What is THE BEST system? With real money!

[Joe]

To me, wins streaks are independent. So I like to wait for them to happen to me.

But how do you identify them? after 1 win? 2? 10?. If you admit that the win streaks are independent (no matter how long they are when you observe them), how does it help?

[gizmotron2]

But how do you identify them? after 1 win? 2? 10?. If you admit that the win streaks are independent (no matter how long they are when you observe them), how does it help?

I just spent 3 months explaining it. I even make many of the important points in this thread.

You might want to know what it means to see singles on the weak side.

[luckyfella]

BEBE is correct : independent spins doesn't mean unpredictable.

This direction of discussion will lead to areas that can confuse further the readers which by now is confusing enough. So lets leave it at that.

[luckyfella]

But how do you identify them? after 1 win? 2? 10?. If you admit that the win streaks are independent (no matter how long they are when you observe them), how does it help?

The encompassing requirement is "skill".

Whether this "skill" is quantifiable and measurable idk.

[gizmotron2]

Giz,
You remind me of Spike from Gambler's Glen - most people here weren't born back then.
This is all old news. Done to death.
Pattern recognition? Check!
Capitalize on winning streaks? Ever heard of the Paroli/Parlay betting approach? Check!
Identifying and exploiting trends? Done.

Everything you talk about has been around for centuries. I don't see anything new here. If you think this is new, you haven't done your homework.
Hey! I'm not dismissing the concept of trends etc. I'm just saying these are old concepts, explained much better previously by more knowledgable people.

And so you know, people, more often than not, see patterns when there is none; it's explained in the following video:

Oh, so it's OK to engage me here at Steve's forum as long as your censorship at your Snowflake forum is a safe space?

You say you remember Spike but conveniently forgot about me. The name was Gizmotron there too. It was both of us. You also don't know how this has developed over these past 14 years. Spike never revealed his secrets. I went ahead since July of this year and have showed everything. That was after a year ago first having successfully taught a single person just to see where the learning errors and difficulties might occur.

This is best as flat betting. Letting the winnings ride is as old as the hills and twice as dusty. This is waiting until you are in a win streak and then striking. Stop at a minimal win or a slightly larger loss point. You are an enemy of free discussion. Yet for some reason you are afraid of a concept where "betting big when you are doing well and betting small when you aren't" somehow threatens you. You clearly want people to pass this by. Only just the opposite is what is going to happen. I have tied seeing trends and using them when they are in a winning state.  You clowns have always said that trends are useless. You trying to do that now.

I'll bet that you can't show anywhere on planet earth where or when "singles on the weak side" were ever used to illustrate one of many aspects where characteristics are used to demonstrate visual dexterity. I have gone miles beyond those people you say have done this to death.

Your sophistry will not work. I have done this to put people like you in your place. It's you and your archaic thinking that has been done to death and the results are clear for everyone to see. Reading Randomness will replace what you think is common sense. You can't stop those that know you are wrong. That group will keep growing is size because I know this works. They will try it, become skilled at it, and freely discuss it. They will know the difference between just seeing trends and seeing trends and using them effectively.

Now I will watch your video. It's probably the mother ship for you tin foil cap boyz.

[gizmotron2]

What a joke. You and him belong together. There's more sophistry to go around. This guy is blind to Reading Randomness. Perhaps you can get him to commit to researching it in order to destroy it. I would love to see that video. If he does actually learn it and fails then he will be an idiot around those that don't fail at it.  He's talking about gamblers fallacy and tying it to trends. That's an easy way  to win an argument.

I wish I had the power to cut you off and silence your voice. All I can do is expose your fallacy. I'm sending an army that knows you are wrong. People want money. They say that money won is twice as good as money earned. You can't stop this.

Try this video: Best viewed in a full screen option.

link:s://:.youtube.com/watch?v=f-BbdPFzn0o

[Kav]

You sound mad at me.
If this is not business and you don't sell anything, why get mad about objections?
A person winning roulette should be happy, not mad.

[gizmotron2]

You sound mad at me.
If this is not business and you don't sell anything, why get mad about objections?
A person winning roulette should be happy, not mad.

Are you kidding? You hold me in total disdain and regard things I believe as stupid. Your protection of your own forum is proof of that. I consider it all funny. You reject the one thing that works. You have the basic need to be accepted and respected for it. But when it comes to really discussing things you are a massive control freak. There is a limit to what you will tolerate. You do know that I gave it all away for free don't you? Did you think it was a sale's pitch?

[Steve]

Gizmo, I've taken your points and claims seriously. But I cant find any merit in your approach or theories. It is not a conspiracy. I did the same with Turbo - just a bunch of nonsense. Sorry, but it is.

Take your latest video. The person in the video retrospectively looks at a black/red and says "gee if we bet RED instead on these past spins, we would have won". Well, duh.

Then he talks about betting high when in a streak. There are no streaks. It's random. What you perceive as a streak is just a series of independent events, and normal probability that sometimes a few reds/blacks will be in a row. Streaks is one of the oldest approaches used by gamblers, which have tried to exploit it in many ways. So just when you think you're in a streak, the future spins either continue the trend, become choppy, or change trend, then maybe back to choppy, a really short streak, back to choppy, then somewhere between choppy and streaks etc etc. You cannot predict it. That's why it's called random.

I'm not interested in arguing the point. Again I took what you presented seriously, and just wasted time. No need to argue about it. As I said before, if you or the person in the video are winning fortunes, good, keep doing it. Make fools of us.

[gizmotron2]

1.) Gizmo, I've taken your points and claims seriously. But I cant find any merit in your approach or theories. It is not a conspiracy. I did the same with Turbo - just a bunch of nonsense. Sorry, but it is.

2.) Take your latest video. The person in the video retrospectively looks at a black/red and says "gee if we bet RED instead on these past spins, we would have won". Well, duh.

3.)Then he talks about betting high when in a streak. There are no streaks. It's random. What you perceive as a streak is just a series of independent events, and normal probability that sometimes a few reds/blacks will be in a row. Streaks is one of the oldest approaches used by gamblers, which have tried to exploit it in many ways. So just when you think you're in a streak, the future spins either continue the trend, become choppy, or change trend, then maybe back to choppy, a really short streak, back to choppy, then somewhere between choppy and streaks etc etc. You cannot predict it. That's why it's called random.

4.) I'm not interested in arguing the point. Again I took what you presented seriously, and just wasted time. No need to argue about it. As I said before, if you or the person in the video are winning fortunes, good, keep doing it. Make fools of us.

1.) But you have been respectful and also interesting to talk to. You have your interests and I have mine. I see no point in debating where we are both so entrenched in our own methods.

2.) That video is to illustrate that strong trends can be matched to streaks of wins, nothing more. All I do is hunt strong streaks or swarms of micro streaks. I could create a video that shows winning with micro streaks. People that are trying this are seeing these things. We both know that practice during learning is not the same as live play with hard earned money.

3.) You have just described very well chaotic streaks without any form or direction. That is a very common condition and it is unavoidable. Everyone will see that. If they look they will also see steep losses all at once too. But for some reason there won't ever be win streaks. I wonder why randomness never does that? It should. I never see the pit boss come and stand by the table when a losing streak happens.

[Steve]

I see no point in debating where we are both so entrenched in our own methods.

What I explain is not about my methods or preferences. It's just about reality.

That video is to illustrate that strong trends can be matched to streaks of wins

No it shows you can have wins and losses, but still overall you lose. This is because the odds of winning are the same as random bets.

But for some reason there won't ever be win streaks

Of course there are. Both win and lose streaks, as explained above.

[luckyfella]

This current discussion about streaks or trends.

What we observe is random walk and levy flight and other processes.

This is seen as stochastic process. That means to aid prediction we use stochastical analysis techniques that's a large field of math.

[gizmotron2]

This current discussion about streaks or trends.

What we observe is random walk and levy flight and other processes.

This is seen as stochastic process. That means to aid prediction we use stochastical analysis techniques that's a large field of math.

Who are you trying to kid? It's a coincidence when a trend and a win streak happen at the same time.  If you are a duck hunter you sit in a duck blind until the ducks come in and lock up their wings for a landing. Then you blast away and then send out the dogs. The only math going on here is counting how many ducks you shot down.

It's the same thing with Reading Randomness. All you care about is getting your three ducks. People that can see win streaks can also see that these win streaks can be associated with a trend that is occurring at the same time. I can have a win streak because ten reds in a row occurred. I can also have a losing streak because 5 reds, one black, and then 5 more reds occurred. It could be because of bad timing or of just bad luck. It's not because I claimed to know the future.

I certainly don't have time to do complex theoretical math for the bet selections, that's for sure. Guessing is a skill, not a science. I choose to win more than I lose. I get that extra few wins while I see a connection between the trend or pattern working at the same time that a win streak is working. Perhaps there is a mathematics for quantitative recognition or quantifying coincidence? It's all a butch of hogwash to most people anyway, so why worry about it.

[gizmotron2]

1.) What I explain is not about my methods or preferences. It's just about reality.

2.) No it shows you can have wins and losses, but still overall you lose. This is because the odds of winning are the same as random bets.

3.) Of course there are. Both win and lose streaks, as explained above.

1.) Well I'm glad that one of us is based in reality.

2.) So what are the odds for a trend occurring and coinciding with a win streak. Is there a reality for that?

3.) Yes, please explain above. (#2)

[SWEET]

let me chip in my half cent.
What Gizmotron trying to say is, that in next few hundreds spins, of double dozens bet, there will be LONG streaks of POSITIVE and negative VARIANCE.
Though the dd is 66%...it will not wwlwwlwwl all the way, streaks of positive,negative and mix will always presents alternatingly.
When he see negative and mixed streaks happened...he guns for POSITIVE STREAKS TO HIT....and take advantage to hilt. H may lose when negative keep hitting...but when positive hit ,he recoup. He cant and not predicting when the positive will hit. He just takes caculated risk, to bet FOR POSITIVE TO RUN.