+ Register

[alrelax]

That's quite a statement Giz. A young kid walked into the local supermarket store and stole a bar of candy. Mr Singh has now closed down all his 5 shops. A shame really 'eh.

But,  how many of those kids turned out to be the shooter like the 19 year old at Parkland, Florida that killed 17 other kids because of their way of thinking??

[Gizmotron]

Bally6354, you are right. It's possible for there to be a first time. It's my opinion that this is not it. Has anyone validated your findings? Has anyone power tested it with algorithms that are correctly constructed? I don't have time to power test it myself. I can read someone else's software code faster than I can understand explanations of the method placed somewhere in those 30 pages. I need a simple rule based set of commands. I can take it from there. But people don't like to explain things with the simple step by step method. Somebody created a test for it in a spreadsheet. Do you have the code for that? I can look for the weakness that way. It is my opinion that the most unlikely to occur sequence will happen just often enough to make it a loser. BTW


This: "Ramsey theory, named after the British mathematician and philosopher Frank P. Ramsey, is a branch of mathematics that studies the conditions under which order must appear."


Go for it. Telling me that order must appear that beats large number theory is for sure a unique way to beat Roulette. But I'll stick with my axiom "nobody knows when a trend will start or end or how long it will last."

[Bally6354]

By all means, if somebody would like to power test this, that would be great. This 16 combination AP is one of the most basic non-random concepts that I know about. Now believe me or not, there are a lot more powerful ones that will never see the light of day on a public gambling forum. I always like to think when I type up anything on these boards which is rare nowadays that I am trying to help players to look at something different instead of a lot of the older ideas revolving around MM and such.

cheers

[Gizmotron]

Please try to give me the best example of a step by step simple set of rules in an example. It could be a link to a single post already somewhere in those 30 pages of posts. It might take a new fictitious example. I don't want to read 30 pages to find it. Then I will decide to code test it to the max.




On second thought please don't bother or to waste your time. I've looked at several threads regarding this around the internet. It's a baloney festival. For every sequence that triggers a decision you will get a balance of opposing triggers that will equivocate to more balance. Nobody knows when a trend will start or end, or for how long it will last.

[Bally6354]

On second thought please don't bother or to waste your time. I've looked at several threads regarding this around the internet. It's a baloney festival.

Fair enough! Now not to brag or anything and for sure it doesn't proof anything really, however, here is little old me on the 'roulette simulator' website in top spot.

[attachimg=1]

Going by what you requested, it seems you just wanted to take the basic concept and proof to yourself that it didn't work. Good for you.
Mr J was bang on with what he said on Kav's forum the other day and that was that some people just REFUSE to learn. But you are in good company Giz. Keep doing it your way.

[CoderJoe]

https://betselection.cc/roulette-forum/use-math-to-beat-roulettebaccarat/
Click on the link above. Everything you want to know about Van der Waerden theorem is in this interesting thread.

Thanks James. Very interesting indeed, I can see lots of applications for this, and not just for the even chances.

[Gizmotron]

Going by what you requested, it seems you just wanted to take the basic concept and proof to yourself that it didn't work. Good for you.
Mr J was bang on with what he said on Kav's forum the other day and that was that some people just REFUSE to learn. But you are in good company Giz. Keep doing it your way.

You are right. I wanted to prove it doesn't work. I've yet to see a method that mindlessly, in a mechanical fashion, uses math to give an actual advantage in the game of Roulette. I mean that is up there with counting cards in 21. It would be a real advantage. So where are the bean counters for this? This stuff has been around since the beginning of the 20th century. That is the missing thing in all this. What I want to know is anyone going into real casinos and capitalizing on it. Where are the MIT gambling teams for this? If you look real close to this thing it is nothing more than a law of thirds packaged in such an extraneous way as to make it look official. I just got done with TurboGenius's law of third system. It looks convincing on the outside but fails to materialize in the real world. I'm not posturing. I'm willing to do a lot of hard work. This is vapor ware. Nobody has made the final argument on this. That is what is missing from the internet forums. So Take it to the casino and put money on the line. That is a the real test.

[alrelax]

Mark, Would you not agree that there are two separate worlds?  The on-line adventure to 'beat-the-casino- on paper and the real gambling world at the casinos?

The same as reading and watching a video about say, using a lawnmower and then actaully doing it??

[Gizmotron]

Mark, Would you not agree that there are two separate worlds?  The on-line adventure to 'beat-the-casino- on paper and the real gambling world at the casinos?

If you are saying that the online adventure is a quest to find a mindless mechanical system online and then take it into a casino to use it, assuming that no mistakes will be made, then there might not be a noticeable difference. If anyone is willing to do real world power testing of a system then the results would be the same. This is proven by expert card counters in the game of 21. But what really happens to most of these people is that they don't do the work to become expert card counters. When they go into the real casino they make mistakes. In that case there is a huge difference.


TurboGenius is still claiming that he beats the casinos with the use of hot numbers and that he does that because of mathematics. He even just made that claim today. A bunch of us set out to master his method based on breadcrumbs and clues he left online and in private conversations he had with others. I already proved I could make a rear-end of myself trying it. The only evidence of validation he could give me at this point would be his gambling winning tax return. He could somehow disclose it as proof without giving out SS numbers I suppose. It would be fascinating if he really did it. But he has been a system player for more than 13 years. He may actually believe he did it on paper. They call it confirmation bias. It's a very common mistake made by educated researchers.


If anyone that has a bet selection method that works well for them in real world practice settings, that person must also know that once they put money on the line that they could lose, they will have to face their own ability to handle any inevitable losses along the way. The system player, if they stick to the system, takes decision making out of the process. But even that is very hard to do. A very good card counter can still hit a random bad streak even though they have followed the method perfectly. That is why casinos encourage card counters to try and go for it. The casinos have made ten times as much off the wannabee card counters as they would have if the casino had just banned all of them. These amateur players almost always get taken out by their weak bankrolls. And it's real easy to find the good players and just ban them instead. So there are two kinds of online players and there are two kinds of real casino players in my opinion. There are no mindless system players that the casinos need to look out for. They do have to watch out for defective wheels though. And they still need to watch out for cheaters.

[alrelax]

If you are saying that the online adventure is a quest to find a mindless mechanical system online and then take it into a casino to use it, assuming that no mistakes will be made, then there might not be a noticeable difference. If anyone is willing to do real world power testing of a system then the results would be the same. This is proven by expert card counters in the game of 21. But what really happens to most of these people is that they don't do the work to become expert card counters. When they go into the real casino they make mistakes. In that case there is a huge difference.


TurboGenius is still claiming that he beats the casinos with the use of hot numbers and that he does that because of mathematics. He even just made that claim today. A bunch of us set out to master his method based on breadcrumbs and clues he left online and in private conversations he had with others. I already proved I could make a rear-end of myself trying it. The only evidence of validation he could give me at this point would be his gambling winning tax return. He could somehow disclose it as proof without giving out SS numbers I suppose. It would be fascinating if he really did it. But he has been a system player for more than 13 years. He may actually believe he did it on paper. They call it confirmation bias. It's a very common mistake made by educated researchers.


If anyone that has a bet selection method that works well for them in real world practice settings, that person must also know that once they put money on the line that they could lose, they will have to face their own ability to handle any inevitable losses along the way. The system player, if they stick to the system, takes decision making out of the process. But even that is very hard to do. A very good card counter can still hit a random bad streak even though they have followed the method perfectly. That is why casinos encourage card counters to try and go for it. The casinos have made ten times as much off the wannabee card counters as they would have if the casino had just banned all of them. These amateur players almost always get taken out by their weak bankrolls. And it's real easy to find the good players and just ban them instead. So there are two kinds of online players and there are two kinds of real casino players in my opinion. There are no mindless system players that the casinos need to look out for. They do have to watch out for defective wheels though. And they still need to watch out for cheaters.

Actually saying, there are thsoe that stay on-line without going or very limited attempt at the real world translation of their on-line pre-programmed event they describe in detail within the forums and the real world gambler that actaully does whatever he says, no matter if that is winning or losing. 

For sake of explanation again, I put you into the latter 'world'.  I put some others (lots) into the first.  kind of like my kids, watch the movie 'The Black Panther', go out and buy them masks, claws and other movie stuff they pretend and play.  They go into the real world with it--yes.  But that does not make them, 'The Balck Panther' or whatever they pretend to be.  It allows them to act out and explore and expand their imaginations. 

So there are two worlds no?  The on-line adventure and the real casino world of gambling. 

And yes, if you do beat something on-line does that mean it will translate into the real casino world for an actaul pay-off repeatedly?  Etc.

[Gizmotron]

I just read your other thread regarding how you play in the real world. I find it easy to relate to and it almost perfectly describes  the way how I used to play. I would go into a casino with a good sized bankroll and almost always have it grind its way down to the very bottom before hitting that streak that I would attack and kill the casino in a massive winning streak with. I didn't mind being ground down to almost nothing. It was just part of the process. Now I play completely different. I still have the stop loss at 8 net losses, that's eight lost bets without any recovery to bring me back. I also have a stop bet where the bet selections all enter a free fall state. I just wait it out with virtual bets. As soon as the free fall stops I get back in. I now stay until I hit my swing trading limit up. I no longer hunt the huge win streaks. But if a huge win streak forms up, I still hammer that. But most of the time there is no need for it. I don't descend very far. That's what is different now. There is no need for waiting for the huge winner. I don't dig a deep hole that I must work my way back from. The three net win method is good enough. It's easy to hit. In real world practice I win every time. And in recollection of years played in the past the roller coaster rides I used to take always had me up by three net wins at some point before losing my session buy in. Some day I will hit a lost session. Or I might even hit a string of lost sessions. But I just don't play not minding hitting deep holes anymore. I don't feed a loser. $5 chips times 24 numbers and three net wins = $180. Ten sessions like that in a long weekend and that's $1,800. Add that to my retirement and I'm out traveling and having a great time. So that's my starting point plan. I should be able to prove to myself if I can win or not. I found a way to overcome my own playing demons. It only took 12 years. I'm not saying it's better. I'm saying it's best for me.

[Nickmsi]

Gizmotron:
"For every sequence that triggers a decision you will get a balance of opposing triggers that will equivocate to more balance."

You are correct. With the basic VDW theorem you will eventually get balance which is what Bally6345 confirmed.

The point is don't use the basic VDW theorem.  If one digs deep enough, if one wades through the 256 different patterns that can be formed by one side, if one calculates the statistics for the different AP, then one might have another opinion, one supported by empirical data, that does indeed, as Ramsey pointed out, show order in chaos.

Alrelax:
"Mark, Would you not agree that there are two separate worlds?  The on-line adventure to 'beat-the-casino- on paper and the real gambling world at the casinos?"

I certainly don't agree with your demeaning assessment.  Both are gambling. Both take your money.

Granted you have a ton of experience with B & M gambling so I would suggest those who play in B & M casino would be wise to listen to your advice.

Most of my experience has been On Line and as such it offers many different perspectives that cannot be achieved in the B & M casino.

Cheers
Nick

[alrelax]

I certainly don't agree with your demeaning assessment.  Both are gambling. Both take your money.
Thanks

Most of my experience has been On Line and as such it offers many different perspectives that cannot be achieved in the B & M casino.

Nick


I said on line as an adventure and on paper.  I did not refer to online gamblers with actual risk of funds.

[alrelax]

Something along the same lines.  I had an expartner in new jersey that used to kill it and slam the casinos  most every weekend big time betting large amounts on roulette straight up numbers.  He would wager like 30 numbers or so at a time.  Won the highest majority of his plays.  Then the law of averages or what the winners by their own success fail to acknowledge happens, happened.

Good lord, what he won over a short period he gave back many times over.  He lost his share of a viable profitable business and beautiful house as well as other paid for assets. 

I remember him running the numbers on a computer every week to verify his success or his comeback after the downfall.  He was always so confident.

[Gizmotron]

Snowman:

Claiming that you can predict randomness is an oxymoron at best.

"That's why I never claim that I can predict randomness. You don't need to predict anything. You just have to know what characteristics of normal random events look like. Nobody can tell when a trend will start, end, or continue. Yet those three things happen all day long. But what is real interesting is how expectation has an effect on people in a form of a kind of blinding them. If you can't predict something, you should never fall into the trap of expecting a thing to happen, except in cases where a different skill like VB or apparatus defects may be considered. But leaving out those skills, expectation is a trap. But then there is this: You can guess until your guesses are in sink with win streaks. At that point you are still just blindly guessing, but your sequence of guesses can fall into a perfect 100% pattern with your winning bets. You can still do well in a casino if your bets/guesses are just running at 80%. It all comes down to being agile enough to hit the good streak harder than the bad streaks. For that you need to use your brains. Stupid people should leave the difficult stuff to the smart ones. Everybody wants to get on the expectation band wagon. They want an easy win. And that is why sharing what works is not really that dangerous to those of us that can do it. D. Sir is not worried about sharing his expertise. It's a highly refined skill. It has to be."