+ Register

[VLS]

This is not an evil thing. It just makes us look elsewhere.
for the answer.

It's all good 

[spike]

You mean answers.

Actually, I don't. Sorry. Answer stands by itself.

[Gizmotron]

Actually, I don't. Sorry. Answer stands by itself.

On this forum, context has consequences. When Vic suggested that someone should chart results in a timeline, (an obvious continuous sequence of spins,) Spike went off saying there is no timeline in randomness. This is Spike being Spike. He loves to make you follow red herring trails. All a timeline is, is a continuous set of past spins. All Vic was suggesting was people should look to see how often sleepers & singles streak together in the dozens & columns. All old Spike wants is for people here to think that randomness only works for him. Don't be fooled by his debating techniques. He loves to change the subject. It takes actual work to stay on topic while he is around. Want to see a trend? Look how many times he has attempted to take words and phrases out of context just in this thread alone. He has yet to deal with his obvious contradictions. Spike knew he made a mistake on that one. So he's back plugging along with his same, tired out, debating style.

[spike]

  All a timeline is, is a continuous set of past spins.

No, that isn't a timeline. A timeline is just what the word
says it is. A line to establish when certain events occur in
correlation to other events so we can determine if there
is a pattern to these events that we can exploit to our
advantage. Smart men have been looking for this since
roulette was invented. They never found it because it
doesn't exist in random outcomes.

[Gizmotron]

Spike- " Smart men have been looking for this since roulette was invented. They never found it because it doesn't exist in random outcomes."

That's Spike's entire argument. He says his kind of randomness works and that using trends and patterns don't work. This, from the same guy that is clueless regarding the concept of the global effect. I'm sure that if he could explain it, that somebody else wrote about it hundreds of years ago too. Randomness only works for Spike. What he does was never written about in the past. He's the genius that does not have to explain or prove anything. Yet he reserves some self imposed righteousness that he alone is worthy. Spike does not know that patterns & trends are in fact opportunities. It's in everything that he says. He can't produce any gambling literature that has as extensive a discussion of my randomness concepts discussed at this forum. His claims are just words without substance. He won't back up any of his claims.

[spike]

Spike- " Smart men have been looking for this since roulette was invented. They never found it because it doesn't exist in random outcomes."

That's Spike's entire argument. He says his kind of randomness works

There is no 'his kind of randomness', there's only random.
Just one kind, it doesn't belong to anybody. It stands by
itself, accept it or don't, it will continue without you.

[Gizmotron]

AMK , as per your request:

Code Select Expand


| A B C | 1 2 3 | -- ## -- Line
|     X |   X   | -- 35 --  1
| X     |   X   | --  5 --  2
|   X   |     X | -- 21 --  3
|     X |   X   | -- 35 --  4
|   X   | X     | -- 22 --  5
| X     |   X   | --  5 --  6
| X     |   X   | --  2 --  7
|     X |     X | -- 33 --  8
| X     | X     | --  4 --  9
| X     |   X   | --  2 -- 10
| X     | X     | -- 10 -- 11
| X     |     X | -- 12 -- 12
|   X   |   X   | -- 23 -- 13
|   X   |     X | -- 21 -- 14
|     X | X     | -- 25 -- 15
|   X   | X     | -- 13 -- 16
|---------------|  -  0 -- 17
| X     |     X | --  6 -- 18
| X     | X     | -- 10 -- 19
|   X   | X     | -- 22 -- 20
| X     |   X   | --  8 -- 21
|     X | X     | -- 28 -- 22
| X     |     X | --  6 -- 23
|     X |     X | -- 36 -- 24
| X     |   X   | --  5 -- 25
| X     |   X   | --  5 -- 26
| X     | X     | --  1 -- 27
| X     | X     | --  4 -- 28
|   X   | X     | -- 13 -- 29
| X     |     X | -- 12 -- 30
| X     | X     | -- 10 -- 31
|     X | X     | -- 28 -- 32
|---------------|  -  0 -- 33
|   X   | X     | -- 16 -- 34
| X     |     X | --  3 -- 35
|     X | X     | -- 34 -- 36
|     X |   X   | -- 32 -- 37
|     X | X     | -- 34 -- 38
|     X |     X | -- 36 -- 39
| X     |     X | --  9 -- 40
|   X   | X     | -- 13 -- 41
|     X |     X | -- 30 -- 42
| X     |     X | --  6 -- 43
| X     |     X | -- 12 -- 44
|     X |     X | -- 36 -- 45
| X     |   X   | --  8 -- 46
|   X   |   X   | -- 17 -- 47
|   X   | X     | -- 16 -- 48
|   X   |     X | -- 24 -- 49
|     X | X     | -- 25 -- 50
|     X | X     | -- 28 -- 51
| X     |     X | --  6 -- 52
|   X   |     X | -- 15 -- 53
|     X |     X | -- 27 -- 54
|---------------|  -  0 -- 55
|     X |     X | -- 36 -- 56
| X     | X     | --  1 -- 57
| X     |   X   | -- 11 -- 58
|     X | X     | -- 34 -- 59
|   X   |   X   | -- 23 -- 60
|     X |   X   | -- 26 -- 61
|     X |     X | -- 36 -- 62
|   X   |     X | -- 15 -- 63
|     X |   X   | -- 32 -- 64
|     X | X     | -- 31 -- 65
|   X   |   X   | -- 14 -- 66
|   X   |   X   | -- 20 -- 67
| X     |   X   | --  5 -- 68
| X     | X     | --  4 -- 69
|     X | X     | -- 31 -- 70
| X     |   X   | --  8 -- 71
| X     | X     | --  1 -- 72
| X     |     X | --  9 -- 73
|     X |   X   | -- 32 -- 74
|   X   |   X   | -- 17 -- 75
|   X   |   X   | -- 23 -- 76
|     X | X     | -- 28 -- 77
|     X | X     | -- 34 -- 78
| X     | X     | -- 10 -- 79
|   X   | X     | -- 22 -- 80
| X     | X     | --  1 -- 81
|   X   |     X | -- 24 -- 82
|   X   | X     | -- 13 -- 83
|     X |     X | -- 36 -- 84
| X     | X     | --  1 -- 85
|     X | X     | -- 31 -- 86
|   X   | X     | -- 13 -- 87
| X     |   X   | --  2 -- 88
|     X |   X   | -- 35 -- 89
|   X   |     X | -- 18 -- 90
| X     | X     | --  7 -- 91
|   X   |   X   | -- 20 -- 92
|     X |     X | -- 33 -- 93
|   X   |   X   | -- 20 -- 94
|   X   |     X | -- 15 -- 95
| X     | X     | --  4 -- 96
|   X   | X     | -- 19 -- 97
|   X   |     X | -- 15 -- 98
| X     |     X | --  6 -- 99
|     X |   X   | -- 29 -- 100
|   X   |   X   | -- 20 -- 101
|   X   | X     | -- 13 -- 102
|     X |   X   | -- 35 -- 103
| X     | X     | --  7 -- 104
| X     | X     | --  7 -- 105
| X     |     X | --  3 -- 106
| X     |     X | --  3 -- 107
|     X | X     | -- 34 -- 108
|   X   |   X   | -- 23 -- 109
|   X   |   X   | -- 17 -- 110
| X     | X     | --  7 -- 111
| X     |   X   | --  8 -- 112
|     X |   X   | -- 35 -- 113
|     X |     X | -- 30 -- 114
|     X |     X | -- 36 -- 115
|   X   |     X | -- 15 -- 116
|     X |     X | -- 27 -- 117
|     X |   X   | -- 32 -- 118
| X     |   X   | --  2 -- 119
|   X   | X     | -- 16 -- 120
|   X   | X     | -- 16 -- 121
|   X   |     X | -- 21 -- 122
|     X |   X   | -- 35 -- 123
|   X   |     X | -- 18 -- 124
|   X   | X     | -- 16 -- 125
| X     |     X | --  9 -- 126
|   X   |     X | -- 24 -- 127
|---------------|  -  0 -- 128
|     X |   X   | -- 26 -- 129
|---------------|  -  0 -- 130
|   X   | X     | -- 13 -- 131
|     X | X     | -- 28 -- 132
|   X   |     X | -- 21 -- 133
| X     |   X   | --  2 -- 134
|     X |     X | -- 36 -- 135
| X     |     X | --  9 -- 136
| X     | X     | --  7 -- 137
| X     |   X   | --  8 -- 138
| X     | X     | --  4 -- 139
| X     |   X   | --  8 -- 140
| X     |   X   | --  8 -- 141
|     X |     X | -- 30 -- 142
| X     | X     | --  1 -- 143
|     X |   X   | -- 29 -- 144
|   X   | X     | -- 22 -- 145
|   X   | X     | -- 19 -- 146
|     X |   X   | -- 26 -- 147
|   X   |   X   | -- 17 -- 148
|     X |     X | -- 36 -- 149
| X     | X     | --  1 -- 150




[Gizmotron]

In my example above, there is a very nice display of the global effect. I wonder who can see it?

[Gizmotron]

There is no 'his kind of randomness', there's only random.
Just one kind, it doesn't belong to anybody. It stands by
itself, accept it or don't, it will continue without you.

There is most assuredly "your kind of randomness." You think that sitting out spins is a necessity. If a person makes a bet for every spin, that makes them a fool. You are clearly saying that there are segments in the stream of spins that are useless, or ineffective, other than avoiding them. Again stating that if used it would be foolish. That is as clear a case of evidence that you use a kind of randomness that suits you as there ever could be. There is opportunity from everything that happens. The anti-trend is information too. The absence of a streak is reading randomness too. The win streak as well as the losing streak & the I don't know streak all happen because of every characteristic found in randomness. That includes every form of anti-characteristic that also relates to reading randomness. You, Spike, advocate a specific type of randomness. Yours is a limited kind of randomness that allows you to present yourself as superior, as the sole possessing author of your kind of dogma.

[spike]

You are clearly saying that there are segments in the stream of spins that are useless,

I'm not clearly saying that at all. Why should I bet
if I don't have an advantage? I have no interest
in breaking even anymore when I'm not winning, so
betting every spin is a waste of time. There no my
random or you're random, there is only random.

The point is to get out of the casino as soon as possible,
not dawdle around..

[Gizmotron]

Spike, you don't have an advantage at times because you don't see one.

I'm not clearly saying that at all. Why should I bet
if I don't have an advantage? I have no interest
in breaking even anymore when I'm not winning, so
betting every spin is a waste of time. There no my
random or you're random, there is only random.

The point is to get out of the casino as soon as possible,
not dawdle around..

What are you afraid of Spike? I thought you could win every time you go to the casino.

I don't need to be lectured by someone with both limited knowledge and limited experience too. Just because you've done the same thing for years does not mean that you have a vast amount of experience.

[Gizmotron]

I'll say it again. There is opportunity from everything that happens. I know, because I can teach a computer to look at just about everything available to the outside bets on the layout. These are the same groupings monitored in my play and practice software. That process is a method of going out and finding information and choosing the best thing to bet on.

What I like about Buffter's idea is that it uses the premise of having a computer go out and find a grouping, and having the program bring back a set that has performed in a dominant state of continuing. It might be fun to power test it with millions of spins.

[spike]

Spike, you don't have an advantage at times because you don't see one.

I always have an advantage at all times. Its just
some times are better than others. Again, the
point it to spend as little time making your goal
as possible, not to make as many bets as you can
when you're there.

My goal is always paramount in my mind, how to make
it in as few bets as possible. The last thing I want is
for the pit to say "Here comes that guy who bets and
bets and always leaves a winner." I want to get in and
get out before they hardly know I'm there.

First you have to learn how to win, but that's only half of it.
Now you have to learn to get away with it in the casino.

[ll l lll ll l lll]

My goal is always paramount in my mind, how to make
it in as few bets as possible. The last thing I want is
for the pit to say "Here comes that guy who bets and
bets and always leaves a winner." I want to get in and
get out before they hardly know I'm there.

First you have to learn how to win, but that's only half of it.
Now you have to learn to get away with it in the casino.

And you do this with a pad and pencil and still write whatever you do down?

[spike]

And you do this with a pad and pencil and still write whatever you do down?

Depends on what I'm doing that day. Sometimes
I just use the board. I never sit at the table, ever.
And no its not hit and run, just because you don't
sit there with the other chumps doesn't mean its
hit and run.