Begin by tracking until a pattern is established. Could be as few as 3 spins.
RRR is a pattern. RBR is a pattern. RRBB is a pattern. RRBRRB is a pattern.
Bet that a pattern will continue. If you have RRR bet that the next color will be Red. Don't bet just once, bet 3 times. In other words if you are betting that Red will continue and a Black spins, bet that Red will hit a second time. If Black or Zero hits then bet one last time that Red will hit. We have to lose 3 times before going to our next bet.
These patterns aren't necessarily based on the last 2 or 3 spins, but more so on the recent history, say the last 15 spins. In other words, check to see what has been happening if you have BBR. Has this pattern been staying Red or has it been going back to Black and bet that what has been happening will be what the wheel is doing at that time.
If there are no recent patterns to mirror, then use the common ones shown above. And remember, you have 3 shots for a pattern to match recent history.
Now comes the bet progression. We will bet a mini martingale of 3 steps. This is not too dangerous. All we need is 105 units to play a session. Level1 = 1-2-3; level 2 = 2-4-8; level 3 = 4-8-16; level 4 = 8-16-32. If we lose at the 8-16-32 level it is not our day.
Our 1st 3 bets are where we are going to make our money.
If we lose these 3 bets, all bets after that are recovery bets.
Our money bets are 1-2-4. If we win on any of the first 3 bets, we win 1 unit.
If we lose these 3 bets, we move to level 2 bets of 2-4-8. Since we are down 7 units, we must win 4 times at level 2 before we can drop back to level 1 bets.
If we lose at level 2 before we recover our 7 units, we move to level 3 = 4-8-16. Every win at this level recovers 4 units of the 14 units we lost at level 2. Once the lost bets of level 2 are recovered, we drop down to the level 2 bets of 2-4-8 until we recover the lost bets of level 1. When we have recovered all lost bets, we drop back to level 1 betting. All wins at this level are profits.
Any time we are at a new high point in our bank, we bet the 1st level of 1-2-4.
Since this is not a strictly mechanical bet, but relies on some subjective decisions by us, we have a reasonable chance to win long term.
Pick you own win target. 10 units is very reasonable.
This is very easy to play and can be played on any even chance bet, but Red and Black are easiest to recognize, so I'd start there. Eventually, you can play it on all 3 e.c.'s at once.
Enjoy,
George
Currently I am testing Gizmos's Reading randomness selection method.
I wonder if this is an effective money management/progression strategy for reading randomness.
Quote from: GLC on Jan 01, 11:31 PM 2011Begin by tracking until a pattern is established. Could be as few as 3 spins.
RRR is a pattern. RBR is a pattern. RRBB is a pattern. RRBRRB is a pattern.
Bet that a pattern will continue.
I do like this forum's software. You isolate (select) some text to quote and it comes up already redacted as a quote.
There are isolated trends or patterns that are just three or four in sequence size. In fact they are the majority of trends. But what is wonderful at times is that these size opportunities come in swarms that last from 30 minutes to an hour. For that stretch of time you can kill the casino if you are a good hunter. I don't try to teach with talking about it. I like to show actual examples. This is the most important aspect of Reading Randomness. These micro trends, as I refer to them, are at the heart of good skill.
QuoteI wonder if this is an effective money management/progression strategy for reading randomness.
When you can beat these micro trends with flat betting you will see why progressions dig big holes that you must recover from. RR is also about not digging holes. I just take one win off of each micro trend. That does not mean that you can't try to win three times in a row with several micro trends. I know for a fact that just three net wins per session can make you a millionaire. All you have to do is think about it. I can win almost every session if I just wait for good parts. It's not easy and progressions feed impulsive behaviour. I don't need the progression because three net wins is enough.
For those having a problem with the claim I give you this. $25 chips, a maximum straight up bet in most Native American Casinos, will make you $450 on each win. Three times that is $1,350. If you only gamble 20 days per month then that is $27,000. You take that to a year, you get $324,000. In just three years you have a million.
You calculations make it sound like there are no losing sessions playing flat.
Sorry I do not believe it.
Someone just posted a reading randomness flat bet chart on gamblingforums with huge drawdowns.
Quote from: Kairomancer on Nov 15, 08:16 AM 2019
You calculations make it sound like there are no losing sessions playing flat.
Sorry I do not believe it.
Someone just posted a reading randomness flat bet chart on gamblingforums with huge drawdowns.
Yes they did. Did you also read this: "I know for a fact that if you are willing to have a full out war with the casino, that you can win every session if you have a small enough win goal." Did you also see that they stuck it out and won that session?
I'm taking people from no experience and getting them to 4.66 wins at 3 net losses for each 7 net loss sessions. That's 14 net wins to 7 net losses, all in under thirty days of training. So they don't get to be millionaires unless they play $100 tables for straight up bets.
The mathematical expectation that we have all had drilled into us for centuries has been 2.33 sessions won at 3 net wins versus one session lost a 7 net losses. It takes time to get real good at this. At first you only see a few characteristics, including sizes like this thread points out. I have thousands of sessions experience. Most of that is with money in real live B&M casinos. I saw my first perfect occurring pattern back in 1993 when I would play at least three or four long sessions per week. It will take years for this to become an accepted skill. This idea of winning all sessions is a long ways off for most people. But getting to 100% return out of 5.66 sessions in just 30 to 60 days is remarkable enough.
I'm still looking for any really serious people trying this that are stuck at 2.33 or worse. That is the mathematical break even point. Perhaps some people are embarrassed to come forward. One thing I'm glad about though. There are just a few questions on technique. This thread is really the best stuff that there is. Micro patterns are the basic foundation of good play. If flat betting is hard enough and also rewarding enough then progressions just complicate things to a certain degree. But people will look well past flat betting when they get real good at scoping out opportunities. Human nature will expose the attempt at greed. Greed and loss of self control is the primary factor that will corrupt this method. I'm expecting that and complaints. So we will see.
If I were to guess, there are less than 20 people trying this. Of that only three or four have disclosed their successes. There are people that are being silent. Nothing will be believed until the casino take action against it.
It seems your apprentice is losing. Just look at his new charts.
The graph you referred had switched to a downward moving trend when he quit.
The claim to always quit while you are ahead a few units and implement a stop loss strategy is a hallmark of all losing approaches.
If method has a positive expectation the longer you play the more win you should see over time.
Quote from: Kairomancer on Nov 15, 04:17 PM 2019
It seems your apprentice is losing. Just look at his new charts.
The graph you referred had switched to a downward moving trend when he quit.
The claim to always quit while you are ahead a few units and implement a stop loss strategy is a hallmark of all losing approaches.
If method has a positive expectation the longer you play the more win you should see over time.
I've lost many sessions where I was looking at one thing while something else would have been better that was right in front of me in the charts. I didn't look that close at his last round. So I'll just say it again. I don't feed losing streaks after two losses in a row. I move to virtual bets and wait for a huge change. It takes about a month to learn from lost sessions. I hope he loses more.
My first student had me to comment on things each day. That was stuff like look at section R/B from spins 20 to 30. You missed the singles on the weak side there. These people trying this out are doing it almost completely on their own. This is just day four or five for him.
What I don't see and I find this very interesting. With all the past systems discussed over the years many people talked among themselves about what works and what does not work. There is none of that going on over there. I was hoping that people would start threads like this one here that has the characteristics of micro patterns. Singles on the weak side is a huge pattern. rBBr repeating or pulsating like rBBr BrrB rBBr is a different type of characteristic. This is the first example of a discussion about different types of characteristics other than ones introduced in the Reading Randomness thread since July 20th when I started all this.
I'm taking a hands off approach to the teaching over there. It's a skill to see patterns that you have never seen before while you are playing. There is no way to teach that skill. That is why the guy that wants answers to why there are 19 vs 18, or 20 vs 18 in the inside sets gets me wanting to throw him out of the class. I'm not going to hold anyone's hands and walk them through all this.
So this is a must to learn.
1.) self control over laziness or greed
2.) self control over laziness or greed
3.) learn to see new unseen characteristics and different duration of patterns.
In other words learn a larger vocabulary of Reading Randomness. This increased skill along with plenty of playing experience is the secret edge to using this method. There is no short cut. It is a skill that comes from hard work.
My first student took 30 days with live comments from me two hours each day while he practiced. In the following 30 days he proved his mastery of the skill.
Everyone trying this out now are basically on their own with only a few characteristics to go on. Nobody over there knows that I'm telling the behind the scenes secrets over here. Yet the first people to go at this were all from over here. Maybe I should do a video where I look at tons of characteristics and not just another playing video. I'll think about that.
Well, it is not rocket science to recognize the general patterns (singles on the weak side, absence of singles, chop-chop, double chop, long streak of repeats often interchanging, dominant sides.
The key is to enter early. Let's say after 5 or 6 repeats.
The problems arise when to enter to attack the pattern. You cannot delay it much, because it can vanish any spin.
Often there are multiple guessing opportunities happen all at once which are almost equal in size, so you have to chose one.
You decide to enter the pattern and attack it and you just got unlucky, because it busted.
Then you can decide to virtual bet the other opportunities. Your virtual guess might work, so you enter the other pattern, it busts again and so on and so forth.
You suggest that you can overcome the losing streaks just by making virtual bets.
Unfortunately that is just not the case.
There is no way to know for sure. It is all just random. The pattern either continues or it will not. If you are unlucky you eventually lose all the profits you made earlier.
That is the case with your students longer sessions.
You cannot just wait and snipe the perfect opportunity, because it can fail as soon as you make your bet.
You can hit a few lucky spins in a pattern and delude yourself that this is working and it is.
The reality arises when it doesn't and you continue to lose all your profits and more the longer you play the random guessing game...
Well you have the excuses to lose down pat.
I see something here though:
X | X | X | X | X | X | | -- 65 -- 24 ( $ 890 ) Primes
| X | X | X | X | | X | -- 66 -- 30 ( $ 800 ) Primes
-| X | X | X | X | X | | -- 67 -- 17 ( $ 800 ) Specials
| X | X | X | X | | | -- 68 -- 14 ( $ 710 ) Primes
| X | X | X | X | | X | -- 69 -- 22 ( $ 615 ) Not Specials
| X | X | X | X | X | X | -- 70 -- 31 ( $ 525 ) Red
| X | X | X | X | | X | -- 71 -- 33 ( $ 435 ) Even
-| X | X | X | X | | X | -- 72 -- 10 ( $ 435 ) High
| X | X | X | X | | | -- 73 -- 19 ( $ 345 ) Low
X | X | X | X | X | | X | -- 74 -- 15 ( $ 430 ) Not Primes
| X | X | X | X | X | X | -- 75 -- 12 ( $ 335 ) Not Primes
-| X | X | X | X | | | -- 76 -- 34 ( $ 335 ) Zeros
X | X | X | X | X | | X | -- 77 -- 21 ( $ 420 ) Six's
On the far left are his string of losses with virtual losses and going back to real losses. He rode a death spiral.
So I'll try to say it again. You can avoid a swarm of losses. I know they exist. I know that betting through the chaotic state is nearly the same as betting through a swarm of losses. Only bet through a swarm or slow grind upward of winners. It's not about the trends. It;s about the winning conditions.
Let's look at what really happened. He caught the strong side in the reds and won not just 3 net wins but he reached 100% and won 7 net wins.
W | B R | O E | L H | 0 6 | P | S | -- SN -- SP
nb| X | X | X | X | X | | -- 01 -- 27
nb| X | X | X | X | X | | -- 02 -- 05
nb| X | X | X | X | | | -- 03 -- 09
nb| X | X | X | X | | | -- 04 -- 36
nb| X | X | X | X | | X | -- 05 -- 15
nb| X | X | X | X | X | | -- 06 -- 02
nb| X | X | X | X | | | -- 07 -- 16
X | X | X | X | X | X | X | -- 08 -- 23 ( $ 90 ) Red
X | X | X | X | X | X | | -- 09 -- 27 ( $ 180 ) Red
X | X | X | X | X | X | X | -- 10 -- 07 ( $ 270 ) Red
X | X | X | X | X | | | -- 11 -- 34 ( $ 360 ) Red
X | X | X | X | X | | | -- 12 -- 19 ( $ 450 ) Red
| X | X | X | X | X | | -- 13 -- 28 ( $ 360 ) Red
X-| X | X | X | X | | | -- 14 -- 19 ( $ 360 ) Red
X | X | X | X | X | | | -- 15 -- 09 ( $ 450 ) Red
X | X | X | X | X | | X | -- 16 -- 25 ( $ 540 ) Red
X | X | X | X | X | X | X | -- 17 -- 32 ( $ 630 ) Red
| X | X | X | X | X | | -- 18 -- 24 ( $ 540 ) Red
When outcomes are random, the trend isn't your friend. It's not your enemy either, it's just random!
I've tried the trend following game in the past, but have gotten more consistent results by having a variety of systems on the go at the same time. It's not an exact science but it does adhere to the maxim 'don't put all your eggs in one basket', and it seems to minimize the dispersions.
If gizmo or any of his students are having success, I suggest it's due to this principle, not to any inherent tendency of patterns to continue, because they don't.
Quote from: Joe on Nov 16, 02:54 AM 2019
When outcomes are random, the trend isn't your friend. It's not your enemy either, it's just random!
I've tried the trend following game in the past, but have gotten more consistent results by having a variety of systems on the go at the same time. It's not an exact science but it does adhere to the maxim 'don't put all your eggs in one basket', and it seems to minimize the dispersions.
If gizmo or any of his students are having success, I suggest it's due to this principle, not to any inherent tendency of patterns to continue, because they don't.
That was fascinating. The axiom not to put all your eggs in one basket in order to minimize dispersion would suggest that scattering your eggs in different baskets would maximize your dispersion. Obfuscation is only a delaying tactic that makes you think that you are losing less.
So Joe here thinks that people trying out Reading Randomness are not actually winning. That's great and truly appreciated. We need a full fledged army of skeptics in order to protect the opportunity. I've always enjoyed the efforts of the mathBoyz to fulfill that task for me, and now us.
I've spent a lot of time helping others understand that obfuscation does not make a mechanical based system work. Joe here says that he tried trends and that it does not work. I wonder if he ever tried associating results with trends like the "Effectiveness States" that are at the core of the skill of Reading Randomness?
You ask a person if they know what singles on the weak side means and how do you use it. You get sophistry for the answer. At that point discussion becomes obfuscated. It breaks down to bunny trails of dispersion. It withers on the vine and the trail comes to an ending in the middle of nowhere. Poof, this blows away in the wind, as dust. Silence...
Quote from: Joe on Nov 16, 02:54 AM 2019
If gizmo or any of his students are having success
No , they have not. He's a scammer who's good with words but cant win this game.
Of course he can prove me wrong by beating the game provided here. No words but Actions :thumbsup:
Quote from: denzie on Nov 16, 10:27 AM 2019
No , they have not. He's a scammer who's good with words but cant win this game.
Of course he can prove me wrong by beating the game provided here. No words but Actions :thumbsup:
I love it when someone tells me I have to prove something the way that they insist. I'm sending you an army of people that will all prove it to you.
Quote from: gizmotron2 on Nov 16, 08:15 AM 2019The axiom not to put all your eggs in one basket in order to minimize dispersion would suggest that scattering your eggs in different baskets would maximize your dispersion.
No, the opposite is the case. The principle has been known for millenia and it's just common sense when you think about it. There are mathematical proofs which show that it does reduce dispersion and variance, especially when the bets or investments are negatively correlated. It tends to reduce overall profit because it smooths out the bumps, but that's good enough when you can't get a real edge.
I didn't say I don't believe anyone is winning using your strategy, only that if they are it's not because trends work. Trends in random numbers can only be identified after the event.
Quote from: Joe on Nov 16, 12:15 PM 2019I didn't say I don't believe anyone is winning using your strategy, only that if they are it's not because trends work. Trends in random numbers can only be identified after the event.
Fine. The people that use trends combined with winning phases will just take the money and be sorry that they were wrong. This disagreement will never be settled by changing anyone's opinion with just words or ideas. It will take evidence. First I show how to do it. Next comes people learning it. Then comes a shocked world once they see the body of evidence. You believe that this will never happen because it hasn't happened already. So I will wait and not be concerned about how long it takes.
I can't teach people that 3 net wins is smarter than larger amounts. I can suggest that this small amount is well inside the moving averages for even chance bets though. Self control is part of the skill. I didn't have it until I discovered these "moving average" concepts. I needed to see it visually in graphs before I got it. I know Reading Randomness instinctively, yet I struggled for years with self control.
my half cent,
Gizmotron insist that 3win, more important than others.
imho,
3wins, are STREAK of any hit, that win 3time in row,
either bbb, ppp, bpb,pbp, or any imaginable hit.
Since random must produce streak of 3win, anytime and anywhere in next 100spins, we must research, history of data, what the least ever streak of 3hit.
Oversimplified example,
we need 100units to bet next 100spins, flatbet and parlay+1, to win.
say, parlay winning for 3win,=
1,3,7...=14-3=11unit profit.
needs 3unit to bet
thus in 100spins and 100unit br, we need
around NINE streak3hit to profit.
But I had seen ,
"only two ,streak3hit in 100spins", that 22u profit vs 94 losses...
imho,
no need to argue that random cant or can be read,
we focus on what must happen, and averages of hit, and the least ever hit.
streak of 2win, streak of 3 hit,
MUST HAPPEN,
we need to know the averages of hit, and the worst least ever hit, then build a progression mm around them
Quote from: SWEET on Nov 16, 10:27 PM 2019my half cent,
Gizmotron insist that 3win, more important than others.
I'm saying that in a gambling session that 3 nets wins are the stop win point. I never say that this must be 3 in a row. If I get 13 wins with 10 losses then I get 3 net wins in 23 bets. I also say to stop when I say stop. They call them "stop points." It does not mean that we must have a progression and three in a rows. But do what you want. I can shoehorn global warming into this if that will help. If you have a hot session it is the fault of angry white male protestant reformation.
Quote from: gizmotron2 on Nov 16, 01:06 PM 2019This disagreement will never be settled by changing anyone's opinion with just words or ideas. It will take evidence.
At least we agree on that. But if it works why would anyone be motivated to provide such evidence?
Quote from: Joe on Nov 18, 03:06 AM 2019
At least we agree on that. But if it works why would anyone be motivated to provide such evidence?
I wrote an answer at the other forum that applies to this. But please don't take it personally. It is not a personal comment but rather a generalization that makes sense to me.
Quote
Also I know that a few of you are concerned about an inside set containing 19 or 20 numbers in the sets. The primary reason I'm successful is that I have figured out what "enough" means to me. If I get 3 net wins that add up to $250 to $270, then that is enough for what I need.
I know this works. I also know that greed will kill off all the table games. People will do what they always do in a gold rush. They will kill off the opportunity to take what they could practically use. I have not given you a secret that is fulfilling. I have given you a curse. Many of you call me a scammer. But what I am is retribution for calling me a scammer. This is a slow moving wake-up call. The best part is that the mathBoyz will be the last to know. Normally a math wizard would crawl over dead bodies to get academic recognition in their field. But this time the gamblers will get the accolades. There will not be a gold rush in the math world.
That should solve the mystery of the 19 or 20 numbers in some of the sets. The only scam that is going on here is that I have found a way to weaponize people's own human nature. So the only remaining grievance is my outright gall to pull a monster sized prank on the world. You messed with me so I give you you. I'm not the only one playing this game. Human nature itself is a self inflicting retribution. Just call it another adventure in a kind of a divine comedy.
Now you can start in on my arrogance. But you can also see why there's an excrement sandwich on the menu. Ha Ha. I laid all this out for years in front of you all. It's in all my writings from the get go. It will really be fascinating to see who saw all this coming and who didn't. All I did for 13 years was drop hints here and there. All I did last July was take the cover off the hints and bring everything into full light.
Gizmo, even you admit that it's not trends which are doing the work. On the other forum you wrote :
QuoteIt's so simple. I just use trends as choices because I'm already trained to use trends. You can pre-select all your bets based on the migration of deer. You can go into a casino with 300 already decided bet selections. Then all you do is watch the effectiveness states.
So it all comes down to 'effectiveness states', apparently. Monitor several bet selections and pick the one which is doing the best. Follow it until either a loss or another BS is doing better, then jump on it. Goto step 1.
Does that sum up your method in a nutshell? Are you claiming that you win flat betting? If not, what's the progression?
Nope. Apparently you have to monitor the best looking trends/patterns then make virtual bets and check for winnings in your chart.
If there is an upward movement on the graph, only then you can place your bets.
I believe what he means by effectivenes states is a combination of upward moving winning trends and pattern exploitation.
I already listed all the patterns to look for in this topic.
He is using a stop loss of 7 units and a win goal of 3 units.
Here is what I do not understand. If you continue making gains in a winning streak of a pattern. Why would you exit at 3 units profit?
It could last for 15+ spins. You have very clear exit point when the pattern suddenly abrupts and take all the gains instead of just 3 units.
The 3 units win goal is only makes sense where is a hard and long grind going.
Quote from: Kairomancer on Nov 20, 06:16 AM 2019Nope. Apparently you have to monitor the best looking trends/patterns then make virtual bets and check for winnings in your chart.
If there is an upward movement on the graph, only then you can place your bets.
KM, but this doesn't seem to be what gizmo means, at least not going by what I quoted from him in my last post. If, for instance, you can go to a casino armed with pre-selected bet selections, you are not monitoring the outcomes themselves, but the win/loss patterns derived from them.
As an example, one of your bet selections might be the simple 'decision before last' on R/B. Suppose this is the R/B pattern :
R
B
R w
B w
R w
R L
R w
R w
B L
R w
R L
R w
B L
R w
B w
B L
B w
B w
B w
There is no stand-out pattern there in terms of R/B, but the win/loss trend is clearly up for that particular bet selection (12 wins out of 17 bets). You may be tracking a half-dozen other bet selections, but DBL is doing better than any of the others at this point, so you play it. When another bet selection is doing 'better', you switch to it.
QuoteHere is what I do not understand. If you continue making gains in a winning streak of a pattern. Why would you exit at 3 units profit?
It could last for 15+ spins. You have very clear exit point when the pattern suddenly abrupts and take all the gains instead of just 3 units.
The 3 units win goal is only makes sense where is a hard and long grind going
.
I concur. It doesn't make much sense to cut short wins, only losses.
I guess you can always try this approach.
I think the preselected list was an extreme example just to emphasize how important to track your overall win/loss trend during the virtual bet phase before you jump in to place a bet on a pattern characteristic. It could be a chop-chop, singles on the weak side, repeats and several others.
I think as much subjectivity should be removed from the system as possible. Ideally it should be purely mechanical. You would need a computer based tracker, but it wouldn't be too hard to write , and you would get 3 for the price of one if you used all 3 even chances.
The problem with all trend based approaches, whether the trend is the actual pattern or the win/loss trend, is how far back to track it. 10 spins? 20? 50?
One way of doing it might be to track several spin intervals simultaneously and choose the BS based on some aggregate of the results. That way you could guage the overall trend over the largest interval and the trends at smaller intervals within it. The more recent shorter intervals could be weighted more heavily than the longer intervals so that you wouldn't spend too long chasing a trend which is starting to evaporate, or at least, reduce your stakes proportionately.
QuoteIt's so simple. I just use trends as choices because I'm already trained to use trends. You can pre-select all your bets based on the migration of deer. You can go into a casino with 300 already decided bet selections. Then all you do is watch the effectiveness states.
Quote from: Joe on Nov 20, 03:59 AM 2019
Gizmo, even you admit that it's not trends which are doing the work. On the other forum you wrote :
So it all comes down to 'effectiveness states', apparently. Monitor several bet selections and pick the one which is doing the best. Follow it until either a loss or another BS is doing better, then jump on it. Goto step 1.
Does that sum up your method in a nutshell? Are you claiming that you win flat betting? If not, what's the progression?
{nutshell}
YES {/nutshell}
This is the very best part also. It's 14 years old. I said so from the very beginning that it is the only trend that matters. I tried to explain it. Yet, as I predicted that it would, it was completely overlooked. It was not until I put it in a case of specific instructions that it has been noticed. I now expect the gambling world to flip out and officially reject it.
I asked a guy at the side door of a casino more than 25 years ago," what is the secret to all this?" He replied "bet big when you are doing good and bet small when you aren't." I put that together with the tactic that card counters use. They bet big when they are in an advantage state and bet small when they aren't. I'm not saying that this is an advantage state. I'm just saying that it is a condition that you can intentionally seek out and recognize.
I have tried over the years to say that playing the trends has no magical power of prediction. This is all quit funny to me. It looks like some people are getting the message that always in front of them. There are tons of comments from the past dismissing all this. I've got the world of gamblers documenting themselves just how good they really are. One of the most basic axioms of gambling was never turned into a method. All I did was take trends and combine them with doing good. When your are doing good then the trends are working. That's what pissed off the world. They didn't see the connection and thought I was claiming some kind of magical powers. The only magic I was using was letting them go ahead and think that. It was all hints until I forced people to make the connection starting in July this year.
With gizmotron's method there is no need for a tracking software. He suggests to rely on visual dexterity to track and recognize the patterns to bet. I think it is all very basic and almost instant for the human eye. All you need is a pen and paper which you can use at your local casino.
To evaluate the method and run long complex simulations you will need an AI with pattern recognition.
I think it is so complex work, it would be easier just to test the method yourself. He claims he can make 100% profit / 3 flat bet win session on the long run.
It is not that hard to validate such an extraordinary claims with just statistics.
Quote from: Kairomancer on Nov 20, 06:16 AM 2019
Nope. Apparently you have to monitor the best looking trends/patterns then make virtual bets and check for winnings in your chart.
If there is an upward movement on the graph, only then you can place your bets.
I believe what he means by effectivenes states is a combination of upward moving winning trends and pattern exploitation.
I already listed all the patterns to look for in this topic.
He is using a stop loss of 7 units and a win goal of 3 units.
Here is what I do not understand. If you continue making gains in a winning streak of a pattern. Why would you exit at 3 units profit?
It could last for 15+ spins. You have very clear exit point when the pattern suddenly abrupts and take all the gains instead of just 3 units.
The 3 units win goal is only makes sense where is a hard and long grind going.
The short answer is "moving averages" of common sessions and self control over greed. I also have presented enough information where these stop points are meant for research into the possibility that probability-expectation beliefs have always been in error when it comes to methods like this.
Quote from: Joe on Nov 20, 07:40 AM 2019There is no stand-out pattern there in terms of R/B, but the win/loss trend is clearly up for that particular bet selection (12 wins out of 17 bets). You may be tracking a half-dozen other bet selections, but DBL is doing better than any of the others at this point, so you play it. When another bet selection is doing 'better', you switch to it.
Congratulations Joe. You are the first person in 14 years, including all the students, to see that the bet selection does not matter to this method and to illustrate it with your example. Now try to keep that a secret. I managed to get people to get pissed off about the trends while leaving the real truth right underneath their noses. You just blabbed it to the world.
Quote from: Kairomancer on Nov 20, 08:18 AM 2019
I guess you can always try this approach.
I think the preselected list was an extreme example just to emphasize how important to track your overall win/loss trend during the virtual bet phase before you jump in to place a bet on a pattern characteristic. It could be a chop-chop, singles on the weak side, repeats and several others.
I just found a way to look at 6 individual data streams for conditions that are working to the positive side, at the exact moment. That is why first real bet losses are the only losses that can kill off the method. They can't be all first bet losses. The question is, can you get three net wins before you get seven net losses. The odds alone say that you can. So the odds say that in this condition you must get 2.33 won sessions for each lost session a 7. Now explain why people are getting 4.66 wins for each lost session, or even better than that?
Quote from: Joe on Nov 20, 08:40 AM 2019
I think as much subjectivity should be removed from the system as possible. Ideally it should be purely mechanical. You would need a computer based tracker, but it wouldn't be too hard to write , and you would get 3 for the price of one if you used all 3 even chances.
The problem with all trend based approaches, whether the trend is the actual pattern or the win/loss trend, is how far back to track it. 10 spins? 20? 50?
One way of doing it might be to track several spin intervals simultaneously and choose the BS based on some aggregate of the results. That way you could guage the overall trend over the largest interval and the trends at smaller intervals within it. The more recent shorter intervals could be weighted more heavily than the longer intervals so that you wouldn't spend too long chasing a trend which is starting to evaporate, or at least, reduce your stakes proportionately.
I suggest that you master the method, and once you are an expert at it, then write the software in that order.
First bet losses are a common occurance and can quickly add up. This is based on my own experience with your software. Your student over there report the same thing.
When you monitor those 6 data streams, you catch a pattern characteristic based on the history of the last 5-7 spins.
You place your bet and it misses. Next you think you are on to something at another data stream, then you take a chance and place another bet.
It misses and the cycle continues till you run out of bankroll.
The worst of all when you notice that you keep winning with virtual bets then you bet for real and you lose again. Or the previous data stream you switched from becomes active again while you are losing at another one.
This is the pitfall of your system. It is often a long grind and you need luck.
Quote from: gizmotron2 on Nov 20, 10:58 AM 2019Congratulations Joe. You are the first person in 14 years, including all the students, to see that the bet selection does not matter to this method and to illustrate it with your example.
Cool. ;D 8)
Quote from: Kairomancer on Nov 20, 12:14 PM 2019When you monitor those 6 data streams, you catch a pattern characteristic based on the history of the last 5-7 spins.
You place your bet and it misses. Next you think you are on to something at another data stream, then you take a chance and place another bet.
It misses and the cycle continues till you run out of bankroll.
A mathematical analysis says that since each new attempt (fresh data stream) has a 50% chance of winning or losing on the first bet no matter how many times you switch, it produces the same number of consecutive wins and losses as any other bet (for instance just betting on red), therefore there is no advantage.
I know what is the mathematical analysis. Thanks for the reminder.
Based on that there is no way to win without increasing your odds.
So what is the point in testing novel methods and exploiting trends?
Quote from: Kairomancer on Nov 20, 12:41 PM 2019So what is the point in testing novel methods and exploiting trends?
Evidently most forum members and system players don't believe that the maths tells the whole story.
Quote from: Kairomancer on Nov 20, 12:14 PM 2019
First bet losses are a common occurance and can quickly add up. This is based on my own experience with your software. Your student over there report the same thing.
Yes, you are learning. You learn from how this method loses. I don't feed a stream of first losses without searching for a good winning streak. I don't know how to teach that. If one thing does not work then don't keep using it. Every session is unique. Two lost first bets in a row, after a good stretch of virtual bets for each, is a signal that trouble could be ahead. This is about the results you are getting. You have the control to wait.
Quote from: Kairomancer on Nov 20, 12:14 PM 2019
When you monitor those 6 data streams, you catch a pattern characteristic based on the history of the last 5-7 spins.
You place your bet and it misses. Next you think you are on to something at another data stream, then you take a chance and place another bet.
You haven't mentioned the global effect or the micro global effect. I tried to explain this there. It's important. It's so funny what is happening here. The teaching is over there but the real discussion is here. There are times when I look back 20 or more spins to see if there is a huge over all trend. So I will try to set it up this way. Anything that continues and is part of a win streak or a slow grind upward is what you try to discover. The global effect or the elegant pattern is the only time I drop the strop win point at 3 net wins. I know that I'm in a perfect strong trend that if it continues it will kill off the casino. I expect to go to maximum sized bets allowable and to continue until the situation ends.
Quote from: Kairomancer on Nov 20, 12:14 PM 2019
It misses and the cycle continues till you run out of bankroll.
The worst of all when you notice that you keep winning with virtual bets then you bet for real and you lose again. Or the previous data stream you switched from becomes active again while you are losing at another one.
This is the pitfall of your system. It is often a long grind and you need luck.
So true. It's not automatic happiness just because you walked in the door of the casino. You are supposed to know if a session is easy or if it is difficult. You need to try to take a bigger picture view. Try to look at the session as a single event. The you can see what type of condition the session is in.
I have a drill for all of you with my software. Punch in 100 for the number of spins. Press Red to bet on the red numbers. Hit Spin. Now go to the graph and look at the session. Can you see places to win. I'll post several examples over at the teaching site for those that don't have my software.
Quote from: Joe on Nov 20, 12:23 PM 2019
Cool. ;D 8)
I think it is cool too. What's today's date? It's a moment to remember for me.
Quote from: Joe on Nov 20, 12:28 PM 2019
A mathematical analysis says that since each new attempt (fresh data stream) has a 50% chance of winning or losing on the first bet no matter how many times you switch, it produces the same number of consecutive wins and losses as any other bet (for instance just betting on red), therefore there is no advantage.
There is no mathematical advantage on the next spin. But this same mathematics can't predict the odds for how long the next streak will last. I'm not talking about all the trends in the world for the next 10,000 years. I'm talking about the very next trend. So we have no advantage and we also have no disadvantage. So math is irrelevant to this working. People doing better than the math suggests will one day shake up everything known about expectations.
The signature at the teaching site: "My edge is a large enough number of people doing this and producing win to loss results that are demonstrably beyond the possibility of inaccuracy."
Quote from: Joe on Nov 20, 03:59 AM 2019Gizmo, even you admit that it's not trends which are doing the work. On the other forum you wrote :
QuoteIt's so simple. I just use trends as choices because I'm already trained to use trends. You can pre-select all your bets based on the migration of deer. You can go into a casino with 300 already decided bet selections. Then all you do is watch the effectiveness states.
So it all comes down to 'effectiveness states', apparently. Monitor several bet selections and pick the one which is doing the best. Follow it until either a loss or another BS is doing better, then jump on it. Goto step 1.
Does that sum up your method in a nutshell? Are you claiming that you win flat betting?
This deserves repeating again.
The only progression that works is a two step progression where no bet is used against a flat bet. You bet money when you see a working opportunity and you don't bet anything when you don't see opportunity.
Gizmo, could you describe the phenomena of global and also microglobal effect?
I also intetested in the elegant pattern if it applies to EC bets.
Could you define what do you mean by effectiveness states?
Quote from: Kairomancer on Nov 27, 10:04 AM 2019
Gizmo, could you describe the phenomena of global and also microglobal effect?
I also intetested in the elegant pattern if it applies to EC bets.
Could you define what do you mean by effectiveness states?
That's asking a lot. It's already explained at the teaching thread. If you look at my chart, created by the charting and practice software, you can see a swarm of the same type of characteristic. For this example you will use a swarm of singles on one side or singles on the weak side. Let's say that this happens in the Red/Black for 20 spins and then it starts happening for 25 more in the odd/even right as it ends in the Red /Black. Then it starts up in the Prime/Not Prime group. So it's "global" as in being across all groups, (somewhere). Iv'e seen the longest global effect last for 4 hours. 1 to 2 hours is more common.
The micro global effect is the same kind of swarming but the occurrences are shorter, like in the above example you get just 10 spins to show off the characteristic before it moves.
The Elegant Pattern is a very rare occurrence of perfection. My first perfect pattern only lasted 35 minutes once I noticed it. So I bet the perfect sequence of the pattern and turned $60 into $3,000+ in that short time. The same dozen, the original "Primes" hit twice then not a third time and just kept doing this several times without fail. So I bet for it to win twice and not on the third interval. Then I came back for 2 more wins in a row. The payoff was 2 to 1 on a single dozen inside bets. At the end I was betting $45 straight up on 12 numbers. It was amazing. I have only seen 5 Elegant Patterns in 25 years of playing. I'm always prepared to clean up when I see one. Sometimes randomness is a diamond mine.
Thanks Gizmo.
You do deliver a lot of value here and over there as well. I really appreciate it.
Now that you switched to playing ECs do you still track the dozens for the elegant pattern?
Does it apply to all 12 number groups, or only the group you referred as "original primes".
Your software include a stream of data set for a group of so called primes, but it is a 18 number group.
Correct me If I am wrong, the way I interpret the phenomena of effectiveness states is when coincidental patterns coalign with positive trends in the global scale of moving averages.
I believe I discovered another interesting pattern. When you see number 19 and it follows by 22 there is a strong likelyhood that the next number in the sequence will be a zero.
I hope you will live to see this as well, it is amazing.
Quote from: Kairomancer on Nov 27, 04:41 PM 2019Correct me If I am wrong, the way I interpret the phenomena of effectiveness states is when coincidental patterns coalign with positive trends in the global scale of moving averages.
Here is an easy way to look at it. You see trends and / or patterns and you use them. When they work in the positive then it's like the trends are predicting the future. When the trends don't work then they aren't. So I just look for trends that are working. So you just lay back, hope that you don't dig a deep hole, and pounce on the trend when it works. It's a waiting game. So I amuse myself while I'm waiting. I watch the other players with their hair brained ideas or there total lack of any skills. People always want to stare at a car wreck. It's cheap entertainment. It really helps to lay back and not try to rush it. I know I will take three net wins off the casino if I just remain patient.
Quote from: Kairomancer on Nov 27, 04:41 PM 2019Now that you switched to playing ECs do you still track the dozens for the elegant pattern?
Does it apply to all 12 number groups, or only the group you referred as "original primes".
There is one type only that I look at. The dozens and the columns are easy to track in my head. I look for a long running sleeping dozen or column. The Elegant Pattern version can last more than 30 spins.
Quote from: Kairomancer on Nov 27, 04:41 PM 2019I believe I discovered another interesting pattern. When you see number 19 and it follows by 22 there is a strong likelyhood that the next number in the sequence will be a zero.
I hope you will live to see this as well, it is amazing.
That's a temporary phenomenon. 19 & 22 are part of the six's. There is no reason for the sixes to jump to the zeros. It's just a coincidence. Now you can kill the casino as long as that streak lasts. I look for stuff like that too. I just don't get married to it. What is that joke? "The nice thing about dating a homeless chick is that you can drop her anywhere."
Just remember this topic when you notice it as it happens. I predict you will see it soon enough. :)
I don't refer to the group of sixes followed by the zeros.
Those 3 number together represent a special force, the sequence is important as I laid out.
So you no longer track for the elegant pattern, you watch out for sleeping dozens. Then what do you bet? How many misses required before you take any action?
Do you abandon the ECs while you keep playing the dozens?
Quote from: Kairomancer on Nov 27, 05:28 PM 2019So you no longer track for the elegant pattern, you watch out for sleeping dozens. Then what do you bet? How many misses required before you take any action?
Do you abandon the ECs while you keep playing the dozens?
I mostly stay with the EC's and the three net wins. I noticed that all 5 elegant patterns were things that I have never seen before. So I just look for something sticking out. Attacking the global effect is another story. They are more common.