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.
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
Gizmo
you are desperately poor in your thoughts and you are a moderator! :twisted: :twisted:
you can not bear members criticsm, then you need to be decommissioned! :smile: :smile:
catalyst
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.
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
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
Quote from: iggiv on Jan 21, 01:17 AM 2012
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
Nice going Ken. You exposed the rat.
Once Maui Sunset is permanently banned I will remove this thread. So blaze away on the fraudster.
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.
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. :o
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: -
QuoteThe 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 (link:://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse_gambler%27s_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.
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.
Quote from: kelly on Jan 21, 02:45 AM 2012
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
"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
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
Quote from: MrJ on Jan 21, 08:56 AM 2012
"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.
Quote from: MrJ on Jan 21, 09:11 AM 2012
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
No, I don't think it's ok to brag and at the same time attack others, that's just being a troll. When this forum was set up it was agreed that there should be no "hinting". When people evade questions and yet still drop hints and attack other members at the same time, it's time for them to be banned.
Ken, I think you misunderstand what I wrote, I certainly wasn't endorsing the guy, in fact I was the first to point out he was being inconsistent (wanting it both ways).
And by the way, I'm not in the "advantage play is the only thing that works" camp. Anything that WORKS, I'll give it a try, I'm not biased in favour of one or the other "method".
Actually, the guy reminds me of Spike, but I don't think it's him.
that maui is an idiot i cannot believe you are spending so much of your time to read his crap...he just wants to bang in your brain what he thinks and keeps repeating same and same again and again..just ban him..and let him enjoy the sunset..
Quote from: Bayes on Jan 21, 10:11 AM 2012
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.
And like I said, if he uses statistics, where do statistics come from? THE PAST, which also means gamblers fallacy.
Ken
Quote from: Bayes on Jan 21, 10:18 AM 2012
No, I don't think it's ok to brag and at the same time attack others, that's just being a troll. When this forum was set up it was agreed that there should be no "hinting". When people evade questions and yet still drop hints and attack other members at the same time, it's time for them to be banned.
Ken, I think you misunderstand what I wrote, I certainly wasn't endorsing the guy, in fact I was the first to point out he was being inconsistent (wanting it both ways).
And by the way, I'm not in the "advantage play is the only thing that works" camp. Anything that WORKS, I'll give it a try, I'm not biased in favour of one or the other "method".
Actually, the guy reminds me of Spike, but I don't think it's him.
I think I know who it is but dont want to say in case I'm wrong. Funny thing though, the guy actually told me his identity a while back but I cant remember. (lol)
Ken
Hey Giz,
Don't worry about it. I think the guy is a bit confused about what he believes in the first place:
Ms quote:
"First let's define Gambler's Fallacy:
The false notion that odds for something with a fixed probability increase/decrease depending on recent results. "
MS quote:
"There are NO trends in random numbers - just higher and higher probabilities against the last color/odd/high/dozen/column/number showing up in the next spin to extend the "trend"."
Mmmm....
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 decisio you make.
So why can't he listen? I don't use GF. I check to see if a trend has CONTINUED! You don't win with my methods by only winning one bet after identifying a trend. You have winning sessions that are the basis of continuation being confirmed after the fact. Perhaps some of you old timers around the forums will recall me saying this: "TEST AS YOU GO." I criptically told you my secret all along and for many years. There is no gamblers fallacy in my method. It's based 100% on confirmation.
MauiSunset's argument with me is an old classic debating strategy where he uses the straw man argument. If there is any fallacy it is in Maui attempting to categorize me with his projection into a subclass the he thinks he is Iqualified to ridicule. He calls me idiotic. You watch. He won't understand the difference I just clearly explained.explained.
J i dont endorse Maui in any way, i just dont see him push his opinion any harder than the other fraction push their opinion. As for why there arent any series of 100 reds, well, the probability gets smaller and smaller because of the lenght of the serie. 100 reds has the same probability as 50 reds then 50 blacks or 25 reds + 25 blacks + 25 reds + 25 blacks. Or any other 100 spin sequenze that just happened, well hey, THAT particular sequence just happened so its not THAT impossible.
As for the "higher and higher probability" please note that it never gets to 100% certainity.......
If he says he is doing quite well at the tables by using statistics, he is also himself a GF victim. You wont get anyone to admit that they are a frequent loser.
Kelly - " You won't get anyone to admit that they are a frequent loser."
Then let me be the first. I lose all the time. Many of my sessions begin with draw downs that must be overcome . This often happens because I fail to get into the flow of the randomness. Now some of you will go crazy on that.
Quote from: Gizmotron on Jan 21, 12:31 PM 2012
This often happens because I fail to get into the flow of the randomness.
SPIKE claimed he spent a few hours a day testing just to keep his elbow in.
Does not sound so crazy really. Reading randomness is an art that you can easily lose the knack of without practise.
All you are trying to do is get in synch with the trends. It can produce explosive results.
This is where I think some people misunderstand when they say you are full of crap if you can't lay everything down in a mechanical fashion. It does not excactly work like that.
@Gizmo >> I'm not arguing with you, I consider you a friend. However......."I don't use GF. I check to see if a trend has CONTINUED" >>> So you base you future bet(s) on what has already happened, correct? Let me ask this.....lets say the history board is not working and you have not watched the wheel or recorded any past outcomes. Can you walk right up to a table and place your bet immediately? If no, why not?
Ken
Ken -" Can you walk right up to a table and place your bet immediately? If no, why not?"
Ken & Flukey Luke, no, I can't just walk up and hit a win streak right off the bat if I have not tracked the current conditions. For me it's not about practicing recognition. It's about using my strategies that have already been perfected. I can't use them if I can't see the current conditions. That's not to say that I can't take advantage of Streak on the marquee. That's a chart. It's just not as extensive as my charts.
"I can't use them if I can't see the current conditions" >>> So the definition of this is what? 'Current conditions' means.......?
Can I assume, looking at what HAS ALREADY HAPPENED? It makes no difference if its the last 800 spins or 1 spin, correct? I'm not knockin it, I use some past results. Even the AP guys use past results (but won't admit it). Is the wheel bias? How would a person know if they were not watching what has been hitting? What about DS? You do have to watch past results in order to know, right? Almost *EVERY* method is somehow related to what has happened.
Ken
" Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias, myside bias or verification bias) is
a tendency of people to favor information that confirms their beliefs or hypotheses. [Note
1][1] As a result, people gather evidence and remember information selectively, and
interpret it in a biased way."
In a way I'm using a form of confirmation bias. I'm not using it to fool myself. I'm using it to detect the current conditions. When something is not a trend or a characteristic of a trend type then you know what it will act like . If that condition continues then you can bet on it as long as it keeps continuing. You want to find anything that continues. That also goes for trends that conform to known characteristics too.
"In a way I'm using a form of confirmation bias" >>> That's cool, I'm not knockin it but it does entail past results.
Ken
Ken -" That's cool, I'm not knockin it but it does entail past results."
I get it you are suggesting that everyone uses past spins in some way. After all that's what statistics are based on.
Yes....IN SOME WAY, correct. Like I said, I'm not trying to piss you off, I respect the work you put into this game.
Ken