I'm also moderator of this thread. I don't mind people disagreeing and even embarrassingly taking turns to defensive expressions if they lose it. I like watching people losing their cool. It means that they have lost their capacity to back up a position. Like it or not they are taking a position. I don't have a problem with Trump either. He, just like Capitalism, has raised more people out of poverty than all the well-intention socialistic programs that has plagued our country. The opposition in this case have completely lost it. The people that hate Trump, just like the loyal opposition on these forums regarding probability and advantage, go bat guano crazy when they get honestly challenged for their opinions. People like to make their stands on flimsy facts. There is nothing wrong with their conclusions. They are just misled conclusions that would make perfect sense if the facts were true. But people like where they are getting their facts from. They like the groups that are giving them these facts.


That is why I started this thread. Jimske asked if I was getting tired of these same old arguments. So I found a way to take it to the next level. Why is there an assumption that you must have an edge in order to win? Who is feeding these facts to the world? Are they right?

Einstein never said it.


"No One Can Win at Roulette Unless He Steals Money from the Table While the Croupier Isn't Looking."



https://quoteinvestigator.com/2012/09/09/einstein-roulette/


Is that true? The mathBoyz, over the past decades, all insist that you must have an edge in order to win at Roulette. They require a mathematical advantage, where it is clear that the game has a negative expectation from one spin to infinity.


But is it true? Can the "statistical absolutists" prove that you must have an advantage in order to win? Where is the equation that proves it? Math equations can't predict when a win streak will occur, how long it will last, or when it will end. They can't tell a player when to stop. They don't advise when to bet big or when to bet small. They don't do much of anything for that matter. In fact I don't think that they exist. Where is the proof from the crowd that always demands proof?


This is where silence will probably be the answer. The mathBoyz always go silent when actually confronted with their own logic. So let's see if anyone of them can make a coherent argument without casting dispersion or disparaging remarks on the messenger. Let's see if they can keep it out of the gutter or above the level of crotch jokes.


Prove it.

Quote from: Blue_Angel on May 31, 2018, 05:14:42 PM
@ Giz,


It is in the intellect of an educated mind to entertain a subject even if he/she doesn't agree with it.
Your philosophy is sound because when you are unlucky you are losing less and when you are lucky you are winning more, I got it, it's all about the money management after all.


How I consider this is another matter, but if you'd asked me then I'd respond that is good as long as you have nothing better.
As you see everything somehow is relevant, for you 100,000 could be your whole world and for Donald Tramp just a piece of his hair...

Yes, you are right on again. it's a simple, nothing to get excitable about method. I only wish I got this back in 1994. You are right about what success means too. I'm not dead. This is just another day above ground.

Quote from: Xander on May 31, 2018, 04:13:39 PM
Sorry, but that's just gambler's fallacy nonsense. 

1. You're throwing logic and common sense out the window.
2. You don't have a shred of evidence/math to support your absurd claims.
3. All of the experts, mathematicians, and history say that you're wrong.
4. Since the available number of pockets on the wheel determines the probability of winning, and since the same number pockets remain on the wheel from one spin to the next, then the probability of winning doesn't change just because of you're observations over the last 10 or 20 spins.  Claiming otherwise is ludicrous.

Answers:
1.) Let's see if that is true?
2.) There's no evidence that they are absurd. Please show that.
3.) I'm an expert and part of history. You guys all have a turd in your pockets, "we."
4.) You don't need probability to be in your favor in order to win consistently. That is the flaw in your so called superiority. Where is the math that proves that you need probability on your side in order to claim a winning strategy? This single question sums up all the years of your prestigious claims. You, "we with a turd," need to come up with something better than a self serving dogmatic posturing. I have the logic that undoes all your lame arguments. Prove that probability has to be in your favor in order to win. Prove it. Go ahead we. And don't we we your pants.

Blue "It's like you are saying: "sometimes you are lucky and sometimes you are unlucky..." Do you really believe there is something skillful or intelligent in this?!"


   I do. You can label it any way you want in order to attempt to marginalize it. I really believe that anyone can acquire the skill irregardless of their intelligence. It's not just luck. It takes self awareness skills too. A person must control their emotions and their natural tendencies with respect to human nature. You act like seeing upticks in a candlestick chart is some kind of brainless activity. You imply that there can't be a skill and that there can't be any intellect involved.


So ask yourself this. Why would anyone gamble without skill or intellect? You are a needy personality. You need to confine me to unskilled and ignorant in order to please your own human nature. What's up with that? You act like one of those smart people that run around saying "even a blind squirrel gets lucky once in a while and finds a nut."


One brainless example is all that is needed. What do you, a skillful and intelligent player, do with a same dozen sleeping for 30 consecutive spins in a row? Are you a lucky squirrel? I'll tell you what you do. You try to figure out dealer signature or wheel bias with some kind of claim of physics as your validation for reason. You claim because you have a tangible advantage, "an edge," that people that depend on luck are unintelligent. That is your entire contribution to gambling forums. It just does not add up. You have settled for second best.


"And did you exchange
A walk on part in a war
For a lead role in a cage?" - Pink Floyd

Quote from: greenguy on May 31, 2018, 08:29:38 AM
Sometimes lots of things work really well, and then sometimes they don't. The opposite is also true.

Gizmotron seems to focus and engage his free spirited play on this premise. I really don't see why that's so hard for people to accept.

Whoever else has an interest in playing the game this way might very well pay for some form of tuition to do so.

I'm fine with that, why aren't you?

Gizmo, when you opened your school, how much money in total did you earn from your students?

Let me put forward some perspective before you answer. A little while back I bought ten toy marbles form an auction house for $40. That's right, ten. I sold those ten toy marbles on ebay for $12,000.

What's my point? Give me a break, who should really care if some of us guys make a bit of dough from our expertise, whatever that may be?

Somebody, quite a few somebodies really wanted my marbles, so they paid the price.

I opened the school to have an experience where complaining about the math / edge was set aside. We just discussed trends, perception, change, and also got caught up in the TurboGenius' progression. I spent allot of time on proving that the global effect really exists. I charged because I finally went ahead and built the AI charting program that made bet selections on changes that the software perceived were advantages. I gave that software to each student. I made about $800 from six months work. But what I really got was a civil discussion from a little more than 20 people that asked questions and got answers. It was fun too. I'm pretty much open about it now. I know that making movements, like swing trading, is not easy. If it were there would not be a stock market. I honestly don't know if anyone learned anything. People have kept in touch with me through email. I answer their questions. I've done this twice in the past ten years. There is no need to do it again. I tried to share my experience in perceiving opportunities that come along. This was all done when my attitude to hit the big win streak was my goal. Things have changed since then. I've openly shared those changes.

Quote from: alrelax on May 31, 2018, 01:24:13 PM


Absolutely spot-on, IMO.  Thanks for the great comment!  Seriously, Glen.

I knew that you would like it. It happens to be close to the way that you play. There are those of us that play with a kind of agility to what they are seeing. You have been writing about that for the past year or so. There was a guy years ago names Spike. He plays that way. It might not be provable by a math algorithm but it works for me just the same.

Quote from: CourierPete on May 31, 2018, 11:16:02 AM
I agree, just go with your intuition. Some days you're just playing worse, and sticking to a system won't fix that.

Now you are using your noggin.   You could actually keep track of your wins and losses in a chart too. My wwwLLwwL lists make it easy to see the results. So I prefer to call it analysis. I'd use my intuition for one thing though. Is the over all condition that the session is easy or difficult? In other words am I just battling to break even and even that is hard? A session can just be hard. It must be a condition that can be expected to happen. My plan is to take a break if that happens.

Quote from: Blue_Angel on May 31, 2018, 10:36:49 AM
In other words you are betting for continuation and against alteration of any kind.
Therefore the continuations must dominate the alteration of states, but from my experience I think that alteration is prevalent because at the end nothing is being favored.
Just try to imagine results as a traveler who never stays too much at a specific place, just passes by and from time to time stays for a while, that's variety, that's variance.
If we had dominant continuation, or repetition, of any kind, then it would be clearer what's coming up and more boring to be frank.
But with all those alterations the game keeps the suspense and interest.
I perceive it as a good challenge, easier objectives lose interest quickly and are making you to move on to tougher and greater ones.

Spot on, you are right on about your assessment of my perception of what I look for. Yes, I expect to see allot of alterations, chaos, variance, whatever you want to call it, etc... I call it change if anyone is reading what I have written over the years. I attempt to speculate on change. That includes any trend that ends or any trend that starts. I bet on the middle. It has taken me years to accept that getting out while still in the middle has turned out to be the most effective of tactics for me. It's not easy to walk away with the right amount. It's like flying a plane on instruments. You don't react to what you feel. You act on what the instruments are telling you. I like the idea that if I execute a daily plan where I quit at the success point, a very easy to achieve point, then I know I will take down as much as $10,000 per month from what looks like an innocuous player's good luck.


It also explains why I use 12 different sets of 18 to 20 numbers. Someone might say why use 20 numbers. When you play the reds you are betting that the 18 red numbers will win against the 20 remaining numbers, 19 in Europe. So like it or not, 19 or 20 numbers is part of the action. I just include it on the inside table layout sets. An example would be noticing if the greens are hot, use the inside sets. If the greens are cold use all 12 sets. I never assume that a condition will be dominant before finding out for myself what is really happening. I always wait to see what the real conditions are and then adjust to take advantage of it. I know that I'm reacting to past spin results. It works sometimes. Sometimes it does not. I have a plan for each condition. Sometimes you can't see anything. That is what you are saying above. I know. It's just a condition that will change. It's like flying on instruments through a mountain range, trusting your altitude and location to the instruments. You must have the patience to see it through. The clear air will appear ahead. And yes, that is very challenging.


The skill is in recognition to any condition and having the experience to know what is typical. Those are acquired values. It's like telling someone something but not being able to understand it for them. Knowing that a condition of opportunity will come and that I will reach my very easy to achieve quit point is far different than waiting for a massive win streak that makes descending deep worth it. It's two different challenges. It may sound corny or simplistic. But it just happens to work for me. I know that stop points have been discussed for decades on these gambling forums.  They were not much in my game at all. Now they are. People change.

Quote from: Blue_Angel on May 31, 2018, 12:01:59 AM

So all boils down to: 2,1,2,3,4,5...etc
The progression alone makes you winner?
The cognition or the recognition of patterns??
If I see number 12 is around how can I know that this is not a hunch but clairvoyance?
HUH??

I don't worry about single numbers. My big bet for now is $100. My small bet is $5 It's not a mindless progression. I'm just searching for the absence of down streaks. They are easy to see. You must have a guess in the game on each spin just to see if you suck at it. If my goal was to lose as much as possible I would hunt for crashes in my swing charts. BTW, that 2,1,2,3,4,5, progression is John Patrick's not mine.


Your guess must be blind. It must contain no magical thinking. There is no trick to it. It has the mathematical chance to succeed based on the true odds for one spin and that is all. I just enjoy seeing 20 reds in a row, and that is not wishful thinking in any way. It just happens. I jump in and I either get started or I move to recover that loss. It's so simple. I'm not going to get killed by 20 losses in a row at the big price. But I am going to kill the casino at 20 reds in a row at the big price. It never takes a sixth sense.

Quote from: soxfan on May 30, 2018, 11:39:42 PM
Bwaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, the garnabby is back. So, do tell, what has befallen the gr888888888888888888888888one, hey hey?

Yeah, what happened?

Quote from: james on May 30, 2018, 11:25:26 PM
In my local casino, the following line appears on the screen intermittently, "It is true unicorns are not real, but the house's advantage is." But after reading how the in-house experts consistently beat the house with systems, I have started to believe in unicorns.

It's not much of a system. In fact it is as old as the hills. Bet big when you are doing good, bet small when you are doing bad. Of course you must figure out that math won't help you much when it comes to good and bad streaks or stretches. The house's advantage won't stop good or bad streaks from occurring. It takes cognition. There is no math formula for cognition. Therefor there is no math formula for unicorns.

Quote from: Blue_Angel on May 30, 2018, 10:16:50 PM
I've always tried to emphasize the balance between risk and reward, there are not universal limits for what is good or not, but if we compare the money gained VS money risked then regardless of the size of someone's BR the percentages will reflect exactly this relationship, no matter how big or small a bankroll may be.

Do you agree gentlemen?

I agree with that observation of the percentage staying the same. In fact bankroll size is the only thing I'm trying to lock down right now. That's why I'm practicing so much for this. It comes down to percentage of sessions won vs losses too. I always look for the balance point.

Quote from: Blue_Angel on May 30, 2018, 09:39:06 PM

I guess you are an adrenaline junky, right?
Have you ever had an accident by the extreme sports?
Was it serious in order to handicap you?


About roulette and specifically the streaks, what about those sessions which are quite choppy?
Or perhaps cannot all selections be on the same choppy phase simultaneously, but in order to be on the selection which is more streaky than the rest you should bet'em all simultaneously and keep only what "pays the rent" if you get my drift. 

"I guess you are an adrenaline junky, right?"


I'm just the opposite. There's a very old axiom in mountain climbing lore. It goes like this: "Relax your mind." The entire point of all this hard core rock climbing stuff is to not get nervous, don't let your hands sweat. Don't tremble. Don't waste energy, conserve muscle strength.  Adrenalin causes all those things to jump off the scale. In a way it's a kind of mind control.


"Have you ever had an accident by the extreme sports?
Was it serious in order to handicap you?"


Yes and no. I sprained my knee twice. I got bruised a few times. My first year at ski extreme I almost died in front of 1,000 spectators. I cartwheeled out of control down a maintain face above an Aerial competition going on. Before going over a 150 ft cliff, after cartwheeling down 800 vertical feet, I came to a stop five feet from the top edge. There is no way to stop yourself once you start to cartwheel. I took a "screamer" down a vertical face rock climbing over an overhang. I hit a 2 inch wide ledge just before the rope tightened up. That was like trying to put your left heal up your butt while getting squished into a 10 gallon bucket. I was only out of work for two weeks on that one. That's it. I might be the first person to base jump an airplane down a rock face. That didn't even jazz me up. That was pure execution. "Relax your mind." There are hundreds of stories and many other types of extreme adventures that I got pretty good at. I even let Golf kick my rear. Now that is very hard to relax about. Golf can really mess with your mind.


What about streaks and choppy?


I like choppy. Choppy is an indicator too. If any recognizable thing, be it a fantasy in seeing it or not, if that thing continues then you can adjust to it. If the characteristic continues for just one spin then your risk to go further is a free chance after you win from it. This is what happens. You see a connection within the past few spins. You then place a bet that is a wish. Sometimes that wish comes true. Sometimes it does not. I really don't care much. I know that the guesses will have small upticks. Any loss is an indicator that I'm no longer in an uptick part of a session. I stay out until I do start to go up again. For me to lose mathematically I must stay in on all the down ticks. I don't. It's a matter of watching the chop vs the bigger movements. I play loose, like standing on a mountain top and seeing my line. Pushing off on a Roulette table is like a kiddie ride at the arcade. There's no adrenaline. Just keep your focus and your plan.

Blue_Angel, absolutely brilliant. I can't say for sure if it's a great way, to go your own way in gambling, unless you happen to be a pioneer of some sort.


I found my own way after I got my first job and moved out. It was rock climbing. They were still using pitons in Yosemite. My first ice axes were made of wood. Everyone I knew labeled me crazy. I learned from then on, in that first year, to do it all for the personal enjoyment of it all. I only climbed with people that were also tired of the bull stuff, why do you do it questions. Then this guy skis off the Grand Tetons back in 1971. That was it for me. I started that too in the next ski season of 71-72. I had to get really good at rock climbing and mountain climbing just so that I could ski off of never before skied mountain faces. I did all that alone. I knew of nobody that was into this. It was until 1984 when I was introduced to the "Peddle Hop" turn. I found my true calling. I turned 70 degree faces into easy ski turns. I know what it means to go your own way.
-------------------------------------


Mike, thank goodness that you don't have perils of wisdom for day trading, swing trading, a Roulette table. Your incites are good enough to act as a red herring or even better a straw man. I suspect you keep this level of mentality up so that it somehow gives you comfort, perhaps something even simpler than that. Your point of view is clear.


If I just bet on the reds alone each spin, I would produce a candlestick chart that would prove my point, that upticks happen all along the way down the mathematical expectation required by the mathBoys. The math oriented absolutists would be happy with such a chart. They would say that it represents the truth. So what about guessing?  Is there a mathematical law that says you can't bet on the upticks? Your argument is that you can't or that nobody can. I know how to stay out of the deep down ticks. Do you suggest that that is a skill that can't exist? Why do you guys use a logic that says you are right and people that guess are wrong? As you can see, if you are not blind, betting on the reds alone produces these down tick and up tick swings. All I do is watch 12 different sets of 18 numbers. I'm not stuck to just the reds. I can see up ticks in any one of the sets. I can guess better than you can pontificate. I have the skill. You don't. Just saying you are right does not actually make you right.


I'm OK with that too. You are too invested in your way to ever consider achieving a skill that for all practical purposes represents a flat earth mentality to you. You can never lower yourself. Too proud.    Too captured by the system that in the end makes you mechanical.