What is THE BEST system? With real money!

[Steve]

I understand what he's saying. But his bet selection approach doesnt work because what he perceives as a streak is just random. And from there, what happens is equally random. So he's just making random bets without understanding it's all he's doing.

[Joe]

2.) So what are the odds for a trend occurring

Tell me what a trend is and I can give you the odds. That's the problem I have with your strategy; a 'trend' could be almost any pattern.

[Roulettebeater]

I identified one automated wheel with a repetitive pattern, I collected 5000 spins from the wheel and tested them, the result is :

Only 2 times a streak of loses (>14 misses in a row) occurred !

Do you think attacking this system with a neg progression is profitable ?

[gizmotron2]

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.

I did promote double dozens for about 10 years. About 2.5 years ago somebody posted a link to a video about trading stocks like a casino. I switched back to Even Chance. My new practice software is all based on 18 - 20 numbers at a time. I also no longer try to wait for the huge win streaks. I now recommend 3 net wins and done. I also recommend 7 net losses and done. It's a combination of these two stop points and the common aspects of micro swings in the win loss graph that make this work. The thing now is to not dig deep holes.

[gizmotron2]

I understand what he's saying. But his bet selection approach doesnt work because what he perceives as a streak is just random. And from there, what happens is equally random. So he's just making random bets without understanding it's all he's doing.

For a guy that likes being right you could not be more wrong in your perception of what I do. I'm truly sorry that the process for communicating this thing that I do is so difficult. I got you to admit that win streaks occur and that you can see it when that happens. Let's try this one time from what you do perceive. I see a win streak that is just random. You see a win streak that is just random. I do something about it. I guess you do "what" about it? I'm very good at teaching people to take action when randomness goes into a winning condition. It makes no sense that Roulette is always in a losing condition. But that is your point of view. OK, I surrender. It is a waste of both of our time to keep haggling over this point. I no longer go after the huge win streaks as I have become very skilled at micro movements. We have never discussed changes and the nature of changes because we are stuck on what randomness is.

So it won't be me that gets you unstuck. It will be many others that at some point will be too many others. I know this will happen. It's simple logic. But to you it is outright foolishness.

[Steve]

Gizmo, are you winning a fortune? Are you students winning a fortune? Do you have the hg and are guaranteed long term profit?

[gizmotron2]

Tell me what a trend is and I can give you the odds. That's the problem I have with your strategy; a 'trend' could be almost any pattern.

I should have said what are the odds of a trend occurring at a predictable moment? How long will a trend last? When will it end?

Also, I'm truly glad there are people out there that don't recognize trends and patterns. I have used singles on the weak side in order to make sure people are looking at my type of charts. I base all this on figure formations and visual dexterity. Those are practiced and recognizable skills. At first you can't see anything and then all of a sudden you begin to see it. After that you can't go back to not seeing it.

[gizmotron2]

I identified one automated wheel with a repetitive pattern, I collected 5000 spins from the wheel and tested them, the result is :

Only 2 times a streak of loses (>14 misses in a row) occurred !

Do you think attacking this system with a neg progression is profitable ?

No. With my charting system I see enough opportunity in every 100 spins to win my sessions the way that I intend to win my sessions.

[gizmotron2]

Gizmo, are you winning a fortune? Are you students winning a fortune? Do you have the hg and are guaranteed long term profit?

No. You are proof that this can't be taught to everyone. I also expect some people to use very bad judgment and to make bad choices and fail at this. They will then logically blame the method. That is just the way it will be. Did you know that it is the responsibility of a pilot instructor to tell a person that they should not try to become a pilot in the first 8 hours of flight instructions? It's true. I don't want math to be a stumbling block but it is all that some people have their hats hung on. I'm glad that this is the way that it is though. I know you have a business to run. I'm 100% all  for that.

People are their own worst enemies. Greed is the thing that wrecks success. Fortunes are a relative value. What's one man's fortune is another man's poverty. I gave up millions to be an extreme poly athlete. I know for a fact that it was the right thing for me. Everyone should know what it is like to ski off a blind cliff at 90 miles per hour and turn on the landing in hopes of shaving off a quarter of one second. They should know what it is like to ski down a 70 degree face and make it look easy. And I don't mean lose it and just run wild at full speed. But having so much self control that you can stop any time you want to. There is no substitute for Yosemite rock climbing, deep scuba diving, radical flight precision, insane windsurfing conditions, and even running a business on automatic control. And now beating Roulette and telling the world. I guess there will always be people that will say that I should not have done it this way. But I'm the first. I wanted this to be another first. So it is.

[Steve]

You make your system sound like guessing. I think you said somewhere guessing is a skill.  An educated guess is a calculated risk, with benefits, if the education is accurate. Otherwise, guessing is not a skill. Its just guessing.

If you can't define mechanical rules that anyone can follow, it sounds less like a system and more like guessing.

What makes your guessing better than other people's guessing?

[gizmotron2]

You make your system sound like guessing. I think you said somewhere guessing is a skill.  An educated guess is a calculated risk, with benefits, if the education is accurate. Otherwise, guessing is not a skill. Its just guessing.

If you can't define mechanical rules that anyone can follow, it sounds less like a system and more like guessing.

What makes your guessing better than other people's guessing?

My guessing is better because of timing, self control (greed), situational awareness, and stop points inside the most common range of moving averages. I don't depend on one guess at a time but on sequences of guessing existing in conditional phases. I have proved to my students that theses conditional phases can be seen and exploited when they are in conditions of continuance. I also acknowledge that there are people that can't see any of this. In their hands it is all  a waste of their time. So my conclusion is that people that can't do this are in no way experts on it. They are uninformed in most cases. We see this all day long in the world of politics and news bias. People have very strong opinions and are not willing to see if they are not seeing something.

None of that matters. What matters is that more and more people are learning these skills. They are doing it while others insist that they can't do what they are actually doing.

As far as mechanical rules go I suggest that you try to prove this works withing the confines of three net wins and done per session. I also recommend that you end a session on 7 net losses. I also suggest that you try flat betting and virtual bets only on your way to proving to yourself that this works.

[Joe]

If you can't define mechanical rules that anyone can follow, it sounds less like a system and more like guessing.

I agree, but if it's an educated guess what is it based on? And I don't agree roulette is a game of skill, unless you're talking about VB which takes practice to become accomplished.

Gizmo talks about timing, but there is no timing involved when your next bet is based on past patterns. Either the next bet(s) are favourable given the current pattern, or they aren't. It's a simple binary choice. Timing doesn't come into it as it would if you were using VB and watching the wheel waiting for the best time to place your bet.
Either you know which patterns are favourable or you don't. That's not a question of skill but knowledge.

Because there are a finite number of patterns, you could generate data for each one and set up a large contingency table then do a chi-square test for independence to identify the 'favourable' patterns. Having found them you could keep them in a database and write a program to track past spins. When a favourable  pattern starts to form you would bet on it continuing. If the pattern broke you would remove it and search for another which partially matched what has already formed. Continue like that until you reach a new high balance or you run out of patterns, then start over with all patterns available again.

Of course the theory is that all patterns are equally likely, so if that holds up then you won't find any 'favourable' patterns. 

[gizmotron2]

Of course the theory is that all patterns are equally likely, so if that holds up then you won't find any 'favourable' patterns.

Timing refers to the condition that the trend is working at times and not working at others.

I simplified all this with a simple claim. My charts look at 12 sets that make up 6 groups. If you just look for singles on the weak side in 100% quality, and secondarily in 95% perfect quality in that chart then you have all you need to beat roulette to the point that with a big enough bankroll you can become a millionaire winner in just a couple of years.

[gizmotron2]

You do not need to take my word for it. I have provided the software that can run 100 no bet spins and chart them. I just ran a few  different 100 spin tests and I always found at least one stretch of singles on the weak side that lasted from 20 to 30 spins. That's enough to win three net wins. I explain how in Reading Randomness where everything is published.

You can write your own sim in your own software to explore the existence of singles on the weak side.

You should know that singles on the weak side is just one characteristic of randomness. I have many common types. But just this one characteristic is enough to prove my point.

[SWEET]

random MUST succumb to math expectation law, although it may not adhere to balanced result, in next 100,200,300, or even next 1000spins,

BUT random itself must alternate!
Or else you see streak of 100 single dozen, or streak of 100 dd in next 100spins.

IMHO, if we see a very long negative variance, then due to math expectation, the mild or agressive POSITIVE  variance MAY HIT...(before you balk, i said..MAY HIT)
thus we risked this "MAY HIT " possibility.
We cannot, and do not predict the outcome, just risked the possible outcome.
As Gizmotron had point out clearly. look at any long spins data, you see positive and negative streaks ALTERNATING (in random length) constantly, then think, how to take ADVANTAGE or this  normal constant occurance? the keyword is ALTERNATING.