+ Register

[Mike]

Trends can be observed at the very beginning, the middle , and the end of their occurrence. An experienced player knows how to live with the results of all three conditions. I assure you that you can bet that the next spin continues the trend and that you can win or lose based on what happens in the future. The trick is in knowing how to exploit the unknown future.

You can observe the beginning of what MAY become a trend, but you can't observe the middle or end before the middle and end has actually occurred. How can you? you can only know it's the middle or end AFTER the trend has ended. So you can see a dozen and start betting that it will trend. Oops, it switched, ok now bet the current dozen, damn it switched again. Sometimes the trend will continue long enough to get a win rate higher than expectation, sometimes it won't. On average the expectation prevails. You are just guessing, nothing more. The vital missing ingredient is cause and effect. What is the cause which creates the effect of the trend? without that you have nothing. And there is no cause to be found in looking at past spins because past spins don't indicate future spins. There is no connection whatsoever between past and future spins, and that's why bet selection in the random game is a non-starter.

[Mike]

In your defense, you cannot properly assess the concepts mentioned because your point of view comes from an ethnocentric point of view and values that you have been taught. I get it. Without this knowledge, you can only state what you know.  For that, you are correct. For others that know, their reality is a humble one.

It's not a question of any point of view, whether "ethnocentric" or not. It's a matter of basic logic, which is universal. Roulette spins in the random game are a chain of DISCONNECTED links. On each spin, every pocket is available; if they weren't (or the wheel was biased), bet selection would actually mean something. Human beings have a need to make connections, even where there are none. This is a useful habit and has served us well, but there are some circumstances where it's just not appropriate to make connections. Roulette is a highly artificial setup which was specifically designed so there there are no connections between past and future spins, but people make spurious connections anyway, hence a plethora of roulette systems exist.

It's a religion in that there's not the slightest shred of evidence that any successful roulette system exists or can exist, but people go on looking for it anyway. And they'll go on looking until they realize that their basic premise is flawed. Assume that events are dependent and connections exist then the whole world of roulette systems is available; understand that events are independent and that no connections exist and you're free of the whole sorry business.

Set yourselves free folks, and don't listen to the those who would have you believe that you too can have the keys to the golden kingdom, for a fee...

[Kimo Li]

Logic, therefore, dictates that players cannot profit from playing roulette, end of story.

"Sometimes there just not enough rocks....," Forrest Gump

[Mike]

You can profit from playing roulette but not the GAME of roulette. To make a profit you have to use physics (either bias or visual ballistics), and that usually involves doing some research on specific wheels and conditions. Not all wheels will yield a profit.

The dream of being able play ANY wheel at any time with the expectation of profit, using only past spins or patterns as guide to future spins, is just that: a fantasy.

The closer any given wheel is to the idealized game, the less chance you have of making a profit. And that rules out ALL systems based on guessing, obviously (and all bet selections are just guessing).

[Gizmotron]

but you can't observe the middle or end before the middle and end has actually occurred.

Yes I can. I can confirm a continuing situation as it continues. I do this as it happens. I don't need it to do a certain thing to exploit it. Your brain is fixated on defining what I do. That's your trouble. You are just guessing from an uniformed opinion. Your argumernt is as old as the hills.

[Mike]

Your argumernt is as old as the hills.

An argument's validity isn't based on its novelty.

In fact, looking at your assertion

Trends can be observed at the very beginning, the middle , and the end of their occurrence. An experienced player knows how to live with the results of all three conditions

I'm not sure what this even means, and I'm pretty sure you don't either. But it sounds good, and that's the main thing, right?

[Gizmotron]

An argument's validity isn't based on its novelty.

In fact, looking at your assertion

I'm not sure what this even means, and I'm pretty sure you don't either. But it sounds good, and that's the main thing, right?

The main thing is I'm going to spend this winter writing the proof algorithm in the X-Talk language. That's just because of you and the symbolism you represent of all the Math Nazi's I've had to deal with on all the forums for the past ten years. If I succeed then you are total dust in the wind. If I fail then you can boast of your superior intellect. No matter how righteous you think your opinion is, I control what happens next.

[Mike]

Gizmo,

It doesn't take a superior intellect to understand that past spins don't indicate future spins. Only in a roulette forum might that seem "superior", LOL.

Good luck with your algorithm, but hey, Kimo has already beat you to it. Funny that roulette and casinos still exist though. 

[Kimo Li]

You can profit from playing roulette but not the GAME of roulette. To make a profit you have to use physics (either bias or visual ballistics), and that usually involves doing some research on specific wheels and conditions. Not all wheels will yield a profit.

The dream of being able play ANY wheel at any time with the expectation of profit, using only past spins or patterns as guide to future spins, is just that: a fantasy.

The closer any given wheel is to the idealized game, the less chance you have of making a profit. And that rules out ALL systems based on guessing, obviously (and all bet selections are just guessing).

Ahhh... so there is a chance.

You assume my method does NOT involve physics.

I assure you. My method involves most of the scientific principles known to man. The layman does not need to know the blueprint behind my method. Every method has a core principle; for my method, it starts with mapping the wheel, the Global Pie Method (GPM). Why, because if do not have accurate reference points, you certainly cannot measure velocity, speed, or distance, nor can you recognize, identify, or pinpoint a location. GPM is used, not only as a map, but as a language to communicate and decipher ball movement.

How would someone, who uses the bias or visual ballistics, measure ball speed, velocity, or location, let alone communicate results? If the ball was released on number nine and landed on number 32 (double zero wheel), how would a bias or visual ballistics interpret the data?

A GPM player would know that the ball was released in section one, star two, number 9, and the ball landed in section five, star two, number 32. Data interpretation confirms that the ball is moving one section clockwise and is landing in the second position of that sector. How to use that information is a different story.

I have taken into account the complicated calculations of measuring where the ball will fall and designed my method so that the layman can simply follow a process and be able to bet with confidence that they will be in profit in the long run.

As I have stated in other forums, it's like driving a car. A layman can get into a car, start the engine, and drive to their hearts content. They do not need to know the physics or mechanics behind building the car, leave that to the specialist. In addition, I have also mapped the layout grid using the same principles used to map the wheel. As a result, the GPM player is able to identify, classify, and bet "non-traditional groups."

Bet selection, tracking, and money management are common terms, it's highly sophisticated; yet, the approach is based on common sense, no validation needed.

Apple and oranges, no comparison, I have never spoken for or against the visual ballistic approach. I simply do not care.

[Gizmotron]

Gizmo,

It doesn't take a superior intellect to understand that past spins don't indicate future spins.

I don't need to know the future in order to speculate on it effectively. You continue to imply that I claim that I need to. Let's call what you are projecting as some kind of pseudo mathematical fallacy. You run around on these forums like some kind of Don Quixote disguised as Barney Fife. You keep dropping your red herrings and then acting like it's your duty to save the world from your subjective based crusade. Get real. I don't need to know the future in order to take advantage of coincidence.

[Albalaha]

@Gizmotron,
                           Can you validate your claims via long run testing? I can provide you random sessions of European roulette and you need to just do your way of betting on 100k placed bets. If there is any profit betting flat, you are an undisputed champion of randomness and pattern play. Do you have any tracker that can process data and showcase a graph of how your ideas do?

[BEAT-THE-WHEEL]

Dear Mike,
With respect.
Let me, try to explain, in simple English,
[since my English, quite laughaable though...]

Present spin, not connected to past,
and can't predict future  spins-decision.
that's true,


but lets see at "sets bet", of hits.

eg.
We can't predict future,
but we see as event of probability.
say,
will double streets, of 123456...

all SIX DOUBLE STREET,
hit, in NEXT six spins?

Yes...but 1%chance,
or 1/600spins, albeit the zero HE.
Why 600spins, because we need 6spins to have 123456DS.
====================

If NOW,
we see, SIX DS hit, in six spins,
WILL SIX DIFFERENT ds HIT AGAIN,
in next six spins?
How are u going to win?
What the risk?
How much the profit vs risk?
=====================
Double Street.
123456,

if you see 123321 hit,
will 123321 hit AGAIN, in next six spins?
==================

Double Street.
123456,



or for easy visual,
ABCDEF, as ds123456.

if dsA hit, then dsB hit,
that 1space...from dsA

if dsA hit, then dsC hit,
that TWO space...from dsA

thus if u see ABCDEF street hit in row,
that space of 1,1,1,1,1...

A to B=1
B to C=1.
C to D=1..so on..

will  11111, hit again , in next six spins?
=================

thus if u see ABDEABD  street hit in row,
THAT 121212,
WILL 121212 HIT IN NEXT SIX SPINS AGAIN?

AB=1
BD=2
DE=1
EA=2
AB=1
BD=2

=====================================
Double Street.

IF U see DS=ABCABC,
in last six spins,
will ABC, hit in NEXT three spins?

===========
if u see , say DS A and D, sleep for 12spins,
then DS A hit, and now, will DS A and D, together ,
sleep for next six spins?
==========================

that a few simple example for you, to see, the
bet as "SET",
that still edhered to laws of what ever probability,
large number , bla bla bla

[Gizmotron]

@Gizmotron,
                           Can you validate your claims via long run testing? I can provide you random sessions of European roulette and you need to just do your way of betting on 100k placed bets. If there is any profit betting flat, you are an undisputed champion of randomness and pattern play. Do you have any tracker that can process data and showcase a graph of how your ideas do?

Let's be practical. I play in real casinos with a plan to quit once I reach my goal each and every time. I can do that in less than 200 spins. My proof algorithm will stop loss based on a difficulty rate that exceeds a continuous downward grind of steepness that exceeds an undetermined yet practical index of the effectiveness occurring at the time of the session. This will occur before losing the full bankroll. I run a method that has a bankroll four times my win goal, my stop win. I can run 500 tests to see a 100,000 spins test. You should know that this will be a pure, multi-path set of strict rules that will occur sequentially based on which path follows the best effectiveness rate. The method follows the successful waves that seek a positive upward slope that continues until the win goal is reached. 

Now, that's what I do in a casino playing live. Getting a computer to do it is only a monumental trudge. I suppose a working bot that can take on online casinos and win more than it loses might actually be worth something. So how much would or should a person pay for a truly effective bot? What's it worth?

[Albalaha]

Ok. You play in a real casino but you do have a mechanical way to do everything and you better know that the same can be programmed very easily to be a bot/tracker.
             It will help you too to understand if your wins are merely coming as a fluke or variance working for you or it is a permanently profitable way to play. I or anybody else have no right to demand from you and I can not even say that unless you prove to me I will consider your claims fake but a proper showcase of an ides through simulations on randomly picked data(not your handpicked one where you can do reverse engineering to prove your point) long enough to ward off any chance of momentary variance affecting results, will be enough to prove your point. 100k placed bets on ECs or anything alike will be enough to conclude.
                     If your way is proved to be correct and if it can win flat as well even 1 chip in 100 spins, it is worth its weight in gold and an answer to the joke of Einstein. You will be the first person to do that ever.

[Mike]

Kimo,

I have taken into account the complicated calculations of measuring where the ball will fall and designed my method so that the layman can simply follow a process and be able to bet with confidence that they will be in profit in the long run.

So you're saying that your GPM is actually an AP method? I haven't read your books, but I've seen enough of your posts at various forums over the years which suggest that isn't the case. You admit that your books outline only a way of "mapping" the wheel, and that the GPM also provides a "language" with which to communicate and decipher ball movement. So we still have the question of how you select your bets. If it's a form of VB, then how can the bet selection be as subjective as it appears to be? The core principles of VB are not subjective.

Mapping the wheel, providing the means to effectively memorise it, and deciphering ball movements may all be valuable additions to the roulette player's arsenal, but they're not a substitute for bet selection (which is what this thread is about). When it actually comes to the time to select a bet, how does all the paraphernalia of GPM tell you how to proceed if it's not based on past spins? And if it's based on past spins, you're back in the fallacy.

It seems to me that you're trying to add an element of physics to GPM in order to give it an air of respectability, but in fact there's no real physics involved at all. It's basically a trending system, albeit a rather sophisticated one. A case of physics envy perhaps?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_envy

@ BEAT-THE-WHEEL,

Selections based on probability won't overcome the house edge. You need a way to select bets which overcome the house advantage otherwise your results will merely conform to the negative expectation. Probabilities can help if you're playing in order to reach some specific goal or manage a limited bankroll, but it won't give any advantage.

@ Gizmo,

I don't need to know the future in order to take advantage of coincidence.

That's an oxymoron, like saying you can "read randomness". Randomness by definition can't be "read". It's absurd. Similarly, coincidence is something you can't predict. You can't "take advantage" of coincidence until it's already happened, by which time it's too late to take advantage of it.

I get what your bet selection is attempting to do but it doesn't work. You try to catch a trend and if it doesn't work you find another one and jump on that. Rinse and repeat. Eventually you hit a nice long trend and clean up. It's not a bad idea but unfortunately the reality of randomness means that the losses you make in the many minor and failed trends will outweigh the gains made on the relatively few major trends. And again the selection is based on past spins, so the foundation is built on sand.