Over There but Here, Reading Randomness

[gizmotron2]

I understand what you;re saying by the "current state" (the NOW), but you're still basing bets on what you expect will happen in the future. Nobody bets on the present. It's always about what happens next.

I don't expect a thing to happen. I know first try losses are always out there.  I just watch out for swarms of first try losses. It's just a guess. But sometimes those guesses go into phases of working perfectly. It's so simple. It's just noticing when your bets are working and when they are not. You don't need trends. You can use a pre selected set of bets and just watch for when they start to work in swarms of spins temporaraly. It's not the bet selection that makes this work. It's the effectiveness conditions. At times they come in swarms that last for a while. I just pounce on the casino when that happens. People think it is just a lucky streak. Well, it is just a lucky streak. All I have done is teach others how to take advantage of lucky streaks. In this case all my lucky streaks occur when my trends and patterns are in a working condition. It's so simple.

[gizmotron2]

I understand what you're saying, but it's incorrect. What I'm saying is not theory. It's fact. You can only bet on future spins.

Pretzel logic. I bet on the waves caused by the ups & downs of effectiveness. It's always based on the current continuing or ending conditions. It is in fact based on the "now" condition. I can lose the next bet and still win the session.

[gizmotron2]

Sounds awesome. Except in reality, that's the last thing a professional player wants.

Actually I'm a building contractor. I want the job to be done. Anyway I have so many experts to tell them that it was just a lucky streak. Just let him keep playing and his luck will run out. My goal is to make the mathNazis eat it. I want to change the world and don't care if I lose my access to keep doing this. You can't take it with you.

[gizmotron2]

Just before you said you "increase the results". Does that mean increase the accuracy? No matter how you spin it, your bets are based on something. And it's still a prediction. Even if you call it "unfolding", it's still a prediction.

I don't increase anything. It's all based on coincidence. Randomness is in the driver seat. I have no control over it. But when it all lines up in a convenient sequence I take what it is giving. For me it's a bag of gold just sitting there waiting to be picked up. It's not a magical claim. It's not a fallacy. There are no odds to figure it by. You see it and grab it or you don't. I don't care how long this will take. If you wait in a non destructive fashion then you will be situated to grab it when it comes. It's just waiting for coincidence to line up nicely.

[gizmotron2]

I think he have something NOW, why to throw stones on him, give him a chance to explain his betting pattern.

I already did explain it. It's found in another thread at a different forum. The link is fanatically disclosed in my signature on each posting here. But I started posting about it here because some people here were working on it. It's ten times more fun talking about it here. I just don't want to write it all down again.

[winforus]

Why are you calling it "randomness" then? Random by definition is unpredictable. And you are clearly able to make predictions - at least accurate enough to be winning.

[gizmotron2]

I don't think Gizmo has a betting pattern. What Gizmo has is a vision of the trends that are being created by the roulette spins. And he plays according to that. It's not a fixed "something" that can be coded.

It can be coded. It's a royal pain in the arss. It's easier and faster to program players.  If I tell you to look for singles on the weak side of an EC selection then you do or don't know what I'm saying. But if I illustrate it in charts then you get to see it right in front of your eyes. That is programming people. They are better logic processors.

[gizmotron2]

Why are you calling it "randomness" then? Random by definition is unpredictable. And you are clearly able to make predictions - at least accurate enough to be winning.

I'm making bet selections that are funded or they are not funded. I lose the bets that I'm expected to lose based on the odds. I just don't lose all the money that I'm supposed to lose.  People insist that you can't know the timing of when to bet money and when not to. But they are not skilled at this. So I will say it again. Randomness also includes swarms of a same condition. You can recognize favorable conditions and exploit them as long as they continue. Or you can ignore their existence and only see chaos. Randomness can appear to be structural even when it is in fact chaos. None of this is that important to me. People are looking for validation. They want me to prove it. All I'm doing is programming people to see it and then letting them prove it to themselves. That is all that is going on here. They are all free to answer their own questions about validation.

[gizmotron2]

But he said he doesn't increase accuracy. He increases the results though. I'm waiting to hear what that means.

I don't count on the guess doing the job of winning. I count on a sequence of wins gathering in a swarm to do the job. That all occurs by coincidence and not by accuracy. It's just a state of being. I just look for it. You can play without a bet selection method and still get win streaks.  I just use trends to find win streaks. So when trends are in a working very good state the win streak also happens.  I don't hope that a bet selection will work. I just look for bet selections that are already proving to be working at the time. There is a simple logic to this. I can only win in a streak if the streak already exists as apposed to hoping that the next bet will be the beginning of a streak when there is none to find lurking about.  It's like cruising for chicks. You won't find a babe in a swarm of ugly ducklings.

[gizmotron2]

Can I give him for free a 37 roulette random spins to show me what to play next?

It doesn't matter what you bet next. What matters is if you can catch a win streak. You put up big money in a win streak and you place minimum bets during anything else that is not a win streak. I make a bet selection on each spin. I just don't fund bets that are not in a win streak.

[winforus]

I checked the other forum and in your thread, you stated that you started using this approach 14 years ago.  No where in your thread did you state how much you have won.

In the last 5 years, around how many units you have won and in how many spins?  (not asking for amount of $ but units)

[gizmotron2]

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.

I never expected you to go over where the teaching is actually being done. You have your own business interests to run. That is where it is all explained. It begins by teaching characteristic recognition. It makes a complete example of singles on the weak side at first. Just one characteristic in order to teach process recognition. That is only the first step. It goes on to recommend other characteristics like singles, doubles, triples, etc...  But then it goes into effectiveness recognition. It's all taught there. I just wanted to write it down once, and in one place.

[Mister Eko]

It doesn't matter what you bet next. What matters is if you can catch a win streak. You put up big money in a win streak and you place minimum bets during anything else that is not a win streak. I make a bet selection on each spin. I just don't fund bets that are not in a win streak.

Unifrtunately you dont know where the winning streak will end, and where will start . Probably the WLWLWLWL OR WWLWWLWWL will kill your bankroll.

[gizmotron2]

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

People are allowing themselves to be programmed. They are tasking from this what they like. I could not be any more pleased. They will make it their own. I like trends and patterns because they are littered all over the place to a skilled observer. And there are times when they swarm in the same sizes or very close to that.  That's a bag of gold just waiting to be picked up.

[gizmotron2]

I believe he is just doing some sort of precog.

It's not precog. I have very powerful future sight abilities. They are always regarding my future. they come true years in advance. But when I get that same feeling over numbers all I'm doing is seeing a winning structure of a set of numbers.  I see that the 2's, 4's, and 8's in the finales are streaking in domination. So I hit it until it ends. That's just pattern recognition coupled with the 3 & 7 stop points. I just search for a trend or pattern in a state of working. A computer can be hard coded to do that as a function.