HOW MANY HERE BET EVERY SPIN

[Spike]

So are you saying you will walk up to the table and commence betting immediately>>

After I record the last outcomes so I can determine the next bet.

[madupz4]

Spike,

I still don't understand why you need to record when the past 18 numbers are already recorded and shown on the marque board for you?  Especially when you are only playing the "short-term."  Why not just look up? 

[bombus]

Spike,

I still don't understand why you need to record when the past 18 numbers are already recorded and shown on the marque board for you?  Especially when you are only playing the "short-term."  Why not just look up? 

I think he might mean record the past results on a custom made chart or card that he brings with him.

[bombus]

So are you saying you will walk up to the table and commence betting immediately>>

After I record the last outcomes so I can determine the next bet.

Thanks, Spike.

But doesn't recording past outcomes equate to waiting for a number of spins before betting commences?

And isn't record taking always done in a mechanical fashion, thereby instilling a mechanical element into the method?

[Marven]

I still don't understand why you need to record when the past 18 numbers are already recorded and shown on the marque board for you?  Especially when you are only playing the "short-term."  Why not just look up? 

He plays three EC's, like I do (well, if I'm not playing VB which is more powerful for me, when the conditions are right), so I do understand the need for some manual charting.

I mean, if you have an edge playing one EC, then playing three at the same time will only accelerate your winnings, right Spike?

And isn't record taking always done in a mechanical fashion, thereby instilling a mechanical element into the method?

I'm not Spike, but personally, recording the data is done mechanically, but interpreting it is done very non-mechanically.

[lucky_strike]

Well put up with some-thing.

Values, variance, math, probability and statistics.

How many attempts for an attack 3 5 7 9.
Frame 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 and so on.

What to capture?

X = End of day.

Singles contra series.

920108 Ecart 3.44 +1 +1 +1
920124 Ecart 3.27 +1 +1 +1
920127 Ecart 3.00 +1 +1 +1
920131 Ecart 3.00 +1 -5 +1
920205 Ecart 3.40 +1 -5 +1
920211 Ecart 3.12 +1 +1 +1
920213 Ecart 3.41 +1 .X .X
920214 Ecart 3.12 +1 +1 +1
920218 Ecart 3.12 .X +1 .X
920219 Ecart 3.27 .X .X +1
920302 Ecart 3.64 +1 +1 +1
920325 Ecart 3.40 -5 +1 +1
920406 Ecart 3.00 +1 +1 +1
920428 Ecart 3.00 +1 +1 +1
920519 Ecart 3.54 -5 +1 -3
920520 Ecart 3.00 +1 +1 +1
920527 Ecart 3.15 +1 +1 +1
920609 Ecart 3.00 +1 +1 -3
920612 Ecart 3.15 +1 +1 .X
920613 Ecart 3.00 +1 +1 +1
920617 Ecart 3.00 +1 +1 +1
920622 Ecart 3.00 +1 +1 +1
920716 Ecart 3.00 +1 +1 +1
920720 Ecart 3.00 +1 +1 +1
920723 Ecart 3.00 +1 +1 +1
920810 Ecart 3.02 -5 .X .X
920818 Ecart 3.15 +1 +1 +1
920824 Ecart 3.00 +1 +1 +1
920826 Ecart 3.15 +1 +1 -3
920827 Ecart 3.15 +1 -5 +1
920903 Ecart 3.15 +1 +1 +1
920904 Ecart 3.00 +1 +1 +1
920909 Ecart 3.00 .X .X +1
920915 Ecart 3.18 +1 +1 +1
920923 Ecart 3.02 +1 +1 +1
920924 Ecart 3.00 +1 .X +1
920930 Ecart 3.29 +1 +1 +1
921002 Ecart 3.12 +1 +1 +1
921005 Ecart 3.88 +1 +1 +1
921005 Ecart 3.15 +1 +1 +1
921014 Ecart 3.70 +1 +1 -3
921022 Ecart 3.50 +1 .X .X
921024 Ecart 3.65 +1 +1 +1
921027 Ecart 3.00 +1 .X +1
921030 Ecart 3.00 +1 +1 .X

1th) 39/15
2th) 39/15
3th) 35/12

Any one can put up with statistics with out tell how they play!
But none does.

Do you know what an Value is?
Do you know what math is?
Do you know what probabiltiy is?
Do you know what statistics is and how it produce an variance?

There is not much here in this post all you have opinions, so what is fact and fiction?
What direction should some one contribute with an value and knowledge you can gain important information from?

So much talk about flat betting and no how-to.

Cheers LS

[lucky_strike]

How do you grasp mechanical and how the flow unfold.
None, indication, tendency.

The only true non mechanical is an blind man who put hes chips on the carpet with out a tought.

Cheers LS

[kav]

"recording the data is done mechanically, but interpreting it is done very non-mechanically"

Hi Marven,

Maybe we have a definition problem here. I'm not sure what "mechanically" means to you. But to me it means that specific parameters are taken into account and according to them, specific out comes. Basically, "mechanically" means that every time you have the same input (data), you have the same output (conclusion, decision). According to this definition, "non-mechanical" means random choices based on intuition, psi or whatever, in which case I don't ee the need to collect data in the first place.

[bliss]

I'm with kav and LS on this. If you can't explain your method or system in terms of a sequence of "IF-THEN" statements then you may as well scatter your chips randomly over the table.

If you have a method which wins consistently, as Spike claims he does, there must be some kind of structure to the betting otherwise you wouldn't do any better than random. I've had discussions with Spike over this before, and all I get from him is smoke and mirrors. 

[Marven]

"recording the data is done mechanically, but interpreting it is done very non-mechanically"

Hi Marven,

Maybe we have a definition problem here. I'm not sure what "mechanically" means to you. But to me it means that specific parameters are taken into account and according to them, specific out comes. Basically, "mechanically" means that every time you have the same input (data), you have the same output (conclusion, decision). According to this definition, "non-mechanical" means random choices based on intuition, psi or whatever, in which case I don't ee the need to collect data in the first place.

Hi kav,

I understand what you're trying to say, and I do admit it's a tricky thing. Usually when I say mechanical bet selection, I mean the old classical/conventional trigger-based one. E.g. Wait for Red to hit and bet on even Red. This type of mechanical is a blind one. It does not take into account observing the random flow and extracting conclusions and decisions based on it. They simply take one (or more) of two (or more) possible events that random can throw, and bet on it blindly. You can literally spend a lifetime testing systems and this classical approach will ALWAYS end up with one result: The chances of winning equal the chances of losing, minus the house edge, therefore a long term loss.

In THAT SENSE, I label my way of play non-mechanical.

Within this way, it is absolutely acknowledged that each spin is an independent trial, etc. Each spin does not abide by any imagined rules, but the ensemble of many of these trials forms something called the short term random flow. As a "flow", it (in itself) has certain slight characteristics (for lack of a better word), invisible to the untrained eye.

It is therefore true that if you give me the same ensemble/data flow twice, I will interpret it the same way (okay, I'm no computer nor am I that experienced yet, so maybe a LITTLE bit differently each time, but I would say in 95% of the time the betting decision I make is the same).

Now in THAT sense, you may feel free to label it "mechanical". Personally, if I had to, I would describe it as an advanced form of "mechanical".

So Lucky is definitely right:

The only true non mechanical is an blind man who put hes chips on the carpet with out a tought.

[bombus]

Yes I think it's virtually impossible to play any method without a degree of mechanicality (is that a word?) creeping in at some point.

And the fact that almost everyone to a man needs to watch how the numbers behave for a while before betting means that no one bets every spin.

[Spike]

If you have a method which wins consistently, as Spike claims he does, there must be some kind of structure to the betting otherwise you wouldn't do any better than random.>>>

No structure. I see a betting opportunity and then I determine what the best bet is. A betting opportunity is a multi layered thing, its not as simple as "I see A has happened so now I bet B."  I have to make make decisions to arrive at an educated guess, its never cut and dried. Random is slippery, you can never get ahead of it, you can only try and keep up.

[Spike]

I mean, if you have an edge playing one EC, then playing three at the same time will only accelerate your winnings, right Spike?>>>

Actually, no. I play 3 because 1 or 2 of them often produce no betting opp's, so I depend on the 3rd. And sometimes they all go dormant and I break even for awhile. I've tried tracking as many as 6 EC's at once and its too many. 3 is optimal.

[Spike]

watch how the numbers behave for a while before betting means that no one bets every spin.>>>

I don't watch how the numbers behave, I don't watch the numbers at all. I record the EC's and look for betting opp's, which I see in every spin. Very seldom do I skip a spin, maybe 3 times in 100.

[bombus]

watch how the numbers behave for a while before betting means that no one bets every spin.>>>

I don't watch how the numbers behave, I don't watch the numbers at all. I record the EC's and look for betting opp's, which I see in every spin. Very seldom do I skip a spin, maybe 3 times in 100.

Record the numbers - Record the EC's, it's the same thing.

You still need to skip some spins to start off. If you use the Marque, then that's the same as skipping those spins.

I understand that perhaps once the betting commences there are few to no more skipped spins, but at the beginning....

[bombus]

-