Intro Greetings Everyone

No way am I going to give that kind of advice. I know better than to jump in between.

 

Wow that's really nice. I'm not sure why you're so hostile? You have to know that with any betting system there's always going to be some skepticism(even legitimate mathematically proven AP is meet with skepticism). I haven't been hostile with you, I just asked some legitimate questions. You called me ignorant(one of the nicer things you called me). I think it would be ignorant to just buy into your system without asking questions and being skeptical. Don't you?
Yes... I did say... selling >NON< working gambling systems should be illegal(I truly believe that) if yours works you shouldn't be offended by that statement. I didn't call you a scammer fraud or anything negative.



Unfortunately there's a significant amount of bogus betting systems and pushers out there. obviously there things like card counting that have been proven mathematically and in practice, but were not talking about that.

Not one person in the history of betting systems or gambling has anyone ever proven with MATH OR BY DISPLAY a working betting system that can beat a game that has a mathematical return lower than 100%. That being said, I have to wonder what it is that makes your system the one? What makes you one of the smartest people on the planet? If you can beat games of chance and teach people how to gain an advantage consistently(you said something like 25% of your session BR daily) on a -5% game, that's FUCKING INSANELY AMAZING. Sorry I still can't grasp why you're selling it for $200.
If everything you say is true YOU ARE WASTING YOUR TALENT for $200 a day.Hell, you probably have the ability to cure cancer, stop aging and time travel.


You say you have this awesomely incredible fool proof system, however you admit you're betting fairly small and I haven't see or heard any talk of using all the extra very lucrative money earning tactics available. It's like building a souped up muscle car and then putting a 10mph governor on it. Wouldn't you be sceptical if I told you I could make thousands per day doing something i'm already doing with no extra effort or time but I choose to not because $200 is enough for me? I'm sure you would call BS.

Someone brought up a good point that you're actually getting some bang for your buck with your system. I'm skeptical of it actually working but I was very interested in knowing more about the software(your software might have some value), classes, videos or whatever you have going on. I actually kinda admire the ability to put together stuff like this, minus any untrue claims or scamming.

I was wondering how many people actually purchase your system per month?

Im interested in all things related to gambling even betting systems I don't believe in, if it was something convenient and I had extra time I wouldn't mind investigating something like this just for the experience and first hand knowledge and give an honest assessment. But you seem to like being belligerent and hostile to anyone asking legitimate logical questions. <<<That doesn't sound like a good strategy at all.

 

1.) The only way you can lose is at an exact moment in a stream of spins bet on. That is when there are many bets placed that don't face the same risk. I'm not implying the use of virtual bets either. I'm satisfied with the progress of my students. It's been less than two weeks now. I've managed to add all the features that they requested in that two weeks also. I started with just five threads on a forum. I've gone on to add about 19 more do to things I wanted to teach and questions also dealt with. There are 23 threads and 319 posts in all that serve to inform either by my guidance or in answering student's questions.

2.) It's 350 miles one way to go to the casino for me. But I still go at least once per month. It's a different animal in the casino compared to practicing at home with my practice program. I go for the challenge of having spin to spin duration different than my own practice timing.

3.) Seven paying and two I asked to join for free. Two more say they will join soon. It's enough already. It's fun too. It's more fun seeing people open their eyes and have that excited moment than it is to sit in a smoky loud casino.

4.) I'm done with the mathboys that never seem to get it. Everywhere I go I'm treated as an imbecile either politely or by way of troll craft in nature. Everyone here has taken a pot shot at me.

You could go through my teaching at your own pace and without the scrutiny of others watching you. The software links to all phases of development and are there and active for download with each upgraded version. The entire thing is there. There is no request from me to buy a new and better secrets that I'll sell to advanced students. It's all there. I'm not going to be selling my Ai version and I won't be making it available to my school either. I have a reserved purpose for it that is beyond the school.

 

Wouldn't it be wise to buy a house or condo next to a casino? If you were lets say the best poker player in the world wouldn't it be smart/prudent/necessary to have easy access to a casino ? Unless of course you're playing online and if that's the case.... IT WOULD BE EXTREMELY EASY TO PROVE YOUR SYSTEM WORKS WITHOUT GIVING AWAY YOUR SECRETS(hopefully I don't have to explain how that would work, and yes I believe they have regulated live roulette online) do that and people would be breaking down your door with a fist full of cash. Prove your system works and I have a fist full of cash plane tickets and a nice suite waiting for you at any gaming destination in the United States (IF your system works, you're the best gambler on -EV games in the world).

 

gizmotron) I'm not a math boy, however I respect math and know it works, I'm not sure how anyone can argue or dispute that fact.

FYI http://vegasclick.com/gambling/betting-system-challenge
Alternate "Live Casino Challenge"
Some system sellers claim that their systems work in a casino, but they can't beat a computer simulation because "a computer isn't a real-world test". Anyone who understands basic probability knows why that claim is ridiculous, but in any event, I have a special live challenge to accommodate it. The live challenge is the same as above, except:

1. It takes place in a Vegas (or other U.S.) casino, with you and me (or my representative) present. You will bank and place your own bets.
   
2. You will choose the number of rounds to wager on before we begin (1000 to 10,000 rounds). If your system is played in "sessions" it doesn't matter: you keep track of your "sessions" however you define them, they're irrelevant to me. You win by showing the required overall profit (defined below), no matter how many "sessions" you divided your play into.
   
3. The challenge is an even-money bet between you and me (not 10-1 odds). The amount wagered between you and me is any amount you choose, between $1000 to $30,000, with a minimum of $50 per hour of play (including time you spend at the table not betting while waiting for "streaks" or other conditions). Yes, you won't know the exact number of hours you'll be playing in the casino to finish your X number of rounds, so you should estimate well to make sure you meet the minimum challenge wager. Roulette, craps, and baccarat are typically played at around 40, 50, and 70 rounds per hour respectively, but if you're waiting for streaks or other conditions then your play will be slower.
4. All play must be completed within one month.
5. Starting bankroll is 1/3 the number of total rounds, in dollars, banked by you. (e.g., a 1500-round challenge means a starting bankroll of $500.)
6. You win if you achieve a profit of at least $15 an hour on average. (Win must be at least [total hours played] x [$15].)

Those who are confident and agree to the terms without any modification whatsoever are invited
to accept the challenge. (i.e., Do not write if you intend to suggest any change to the rules.)

Bluejay's $30,000 challenge

1. The Challenge. I will wager my $30,000 against your $3,000 (or my $10,000 against your $1,000, if you prefer) that your betting system cannot beat a game of roulette, baccarat, or craps, as the player, using common Vegas rules, starting with a generous $5000 bankroll (play money, not real money), in a computer simulation, as per the additional terms below.
   
   
2. Length. Each test will run for 200,000 rounds. A "round" is an event where any bet is resolved — i.e., your bet wins, loses, or pushes. (In craps, if multiple bets are resolved on a single roll of the die, that counts as one round.) It's fine for your system to sit out sometimes to wait for "streaks" or other conditions (up to 20 million rounds sat out per test), but 200,000 rounds must be wagered on for each test (unless your system goes bust first during a test, which will end that particular test). We'll run this test 20 times, and you win the challenge if your system wins at least 11 out of the 20 tests. This is generous, because your system doesn't have to win all the time, it need only win slightly more than half the time in order to beat the challenge. (For those who think this is a bad test because "nobody plays 200,000 rounds", see the explanation further below.)
   
   
3. Betting System. Your system must be one that could actually be used in a typical Vegas casino, since the point of your challenge should be to prove that you can win in a casino environment. So, for example, methods that attempt to exploit the computer's random number generator are specifically disallowed. Any system that wins by screwing with the RNG cannot win in a real casino. Similarly, any system that cannot be actually be employed by an average person with nothing more than a pen and paper is disallowed, since if a system can't be used in the real world then it's worthless. Your system must be a traditional betting system, where bets are based on the outcome of previous rounds. The point of your wager must be to prove your betting system, not find some flaw in my rules. Systems that are optimized to try to exploit some flaw in my challenge (rather than general systems which are actually intended to work in actual casinos), are specifically disallowed, as are card-counting systems.
   
   
4. Game Rules, Table Limits, & Bankroll. You choose the game. Roulette can be single- or double-zero. Craps has standard 3-4-5x odds. The table limits are $5 minimum and $5000 maximum. In roulette, the minimum is either for a single outside bet, or the total of all inside bets; multiple bets can be placed on the same round, with each bet subject to the Table Max. (i.e., The Table Max isn't applied to the sum of all bets.) In craps, maximum Free Odds can be taken on a Table Max pass line bet. Starting bankroll for each test is $5000.
   
5. Earnest Money & Contract. We'll choose a third party (agreeable to both of us) to hold our money in escrow (e.g., any licensed attorney in good standing), and a third party to act as judge. If we agree, the escrow agent and judge can be the same person. If either or both third parties has a fee, we'll split the fee equally. You'll deposit your money with the escrow agent first to show that you're serious (since to date, out of dozens of inquiries, not a single person has actually gone through with the challenge). Once your money has been deposited, we'll both sign a contract, and then I'll deposit my money. After this, any party who backs out or fails to proceed as specified below will forfeit. Either party may appeal any decision made by the judge by our engaging a mutually agreed-upon neutral professional arbiter to decide the issue, with the losing party in the arbitration paying the arbiter's fees.
   
   
6. You will provide me your system rules within one week of our both signing the contract. If I feel the rules are not clear I have 48 hours to ask you to clarify, and you will have 48 hours to provide revised rules, with this process repeating if I feel the revised rules are still not clear. After two weeks from your sending me the the initial set of rules, if I feel the last-received rules are still not clear, then at my option I can ask to the judge to rule that you forfeited by failing to submit an understandable betting system. If the judge rules against you then you can appeal via arbitration as per above. (This rule exists because one potential challenger submitted complete gibberish. Fortunately for him, it was before we signed a contract; now I require the contract be signed before I get the rules.)
   
   
7. I will program a computer simulation and provide you with the results as well as the source code so you can have your own expert(s) verify its accuracy. If you convince me of an error with my code I will correct the error and run the simulation again, with the new test being the official one. This will repeat as many times as you find errors that I agree are errors and fix. If you believe my code to be in error and I disagree, you can ask the judge to rule for you. If the judge rules against you, you may submit the case to arbitration as per above. I'll program and start the simulation within three days of my acceptance of the system rules.
   
   
8. Since the first would-be challenger who wrote to me was concerned that I would use his winning system in the casinos myself to capitalize on it, I promise in writing (here and in the contract) to do no such thing. Clearly if I'm able to offer a $30,000 challenge, I already have more money than I need.
   
   
9. In addition to the $30,000 (or $10,000), a winning challenger will also receive a prominent ad on the front of VegasClick.com for the system, along with my statement that the system beat my challenge, for a period of at least one year from the date of the test.
   
   
10. I will not disclose the challenger's contact information or the specific rules of the system without the challenger's permission (except to the judge and arbiter, if there's a dispute). I will be allowed (but not required) to publish:
    1. The address of the website selling the system, if it is for sale to the public.
    2. The name of the challenger, if it appears on the challenger's own website about the betting system (otherwise, I need the challenger's permission to publish his/her name).
       
    3. A general description of the system. (e.g., "This is a standard positive-progression system," "This system is based on betting on red after a certain pattern of red/black hits has been established," etc.)
    4. The basic results, including the amount won or lost for each test, average bet size, percentage of time the system was ahead, and the largest number of rounds in each test at which the system was ahead before going into the red and not recovering.

I do not test betting systems outside of this challenge, period. My only interest in offering the challenge is to disprove betting systems; I certainly don't need any more programming work. If all you want is a test of your system, hire anyone with some programming skills for $50 to $100, on craigslist or upWork. In fact, if you're not a system seller but rather somebody who just thinks he came up with a winning system, I strongly advise you to hire someone else to computer-program your system to show that your system doesn't really work before you risk your $1000 or $3000 with me.

Those who are confident and who agree to the terms above without any modifications whatsoever are invited
to accept this challenge. (i.e., Do not write if you want to ask to change the rules in any way.)



"But no one plays 200,000 rounds!"
Some folks have said the challenge is unfair because a system could win in the short term, even if it can't last 200,000 rounds. They're missing two things. First, I'm offering a whopping 10 to 1 odds. With such generous odds, even a system with a lousy 11% chance of beating the challenge is a good bet for the challenger (and a bad bet for me and my $30,000). Their system could lose 89% of the time in the real world but still beat my challenge. And a system that loses 89% of the time in the real world is the farthest thing from a "winning betting system". So I've got to make sure we play long enough that a challenger doesn't have even a lousy 11% chance of winning.

Next, my criteria for what constitutes a "winning system" is really soft: In the real world, a system that showed a measly $5 profit after 200,000 rounds (less than a penny an hour) would be considered a miserable failure, but that would be enough to win a test in my challenge rules. My challenge does not require the system to win a meaningful amount (say, $20 an hour); it counts even tiny, pathetic amounts as wins.

By the way, you absolutely could play 200,000 rounds anyway. Playing baccarat at 125 hands per hour, 8 hours on a weekend, 26 weekends per year, for 35 years, is nearly a million rounds.


No one has ever accepted this challenge
One reader said that a system-seller claimed to have beaten my challenge (or perhaps the Wizard's challenge, he wasn't clear). Let me be clear: no one has ever even accepted my challenge, let alone beaten it. And the one person who accepted the Wizard's challenge (back when he offered it), lost it readily. Anyone who claims they've beaten my challenge should show you the alleged contract we signed, listing the supposed escrow agent and judge, allowing you to verify whether any challenge really took place.

 

What a joke. This clown doesn't consider someone else writing the code. I can write the rules as code faster than I can tell them to him. If he is a dumb shit programmer he will fall on his ass writing an Ai that needs years of playing experience to comprehend the task at hand in the first place. The contract is a trap. There must be a consideration for both parties that if he fails he can't complain that the rules where not clear. How is this guy going to get my playing experience in 48 or even 48 more hours?

It's a great idea he has. It's a wonderful challenge. It's just not designed to validate an Ai algorithm that could be written so that the RNG is an outside source and that the bets must be placed before the next spin occurs, and all that as automation. If there could be a way to validate my code and then to accept that the sim is not looking forward somehow, then that would be a real world validation. As it stands right now, it places bets before the sim allows the users to enter the next spin manually. It will execute as a comma delimited set of spins too. It could take 200,000 spins, place a bet on every spin, and be proved that it is not looking forward. It can run from it's own fair RNG too.

There is no way on this side of the galaxy that this guy can program this in a time that will satisfy him. Just how much is a working algorithm worth to a guy in Vegas anyway? NDA's don't stop people from breaching contracts. $30,000 is chicken feed to someone possessing an actual program that beats the casinos. Remember this, it must be an example of a system or method that can be duplicated in a casino with just a pen & paper as the only tools. If this guy ever gets beaten in his challenge he will certainly make up for it through other means. It's a suckers bet. He wins no matter what happens.

It's a scam. It is designed to pay off even if he has to pay up. Meanwhile he gets to grandstand for impressionable individuals like you that like intimidation by exposing others through peer pressured dares. It's nothing more than self serving stunt. That makes you the sucker at this poker table.

 

Hmm... It's all about the money isn't it? Money is the proof. Money is the reason why in the first place. You are either a fool or a liar if you don't go after the money. How come this is only $200 if it works?

Man, life is more than just "beauty is only skin deep." We covet with our eyes what we think will make us all happy, and therein lies the world's biggest scammer of them all. I can be the first and I can expose it all for free too. I'm not playing your game. I'm playing my own game here. You had best come to grips with that. That's the thing that just doesn't seem right to you. Why would anyone give away a gold mine? It just does not fly on a gambling forum. There is no way this can be true. I really mess with your mind don't I? Perhaps this is a self serving challenge too.

 

You merely hypothesizing, I suggest you look up DSM-5 seeing you are so acquainted with it, deranged, deluded.

Hrmm, play online. So this phantom casino visit you played last week, never really took place eh? That figures, you gonna be able to eat well next week? Just asking. You're an old timer, battered and bruised from undoubtedly a decade at least of gambling, I get that. A lot of old fella's have a wacko system, I've had the misfortune to chat to them far too often, shame you went down the scamming route, what was it, desperation?

You only have yourself to blame, you either share and open yourself to scrutiny or keep it to yourself. Scamming is a bigger sin than sock-puppery or welshing a bet IMO.

 

I'm acquainted with it because I considered the creation of a unique file formatted version for a unique kind of internet browser that displays as a single file website with images and hyperlinks to the outside web. It was like a website with thousands of pages and a single downloadable file that was like a PDF file containing text and images. This was back in 2001, long before the DSM-4 had a website presence. To this day the cross platform browser is still innovative and way ahead of it's time. I diploid a free version, both Mac 10 and Windows, to the world for free in 2007. My brother is an acclaimed and well respected psychologist and is the author of many published books on the subject of psychology, and no, he's not some POD publishing wannabe. He is the reason I decided to tackle the DSM-4 resource.

That does it. Here in America you can't gamble online even though the state that I'm in does not make it a crime. I'm going to do you a favor, don't ask me why. You could be a victim or even a cause of your own trouble. I advise you to look up NPD in the DSM-5. You tend to display the characteristics of a Narcissist, or one of its victims as described in Narcissistic Supply. Also check out Secondary Narcissistic Supply. You need to have that "OMG that's me" kind of a moment. If not you more than likely will go on to throwing your life away creating crisis and feeding off it, or placating others from a need to please, rather than confront the real reason in the first place. I tend to lean on the latter in your case. Of course that junk in the spandex act of yours can easily be interpreted as a derivative of one of both disorders. You need to be a Psychologist or a Psychiatrist to give personality disorder assessments, and that is after meeting and seeing one of these in a clinical setting. Saying that, I can only suggest that you have troubles and might want to see a shrink.

Hey, delusional one, yes you, everything you say is defensive and divisive. You say that I must do this your way, control freak, or suffer the only alternative of intimidation from you and all your imaginary supply stooges. I tend to treat assholes like you with total disdain. You only have your assumptions that because there is a price on this that it must be a scam. You have tried to put me on the defensive and to destroy my presence here, claiming that I deserve your wrath. It must be nice to live in your world of unsubstantiated truth.

Get some help.

 

Brilliant news, if you sink lower in your life you now have a wealthy family member to lean on, plead to. Now I can stop feeling pity for you and will sleep better.

 

I like spandex. Does that make me a candidate for the DSM? Most of my underwear has some spandex in it. Actually, a lot of clothes these days have some modicum of spandex. It goes to hell after a couple of washings, though. But I digress....

Why, gizmo, are you on a low-end, barely sane gambling forum instead of a math forum with this? Surely there are academic forums that would treat you properly and ask the appropriate questions. The only reason I can think of, if I were in your shoes, to be on a forum like this is because this is the place with the people who might pay a few bucks for systems. I don't see the rationale for your presence here, otherwise. People here aren't going to be qualified to analyze or vet your system. They aren't even a good demography with which to discuss it. So, except for the target consumer angle, I don't understand why you are here.

If I weren't using my real name, I think I would change my handle to ILikeSpandex.

 

What a crock of it.

 

Spandex aside who are you kidding? Math oriented academic types would dismiss this faster than they could start an ignore it committee, It would be drummed out of any forum because I'm not actually part of the club. You people here at least know a little about playing Roulette. I prefer to ambush them from a nowhere place like this as you suggest that it is. Proof and peer review are the only things that will make them listen. A Proper research study of my students conducted by actual scientific research needs to occur in a controlled setting. If that sends tingles up their asses then they will have to explain it all to the world in mathematical terms. But they won't do that until it's proven to them. The world is renowned for intellectuals stealing other's works. You are frankly too stupid to pull that one off. I'm here at this exact forum because it's safe and I needed to take a big crap on the mathematical dick heads that are here. You toads of the road have absolutely no way of comprehending the significance if it is peer reviewed and deemed a true breakthrough in mathematics in the first place. Thanks for asking.