Over There but Here, Reading Randomness

[Steve]

Like i said, its not even the same sport.

Do you understand what i mean by physics and ap having much more substanting data?

100 spins for a roulette computer is about the equivalent of 100,000 spins tested for a typical system. In fact probably more.

There's the ball fall time, fall place, rotor orientation, scatter charts and more. The data can be broken down precise details so there's no doubt where accuracy comes from. I've been doing this a very long time.

[Steve]

What?

Producing hardcore porn.
Of course.

[RayManZ]

Cht, vb is an algorithm. The player is the computer. Like a real computer, it is subject to some error. That's the same as vb..

Gizmo is the computer...

Also he stated i could be coded but he won't do it. He coded his Double dozen system. Same principle. More numbers.

[Steve]

If gizmo is the computer, whats he calculating?

He isn't clear about that. Maybe he has something that works, maybe not.

But i just haven't seen anything at all to indicate a valid approach. From what i do know, it looks the opposite. But i have an open mind. Ill look at whatever he has to offer. Like i did with turbo, although his talk was just a pile of dribble and nonsense. Big waste of time.

[RayManZ]

If gizmo is the computer, whats he calculating?

He isn't clear about that. Maybe he has something that works, maybe not.

But i just haven't seen anything at all to indicate a valid approach. From what i do know, it looks the opposite. But i have an open mind. Ill look at whatever he has to offer. Like i did with turbo, although his talk was just a pile of dribble and nonsense. Big waste of time.

He is just riding the variance waves. Only he sees it as patterns, but we all know patterns are just in the human head. A visual aid. Nothing fancy about that.

I believe he is just doing some sort of precog. I bet he sometimes cant even explain why he is betting or not betting. Just a hunce/feeling.

I read all gizmos posts. I think you didnot? I even tried his method for a couple of months. I did work for me. But my own method is faster/easier and more precog. I do like his 3 net wins 7 losses idea and i use it to.

As he said, practice practice practice practice practice and more practice. It does make perfect.

I you can write an AI and have a database of All Gizmo's plays i bet the AI would be even better.

[Steve]

I can believe precog. Its at least more credible than 1+1=42

But didn't he say it could be coded?

[cht]

For systems bet, we all know it can be coded, tested over millions of spins easily. Fact. The problem is NOBODY who has this proof will post it on forum. No point waiting or asking for proof - your assumption that it doesn't exists is not proof.

The real problem is casino's ban such systems bettors and disallow the use of systems betting apps on their phone.

[Steve]

There are more ways to beat roulette than computers. Its just my preferred method.

I'm not waiting for anything.

I respond to claims and posts, where i thibk is needed.

No casino allows consistent winners, no matter how you win. No winning system is allowed. Winning is not about what allowed.
You must avoid detection.

[winforus]

Either Gizmo is not very good at articulating himself or still doesn't properly understand what he is actually doing- one or the other.

I believe that he is either doing precog without knowing it, or using a concept similar to Tesla's 369 - but with "patterns". Or a combination of both.

The thing that makes me skeptical, is the fact that he refuses to answer this question that I and other people have asked:

Gizmo, have you been winning consistently with this? Can you share us some of your results? (number of units won, and spins)

[cht]

You must avoid detection.

Detection is a problem BUT it can be avoided.

The real problem with winning systems betting is the.....

WORK!

Like the casino, positive edge systems bet still require large bets and lots of bets for the positive edge to materialise. Player could be clocking 6-12hrs daily grind at the b&m casino. Are you prepared to do this dirty work? Guess not.

[winforus]

For systems bet, we all know it can be coded, tested over millions of spins easily. Fact. The problem is NOBODY who has this proof will post it on forum. No point waiting or asking for proof - your assumption that it doesn't exists is not proof.

Of course they don't have proof - there wasn't a single person who came to this forum to claim to have HG, actually had it. All disappeared, and later revealed to be scammers or bullshitters just trying to sell their junk to addicts.

And if they would have proof - you can bet your ass that it would be sold for a very great price (over $100k at the very least as Steve said).

[winforus]

Ignorance and stubbornness is the biggest issue with system players on this forum.

You got a person (Steve), who has decades worth of experience, sharing with your FREE information on methods that have been PROVEN to work. A guy with a proven track record, that has won a decent amount, and that has studied roulette for many years. He even offers to share profits 50/50 - at no upfront cost to use his computers. (I would certainly take up that offer, but unfortunately only live in a location with 1 small casino, so playing online is the best option at the moment)

They could learn from the mistakes of others, and save lots of time/money. But their donkey stubbornness won't let them.

[Steeefan2014]

Of course they don't have proof - there wasn't a single person who came to this forum to claim to have HG, actually had it. All disappeared, and later revealed to be scammers or bullshitters just trying to sell their junk to addicts.

And if they would have proof - you can bet your ass that it would be sold for a very great price (over $100k at the very least as Steve said).

I'm still here! 

[Clf7]

There are more ways to beat roulette than computers. Its just my preferred method.

I'm not waiting for anything.

I respond to claims and posts, where i thibk is needed.

No casino allows consistent winners, no matter how you win. No winning system is allowed. Winning is not about what allowed.
You must avoid detection.

Which ways? I mean ways who real work, dont say like bias who are not working on modern wheels.

[gizmotron2]

Whether you use the NOW, or the PAST to determine where to bet next, it's still a "prediction".

It feels like a guess. It could be a prediction without merit. It's just semantics at that point.