To get to where I am with it you must allow for expansion of the axiom. You must come to grips that there is another fact of life, that the trend can also be your enemy.

In my basic teachings, and I've shared this openly for many years, you will find out that using the trends for bet selection, that it will work very well, it will work flatly, (without much movement, plus or minus,) or it will work very badly. These are the three states of using trends. You must play with an awareness of these three states.

Sure, play as if the trend is your friend, but be aware that the trend can also be your enemy.

Quote" From your expirience what is more likely to happen?"

My experience tells me that it doesn't matter what happens. I'm only concerned with one or another thing. Did the trend (following the trend to continue), did it continue and result in "A" a win? Or did the trend (following the trend to continue), did it not continue and result in "B" a loss?  I divorce myself from the bet selection process and the single track of results. I do this because of A & B decisions that can result in win or loss streaks. I use many possibilities and opportunities to make these bet selection from. By separating the selection process from the stream of results frees me up to react to one single set of data. From the current conditions of that results  track I can make bet level decisions. In extremely strong losing streaks I can use anti-trend bet selections to reverse the loss streak to a win streak. My method simplifies down to a single aspect. I search for anything that continues. If any situation, be it a trend or a streak continues then I attack it for as long as it continues.

THIS IS KIND OF FUNNY. Nobody ever asks me how I make adjustments as things change. Not one single person asks me for a step by step example of how to react with different conditions. Not in all of the past seven years. I think they are all overwhelmed in the trend stage of learning. I've been waiting years for that first inquisitive response. The absence of questions has puzzled me for years. I can only guess, but I must have failed to make an impression that would cause a proper dialog to occur. Can it be that people can't get past the bet selection stage? Maybe that alone is a brick wall.

From the article : "Too many bets at the same stake: you lose."

Thinking linialy in a non-rhythmic, non-symmetrical, non-proportional manner offers elegant possibilities. Thinking that larger numbers decreases the number of losses used against large numbers, as a form of camaflauging the inevitable, like the author suggests, is non-productive. The only way to beat this game is to utilize an agile, intelligent implemented, bi-level, awareness system that deliberately manipulates the balancing effects of the large number effect.

I've been on the same topic for the past six years. Having exhausted myself in pointless progressions and rule based systems almost twenty years ago. In all this time there is still no long term winners.

Thank you to all that participated.

I'm encouraged that people are catching on. Perhaps there will be those that pass me by. There might even be someone here that can teach better than I do. I still have not found a way to pass on experience. Perhaps there is a way.

I do my best when I'm in simple to process sessions. Nice easy trends to read. Perfect effectiveness that rewards you with patterns and trends that run long and cooperate. If it were easy like that all the time the casinos would have shut down centuries ago.

If you can find a way to make that your own then you can find out for all of us. I never leave a positive opportunity in the middle of it. The reason that I discovered a global effect occurring on four different tables is because I was betting against the opportunities. I learned about trends the hard way. But that was way back in the beginning. I hope to help many of you from making huge mistakes.

So now I can simplify all this. While typical randomness characteristics are occurring, they also sometimes simultaneously exist in a bigger, over all, characteristic that runs through everything. You would be wise to become aware of patterns and other characteristics, so that you become accustomed to seeing the trend, having never seen them before.

Now is that difficult to understand by any of you? I'd be very happy to answer any questions.

Quote from: Dino246 on February 26, 2013, 07:49:16 PM
Would make a great film.

It already is a great film. Look for it in the TV show 'Breaking Vegas.'

wannawin, welcome to the club. Winning is hard.

mBB, as you might have read in another thread somewhere, you must find a way to make it your own. I like looking at the conditions and using a built in regression style after each attacking win, if the conditions allow for it. Your vision of attacking the triples would have also been profitable.

As far as knowing when to jump in goes. I look back from eight, to sixteen, to thirty spins back. I use a charting method that allows me to see the effect of any patterns forming or existing in rapid order. It's possible to pick up on characteristics with a quick glance.

Most of the time my way of doing this is to play the existing short term trends while also letting any global effect also influence my guesses.  I've learned that it's great to catch a long term GE early. There is no rule. Experience tells me to give it a try. Please take note of this: I always look at each session from the point of its difficulty. That lets me know if things are changing or if they are continuing to be difficult.  It's all covered in my checklist of things to scan for on each spin.

... I'm so sure ths discussion will be fruitful that some of you will see examples of the effect and present them for discussion.

Here is another example of a global effect. When stretches of sleeping dozens occur, it's always the same dozen that sleeps for at least five spins. Or like this, for another example, When the high column sleeps it always does it at least six spins before coming back to life. These are exploitable conditions when they just keep happening for long parts of any session. There is one rule to live by. They always signal their falling apart by breaking their perfect structuring.

That's not to say that a global effect that is 95% perfect is not an opportunity also. I once saw the same global effect hold for four different tables over a four and one half hour session. The same 12 inside numbers lay almost dormant during that time.

Once you have learned this, you will never look at Roulette the same.

I'm accustomed to looking how the singles are flowing. There is one pure thing going on. When it changes from red or from black, there is at least one repeat from the new color. When it changes to a stretch of singles it comes back to the same characteristic. Once again it starts with at least one repeat before shifting.

I would bet big for every next bet after a change. Then I would bet at 25% of each big bet until it loses. The loss being a shift to the next color. After two losses in a row I would see that the perfect condition had changed. So that ends exploiting it. BUT -- it comes back to doing it again. That's one of the characteristics of the global effect. The strange configurations become a kind of type that returns for 30 minutes to several hours. Before me , I doubt that there were any players that tried to exploit these kind of big picture characteristics and conditions.

Once you start seeing these conditions you will never be able to go back to not seeing them ever again. They are great opportunities waiting to be exploited.
I'm so sure ths discussion will be fruitful that

That's almost it. You are looking at it as a bigger picture. Now ask yourself this. You see that it changes from red to black and black to red. Is there one single thing that holds up as a constant, excluding that short stretch of singles, I'll tell you all what it is after the next comment(s).

It's not dealer signature or any kind of physical bias. It's  an aspect of randomness.