Is proper bet selection really necessary?

[winkel]

Winkel, are you feeling ok? Your explanations are really bad. Obviously you think youre a master of explanations too.

Again can you please just stop acting like a child and explain clearly instead of wasting time.

Who thinks this is proper discussion?
No reply to the explanations. Just criticising the "messenger" and criticising the kind of writing.

[winkel]

Rg, he has said he wins more than he loses. Thats not a problem. I did that with a bad system for a year and wouldn't let anyone tell me i hadn't completely beaten roulette.

I did /do it since 14 years.

The GREAT UNIVERSAL THEORY seems pretty HGish to me. He borrowed the name from the Grand Unified Theory.

No I didn´t. This name was created from a friend of mine. This friend was a mathematician who worked with Pierre Bassieux.

Put things into perspective. He appeared confident he has it figured out and that i was the stupid one. So ok, i decided to see if thats the case. Am i allowed?

You are allowed, but you didn´t do it.

So naturally, i asked him to back up what he says. Considering people follow him, my queries are reasonable. But his response is complaining and acting like I'm trying to destroy him.
Don´t you? You do! Ok you try to do so
I mean grow up, get a backbone.
Same to you
People are allowed to question you. I don't have a fit when someone questions me... instead i respond with clear validating information. If winkel doesn't want to do that, it doesn't really support his claims or look good for him.
Over 14 years there is a history, that I always responded very well in my best English.

At this stage, I'm still trying to understand his ambiguous and vague explanations. When i do, we can run some simple tests.
You can already run simple Tests with GUTCBA

Based on what he said, he keeps all the secrets to himself. He only gives part of his master plan to the public. You believe it? He surely made a fortune by now.

Proper discussion again:
First Lie: I don´t keep all the secrests. Only some. the basic Idea and how to handle it are openly accessable.
Second Lie: I never talkes of a amasterplan. There is none.
Third Lie: I don´t made a fortune by now from selling it. (Which this obviously implies) I didn´t sell it at all.
Tell me one single person I sold GUT or a variation of it.

[Turner]

Who thinks this is proper discussion?
No reply to the explanations. Just criticising the "messenger" and criticising the kind of writing.

Well it's rather like a Christopher Hitchens and Mother Theresa debate.
Although I'm with Hitchens all the way because I'm a big fan......both on the same stage is pointless.
Never the twain shall meet.
I'm 100% certain that Hitchens book " God isn't great" wasn't on her bookshelf

[winkel]

Understand I'm not the enemy here. I'm just explaining inconvenient truth. Don't shoot the messenger. Don't get offended when i or anyone says something that goes against what you think. Its not a conspiracy. Try to understand what's being said.
Every truth is inconvenient if it is not your truth!
I wouldn´t mind if it goes against my theories, but most of all it goes against me (see the post before) You nearly never ever did respond to my explanations. And if you claim you didn´t understand, you are nearly the only one in this forum. think about!
Again generally im much more likely to address a self professed guru who's misleading a lot of people, whether intentionally or not. Or should i allow my forum to be used to mislead people?

In your thinking these expressions "self professed guru" and "misleading a lot of people" are part of a "proper discussion" and arguments referring to the strategy? GROW UP
.....
And I'm not against systems. I'm against old methods we already know fail.
OK 14 years is quite old, but it is never proofed to fail. Not even by you, cause you are discussing my person not the message.
...

People don't need to listen to me. But its at least wise to consider what's being said.
It would be wiser if you would do so!

[winkel]

In winkels system, he is just waiting for a normal and meaningless statistical event to happen, then expecting spins from there will somehow be more predictable. They arent.
"normal" what is bad with "normal"? It is a meaning not an argument which proofs anything.
everything which is normal cannot be meaningless. Because it is always there and we can rely on
I say I can do a better prediction. You say: NO! Nice kind of proper discussion again.

He said he doesnt change odds and doesnt need to. It appears he doesnt understand whats meant by odds. Because if he understood, he'd know its impossible to perpetually profit unless you are winning more frequently than random.
My intention was never to beat "odds". My intention was to use a repeating sitzation, study it an find a way to improve my guessing. I don´t care if you call it "changing odds".

For example, if you bet on a coin toss with 50% probability of a win (50% odds), but are paid only 0.9-1 instead of a fair 1-1 on wins, then how can you profit if you only ever average 50% wins? Thats why you need to improve odds, ie increase accuracy. Winkel saying he doesn't need to change odds is a serious problem.
You are aware that we are talking about Roulette and with this not of Even Chances. We are talking about straight numbers.
But ok it appears he just didn't understand what odds means. Not good for a guru, but ok.
Again this GURU-Talk. Why do you need this? I know what odds are, I understand, but I don´t care about odds in my strategy. Pls try to understand.

Then he said his system tells him when betting is more likely to be a win. Finally, he claims to change the odds / increase accuracy. So let's move on.
I´m here. If you are really interested in a proper discussion and would start to attack the message and not the messenger.

His method to do this is like wait for 19 unhit numbers in 18 spins. The "crossing" is about to occur.  I mean wtf? Why do your chances of winning suddenly improve at that point? Does the wheel have this secret point it springs on you??
Another one of your tricks. Don´t argue these points just make it a joke. Nice kind of proper discussion!

Its nothing personal against winkel. Not even remotely. I sincerely feel bad when i deflate someone's balloon and tell them santa isn't real. But it's beneficial for them still.
Nothing personal? Guru, misleading, etc.etc.? you are joking again.
You can´t deflate my balloon, there never ever was one. What about your balloon?
And it is not very beneficial for me being calle names and made joke of af arguments instead of a "wanted proper discussion"

Where i don't feel bad is when they realistically know, after so long, that they've been misleading people. And any embarrassment brought to them is just how it plays out.
Where and how did I mislead people?
I called it strategy from the beginning, not system!
I always and again and again I said: Test it, try it leanr it, before you bet on it. Other members build programs which helped to test and to figure out the idea of this strategy.
I never sold it or parts of it.
Where how or why did I mislead anyone.

Where i especially dont feel bad about it is when the guru clearly knows, is arrogant about it, and continues the charade.
Charade another qualified proof that GUT doesn´t work? I´,m arrogant? Yes because I clearly see I´m a better person and debater than you. Do I have the right (Sorry, stolen phrase)

These are the kind of people that deliberately use unrealistic games, play money leaderboards, and spend an awful lot of time convincing their play money wins is proof of their superiority over everyone. The master. Thats what narcissists do.
Now we change to the impressing arguments about GUT. Th creator is a narcisst. This clearly proofs you are right steve. Sorry, No! It proofs you are not clever enough to be part of a "proper discussion"

In the end, there will be genuine people who make mistakes, and narcissists who lie through their teeth to keep their charade going. And sometimes there might be a genuine guru with the true hg.

So how can anyone know the difference? Mostly by understanding what does and doesn't work, and why.  Lots of proper testing. And using your own common sense. People shouldn't be so damn gullible.

God thanks it is open now: Steve is the only person with a common sense. all other expecially people who are just interested in GUT have no common sense. They just follow a GURU. They are so stupid to allow to be mislead. All sucking dimp people. But have hope. Steve is here to help and save you.

And now the best for you Steve. Here is a picture of som spins. Pls answer:
Are there crossings?
Do they cross?
Do all win? No!
Do all lose? No!
Is there a way to distingish one from the other?
You answer will be: No there are Odds!

[winkel]

The highest alert for Steve is: GUT is flat betting.

There is no need to create a progression to it. All bad strategies or systems can´t stay away from progressions.

But GUT can.

[nottophammer]

Winkel this is like a game of tennis, an its advantage Winkel, oh you just aced him game set and match Winkel.

It'll be like Brexit, Steve will bleat on and on and on, yawn its boring Steve

[Normy2000]

RG, just wound up Normy on MPR, said i wont press ready, but the good old boy i am i did.

So "who are you" is you?   
Thanks for being READY 

[Steve]

Winkel, your response was just a mixed up mess, and big sob story. Poor winkel for rightfully being questioned.

So am i right about my understanding of how your system is supposed to work? You said everything except for what mattered.

I guess i was correct... you wait until the crossing is about to occur, then bet.

So what makes this moment magical? Whatmales your chances of winning better? I wont call it changing the odds, because youll complain again.

If i only use this betvselection, will i win more than i lose? Or is the secret part you hold needed?

[Steve]

Another one of your tricks. Don´t argue these points just make it a joke. Nice kind of proper discussion!

This is your response to the question that matters. You call it a "trick". No winkel.

Im trying to understand why you think this works.

Your other responses were similarly pointless, backwards, based on misunderstandings, and messy. So lets make it simple and focus on the one point.

[Madi]

So what makes this moment magical? Whatmales your chances of winning better? I wont call it changing the odds, because youll complain again.

No magic in there. Just simple logic. As the time goes forward with more spins it will cross. He tries to get the exact point looking at “if” and “but”.

Odd changing? When someone win it must be a changed odd to ur favour either done by u or random itself changed the odd to ur favour bcz in ur language random is unpredictable. These people are tring to use that point where random gives a favour while using their system.

There might be better explanation for their winning but at the moment we dont know that.

When we get that, ur answer will be given to the point. Winning doesnt happen without any reason when random means unpredictable.

[RouletteGhost]

A crossing will happen. It’s a guarantee

GUT gives you a tool/place to bet and what to bet

I don’t think Steve understands it

No odds changing

Just helping the bettor make decisions

Steve and Caleb are off the deep end with the whole winkel thing

[winkel]

I guess i was correct... you wait until the crossing is about to occur, then bet.

mainly:Yes

So what makes this moment magical? Whatmales your chances of winning better? I wont call it changing the odds, because youll complain again.

It is not magic

If i only use this betvselection, will i win more than i lose? Or is the secret part you hold needed?
Again: there are no secret parts in finding the crossing.

If there is a crossing to appear:
I check how it was created. (pls look former answers you made just a joke out of)
I check at which spin this crossing appears
I check how often I have lost/won this crossing at this spin (no matter if really bet or just watched)
I make an educated guess.

btw: your answers and replies were just a mixed up mess, and big sob story. Poor Steve for rightfully being answered.

[falkor2k15]

The crossing has to happen, but we cannot say when - similar to repeats. Each bet for a crossing is independent of previous bets.
The more numbers a crossing requires the more chance you have of winning. The less numbers a crossing requires the least chance you have of winning. In the end the result is break even and lose to the house.

Now, it surprises me how Steve seems like the most logical person here in terms of roulette lies/facts - yet he's not quite smart enough to understand the psychology behind global deceptions for some reason. If Steve could truly understand deceptions then he could understand the globe earth lie, so I think it's a problem with understanding the bigger picture that's holding him back. Usually, it's people's defence mechanisms, but with Steve I think he just looks at things too literally and out of context, and doesn't seem to understand the deeper side, including dark comedy/satire. It would be nice to walk Steve step-by-step thru the flat earth as part of a separate topic - but it would require the same level of cooperation that Steve has managed to get from both winkel and turbo during the past few months. On the flip-side, Turbo was surprisingly very logical when it came to the flat earth, but not Roulette.

[Madi]

The crossing has to happen, but we cannot say when - similar to repeats. Each bet for a crossing is independent of previous bets.

I agree. From that point of 19vs 18 next spin will it cross or not ? No one knows. But wht if i give u next 5 spin to be correct. Winkle has his own observation to be correct 2 times out of 3.

Its the same thing u described the pegion thing.

Theoritically dozen can come 1 2 3 then 0. But is the practical like that?