QuoteYou are talking about Kimo Li, why don't you be direct on your target?
Afraid of confrontation?

It seems you are awestuck with Kimo Li's work. I asked the question on his very face in this forum itself:
http://betselection.cc/general-discussion/my-questions-for-kimo-li/

QuoteMost likely because of me, remember that thread I had with 10,000 views and all the response and humorous comments???  A couple of us went off into the Voodoo thing.  It has to be my fault.

     Alrelax, most of your thread have less than 2 replies. Do some introspection on what you do and how interesting they are to the community. A 10,000 views are looking such a big deal to you. Look at my topics and their viewership if you want a comparison that way.

                         You do not want me to speak in your topics while speaking too loudly here yourself. Hypocrisy at its worst.
@ Magician,
                    You are self proclaimed genius of the game without providing a single stuff originated from you helping all here. You are great for yourself and your "hidden" team of genius who beat 200k spins. I have beaten over 10 million spins for your kind info, years back. Just check if you and your secret cult of players can handle tough sessions, if and when they come as I have compiled. One of them is the worst possible streak noted from a real casino as claimed by roulette30.com.

@Esoito,
                Buddy, all those ideas that is giving overoptimistic hopes  to you without any scientific backing like precognition, telekinesis, golden ratio of universe and any other unscientific way giving you a hope of winning more and losing less due to that force in a game of negative expectations are in the nature of a "voodoo" merely. Trying to find a built in edge in a betselection is only a futile step leading nowhere near success. That is possible with some physics/maths based proven approaches like Bias analysis on real wheels but that is not doable by everyone. "Out of box" ideas may help if they have any scientific basis. Newer things evolve if we work on something that has not been done. Churning failed ideas will yield only new set of fallacies. That is noting innovative. By the way do you believe that Voodoo works?

QuoteThis fact is quite important to be understood:  money management is not a silver bullet to beat everything.

       Rather, all these suggested money management ensures faster and bigger losses that goes irreparable too.
A well reasoned and all seasoned money management(not only mindlessly increasing or decreasing or staying flat) will help, for sure.
            Those who say that they can win with precognition, without inculcating any money management are godsend angels. It is not doable humanly.

QuoteInteresting decision to return to EC bets.

EC bets suit most to any money management. although any MM can be tweaked to fit any bet although not perfectly, EC looks a balance bet to me. I pick Player in baccarat just for the sake of simplicity and have given arguments for that in my blog earlier too. Banker bet is not suitable for any kind of progressive betting. Banker will win more statistically due to drawing rules yet it is not so good.

Max(esoito) started a thread on brainstorming in general discussions. He offered many of the interesting ideas that may held getting closer to win. I made my point there which he chosen to delete being specially empowered to delete as a global moderator. I have no problem with that as he quoted what I said in another thread about same topic.
                   In my long haul fight with gambling and different aspects of gambling, I encountered hundreds of ideas as to how we can best chose our bet. I worked on all despite knowing that if it is random it has to be unpredictible and hence any attempt with any logic or magic won't help me get a bet that is "better than all" in long run. Forecasting a sports bet could be somewhat realistic and can help a bit in winning but trying to predict in a random game like roulette or baccarat is simply insane. I am sorry if I am harsh to anybody thinking opposite. Flat bet winning is out of question.
Trends, patterns, neighbours, sectors all are illusions merely. Numbers are merely different pockets totally unrelated to each other. A failed mind tries to see hope in these things knowing well that they are illusions alone. One noted author offered various imaginary figures on wheel like nuke, bowtie, pies and hell what not. I asked him how these numbers relate and even if they do how can we earn from this supreme knowledge. As expected, no justification ever offered.
           Now comes the money management part. Traditionally, all suggested money management ideas are simply disasters on their own in just a couple of tests or just by thinking rationally. One approach handles one type of variance and another type kills it instantly taking away more than it could earn being fortunate, so far.
For example, take martingale. Say, we take a 10 step marty, it can let us win in very extreme cases and fetch 1 unit profit again and again till a 10 step loss steps in and takes away 1023 units in one go. Irreparable loss. Same is true with other MMs like labby, fibo, D'alembert, Oscar Grind or anyone else you have heard of. Silly versions of these progressions made by laymen(remember, most oldschool progressions were suggested by mathematicians) made it even foolish. A classic case is HP Johnson progression that was boasted as a panacea in another forum while it is even bad an idea and a simple mix of flat betting, labouchere and martingale which is set to fail if losses come bulked up at a particular span. I demonstrated that and that forum got so angry that I spoiled their hard earned "fool's gold". Many "innovators" are merely ignorant of what their MMs will undergo in long run due to inability to simulate.
                                 I usually do not interrupt in these topics as I have no right to frustrate each and every idea even if it is meant to harm many believers. My point is I do not want to create many new line of losers by suggesting something even I am not sure of. Remember one very important thing regarding progressions. They seek specific spots or ratio or order to win. None of them can handle all variety that can come. If you keep getting wins in your sweet spots, you win the game otherwise the same havenly progression will kill your money.
              It doesn't mean there is no way to win. We can win a game with slight edge if we can counter the edge wisely with a very cautious progressive betting capable of handling the worst probabilities with bearable loss. I have worked on that aspect, got successful so far. Working to even better that. Playing EC bets on European roulette or "Player" in baccarat are my only choice of betselection. Although inside betting still gives me goosebumps and manageble, any EC bet with least house edge is the way to go.
              I am aghast with one or two members here who are taking a forum as their personal facebook. They are loading where they ate, moved, farted and everything except anything even slightly valuable to a gambling community. If members are OK with this or have no other option, none can help. Frankly speaking, 90% of discussions are not even worthy of being opened to read just from the subject line.

Gone are the days when we used to talk of innovations, new systems, their testings and all those stuff that made this place worth visiting. A few members are using the board as a garbage bin putting in all kind of weird unrelated stuff. Going the way gamblers glen went.

I can see only idiotic talks in last few months. It is pretty sad but may be many want only that. A bunch of jokers are talking stuff all over and serious debates days are over, it seems.

does your method win long run test given on a random sample data? Can it overcome the worst possible scenario?
Is it about bet selection or money management or both?

30TH HARSH SESSION:     67 WINS VS 81 LOSSES


L
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
W
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
W
L
L
L
W
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
W
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
W
W

Oscar Grind is a proven failure way to play. Do not waste your time.

To sum up: It is only as good or bad as Johnlegend's Pattern Breaker.

Unless a method/strategy is bringing any change that keeps you alive in the worst possible scenario and let you win back in average times thereafter, there is no single system that can win. In all the gambling/roulette/baccarat forums, there is not even a single system ever published that is dynamic enough to do that. They are even worse than playing any single EC flat bet ever. If you play a single EC every time in roulette/baccarat flat, you will be losing lesser than any of the systems ever published, I can bet on that.

Ok.
1. It would be the best to use baccarat and pick Players as your permanent bet. I have given reasons to pick that earlier in my blog.

2. It would be the best to expect balance only in very long run. I have explained long run too earlier.

QuoteFrequent and/or long streaks create the total difference, thus by following the last decision will eventually place us on the winning side.

If you believe this, you are more than ignorant after so many years of being on forums. No betselection gives us any edge by itself. Every betselection be it the simplest one or the most complex one will face same level of good and bad times as any other will do. Any prediction is only a blind speculation and only prediction that would be true always lies in "the law of large numbers".
  Such harsh sessions are possible with any EC betting one can choose and an informed gambler will be losing the least in the worst of the possibilities too. Expecting flat bet win or "intelligent guessing leading to victory" are F OO L's Gold only.

Quote from: Blue_Angel on February 27, 2017, 11:59:28 AM
Understood, but you've failed to address all of my enquiries...

provide the link when you posed your queries.

QuoteIf you knew beforehand which will be ahead you would be always winner even with only flat bets, do you agree so far ?

We can never predict what will be happening next. It could be the best possible or the worst possible or anywhere in the middle. My point is to make a system that can behave reasonable in the worst of times alongwith the best times possible and yield without bleeding too much. That is where every known progression sucks.

Captain,
These sessions are not normal ones but harsh ones. Keep this in mind, first of all. Harshness could mellow after 50 trials and it could not even after 500 trials in extremes that are possible. My motive behind doing/compiling these sessions to bring different varities of trouble sessions that should kill any known progression. Winning Flat bet is impossible and I am not debating about that here. Those who think that they can win flat bet by their bet selection alone in a game of negative expectations are godsend angels and they can even fly across ocean.

                    If we work only one kind of trouble session like those not having any long stretch of losses, even the dumbest person can suggest a 10 step martingale as panacea. Similarly with long streches of losses and wins, one can easily suggest D'alembert. For just a little below average number of wins, one can suggest playing labouchere or fibonacci or any other silly version of them like HP Johnson. Many came up with gradual martingale like what Blue Angel suggested once. They forget that one key won't fit other as the key is made seeing one kind of lock/trouble only. These harsh sessions show mirror to those daydreamers and confused lots who has any so called money management for their help. They can cross check their expertise on these sessions and innovate to better their approaches.

Quote from: ADulay on February 21, 2017, 04:19:49 PM
What does that mean?

AD

It means that you can reverse engineer a particular harsh case and find any MM workable for that case only but it is not possible for all the given cases. Anyone beating all the given sessions playing all over in a single well defined approach, is a guaranteed randomness and variance killer.