1. Welcome to the #1 Gambling Community with the best minds across the entire gambling spectrum. REGISTER NOW!
  2. Have a gambling question?

    Post it here and our gambling experts will answer it!
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Discussions in this section are assumed to be EV- as they are outside of the Advantage Play section. For EV+ discussions, please visit the Advantage Play section.
    Dismiss Notice

Roulette Reading Randomness

Discussion in 'Roulette Forum' started by gizmotron, Jul 20, 2019.

  1. Median Joe

    Median Joe Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2020
    Likes:
    248
    Location:
    England
    Pedro, it's pointless arguing with these characters, especially when they make comments like "I just bet on the “other Half of the time” simple win technique really". :D

    If they had half a brain between the lot of 'em they'd be dangerous.
     
    Pedro likes this.
  2. gizmotron

    gizmotron Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Likes:
    3,040
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    The West Coast of USA, RV'ing
    You are an inexperienced burgeoning mathZombie. We know your opinion and we know your insistence on a mathematical absolutism. There is no point in discussing this. It's been done to death. Even if I show you and prove it to you you will not be able to accept it. I know from many conversations like this since 2006. You need to be right more than you need to have it proved to you. Others have already proven it to themselves. That is why I wrote this thread. BTW, I'm sure that you can find a 97% consensus from like minded absolutists. Confirmation bias does not mean that the research has been validated. It just means that if you can cancel any opposing opinions all that will be left standing is the baloney that you want others to believe. It works until it no longer works. You are not good enough to debunk Reading Randomness.
     
  3. gizmotron

    gizmotron Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Likes:
    3,040
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    The West Coast of USA, RV'ing
    You are living proof of functioning with half a brain. The purpose of this thread was to provide validation of my opinion. Those that actually do the work to understand and master these skills are that proof. Those that just come here and throw rocks, doing nothing in regards to actual investigation, are the one day skeptics that will all have to eat their own words. That word is shit and I have always said it will be a shit sandwich. I know what will happen though. You will run and hide and hope that nobody will read your words of wisdom. I'm taking the slow road to victory. Other people will prove my point. The world is not flat and everything will change.
     
    Last edited: Nov 21, 2022
    Keyser Soze and Nathan Detroit like this.
  4. Proofreaders2000

    Proofreaders2000 Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2014
    Likes:
    143
    re: mathZombies

    Bumblebees manage to fly although physics-wise they aren't supposed to.
     
  5. Pedro

    Pedro Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2021
    Likes:
    49
    Location:
    Brasil
    But the earth IS FLAT. Do your research.

    Its funny because I did read the whole thread and I did test the theory a lot. But if I failed it must be because I didnt try hard enough right?

    "I'll just insult anyone who disagrees with me. " buddy how do we even know you are not lying? Oh yeah: "go ahead and waste your time chasing a laser pointer. If you fail its your fault. Trust me, lots of people made it."
     
  6. gizmotron

    gizmotron Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Likes:
    3,040
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    The West Coast of USA, RV'ing
    "I can tell you but I can't understand it for you." There are two things, and only two things. You have a huge comprehension problem or you are a liar. I clearly show what to do if you are hit with a swarm of first try losses. Now real quick, you can prove that you bothered to read the thread. What do you do? Or better, what do I suggest that you should do?
     
  7. Median Joe

    Median Joe Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2020
    Likes:
    248
    Location:
    England
    re : mythZombies

    FYI, that was always a myth. Try the Wright brothers instead. YAWN.

    So where is the validation? The only thing you've validated is your own bullshit. Years and YEARS of nothing but proof by assertion and argumentum ad nauseam, one long catalogue of ignorance and fallacies. Quite entertaining at times, but the joke started to get thin a long time ago. Roulette forums died because people wised-up. Not even you can keep the truth down forever Gizmo.
     
    Pedro likes this.

  8. Pedro

    Pedro Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2021
    Likes:
    49
    Location:
    Brasil
    you suggest not to play, to virtual bet. that doesn't change anything.
     
  9. gizmotron

    gizmotron Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Likes:
    3,040
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    The West Coast of USA, RV'ing
    It's not supposed to change anything. What is wrong with you? You wait until you like what you see and you then act according to what you see happening. It's the exact same winning strategy used by card counters in Blackjack. Only this is based on an educated guess. And best of all you dodged the question. You had a chance and did what just about all the skeptics have done. You are a waste of time. Keep losing.
     
    Nathan Detroit likes this.
  10. Pedro

    Pedro Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2021
    Likes:
    49
    Location:
    Brasil
    Yeah, thats what i said, you virtual bet and wait. Half the time what you see changes as soon as you bet for real.
     
  11. gizmotron

    gizmotron Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Likes:
    3,040
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    The West Coast of USA, RV'ing
    Yep, that's what I said. You didn't read the thread. If you did you would know what the answer is.
     
  12. Pedro

    Pedro Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2021
    Likes:
    49
    Location:
    Brasil
    Whathever dude believe what you want
     
  13. gizmotron

    gizmotron Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Likes:
    3,040
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    The West Coast of USA, RV'ing
    OK, thank you, I will.
     
  14. Nathan Detroit

    Nathan Detroit Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2014
    Likes:
    2,088
    Gizmo, You did your best explaining . This cat is now dead wood on my part .
     

  15. Punkcity

    Punkcity Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2020
    Likes:
    1,289
    Occupation:
    CEO, manager of sublease my account name.inc
    Location:
    Troll tag team one accounts head , Skipptophia.
    1, Did you take notes?
    2, Did you try to comprehend what you read as you went along or did you just read then “test the theory”
    3, Did you just run a sim then pluck a “ streak run” data analysis?
    4, Or did you go to a casinoverse brickyard or a live interverse and paper bet with your research notes , notebook with you ? Then write down the live results, plus your choice of bet virtual or real and make a notation as to why it won or lost?
    5, Did you take a session break ( assuming you did do note 4 this post ) after a say 120 spins or even 60 spins and re evaluate if what you just witnessed corresponds to WHAT YOU thought YOU understood what reading random was. ?
    6, Did you take time ( during the session break point 5 this post) to see if you are making any errors during play against the notes you took to refresh your memory of what YOU thought YOU understood?
    7, Did you only just run a sim and rely on YOUR memory of what you thought you read?
    8, Did you at anytime, either during live play or sim data crunching , question YOURSELF if you are actually doing it correctly?
    9, Are YOU the only person that has done the study and categorically aced the total understanding of it on the first attempt and can say it doesn’t work because YOU pedo are totally correct?
    10, ARE you totally correct? Can you honestly say and prove that you fully understand the concept?
     
    Nathan Detroit likes this.
  16. Punkcity

    Punkcity Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2020
    Likes:
    1,289
    Occupation:
    CEO, manager of sublease my account name.inc
    Location:
    Troll tag team one accounts head , Skipptophia.
    The actual point is a streak can be a run of any length.
    Do we all agree on that statement?

    The “ other half of the time” is a correct statement I’m not betting after the first loss of that particular streak I was winning on. If I’m on the streak at say the 3rd spin and ride it for the next seven wins (total 10 streak) lose on spin 11 have I not in fact already been on the “ other half of the time” before you decide to jump on ?

    I use my ability to place a wager with the full expectation that I’m on a winning streak , be it an intermittent streak or a continuous streak. The intermittent streak is a non recurring spin bet but at certain intervals as dictated by whatever is in front of me.

    I believe these subtle variations are beyond pedos comprehension. I believe pedo hasn’t managed to isolate one stream of data and run it as a reading random method, let alone the juggling the other half a dozen data streams available in roulette .

    Most people aim to fail.
    Most people need an excuse other than themselves to fail .

    I highly doubt pedo actually understood the thread.
    The data stream available is not rocket science, even if you only ever take note to bet red only you will increase your strike rate tremendously if you follow what was written here, this thread.

    If you pedo , truthfully don’t understand this concept of this thread you have 2 options.
    1, don’t bet this method it’s obvious that it’s a fake or you don’t understand it.
    2, attempt to read and understand again, ask the right questions , post your live ( not sim ) results with the notes of why , when and what made you select that decision you made . Choose just red/ black to start with. Any number of member here including gizmo ( I assume) will help you through, but you have to demonstrate your willingness to succeed etc.

    Yes YOU have to demonstrate that YOU understand the concept. I totally believe you actually don’t understand it AND that’s the glitch.
     
    gizmotron and Nathan Detroit like this.
  17. daveylibra

    daveylibra Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2018
    Likes:
    14
    Location:
    England
    What is a MathZombie?

    It's silly trying to contradict 1+1=2, and also the probability of the next spin being a red, black or zero.
    Both of which are just as correct, and that is all that 'MathZombies' are saying.
     
  18. Proofreaders2000

    Proofreaders2000 Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2014
    Likes:
    143
    It's silly trying to contradict 1+1=2,-davellibra

    In the words of "Rich Dad" author Robert Kiyosaki "If 1+1=2" your accountant isn't
    smart enough, but if 1+1=whatever number you need it to be, that's the accountant you want.

    Tweaking numbers so they work out an equation, may be helpful.
     
  19. gizmotron

    gizmotron Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Likes:
    3,040
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    The West Coast of USA, RV'ing
    Great question. For years the loyal opposition were already known as the "MathBoyz." They became extremist, math oriented, mean spirited, absolutist that waged internet "flame wars." So I nicknamed them mathNazis. It was a joke. Later I actually listened to the words from Dolores O'riordan's song "Zombie." That's when I knew that line, "What's in your head, Zombie?" applied well to math oriented snobs and control freaks.

    For your information probability will not tell you what comes next. It does not say when a streak will start, how long it will last, or when it will end. You don't need an ability to predict what will come in order to detect a streak. You need other skills that include tracking, recognition, and tactical situational awareness. At no time do you need a magical ability to predict. But you mathZombies need to make the point that there is a claim of an ability to predict. So of course they are right when they say you can't predict. In basic construction worker parlance they are fucking dick heads. They are not worthy to teach and a total waste of time. In other words, as an employer, I would get rid of you in hopes that you would go work for my competitors. I would even say that you are pretty good if asked. People hate Trump, a highly valued construction employer. They just don't get how fast he can detect any FDH. He does not waste his time on failed thinking and planning. He is results oriented in order to make things work correctly. I'm a builder too. I dump the ones that need to be working elsewhere. It's just good business. You want nice? Get your answers from the FDH's.
     
  20. Median Joe

    Median Joe Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2020
    Likes:
    248
    Location:
    England
    The MathZombie's nemesis is the MythZombie.

    Definition of Myth :

    1. a traditional story, especially one concerning the early history of a people or explaining a natural or social phenomenon, and typically involving supernatural beings or events.
    2. a widely held but false belief or idea.

    The MythZombie's major false belief is that past outcomes mean something; that they change the probability of future outcomes. Otherwise, why would they even attempt "educated guessing" or "reading randomness"? What is the guessing educated by? what are they "reading"? past outcomes of course, what else? The MythZombie hates and fears math, statistics, logic, and objective facts; he shies away from them with a snarl like a vampire at sunrise. He much prefers obfuscation, analogies (which are nearly always misplaced), anecdotes, subjectivity, and woolly thinking. Needless to say, he doesn't understand the principle of statistical independence, or if he does, he wilfully ignores it.

    Strangely enough, this denial of math is usually only confined to his gambling life; in other areas (such as construction) he recognizes its importance. Even within gambling he's not consistent; ask him what the chance of red is on the next spin and he will likely say about 50%, he doesn't ask you : "it depends what the previous outcomes are".
    But when actually playing or devising systems these previous outcomes are all important: patterns and trends which hold the key to untold riches. Pointing out that each outcome is equally likely and that study of past outcomes is fruitless is likely to be met with hostility and abuse, or accusations of being closed-minded. Never try to argue with a MythZombie because he's incapable of comprehending the truth about gambling systems. Ironically, it's he who is closed-minded - or perhaps empty-minded, just as a Zombie should be. Perhaps that's why he wants to eat brains?
     

Share This Page