good design cool

[elmo]

**If you have $100,000 and a system that works, Vegas will give you two things:  A plane ticket and a room!**

That one cracked me up. You are right Sam.
Then I have only three words to say to them Vegas Suits   BRING IT ON!!!!!!

P.S. can anyone sub me 100k 

[gizmotron]

elmo, all you need is about $100 to start with.

Just win enough sessions to turn that into $1,000. Then use $5 chips and turn that into $5,000. Then use $25 chips and turn that into $25,000. Then use $100 chips and turn that into $100,000. Then go to Vegas on comp.

[gizmotron]

Why are there no long term posters here with the capability to fill out these charts? Why has Mr Chips put a chip on his shoulder while claiming he has explained everything? Why has MR Chips removed his "Ok, lets 'look under the hood' of the Signum system," remarks? I smell a rat. This is evidence that the system presentation is fishy like a red herring.

[elmo]

**Why are there no long term posters here with the capability to fill out these charts?**

they are all too busy playing BINGO!!!   

[Mr Chips]

Why are there no long term posters here with the capability to fill out these charts? Why has Mr Chips put a chip on his shoulder while claiming he has explained everything? Why has MR Chips removed his "Ok, lets 'look under the hood' of the Signum system," remarks? I smell a rat. This is evidence that the system presentation is fishy like a red herring.

Mark,

Landis/herb/snowman has been his usual disruptive self and the thread has been removed temporarily.

He has even duplicated the title, he must be desperate, to suppress Signum. He certainly has some sort
of problem, it is certainly not normal behaviour.

I can recommend you looking over at GG, where some kind person has shown a copy of the "OK, lets
look "under the hood" of the Signum system2

Regards

Richard

[Landis]

Mr. Chips,

Since you don't want to have any constructive criticism of the Signum here on VLS, I've decided to have the thread moved over to GG and one of the math forums.

Regards,

Landis.

[Mr Chips]

Mr. Chips,

Since you don't want to have any constructive criticism of the Signum here on VLS, I've decided to have the thread moved over to GG and one of the math forums.

Regards,

Landis.

If your idea of disrupting other members threads is constructive criticism then you definitely have
a screw loose. As far as I am concerned we have tolerated your disruptive behaviour long enough
and it's now up to the Administrators to take the appropriate action.

[Landis]

Thanks Mr. Chips.

I feel it's important that we discuss the system and explain why systems built with bad blueprints won't work.  This will help prevent the same losing systems from being reinvented each week with new names.

It's important to explain how dangerous these systems can be to your bankroll.

[malcop]

Thanks Mr.  Chips. 

I feel it's important that we discuss the system and explain why systems built with bad blueprints won't work.   This will help prevent the same losing systems from being reinvented each week with new names.

It's important to explain how dangerous these systems can be to your bankroll.

Landis,

You still did not answer my question, you seem to have all the answers to successfully winning at Roulette so when are you going to share with us lesser mortals.

I would take you more seriously if you could demonstrate to me the success you have had at the tables.

I'm not saying Mr Chips method is good or bad, but at least he is prepared to put his money where his mouth is, unlike you.

I don't understand what your problem is, if people want to try his method let them, his system is not using a large bank roll, how many methods only needs no more than 5 units a session and flat bets?

What I see is members that have taken the time to learn this method have given signum positive praise, but you are disrespecting them by saying they are misguided in trying the system for themselves.

What you afraid of, is it because this thing might actually work!!!

You are the kind of person that would have told the Wright Brother don't be stupid if man was meant to fly God would have given use wings, or say to Thomas Edison give up after the 5th attempt you will never make the light bulb work.

I'm not saying signum in the same vain as above but the fact is you don't know if it works or not because you have not tried it.

GIVE US SOME CREDIT FOR BEING ABLE TO USE OUR OWN BRAINS TO MAKE UP OUR OWN MINDS AND STOP TRYING TO SAVE US!!!

Thanks

Malcop

[gizmotron]

Mr. Chips,

Since you don't want to have any constructive criticism of the Signum here on VLS, I've decided to have the thread moved over to GG and one of the math forums.

Regards,

Landis.

Perhaps what is needed here is a typical response in GG style:

>>> Snowman - "No. Past spins have no influence on future spins. This is why systems like the law of the third, and the signum can not and do not work. They all have bad blueprints that rely on gambler's fallacy."<<<

My response: >>>gizmotron - "No snowman, that is not why systems don't work. They don't work because most people run out of bankroll as they encounter times when the systems are not effective. At no time do past spins have anything to do with anything. Your conclusions are like that if you stand on one leg you will not be mistaken for a pink lawn ornament. Your transcendental mantra is easily becoming the longest running chant in the history of your greatest hits. I doubt that a single visitor to this forum has not heard your broken record trick. I'll bet you are a real hoot at all the parties. Make sure they don't cook you this Thanksgiving. You just might be mistaken for the turkey."<<<

[Jakkalsdraai]

  I just have to ask this.

Landis, have you tried this method yet? How could anyone actually give creative criticism on any topic without becoming an expert of that system themselves beforehand!

Landis, take a page out of Sam's book. (Meant in general)

1.  Learn the system so you know it and can play it at the same level as the creator of that system
2.  If it then fails for you. Compare notes and ask why?
3.  If it still fails and there are no answers from the creator, open a criticism thread and bash the guy. (Sam does not do this though lol)

It seems that you Landis like to skip right to the second part of point 3 (open a criticism thread and bash the guy)

Cheers
Jakk

BTW. I have not looked at signum except for the first couple of pages. Maybe later though.

[malcop]

I just have to ask this.     

Landis, have you tried this method yet? How could anyone actually give creative criticism on any topic without becoming an expert of that system themselves beforehand!

Landis, take a page out of Sam's book.      (Meant in general)

1.       Learn the system so you know it and can play it at the same level as the creator of that system
2.       If it then fails for you.      Compare notes and ask why?
3.       If it still fails and there are no answers from the creator, open a criticism thread and bash the guy.      (Sam does not do this though lol)

It seems that you Landis like to skip right to the second part of point 3 (open a criticism thread and bash the guy)

Cheers
Jakk

BTW.      I have not looked at signum except for the first couple of pages.      Maybe later though.     

Landis,

I am in total agreement with Jakkalsdraai how can you be so critical of something you have not even looked at yet, it does not make sense to me, and I'm sure other members feel the same way.     

Why can't you accept that members that have tried the system so far are happy with signum once they have fully understood it.     

I know it could go bang in the future, but if it does but at least those that have taken the time to learn signum will be more informed to do a full analysis on why it failed and possibly how to fix it.     

Parts of signum are subjective but I look on that as a good thing.     Mr Chips has always said that once you become skilled with signum the decisions you make in a session will become easer.   

I know you are not interested in anything that anyone has to say unless it is in agreement with you, but it had to be said.

Thanks

Malcop

[Tangram]

Seeing that the signum system uses past spins to make decisions, Landis immediately throws it into the "Gambler's Fallacy" trash can. It seems that this observation (that past spins are used) trumps everything,  even the actual results that people are getting. He explains these away by saying that it must be "curve fitting", or unconscious cheating. Landis obviously likes to think of himself as a man of science, but this kind of closed-mindedness is just bad science.

[Landis]

Tangram,

1. He's not exploiting a defective wheel.
2. He's not observing the position of the ball in relation to the rotor.
3. His observations have no meaning.


So you believe that his system works?

[malcop]

Tangram,

1.      He's not exploiting a defective wheel.     
2.      He's not observing the position of the ball in relation to the rotor.     
3.      His observations have no meaning.     


So you believe that his system works?

Landis,

And you obviously believe that your VB method is the only way to win at Roulette, and anything else does not work.       I get you know you have to see it to believe it.     

That's why you kid yourself that you can make good money using VB, you poor deluded fool you.     

Check out this site nolinks. predictroulette. com/roulette/_notes/visualballistics. htm

The conclusion is the VB does not work, period.     

Now I have shown you that VB does not work, now you show me concrete proof that the signum system does not work.     

Oh sorry you can't can you because it is all in your head!!!

Show me the proof not just your opinion that signum does not work, show me tests done on signum that it does not work, guess what you can't find any, but I know if I look hard enough I will be able to find a lot more proof that VB dose not work!!!

[malcop]

-