Yanks

I have input the same numbers I used on Winner's sheet you wrote.  This is much, much better.

I will try to do some hard studies in the next few days and tell you how it goes.

Thanks.

Sam

Thank you, Yanks.  I'll watch that again and again.

Sam

Mr. AMK

I'll leave you to your opinion.

TwoCat

Good!

Yanks

Well, you're right.  Depending on the person and his/her desire, the bet would be placed differently.

Imagine this:  R R R R R  We've all seen it.  Now the next time you see R, you have ask yourself are there four more Rs coming?  Maybe; maybe not.  A flow of numbers will definitely alternate between singles and runs of X.  If my time ever permits, I will continue the study of the VLS Lw Methodology to see if I can truly capitalize on the flow.

Samster

Yanks

Not trying to be argumentative; those who know me will tell you that is not my style.  (Hak-kaf-hak)

Joe Spiffy decides to wait for five of X in a row and then bet against it.  He sees five reds and bets black.  Does the "when" (five reds) not decide the "where" (black)?

TwoCatSam

Yanks said:  "I am going to take a BR of 500$ that I have earned in the past few weeks.....etc,etc, etc..."

Ahem!  Many old hands at this game wish they could make that statement.  Yep, I'm one. 

This begs the question:  Why not keep on keepin' on?  Dance with the one brung ya!

Hey, why so hard on Voodoo, guys?   Sooner or later, you'll find it mostly all Voodoo! 

Sam

Yanks

Look under his cape!!

Oh, forgive me.  I couldn't help myself!

TCH

Bayes

Will Rogers, Oklahoma's favorite son, made this statement:  Everyone is ignorant, just on different subjects.  I am ignorant as to how to perform brain surgery!  I am not offended.  Stupid offends me.  [smiley]aes/devil.png[/smiley]

It seems this argument is academic; no place for a Redneck like me!!  I'll just call it random and do my thing.

Some days my thing works very, very well!!

Sam

Bayes

If I read your second sentence correctly, you are saying <If you believe in random, you are uneducated>.  I'm paraphrasing, but that's the gist of it.

"In a deterministic universe, based on Newtonian concepts, there would be no probability if all conditions are known (Laplace's demon)".

How do you get past that red "if"?

Reminds me of the old saying:  IF we had some ham, we'd have some ham and eggs--IF we had some eggs.

So roulette is NOT random if you know all the variables, but you CAN'T know all the variables.  So what does that make our real, not theoretical, game of roulette?   Random!!

TwoCat

Thank you, Bayes. 

Proof

Not trying to rag on you here, but do you have any proof that RNGs are fixed/crooked?  Especially BV?  Do you believe the SHA-256 is "etched in stone" and cannot be manipulated?

Anyone?

Sam

I guess my bent is this:  I play RNG (BV) for real money.  I think they are honest.  I hope they are honest.  And I'm smart enough to know that what I think and what I hope doesn't mean diddly-squat.

So I'll leave it at that and accept Proof's statement as fact:  He is right.

Sam

Esoito

I like that buzzard analogy.

The lady left with $35,000.  Her friend almost drug her away.

Yes, the casino made up the loss off others.  Why can't RNG do the same?  That was my point.

Sam

Quote from: Marshall Bing Bell on August 10, 2013, 04:04:52 AM
System players need not concern themselves with cause and effect. The roulette wheel will do as it pleases and the ball will land where it will. And yes, random is helpless against itself.