Over There but Here, Reading Randomness

[luckyfella]

Maybe you are aware that this method is semi-dependent on precognition, as described in other threads here?  If so, why not join those threads and expand the knowledge base there? Preferably by adding some empirical studies, or personal reports of success?

Indeed, knowledge is where its at, and it's a major problem when a mind thinks it knows when it does not.  If your mind was filled with knowledge, there would be no room for faith, which is responsible for all phenomenon that can be seen with the human eye.  With full knowledge you would not see planets, or stars or people.  All of these, which change, are faith based phenomenon.  Observation of faith based phenom is mistakenly taken for "knowledge" when in fact it is just the observation of persistent, albeit faith-based, phenomenon.  2 + 2 = 4 is the observation of a persistent phenomenon, but it is not base in knowledge.  What causes 2 +2 to equal 4 is a faith-based phenomenon. 

Hope this helps delineate the realm of knowledge from the realm of faith, two diametrically apposed states of mind.

Thank you very much still.

That's exactly what I want to communicate.

But I am not good in writing and it may come off wrongly.

[luckyfella]

Maybe you are aware that this method is semi-dependent on precognition, as described in other threads here?  If so, why not join those threads and expand the knowledge base there? Preferably by adding some empirical studies, or personal reports of success?

Indeed, knowledge is where its at, and it's a major problem when a mind thinks it knows when it does not.  If your mind was filled with knowledge, there would be no room for faith, which is responsible for all phenomenon that can be seen with the human eye.  With full knowledge you would not see planets, or stars or people.  All of these, which change, are faith based phenomenon.  Observation of faith based phenom is mistakenly taken for "knowledge" when in fact it is just the observation of persistent, albeit faith-based, phenomenon.  2 + 2 = 4 is the observation of a persistent phenomenon, but it is not base in knowledge.  What causes 2 +2 to equal 4 is a faith-based phenomenon. ( It's faith that makes a unified whole seem separable and divisible into things that can be enumerated.) 

Hope this helps delineate the realm of knowledge from the realm of faith, two diametrically apposed states of mind.

One more thing.

If it can be coded, it's a rule.

If it can't be coded, perhaps the coding platform, example mql4 is limited.

Or like you said, it's precognition and not rules.

The objective is more rules content and less arbitrary precog.

There has to be some precog content, can't completely eliminate it.

It's a tradeoff, where bots ignore precog the performance drops. The gain is it's hands free execution.

Manual execution allows for precog therefore it's likely the performance is better. Downside is the work.

Note - I realise my posts is off-topic not related to this thread. Apologise to GizM

[gizmotron2]

One more thing.

It's not very often that you get to watch someone Gaslight themselves.

[nottophammer]

 

[nottophammer]

As Saint says only for the deluded. 

[gizmotron2]

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.

[gizmotron2]

I think that I need to clear something up for those that are not clear on strategy.

I mostly use a two step method against another two step method. When in trouble with it, all be it a limited trouble, I go to flat betting to get out of it.

7 net losses at value 1 are figured this way: (1 X 18) x 7 = 126
Bets at value 1 are $18 simulated.

3 net wins at value 1 adds up to $54

If I flat bet at value 2 and lose 7 times in the aggregate then that adds up to 252

So to play to win $54 I need $252 as my session bankroll.

If I flat bet at value 1 then I just need $126 as my bankroll.

So the progression steps are these.

Up & Pull means value 2, then value 1 on next funded bet selection.

Mini Martingale means value 1, then value 2 with flat betting at value 2 after that.

The value 2 is maintained until the recovery of all lost amounts before the failure point.

The session is played to get 3 net wins at value 1 ( $54)  with a bankroll that could lose $252 ( 7 net losses at value 2 ).

It takes twice as many wins to balance as flat betting does.

Flat betting is the better strategy. When I play the 2,1 / 1, 2 system I always play to win. I don't stop at 7 net losses.  I wait and use virtual bets and just wait until I catch a super good effectiveness streak. It's not difficult as long as you maintain your self control. Battling all day to get back to even is doable but it is mostly just a point of pride.

This information should illustrate the common sense that flat betting makes. It's best to grind out easier and less damaging comebacks. Sometimes I will add the band-aid to a flat betting session and hope that I have not  dug an even deeper hole.

[jono1167]

I think that I need to clear something up for those that are not clear on strategy.

I mostly use a two step method against another two step method. When in trouble with it, all be it a limited trouble, I go to flat betting to get out of it.

7 net losses at value 1 are figured this way: (1 X 18) x 7 = 126
Bets at value 1 are $18 simulated.

3 net wins at value 1 adds up to $54

If I flat bet at value 2 and lose 7 times in the aggregate then that adds up to 252

So to play to win $54 I need $252 as my session bankroll.

If I flat bet at value 1 then I just need $126 as my bankroll.

So the progression steps are these.

Up & Pull means value 2, then value 1 on next funded bet selection.

Mini Martingale means value 1, then value 2 with flat betting at value 2 after that.

The value 2 is maintained until the recovery of all lost amounts before the failure point.

The session is played to get 3 net wins at value 1 ( $54)  with a bankroll that could lose $252 ( 7 net losses at value 2 ).

It takes twice as many wins to balance as flat betting does.

Flat betting is the better strategy. When I play the 2,1 / 1, 2 system I always play to win. I don't stop at 7 net losses.  I wait and use virtual bets and just wait until I catch a super good effectiveness streak. It's not difficult as long as you maintain your self control. Battling all day to get back to even is doable but it is mostly just a point of pride.

This information should illustrate the common sense that flat betting makes. It's best to grind out easier and less damaging comebacks. Sometimes I will add the band-aid to a flat betting session and hope that I have not  dug an even deeper hole.

Great information Gizmo. I'm continuing with my testing but playing more conservatively. I'm trying to flat-bet as much as possible, occasionally introducing a progression as you described above.

I should be finished this next series of tests later tomorrow or Wednesday at the latest. I'll post results when complete.

Cheers

[gizmotron2]

For anyone that thinks I'm scamming people, the only person accusing me is a known malignant narcissist that took over the ownership of bet selection dot cc. He likes to sign into many forums with different names and talk to himself, endear himself to others, to lie, to gaslight, to dox, to  say racist remarks that are on a scale with the KKK. As a malignant narcissistic he goes from attempting to get primary support for his fake self esteem. If that fails he tries to get  secondary support that somehow still gives hi what he needs. When that fails he resorts to a method to destroy anyone that will not give him primary or secondary support. He will talk to you even if you know that he has published massive amounts of vile racist remarks. I outed him a few years ago. Someone else has documented his vile remarks. It can be found at the same forum where I first published Reading Randomness. His fake forum names are known as sock puppets in internet speak.

Look for his real motives at the thread "BET SELECTION CC - SHADY DEALING" in the Baccarat section.

This is my first comment in that thrread: "Alrelax, Glen, likes long winded posts. He likes to comment on his experiences when two other people are talking to each other. He likes always adding his experience to everything. It's like the entire website is his personal blogosphere. Making him a global mediator was the last thing that the forum really needed. The whole site is wrecked. Just look at how the top threads all have his name on them. It's a great lesson in how a forum can be killed. Control freaks are just people that are scared of being discovered. I watched BlueAngel take him on a week or so ago. How'd that go?"

I don't intend to bring this up any further here. I just noticed a person from here getting informed during the all out attack on me by the racist owner.  Much of what I am showing now in Reading Randomness was first published there as hints there and here and just scattered around. So I'm done talking about this here. There is no need to clutter this up, unless a deep sleeping version of Glen is already embedded here and wants to out himself. He can't stop himself. He craves attention, even if it is against him. That's how forums get destroyed. Snowman, sometimes known as Caleb, The General, etc... destroyed Gambler's Glen. Glen Laurence is finishing off bet selection. He is active everywhere people talk gambling or talk about him. He comes to gambling forums years before he destroys them. He has many names at each forum that he picks on.

So back to Reading Randomness. He can't stand it that anyone is following this. I'm the Mark that is under attack over there. Don't make the mistake in trying to make sense to him. He is not interested in anything but getting primary or secondary narcissistic support. If you feed him then he will hate you as he hates himself even more. He is scared to death that he will be discovered as a fake human being that has no clue how to relate to others.

link:s://:.youtube.com/watch?v=osXapUFrcv8

[gizmotron2]

Great information Gizmo. I'm continuing with my testing but playing more conservatively. I'm trying to flat-bet as much as possible, occasionally introducing a progression as you described above.

I should be finished this next series of tests later tomorrow or Wednesday at the latest. I'll post results when complete.

Cheers

If you play online or at a casino with this, just practice the same way all the time and then play at the casino just like you practiced it. Yes, the emotions will run wild. It's fear. This method will rule out the adrenaline rush of a huge win streak. The same goes for a huge downturn. You need to stay on point that you will get more winning sessions than lost ones. The three and 7 stop points are there so that you stay in control. Try to ignore all distractions, including boring players asking you questions. Get your money and go do something else. It takes days and weeks of real play to convince you that this works.

Start with the smallest bets possible. You want to see if you can take the casino's money just like the skill in winning with the practices. It will be much harder if you can't place the inside bets or recognize them instantly what sets they belong to. You have the six sets made up of the three outside bet groupings already. You must have the inside sets all memorized. Having six groupings is essential. Once you master this you will not want to play games with one grouping like Baccarat, Craps, or Blackjack. The wait for good trends in those games are torturing.

[jono1167]

If you play online or at a casino with this, just practice the same way all the time and then play at the casino just like you practiced it. Yes, the emotions will run wild. It's fear. This method will rule out the adrenaline rush of a huge win streak. The same goes for a huge downturn. You need to stay on point that you will get more winning sessions than lost ones. The three and 7 stop points are there so that you stay in control. Try to ignore all distractions, including boring players asking you questions. Get your money and go do something else. It takes days and weeks of real play to convince you that this works.

Start with the smallest bets possible. You want to see if you can take the casino's money just like the skill in winning with the practices. It will be much harder if you can't place the inside bets or recognize them instantly what sets they belong to. You have the six sets made up of the three outside bet groupings already. You must have the inside sets all memorized. Having six groupings is essential. Once you master this you will not want to play games with one grouping like Baccarat, Craps, or Blackjack. The wait for good trends in those games are torturing.

More good advice. I'm glad you shared it.  As I'm working my way through my practice sessions and achieving results which I would not have thought possible, I'm thinking that this couldn't possibly work at a casino. Reality will eventually come crashing in! You just said, "it will take days and weeks of real play to convince you that this works".

I guess this is where I am at the moment. So far the method is doing exactly what you said it would do, if not better. I'm a long way off achieving the kind of results you have been achieving at the casino. It's reassuring to hear you say it will take time and to start with the smallest bets possible.

Cheers Gizmo

[gizmotron2]

More good advice. I'm glad you shared it.  As I'm working my way through my practice sessions and achieving results which I would not have thought possible, I'm thinking that this couldn't possibly work at a casino. Reality will eventually come crashing in! You just said, "it will take days and weeks of real play to convince you that this works".

I guess this is where I am at the moment. So far the method is doing exactly what you said it would do, if not better. I'm a long way off achieving the kind of results you have been achieving at the casino. It's reassuring to hear you say it will take time and to start with the smallest bets possible.

Cheers Gizmo

You are doing better than me. I can only guess why. I just know that when you put up money it is not the same. It's nerve wracking unless you play the big picture that you know you will lose a few session for all your won sessions. Don't ever play tired. It will cause you to get lazy. You might lose more than the right amount that your practice win rates showed the first few times out in real live play.

Another thing. I always practice before I go to a casino. I might not on the morning of a long drive but I practice the night before. I want fresh memories of looking at charts and making choices. It's a mental muscle memory technique. I only focus on the skill and what the charts say. I do exactly the same things as practice.  I'm faster than most dealers when it comes to stacking chips on 18 to 19 numbers inside. that comes from years of playing. It just means that I am not rushed in making choices. Not being rushed is a needed skill.

Another thing. Don't take your eyes off the dealer raking the losing bets. They often rake a winning bet off the table. Don't start filling out your index card until you know that your winning bet or bets have not been raked away. Yell and stop them as soon as they try to take a winning bet away. They will stop and look at it or they will ask the pit boss to OK it or look at the video tape to confirm it. This is normal. You are not a bone head for protecting your interests.

[Tinsoldiers]

 

[gizmotron2]

Just so you know what is going on with the Reading Randomness thread. The entire concept & strategy is over there at the other forum. I know that at least 60 different people have looked at part of it so far. It's not easy. It is easier than learning counting cards and looks to be more profitable than counting cards. It's most advantageous in Roulette but can still be used with Baccarat, Craps, and Blackjack where you are expected to flat bet to prove that you are not counting cards.

It's done. I took people through enough basics that they can take it from there and improve on it. The skill involved is in character recognition. That skill can be expanded. As the player gets better they get better at seeing how randomness deliverers opportunities. This method is designed to make a person a millionaire. It's free. It's complete.  I don't know if people will learn it and discuss it much. But I do know that people want to learn how to beat the casinos.

Unless activity starts up here I will be watching over there where I first posted it. Thanks for any interest shown so far.

[Let Me Win]

On the bet selection website they say you are a conman called Mark who has stolen lots of money