I believe the phenomenon called intuition when betting is related to our internal subconscious accounting, and the ability for humans to get patterns out of any relationship of events.

For instance, an experienced player may have observed through the years that most numbers show up within 3 cycles (111 spins). So, in the last half of the third cycle the player "intuitively" feels some numbers are due. He will be right as much as probability dictates, but he will give more weight to the times he hits over the times he misses.

An experienced player might notice the natural clumping of events in the game and "intuitively" bet when his target event is in a clump, being rewarded every now and then with a random walk.

...At times when when being on a real American roulette table, I heard more than one player claiming "Greens attract Greens" (i.e. Zeroes attract Zeroes), this formed from simple observation. Of course players weren't tracking the plethora of other possible combinations, just focused on the times when a concentration of hits appeared, according to the expected ebb and flow in a single-number location for preserving the overall happened, and the times they earned, validated their feelings.

I can imagine their perception was aided by the zeroes being highlighted in the marquee, while the plethora of other combinations weren't.

-----------------

If this "yet another explanation" for how Intuition works holds ground, then we are not over-reaching when affirming intuition can be programmed to some extent.

In this sense, when the "intuitive" phenomenon is described in mathematically verifiable terms, it can be coded (do remember a degree of malleability is allowed in the mathematical approach too. Ranges can be used).

For instance, I'm going to give you a personal history about Lw's on double-dozens, considering tracking "Hit on any of Last two Dozens" event.

There is roughly a 64% chance of getting a w. (~Two thirds)

There is roughly a 32% chance of getting an L. (~one third)

It is therefore naturally expected to have more w's in any set of actuals. So the "expected" outcome from the next spin leans towards the "w" (win) of the last two dozens spun. But we know in real life the same two dozens don't continue to be spun the same for incredibly longer spans just because of their expected values for the next single spin.

An ebb and flow of L's and w's is expected instead. It is in here where short-term speculation and -yes- intuition can have a place in the picture.

I would predict . The trigger for my prediction being there having more w's than expected. I calculated my prediction zone to be 4/5 cycles. I would predict that after a dominance of w's in the past 12-15 spins (or more), after there were two L's in a cycle (3 spins) there would be some more L's above.
If there isn't a "random walk"[link], it is the plausible thing .

Likewise, after a concentration of L's above the expected rate for 12-15 spins, I would tend to bet for a small comeback of w's.

This was just one of the most obvious triggers. There were loads and loads of shades in that mentally tiresome strategic-play. i.e. If back to back losses (LL's) were trending in the registry. What was the maximum of L's back to back for the session, then betting it wouldn't go further. Even betting on plain hunches.

...Ultimately I did an experiment asking myself "why do I want to bet this", and found out it mostly answered to events related to that "ebb and flow" made by the natural concentration and dispersion of hits in any location, according to its coverage. Nothing spectacular.

I rationalized intuition *to a degree*, not all shades of it, yet at least in this very small portion of the picture I got the basics for forming my own answer as to what intuition is.

Enter our "internal accountant".

Our "internal accountant" accumulates patterns and "meta-patterns" throughout the years, stacks them and guesses based on them. It is just a background activity of the brain.

This even happens if the player doesn't even know a thing about expected probabilities, variance, standard deviation, etc.

It happens subconsciously, and I would argue it happens in any repetitive field. Our brain finds patterns in things as trivial such as some trains arriving late at some days of the week ("aha! I knew this train would be late"), as well as many plain seemingly meaningless repetitive events...why would it be different for betting a casino game?

(We all suffer our share of Apophenia [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apophenia])

Of course, you need to be a regular in order to form your "internal accountant" for that field. You won't form processing for recurring patterns out of nowhere.

In this sense, true metaphysical intuition would involve pulling out better-than-expected results with no prior knowledge of the activity. As opposed to the down-to-earth intuition we are talking about in our "yet another explanation", which can be labeled more as a subconscious function of our pattern-loving brain than anything.

-----------------

...Chances are most players aren't aware of their "internal accountant", but it's there nonetheless.

Vic

Quote from: VLS on September 21, 2014, 06:58:40 PM
I believe the phenomenon called intuition when betting is related to our internal subconscious accounting.....

Of course, you need to be a regular in order to form your "internal accountant" for that field. You won't form processing for recurring patterns out of nowhere.

In this sense, true metaphysical intuition would involve pulling out better-than-expected results with no prior knowledge of the activity. As opposed to the down-to-earth intuition we are talking about in our "yet another explanation", which can be labeled more as a subconscious function of our pattern-loving brain than anything.

...Chances are most players aren't aware of their "internal accountant", but it's there nonetheless.

Vic

Vic, thanks for this really helpful discussion on applications of intuition.

Recently a writer on this Forum made I recall an earlier distinction between metaphysical application of intuition and bet context application of intuition along the lines to which Vic has here given a very helpful analysis. I think that writer strongly felt that the 'higher' intuition would not be appropriate to the betting world. It was Schoolman writing in the Intuition thread under Gambling Philosophy.

This is an interesting and quite challenging subject and one which interests me.

Step one is to acknowledge there is intuition, and many would agree, some might deny. Perhaps it may be latent in us all as you have earlier suggested.

Step two is to apply intuition in the 'down to earth' context as mentioned by Vic.

Step three then suggests by this model there is a 'higher' intuition that is not engaged in this work.

Why separate? When all is inter- connected ( some will challenge this statement) why draw distinctions unless at certain levels transitions occur from gross to immaterial? But surely it is all life experience - where does gross stop and spiritual start?

Or are there other issues here?  Perhaps we see ( maybe rightly) Wall Street and Casinos as places of gross materialism? But in both places there can be very clever and fine individuals - is what is conducted there the problem?  Maybe that is it - too earthy, and not enough of  the reverse of that ( whatever we term it)? Not pure enough ( whatever that means)? Not refined enough ( whatever that means)?  Is it the thoughts and feelings, the vibes, the actions, the stress, the selfish greed in the Marketplace that might drive away the higher intuition?

Questions of degrees - just thinking aloud here. How best to approach this?

Trying to find the right balance.

Again I refer to Sunil Padiyar's book ' The Psychic Gambling Supersystem' - more questions than answers at this time.

QuoteI believe the phenomenon called intuition when betting is related to our internal subconscious accounting, and the ability for humans to get patterns out of any relationship of events.

Victor, I strongly agree.

We as a roulette group cannot agree on the best way to learn how to beat the game of roulette. We, instead, speak about our own roulette experiences and what we have read from various disciplines and points of view:  wheel-based, layout-based, physics, math, psychic, etc., disproving and justifying why a particular approach does not work.

I remember when The Roulette Formula, by Kimo Li, was first made public in 2005 regarding the many facets of dividing up the wheel and categorizing them into groups that would serve as a universal roulette language. For those players who have embraced the ideas of the Global Pie Method and later The Matrix, they are consciously and subconsciously reaping the benefits of pattern recognition and intuition. It could be as simple as which half of the wheel is the ball falling, or more complex, like reading boomerang patterns on the layout, and knowing the number relationships on the wheel.

The internal accountant retrieves information from several databases stored within the cortex of the brain, unlike a library that is well organized, but rather, data randomly scattered throughout the brain, most of the time duplicate in nature. If one part of data is "erased", it can be traced and found in another part of the cortex. One must have data in their minds and not on a computer or cell phone. You don't believe me. Imagine if you lost your phone. How many phone numbers do you remember?

Intuition, therefore, has a direct relationship with information gathered and stored throughout one's experience using a set of principles that is "proven" to win consistently, which by the way, cannot happen without a universal language,  set of rules, and discipline.

No pattern escapes the intuitive mind of a professional Global Pie roulette player. My intuition tells me that there is someone out there who begs to differ.

Kimo Li

An interesting tought: "Intuition" being coded

If we are "human machines" with a certain amuont of processing power attached to our "central processing unit" (our brain), then human intuition is "a program" that our brain's "internal accountant" executes