Reading Randomness ( The Real Way ) @ Roulette Simulator

[gizmotron2]

Of course I can see them - but they are meaningless, because there is no cause/effect. The roulette wheel has no memory, and there are no other variables that change.

Why do these streaks need a cause and an effect?

I will give you their cause then. They happen because of coincidence and randomness. Now you have the cause. As far as a conversely expected effect goes, why does it have to have meaning. You are looking for prediction where there can't be any.

But you are flat out wrong that you can't use them.  A person just has to decide to use them. You have decided not to use them.

[gizmotron2]

If there was a cause and effect - then you would be able to have an edge, and win with flat betting.

I have already demonstrated a way for you that flat betting is nearly useless. You must have a way to defund losing streaks or variable change is not possible. If you add to that attacking the stronger patterns of coincidence then you are even better off than just flat betting & defunded bets.

[gizmotron2]

All and all this has been a great discussion today. It seems to come down to being able to use streaks by targeting them when they show evidence that they are occurring.  That is possible because you also use their effectiveness states. There are times when it works and there are times when it does not. Those are absolute certainties and they can be known.  They are facts. I can use those facts to continue or not. The casino can't make me sit there and lose. I can get up and leave the session. I can also leave with my miniscule 3 net wins. They can't lay a guilt trip on my like poker players can.

[Mean]

But what if it wins by targeting opportunities with an increased sized bet and mitigates losses by a lower priced bet?

You can't predict when there's an "opportunity" or when you are more likely to lose. In fact, opportunities don't even exist in roulette; it's all random.

I did the first 50 games flat just for you

Contradiction alert: you just posted last night that you had to use progression for RR to work.

I guess you have never seen me say that you will lose the correct number of bets that math says you should lose

This means you cannot win at a better rate than random.

I'm clearly saying that you can make unfunded bet selections that lose at the mathematical rate.

Both your unfunded and funded bets lose at the same rate.

I have math on my side

How? You cannot beat the house edge by guessing or using your reading randomness system.

[Mean]

They happen because of coincidence and randomness

They happen because of randomness alone. Why do you throw this coincidence idea into the mix? What is your motive of trying to deceive us?

I have already demonstrated a way for you that flat betting is nearly useless.

You keep flip flopping. Now, you're back to flat betting not working again.

[Moxy]

Not at all. If they can talk the talk, then they should be expected to walk the walk. Proof is expected of everything in our world: would you swallow some random pills that purportedly cure you of illness? No, you would want proof.I have no beef. They can go to the casinos themselves and lose. The beef comes when they spread their false information, delusions, lies, etc. to others.

The Freudian blindspot of people asking for proof on a public forum is astoundingly tone deaf...  Or... 

That there are actual obliging is inexplicable.  It's an exercise in futility regardless.

[gizmotron2]

and now the trolling starts up again.

[cht]

The Freudian blindspot of people asking for proof on a public forum is astoundingly tone deaf...  Or... 

That there are actual obliging is inexplicable.  It's an exercise in futility regardless.

Best to step back from the forum, watch this farcical show this coordinated fraudulent naysayers group display to us on this forum lately. Enjoy the movie. 

[Mean]

Best to step back from the forum, watch this farcical show this coordinated fraudulent naysayers group display to us on this forum lately. Enjoy the movie. 

What's "fraudulent" about proving you system junkies wrong?

Best to step back from the forum

Why don't you leave already? Why do you always have to say I'm leaving? I'm done with this forum. Blah, blah, blah. Just shut your trap and go already.

naysayers

I'm not a naysayer. I already told you I can flap my arms to the moon. I don't have to prove it. Gizmotron gets immunity; we all get immunity.

[winforus]

Why do these streaks need a cause and an effect?

I will give you their cause then. They happen because of coincidence and randomness. Now you have the cause. As far as a conversely expected effect goes, why does it have to have meaning. You are looking for prediction where there can't be any.

But you are flat out wrong that you can't use them.  A person just has to decide to use them. You have decided not to use them.

They have no cause and effect, thus they cannot be used to beat roulette. In stock market there are, thus people are able to make money.

Cause and effect is what is needed to increase the accuracy of your bet selections. If you cannot increase the accuracy of your bet selections - then you have no edge. 

And this is why you couldn’t win by flat betting.

If you disagree, then you need to go back and study the fundamentals that Steve talks about.

[gizmotron2]

Cause and effect is what is needed to increase the accuracy of your bet selections. If you cannot increase the accuracy of your bet selections - then you have no edge.

Or, I can increase the chance that I can target win streaks and losing streaks, thus giving me an edge. I can only get a few unfunded bets during a losing streak. I can't target them during chaos. The same goes for win streaks. They can only be doubled down on for an attack during a win streak.  All you are trying to say is that you can't know these conditions for sure.

Nobody on planet earth has suggested variable change this way. So not even Steve has the absolute math that solves everything, including standing up for you. I know that I'm right. It's just you that insists that it must be done flat betting. So how does that work. I'm supposed to put my mind in a sling and do what you say I must do. I don't think so. I believe I will just not care what your concerns are and go about my business. I can use streaks and you say that I can't. Big deal. We are getting nowhere.  You think that you are right and have the responsibility to inform me and others. I share what I know is true and the world can go fuck itself. It's doing a pretty good job of that anyway. I'll just do what you say I can't do for you at R-Sim. Let that speak for itself.  You will then have the freedom to pull it all apart, hopefully not with lame arguments and sophistry.

[Mean]

Or, I can increase the chance that I can target win streaks and losing streaks

It's impossible to target what you can't see.

They can only be doubled down on for an attack during a win streak.  All you are trying to say is that you can't know these conditions for sure.

Will you ever stop spreading lies and gambler's fallacies?

It's just you that insists that it must be done flat betting.

One day you say that your system wins by using flat betting; another day you need progression. You keep flip flopping.

[winforus]

Or, I can increase the chance that I can target win streaks and losing streaks, thus giving me an edge.

No you can't, because you don't know when they start and when they end. You have no ability to tell when the next number is more likely to come, color, column, etc. That's why your bets are no better than random bets. Steve said it as well.

It's just you that insists that it must be done flat betting. So how does that work

Seek first to understand, than to be understood. Do you understand why I am insisting on flat betting? Do you think it's just to make you jump through extra hoops or just because I want to discredit you?

If a system cannot win by flat betting - it's a losing system, period. This applies not just to RR but to every system out there. This has been explained many times already on this forum, on roulettephysics.com, and in Steve's videos.

If the system wins by flat betting, it means that it has an edge. If the system cannot win by flat betting, it means that it has no edge. This is how we know if the wins come through variance/luck, or they actually have an edge.

What is so hard to understand this? This is really basic and fundamental stuff.

[gizmotron2]

No you can't, because you don't know when they start and when they end.

I'm not as stupid as the pit bosses or you for that matter. Yet the pit bosses see every one of my win streaks. How is that?  You do play in real casinos, right? You have seen this haven't you? I really wonder.

[gizmotron2]

Seek first to understand, than to be understood.

Or just tell the mathZombies to eat shit.  Don't forget to vote.