Quote from: KingsRoulette on December 13, 2012, 03:27:20 AM
               It is. It is called game of chance and no one can make it a game of skill. A smart player can only take chances in smart manner like not playing martingale type of thing and stop loss and profit target etc. There can not be an "educated guess". This is the most uneducated way to handle randomness. You can ofcourse read the past but by no mean take any inference out of those regarding future.

How would you know? You have presented nothing. If you don't back it up with facts then this is nothing more than personal attacks.

Quote from: Gizmotron on December 12, 2012, 04:36:51 PM
I can guarantee that you can have great trends or patterns to make choices with and you will have sessions that would have killed you. Like a string of straight down losses. You won't be able to avoid it. Now if you are prepared to deal with this when it happens then you can minimise your losses. Things will change. They always do. The effectiveness will move to one of the other two conditions. As far as a global effect for the effectiveness condition goes, you would be wise to consider session difficulty. Some sessions are so difficult that it takes forever to get a decently sized prize. With full knowledge that other sessions will allow you to kill the casino, why bother with the difficult ones.

I must apologise for fooling around with progressions. I only use them when acting irresponsible and falling on a crutch of impatience. I know I can dig my way out of a small hole. So every once in a while I'll attempt to blast out a small correction. It's stupid actually. It so often works to the positive. I might use a three step Marti once or twice in a session with full knowledge that it could really bite me.

Nice job on seeing the trends in the charts. I've been doing this for years. It's impossible for me to not see the opportunities. So I'll  try to relate what it is that I see.

To openly discover a method to get rich off of casinos, and to consequently kill off any chance of using it. To do this in a way that attempts to teach a moron a new trick, without ever insulting him. So in a way it's a two way pistal. When you shoot the other guy you shoot yourself too.

Quote from: Bayes on December 12, 2012, 03:46:01 PM
I take it that by 'effectiveness' you mean the string of W/L as opposed to R/B (or whatever). So it means your results as opposed to what outcomes the wheel is producing. Does this effectiveness also have context and global effects which you take account of?

I can guarantee that you can have great trends or patterns to make choices with and you will have sessions that would have killed you. Like a string of straight down losses. You won't be able to avoid it. Now if you are prepared to deal with this when it happens then you can minimise your losses. Things will change. They always do. The effectiveness will move to one of the other two conditions. As far as a global effect for the effectiveness condition goes, you would be wise to consider session difficulty. Some sessions are so difficult that it takes forever to get a decently sized prize. With full knowledge that other sessions will allow you to kill the casino, why bother with the difficult ones.

Quote from: Bayes on December 12, 2012, 03:46:01 PM
You say that 'everything you need to know comes from the single most recent spin' but also talk about context, trends and global effects, which suggests that it's not simply the last spin you're looking at?

It's actually very simple. After making a decision I place the bet. The next spin tells me if the conditions for bet selection continued and if the conditions for effectiveness continued. If both of those conditions continued then I would continue to bet the logical condition and trend or pattern.

It's very simple for me. I take a complete proactive approach. Everything depends on the result of the next spin. It is the only way to determine effectiveness. A string of reds does not give you all the available information needed to make a really smart guess. There is always a context. There is the current state of the global effect and there is the current state of the effectiveness to consider on each bet. There is never a consideration to use a mindless simple rule or trigger. Everything you need to know comes from the single most recent spin. It tells you if anything, trend, context, or effectiveness has changed. In a way it's like considering the presence of many triggers at once and also considering the absence of many others at the same time. If I were to best describe this I would call it a decision. A decision is almost never mindless. In my opinion it's too complex to call this a complex set of rules. I also think that people that have not mastered the craft are going to struggle as they attempt to describe or even criticise it.

It's completely possible to deliberately win every session you attempt to play. All it takes is skill and perseverance based on experience. How can unskilled and inexperienced people to be fairly considered as fools? It could never be a real consideration.

The strategy :

Select the hottest number.

In 300 more spins you need 9 wins to break even.
Hot numbers hit from 12 to 24 times per 300 spins.
A hot number can cool off at any time.
"Know when to hold them, know when to fold them."

Roulette Marquee 3.2 now released.

This upgrade allows you to place bets. It tracks each bet and keeps a running total.

Press spin to start. I always run out 12 spins before I ever place bets.

It's against the law to provide an internet gambling device in the state of Oregon. There are several states that have strict laws restricting online gambling. So even if its legalized nationally it will still require amended legislation in many states across America also.

Quote from: wannawin on December 09, 2012, 05:02:14 PM
Thank you for posting the software here.

It is appreciated.

You are welcome. I haven't worked on it in a long time. I use real weighted chips when I practice. It would nice to add an easy way to place bets and track results. I'll work on that. This will never be a bot. It's actually a violation of the gambling laws to provide one. I don't need that headache.

I'll try to explain every concept until the communication process is understood and real examples are clearly identified and taught. In other words I don't want to fail at teaching this.

http://betselection.cc/gizmotron/

http://betselection.cc/meta-selection/the-simple-explanation-attacking-trends/

Here is the original avitar source.

gizmotron.mov

I did this in twenty minutes, $25, $50, and $100 bets.

Practice Log: Dec/7/2012
spin 13 to 21, $100
spin 13 to 29, $100
spin 13 to 49, $200
spin 13 to 14, $100
spin 13 to 20, $100
spin 13 to 16, $100
spin 13 to 15, $100
spin 13 to 19, $100

The only proof that works or is worth anything is the proof that convinced you that something is true. I believe that takes the best method of all. Prove it to yourself.

If you just bet on red, and nothing else, then you will encounter at least one of the three states that can occur. The trick to being a consistent winner is in learning how to live with and survive these three states. So if you practice to see if you can expose and identify each state. You can learn to identify the quality of each state, as you encounter it.

So you use the charts and the check list to find the best looking bet selections. You use the flow of the session to identify the quality and duration of the three states as they change.

Technically speaking, if you want to be a maniac, you can program these steps into a computer program. It's just a nebulous task. It's also without reward too. You can't use it in a casino. It would not be another mindless system hammering away. It deliberately makes changes in strategy as each combination of bet selection and condition of state changes.

The human brain does a fantastic job of this. All it takes is discipline and an acquired set of skills.

I did all this without a mentor or a direction. So I have the greatest reward of all. I walked this path of discovery alone. I made all the mistakes, including magical beliefs and superstitious conclusions that eventually allowed me to weed out these mistakes in the end. There wasn't anyone to tell me about the relationship between bet selection and the three kinds of effectiveness. I've given away this knowledge in order to see what others would do with it. There's nothing easy about it. Consequently there will be few that master this and even less that will talk about it much. And that is likely to be expected. At least that is what I'm seeing. That's good too. It's still a well kept opportunity, while it lasts.