directed to look at another post, which directs
me to another thread, which directs me back here.
I'm starting to think its all a wild baloney chase..
Quote from: spike on March 31, 2013, 02:42:06 AM
Yes, something would be better than nothing,
which is all I can find now.
That certainly explains how you can criticise my contribution to understanding randomness. Your opinions are groundless, based on impressions that you want to be correct. As if wishful thinking were your argument. You have no basis in fact. You clearly demonstrate an unscientific approach to your efforts in these forums. Any might guess that jealousy were your primary motivation. But that's just an educated guess. I'll be done with my proof of concept algorithm within two months. Perhaps you should use your own capacity to research my writings at this forum. It would be very interesting watching you explain to everyone how an example of working proof can't work, even though it clearly does in demonstration.
By request I've been asked to bury the hatchet. I've actually considered that.
I've set out to accomplish the impossible. So I'll do it.
I leave to do a difficult task. But I give you this Spike:
Pink Floyd Lost For Words (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEBPt4bAa1o#)
You must wait for it.
"By request I've been asked to bury the hatchet."
Good man. :thumbsup:
Blessed is the peacemaker.
I wonder if I get this black box validator working, I wonder if I should first sell it to rich people. I figured out a way to give it away as a trial period. Steve says he makes $300,000 per year off his sales. It's obvious that there are people that could afford to validate this in a real world testing type of a situation. That would eventually lead to rumors of its effectiveness. That would cause a big enough buzz as to cause a great deal of attention. That would lead to a proper demonstration to occur. Then a release of the open source version would be taken serious.
Any ideas or comments regarding this are welcome.
Quote from: Gizmotron on April 05, 2013, 01:35:10 PM
Any ideas or comments regarding this are welcome.
My comment is: if you have a clear intention of making it public from the beginning, you can release it open-source from day 1. Even from the building stages.
If you want people to use it, but don't want to disclose the "how to's" you can always make a web application, host it in a secure server and let willing people connect.
If there's money to be made, it's almost certain someone "out there" will show interest :cheer:
The main idea with it is to teach and validate concept. So I'm designing it to produce telemetry for each characteristic of randomness. In other words it outputs what I think when analyzing each spin. That way I won't have to teach by writing books. The software does that for you. I would like to be compensated for the four to six months of work that is going into development of this product. That's what it is you know. It will teach far better and easier than any book and teaching school. Other people will become experts. It is they that can teach those that struggle with it. I might sell it at a reasonable price, as a software product. What about that? Once I reach a set earnings goal I can let it go as open source. How much is six months of development time worth?
Quote from: Gizmotron on April 05, 2013, 03:30:14 PM
How much is six months of development time worth?
It varies by country and what the programmer agrees to. Over here it is usually a "per project" fee. In other countries it is measured in $/hours.You should check the status yourself by asking an IT professional from your locality.
Will you public a holy grail?
No.
But i would assist someone to go in the right direction.
Regards
Max
Quote from: Max on April 05, 2013, 04:56:16 PM
Will you public a holy grail?
No.
But i would assist someone to go in the right direction.
Regards
Max
Max, I already did. It's published here, like chips in chocolate chipped cookies. The only thing not published is a spin by spin explanation and working results. I really did expect people here to do the work. Human nature deserves a lesson. Max, the answer is YES. When you get the message you will scratch your head. You will ask, why tell the true holy grail publicly?
Gizmotron can you please guide me to which topic/posts to look in order to read all your info about your HG?
Thank you.
I did about 5 minutes of looking on this...Gizmo is this the basis (I know or presume the basis would actually be in the interpretation of what is tracked and what you do with that interpretation) of what everybody is looking for? If they search this----Tracking Software for Practice Real Play (http://betselection.cc/gizmotron/tracking-software-for-practice-real-play/msg3163/#msg3163)
Like I said I only looked for about 5 minutes because people keep asking. Looking at the tracker format it wasn't my cup of tea because I am just stuck in my ways of betting just a couple inside numbers and I'm usually looking at repeaters of one form or another or repeating wheel sectors so all the outside tracking wasn't huge to me...although I realize the outside tracking does correlate to those pesky inside numbers (something about old dogs probably applies here). If I'm way off track that's okay too...at least it can narrow things down for everybody a little more as to what you're not referring to then.
Yes, that tracking software is essential. You can fill out charts by hand if you can't run this software. I have an example further down in that thread. There is another thread here where I published the list of characteristics that I look for while looking at these type of charts. Do a search for "list" & gizmotron. That might bring it up.
It did :
http://betselection.cc/meta-selection/the-simple-explanation-attacking-trends/msg2678/#msg2678 (http://betselection.cc/meta-selection/the-simple-explanation-attacking-trends/msg2678/#msg2678)
I've had a request to write this in another scripting language. I've got enough to do writing it in xTalk. Here is the secret to programming it. Have the algorithm perform each observation of a characteristic at a time. Have it send back a percentage of effectiveness from the recent history of spins. Do this for all the characteristics, including the possibility of a working global effect occurring for each characteristic. Make the software think like you think when identifying characteristics and patterns. Take all that data and have the software select the best trend to bet on. Have the software evaluate the session difficulty. Have the software constantly search for elegant patterns.
To write this software you must already know how to do everything. It makes no sense in tutoring others at this point. The software, when completed, will be the perfect tutor. It will kick out perfect telemetry for every characteristic, for every spin entered.
I know there are those that want this to operate as a bot. It won't need to be a bot. You can run it on a second screen while you are logged into an online session.
http://betselection.cc/gizmotron/ (http://betselection.cc/gizmotron/)
Thanks
Gizmotron,
I've spent quite some time practicing with the tracker using all the information you've given on various threads.
Although I sometimes manage to get on some good trends I'm a long way off being good enough, it's a lot harder than it looks.
A lot is down to never being sure when a trend is strong enough. By the time I'm sure it's stopped.
Would you say you're so well versed in this technique that it's almost intuitive? Is that how good I have to become?
I can imagine that your new software might really help speed up the learning process.
Trebor
I am always trying to have an open mind but this "follow the trend" approach seems to me like anything else.
Because follow the trend or go against the trend has the same rate.
And even if we are mixing these events we can still lose because randomness has no flow.
What I say is that there is no better selection whatever we chose because the pockets of the wheel are still there and nothing is blocking the unbet pockets to hit.
That s my opinion that is comming from pure logic...
I respect Gizmos theory and I hope he really wins with it but I don t think it s any better than anything else.
Ofcource I hope I am wrong for the sake of all the members in here
Razor
I pretty much agree with you, but trends and waves do occur. Whether or not they can be ridden to $$$$ is another story.
Sam
Yes sure Sam.
But trends are just the tracks that randomness leaves behind.It should leave something behind as preveous results...either we call them trends or random results its the same thing.
Trying to ride them seems useless because NEW tracks will be added soon and they are UNPREDICTABLE.
They aren t human tracks they are the tracks of a random ball spining in a wheel with always 37 pockets of freedom...they have no root,no destination as human tracks.
But I am waiting the tool of Mr Gizmo with great interest.
Quote from: Trebor on April 06, 2013, 11:06:37 AM
A lot is down to never being sure when a trend is strong enough. By the time I'm sure it's stopped.
I think what gizmo does is try to anticipate a trend (try to catch it early on) and not wait until it's firmly established before riding along with it. As you say, the problem with trying to exploit trends is that they can turn in the blink of an eye. Anyway, I'm looking forward to giving gizmo's software a trial when it's done.
Razor -" ... like anything else."
That's exactly correct. Following trends is no better than anything else. But it's not a mindless set of rules, like a progression is. What it is, and why I like it, it's a great method to detect winning streaks and losing streaks. It gives you a "WHY" it's working. When you are searching for cause and effect, even if it is not real, like seeing formations in clouds, trends are just a method to apply a mapping of the recent effectiveness. The sole purpose of which is to move into win streaks while avoiding being killed by the losing streaks. You can use anything to give meaning to the why. I have found that using a ( why it's working ) method makes seeing the global effects, the elegant patterns, the win streaks easier to keep track of. Every session is different. You must learn to treat every session differently. Keep your eyes on the big things that always tend to be similar. The biggest thing is the win streaks. They come and go differently every session. The why they come and go is different every time too. I have a well developed agility. My intuition is to adapt to the current conditions. To do that I must see them. That's why I must have a useful method of mapping the conditions. Following trends is just a tool that leads to a stretch of positive results that are easier to exploit.
I thought I would show a little progress so far. This telemetry will be changed to logical phrases that are good for seeing process. I still have to add recognition for patterns, global effect, and session effectiveness.
holdYesListSingle && holdThisBet && zapDis
Level 2 doz3, col2, col2, 2
<<<< -- Winner! -- >>>>
-----------------------
Your running total is now at 20
Place a bet of 10 on Column 2
holdYesListSingle && holdThisBet && zapDis
Level 2 doz3, col2, col2, 2
<<<< -- Winner! -- >>>>
-----------------------
Your running total is now at 40
Place a bet of 10 on Column 2
false1, false2, false3 -- holdDozDoz3sp
true1, false2, false3 -- holdDozCol3sp
false1, false2, false3 -- holdDozDoz7sp
false1, false2, false3 -- holdDozCol7sp
3213112111321 -- dozList
3113211123222 -- colList
even, high, doz2, col3, -- holdMaybeListSingle
col1, -- holdMaybeListSleep
doz3, col2, -- holdYesListSingle
-- holdYesListSleep