Why not like AP players in forums ?

[Bebediktus3]

I read and sometimes write in several forums. And everywhere see the same situation - main mass of members not like those, who play in some advanced methods - bias, VB, RC etc. Even those, who try some very complicated mathematical methods are also not much popular. Where is the reason for that?

Between AP is such opinion, that peoples are usually lazy and because all AP needs much more job - that is the reason not to like such methods. Ok, that is easy to understand.

But... what is the difference between AP and system? The difference is very small and it can be described by one sentence - AP player by some special laws, rules or other, choose what to bet, system player such part not do, or do that very minimalistic. Or to say other  AP player can give logical and mathematical and physical explanation why he bet her and not in another place, what cant do system player.
After AP player chose what to play - later he behaves very similar to system player.

I sometimes think, maybe system player not like not methods, but peoples. In German forums - they not like Kaisan, here not like General...

But I think most of them believe, that they with their methods won quite much?

So what is the main reason?

[Steve]

Some system players:

1. Think APs explanations are arrogant, rather than explanations of variable fact.

2. Are themselves arrogant and don't like to be told they're wrong, even when clearly they are. Like a child stomping feet refusing to accept clear reality.

3. Plain don't understand. But say the APs don't understand. Who's right? Whoever's math and logic is verifiably correct.... Verifiably correct.

4. Think APs believe it's our way vs theirs, when it's in fact what works vs what doesn't. We didnt design reality. Its not opinion or preference.

5. Don't understand there's a difference between short term wins, and legimate advantage.

APs don't give a crap if a system player thinks they have the hg. Does an adult feel the need to tease a child for not understanding something? We've all been wrong before. APs mostly try to correct people's mistakes, and system players take it personally. The bullshit rift between system players and APs is mostly system players not understanding, and taking it personally.

I certainly don't give a crap if someone is winning with whatever method. Good for them. Keep doing it. But reality verifiable with math is not debatable.

Some system players are repetitively clueless, unwilling to try to understand, shortsighted, and don't understand most APs have been where there they are before.

[Steve]

Basically the people who chase repeaters, cold numbers or whatever, don't understand they aren't changing anything. The accuracy is the same.

Thinking otherwise is delusional. Don't argue, just test. But test properly. Reality isn't debatable.

APs are NOT saying we know it all. But we are stating very clear facts that are usually not understood by system players.

A mature adult prefers truth instead of delusion, whether or not it hurts their pride.

[Steve]

One common theme lately is "random is predictable because of the law of a third".

Yeah and so is around even amount of reds and blacks.

Repeaters are normal probability and some people have no clue, you can't use this to change odds.

[Steve]

Another common attitude of system players towards APs is they think we act like know-it-alls, then reject anything the AP explains.

You know, you don't need to and never should take anyone's word alone. Instead, check for yourself. Test properly. Find out for yourself.

Take your head out of your asses, look at the message, and stop attacking the messenger.

[Bebediktus3]

APs mostly try to correct people's mistakes, and system players take it personally. The bullshit rift between system players and APs is mostly system players not understanding, and taking it personally.

Yes,  that "personally" very easy to notice.

Why, if write - you do bad, because you not do chi square test, and mean do such test and much will become clear, so like the good suggestion, like help, system player usually accept that like - " you are stupid and not know how to make chi square test " ?

[Bebediktus3]

Ok, Steves answers are from one side of barricades... what will be from another side?

[Steve]

Most system players don't know what a chi test is. So they think its bullshit. They think if they win a bit, it must mean their system "works".

Put it in their language: anything can happen, and anyone can win in the short term. Short term is statistically almost meaningless. The more you test, and the more results "stand out", the closer to 100% certainty you get.

[Steve]

Ok, Steves answers are from one side of barricades... what will be from another side?

Yes let's hear the other side. I would specifically like to know why system players refuse to adequately test working principles of systems (the part that supposedly changes the odds and makes bet selection better than random)

[Scarface]

I think all system players get looked at as all the same.  I agree most systems are bad!  The problem is most people who don't understand probability will base their system on what they think is a rare event that won't happen, not knowing that the event is not that rare.  This is like that guy that plays red and doubles wagers after a loss, thinking 10 losses in a row can't happen in a short period of play.

I say random is predictable, which just means having a good understanding of probability.  I do think that a player that knows this well and uses it is a better player than the one I just mentioned.

People can't wrap there head around random, and have a hard time visualizing it. If you ask someone to write down a 100 spin sample of how they think dozens will fall, most people will show a pretty equal distribution without large gaps.  I took a quick sample of 100 spins betting dozen 1.  The largest gap was 15.  There was also 6 hits in a row as well (the odds of this is 1 to 729). 

Knowing how random works will help in your bet selection.  It will help to avoid losses that you may think is rare.  Random is not an equal distribution of numbers...most outcomes will be long gaps with no hits, and short clusters of hits together. 

[winkel]

Yes let's hear the other side. I would specifically like to know why system players refuse to adequately test working principles of systems (the part that supposedly changes the odds and makes bet selection better than random)

AP-players wouldn´t allow a proof. See herb/general/snowman/all other names bashing against me and GUT.
No AP-Player just tried to think about the idea. Their most and only argument is "independence of spins".
It sounds like 1+1=2 no other math is possible and allowed

[Bebediktus3]

Remember question - why you not like, not who is good who is bad 

[Scarface]

Remember question - why you not like, not who is good who is bad 

Not personal.  Maybe disagree.  I'd buy them a beer a play some roulette with them 

[The General]

Steve,

I think it all comes down to math, logic, and denial.  System players tend to really suck at math/basic probability/statistics.  Logic too is a big problem for many of them.  Lastly, denial.  They don't want to believe that what they're doing can't work.

[Steve]

I think all system players get looked at as all the same.

Thats because they share the same misunderstandings.

For example, the rare event approaches... there are countless rare events.  Even the sequence 32,5,19,4,3,18 is very rare. So what? You cannot use that or any rare event because the odds are still the same.

I say random is predictable, which just means having a good understanding of probability.  I do think that a player that knows this well and uses it is a better player than the one I just mentioned.

Random is not at all predictable, unless you consider something useless like repeats as being predictable. It's just normal probability you cannot use for even a slight edge.

People can't wrap there head around random, and have a hard time visualizing it. If you ask someone to write down a 100 spin sample of how they think dozens will fall, most people will show a pretty equal distribution without large gaps.  I took a quick sample of 100 spins betting dozen 1.  The largest gap was 15.  There was also 6 hits in a row as well (the odds of this is 1 to 729). 

You too aren't understanding the uneven distribution is useless basic probability. On future spins, what you perceive as a trend has no bearing on the next spins.

AP-players wouldn´t allow a proof.

Nonsense. The kind of proof a system player gives is short term charts with spins that match their theory.  An AP explains with proper testing you see any bet selection with random spins is as useless as another.

Its not opinion. It's verifiable fact. No system player has ever shown me otherwise. What they show is poor understanding, and attack me personally, rather than do proper testing.

I think it all comes down to math, logic, and denial.  System players tend to really suck at math/basic probability/statistics.  Logic too is a big problem for many of them.  Lastly, denial.  They don't want to believe that what they're doing can't work.

Basically yes. The understanding is elementary. Flat earthers don't know how bad their logic is.