Quote from: AsymBacGuy on May 14, 2023, 08:34:22 PMWelcome back Giz!!

Thanks. It's good to carry on with the new stuff.

I'm an obvious fan of Tommy Renzoni, mostly in trend following in the game of Roulette where I keep track of 6 independent groupings with my charting method. It allows me to see more trends and patterns all at once. It's not outlawed yet as people that track past results in Roulette are considered idiots. In other words, for now, the casinos love us for being unsuccessful idiots. But by sharing the method I hope to prove that all wrong. If so it will change what is known about statistical mathematics. If it proves out then mathematical calculations will need to be discovered that are for now unseen. Not by me of course. I'm no mathematician.

But I am shining the light on this anyway. I have come up with the practical application of what the math would result in.

According to this article about legends it says this about trend play:

Tommy Renzoni:

"If, for example, the cards favour the player for three consecutive decisions, then your next bet should either be player or you shouldn't bet at all! If you lose, you lose only one wager.

"If you bet against the trend, you can be suckered into betting and betting and betting. I have seen more fortunes lost by people who became emotionally committed to one position that went against the trend than through any other folly in gaming!"

I'm just saying that you can see this method better in the game of Roulette as long as it is allowed.

So I love this part of the article. It makes you wonder if I can go on a "Run."

Thanks for posting this. It's one of my favorite reads all over the internet in the past 17 years.

Victor, still around also. Good to see you are still working on things. Hope your are well. I almost gave up. Then something opened my eyes.

So what is your method, system, capability, awareness, etc... of gambling interest now days?

And now to put it all into perspective. Here is the video that changed everything that led to me sharing everything almost four years ago.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRCtBRsLPmk

Yep, talked with Glen today. No more BS back and forth. We all, including myself, have demons to forgive and forget about, especially myself.

Time has helped everything.

Glen knows how to win.

I wrote a thread that supports everything that I have theorized. This July it will have been 4 years since I published it. I sold my last class to a single student around 5 years ago. I waited one year and then wrote the "Reading Randomness" thread. It has more views than any other thread over at that website forum. That thread is a full, in the wide open, discussion of everything, all for free. It is supported by free software that I built in order to practice it and to validate the theory. You can download that software there for free.

A few people have gone on to perfect the skills explained in the thread. They are skilled at Reading Randomness. They know and have experienced the "Global Effect" and the "Elegant Pattern." Some have stuck to the thread's validation experiment. Many have spent time learning this and have never contributed to the threads discussions. So who knows how many use the technique?

I defend my ideas against the onslaught of the never ending assumption projected by the math oriented players that frequented the thread. Even here the "mathZombies" feel the right and privilege to attempt to cancel me. I'm done with that. There are too many people now that see that this has taken off as a viable method to take advantage of the casinos through observation, situational awareness, and skill.

There are still people in different stages of learning about gambling that feel the need to lecture everyone on the realities and beliefs of statistical established norms. I expect to change the world's view on this. That includes the beliefs that the casino always wins. The cassino has a mathematical advantage. The games are rigged to win in favor of the casinos. The casinos win because they have an 5.4% advantage built into the game. This implies that the known beliefs about statistical math is also wrong. So it's a big deal observation. I call it "Coincidental Change." It's based on a comparison to "Variable Change," a well known concept derived in counting cards in Blackjack. 

I also discussed this at the website forum developed by, I think it's Steve, who sells targeting computers. He allowed it to be discussed away from the original thread that was at the other forum. It became tiresome and for some reason or another I stopped supporting discussion over there. The primary discussion is at the Reading Randomness thread. I just mentioned Steve's forum because several people over there became masters at the skill and validated the experiment.

Anyway, that is all that has been happening. I discovered a video that changed everything for me. It is from a guy that has all the truth about what is happening in casinos wrong but has almost all the truth about strategy right. I based my Reading Randomness thread on his ideas. I was about to quit when I discovered this video. Everything changed after seeing that video. I could see a way to control my weaknesses.

Quote from: Lungyeh on June 17, 2019, 09:14:51 PM
There was a time when somebody asked if bet selection is more important or money management. The votes were quite evenly split. I chose money management. Until today, I still believe so. Bet selection works for the trenders some times and works for the anti trenders other times. The decider comes down to MM when you are winning and when you are losing.

You have just described the secret to winning. Glen knows this too. A complete discussion on how good players do this is all that is needed to end the games that we love to play. It's not that hard. I'm surprised this is not basic method for all gamblers. My quest to find it started with rule based systems where you try to treat a casino like a personal ATM machine. It seems like that is where most players get started. The need to move past systems and progressions. But as long as people want to discuss systems and progressions we have gambling forums. Good Luck with your new venture Glen.

Quote from: BEAT-THE-WHEEL on January 27, 2019, 03:07:07 AM
EVERY single SELECTION has a....KILLER SEQUENCES, THAT KILLS YOUR progression  BR!!!!

IDENTIFY them, and avoid them,
only then you reduced your risk....
Any ideas?

Even if you can identify upticks in your charts you can't avoid the big holes created by progressions. And you waste your time if you try to get rich off of positive, even "Up & Pull," progressions because they take away the needed wins to balance. I suggest that you try to win with flat betting combined with no bets. But I doubt that you will let that advice help you.

Quote from: Jimske on January 26, 2019, 08:56:26 PM
OK, my bad.  I was under the impression you had a prediction method.

No. Prediction is impossible. All I can do is get into synchronization of when my guesses are working. After more than a decade quarreling with Caleb/General/Snowman/Xander/Dr Nobody/etc... I have tried to make it clear that I can't predict any future outcomes. Accept perhaps for this prediction. He will continue to gather his sycophant army to record spins from wheels for him from all over the world. It's nothing less than a Cult following.

Quote from: alrelax on January 26, 2019, 02:54:13 PM
How does one know when they sit down at the table where they fit in, in those type of charts?  Such as when you look at a weather chart with the time day you know at 11am what temperature or snowfall or precipitation or Sunshine it is going to be by the estimated published rate and you compare that to the time of day it currently is. I understand that, but how do you do that with a gambling chart?

I don't keep a graph when I play. That's just to demonstrate visually that up or down swarms occur while you play. When you see chop you don't visualize valleys, downward slopes, inclines, or mountains. But you can see the slow grind downward in your results. If you keep a chart, it can even be stacks of chips of two different colors, you can show wins or losses. Look at these two charts  wwlwlwwlllwwlwlwlwl  & wwLwLwwLLLwwLwLwLwL. One is easier to read the changes than the other. Now look at this: pbpbpbpppbbbppbb vs pBpBpBpppBBBppBB. Now look at this type of chart: X=XX==X=X=X===X==XXX=. You can stack white chips mixed with red chips to show wins and losses. So you make a best guess on every hand or spin.  You look at what is happening and decide to fund the bets or not. You know when you are in a grind that is upward or downward. You can see a win streak or a losing streak. You can see one side as strong and one side as weak. Nobody can know the future but you can know the middle of something continuing. Anything that continues to keep going is all you need to know. You can know when a perfect win streak stops. You can know when singles on the weak side stop. If you can't see anything continuing then don't fund the guesses. But keep making the guesses based on your best impressions of the trends or patterns anyway. You need a wL list to see what is working even if they are just virtual bets. Does that explain it?

Quote from: Jimske on January 26, 2019, 05:35:39 PM
It appears that the only regular posters that would disagree are Asym and Giz.

My response already was: "I don't disagree with any of this."


To be quite clear I'll state it again. I agree completely.

Don't fund the valleys:


This is a graph of 100 spins all bet on Red. It's the same as FTL as far as showing valleys or mountains:


[attachimg=1]

Quote from: Lungyeh on January 25, 2019, 03:39:49 AM
And soon the winnings and the capital are together decimated. Gizmo despite his professions of his ability to keep track of win/loss had his failings at this precise situation. Perhaps he has improved on it.  But in any case, my moot point is that Loss Management is the key. Not bet selection. But feel free to disagree.

I don't disagree with any of this. And I have improved on this a lot. Yes, this was the monkey on my back. I kept giving back my winnings. What helped the most was noticing that seeing the bigger picture made seeing the bet selections themselves more in the form of bigger waves. I was no longer looking for the short spurts of success. I changed to seeing the entire gambling experience as a single event. The session is a single event with domination, weak side / strong side, as the best trend to look out for. I was using the big Caterpillar D-10 Bulldozer to grind away at the task at hand. That is the big tool to overpower the slow grind downward. But it too can encounter catastrophic losing stretches or streaks just like any other bet selection process. This occurs when you really don't have one side weak and the other side strong. Then your wishful thinking or your impatience takes over and you make risky mistakes. So I stay out of conditions that are not the best.


I added to that bet selection method three net big valued bets and done. An example would be three $250 net wins, $750, and the session was won. I learned that playing this method against seven net lost bets was the "stop loss" point best to use against it. I got good too. It took 2.333 won sessions to make up for one lost session. But with my bulldozer, big picture, bet selection method I was winning 4.666 sessions to each lost session. I had a session win rate of 2 to 1. This is a significant ratio too, as I will show you guys. About 6 months ago I came across a video on how to play the stock market like a casino. That opened my eyes to even a bigger picture. It made it easy now to lose and not get anxious about it. It's just all part of getting the monkey off my back. I use virtual bets, unfunded bet selections, when I can't see the strong side / weak side condition somewhere in my charts. A streak of Bankers is still a short lived strong side. So I get one or two net wins from that. But the goal is to get those three net wins and done. The video will explain the logic here.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRCtBRsLPmk


It's taken me four and a half years to put all this together. I've added something to it in the past month that is interesting, - better even. But I need to prove it works better first before mentioning it.


I hope that makes sense. Hopefully that video will open a few eyes here in the gambling world. It put me on to self control.

Quote from: The Crow on October 25, 2018, 01:02:15 AM
Without being too obvious, the message I was trying to convey to Gizmotron is not to disclose his secret because I have seen him work so hard over the years and for him to give it away is a shame. I understand Gizmotron seeks validation, but I believe he will be best served to be quiet and just make money.

The Crow

I got the message and agree with it. It makes no sense to get mad enough to wreck my own future. If I don't want to be mad I'll just have to give up the forums.

And the chart:



W | B  R | O  E | L  H | 0  6 | P | S |  --  SN  --  SP
nb|    X |    X |    X |    X | X | X |  --  01  --  32
nb|    X |    X | X    | X    |   |   |  --  02  --  14
nb|    X |    X |    X | X    |   |   |  --  03  --  36
nb|    X |    X |    X |    X | X | X |  --  04  --  32
nb|    X |    X | X    |    X | X |   |  --  05  --  18
nb| X    |    X |    X |    X |   | X |  --  06  --  20
nb|    X |    X |    X | X    |   | X |  --  07  --  30
nb|    X |    X |    X | X    |   |   |  --  08  --  36
nb|    X | X    | X    | X    | X |   |  --  09  --  01
nb| X    |    X |    X | X    |   |   |  --  10  --  26
X-|    X | X    | X    | X    |   |   |  --  11  --  09 ( $ 0 ) Red
   | X    | X    | X    |    X |   | X |  --  12  --  15 ( $ -90 ) Red
X |    X | X    | X    |    X | X |   |  --  13  --  03 ( $ 0 ) Red
X-|    X | X    | X    |    X | X |   |  --  14  --  03 ( $ 0 ) Odd
X | X    | X    | X    |    X | X |   |  --  15  --  17 ( $ 90 ) Odd
X |    X | X    |    X | X    |   | X |  --  16  --  23 ( $ 180 ) Odd
X-|    X | X    | X    | X    | X |   |  --  17  --  01 ( $ 180 ) Not Specials
   | X    | X    |    X |    X |   | X |  --  18  --  33 ( $ 80 ) Not Specials
   |    X | X    |    X | X    |   | X |  --  19  --  25 ( $ -20 ) Not Specials
  -|    X |    X |    X |    X | X | X |  --  20  --  32 ( $ -20 ) Not Specials
  -|    X |    X |    X |    X | X | X |  --  21  --  32 ( $ -20 ) Not Specials
X |    X |    X |    X |    X |   |   |  --  22  --  34 ( $ 70 ) Even
X |    X |    X | X    |    X | X | X |  --  23  --  12 ( $ 160 ) Even
X |    X |    X | X    | X    |   |   |  --  24  --  14 ( $ 250 ) Even
X | X    |    X | X    | X    | X |   |  --  25  --  02 ( $ 340 ) Even
   | X    | X    |    X |    X | X | X |  --  26  --  31 ( $ 304 ) Even
  -|    X | X    | X    |    X | X | X |  --  27  --  05 ( $ 304 ) Not Specials
X-| X    | X    | X    |    X |   | X |  --  28  --  15 ( $ 304 ) Six's
   |    X |    X | X    | X    |   |   |  --  29  --  14 ( $ 204 ) Six's
X | X    | X    |    X | X    |   | X |  --  30  --  35 ( $ 294 ) Zeros
  -|    X |    X | X    |    X |   |   |  --  31  --  16 ( $ 294 ) Zeros
X | X    | X    | X    |    X | X |   |  --  32  --  17 ( $ 374 ) Six's
X | X    |    X | X    |    X |   |   |  --  33  --  08 ( $ 454 ) Six's
X | X    | X    |    X | X    |   |   |  --  34  --  29 ( $ 534 ) Not Specials
X | X    | X    |    X |    X | X | X |  --  35  --  31 ( $ 624 ) Black
   |    X | X    | X    | X    | X |   |  --  36  --  01 ( $ 534 ) Black
  -| X    |    X |    X | X    | X |   |  --  37  --  28 ( $ 534 ) Red
X-| X    |    X | X    | X    |   | X |  --  38  --  10 ( $ 534 ) Black
   |    X | X    |    X | X    |   | X |  --  39  --  25 ( $ 444 ) Black
X-| X    |    X | X    | X    |   | X |  --  40  --  10 ( $ 444 ) Zeros
X |    X |    X | X    | X    |   |   |  --  41  --  14 ( $ 534 ) Zeros
   | X    | X    |    X |    X |   | X |  --  42  --  33 ( $ 444 ) Zeros
   |    X |    X |    X |    X | X | X |  --  43  --  32 ( $ 354 ) Zeros
  -| X    | X    | X    |    X |   | X |  --  44  --  15 ( $ 354 ) Zeros
  -|    X | X    |    X |    X |   |   |  --  45  --  19 ( $ 354 ) Zeros
X |    X |    X |    X |    X | X | X |  --  46  --  32 ( $ 434 ) Six's
X |    X |    X |    X |    X |   |   |  --  47  --  34 ( $ 514 ) Six's
   | X    |    X | X    | X    |   | X |  --  48  --  10 ( $ 414 ) Six's
X |    X |    X |    X | X    |   |   |  --  49  --  36 ( $ 494 ) Not Primes
   |    X | X    | X    |    X | X |   |  --  50  --  03 ( $ 454 ) Not Primes
X |    X | X    |    X | X    |   | X |  --  51  --  23 ( $ 486 ) Not Primes
X |    X |    X |    X |    X |   |   |  --  52  --  34 ( $ 518 ) Not Primes
X | X    | X    | X    |    X | X |   |  --  53  --  17 ( $ 598 ) Not Specials
X |    X | X    | X    |    X |   |   |  --  54  --  07 ( $ 688 ) Red
   | X    |    X |    X | X    |   |   |  --  55  --  24 ( $ 598 ) Red
X-|    X |    X | X    | X    |   |   |  --  56  --  14 ( $ 598 ) Red
X | X    |    X | X    |    X | X |   |  --  57  --  06 ( $ 688 ) Black
X |    X | X    | X    | X    | X |   |  --  58  --  01 ( $ 768 ) Not Specials
X | X    |    X | X    |    X | X |   |  --  59  --  06 ( $ 848 ) Not Specials
X |    X | X    |    X | X    | X |   |  --  60  --  27 ( $ 928 ) Not Specials

So you advocate for not sharing the secrets then. The math crowd, (OCD)    appropriate, don't deserve to be shown as feckless. And I should not be so mad as to show masses of people how to win.


In the following graph and chart I used bet selection based on trends, virtual bets where a $0 value was used to make a selection. The chart shows these with a hyphen next to the win or lose marking for that spin. At the far right is the set that is bet to win.


So it would be a major jip if I don't enplane how I use the concept of the video to enhance my trend betting style. I'll have to think about this.


So I decided to show one last example. I can go back to my self imposed silence. It has it all in it. I ran 10 spins just to get the chart going. Then I played 50 bet selections with and without value.


It's all here by example: