Selected quotes

[Mortagon]

Hi All,

I Will publish a series from quotes  of one of us, but from another forum. We'll call it for now Mr. "H ...”. It will be interesting who will recognize it first?


                                                     

  GUESS WHO'S COMING TO DINNER

Let's start with the icing on the cake - "greeting” to Steve



Posted: 29 January 2015

H… : “At the current time, I'm banned from roughly 1/2 of the casinos within the US. By the way, it's for winning.”

P… : “If you are banned in one casino in Vegas you are banned from all of them. And it’s not for winning. Same in Atlantic City. So that leaves few choices of casinos scattered all over US.
So you should be very busy flying around all over the place , and checking into hotels and checking out to catch the next plane.
Instead you are here in the forum (full time it’s obvious), and a bunch of other forums. That makes it unlikely that you have time for anything else. Who in his right mind, making that kind of money, and being busy in casinos all over the place, would have the time and patience to respond to every post in every forum? What is the gain for you? You never convinced anybody to agree with you or change his mind. All you efforts are wasted. A real businessman does not waste time. They stay low and keep to themselves. That’s a fact.  So what’s your point? Is being negative a form of self gratification? It sure is, with many underlining psychological reasons. So no need to waste any time with us. Your carefully constructed arguments, satisfy your extreme need for attention, but they leave me unimpressed.”

S… : “That should boost you ego… truth is that people like V…, H… and recently myself are leaving traces of info in public forum to look for potential team mates and providing starting point for these who at least has some brain.  Nobody wants to convince you of anything or impress you… time wasted here is a business investment.”

P… : “S…,
Are you saying that H…’s posts have the hidden goal to find potential partners? By sending him PM and make arrangements to meet somewhere and draw plans for a big casino hit?
Hahaahah.  That was a nice one. Y would a winner want to share his profits with someone else? I know. Maybe I have a clean record in the casino police logs, and H… is a marked man. As being a VB/AP with tons of winnings in his casino criminal record.
Oh S... .  Nice sense of humor. And for that I will tell Har… to look you up when he arrives in the UK. And I’ll keep you in mind when I return to Europe someday. Seriously.”

P… : “S…,
I already have a very lucrative offer from a VB site that offers potential of $30,000 in a few days.  What do you think”

H... : “P… ,
You’re falling prey to a scam by Steven Hourmouz.  Just an fyi, did you know he’s been convicted of fraud?Did you know that using a roulette computer is a felony in both the Mohegan Sun and Foxwoods?Furthermore, I’ve heard that his doesn’t work.             
What happened to your supposed roulette system?  Why are you now considering committing a felony?Please rethink what you’re doing.  Consider a part time job instead. “

P… “Do you really think H…, that I’m so naïve to fall for this scam? It’s just that I looked into VB/bias systems long time ago and he sends me emails ever since I visited his site. . It started out from selling his computer for $100,000 to looking for partners now. But surprisingly his methods seem to agree with your line of thinking. Check it out. Interesting material with videos. You probably know all about it. You can also look him up at the VLS forum. There is a sucker born every minute. I’m not one of them. . I know all about his scams, including the green energy scam. Before systems and above all,  it’s common sense.”

H… : “We thought that you had fallen prey to his scam.Your post made it appear as though you were naive.” ...

                                                                                                         

To be continued

[Steve]

Is this an attempt to turn me against Caleb?

Whether or not it was him that said these things a year ago, I already know Caleb has said crap about me before. Maybe he knows better now, maybe not. There are many people who've said rubbish about me before. I used to care. Not so much now. If people arent smart enough to see through bullshit, how unfortunate for them. It's really easy to know if my computers are a scam. Just get a free trial and test it for yourself all you like, for free. Or see it in person on any wheel. Or attend a public demo. If anyone is so dumb that they'd rather believe anonymous forum postings, woopie for them.

Understand Caleb and I arent buddy-buddy. We have had differences in the past and I've already given my opinion of him. But knowing what I already know about things he's said in the past is not going to change anything here.

Was it him that posted the crap;? Maybe, I dont know. It wouldnt change anything if it was.

[Perperikon]

In all forums - the same “song”.


Houston -  Posted: 26 January 2015 11:03 AM

“I’m always amused when someone like you attempts to explain AP play to a professional.  The first part is correct.  We rely on the expected result based on the strength of the bias.  However, we are still subjected to variance and probability.  Do you have to understand all of this to win if you truly have the edge?  Not really, but it helps.

For example:  If an AP had a biased edge of 15% at each spin of the wheel, how many spins would the AP need to play in order to make a profit over 95% of the time?  In order to help you grasp how variance affects an AP, simply input various spin totals into the two simplified formulas below,  then compare and add the values.

First off, how big will the variance likely be…  (simplified version)  The player’s variance is as follows: (+ or -3) x (square root of (number of spins played x 1 unit) = expected variance
Now what is the expected win.. (20% )x (number of spins played x 1 unit) = expected win
Now what happens if the player plays for only 100 spins?
Variance = Most of the time the AP can expect variance to be somewhere in between losing 30 units and winning 30 units.
Expected win with no variance = The player can expect to win 20 units.
The expected win/ loss for the AP when variance is included is some where in between -10 units (a loss) or a win of 50 units

Now the above examples are very over simplified, but for a reason.  It’s so that you can grasp how APs can have an advantage, but still sometimes lose.  Like the casino, the AP relies on an edge to win.  The longer the AP plays, the more likely he is to win.  The reason is because over time, the win from the AP’s edge becomes much larger than the loss from variance.  The flip side is true for the casino and the average gambler.  Eventually, the house edge completely dwarfs variance altogether.
The house edge is what pays the casino’s bills, not variance.

If you want to more about how to actually calculate it..(The luck factor in a casino game is quantified using standard deviations (SD). The standard deviation of a simple game like Roulette can be calculated using the binomial distribution. In the binomial distribution, SD = sqrt (npq ), where n = number of rounds played, p = probability of winning, and q = probability of losing. The binomial distribution assumes a result of 1 unit for a win, and 0 units for a loss, rather than -1 units for a loss, which doubles the range of possible outcomes. Furthermore, if we flat bet at 10 units per round instead of 1 unit, the range of possible outcomes increases 10 fold.
SD (Roulette, even-money bet) = 2b sqrt(npq ), where b = flat bet per round, n = number of rounds, p = 18/38, and q = 20/38.
For example, after 10 rounds at 1 unit per round, the standard deviation will be 2 x 1 x sqrt(10 x 18/38 x 20/38) = 3.16 units. After 10 rounds, the expected loss will be 10 x 1 x 5.26% = 0.53. As you can see, standard deviation is many times the magnitude of the expected loss.)”



Houston - Posted: 26 January 2015 06:10 PM

“You may not realize this, but you’re on about step four of the evolution of a system player.  Which means that you probably haven’t been playing for more than a year or two.
1. The player discovers roulette
2. The player discovers the Martingale.  At this time the player is so astonished by it’s limited success, that he’s willing to completely ignore all of the experts and mathematicians.
3. The player discovers that the Martingale doesn’t quite work and begins looking for just the right progression to make it work.
4. The player can’t find just the right progression to make it work and begins looking for triggers, and revisits step 2.
5. The player may realize after some period of time that triggers are of no value.
6. The player turns toward money management in an effort to make the triggers perhaps work and to make the progression work better.  The believe in the “hit and run” is alive and well and he revisits steps 2 through 4.
7. The player begins to believe that greed is the problem, “if they just focus on winning only one unit per day that they can perhaps make it work.”  The believe in the “hit and run” is still alive, but not as much so.
8. The player begins to realize that “hit and run” and money management doesn’t work, because there is no time frame that enables it to work, and there is no magic place in which to run that enables it all to work again when he returns to play again.
9. The player faces gambling ruin.
10. The player begins to realize that perhaps the experts weren’t so wrong after all, and that “Denial ain’t a river in Egypt” “.



Houston - Posted: 26 January 2015 09:59 PM

“You can read his quotes as the would apply to roulette in, “The Mathematics of Gambling”, below.

The general principles apply to almost all gambling games, and when they apply, they guarantee that systems cannot give the player an advantage.
To help you filter and reject systems, here are conditions which guarantee that a system is worthless.
1. Each individual bet in the game has a negative expectation.  This makes any series of bets have a negative expectation.
2. There is a maximum limit to the size of any possible game. (This rules out systems like the Martingale and up as you lose.)
3. The results of any one play of the game do not “influence” the results of any other play of the game.
(Note that we are talking about the “game of roulette”, not the “gaming device.”
4. There is a minimum allowed size for any bet. (This is necessary for the technical steps in the mathematical proof.)
Under these conditions, it is a mathematical fact that every possible gambling system is worthless in the following ways:
1. Any series of bets has a negative expectation
2. This expectation is the (negative) sum of the expectations of the individual bets.
3. If the player continues to bet, his total loss divided by his total action will tend to get closer and closer to his expected loss divided by his total action.
4. If the player continues to bet it is almost certain that he will:
  a. be a loser
  b. eventually stay a loser forever, and so never again break even;
  c. eventually lose his entire bankroll, no matter how large it was.
  -Please note the source “The Mathematics of Gambling”, by Dr. Edward O. Thorp.


Now, there are several other mathematicians, including Michael Shackleford aka the Wizardofodds that too will say pretty much the same thing. 
Perhaps you’d like to explain to us why it is that you believe that they’re not as qualified as you are on the subject, and why you believe that they are all wrong?”



Houston - Posted: 29 January 2015 07:09 PM

“Kaisan and I have met.
We met in LV.  We just by chance happened to be watching the same wheel.
I periodically rely on people from various forums to keep me updated on the locations of certain wheels.  In this way, I’ve found some forums quite useful. “



Houston  Posted: 30 January 2015 05:03 AM
“Anyone that’s good at math doesn’t play roulette systems to make money.
I do use some of the forums to gain intel on the locations of certain wheels/brands, etc.
- Signature 
“Like a fool, a system player and his money are easily separated!” “



Houston - Posted: 30 January 2015 08:22 PM

“It’s that we already know that the systems don’t work.  This much is already known as fact.  And I do mean FACT.  If you win, then it’s LUCK…That’s it!.  It’s been analyzed mathematically… countless times, since the games inventions.  Well respected mathematicians have gone into great detail, as to why it will loose etc…  However, despite all of the encyclopedias, and all of the gaming experts, and all of the mathematicians, people naive system players, are certain that everyone else is wrong, and that they are the ones that are correct.  Why?  Why ignore all of the history???

Rather than debating it, why don’t system junkies simply read more on the history of the game?  If you do, then you’ll learn more, and you’ll gain some insight as to how to actually beat the wheel, rather than the game.”



Houston - Posted: 30 January 2015 11:56 PM

“Your strategy should be to try and beat the wheel, not the game.  It’s not possible to beat the game in the long run.  Sure, you might get lucky from time to time, but in the end you’ll be a net loser after enough trips to the casino.

-Signature
“Like a fool, a system player and his money are easily separated!” “

[Mortagon]

Steve - Re: Random Thoughts
« Reply #666 on: May 07, 2016, 10:56:20 AM »
“No. Really its simple. He is giving accurate advice, and for that some think he's just being "negative". It is anyones best interest to listen to reason. For the vast majority of what he has said, he has been factual and direct for everyones benefit, but not rude or abrasive. He is preaching what? Basic fact, not opinion, that the whole professional gaming community knows. The same facts casinos use to make billions. The same elemental facts you will find on wikipedia or any credible site.

Everything we both say is ignored by most people. There is no conspiracy between me and Caleb. Its just that we understand grade 3 math. Really thats what it is. And when we see people preaching utter nonsense, we try to help, but are seen as negative nancies with a hidden agenda.”

                                                        ------




“If one a person carries a torch, can give  fire of all”


But

"AGNI YOGA"

       .35. When one speaks of someone's usefulness it is not meant that he is a pillar of the Teaching. One should take things in their reality, because exaggerating is as wrong as belittling. One must not drag anyone forcibly to heaven. At the destined hour, the blind regain their sight. It is useful to point out the measure of the order of life, avoiding what is unnecessary, so that even the humblest may see the benefit of material progress. But it is wrong to force people to wash their faces. Mark the usefulness of each messenger and do not place the load of a camel upon a donkey.

       .37. Answer only when you see that your answer can be understood. Often a questioner is not able to grasp your answer. Then it is necessary to find a consonant chord before sending your thought in a new direction. It is an error to believe that a current that cuts across the thought is less dangerous than a knife severing an artery. You must not intercept the questioner's thought, but must infuse new blood of life by nourishing his nervous system. Each answering word must be given not as a nail in a coffin, but as a physician's ray. A deferred reply may be given in the form of advice.

[Mortagon]

Сasino 'sting'

Norman Leigh: 13 against the bank


Why Norman Leigh?

”First, Norman Leigh became public enemy number one in the eyes of the French casinos in 1966 because ho won the substantial figure of FF800,000, which at the time was worth £58,000 - a very tidy sum forty years ago. Second, he scared the French gaming industry so much that they barred him from every casino in France. Third, he had the guts and determination to hit back at an industry that had wronged him by treating his father badly.

The facts that Norman Leigh and his "reverse Labouchere" betting system has no proven long-term mathematical edge, and that he was only active for about two weeks and would have surely lost it back had his team continued, are neither here nor there. Hut what cannot be ignored is that his name went into roulette folklore because of what he did and his account of it in the wonderful book Thirteen Against the Bank. This tells the story of Leigh and his team of twelve individuals from all walks of life who took on the might of the Casino Municipal in Nice and broke the bank.

The term "breaking the bank" does not mean busting the casino. It means taking all the chips that are currently on the roulette table - a fair sum of money but nothing compared with the financial resources of a large casino.

The only reason that the French casinos gave for barring Leigh's team was because they won systematically, consistently and methodically. Norman Leigh was born in 1928 in London and did his national service in 1946. He worked as an interpreter for a while but retained a lifelong fascination with roulette. Because Leigh was sent to prison for fraud in 1968, I've read comments from people who think that Leigh was a con man who tricked twelve individuals into bankrolling a trip lo Monte Carlo in 1966 while he basically free rolled with their money

I don't buy this, simply because the era that we are talking about is 1966 and not 2006. I think it is more likely that Leigh firmly believed in his own mind that his system was viable, which made the task of selling it to others a lot easier. I know from personal experience that casinos will bar players it they are winning too much money and especially if they don't fully understand the reasons behind why they are winning.

Because Leigh was winning in 1966 and nor 2006, I believe that the casinos acted through fear brought about through ignorance. Modern-day casinos tolerate system players and even en¬courage them by placing score cards and writing equipment at the side of the table to assist them. They understand that there is no mathematical system available that can beat them and that they will eventually get the system players' money.

The casinos knew only too well betting systems back in the 1960s, but were not overly aware of the strange looking: reverse Labouchere system, which is vastly different from the normal progression type systems. A two-week period is a very short amount of time to prove the validity of whether a betting system is working or not, so the fact that Leigh and his team won nearly £60,000 is academic.

The game was terminated by the casino when Leigh’s team was â,¬58,000 ahead, which is a vastly different story. The gaming world is full of punters who have been ahead by astronomical amounts, only to lose it back. I could fill an entire book with stories of punters and even system players who were ahead for considerable lengths of time only to be wiped out by one big reverse; every casino employee in the world has similar stories.

But although casinos tolerate system players, they are not overly fond of them because they tend to bleed small amounts of money for long periods without giving anything back in return by way of action on other games. System players tend to be very careful with their expenditure and don’t get involved in any other game apart from roulette. In short, they are not interested in any other casino activity other than the one game where they can execute their system.

The best systems can defer loss for very long periods indeed, and it is strange quirk that creates the illusion that some of them work. The Labouchere system is one system named after of one Queen Victoria’s ministries. The “reverse Labouchere” turns the normal system requirement of adding to the bet after a loss on its head. It essentially only increases the bet when you are already ahead, but it does require significant starting capital to operate effectively.

Leigh came across this system while scouring a bookshop near Charing Cross so it wasn’t his idea; he merely copied it with a few added modifications of his own thrown in. In today's more enlightened times, it is doubtful whether a man like Leigh could have convinced twelve seemingly intelligent individuals to go on a caper like this (but then again). But back in the 1960s, the overwhelming majority of people had next lo no experience of this kind of thing and had certainly not read about anything to do with the game of roulette.

But the determination of Leigh was something that I've always admired, especially after reading his book. If you can accept the fact that some of the events have been enhanced for literary effect, the book is a very enjoyable read. After getting hold of his system in a local bookshop, Leigh's next step was to recruit a team.

This was the clever part about what Leigh did in my opinion; he knew full well that the system would require a fair degree of starting capital and that a bigger team would accelerate any winning run should they have one. A single person using the "reverse Labouchore" system could have taken weeks if not months to get wiped out, but could also have taken a long time to encounter one of the progression "mushrooms" as they called them in the book.

Leigh systematically interviewed every team member after placing an advertisement in a Bournemouth newspaper and then placing further advertisements in national newspapers for what he called "a limited number of vacancies of a clerical nature in a group to be formed on the Cote d'Azur". The entire operation from the planning to the wording of the advertisement in the newspapers to the training and then execution of the system was almost military-like in its execution.

This team play really spooked the casinos in France; they had never encountered anything like it before. But forming a team and attacking the casinos systematically is something that I can relate to and anyone who has read my book Princes of Darkness: The World of Highs hikes Blackjack will know what 1 am talking about. Each team member walked away with almost $12,000 (£4,230) profit, which was a substantial sum in 1%6, but their greatest achievement was to scare the French gaming industry so much that the French government got involved at one stage.

As soon as Leigh's book was published, he received offers to take his system to Las Vegas from numerous people, but he declined draw your own conclusions. But I take my hat off to a very intelligent and determined man who had the guts to take on an industry and stand tall under what must have been in¬tense pressure and very close scrutiny and come out standing tall: Norman Leigh... I salute you.”

                                                                           

-------

Thirteen against the Bank by Norman Leigh

“In 1976 a Londoner named Norman Leigh wrote a memorable book called Thirteen against the Bank, published by Oldcastle Books in the UK. This recounts his remarkable plan in 1965 to take revenge on the casino in Nice for humiliation allegedly suffered by his father at the hands of the management years before. I have no reason to disbelieve that his book is true but his story has been denied. His plan was certainly capable of working. Though denied by the the reverse labouchere casino, I suspect that the massive profits he describes could have been won. The Reverse Labouchspamre system can achieve the type of wins described.

Norman Leigh put together a hand-picked team of strangers to take on the casino. Personally,
I think he ran into the trouble, as described in the book, because he took his system to extremes. He made it aggressively obvious that he was taking on the management. He used not just six players at a time, each one playing a different even chance position (playing therefore against each other) but had teams operating in shifts. He had realised that every so often, there must be a serious imbalance between the number of Reds as opposed to Blacks or Highs as opposed to Lows or Odds as opposed to Evens. He wanted to be sure one of his teams was there to cash in when that happened.


                                                               

How he won

When business opened, Leigh had six members of his team at each table. Each had a limited amount of cash. Each possibility on the even chances was covered by one of them every spin. Each played Reverse Labouchspamre with line after line being cancelled at a total loss. For hour upon hour they played and, as they tired, he moved in other people to take their chairs to carry on where they left off. Most of the time, most of them were writing-off capital.

It is perfectly possible for both the person backing Black and the person backing Red to be losing over a series of spins. It is not as simple as saying that one or other must be winning. There must be a serious imbalance if one is to be winning big time. When that happens, the loser is losing far, far less than the other is winning. Why? Because the losing bets are all level-bets at the base figures.

Eventually some of the players started getting long lines as their even chance started to win much more than its opposite. Some reasonable wins occurred. Each win added to the line’s length and even though they lost the odd bet or two, so long as they were winning a good deal more often than they lost, the longer the lines got.

Suppose that the person winning was backing Red. The person backing Black will be having a thin time losing 1+1+1+1 every two spins. The winning player is forging ahead and betting with systems and advanced play winnings. Once there is a serious imbalance, perhaps running for several hours, the line can look awesome even if it started out as modestly as: 1 1 1 1.
This is because it can grow to something like: 27 36 48 65 82 99 121 143 165 187 214 241 268 295 322 347 374 401.

On that line, there have been 10 losing bets and 35 winning. The next bet would be 401 + 27 = 428. This huge stake (in the context of the modest aims of this book) is using winnings. A first stake of only two chips has grown to large profits and Norman Leigh’s team used to go on and on until the stakes were in thousands, bet after bet.

Using this system our Fighting-Fund would be safe, betting at these levels, as the Reverse Labouchspamre depends on bets increasing only after a win. The rule of needing at least 40 times the largest amount staked applies to sums using your own cash. The largest sum staked on this type of line with your own money is two chips. However, I do not think it safe to say that a Fighting-Fund of 80 or even 160 chips would be safe using this system. It should be much larger because you are writing off line after line while waiting for the imbalance. But remember, you are not out to beat the casino into pulp! Your aim is to reach your targets and so you will need far less of an imbalance than Norman Leigh was seeking.

Tip: The Reverse Labouchspamre is a classic example of keeping losses down to win big. The problem is the large number of small losses, which are disheartening and bad for the Fighting-Fund as capital is decreasing constantly â€" until that blissful day of imbalance when the rewards aremighty!

Leigh’s team forced a roulette table to shut on more than one occasion because it ran out of money. This has been called “breaking the bank” although the casino was not in danger of running out of money.

I am not suggesting that you form a syndicate of six, twelve or eighteen and play round the clock. I see little point in taking on the casino in such a big and aggressive way that if you win, you will get banned. Far better to be patient for the day when your wins distinctly exceed your losses (but not needing to win spin after spin the reverse labouchere such as two or three in a row). You will then win big. In the meantime, remember that your Fighting-Fund may have suffered small but all too frequent losses when you fail to get a really good imbalance.

If you can cope with the demoralisation of losing, time and again, the rewards when they do come should amply cover your losses.

Strategy
● You can back both Red and Black at the same time â€" follow them both. This means that when either one starts to romp ahead, you’ll be there cashing in the winnings. The recordkeeping when running two separate lines is tricky and, as mentioned before, you can be losing on both until an imbalance develops. In effect your total stake is double each time and the drain on funds can be tough. When judging your needs, take at least 40 times the total base bet on both lines. (Others at the table will think you are mad for betting against yourself!)● You can back Red and Odds every spin or even Red, Odds and High. You just need more cash for each Game. Norman Leigh’s team covered all six even chances every spin.
● You can back Red and a friend can back Black. You will then divide the profits and losses. Casinos may not like this, particularly if taken to extremes. Generally, they are entitled to ban you with various degrees of politeness!
● You can back any even chance on its own, hoping that today, at some point, it will be winning seriously more often than the opposite.

Norman Leigh claims he was banned from the casino, arrested at the casino’s request and unfairly banned from entering France again!
If this is true, there can be no greater testament to the success of the system. “

                                                           

------

Mr oops' "reversed Labouchere SLH"
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=2904.msg26450#msg26450

[Mortagon]

Сasino 'sting'

Ã,£1.3m casino 'sting'

"In 2004 a professional roulette team legitimately won £1.3 million from the Ritz casino in London. The story was reported in all of the major English news papers, including the Evening standard.In the 4th paragraph the author wrote:

"They were apparently using a laser scanner hidden inside a mobile phone, linked to a microcomputer that calculated where the ball would drop."

Notice the author specifically mentioned  'where the ball would drop' and not the winning number. This is important because the team wasn't betting on a single number, they were betting on a section of the wheel. This should reveal to us how effective their methods were."
link:://:.mastersroulette.com/MORE_INFO.html


Ã,£1.3m casino 'sting'
link:://:.standard.co.uk/news/13m-casino-sting-6952414.html 

[Steve]

There's no way vb is more accurate than computers. That page has a lot of incorrect information.

[Steve]

And there's no way the ritz team used a laser scanner.  It would need precision aiming with no guide and to be perfectly motionless. I know because i have similar technology and know its limitations. That's why i developed better versions without the limitations.

And besides on a typical suitable wheel ball timings can be very sloppy and you still get good accuracy with predictions. You only need precise ball timings if you predict diamond hits to minimize scatter. It's actually more important to get precise rotor timings. The ritz casino staff made assumptions from bad knowledge of vb. Most casino staff are clueless

[Mortagon]

I want to make clear that my target is to make better life for people around me an not for myself. If people around me will be happy, I would be the happiest...

+10! +10! +10!

Dioskouri
link:s://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castor_and_Pollux

Polydeuces goes to his father Zeus and says:
"Take my immortality and leave me at my mortal brother, to share his way! "

[Mortagon]

Man is mortal god, gods - men immortal
The lips of wisdom are closed, except for ears that can listen!
Not Egypt  devote Hermes, and Hermes dedicate Egypt!


Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces.

   Matthew 7:6

                                                                                                     

To Him of the great Illumination there came a pupil who sought a miracle, saying, "After the miracle I shall have faith."
The Teacher smiled sadly, then produced for him a great miracle.
"Now," exclaimed the pupil, "I am ready to ascend the steps of the Teaching under your guidance."
But the Teacher, pointing to the door, said, "Go. I don't need you!"

AGNI YOGA - 95

                                                                                                                             

[Mortagon]

Kimo Li
scattered pearls


You will never hear of anyone who has learned GPM from me privately speaking about what they have learned because they are on non-disclosure agreements, besides they paid for that information.
No proof needed.

The Global Pie Method came to light when patterns started to emerge as I started to make the realized that I had a gift.
I was five years old when I began to see patterns in people's behavior and that I could predict how they would react to any given situation.

Full circle, that's how I would describe my journey. What I had discovered 30 years ago has made itself known to be the only method that can win consistently. I have dissected, arranged, and manipulated the numbers on the wheel for 30 years. What I found is simple is best, original thought. Global Pie sector tracking. It's hard to believe something so simple can predict numbers. Go figure.

[Mortagon]

The Global Pie Method came to light when patterns started to emerge as I started to make the realized that I had a gift.

The Global Pie Method came to light when patterns started to emerge as I started to make the connections in my mind. Pattern recognition comes naturally for me. I realized that I had a gift.

[Mortagon]

Kimo Li
scattered pearls



Players who are successful will not post their comments because they do not want to be bombarded by questions from those who do not understand. Members are subjected to a non-disclosure clause. If they do speak out, they can only offer how it has helped them. So you see, they choose to remain anonymous. Not all players have had a good results, even a few who have been coached. But, they are those players who get it.

A professional roulette player is much like a professional boxer. The roulette player's nemesis is random numbers. How does one conquer random numbers? The boxer acquires the fundamental skills necessary to compete, jabs, hooks, upper cut etc. and applies certain strategies, depending on the opponent. So too does the roulette player, the player must acquire many skills, not just the basics, things like wheel head number positions, ball movement recognition, trends, pattern recognition, money management, etc.

To defeat one's opponent, a boxer must possess an arsenal of skills. He must learn everything about the opponent's habits and tendencies. Is the boxer aggressive, passive aggressive counter puncher, or multifaceted?

Random numbers behave similarly, tendencies like RRR BB R BBB R, LHLH LLL HH L, OE OE OOO EE O. From the GPM point of view, 4 6 8 5 9 7 or 1 5 3 2 6 4 etc.

The key to winning is to possess the necessary skills of identifying and classifying random numbers and applying specific strategies that will have a favorable outcome.

Most of the time boxers will accumulate points per round to win a match. Many boxers will try and often fail. However, a special boxer, a natural, will come along and possess the necessary skills to achieve a knock out consistently.

Some people are not meant to be boxers.

[Turner]

Some people totally underestimate their audience

[Mortagon]

Kimo Li
scattered pearls



In 2005, I introduced an innovative concept.  For those who attempted to understand, gained major insight to the game of roulette.  Over the years I gave clues as to how the Global Pie Method works, with polarized reviews.  Nonetheless, it has open many minds and ironically closed many as well.

Here's the good news.  From my teachings many have opened their minds to create and discover ways to beat roulette.  Matrix was never used to describe roulette strategies until I introduced the idea.  Now we have many experts with many strategies.  How great is that? Here's the bad news, most people will never understand it.

A carpenter, auto mechanic, salesperson, IT tech, accountant, CEO, baker, taxi driver, bartender, the list is endless, all possess certain skills. Their worth is measured in the exchange of values.

If you have something of value that I am interested in, I will make an offer to buy or trade.  I will never ask for anything for free.  You will never understand the worth of someone's soul until you have walked in their shoes.  When you can understand that, you will understand your own worth.

I tried giving things for free. It did no good to anyone because there was no exchange of values.