Even Stevens

[MrJ]

cmon yall should be in 'The Bi#ch And Complain Thread Aka Your Chance to Yell At The General. " doing dinner plans etc

What state are you in? I'll give out my damn address, I dont give a s**t.

Ken

[mogul397]

I'll say the same thing I say at a table.

"DON'T BEAT ME!!!!!"

[mogul397]

I just bought the shovels today.

Ken

You guys are actually going to meet in person?

Are you going to secretly concoct/share the holy grail with RG?
(that you make fun of?)

[RouletteGhost]

(that you make fun of?)

Yea they get to make fun of me in person, and tell me I'm "one of them" and humiliate me. In exchange the general will show me how to find bias in my airball. It's an even exchange

I am hoping for a US meet and greet. So I can see you in person. I have to see you to believe it.

Actually I can't believe in the history of this board noone arranged an Atlantic City thingy

Now if I was placing bets in front of you Mogul, would you be over my shoulder asking me what I am doing even though you are watching in plain sight?

[mogul397]

Yea they get to make fun of me in person, and tell me I'm "one of them" and humiliate me. In exchange the general will show me how to find bias in my airball. It's an even exchange

I am hoping for a US meet and greet. So I can see you in person. I have to see you to believe it.

Actually I can't believe in the history of this board noone arranged an Atlantic City thingy

Now if I was placing bets in front of you Mogul, would you be over my shoulder asking me what I am doing even though you are watching in plain sight?

I might.

Once someone who lived relatively close (Conn I think) had a system he told me about.
We tested it. We arranged a meeting.  I stood and watched him for a while.  (We were both
there to play the same way.  Just watching as I think he had played before).

Long story short, he diverged from his method. And after his play (I wouldn't go up and talk
to him during real play and disrupt his concentration) it turns out that he did divert from the
method.  It diverged from there and the method (on paper) didn't hold up as well as we thought.
Before I played and lost.

One other time I went with someone I know. And one thing is clear.

When you're bellie up to the table, anything can and will happen. And the person draws in,
like a sphincter puckered from being sour. Like a black hole. And the only way they can
explain their actions is after it is over.  (And they should not be disturbed during it)

[RouletteGhost]

like a sphincter puckered from being sour. Like a black hole

That's the worst visual I've ever gotten from this forum. Ever.

Also, that is the most obscene explanation I have ever read describing a player who diverted from the original plan and played random bets.

[mogul397]

That's the worst visual I've ever gotten from this forum. Ever.

Also, that is the most obscene explanation I have ever read describing a player who diverted from the original plan and played random bets.

It's being in the zone.

Was an answer to your question about if I'd ask you what you were doing.  Had the experience that,
even though it had been planned and discussed, didn't look right. And it wasn't.

I thought we had a depth of resolve (considering we meth there) that was true.

BTW, there's nothing to compare to your animations. I won't even try.

[RouletteGhost]

It's being in the zone.

Was an answer to your question about if I'd ask you what you were doing.  Had the experience that,
even though it had been planned and discussed, didn't look right. And it wasn't.

I thought we had a depth of resolve (considering we meth there) that was true.

BTW, there's nothing to compare to your animations. I won't even try.

I thought it was funny what you said.

I know all about diverting. Luckily for me diverting has worked out down to my last dollar and winning it all back

[mogul397]

I thought it was funny what you said.

I know all about diverting. Luckily for me diverting has worked out down to my last dollar and winning it all back

The funny thing about what you say is that I've heard this from you before. And lucky for
you, you do tend to go down that road.  And somehow save yourself. In real life it must really
get you 3nd guessing yourself, since somehow when it gets tough, your intuition kicks in, you
are "all in" and make it out smelling good.  Not a good life lesson.

Most people end up being road KILL.......

While I have you, when you meet the big wigs for the forum meeting, you have to discuss how we
can change things so that a method gets posted, discussed, tested, and then officially dies with
a stream of common sense posts by me that end the tread. Getting weird. When I see a stream of
my handsome face, I know it's over.

It's, "New post,  RG, other person, RG, other people, RG, RG, RG (lookin good so far), a few new comments,
RG, RG, Mogul, RG, someone else, mogul, RG, RG mogul mogul mogul mogul mogul,,,,,,,,,,..................
Then some off topic stuff. This time about the meeting. Beating dead animals and other animations.

Need to continue the winning threads.  But just because you disguise the puzzle pieces to look like
something different, doesn't mean they are the same.  Hence beating the dead horse.....

[Willie]

Thanks RG.  Actually, to be fair, I often don't think deep enough. That's why I end up looking
stupid out of the box.  A little too quick on the draw.  But I know what you mean and what
you are saying.  Gave it a zumma wallpaper test. And it seems reasonable.

NOW,  I'll drill deeper. These are my collective thoughts.

1) I wondered in the beginning about seeing the virtual waits on wins and losses. Then I saw what
seemed to be ignoring them. And a weird documentation crossing "units with units" (like calling
"10" a unit, and then talking about =/- 1 unit.  Even for a dummy like me, that pops breakers in my head.
So I tried to think it through, read the thread, hope someone else noticed....

2) I think that I've explored a method similar to this, but was not sure what could be unique about this
direction. I've looked at aspects of "playing streaks (more than 1 in a row), chops, and the like. In this
obvious methodology you are now playing some sequential betting (flat or progression), which is kind
of spreading out what you might be doing if you bet every spin. (You watching MrJ?)
And then you go through mind spins about how many in a row there are, if you can make more betting
the D'alenbert, how many in a row happen, etc etc.   And you realize that it's no differnet.

However I do think (my own fallacy) that stoping and waiting out losing streaks helps. My own fallacy.

3) Putting a bow on the package, the D'alenbert always seems like the simple solution. And finding something
creative, like spreading out the bet selections, always seems to be the ointment that will smooth it out.
But generally the D'alenbert never seems the best solution.

I like what you (RG) were pointing out in your list of results. It kind of worked. Playing straight showed the
probablility of a long number of losses.  You didn't lay out the results per this method. But if you had,
it would have helped a long D'alenbert that ended up resolving.

I like this kind of methodology. Still looking for something not too outrageous to go and play.
To have many good sessions where I feel comfortable that I won't break a bank, enjoy a couple
hours of play, and make a couple bucks.

I plan on doing more testing, but wanted to see what the masses resolve about this virtual loss waiting
thing, so I can know what I am doing or looking for.

I think the sentiment so far is pretty good.

Not sure why things went downhill after this post.
And yeah the initial terms used could be a bit confusing for some people..

So putting it this way..
If we choose our starting bet to be $10, then we add
+10$ after a loss to our bet size
-10$ after a win to our bet size

Also yes the sequence of OOEEOOEEOOEE could take us deeper in the progression but it won't break the bank since we get 5 losses in these 12 spins which can be recovered from.

Do test and reply with your spins instead of just posting the sequence which would kill it. Every system can be bust when 'the run from hell' comes.
I never said this won't..

[Willie]

.

[Tamino]

Question for Willie,


Is there a reason why you have chosen O  E  - over  R- B or H - L  ?


Just curious.




Tamino

[RouletteGhost]

instead of just posting the sequence which would kill it. Every system can be bust when 'the run from hell' comes.
I never said this won't..

Ive told mogul this many times

This is what he loves to do: open zumma and find a losing page

Ive told him a million times you can find a loser for ANY method

But hes older and wiser......

[Willie]

Question for Willie,


Is there a reason why you have chosen O  E  - over  R- B or H - L  ?


Just curious.




Tamino

No Tamino, no reason at all..
You can go ahead with any of the EC bets here.
I find even/odd easiest to track

[mogul397]

Ive told mogul this many times

This is what he loves to do: open zumma and find a losing page

Ive told him a million times you can find a loser for ANY method

But hes older and wiser......

It's not the point. The point is, when you do the wallpaper test, you would HOPE
to do well for a while before having a loss. Or a really bad run.

When it slaps you in the face, it's not good.