SuperSector 10

[ati]

Spamming? Because I’m telling people systems don’t work?
Why is it ok for ignatus to post thread after thread of systems that do not work? But I make one post and you claim I am spamming?

To be fair, you are starting to turn into Steve or The General.
You know I don't question your way, I have investigated and experienced enough to see that it is legit. However, don't think for a second that you and others have seen everything and know everything about random and the math of roulette.

I don't have a HG, far from that, and I admit that I have not won a single cent of real money yet. But I could post systems that people would probably pay for. See the attached chart from two days ago, it is an EC system, using stitched bets, cycles, statistical constants, etc. All flat bet, no progression, longest losing series 7 in row, once. I know it doesn't prove anything, just like the results on MPR or RS don't prove much. But I believe that there is much more to roulette than most will ever discover. It is extremely difficult to work out things for an average mind, perhaps even more difficult than gaining precog abilities. Working on it for 2 months day and night probably won't get anyone too far.
What I won't do however is explain what I do, or try to prove that I'm (most likely) right. All I want is to make the naysayers consider that maybe there are other things they don't know about, and not every system are random bets.

[Steve]

To be fair, you are starting to turn into Steve or The General.

To be fair, where I'm at is after the final stage, most players will never come close to. But I'm not the only one who at least understands basics. It might be prudent to listen to what's being said.

Most players on forums are completely lost.

[precogmiles]

To be fair, you are starting to turn into Steve or The General.
You know I don't question your way, I have investigated and experienced enough to see that it is legit. However, don't think for a second that you and others have seen everything and know everything about random and the math of roulette.

I don't have a HG, far from that, and I admit that I have not won a single cent of real money yet. But I could post systems that people would probably pay for. See the attached chart from two days ago, it is an EC system, using stitched bets, cycles, statistical constants, etc. All flat bet, no progression, longest losing series 7 in row, once. I know it doesn't prove anything, just like the results on MPR or RS don't prove much. But I believe that there is much more to roulette than most will ever discover. It is extremely difficult to work out things for an average mind, perhaps even more difficult than gaining precog abilities. Working on it for 2 months day and night probably won't get anyone too far.
What I won't do however is explain what I do, or try to prove that I'm (most likely) right. All I want is to make the naysayers consider that maybe there are other things they don't know about, and not every system are random bets.

I respect your opinion, but are you claiming that spins are not independent of each other?

From my understanding of random it does behave in specific ways, I agree with you on that much. But I believe the human element is important. AI can’t predict random.

Are your tests carried out by the computer or is it done manually?

[Steve]

If you were living deluded, wouldn't you want to know you were deluded so you could stop? Or would you prefer to be blissfully unaware?

[ati]

If you were living deluded, wouldn't you want to know you were deluded so you could stop? Or would you prefer to be blissfully unaware?

It depends. If there is no harm done by the delusion, then one can be blissfully unaware. Maybe not the best example, but I know some very religious people, and I think they are deluded, but it makes their life complete and full of joy. Sometimes I envy them.

are you claiming that spins are not independent of each other?

No, I agree that spins are independent and what comes next cannot be predicted. But maybe there are ways to increase the accuracy by knowing what is more likley to happen in the next set of spins, and maybe there are ways where we can follow the variances and we don't keep betting on the same positions, hoping that the bad series will end before we run out of money.

[ati]

Are your tests carried out by the computer or is it done manually?

Not manual, done by simulation. But as I said it's not a HG. It's clearly visible on the chart that there are luckier and less luckier series of outcomes, so the result or win rate is not constant. Unpredictable. I always say that if random can make it lose for a couple hundred spins, then eventually it will probably make it lose for a couple thousands. And sometimes it's painfully difficult to follow the outcomes and bets when you create your own playing positions by connecting outcomes.
But I still think that anyone can make simple systems using cycles where the bets are not random.
Even if it loses more than it wins but the variance is reduced, that proves that the bet selection is better than random.

[precogmiles]

Even if it loses more than it wins but the variance is reduced, that proves that the bet selection is better than random.

Does this have anything to do with RTM or betting against rare events?

[ati]

No it doesn't. I don't know enough yet and I'm not qualified to give a clever answer, but it's more like about using statistical constants, and imbalances. The base of everything is cycles, they have limits, give reliable constants, could potentially help "predict" what is likely to happen in the near future and can also help in adjusting your bet selection to the variances. It might sound outrageous, but my opinion is that even random has to behave in a certain way, otherwise it wouldn't be random. In a million spins you will never see one dozen hit 50%, or most straight repeats will always happen within 10 spins, it will never be between 10 and 15 spins.

There can be many imbalances, for example let's say an EC cycle start with R, next spin is B. After RB, what is the probability that R will repeat? 50% But you can decide to go further, and end the cycle when a second repeat happens. After R, what is the probability that R will repeat twice and not B? You would think it's 50%, but it's actually over 65%. This is of course not a miracle, it happens because the first outcome of every cycle is always given, so one less spin is required for it to repeat twice. But still, it's something that is related to EC's and it's not 50/50, so there might be a way to use it.

I don't advise anyone to listen to me though  Because these are just my thoughts and observations. I can be wrong.

[precogmiles]

No it doesn't. I don't know enough yet and I'm not qualified to give a clever answer, but it's more like about using statistical constants, and imbalances. The base of everything is cycles, they have limits, give reliable constants, could potentially help "predict" what is likely to happen in the near future and can also help in adjusting your bet selection to the variances. It might sound outrageous, but my opinion is that even random has to behave in a certain way, otherwise it wouldn't be random. In a million spins you will never see one dozen hit 50%, or most straight repeats will always happen within 10 spins, it will never be between 10 and 15 spins.

There can be many imbalances, for example let's say an EC cycle start with R, next spin is B. After RB, what is the probability that R will repeat? 50% But you can decide to go further, and end the cycle when a second repeat happens. After R, what is the probability that R will repeat twice and not B? You would think it's 50%, but it's actually over 65%. This is of course not a miracle, it happens because the first outcome of every cycle is always given, so one less spin is required for it to repeat twice. But still, it's something that is related to EC's and it's not 50/50, so there might be a way to use it.

I don't advise anyone to listen to me though  Because these are just my thoughts and observations. I can be wrong.

well If you manage to pull it off, I wish you all the best. I have an open mind as long as you are not using the same old tricks of trying to make 1 + 1 = 3

Good luck!