Dear friends
Lately we got unique opportunity to witness the existence of the Grail. It goes beyond all our hopes, imaginations and expectations. It seems it is right here in front of our noses and we even have some hints how to get it for ourselves. All thanks to Priyanka. Most mysterious and most polite member I have ever spoke with.
Or maybe you think I rushed with conclusions?
But what about achieved score for the mentioned first ranked player in our internal casino here? I mean about his win rate? Am I the only one who finds this enough thrilling that nothing except having very healthy edge could explain it?
So the main question is: Is this enough for all mathematicians, statisticians, professional players, recreationists or just sympathizers of this powerful game who doubt creating a mathematical edge is possible without use of visual ballistics, finally to admit that such concept maybe is possible?
Or there is only some big fraud in all this which can explain it?
I don't need to be sold.
Priyanka definitely backed up the words
Think I need to read through the Pri thread(s), thanks Pri :) :thumbsup:
"We" don't know the number of spins bet on.
I would suppose that it's data though that is available somewhere - but it's the most important
factor in saying something is a success or not.
Balance, amount bet and amount won / win rate don't tell the story at all.
Quote from: Drazen on Apr 25, 01:42 PM 2016
So the main question is: Is this enough for all mathematicians, statisticians, professional players, recreationists or just sympathizers of this powerful game who doubt creating a mathematical edge is possible without use of visual ballistics, finally to admit that such concept maybe is possible?
No. Not without knowing how many spins were played.
Quote from: Drazen on Apr 25, 01:42 PM 2016
Or there is only some big fraud in all this which can explain it?
I wouldn't go that far lol. But we don't have the information needed to figure it out.
If it "IS" a large number of spins played - even then - in order for it to be proof we would have
to rule out any possibility of cheating. We would have to rule out any possible flaw with the numbers as well. I've seen for myself strange things that normal spins don't do. If there is some
error in how the spins are being displayed, etc - that has to be ruled out as well.
At that point you could consider it a genuinely great method of playing - but only once these issues are resolved.
Priyanka def has something in her toolbox that we would all love to have!!!!! It is so cool and gives hope
Quote from: Tomla021 on Apr 25, 08:29 PM 2016
Priyanka def has something in her toolbox that we would all love to have!!!!! It is so cool and gives hope
I would agree - but again that all depends on the number of spins played total.
I don't believe in the term 'luck' but in order for something to be worthy of any excitement, it has to be backed up with data, and at this time we are limited to just "what looks good".
(Life has taught me that what looks good is rarely the best answer lol)
I wouldnt get too excited yet. He's played just 166 spins.
I'm more than happy to say there's more ways to beat roulette than just VB. But I cant say other methods don't increase accuracy of predictions. Why has been explained many times.
Is Pryanka a man or a woman . Me thinks woman but what do I know......,,,, Im pretty confidant she can keep her win rate over 2 ----She also kept the same above 2 pre "the reset" ,,,,
im convinced that even if you prove it and show it and live it, it won't matter
priyanka may turn into that proof
the naysayers will stay naysayers no matter what
Quote from: Steve on Apr 25, 08:57 PM 2016
I wouldnt get too excited yet. He's played just 166 spins.
:o
Well, that explains that. lol
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Apr 25, 09:12 PM 2016
im convinced that even if you prove it and show it and live it, it won't matter
priyanka may turn into that proof
the naysayers will stay naysayers no matter what
No way - when someone does that amazing thing - even the naysayers will have to agree that something works once it's proven to work. No one can seriously think that 166 spins is anywhere near enough to "get excited" over.
That's like a 180 average bowler having a 300 game. It's entirely possible, but after 30 more games - their average is 180.... Now (like people I know) - have 7 or 8 300's ? Of course, who can argue that person knows what their doing.
Makes it easier now - knowing the spin count - to answer the questions though.
Quote from: Drazen on Apr 25, 01:42 PM 2016
Or maybe you think I rushed with conclusions?
:thumbsup:
where can i play this table please ?
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=16796.0
Thank you for your replies. I think all this will be exciting as the time flows.
TG and Steve I agree. It is all about the proofs. We will never get it in full step by step to test it each for ourselves of course, but if Priyanka decides to play enough of spins in our game, I think it should be valid proof in the end. But how many?
My personal opinion is that the edge in Priyankas way of play isn't questionable, but only time will tell.
But how many minimum played spins we must take as a proof if the hit rate will still be above expectations then?
5K ,10K, 100K or more?
Of course for placing 100K or more bets manually will take enormous amount of time, unless Pri decides to make a bot, so I think this proving could take some time.
Cheers
Quote from: Steve on Apr 25, 08:57 PM 2016
I'm more than happy to say there's more ways to beat roulette than just VB.
Do you mean aside from using physics (RC)?
YES there is always, always more than we know about. But I doubt we can circumvent plain logic and math. So whatever method is used, it will need to increase accuracy of predictions. There's no other way around it.
Really I'd bet my life that precognition and related science will be the future of advantage play. I've seen enough to know it is not imagination. And there's enough data to indicate real promise. So when i have time I'll get the programmer to add some parts for testing. The real problem though is testing statistically significant amount of spins takes a long time, and it must all be done manually by multiple people at the same time. So its not practical to test properly. But it would be practical enough for real application. For now I'm after more proof of concept and to refine the prediction process for a group.
Because just guessing numbers gives bad accuracy. Because 13 may feel or sound like 14. But predicting areas on the wheel is much better. Although it depends on the individual. I believe we each have specific and more attuned abilities, whether we realize it or not. One things for sure, conscious thought gets in the way.
The problem I have is the order of the explainations.
Take Priyanka vs TG but with an analogy of a trip up Mount Everest
Priyankas explainations
so far we have a flat map with no contours and a cross where the achievement was reached. I know what tools have been used and many theories like....if you dont wrap up, you get frost bit and if you dont have oxygen you die, and sun glasses block bright light.
But my view is a flat map with no contours. I cant relate the information to the idea. I have to start guessing. Oxygen ? is the air thin on this flat journey? where is it thin? And its cold I think...something about frostbite and its bright? Why is it bright?
Turbos explaination
I am going up mount Everest and here is the path you need to take.
There it is on a map with contours and some 3D pictures to look at.
I know where I am setting off....and here I am on my journey, but its getting cold and I cant see because of all this snow, and I cant breath. I need warmer clothes....not sure why I cant breath.
Ill think about it and try next week
I have a chance with Turbo if I am keen.
I cant work out what it is I am actually trying to do with Priyanka
@The system guys,
Studying a little basic probability, and reading on the history of the game would really help you understand the problem with this thread.
Quote from: The General on Apr 26, 03:08 AM 2016
@The system guys,
Studying a little basic probability, and reading on the history of the game would really help you understand the problem with this thread.
Thanks Caleb. What would I do
without your pearls of wisdom
I have studied probability more than most thanks.
No need VB for me, only little LoT and CT to decode roulette step by step.
Quote from: Steve on Apr 26, 02:36 AM 2016
Really I'd bet my life that precognition and related science will be the future of advantage play.
Does precognition work on your game though. You would be seeing into the past not the future
Quote from: Steve on Apr 26, 02:36 AM 2016
Really I'd bet my life that precognition and related science will be the future of advantage play. I've seen enough to know it is not imagination. And there's enough data to indicate real promise.
Can you please point where we could read more about this? This sounds like a pure attempt of wizardry to me, but I am still interested to read about it. But hm, as I said, its all about the proofs :)
Priyanka said that one has to work hard to enjoy the winnings that comes with the full understanding of his ways of playing. Can you blame him for not giving something on a plate to the whole world he has worked so hard for? All starting with studying advanced math, programming and whatnot in schools, then trying to use and take advantage of all that knowledge in roulette.
There were numerous discussions over the years about holy grails, and what would someone do with it. It seemed to me that most people’s answer was that they would keep it for themselves.
If there was a roulette system available to anyone that can beat the casino, do you think they would not change the rules of the game? The casinos can do whatever they want.
Well, I just really hope that Priyanka is right and someday I will understand all the concepts. I already “wasted†6 years of my youth trying to profit from gambling, and I will continue to use all my free time to understand what is written by him. By wasted, I mean during the thousands of hours spent studying and playing, I only lost money but gained a lot of knowledge that I cannot turn into profit. At least by now I know what not to do.
Ati you could not say it better!! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: I agree with you completely!
Somehow I have a feeling that at first it may seem that Priyankas method of play is so close at hand reach, and it must be due to so many hints Priyanka generously offered.
But If you ask me, it is still enough of efforts ahead of us to fully understand and bring those concepts to life.
Pri said early in this stage that hard work will pay of.. so its up to anyone to question this.
We're talking about 166 spins only here.....
There's nothing to talk about at this point.
(link:s://i.imgsafe.org/722ce89.jpg)
Maybe the method entails only a few spins after some observation
Lol the "thatd be great" memes are great
If i were to read random thoughts could i play like priyanka or is it mainly hints and pointing in the right direction?
Quote from: TurboGenius on Apr 26, 06:49 AM 2016
We're talking about 166 spins only here.....
There's nothing to talk about at this point.
(link:s://i.imgsafe.org/722ce89.jpg)
Yes, you are right. However I took into consideration earlier evidence of Pri-s simulation and BV-s whole year withdrawal list.
But it still can't be taken as some rock solid evidence of course. :)
Now if I may ask as I don't remember to read it ( please correct me If I missed it), do you have the edge in your play?
Or you find some way in between, like taming deviations one way or another? (I mean beating every session without having an edge)
I don't get it.
It's as if you had a 300 lap Nascar race and on the first turn of the first lap you have a leader and everyone is excited about how this person is 'winning the race'.
Back to reality - there will be plenty to comment on once more spins are played and then everyone can judge the value of something. Let the car get around the track a few times ? lol
That's how this game works.
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Apr 26, 07:13 AM 2016
If i were to read random thoughts could i play like priyanka or is it mainly hints and pointing in the right direction?
Its up to you to discover that dear Ghost. But in my personal opinion from speaking with you, there is way too much math and all kinds of mathematical principles and paradoxes for your taste. ::)
Still if you find it useful, let us know.
I have resisted reading it because i know i most likely will not understand it
Quote from: TurboGenius on Apr 26, 07:16 AM 2016
Back to reality - there will be plenty to comment on once more spins are played and then everyone can judge the value of something. Let the car get around the track a few times ? lol
That's how this game works.
You are right to some point, I agree.
We will neglect all earlier Pri-s evidences and take them as invalid, until the game here proves them again.
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Apr 26, 07:25 AM 2016
I have resisted reading it because i know i most likely will not understand it
And that is ok. I don't follow every thread and every post here too, I am not Turner :wink:
I also decide what is worth of reading and then dedicate my time to that.
Anyway, there are lot of things discussed there and I did my best to make basic examples of all bets with distances in hope to show that most simple bets don't have to involve some big math knowledge.. It really isn't hard to understand.
As far as I can see you did not make any single bet on rouletteplayers.org and what do you want? Someone to tell you how to play roulette?
I deleted that last bit. Be careful please
The post isnt that nice without what I deleted
Turner
(link:s://i.imgflip.com/134ssa.jpg)
Quote from: Priyanka on Apr 26, 09:59 AM 2016
(link:s://i.imgflip.com/134ssa.jpg)
(link:://media.giphy.com/media/l2QZRQif7aVJTlJEQ/giphy.gif)
Quote from: Drazen on Apr 26, 07:44 AM 2016
I don't follow every thread and every post here too, I am not Turner :wink:
Guilty :thumbsup:
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Apr 26, 10:01 AM 2016
Trump building wall
(link:s://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/0f/c2/1f/0fc21f487f03902bf43b77b473d65685.jpg)