+ Register

[wannawin]

I hate to be the devil's advocate but are we not all sharing what we feel like it? We keep what we feel like it too.

If so this would be the only forum that implements such a rule. What will they do? Send a moderator to the house or the casino of the person posting to see what is keeping to himself?

Let's face it. Nobody can actually know what is kept secret or forcing someone to say.

[Razor]

Spike my opinion is that your every post is a contradiction.
In some posts you are saying that  random can be read and in other posts you say that random can not be read.You have to chose,otherwise you seem like a fool.
You are also describing piano with randomness read...
Gizmotron don t force Spike to tell you something that he doesn't know...why are you falling into his trap anyway?This is what he neeeds...ATTENTION.
Spike has a lot of years in the forums posting "I know how to read randomness and I m making money but I can t explain how I do it" etc.
Do you think that a person that would be able to do such a thing , he would be an active member in 3-4 forums and posting all day and night for so many years?
Wannawin if someone had the real money maker method he wouldn't be here...so no one is keeping secrets here.
If someone has the character to keep secrets then the only place he wouldn't be ,is a roulette forum that all the Planet can read what he is posting.

I would suggest everybody in here to cooperate and try to find a nice method that is relying on roots that have never been explored before.
And please stop posting BS...it s like an old fart that doesn't smell nice anymore. It's really boring.
Like VLS says: "Be productive"

This was my last post that I am trading words with Spike...
If in the future he will post a serious and productive post he will have my attention again..and I suggest all of you to do the same...let's keep this forum clean.

Bother with people that matters.

[spike]

in other posts you say that random can not be read.

Please point to a post where I said random can't
be read. I would never say that, you misread or
misunderstood.

[spike]

There's no evidence that you have anything.

The casino see's the evidence every time I play, that's
enough verification for me. And they pay dearly for
it.

[spike]

Often linear thinking is more than enough to win. Perhaps the best balance would be to flutter between the two.

Nobody can totally abandon linear thinking, its not possible.
Its always a combination of the two. If you try and explain
it, you end up sounding stupid. Whatever you say, its never
quite right.

[The Crow]

Contradiction is a state of mind.  If you state it, I don't mind. It just goes to show that contradiction and randomness are the same. It's not linear, nor lateral. It's a cyclical, because it repeats itself. So, if you contradict yourself, don't worry, it's cyclical. It will happen again.

TC

[spike]

It's not linear, nor lateral. It's a cyclical, because it repeats itself.
TC

No, it not linear at all. Ever. If it were, it would
be easily beaten. Where is it cyclical? Please
give an example where 50 spins repeats in a
cycyle and is the same as another 50 spins. I've
never seen it. Again, if a cycle could be identified,
it would make the game easily beaten.

Please point out where I contradicted myself.

[Ralph]

While you guys arguing some of us including me made some bucks playing!!

[The Crow]

Spike,

I was not referring to you.  The contradiction claimed by your nemesis is a contradiction in itself. I admire the fact that you can call someone out when it comes to original thought, or lack there of.

Original thought, I have yet to see on this forum from people who claim to be experts. My concession to those who think there are experts is that they do a wonderful job explaining other people's original thoughts and claiming it their own.

This section is about gambling philosophy. Philosophically speaking, claiming to be an expert in anything while preaching other people's original thoughts is just that, preaching.

On the flip side, bashing other people's original thought without having the capacity to understand their concepts does not make that person a qualified critic.

Spike, I too want to expose gambling philosophical fraud.

Welcome to the Darkside.

TC

[Gizmotron]

" 1. A combination of statements, ideas, or features of a situation that are opposed to one another.

2. A person, thing, or situation in which inconsistent elements are present."

Whether Spike can win or not is irrelevant. His ridicule of the concept of a
global effect tells me that he is not qualified to determine if I can win or
not. When I referred to contradiction, I was referring to definition #1.

My validation of concept algorithm will be a contradiction of just about
every gambling book authored and every explanation given by math
experts. That will be a tangible revelation for change. It will be proof
of my claims. I have vehemently opposed the explanation that everyone
must experience the inevitable same bad results when faced with a
transition of large numbers. In view of that contradiction Spike's
opinion is irrelevant.

Spike should set out to disprove the existence of the concept of a global
effect. His attempts to discredit the messenger are nothing more than
feeble excuses for not presenting an argument in the first place. It
appears that Spike would rather experience for himself a contradiction
that is best defined by example number two.

[spike]

Spike should set out to disprove the existence of the concept of a global
effect.

I would if I had even the foggiest idea what it is. You
started a thread about it, then abandoned it without
ever explaining what global effect is.

Tell me and I'll disprove it. Until then I'm afraid I can't
help you.

[spike]

Whether Spike can win or not is irrelevant.

Oh  Au contraire. Roulette is a game about results, not theory.
Roulette is about winning money from a casino. They don't
care what your theories are, just if you can win or not.

[Gizmotron]

I doubt that you will understand this, but there is no such thing as the Spike Theorem.

There is no evidence that you can do anything other than voice your opinion. What I have presented so far is substantive. All you have demonstrated is your stumberness  or your capacity to perceive in ignorance. That does not give you the ability to judge. You can say whatever you want. But you have no clue what the global effect is. You can't verify or validate it because you clearly don't understand it. So you avoid it.

[spike]

There is no evidence that you can do anything

Sure there is, just not here on a public forum. Here we
discuss theory, in the casino we put it to the test.

The recipe for Coca Cola is a deep dark secret, locked
in a vault somewhere. They never discuss it. Yet evidence
that it works is everywhere. Would you fault them for
never revealing their secrets? I doubt it.

My evidence manifests itself every time I play. How else?

[Sputnik]

 
Well testing systems is a waste of time if you think they will win in the long run ...
All you need to do is one educated guess based upon what is current and present in front of you ...
That is a kind of methodology, but i don't know what some one would name it ...