MauiSunset

[Gizmotron]

MauiSunset

I just looked up all his posts. They all involve attacks addressed to me.

He goes or I will. Do something or I will.

[vladir]

Lol.  Stay cool man.  Even if that is true, let him be. "Attacks" here don't really get anywhere, and they only create bad situations to the ones perpetuating this "attacks", directly(i.e. he can get banned ) or inderictly (i.e. other people noticing the attacks will therefore ignore him). It's kind of funny how we don't generally notice it, but attacking someone usually hurt's us in someway too. Just "evade" those attacks, dont let tem get to you, stand back and enjoy

Cheers

[catalyst]

Gizmo
you are desperately poor in your thoughts and you are a moderator! 
you can not bear members criticsm, then you need to be decommissioned!
catalyst

[Gizmotron]

I'm only a moderator in this Randomness section of the forum. I have no discretionary  privileges  at the other sections. Please consider that Catalyst.

[MrJ]

I looked at all his posts as well. Around 80% of them are....."you can't win with roulette", "you're using gamblers fallacy" etc etc.

I don't mind the person who posts his/her view, no problem. However, when it turns into CONSTANTLY JAMMING YOUR VIEW DOWN EVERYBODYS THROAT, that's something different.

That's not how a forum works. Some people feel.......they are correct and you better adapt.

Ken

[iggiv]

when u r in Rome behave as Romans do....it does not make sense in Roulette forum just telling u can't win. If u have what what to say -- speak your mind. Tell how u can win or how u can't. What can help and what can't...Otherwise dont trouble trouble till the trouble troubles u

[MrJ]

when u r in Rome behave as Romans do....it does not make sense in Roulette forum just telling You can't win. If You have what what to say -- speak your mind. Tell how You can win or how You can't. What can help and what can't...Otherwise don't trouble trouble till the trouble troubles u

....and I do agree. The way its SUPPOSE TO WORK, if a member here is talking crazy.......Only they can win and we can't etc., either post the rules of the method (no links) or its bye bye time for that member. Seems fair, fast and effective.

Ken

[Gizmotron]

Nice going Ken. You exposed the rat.

Once Maui Sunset is permanently banned I will remove this thread. So blaze away on the fraudster.

[kelly]

I dont think Maui is trying to force his opinion (GF exeistence) down others throats harder than the "GF is a myth belivers" is trying to force their opinon down others throats.  But this being a roulette forum i guess the "GF is a myth" believers probably has a higher ranking.   On a roulette forum the the myth belivers probably has a 95% rate where if you include the rest of the world the myth believers will only be a 5% fraction.  GF bets is being placed everyday in all casinos and the casinos has some very healthy bottom lines on their books due to exactly that. 

[Bayes]

 Maui says on his site that you commit GF whichever side you bet on - if you see 4 heads in a row and bet tails (because it's due) OR if you bet heads (because there is a trend). So you're damned whatever decision you make. 

It seems to me that the only way not to commit a fallacy (according to Maui), is to flat bet randomly, and trust completely to luck. Why flat bet? because using any kind of MM or progression implies a bias (FALLACY) one way or other - either in favour of GF (red has to hit soon, so I'll start doubling up), or reverse GF (I'll increase bets after wins because that way I'll catch all the trends).

So if Maui flat bets in a random way then he has every right to pour scorn on us with our "insane" views, otherwise, it seems like he's just a troll.

GF and "reverse" GF don't have the same status. While GF is always a fallacy, reverse GF MAY be correct: -

The conclusion of this reversed gambler's fallacy may be correct, however, if the empirical evidence suggests that an initial assumption about the probability distribution is false. If a coin is tossed ten times and lands "heads" ten times, the gambler's fallacy would suggest an even-money bet on "tails", while the reverse gambler's fallacy (not to be confused with the inverse gambler's fallacy) would suggest an even-money bet on "heads". In this case, the smart bet is "heads" because the empirical evidenceâ€"ten "heads" in a rowâ€"suggests that the coin is likely to be biased toward "heads", contradicting the (general) assumption that the coin is fair.

Wikipedia.

Kelly, strictly speaking, the casinos clean up from GF only because players chase losses. If the odds are truly 50:50, then it doesn't matter  what side you bet on, so GF in the sense of believing "red has to hit soon" can't be the cause of losses - red has just as much chance to hit as black.

[kelly]

Agreed, my point was that even though an army of GF non believers attacks the casinos on a daily basis with bets in "favourable" conditions, the casinos still maintains a healthy bottom line.

[MrJ]

I don't think Maui is trying to force his opinion (GF exeistence) down others throats harder than the "GF is a myth belivers" is trying to force their opinon down others throats.  But this being a roulette forum i guess the "GF is a myth" believers probably has a higher ranking.   On a roulette forum the the myth belivers probably has a 95% rate where if you include the rest of the world the myth believers will only be a 5% fraction.  GF bets is being placed everyday in all casinos and the casinos has some very healthy bottom lines on their books due to exactly that.

All you have to do is read his posts. Let me ask this......would it be ok if I posted in CAPS....GAMBLERS FALLACY WORKS, OPEN YOUR EYES PEOPLE, A REAL GOOD METHOD IS ALL YOU NEED TO MAKE IT IN THE WORLD!!!

So, would this be alright in 80% of my posts? Would Steve or any other admin. allow me to CONSTANTLY jam this down members throats? Not to mention the Wizard site. OMG, if they don't like your name, your post gets deleted, much less SPAM. The guy is anti-Advantage-play, I'm surprised you endorse the guy Kelly. When people post methods, you don't see them glorifying gamblers fallacy JUST BECAUSE they posted an idea. With Maui, he's the opposite. He slams others for not thinking like he does and ends up NOT posting a method. (LoL)

Ken

[MrJ]

"So you're damned whatever decision you make" >>> Yeah, this is called having it both ways. If you don't take a side, then you're not accountable to anything, off the hook as they say. Its an old school tactic, I find it funny as hell.

"So if Maui flat bets in a random way then he has every right to pour scorn on us with our "insane" views" >>> Ok, if you bet randomly, is that a method? If you pay for a method that says, bet randomly, is that alright? So in other words, his method might look like this......bet the 1,4 split then bet the 35,36 split then bet the 17,20 split then bet the 13,16 split then bet the 9,12 split. Will this be his idea of a method? Listen VERY carefully, a person can not have it both ways.

He says he's not into Advantage-play so his a** belongs to me. Why? Your method has to be *BASED* *ON* *SOMETHING*!!!!!!!!!!!! Even if others laugh at the idea, its still based on something and 99.9999% percent of the time, it'll be based on 1-800 past spins, which by definition, is gamblers fallacy. The same gamblers fallacy that he slams other people on. I asked the guy a few simple questions, he REFUSED to answer, big surprise.

Then he changed his definition of GF. NOW, its only if you think the H.A. will 'change' for you. So ole' Kenny asked......what if I used 10 past numbers for my method but I still understand my H.A. stays at 5.26%. Guess what? No answer from the guy, big surprise. If people have to PAY for his method, I know what he's counting on.

He's hoping the method will not get leaked but we all know, the method eventually comes out and when I have it (and I will), I'll POINT OUT his usage of gamblers fallacy. The guy can not have it both ways.

Ken

[MrJ]

Question for you Kelly and Bayes >>> Do you endorse a person claiming they have a kick a** method.....we're all idiots for not being followers of the guy etc. BUT the person does not post the method. Is that alright to NOT post the method? If yes, why? Remember, you'll be on record (I'll copy/paste the answer before the thread is deleted) ......its ok to dangle the carrot?

Ken

[Bayes]

"So if Maui flat bets in a random way then he has every right to pour scorn on us with our "insane" views" >>> Ok, if you bet randomly, is that a method? If you pay for a method that says, bet randomly, is that alright? So in other words, his method might look like this......bet the 1,4 split then bet the 35,36 split then bet the 17,20 split then bet the 13,16 split then bet the 9,12 split. Will this be his idea of a method? Listen VERY carefully, a person can not have it both ways.
Ken

Betting randomly isn't a method, in my opinion. By randomly I mean something like picking birthday numbers, or just scattering a handful of chips on the table with a blindfold on. If you bet randomly, you've already decided it's all down to luck.

But Maui says roulette is "all about **statistics** and luck". If statistics is a factor, then presumably his method is based at least partly on statistics, so he's not betting randomly. I already asked him how he played, but he ignored my questions and referred me to the website. So yes, the guy wants to have it both ways, I agree, and attacking others for something you do yourself makes you a hypocrite and a troll.