Beware of a potential scam that may be in the works. The "Random Thought" thread being posted by Falknor has the ear marks of a scam.
1. Bullshit terms being used in an attempt to dazzle and confuse the simple minded system players.
2. Hints, absurdly eluding to a second and or third person that may have the secrets to "making the system work".
There are numerous references to Pri and various secrets. In reviewing the thread, it's rather obvious that Falknor and Pri are likely are the same person.
Beware!
-The General
Priyanka and Falkor are LIKELY the same person! What are you smoking bud? I will bet you a $1000 that they arent.
Hi General, I understand why you believe I could be the same person as Priyanka: we are both logical and try to solve problems by asking the right questions - but I am nowhere near as intelligent or smart as Priyanka and I've had a hard time keeping up and making sense of all these principles. It's not often I meet someone like Priyanka who is more intelligent than I, and I've probably put in as much work as Drazen - if not more - as we can both spot the merits of his/her teachings. I would also like to publicly thank Tomla021 for helping me with this Random Thoughts research project - it's up there with the most fascinating subjects I've ever delved into during my entire life - certainly nothing in college or uni was as interesting or exciting as this! O0
falkor,
Just because someone writes or says something you don't understand doesn't mean that they're necessarily intelligent. Not saying that Priyanka isn't, but it doesn't follow.
Actually, one or two of Priyanka's statements are quite revealing, and not in a good way.
Someone needs a life.
I have read Priyanka before, pm'd with her a few times. talked to her in chat during roulette sessions-I also talked to her a couple of years ago..... never ever not once did she try to sell anything.
I think she has just looked at the game in a new way and wants to "proof" that her theory works for academic acclaim and would also play for herself in a financial sense. Nothing wrong with all of that.
I think her whole point is that there are other ways to look at the game.
As I understand it she has a PHD in statistics
QuoteActually, one or two of Priyanka's statements are quite revealing, and not in a good way.
Oh my. :o
QuoteSomeone needs a life.
Rouletteghost,
You have over 4916 posts! You are correct,
you need to get a life. ::) :thumbsup:
However, I have only made 463 posts.
It appears as though I live a bit more than you do. :thumbsup:
Quote from: Bayes on Jul 03, 03:21 PM 2016
falkor,
Just because someone writes or says something you don't understand doesn't mean that they're necessarily intelligent. Not saying that Priyanka isn't, but it doesn't follow.
Actually, one or two of Priyanka's statements are quite revealing, and not in a good way.
I admit it takes a special skill and the joining of many dots to spot Priyanka's merits. Not many people have that skill - all they see is smoke and mirrors. I see Priyanka as potentially being in the top 1% of the population in terms of intelligence - in some ways she reminds me of Dr. Judy Wood in terms of how she uses evidence to solve problems, such as the question of whether Roulette can be beaten (you also contributed to that topic) or whether 9/11 was an inside job or not.
link:s://:.youtube.com/watch?v=vadSaWyiozg
In my opinion, if you are sure 9/11 wasn't an inside job then you can't call yourself intelligent - only educated. It's as simple as that. Again, that's my humble opinion - I don't expect everyone to agree.
What of Priyanka's statements would you say might undermine her reputation here?
Quote from: The General on Jul 03, 03:35 PM 2016
Rouletteghost,
You have over 4916 posts! You are correct, you need to get a life. ::) :thumbsup:
However, I have only made 463 posts. It appears as though I live a bit more than you do. :thumbsup:
One day you will grow up and realize gambling strategy forums are a waste of your time
Your an odd character.
QuoteOne day you will grow up and realize gambling strategy forums are a waste of your time
Your an odd character.-Rouletteghost
You've made 4918 retarded posts, while searching in vein for a working system.
4918 posts!!! :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:
For me, the forum has been a bit of a gold mine of connections. An efficient way of connecting with people around the world in order to keep tabs on various casinos and opportunities.
Quote from: The General on Jul 03, 03:45 PM 2016
You've made 4918 retarded posts, while searching in vein for a working system. 4918 posts!!! :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:
One day you will grow up and realize a gambling strategy forums is not for you
Good thing you use bold and larger letters otherwise noone would understand you
(link:s://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/4b/d6/13/4bd6138e8821784192683a2ddf917495.jpg)
And Grass Roots... how many posts did you make on that retarded system?
Quote from: The General on Jul 03, 03:50 PM 2016
(link:s://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/4b/d6/13/4bd6138e8821784192683a2ddf917495.jpg)
And Grass Roots... how many posts did you make on that retarded system?
One day you will grow up and realize a gambling strategy forum is not for you
QuoteOne day you will grow up and realize a gambling strategy forum is not for you
You've made over 4920 posts. Have you found what you've been looking for after all of those thousands of posts? How many thousands and thousands of more posts will you be making in vein? :o
I'm here to educate, and to make connections around the world. Something that's worked out quite well for me.
However, you're here for the fairy tale. ::) ::) ::) Be sure to let us know how that has worked out for you once you reach 10k posts.
(link:s://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/ff/b2/29/ffb22981924b21c5b4d8759ea30e0cef.jpg)
Quote from: The General on Jul 03, 04:27 PM 2016
You've made over 4920 posts. Have you found what you've been looking for after all of those thousands of posts? How many thousands and thousands of more posts will you be making in vein? :o
I'm here to educate, and to make connections around the world. Something that's worked out quite well for me. However, you're here for the fairy tale. ::) ::) ::) Be sure to let us know how that has worked out for you once you reach 10k posts.
K.
Quote from: falkor2k15 on Jul 03, 03:35 PM 2016
What of Priyanka's statements would you say might undermine her reputation here?
I'm not necessarily suggesting that there is anything sinister going on or that Pri is trying to deliberately mislead people, but let's take one of the main premises of her argument - that we shouldn't focus on statistics or random outcomes, but what will
definitely happen.
Cue the VDW theorem, which says that there must be an complete A.P. within 9 spins.
But using the VDW doesn't exclude randomness at all (as one or two others have pointed out, but their comments were ignored). You may as well say that given all 3 dozen have occurred, the next must be a repeat. That is a "non-random" outcome, but it's of no help whatsoever because you have no idea
which dozen will come out.
Later on in the thread, Parrando's Parradox came up. I think it was Drazen who quoted a post I made on it ages ago, to which Pri responded -
QuoteNow see the following two events.
First event - spin 1 gets me 20.
Second event - Sum of spin 1 and spin 2 gets me 44.
Are these two events independent? No. A big NO.
Lets go to the post you copied from Bayes. Actually, a better explanation of why PP can't work with casino games is because outcomes are independent, but PP requires some interaction between the current game and the previous one. In the above example, have we not created an interaction and made dependent events in roulette outcomes? As we have managed to create dependent events then the argument of why PP cannot work in roulette doesn't hold good. There is nothing wrong in what Bayes has explained, but carefully creating those events to make them dependent is in our hands. We cannot achieve that just with spin outcomes, you have to find a way of stitching them together.
VdW and other non-random examples that I explained are ways and means to induce those dependencies and create and locate events that are dependent.
So Pri is suggesting that there are dependent events in roulette, and that's absolutely right. Another example might be "what is the probability that red hits, given that even hits?". The events are not independent because red is constrained by even. But her example is misleading because it's again like the example of having to get a repeat in the next spin because all previous outcomes have been "used up". That, too, is a dependent event. The fact that the first event is a 20 does constrain the second outcome given that the sum of the two outcomes must equal 44, but what is the meaning of this latter condition and why use it? you may as well say that the sum has to be at least 20 (which must happen). You would always be correct, but again there is no "predictive" value in this non-independence.
It's quite easy to come up with apparently dependent outcomes in this way, trivial, in fact. But none of these "dependencies" will make a difference to the success or otherwise of predicting future outcomes, in the way that removing cards from a deck does.
Then there was a rather strange comment from Pri in a thread about Betvoyager which Steve made. Steve was accusing BV of being misleading in that their no-zero game actually had a higher effective house edge than the standard game. Pri agreed with this and then someone asked her why she played there, in that case. She replied that if you have the advantage then the house advantage is irrelevant! (and actually, it turned out BV's 10% tax is applied only to net profits, not all winning bets, which neither Steve nor Pri had noticed).
I'm not suggesting that this necessarily implies that Pri doesn't have a system which wins consistently, but I haven't seen anything in her posts which warrants the "rabbit caught in the headlights" behaviour of some devotees. But then, I've never seen a "hinting" thread that ever had anything of real substance, only perhaps sometimes a novel way of looking at things, which I suppose is enough for some, together with the suggestion that here lies the path to the holy grail.
Quote from: Tomla021 on Jul 03, 03:26 PM 2016As I understand it she has a PHD in statistics
You seem to understand a lot apart from the fact its a bloke...lol
Ive known pri is a man. Baby.
Quote from: The General on Jul 03, 02:05 PM 2016Falknor and Pri are likely are the same person.
They are not the same....but Herb, Xander, General, Caleb, Real, Snowman are lol
The inventor of name scamming.
You just stood in your own poo....lol
Quote from: Turner on Jul 03, 05:42 PM 2016
They are not....but Herb, Xander, General, Caleb, Real, Snowman are lol
The inventor of name scamming.
You just stood in your own poo....lol
Lmao!!
I hate xander the most. That alter ego has got to go
I thought Pryanka was a man also on the table said she is a she--what do I care !!!
Bayes, thanks for sharing your perspective on Priyanka's theories. I know you are an expert in Maths and you have a very comprehensive website specifically with regards to maths and Roulette, so it's interesting and refreshing to know how far you agree with Priyanka and where that agreement ends. This gives the rest of us a valuable perspective on how Priyanka fits into the mainstream view of things, as I realise a lot of what she says could be considered controversial. With many respects I know you did agreed with her/him on the majority principles, like constant odds, but here it seems you are unable to extend that mutual understanding/agreement to VdW and Dependencies?
After much studying under Priyanka (I like to think I'm currently her best student! :twisted:), re-reading her entire corpus, I believe VdW and it's application, my man, is some "next level"; you get me? >:D You know that VdW/Ramsey theory is linked to Quantum Mechanics and has a whole set of other theorems all built up around it? On the surface it seems deceptively simple - yet the Dutch mathematicians' career - even his entire life - was built around it. Priyanka may not be sinister in a malicious way (she's not), but there's definitely something sinister about VdW that has caught the attention of many professionals. I think it's implications extend beyond the discipline of maths into something stranger still, than even science fiction - Quantum Mechanics. It took me a while to come to terms with her way of thinking about VdW, but now I'm starting to understand it and have gained insight into this other worldly mechanism; I imagine VdW as some kind of machine that feeds on any stream of random numbers then outputs them as bricks and mortar to build a symmetrical structure - invoking some very abstract thinking indeed - relating to order out of chaos and the architecture of the universe. I plan to do some thorough testing on this soon, so stay tuned...! :wink:
Her description of dependencies is another tough principle to make sense of - I agree. From what I gather I don't think she intends us to use dependencies to increase predictability on it's own; rather he/she (she from now on!) seems to suggest it's application lies in parallel games - and in this context of dependencies/parallel games she even quoted you, Bayes, as once having analysed many different parallel games.
Quote from: Turner on Jul 03, 05:42 PM 2016
They are not the same....but Herb, Xander, General, Caleb, Real, Snowman are lol
The inventor of name scamming.
You just stood in your own poo....lol
Another schizophrenic. .... damn it's a virus. Or maybe he learned from Kav :lol:
The only name under which I post on this forum is The General.
Years and years back I used to have a Xander ID, but I lost the password for it. On another forum, I think it was VLS, I posted under the name Herb, but again, I don't know the ID, and I don't go there anymore.
Quote from: falkor2k15 on Jul 03, 03:35 PM 2016I admit it takes a special skill and the joining of many dots to spot Priyanka's merits. Not many people have that skill - all they see is smoke and mirrors. I see Priyanka as potentially being in the top 1% of the population in terms of intelligence
Laughs
falkor,
I admire your enthusiasm and tenacity, but all you're doing is busily confirming that the laws of probability do actually work. And where do they lead?
If this is fun for you then by all means have at it, but the laws will always lead to the conclusion that the house edge is inescapable.
I think I posted the original smoke and mirrors comment
Its admirable how Falkor tries to get to the bottom of things (I mean that most sincerely folks) but I hope he comes to the conclusion Bayers posted last
He should do
I did off gut feeling after a few posts of random thoughts
All theories should be thrown out there and constructivly criticised.
Good forum stuff is this
Quote from: Tomla021 on Jul 03, 03:26 PM 2016
I have read Priyanka before, pm'd with her a few times. talked to her in chat during roulette sessions-I also talked to her a couple of years ago..... never ever not once did she try to sell anything.
I think she has just looked at the game in a new way and wants to "proof" that her theory works for academic acclaim and would also play for herself in a financial sense. Nothing wrong with all of that.
I think her whole point is that there are other ways to look at the game.
As I understand it she has a PHD in statistics
Priyanka was most helpfull, never ever mention of selling something
Quote from: nottophammer on Jul 04, 06:17 AM 2016
Priyanka was most helpfull, never ever mention of selling something
Listen people, dont get sucked into Generals jealousy of people who are liked
Priyanka is a cool guy. He is not selling, he isnt a scammer...he isnt Falkor
He works hard on alternative ideas and likes to get people thinking. He has achieved that I guess.
I struggle making the jigsaw, but I find it interesting. Perhaps I am not clever enough.
I have a great respect for him. You have to earn respect
You cant just keep demanding it by bashing everyone and telling them (not proving to them) that you are right
Just my 2 peneth, for what its worth.
Almost everyone was duped - and they ran around like a dog chasing it's tail instead of listening
to those who KNOW better.. Instead - those people get insulted.
(link:s://s32.postimg.org/efadrtth1/untitled.png)
Amazing how once the ability to cheat was removed - from that exact moment on -
what happened ?
Exactly.
Everyone was told but no one wants to listen.
This is why religion is so amazingly popular - people want to be fed bullshit
and they willingly and desperately feed upon it.
When someone walks up and says "There is no God, it's nonsense created to......" then
everyone throws stones at them.
What a waste of time.
Oh don't tell me - "He's" too busy at the moment and can't spend any time on the site
playing anymore.
No cheating is possible now.... where is the savior
I call people out for what they are - not sugar coat their BS or defend them.
I don't kiss up to people who cheat and lie and convince others who really do need
guidance into chasing their tails around in circles.
Someone can come along and post every element and chemical that it takes to make a pretzel and then show you a pretzel and you're amazed.
Make 61 page posts about the pretzel - waste your time, you WONT waste mine.
"I see Priyanka as potentially being in the top 1% of the population in terms of intelligence"
Unreal. Even the people who should know better are acting like they don't know better.
(link:://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/f5/9a/e8/f59ae882d91a6dac259366c79bb2c29f.jpg)
How true
Welcome back though :)
Good Grief TG !
The man doth protest too much, methinks :o
Too much blah blah lately
Can we get to roulette? Without bias players
Quote from: Turner on Jul 04, 11:52 AM 2016Good Grief TG !
The man doth protest too much, methinks
The truth doesn't want to be heard - so I have nothing else to say.
I did however want to point that out, as I did.
I don't protest anyone's right to be ignorant and be made fools of.
Deletes my bookmark for this place as well. Wow - I have a free spot now, I wonder
what I should put there.
Quote from: TurboGenius on Jul 04, 12:20 PM 2016
Deletes my bookmark for this place as well. Wow - I have a free spot now, I wonder
what I should put there.
A website explaining that people play hobbies differently
Turbo, you don't strike me as a genuine truthseeker... are you the hired opposition instead? :)
If you were a genuine truthseeker then you would follow up on what I was telling you about the real king of the Jews being a real historical character, i.e. Jesus was loosely based on a real character even if the Christian religion was invented by man instead of being ordained by God.
If you were a genuine truthseeker then you would also consider that Priyanka might just know what he's talking about!!!!! Did he not convincingly argue the case that we shouldn't assume roulette is unbeatable?
Math proof that roulette cannot be beaten... (link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=16972.0)
Want to know what defines intelligence? I don't know if I should let the cat out of the bag... it's a kind of secret amongst us real truthseekers... "making too many assumptions is a sign of stupidity"! There... I said it!
Assumption: Turbo is so sure that Priyanka is feeding people BS.
Assumption: Bayes is so sure that the UK is a democracy.
Real truthseekers question what evidences exists and then place a probability on an assertion:
Could Priyanka be onto something? This makes sense. That doesn't make sense. What does she mean by that? Example: currently, I think there's only a 40% chance that Priyanka is telling the truth, knows what's she's talking about, and can beat roulette - subject to change based on new evidence.
Quote from: TurboGenius on Jul 04, 12:20 PM 2016
The truth doesn't want to be heard - so I have nothing else to say.
I did however want to point that out, as I did.
I don't protest anyone's right to be ignorant and be made fools of.
Deletes my bookmark for this place as well. Wow - I have a free spot now, I wonder
what I should put there.
Do you want me to put these toys back in the pram? Lol
turbo are you saying that priyanka cheated somehow? how? curious here
ps i doubt it but who knows
"Those who KNOW better"... C'mon, really?
You're a system player yet you are bashing someone for their system and those trying to learn from him?
Why would YOUR math work but his won't?
This is my last post on this but it needs to be called out for what it is.
Good luck all.
who cares!
enough of this
I am SO SICK AND TIRED of listening to the general, and about priyanka and how it cant work its all BLAH BLAH BLAH
who is this guy to say what is meaningless and what is not
for all we know this guy could be winning OR losing due to variance, maybe his biased play is BULLCRAP
look at 10,000 spins then bet the hot sector? could just be luck?!?!?!
he is no better or worse then all of us
seriously sit the hell down! people will create and play systems if thats what they want to do
GOOD DAY!
the general is like a broken record, jesus christ!
the whole i am right and you are wrong mentality is bad for a forum!!! do what bet selection did and silence this imbecile
moderators, let me point this out to you: the general will occasionally say show me a working system, then when you show him something that works or something outside the box he says it is meaningless and the results are just luck! silence this idiot!
the go to response its meaningless and variance is on your side and it will lose long term. SHUT UP!
isn't there a forum where he can go pound his chest? or is his infant brain confined to busting on gambling strategy players
COPY AND PASTE SCIENTIST
(link:s://:.youtube.com/watch?v=QoLywiaM6PA)
he is hijacking the forum
(link:s://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/50/5a/e0/505ae0c99e257f0a5112175114e4a81e.jpg)
"show me a working strategy" -General
"here this makes me money" -player
"results are meaningless, it is luck" - general
LOSE LOSE SITUATION
bash notto for KTF? got news for you all. KTF is a damn good strategy. it wins more than it loses.
on any other forum hijacking it and mocking as he does would result in a ban!
and we know he thinks steve is a scam he has said it on other forums!
steve wont like this
but this is the general
houston, general, herb, xander, caleb whatever you are piss off
steve i think your computers work......but i cannot afford them nor is it legal here...the POINT is the general just TALKS...all talk no show...
lets get with the program people
you are being fooled by CALEB
Let's all chill..... meanwhile a brief word from our sponsor :lol:
Quote from: denzie on Jul 04, 01:32 PM 2016
Let's all chill..... meanwhile a brief word from our sponsor :lol:
he is another one.....too good to post his methods....throw his posts on the back burner, he graduated.
he went through the generals school, as did turbo...sad to say it cause i really like turbo....
I will secure a 7 day ban in no time no doubt about that cause i tell it how it is
i have been fixing up my new house...so have not had time for roulette but if i did i wouldnt post the methods cause of him and his minions
Relax....they all talk big . But none of them provided a working method. And then they get frustrated coz some 7-9 crew(no idea why he thinks that but he is obsessed with that) tested it and fails miserable. I call that bad losers. Oooo and those excuses. ..I tweaked it... uuuuhuuu. Sure
Now they go act big at another board(s) coz here they can't win verbally.
Actually it's pretty funny. Eating popcorn
i wish i could relax. but all this freedom on the 4th of july there is no chill
:xd: :xd: :xd: :xd: :xd: :xd: :xd:
Drunk already?
Quote from: denzie on Jul 04, 01:44 PM 2016
Drunk already?
almost
had three 8% beers. so i should leave.
throw dirt on me? im a wild flower
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Jul 04, 01:45 PM 2016
almost
had three 8% beers. so i should leave.
I can tell....you are making a dick of yourself
Listen...Caleb has his view like the rest of us
Your reaction provokes a reaction.
You need to ignore him if you dont like it.
Calebs approach is like saying to a begger...what you need is loads of money like me...then walking off
AP is probably the way. And he tried maths to beat the wheel for years.
But no one is taking up AP soon so the argument isnt an argument
If you are going for it...beer wise..I would come back tomorrow.
Go let off some fireworks or whatever you guys do today
Turbo, Bayes,
Should we tell them what really happened with Pri on the multiplayer?
I swore that I wouldn't tell, but maybe we shouldn't enlighten the delusionals.
(Oh my, I see the truth is coming out already.)
Quote from: The General on Jul 04, 02:27 PM 2016
Turbo, Bayes,
Should we tell them what really happened with Pri on the multiplayer?
I swore that I wouldn't tell, but maybe we shouldn't enlighten the delusionals.
let us know all mighty one. then you and turbo can go bromance.
QuoteRelax....they all talk big . But none of them provided a working method.-Denzie naively said
A...actually I have on this forum. A method that can actually provide the player with an edge. ;)
How about you Denzie? How about you Rouletteghost? Have you? (The answer is NO)
Quote from: Turner on Jul 04, 02:25 PM 2016
I can tell....you are making a dick of yourself
I am not. saying what needs to be said.
2 smites? that is all u got? need 10 more captain dick, I mean the general.
QuoteQuote from: Turner on Today at 06:25:36 PM
I can tell....you are making a dick of yourself
Rouletteghost,
Yes, you actually are.
where did i make a dick of myself? besides stating truth?
i will be back tomorrow and if the general is not gone i will start up again
Hi there recruit,
Grumpy old men finished already?
Did I provide such thing ? No I did not (literally). Did I posted something that once you measured the variance it can actually win ? Well yes I did. Is it playable? Not for most unpatienced people.
Recruit....still eating popcorn
RG
The General will not be gone by tomorrow. I have been following the General`s posts for over 10 years and continue doing so in the future.
To be brief: Minds are like parachutes. In order to function they have to be open.
Nathan Detroit
Quote from: Tamino on Jul 04, 03:11 PM 2016
RI have been following the General`s posts for over 10 years and continue doing so in the future.
Nathan Detroit
Ouch. Sorry to hear that
Therapy is usually covered by insurance
Quote from: The General on Jul 04, 02:27 PM 2016swore that I wouldn't tell
Remind me not to trust you with a secret.
Quote from: The General on Jul 04, 02:30 PM 2016A...actually I have on this forum. A method that can actually provide the player with an edge
I read it
I've seen the ball track round the numbers rare times.
It would mean sitting there for days. Where's the edge in that?
And say you have absolutely nothing else to do in your life....if there was a point it hit more...and you knew where that was...it would show up when they test the wheel
And it's not going to fall in there all the time....You are covering a sector of 9 or so.
Many times it will hit the sector when it's nothing to do with the system. Some odd bounce lands it there for other reasons. You take that one but it's luck
How many other times does it land there in your predicted area when it was just luck?
Hmm?
In other words.....if it landed as you predicted by means of hitting the anomoly as it coasted round....and no other reason...it wouldn't do it enough to make a profit. It has to land in there by luck also to have an edge
It`s the WHEEL that counts not the layout on the felt. Amateurs are playing the lay out on the felt .
The WHEEL rules. Now and Forever .
Nathan Detroit
Quote from: Tamino on Jul 04, 04:24 PM 2016
It`s the WHEEL that counts not the layout on the felt. Amateurs are playing the lay out on the felt .
The WHEEL rules. Now and Forever .
Nathan Detroit
I thought you played double columns
No matter what I am playing columns, dozens , 22 action numbers EC are all wheel based .
Nathan Detroit.
P.S. Excellent question re 2 columns. Dozens depends at which wheel single 0 or 00 There is a difference of bet selection.
So then it is ok. Any other way is simple minded
please can someone explain how come there is diffffffference between numbers on wheel and layout...does it mean that numbers on wheel hit more than numbers on felt ???
Ball lands in generals sector
It was not bias. It was luck
He takes it and runs. I have a bias!!
It is some bloke who thinks his steak is better then everyone elses
RG with all due respect i dont think you can explain that...
Quote from: maestro on Jul 04, 05:07 PM 2016
RG with all due respect i dont think you can explain that...
Explain what? Elaborate
I dont speak vague.
QuoteI read it
I've seen the ball track round the numbers rare times.
It would mean sitting there for days. Where's the edge in that?
Turner,
No, it's not about sitting there for days. On some wheel designs, it does that almost every other spin. I suspect you don't really understand what it is that I'm describing.
QuoteAnd say you have absolutely nothing else to do in your life....if there was a point it hit more...and you knew where that was...it would show up when they test the wheel
Yes, and no. The tracker has to separate by wheel speed, and by spin direction. When all wheel speeds are combined, the pattern will appear to wrap all the way back around the wheel. When both wheel directions are combined, it's diluted further. What's the edge? Upwards of 15% on a small arc.
QuoteAnd it's not going to fall in there all the time....You are covering a sector of 9 or so.
No it's not. But it will hit more frequently in the area, based on wheel speed and direction, than what probability would expect. Significantly more so.
QuoteMany times it will hit the sector when it's nothing to do with the system. Some odd bounce lands it there for other reasons. You take that one but it's luck
How many other times does it land there in your predicted area when it was just luck?
QuoteIn other words.....if it landed as you predicted by means of hitting the anomoly as it coasted round....and no other reason...it wouldn't do it enough to make a profit. It has to land in there by luck also to have an edge
Luck is a double edged sword. Sometimes it's good, sometimes it's bad. Solely relying on luck is a fool's folly. In the end it's having the edge that matters most.
Again, because of the defect the ball will strike the area more frequently than probabilty would predict, and because of the defect, the player can get the edge.Regarding the data dowloads: You really give the casinos too much credit. They don't react to wheels when sections run hot. They're more concerned with whether or not a wheel is losing money, not whether it's biaXed. Biaxed wheels usually make the casino just as much money as the other wheels.
i did ask normal question and you giving me example of generals play..i dont care what general does or play...
QuoteBall lands in generals sector
It was not bias. It was luck
He takes it and runs. I have a bias!!
It is some bloke who thinks his steak is better then everyone elses-Rouletteghost naively wrote:
Rouletteghost,
Ignorance is not a virtue. Didn't you at least take one science and or physics class in high school??? ::)
Quote from: The General on Jul 04, 05:10 PM 2016Luck is a double edged sword.
But....my point
AP players would not win if it wasnt for pure luck as well
I am not saying you cant find a bias or what you do is rubbish. I cant comment because I have never done it, but I get what it is you are doing
If Buzz Aldrin said landing on the moon was boring, I couldnt argue with him
But, you always lampoon people for their ideas because they amounts to pure luck
But AP players rely on luck as well. The bias alone isnt enough
Quote from: The General on Jul 04, 05:18 PM 2016
Rouletteghost,
Ignorance is not a virtue. Didn't you at least take one science and or physics class in high school??? ::)
Earth science
Chemistry
Physics
And 2 Astronomy classes. Dickwad.
Astronomy is something where I'd blow your infant brain away
QuoteAP players would not win if it wasnt for pure luck as well
No, we don't rely on luck.
Here's a very crude example to explain why:
1.
Luck a crude formula ..good or bad represents: + or - (3 x the square root of
the number of spins played over time).
2. A
The edge (A 15% edge) represents: .15 x
the number of spins played over time.Input a few different amounts of spins into the crude formulas above. Try using 300 spins, 2000 spins, and 10k spins. After inputing various spin amounts you'll see that variance really isn't the factor that you believe it to be.
Even in the event of extremely bad luck, the edge dominates over time to become the biggest value. AP players do NOT rely on luck in order to win. We rely on the edge, and try to play for as many spins as we can over time.-The General
Quote from: The General on Jul 04, 05:33 PM 2016
No, we don't rely on luck.
Here's a very crude example to explain why:
1. Luck a crude formula ..good or bad represents: + or - (3 x the square root of the number of spins played over time).
2. A The edge (A 15% edge) represents: .15 x the number of spins played over time.
Input a few different amounts of spins into the crude formulas above. Try using 300 spins, 2000 spins, and 10k spins. After inputing various spin amounts you'll see that variance really isn't the factor that you believe it to be. Even in the event of extremely bad luck, the edge dominates over time to become the biggest value.
-The General
Nah. You also win thanks to luck.
QuoteNah. You also win thanks to luck.
Then I'm surely the luckiest person that I know.
::) ::) ::)
Rouletteghost,
Perhaps later on you can ask an adult to explain to you what it is that I have written. :thumbsup:
Quote from: The General on Jul 04, 05:41 PM 2016
Then I'm surely the luckiest person that I know.
::) ::) ::)
Rouletteghost,
Perhaps later on you can ask an adult to explain to you what it is that I have written. :thumbsup:
Luck
Quote from: The General on Jul 04, 05:33 PM 2016No, we don't rely on luck.
ok...accepting your crude formula, there are some edges of lower values, say 5% where -3xSQ would still get you into a negative
so my question is, how do you know your edge value without playing it? ...where you may find your edge wasnt that good.
heres the rub...and I may be wrong.
You would only know what edge you had by using the past data you had collected.
So you are predicting future play by using past data. :thumbsup:
Quote from: Turner on Jul 04, 05:58 PM 2016
ok...accepting your crude formula, there are some edges of lower values, say 5% where -3xSQ would still get you into a negative
so my question is, how do you know your edge value without playing it? ...where you may find your edge wasnt that good.
heres the rub...and I may be wrong.
You would only know what edge you had by using the past data you had collected.
So you are predicting future play by using past data. :thumbsup:
Yes
But but but its right for this. It is not meaningless here
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Jul 04, 06:01 PM 2016
Yes
But but but its right for this. It is not meaningless here
RG....with all due respect, can I just have a chat with Caleb. I am not trying to trump him (no pun intended)....just trying to understand AP
No better man to ask
QuoteYou would only know what edge you had by using the past data you had collected.
So you are predicting future play by using past data. :thumbsup:
Yes, you're using specific data to measure the fitness and performance of the gaming device, NOT the random game.
For example:
Let's pretend that there's a ridge between the 0 and the 32 on the wheel.
How are you going to measure the effect that it has on the performance of the wheel?
The answer is that you're going to collect specific data. Such as the approx. point of first impact of the ball on the fret, a rough estimate of wheel speed, spin direction, ball being used and number hit. Understand?
Quote from: The General on Jul 04, 06:12 PM 2016Understand?
yes
But you dont know it the ridge is going to do anything to make any difference
you cant see it and say, I will play 28 and neighbors because its a bit further round.
You would have to see if there is a bias relating to that anomoly, There may not be
Quote from: Turner on Jul 04, 06:22 PM 2016
yes
But you dont know it the ridge is going to do anything to make any difference
you cant see it and say, I will play 28 and neighbors because its a bit further round.
You would have to see if there is a bias relating to that anomoly, There may not be
Sorry, I left this late...will have to get off.
Will check in tomorrow.
QuoteBut you dont know it the ridge is going to do anything to make any difference
you cant see it and say, I will play 28 and neighbors because its a bit further round.
You would have to see if there is a bias relating to that anomoly, There may not be
Turner,
Cause and effect.
You still need to collect the data to quantify it, so that you know the scatter profile of the wheel at various speeds. It's not as straight forward as just blindly betting the 28 and neighbors.
QuoteYou would have to see if there is a bias relating to that anomoly, There may not be
That's the point of the specific data collection.
Quote from: The General on Jul 04, 05:10 PM 2016
Yes, and no. The tracker has to separate by wheel speed, and by spin direction. When all wheel speeds are combined, the pattern will appear to wrap all the way back around the wheel. When both wheel directions are combined, it's diluted further. What's the edge? Upwards of 15% on a small arc.
No it's not. But it will hit more frequently in the area, based on wheel speed and direction, than what probability would expect. Significantly more so.
So your a walking roulette computer.
General JAA :thumbsup:
Quote from: denzie on Jul 05, 12:33 AM 2016
So your a walking roulette computer.
General JAA :thumbsup:
Think General words have strong smell. Animal farm smell same.