Quote from: Number Six on January 27, 2014, 10:30:55 AM
Albalaha,

What do you hope to achieve by trying to discredit people like Bayes and Victor in such trivial ways?

                    I am only answering the blatant attack on me. Who the hell has given even a single winner method here that has any statistical edge, if played in long run?


                     Why should I put my HG here? Whoever did that were proved to be either  wrong or confusing,so far. Mine is mathematical and logical. Not a subjective holy grail but a pure one.

I have no business to stay in such forums with double standards. Why can't you or Victor or MrJ or Bombus@MBB@billionloudspeaker@skakus ask Lord Steve to prove that his genuinefailure system which he is selling for $2500 works or not?


                          Go and write testimonials for him and get your commission. I have no need to stay here or in any forum. If you can not control the mob mentality here, delete my account. I know that you are only here to promote the agenda of Steve that only roulette computers win and my claim can harm his business(scamming).

Here is Victor in the Sister Community.


[attachimg=1]

So Bayes,
             You are not just a member in rf.cc but active one and moderator or maths section and a global moderator otherwise.
         For records, Victor did state that he has quit rf.cc forever but he is very active there.


Why are you pampering a jailbird scammer openly, if you have a crusade against them?


Any answer?

QuoteFor the record, I resigned my mod status and left rouletteforum.cc shortly after Steve H. took over.

Really?
        I can see your current status here as this,
[attachimg=1]

Bayes,
          I used to respect you and you are among a very handful of members whom I felt like consulting or debating a bit.


First of all, I am not selling any system and my blog has clear announcement in this regard including this place


Secondly, members here are barking over me causing me to retaliate and answer.


Thirdly,  I am not bragging of anything just wrote in a single post that I have beaten #3.


Fourthly, Pockets did a similar claim and nobody including you bothered to test that then why are u so much worried to test that of mine? I can do that myself and do not need certification from you.


Fifthly, prior to jumping over me, ask all others that you listed yourself as claimant of Holy Grail to reveal their methods or leave this space.


Sixthly, a few of the holy grail claimants including you, MBB(@skakus@ billion loudspeaker@bombus) and MrJ
are either present of ex-commanders (global moderators) of a jailbird scammer. Do you have any morality to ask your Patron to prove whether his genuinefailure works or not?

QuoteI bet 5 units on 1-6,  5 units on 4-9, 5 units on 25-30.  Three double streets. 15 units out.  Number 4 spins.  Win on two of my bets.  60 in.  Net profit = 60-15=45 units. 

So, you have overlapping bets too? How can I guess that? If someone says I bet 3 numbers with flat bet 1 unit each time on straight up and I won a net profit of 69 units, I can never guess that u bet two units on a single number.
               If it is really flat bet, as you say, it is commendable. 

QuoteMy base bet is 5 units. I bet on 3 double streets that is my bet selection. So when my selected double streets win I got a profit of 45 units.

What a strange mathematics. Even aliens do not have such developed science. You bet 5x3=15 (three double streets equally) and get a profit of 45 units, at once. Wow. In all my experience, your max win should be 15 units in such cases. Even if you bet only one doublestreet with 5 units, u can earn 25 units max.
          Maybe superman can solve your mathematical theories of betting flat bet, this way.

Quote[/size]The only person who is currently frustrated in the whole world seems to be you. Looks like reality is biting.[/size]

Three posts on me here and three in rf.cc and guess who is frustrated over what. lol

Actually,
              if we analyse any bet in any large enough data, we can see that 95% of times, a win comes during this span and playing above this is a sure way of going bust, sooner or later. Extreme Variance Management is the first requisite of pro gambling apart from keeping patience and trying to earn in a reasonable timeframe, not in a single spin.

Victor,
       I taught this idea two years back here: http://albalaha.lefora.com/topic/4332355/How-to-fight-with-the-worst-enemy-of-gamblingVariance#.UuXpYtK6bIU
     and it was you who first appreciated that.

Quote from: Pockets on January 27, 2014, 02:38:31 AM
Albalaha, here you go. See the following.


Starting bank roll 1000, played 100,000 spins. Ending banking roll double what you have achieved. And you will be falling on the floor, if I say this is all flat betting.

You asked me to show one result and I have shown one. You want multiple? I can do variations of this. Now what?

You are missing Bayes's point here. Sites like testmystrategy.com is flawed. They don't simulate casino conditions. Does getting a double profit than you in testmystrategy.com makes my strategy better than yours. NO! This is what you are failing to understand Albalaha. All your research and years you have spent is waste if you cannot understand this.

Pockets,
              You have contradictions in your statements in what you posted and what I can see.


               First, u said, u did it Flat bet, That is a plain lie. Even a myopic person can see your max losing bet to be 45 units. So, you are only defrauding yourself with your silly claim of doing flat bet.
2. Testmystrategy nowhere contains your name/email in any test done with any such profits. If I show a picture of a man holding wimbledon trophy and tell all that it is me, only blinds will believe that.


               If you have such great ideas, why are you following silly forums or people like me or anybody else? Earn thousands of Euros daily and let your ideas make other frustrated people get rich too. You are only making them more frustrate than ever. You are leading the frustrated players' league. lol
            Enlighten them Pockets.

QuoteBayes and Pockets have you in checkmate.  Your bloviating isn't helping.

           keep barking. 

QuoteRegarding the "testmystrategy" site, I haven't looked at it in detail but it seems that you can "play" using pretty unrealistic house limits.

max bet =32, total bankroll=1000 chips, what is "unrealistic" in that?Further,  I did it in public domain and not in anyone's personal computer. I had no way to "know" prior to my bet as to what would be the result.

QuoteAnd you haven't answered my second question: WHY are you selling the systems?

            Why do people sell books? Three interests: 1. to earn money, 2. get recognition; and 3.to spread knowledge and awareness.
         Why did Thorpe sold his book after winning all his life from "card counting"? All three reasons. Clear?

[quote]As for pockets, I haven't studied his system, but he's posted it in its entirety as far as I can tell, so what's the problem?

               The problem is his claim, to win what could never been done so far, except by "cherry picking" in your vocabulary or "reverse engineering" as I say of favorable odds. If his claim is as true as he claims, as a mathematics and gambling aficionado, don't you feel like evaluating this specially when he is claiming so openly and loud?

See this archive page which neither I manipulate,nor u
I got in their "hall of fame" for this : https://web.archive.org/web/20111229181728/http://www.testmystrategy.com/

Quote from: Bayes on January 26, 2014, 10:17:50 AM

Al, you're missing the point. Your 100k spins test wasn't conducted under controlled conditions. How do we know that you didn't "cherry pick" that sequence? We have only your word for it. Like I said, you can post any number of charts and tabulated results (just like the system sellers do) but it doesn't count for much.

And it doesn't help your case much that you have sold systems.


Two questions for you:


1. Have you sold systems in the past? please answer yes or no.
2. If the answer to (1) is yes, WHY?

        If you conduct a test of 2000 bets, it is "controlled condition" and not cherry picking and when I and Ophis simulate over 10 millions spins from various forums ( a few provided by you too), that is not "controlled condition". If we can pick "cherry" through bots of 10s of millions of spins spread over dozens of data, what kind of cherry picking is that?
         I have sold my e-book and systems to not less than 100 members and guests of various forums and through youtube. You can't see even a single complaint of cheating. I have written one among them called "finest method of defeating roulette" openly and that was appreciated by all too. What kind of method utilize only 1000 chips to play through 100,000 spins betting all and winning 568% net profit? Try whatever u know and show one such result on a public domain like testmystrategy.com. Let me see how u cherry pick such wins.

Quote there should be rule that IF they brag that they do have a consistent winning method, they should either post it or submit to a test. That doesn't mean that they have to give anything away in terms of the specific method of play, only that they should show us. Unfortunately we have no facility for conducting such tests on this forum.

             Charity begins at home. Pockets openly bragged that his method is beating all numbers of zumma from the best to worst. Why any of one can't simulate that, instead of so many arguments with me and preachings?