Roulette Reading Randomness

Probabilities n perdicting randomness do not work.Majority who play loses because of probabilty n randomness. Online roulette is all rigged.Play live in casino roulette u have more chance of wining.Pay attention to wheel not the board.Board is there so people cab think next black or red.The ball n wheel have no brain to follow probablity. If u can find deficiency in wheel u can win regularly.

 

I tried to copy what you know and extremely hard. But I did make several thousand dollars because of you and thank you you are absolutely great.

How come you spend so much time explaining and then fighting with people on here? I'm just curious you please answer thank you.

Your time should be worth thousands dollars an hour I just cannot imagine somebody giving away so much time for nothing.

 

I just wrote this somewhere on the internet:

"Time to play squish the dogmatic illusions of reality.

Let's break this down into three facets. In the world of gambling we have the bet selection process, the mathematical expectations that are indisputable, and the results, either wished for or actual.

Bet Selections:

You can guess or you can predict through physics. I will rule out psychic ability. You make calculations for dealer signature, wheel bias, or visual ballistics. In either case you make a consistent selection based on either a fact or by assumption. Let's just stipulate that this is a constant effort. The question that needs to be answered honestly is does it always work all the time, or does it work at times real good, or average, or very bad at times. I would love to hear the simple consensus on that.

Is it knowable that you have good sessions and bad sessions using physics based bet selection?

Now to guessing. If you have a consistent guessing technique then I can confirm that you will get good winning session, flat going nowhere sessions, and disastrous losing sessions.

The Math

Now for the interesting part. Can you have a winning session even though you experience the average expected losses during that session? For an example you play a 100 spin session. You win just 47 of the hundred and lose 53 of them. Is it possible to win flat betting?

You control the bet amounts. The casino nor the probability police hold a gun to your head. It's up to you to decide what to bet on and how much. That's good too. If it is true that in physics play as well as guessing you can know when you are in a bad stretch of the session then you can control that session. Now the action you take will be in not knowing when the bad will end in the future, but you should know it when you see it. You will still lose the expected amount and win the expected amount in the long run.

So the question is, do you have to pay the same full price for losing streaks? Do you? Is there a law that says you must fully fund losing streaks? It comes down to being able to see the differences between the three possible phases as the current conditions as they occur. Can you do that? You can see when the physics is working better or worse. You can see when the guesses are working better or worse. There is no magical elf causing these conditions. It;s just pure randomness. There is no law of averages that sabotages your play. The space between your ears does a fine job of that without any help."

 

I'm doing this for personal reasons. I just shared this at another location:

 

Bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbwwwwwwwwaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhh, what utter self congratulatory bullshits and nonsenses! The bottom feeding, scamming piece of shit is wobbling out of control. the cat's a nutjob with ever increasing delusion of grandeurs, hey hey!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

soxPuppetFan said:

I'm sorry you feel that way.

 

Gizmo; the soxfan is lost in the fog; a no hoper. Just keep posting charts with explanations and those who can see, even if it's 1/37, understand that a sequence of the 1/37 gives the chance to bet, or should I say guess.

 

Mark, I’m still working my way through my 100 session test series. A friend suggested it would be a good idea to break everything up into three sets of 33 sessions each.

I’ve just completed my 70th session so I can give you two complete sets. See results below.

Sessions 1 - 33
92 net wins. 10 net losses

Sessions 34 - 66
86 net wins. 14 net losses

I’ll keep going with the testing. Next will be sessions 67 - 99.

I can’t do as much testing on the weekends so look out for that on Monday or Tuesday next week.

 

Jono,

Amazing results.I'm wondering if you just have a gift for this or if other people can get this good. I only do good when I play one session at a time. Like one session per day and not every day. Still, you are completely obliterating the math and the house advantage. It's too late to stop this. The trolls have failed.

 

I should have mentioned, about 8 of those sessions were experimenting with a labby. Even with the labby, the progression never went above three units. For the next 33 sessions, I’ll take note of which games were flat bet and which had a progression.

What are your thoughts on a progression? I know you sometimes use the 2, 1 for your three net wins.

I have a feeling a small progression could be a good thing.

 

It can be a good thing. It can also dig a fast hole. I know that this method cuts down on the volatility a great deal. In the world of progressions there is always that sequence that kills it. I use another easiness that I have mentioned. I like to flat bet and just let randomness give me the win. You see it in my charts. Randomness flows up and down like a cycle of a wave. It naturally fits itself to a kind of correction. This works if your goal for the moment is to just get back to even. That even can be at +1, or +2 while on the way to +3.

If some of these terms sound strange to you it is because for years we at gambling forums have clearly discussed concepts like correction. In other words it means recovering from a loss or losses. It's a kind of now battle. The concept is kind of stupid as a tactic. In the game of golf you play 18 holes. You don't know where the good holes will come from so you need to be ready for the good stretch but not do any more damage trying to get to the good patch. So easy is the actual enemy of this method. You will get a lot of wins with the progressions but you will also find yourself needing to dig out from deeper holes doing so. Nobody knows when change comes. The secret to my method is in dealing with changes. It must be fast and deliberate. I find that flat betting is the strongest platform. It's more difficult but it digs the shallowest holes. The virtual bet selection, that's the unfunded bet selection for anyone new here, in combination with flat betting is the most powerful tool in the arsenal.

 

Although I’m trying to make everything as realistic as possible, the reality is I’m not under the same pressure as I would be if I was playing for real money. I know there will be no repercussions associated with a loss.

While the testing sessions are great and they need to happen, I know I will be a lot more conservative when I play for real money.

Anyway, I’ll get through these testing sessions and then take the next step.

Everything continues to hold up well. Cheers Mark

 

I enjoy very much abstract conceptual/philosophical debates about randomness, but it's about time to come up with a specific system.
Simple and clear.

 

Good idea. I was just asked to explain how to program it. This can't get more specific than that.

"I'm just not optimistic about my ability to "read" six streams of ECs without very clear rules, clear enough to feed to a computer (which is what the brain is?). If i have to rely on precognition, i should just recognize that, and concentrate my efforts more directly on cultivating that. Isn't this logical?"

To program this it would need to numerically construct a valuation criteria that compares likelihood scenarios for every known characteristic, and run those considerations against actual effectiveness results. I have only shared a very few characteristics.

It would need to identify the differences between swarms of the same characteristic and the absence of such swarms. So you would need to apply 20 major characteristics and filter all that through pattern recognition, domination, strong side weak side, size of trends in swarms, lone super streaks, perfect symmetry, and the total absence of any formations just to make note of the best features of reading randomness. Once you have a best bet selection solution the software would then need to relate all bet selection results to identify the three basic forms of effectiveness. And last the agility to recognize change must be programmed into the robot. It must get off of things once it becomes attached to them.

Now you have the basics of the rules required to perform optimal execution. It's all very simple actually. The human brain can be trained to do things thru a kind of mental muscle memory. I just keep a checklist of characteristics in my head. Characteristics, patterns, trends, formation sizes, global swarms, and changes are all part of the recognition function. The consideration for effectiveness balancing is a strategic function. The primary achievement function is in 3 net wins and done or 7 net losses and done.

Learn all that and then program it. You will have created artificial intelligence that functions as a rare form of agility binding with selection optimization. Your algorithms will end up being mathematical validation. Simple enough. I would expect at least a million lines of code if you are smart enough to create your own class libraries and utilize object oriented programming techniques from those classes. In my preferred 4th generation language they are called functions. You would need to create an operating system for reading randomness. You could then program your million lines of code after that.

There is no precognition going on here. It's all functionary and logic based. I'm teaching the very first baby steps. Some babies want to chew on the crib for a while.

 

The system is here already : when the selection shows then bet twice then stop until the next opportunity .


EC are a short term play. EC have a chance of cooling off .




ND

 

wonder is gizmotron is a math college professor or scientist?

 

Nope, he's The Sheep Whisperer.

 

do sheep charge money or take money from those learning?

is this slang or a dark quote as it was called in other thread here?

can you explain please?

 

can you tell me if gizmotron is what they call sock puppy for the other person here?

 

Well in the past he has played with other people 's money so who knows?

But today i guess he just needs recognition from sheep that doesn't understand probabilities as well and what it involves... You can feel you are a wizard by guessing but at the moment you are betting, there is still 18/18+0... Just pay attention how it avoids to answer how many spins he bet on and how much he won... That means everything.