VLS Roulette Forum

A few days ago, someone brought up an interesting point regarding (yet again) past numbers. *ALWAYS* a favorite subject of mine.

We'll use the 00 wheel for my example. When the AP (cough) crew do their thing regarding looking for a bias wheel/tilted wheel (use whatever term you like), they either jot down many numbers OR we have also read that it only takes a couple spins to spot it IF it exists. I say thats a load of BS but thats a different thread (lol). Anyways, those AP guys are using PAST RESULTS ('gamblers fallacy') to now make their bets and hopefully a profitable day.

Example being, the tilt (or bias) is in the 30, 11, 7, 20 section. Ok, fine whatever. Now take the method guy that also did some tracking etc. and he wants to include those same 4 numbers into his betting METHOD. Whether its flat betting or a progression, does not matter. My point? Its comical that when the AP (cough) crew use PAST RESULTS, its somehow BETTER or more acceptable.....God like almost (lol).


When a hard working method guy wants to use those EXACT SAME numbers, for some reason HE is using gamblers fallacy and destined to lose. Hmmmm, I'm a bit confused.

Ken

Here is the bottom line for definitions of using past results (gamblers fallacy).

Not EVERY situation can be the SAME definition guys.

I'll give two opposite situations >>

The first, past numbers mean something. I'll track 200 spins. I'll choose 3 numbers for YOU and 3 numbers for me. For myself, I'll take the 3 most recent numbers that have three hits on it (hot).

For you, I choose 3 numbers with the fewest hits in the last 200 spins (very cold). We'll flat bet for the next 20 spins, my numbers against your numbers. We'll do this experiment not once but over 100 different sessions. *ANYONE* who says it will come close to balancing out is LYING, plain and simple. That is an example of past numbers with MEANING.

Now, an example of gamblers fallacy >> The 4 5 6 street has not hit in the last 12 spins so now its DUE to hit SOON.

Are BOTH of my examples the same? Of course not. Do they BOTH use past results? Yes.


Ken

Quote from: Mr J on July 13, 2011, 08:08:53 PM
Anyways, those AP guys are using PAST RESULTS ('gamblers fallacy') to now make their bets and hopefully a profitable day.

Example being, the tilt (or bias) is in the 30, 11, 7, 20 section. Ok, fine whatever. Now take the method guy that also did some tracking etc. and he wants to include those same 4 numbers into his betting METHOD. Whether its flat betting or a progression, does not matter. My point? Its comical that when the AP (cough) crew use PAST RESULTS, its somehow BETTER or more acceptable.....God like almost (lol).

When a hard working method guy wants to use those EXACT SAME numbers, for some reason HE is using gamblers fallacy and destined to lose. Hmmmm, I'm a bit confused.

Ken, the reason you're confused is because you don't understand what gambler's fallacy is. GF is the belief that JUST BECAUSE a number hasn't come in a while then it must be due soon. To "use" GF, you need to look at past results.

On the other hand, the AP guy looks at past results, not because he wants to see which numbers haven't come in a while so that he can bet on them, but because past results are the data which point to a bias or whatever.

Why is the "hard working" method player committing a fallacy but the AP guy isn't?

Because the bias player is looking at OTHER data as well as past numbers. In fact, the past numbers are merely incidental to the main objective which is to locate a bias, which if it exists, is conveniently located by referring to the numbers on the wheel.
On the other hand, the method player doesn't look at anything other than the past numbers themselves, his bet is based on PURE STATISTICS. The trouble with relying on statistics is that numbers will "sleep" anyway just by random chance, there is no guarantee that they will "wake up" just at the moment you start betting on them, that's what makes it a fallacy.  :nono:

The AP guy might see a slight wobble in the wheel (whether you believe this is possible or not isn't the point, it doesn't change the PRINCIPLE) which results in the ball being less likely to fall into a particular sector. That's PHYSICS. Physics doesn't rely on probability so you can be sure that the ball will continue to avoid that sector so long as the bias exists.  :yahoo:

So they may both identify the SAME numbers, but the GF guy will be betting FOR them (because they're "due"), but suppose the AP has identified this sector as being one which (because of the bias) the ball will tend to stay away from. The AP guy will then bet AGAINST these numbers, which is opposite from the method player. The winner will be the bias player.  :dance1:

Quote from: Mr J on July 13, 2011, 09:24:57 PM
*ANYONE* who says it will come close to balancing out is LYING, plain and simple.

So are you saying that choosing the "hot" numbers will give the better result?

Again, you're confusing gambler's fallacy with something else. GF only applies to the belief that numbers have to catch up (you got that part right in example of the street 4,5,6).

Believing that because numbers are "hot" then they're more likely to keep hitting is called the INVERSE gambler's fallacy.  :biggrin:

Actually, to be fair, betting on the hot numbers isn't such a bad idea because you may have inadvertently stumbled on a bias:

QuoteThe conclusion of this reversed gambler's fallacy may be correct, however, if the empirical evidence suggests that an initial assumption about the probability distribution is false. If a coin is tossed ten times and lands "heads" ten times, the gambler's fallacy would suggest an even-money bet on "tails", while the inverse gambler's fallacy would suggest an even-money bet on "heads". In this case, the smart bet is "heads" because the empirical evidence—ten "heads" in a row—suggests that the coin is likely to be biased toward "heads", contradicting the (general) assumption that the coin is fair.

(wikipedia - Gambler's Fallacy)

So wouldn't it be great Ken, after all this hate campaign against the AP players, you actually turn out to be one yourself, only you didn't realise it!  :haha:

It's certainly a very BAD idea to bet on a few sleeping numbers which you think are due to wake up.

Well to be honest my basic method of play at the moment is to log onto smart live casino

low limit euto wheel .. open the history (last 185 numbers)

and track the last 50 spins on a wheel...

i always see osme areas of the wheel hitting more than others

i try to keep my bets below 24 numbers as a rule and i dont like to exceed a 1,3,9 progression...

ideally i bet around 18-20 numbers on a marty style progression.

i do pretty well 90%$ of the time id say.

im playing as we speak ... image atached ...

ok so thats 20 numbers im playing on a marty stle progression

numbers after tracking:

15 W
18 W
20 W
16 W
4 W
24 W
6 L
2 L
20 W
31 W
11 L
28 L
8 L
29 W
5 L
14 W
1 W
16 W
10 L
15 W
7 L
27 L
27 L
4 W
2 L
23 L
4 W
1 W
14 W
32 W
21 L
33 W
7 L
2 L
32 W
33 W
14 W
14 W
16 W


END GAME AS I HAVE TO GO TO WORK

20 NUMBERS PLAYED FOR 39 SPINS - 24 WINS & 15 LOSSES

i think thats gice me around 62% average wins.

step 4 was max on my progression, but a flat bet should have produced around a 12% increase in BR.

but a flat bet would have produced a sli

Ken you keep coming up with the same conclusions and you get the same answers. Nothing really ever changes.

Tracking a tilt has nothing to do with the numbers.  A tilt tracking sheet for a 8 deflector wheel might look like this:

1. XX
2. X
3. XXX
4. XXXX
5. X
6. XXXXX
7. XX
8. XX

See no numbers !!! wooo....... Yeah i know, i numbered the deflectors. Damn.

If a deflector gets more hits there are usually a physical reason. Whatever the reason, the point is that if we know the odds for a diamond to get hit before the ball has even been launched, there can be taken advantage of it.


As for the sleeper/hot number thing, thats just plain rubbish which springs out from not having worked enough with testing.  So far i have not seen ANY difference in long term tests wether you choose hot numbers or sleepers, they all come out in the - 2.7% are with minor fluctations. 

Same old same old.

Quote from: Kelly on July 14, 2011, 02:00:11 PM
As for the sleeper/hot number thing, thats just plain rubbish which springs out from not having worked enough with testing. 

Between here and the Wiz site, lets begin.

"the reason you're confused" >>> I'm not confused, I was being an a**hole.

How can I re-ask this? Both guys (AP and the method guy) are using the SAME past numbers for betting REGARDLESS of how or why they got those numbers. (its hard to word this).........Its funny how the AP guys use the SAME numbers but somehow THATS OK. They also used past results. You can give it whatever TITLE you want to BUT they use past results. I dont think you would disagree Mike? The method guy (or system) uses those numbers and he's an idiot?? It makes no sense. The AP (cough) guys can NOT have it both ways.

Ken

Quote from: Mike on July 14, 2011, 06:05:11 AM
So are you saying that choosing the "hot" numbers will give the better result?

Again, you're confusing gambler's fallacy with something else. GF only applies to the belief that numbers have to catch up (you got that part right in example of the street 4,5,6).

Believing that because numbers are "hot" then they're more likely to keep hitting is called the INVERSE gambler's fallacy.  :biggrin:

Under the EXACT situation I posted, (and 100 trials) I am 100% correct. If you go changing what I said, then I cant comment. *EVERY* *EVERY* situation can NOT be clumped together as gamblers fallacy. I gave 2 opposite examples.

Ken

Quote from: Mike on July 14, 2011, 06:46:12 AM
Actually, to be fair, betting on the hot numbers isn't such a bad idea because you may have inadvertently stumbled on a bias: (wikipedia - Gambler's Fallacy)

So wouldn't it be great Ken, after all this hate campaign against the AP players, you actually turn out to be one yourself, only you didn't realise it!  :haha:

It's certainly a very BAD idea to bet on a few sleeping numbers which you think are due to wake up.

No hate from me, not sure what you mean? I have posted 100000000000000000000 times, I RARELY bet on 'due' anymore. Not sure why you mentioned that. Here is an example: Lets say Snowjob and I lived in the same city, with one casino. I go and track a bunch of numbers and I see that 3 numbers are hitting alot. I DONT CARE WHY but they are hitting alot. I do my betting and I have a great day. Two days later, Snowjob goes (same wheel) and he notices his bias (cough). Bets on those numbers, has a great day. Him and I were betting on the same numbers. Why am I the sucker for betting on those numbers OTHER THAN....I'm a method guy. Who cares?

Ken

@Kelly >>> I dont want to re-post everything again. Too many HATE posts to get to today.

Maybe my POINT (not question) was taken wrong?

Two different guys from opposite sides of the tracks using the SAME numbers.........Why does one guy want a 21 gun salute cause he's into AP but the other guy is an idiot? (SAME NUMBERS SAME NUMBERS SAME NUMBERS SAME NUMBERS)

Ken

@Mike & Kelly >> So you are saying this EXACT situation, is WRONG? You are more crazy than I am >>


The first, past numbers mean something. I'll track 200 spins. I'll choose 3 numbers for YOU and 3 numbers for me. For myself, I'll take the 3 most recent numbers that have three hits on it (hot).

For you, I choose 3 numbers with the fewest hits in the last 200 spins (very cold). We'll flat bet for the next 20 spins, my numbers against your numbers. We'll do this experiment not once but over 100 different sessions/trials.

Snow tried to tell you years ago that chasing hot numbers instead of sleepers in any case would be a better choice. THE ONLY REASON being that you might be betting on a positive bias. Where chasing sleepers as a worst case scenario would cost you way more than the house edge because they were donators to a positive bias.  You can`t have a positive bias, without a negative bias somewhere else.  

The difference between you and snows method being, that snow would be betting the true bias and you would be tricked to also bet the small fluctations away from the bias and fall on your ass when the fluctation retraces. Overall you would still be better off than the house edge because you would be tricked back to the true bias sooner or later.

Spotting  the true bias is still number one because you can break up if the bias parameters changes (number ring rotation, cleaning etc.)

PS: About the picking number thing: Do it which ever way you want as long as you for use some sort of methology that rules out selecting specific days and leaving others out.  Pick some numbers from the internet, then make 1 session per day. Or make it as one long string of sessions without breaking it up for days (like if you were camping in the casino) or use evere second day or every third day etc. 

As long as it is not 250 spins from wisconsin and then 500 from wiesbaden and then 230 from gala in london. Leaves too much room for fiddeling with the numbers.

For a minute, forget the bias factor (please!)

In my above example, lets say the wheel was 99.9999% accurate. Do you STILL not agree with me? Dont answer, I know your answer is 'no', thats fine.

Ken

You can`t leave the bias factor out if you wanna play on the same wheel as snow. If it was 99.999999% perfect you would be playing hot numbers, snow wouldnt.

Quote from: Kelly on July 14, 2011, 04:34:55 PM
You can`t leave the bias factor out if you wanna play on the same wheel as snow. If it was 99.999999% perfect you would be playing hot numbers, snow wouldnt.

Ok, hot numbers it is. Only myself, Snowman not involved. The wheel is 99.9999% accurate. Do you agree? >>


The first, past numbers mean something. I'll track 200 spins. I'll choose 3 numbers for YOU and 3 numbers for me. For myself, I'll take the 3 most recent numbers that have three hits on it (hot).

For you, I choose 3 numbers with the fewest hits in the last 200 spins (very cold). We'll flat bet for the next 20 spins, my numbers against your numbers. We'll do this experiment not once but over 100 different sessions/trials.

Changing the subject a bit...I dont know why some think The Wizard and JP are some form of God?  :girl_wacko: Cracks me up.

Ken

I thought that there are very few bias wheels anymore, so if a number (or sector) is repeating and getting hot, does it necessarily mean that that wheel is bias at all?

Isn't it just that some areas go through hot spells, and the trick is to hang onto its coattails for a while?

Quote from: buffalowizard on July 14, 2011, 06:56:28 PM
I thought that there are very few bias wheels anymore, so if a number (or sector) is repeating and getting hot, does it necessarily mean that that wheel is bias at all?

Isn't it just that some areas go through hot spells, and the trick is to hang onto its coattails for a while?

FU***N BINGO, thank you!! You hit it on the head. But if a 'method' guy were to bet like you described, I would be the sucker for doing so BECAUSE those are PAST results.

Ken

Npthing happens  just out of   nowhere.. One  must also  consider the interaction  of croupier  and wheel.

My prefernce are   B & M casinos with live  dealers at the roulette table.

" SOME LIKE IT HOT" .


Nathan Detroit
HAPPY WINNINGS!!!

You can call it a sucker bet if you like,  it has the same probability as a sleeping section and on a perfect wheel you would come out no worse or better than on the sleeping sectors.  The truth in the pudding is in the reason for betting there. Your reason for betting there would be that it would stay hot or that the sleepers will wake up.  On a perfect wheel, you end up with the same result. 

On a biased wheel you will end up with more hits. Tracking past numbers is just to confirm a bias that you visually already know about.  Playing "biased" numbers on a wheel where its impossible to detect any visual bias is in my opinion just as much a sucker bet as betting on a "hot" sector.

But thats not how its done ayway.

Well i just have to say if i have to make some bets to look occupied playing when tracking i find it being a great option to make some dummy bets and play hot numbers.
I also find the previous five as Snow mention so many times just work as clock work - even if i add twist to it.

Sure there is more potentials hitting some slight bias numbers that way then play sleepers.
And with does low value you recoup very fast when you start to play for real.

But i assume that is a different topic as there would never exist a reason for Mr J to play hide and seek at the table.
One other thing that strike me when i read about all does RC and many among the AP community actually starring into the wheel make me just wondering how they last standing at the tables.
The first thing Laurance tough me is just find a good way to glance at the wheel three times - saying that i should just say i don't use hes method do.

Ok Kelly, can you meet me halfway? Lets say I am betting on numbers (a section) that is HOT but the reason its HOT is because of a slight bias. Lets say I do NOT know its a bias (nor do I care), is it acceptable to your holiness that I am betting on them?

Ken

Which part is unclear ?

QuotePlaying "biased" numbers on a wheel where its impossible to detect any visual bias is in my opinion just as much a sucker bet as betting on a "hot" sector

Hmmm, I dont know a better way to ask my question.

Ken

Quote from: Mr J on July 15, 2011, 08:54:47 PM
Ok Kelly, can you meet me halfway? Lets say I am betting on numbers (a section) that is HOT but the reason its HOT is because of a slight bias. Lets say I do NOT know its a bias (nor do I care), is it acceptable to your holiness that I am betting on them?

Ken

No it's not acceptable, because if you don't know that there's a bias why are you betting on them? Just because they're 'hot' doesn't mean there is a bias, because numbers can run hot anyway due to random fluctuations. That's why I say you need to FIRST identify the bias VISUALLY, then you know that the numbers are hot because of the bias.

Quote from: Mike on July 17, 2011, 10:11:43 AM
No it's not acceptable, because if you don't know that there's a bias why are you betting on them? Just because they're 'hot' doesn't mean there is a bias, because numbers can run hot anyway due to random fluctuations. That's why I say you need to FIRST identify the bias VISUALLY, then you know that the numbers are hot because of the bias.

That's why I say you need to FIRST identify the bias VISUALLY, then you know that the numbers are hot because of the bias.

If i understand you correct with your statement so do you refer to some kind of visual defect - is that correct?
If so then i would not agree as there exist one other method to verify to certain degree if you have a bias that is not due to random fluctuation with out any need to make a visual spotting of some kind of defect.
Its just take more time and effort and what you refer to  :whistle:

Quote from: Mike on July 17, 2011, 10:11:43 AM
No it's not acceptable, because if you don't know that there's a bias why are you betting on them? Just because they're 'hot' doesn't mean there is a bias, because numbers can run hot anyway due to random fluctuations. That's why I say you need to FIRST identify the bias VISUALLY, then you know that the numbers are hot because of the bias.

@Mike >> First off, this was for Kelly, not you. As long as you responded, lets rock.

I think you have my post all wrong, I'm not sure? 

"if you don't know that there's a bias why are you betting on them" >>> I dont care about a POSSIBLE bias (cough), thats my point. If I tracked numbers from that wheel and found a section to be hitting alot REGARDLESS of the reason, what is the big issue that I'm betting on that section and still labeled a 'method player'? Is there a problem with that? Do I have to be labeled an AP (cough) guy in order to bet in that manner?  I said in my post......."What if I did NOT know a bias existed".


Ken

I'll just say:

* Bias occurs far more frequently that casinos know. Their software is inadequate.

* Temporary or what I call "dynamic bias" occurs all the time. It can be presented as "hot numbers", but typically the temporary bias is only very slight. It is not something like 10 blacks in a row. An example of CAUSE is a temporarily stronger dominant diamond due to ball track grit IN COMBINATION with a particular bowl and rotor combination.

To exploit a temporary bias, you have to deal with much fewer spins than you normally would with typical bias analysis. You need to visually observe the wheel & ball where possible (and listen if possible), and segregate data which means things like rotor speed, direction etc. The trick is the combination of segregating data with such a small amount of spins, and observe what is happening at the wheel. To find dynamic bias, you MUST match up CAUSE AND EFFECT.

But still, there are much better ways to beat roulette.

Quote from: Mr J on July 18, 2011, 07:18:07 PM
@Mike >> First off, this was for Kelly, not you. As long as you responded, lets rock.

I think you have my post all wrong, I'm not sure?  

"if you don't know that there's a bias why are you betting on them" >>> I dont care about a POSSIBLE bias (cough), thats my point. If I tracked numbers from that wheel and found a section to be hitting alot REGARDLESS of the reason, what is the big issue that I'm betting on that section and still labeled a 'method player'? Is there a problem with that? Do I have to be labeled an AP (cough) guy in order to bet in that manner?  I said in my post......."What if I did NOT know a bias existed".

Ken

Ken, I believe I understood your point well enough. MY point is that if a section is "hitting a lot" you CAN'T ignore the reason, because all sectors and groups of number have periods when they "run hot" because of standard deviation, or "luck" as you might call it. If you start betting a sector having observed that it's hot, how do you know, without having looked for possible causes, that it isn't just randomness which is "causing" the sector to be hot? As kelly says, collecting spins should be for CONFIRMATION that your hypothesis of bias is correct. If you don't have a reason to think that the sector SHOULD be hot then you're just guessing (and hoping) that it will continue to run hot when you start betting on it.

However, if you record enough spins and the sector is running at 3 or 4 standard deviations then you MIGHT have reason to believe that there is a bias, even without doing visual checks.  What won't work is just looking at the last 30, 50 or 100 spins and then making a decision based only on that. You need to be more sophisticated, and as Steve says, you have to link cause and effect.

Ken you made your point very well by saying that the wheel was 99.999999% perfect.  You play the hot sectors, snow don`t because there are no visible bias.  IF he played the hot sectors along with you, it would be sucker bets as well.  I can`t see why that doesn`t answer your questions.

@You two >> "MY point is that if a section is "hitting a lot" you CAN'T ignore the reason" >> Sure I can, why not? I certainly dont care what the reason is. Like you said Mike, it is possible I would be betting on a hot section that is a bit bias but I really dont care about the label of it.

If I tracked 'X' numbers and found a few numbers were hitting ALOT, I dont give a s**t as to why. I'll temporarily bet on those numbers until they are hot no more. Either way, I think a SIGNIFICANT bias is a load of BS.

Ken

And the reason the advantage player wouldnt is that if there were no bias your "hot" sector would only hit with the expectation, not above expectation.  Feel free to prove otherwise. 

Prove? Again, if any AP (cough) guy wants to bet on a section for WHATEVER reason, I dont care, have fun. I see once again we dont agree on something, no biggie. I let my wallet do the talking for me, not a message board.

Ken

@Kelly
Bist wirklich umgestiegen auf Kesselgucken?
Do you really trust in visual not math´s prefer physic´s?
Answer requested,if you want
CU
RCEC

8)

Quote from: buffalowizard on July 14, 2011, 06:56:28 PM
I thought that there are very few bias wheels anymore, so if a number (or sector) is repeating and getting hot, does it necessarily mean that that wheel is bias at all?

Isn't it just that some areas go through hot spells, and the trick is to hang onto its coattails for a while?

WRONG. First, there are a lot more bias wheels than you believe. You're just repeating the same old garbage the casinos want you to think, their disinformation campaign is working well!  :haha:

Second, on a random wheel, betting on hot numbers gives no advantage whatsoever. WHY should it? the math is correct for random wheels and it tells you that all outcomes are equally likely. Hot numbers, cold numbers, it's all BS.  Seriously, people have been playing that way for hundreds of years without success. It's just pure ignorance, but whatever floats your boat I guess.

Yes, hot numbers don't NECESSARILY mean the wheel is biased, which is why you need to look for signs of bias, isn't that just common sense? if there is none, WHY bet anyway ASSUMING that the hot numbers will stay hot? the numbers are just as likely to turn cold. There is not and cannot ever be a RELIABLE indicator, based purely on statistics, which will tell you that the numbers will stay hot for X more spins. Something like that would contradict the math of the game.

Quote from: Mr J on July 13, 2011, 09:24:57 PM
The first, past numbers mean something. I'll track 200 spins. I'll choose 3 numbers for YOU and 3 numbers for me. For myself, I'll take the 3 most recent numbers that have three hits on it (hot).

For you, I choose 3 numbers with the fewest hits in the last 200 spins (very cold). We'll flat bet for the next 20 spins, my numbers against your numbers. We'll do this experiment not once but over 100 different sessions. *ANYONE* who says it will come close to balancing out is LYING, plain and simple. That is an example of past numbers with MEANING.

Ken, it's easy to show that this can't work. This is one of the first things I looked at when I was investigating systems. It DOES all balance out in the end. Computer simulations confirm the math.

Ken you said that anyone who claimed that there would be a difference in betting hot and cold numbers were LYING.  I suggest you back that statement up. I can prove the exact betting preferences you describe does not yield a difference, if you can accept +- 0.20% from expectation to each side.

I can also prove that if we knock a wheel until its biased it also diverges from expectation.

Now what can you prove to back your high horse statements.

This is nothing against either one of you but you guys wouldn't know a good bet selection if you tripped over it.

Continue studying THEORIES. Overall, we dont agree, oh well.

For someone to say my example is flawed is silly in the head.  :girl_wacko:

The 3 CURRENT hot numbers vs. the 3 coldest for *ONLY* 20 spins of betting (800 trials)....."Yeah Ken, it'll even out".   :suicide:

Forget it and good luck in doing, whatever it is you do again.  :wub:


Ken

Why so shy ?  Its a pretty bold statemet to be left hanging.

very disappointing Ken, I thought you were going to prove us wrong.  :'(

Prove? Should we take this to GG (if its still there) and take the gloves off?  :girl_wacko:

You 'prove' to me that YOU do well with roulette. Same rule for everyone Waiting......

Dont think you two can team up on me. (lol) I'll take 12 of you wannabee's on while eating a taco, taking a s**t, cleaning my shoes and doing my taxes. You guys scare nobody.

Ken

Go ahead im waiting.  Don`t know how you manage to sh**t on your shoes though. 

You have dumped a bold statement that i can prove on real numbers is bullshit, but the ball is in your court and im waiting to see what makes you act that naive.

No, no, no....waiting. Show us that you do 'well' with roulette. Same rule for everyone.

The ball is in your court sir.

This is a true statement >> The 3 CURRENT hot numbers vs. the 3 coldest for *ONLY* 20 spins of betting (800 trials)....Keep in mind this is the shortened version.

Let me ask you this. Throw me your opinion >> Here, Roulette Evolution shows the hottest 5 numbers from the last *500* spins. RARELY have any of those 5 numbers hit in the last 15 numbers (history board). Do you think its PROPER (not sure what other word to use) to show the last 500?

Why not show whats hot over the LAST 20-30 outcomes? BUT THEY WON'T DO THAT, WHY??  You feel its only a coincidence, they are showing stats from fu***n 500 prior spins?

Ken

Ken,

I'm confused. Initially you said this:

QuoteFor you, I choose 3 numbers with the fewest hits in the last 200 spins (very cold). We'll flat bet for the next 20 spins, my numbers against your numbers. We'll do this experiment not once but over 100 different sessions.

Now what's all this about 800 and 500 spins?

Give me the exact method or challenge and I'll test it. I don't have an agenda here in spite of what you think. You don't think I would prefer to use a simple method instead of scouting for biased wheels? The ONLY reason I do that is because I've found nothing else that works, period. I would be DELIGHTED if your method worked, in fact I'd like to shake your hand and buy you a beer.  :thumbsup:

Ken i don`t care how you do in the casino or i do, just show some stats to back up your funny claims hot numbers has an advantage over sleepers on a perfect wheel.  Set the preferences as you wish.

Quote from: Mr J on July 20, 2011, 01:53:03 PM
Prove? Should we take this to GG (if its still there) and take the gloves off?  :girl_wacko:

You 'prove' to me that YOU do well with roulette. Same rule for everyone Waiting......

Dont think you two can team up on me. (lol) I'll take 12 of you wannabee's on while eating a taco, taking a s**t, cleaning my shoes and doing my taxes. You guys scare nobody.

Ken

I tried opening an account at GG but never got my username. It seems the admin is broken which explains why the forum is so dead. Get me an account and I'll be happy to post there, but what's wrong with this place? is it that you want to get abusive and you can get away with it there?

If that's the case, I suggest you grow up. I'm not interested in a pissing contest with you or anyone else. If you have a claim then I suggest you behave like a rational adult and back it up with facts, evidence and/or reasoned debate.

@ Mike,,

Consider yourself lucky  not  being able to  register at GG. The  roulette section is  dead  as a door nail  and  you  do not  need the usual  rant at the  General section either .

You are  much too intelligent  for that kind of  actiion there.  At one time  GG was  a  very interesting board  but it has  reached the  bottom of the barrel. :skull: :skull: :skull:

Nathan Detroit
HAPPY WINNINGS!!!

Agreed, i promised myself a long time ago not to participate anymore in Js rantings there and now i dont think i have my password anymore. Thanks god.

Hey thanks Nathan. I agree with you about GG  Shame really, there are some great threads in the archives.

Quote from: Mike on July 20, 2011, 04:05:42 PM
I tried opening an account at GG but never got my username. It seems the admin is broken which explains why the forum is so dead. Get me an account and I'll be happy to post there, but what's wrong with this place? is it that you want to get abusive and you can get away with it there?

If that's the case, I suggest you grow up. I'm not interested in a pissing contest with you or anyone else. If you have a claim then I suggest you behave like a rational adult and back it up with facts, evidence and/or reasoned debate.

You're embarrassing yourself sir. As far as GG goes, perhaps someone would be willing to give you their user name and password. I think there might be PLENTY of people to choose from.

Ken

If fishman would sell GG to me I'd fix it.

 "but what's wrong with this place? is it that you want to get abusive and you can get away with it there?

If that's the case, I suggest you grow up. I'm not interested in a pissing contest with you or anyone else. If you have a claim then I suggest you behave like a rational adult and back it up with facts, evidence and/or reasoned debate" >>> Yes, I can get away with it there. (thats called answering a question).

Back it up? Oohhh, you mean like AP (cough) guys do, right? Same rule for everyone. Dont TELL me to do something if YOU will not do the same. You know little about bet selection and a DECENT method, sorry........"but Ken, 2+2 will never be 5". << This BS gets old real fast. By your request, I'll re-post my question.

Ken

Geeez, and here we go again. Ok Mike >>

I'll track the last 200 numbers. I'll pick 3 numbers for you and 3 for myself to flat bet for ONLY the next 20 spins. For me, I'll take the last 3 numbers with 3 hits on it. Very hot but most likely temporary. For you, I'll pick the 3 numbers that have the fewest hits on it, very cold.

Flat bet for 20 spins. It would be 800 trials of 20 spins. Why so many? So I dont have to hear the BS of, its too small a sample. There is no way I would even look at your *BIAS* results, no way!!

Ken

"I would be DELIGHTED if your method worked, in fact I'd like to shake your hand and buy you a beer" >>> First off, not even sure which method you are talking about. Second, if 'it' worked, NOBODY would even know it did. You would not post good results. Gotta keep the agenda going. A nice link for you >>  nolinks://vlsroulette.com/gambling-and-roulette-related/keep-at-it-my-method-friends!/

(Sorry for so many posts guys, alot to get to PLUS the Wiz site  ::)) >> @Mike >> This other question of mine, I recently added. I was only looking for an opinion from ANYBODY. I think its a fair point I bring up.

We have a game here called, Roulette Evolution. It shows the hottest 5 numbers from the last *500* spins. RARELY do any of those 5 numbers hit in the last 15 numbers (history board). Do you think its PROPER (not sure what other word to use) to show the last 500 outcomes?

Why not show whats hot over the LAST 20-30 outcomes? BUT THEY WON'T DO THAT, WHY??  You think its only a coincidence, they are showing stats from fu***n 500 prior spins? I think its setup like that for a reason, just my opinion.

Ken

Quote from: Kelly on July 20, 2011, 03:45:56 PM
Ken I don`t care how you do in the casino or I do, just show some stats to back up your funny claims hot numbers has an advantage over sleepers on a perfect wheel.  Set the preferences as you wish.

Please quote correctly. Under the EXACT conditions I posted. The way you worded it is too vague.

Ken

Are you trying to say you cant remember your conditions (not that im surprised)  ?  Dont worry ken, we can easyli find a biased wheel to test once you have delivered your stats if that is your REAL problem.  Somehow it seems like you cant back up your claims, not that its a big surprise to anyone. 

I dont care about your first and secondary hidden agendas about AP guys, just back up your own weird claims. Have i ever run away from any of your demanding requests ? 

Are you man or cookie ?

Quote from: Kelly on July 20, 2011, 08:19:16 PM
Are you trying to say you cant remember your conditions (not that im surprised)  ?  Dont worry ken, we can easyli find a biased wheel to test once you have delivered your stats if that is your REAL problem.  Somehow it seems like you cant back up your claims, not that its a big surprise to anyone. 

I dont care about your first and secondary hidden agendas about AP guys, just back up your own weird claims. Have I ever run away from any of your demanding requests ? 

Are you man or cookie ?

Are we even talking about the same thing? Cant remember my conditions? I posted it I think 3 posts back. Deliver stats of what? As far as yourself......same rule. BACK UP YOUR CLAIMS that you do 'well' with AP. Waiting....

Ken

Like i said, i dont care how you do or how i do in the casino, all you have to do is put up  at least a try to convince us that hot sectors is better than sleepers. You said earlyer that people who said otherwise were LYERS.

Well, i say otherwise. Prove me to be a LYER. 

Hot sectors? Do you read the posts or only do a quick scan? I said the 3 numbers that were hot UNDER THE CONDITIONS I laid out. Prove to us that YOU are not a LIAR in regards to you doing 'well' with AP (cough).

You see how it works? Both ways. Waiting.......

Ken

Okay, so will you back up your claims to a person who is NOT an advantageplayer ? Or can you make up more excuses ?

Like i said, you can set up your conditions for when the numbers are hot or cold or whatever you call them, just try not to make more excuses now.

I'll play along with your GAME Snowman. You know I dont do charts & graphs but you want to see them anyways. So who is bullsh****ng who? The FACT is, once an AP (cough) guy crosses that line and says......"yes, under those conditions Ken, those hot numbers are the better choice".

Once that happens, you are fu***d and you know it. Thats why you won't admit it cause you know I'll be quoting that for YEARS to come. Just like over at the Wiz site, there is a female (so she says) that screwed herself a few days ago. She is anti-roulette and she said that under my conditions posted, it is unfair. In other words, she knew what the BETTER OPTION was for betting. I asked her what was unfair about my conditions? She has YET to respond. She fu***d herself and NOW can not take it back.

Ken

@Kelly (or anyone) >> Being serious. Do you have an OPINION on this?....



We have a game here called, Roulette Evolution. It shows the hottest 5 numbers from the last *500* spins. RARELY do any of those 5 numbers hit in the last 15 numbers (history board). Do you think its PROPER (not sure what other word to use) to show the last 500 outcomes?

Why not show whats hot over the LAST 20-30 outcomes? BUT THEY WON'T DO THAT, WHY??  You think its only a coincidence, they are showing stats from fu***n 500 prior spins? I think its setup like that for a reason, just my opinion.

An opinion ? How slow can a man be. How many times do i have to repeat myself ?  I have already told you that i can run any of your preferences on real casino numbers and show that your hots and colds are a complete bunch of crap. All I wanted to see, is what triggers you to dump such a naive statement and you say you dont care about stats, no i bet you dont because they dont support your claims. This thread proves that you are the master of ducking and diving.

You even have the option to prove it to someone you dont have an issue with.  But i know what your problem is, you cant back it up.   

Cookie it was. 

(lol).....Kelly, my last post (Roulette Evolution) has NOTHING to do with a method !!

I was looking for your opinion.

Ken

 "your hots and colds are a complete bunch of crap. All I wanted to see, is what triggers you to dump such a naive statement and you say you dont care about stats" >>> I did not say I dont care about stats, please quote correctly.

Under the EXACT conditions I posted, I am correct. You can slam me all you want to....keep the AP agenda going, nobody cares.

I said it before....There are very few examples of past numbers being useful for future betting. Example being: The 4 5 6 street has not hit in 12 spins. It is now due to hit. I agree with you, this is BS. You are putting EVERY EVERY EVERY EVERY EVERY EVERY EVERY example of past numbers into ONE grouping...."they are all useless".

This is a load of s**t and you know it. Come out from behind the curtain. You will NEVER, EVER, EVER stop me from posting and telling the TRUTH of how AP (cough) is a load of LIES.



Ken

Cookie no one in here talks as much about ap as you do. For all I care you can slam it as much as you like I dont care. YOU are the one that keeps bringing up the issue and your brain has gone bonkers about it.  Im sure you wake up screaming when dreaming a big bad snowman is leaning over you.

" Under the EXACT conditions I posted, I am correct"

Like I said, stand up for yourself and prove that you know what you are talking about.  If I was as dumb as you I would copy and paste this issue in after each of your posts adding "waiting......" but dont worry cookie I wont.  You have proven that you are better at running away rather than standing your ground.

Hmmm, this sure does not sound like Kelly?  :spiteful:

Ken

The last post at the  GG roulette board appeared om June 20th 2011. GG is DEAD :skull:

I saw that.  :sarcastic:

You don`t like the new sound ?  Where is your evidence that im lying ?

Quote from: Mr J on July 20, 2011, 09:46:58 PM
You are putting EVERY EVERY EVERY EVERY EVERY EVERY EVERY example of past numbers into ONE grouping...."they are all useless".

This is a load of s**t and you know it. Come out from behind the curtain. You will NEVER, EVER, EVER stop me from posting and telling the TRUTH of how AP (cough) is a load of LIES.

Ken

Yes, past numbers are always useless, if that's all you have. Ken, please explain how and why the math is wrong.

Just because you say AP is lies doesn't make it so. For some reason you feel the need to trash something you obviously know nothing about. Give it up Ken, you're just making yourself look a fool.

@all

Why should past numbers be useless?
Look at this file
It search for a+2 standarddeviation ,that´s a signal to bet this number
it goes about 37*37 Spins
always hit´s more often than it´s lose

Quote from: Kelly on July 21, 2011, 01:31:41 PM
You don`t like the new sound ?  Where is your evidence that im lying ?

I love this, classic!

I need to show evidence that I do 'well' AND I have to show evidence that you dont. Classic AP (cough) logic, always wanting it BOTH ways.

Ken

Quote from: Mike on July 21, 2011, 02:20:26 PM
Yes, past numbers are always useless, if that's all you have. Ken, please explain how and why the math is wrong.

Just because you say AP is lies doesn't make it so. For some reason you feel the need to trash something you obviously know nothing about. Give it up Ken, you're just making yourself look a fool.

Wrong, in a *FEW* situations, past numbers are useful. We can do this for months if you want to. So I could ask you......what AP (cough) style of game do you play? Can you post the EVIDENCE that you do 'well' playing it?
Thanks buddy.

Ken

QuoteFor you, I choose 3 numbers with the fewest hits in the last 200 spins (very cold). We'll flat bet for the next 20 spins, my numbers against your numbers. We'll do this experiment not once but over 100 different sessions. *ANYONE* who says it will come close to balancing out is LYING, plain and simple.

I say it will balance out, so im supposed to be lying. Prove that im lying, after all math and 99% of the worlds population will agree with me without testing anything.  I can test it or Mike can BUT why don`t YOU do something for a change. You are the one with the bold statements.

You know why you call it a 'bold statement'? Not because its from me, its because its an anti-AP statement, call it like it is. It goes against AP, correct? Are you going to me give me your opinion regarding Roulette Evolution? I asked at least three times.

Ken

For you it may be a anti ap statement, for the rest of the world its just something that brings a brief smile to the face because of its naivity.

You dont care about my opinion and im not gonna answer any of your questions anymore before you back up just this one silly statement with facts.  I will prove to you after that, that a biased wheel produces an uneven distribution. Something for something right ?

**People in glass houses shouldn't throw rocks**

@winner >> Back it up for AP as well. This 'prove it' thingie is for EVERYONE Kelly/Snowman. Its NOT just for people you feel like choosing. Still waiting for your PROOF that you do 'well' with AP (cough).

You made a SMART MOVE......not giving your opinion on Roulette Evolution. Going 500 numbers back?? WTF?

Ken

Christ, every time i want you to be specific you run to another corner like a rat and i have to run after you.

You have been winning for 3,5 years so you lay out the records that you expect to see for me to be successfull because i havent got a clue what you expect. Car, house, ? My last buy is a Chevrolet Orlando 2011, but i got 3 more. What do you want ?

You lay out your own records and i will do the same.

If thats too much to ask, just re read my last post and get started, i will do my thing afterwards.

Im surprised you cant figure out my opinion on past numbers in Roulette Evoloution.  Is that really so, hard ?

Roulette Evolution?

I thought it well known that casino's like to offer as much information as possible to the roulette player for the very reason that they believe it is all useless. And so instilling a false sense of confidence by addition.

So the more stuff they give the punter to look at and analyze, the more likely said punter will comfortably lose.

As for hot numbers over the last few dozen spins, I would think they believe the player can work out for themselves what they are, and so instilling a false sense of confidence by omission.

Just my opinion on your question.

The strategy from the management side has always been to set up as many bear traps as possible. Goes from making the player feeling as comfortable as possible, comps etc, to handing him all the data he wants. German casinos provides a written  permanenz for each table on a  daily basis. And keeps the records for years back that you can get for a small fee if you want.  If it could be done in a nice and handy way they would probably provide the last 3000 numbers on a screen for each table .

Come and play..... kitty kitty........come here and bring your wallet.

@Bombus >> Thanks for the reply. I agree that a person can simply jot down the last 24-34 numbers on their own and use those but at Roulette Evolution, nobody does!! I watch and talk to these people just to get some kind of insight. For the HOT number bettors, they indeed look at the stats from the last 500 spins which in my OPINION is a waste. Like I said, rarely do you see any of those numbers STILL hitting CURRENTLY.

Why bet on hot numbers from 350-500 spins ago? My point being (I'm not saying I'm right), I think its on PURPOSE, the machine maker giving out stats from so long ago. Why do I think this? The *KEY* *KEY* hot  numbers are from CURRENT outcomes!!!

Lets say you were betting on hot numbers, as an example. Do you care that the 32 hit 6 times in 19 spins FROM 350 spins ago? How the heck does that help me?

Ken

Im sure that if you told them what you just wrote, they would put a label after spin 30:

Warning these numbers are too old and should not be used as predictors. We have instructed the ball not remember any numbers past spin 30.

Either one of two choices.

A) You are a liar and play some form of a method.

OR


B) You stick to your guns and foolish remarks. Claiming AP will save the world. (lol) AP is a LIE, pure and simple. I'm sure it was fine back in 1923. If you are WAITING for me to flip out or something, it aint gonna happen.

"Come and play..... kitty kitty........come here and bring your wallet" >>> Thats fine but I leave with a thicker wallet. Can you say the SAME without LYING?

Ken

I offered to hand everything to you, even THEN you run to another corner. Not much ass in those pants.  I thought a proud american like yourself was not all Danish Pastry.  Im very dissapointed in you.

Its hard to be soft when you were born to be a piece of iron. 

Im done, just don`t say i didn`t give you the opportunity to have everything you asked for,  handed to you. But its not easy when you keep running around like a Duracell rabbit.

I have now wasted 1 hour of my life writing answers to you. Again.  At least i made you show your real colours. 

No, I asked for an OPINION and you (and Bombus) gave me your OPINION, so I cant be pissed. Thanks for your time.

Ken

Must be honest here. Mr. J, you do seem to have a vendetta against AP. Why not just keep quiet and do what you do. If you are so successful as you claim then why bother with Kelly? One thing I know. There is not one system player I know that is winning in the longrun.

Mr J sometimes i wondering if you understand simple principals regarding one wheel and its development during spin after spin.
There is one expression that the wheel has 37 degree of freedom which mean the ball can end up in any pocket.
The conclusion is simple that there is no attractors wish will be in favour except luck and you hit some positive fluctuation.
So no matter wish roulette system you apply it will allways be a losing bet in the long run and there is no progression that can save you as it only delay that will happen sooner or later.

Second to speak of past result with our any measuring using shi, cor, std you would never know if the wheel you play is 1 in 100 being due to bias or not and even worse you have no formula wish dictate what the probability is if what you have is due to random fluctuation or not.
So when you play hot numbers or sleepers you are just among all other average roulette system players and all does system boils down to one simple fact that there is no positive expectation.

Quote from: System on July 22, 2011, 03:02:27 AM
Must be honest here. Mr. J, you do seem to have a vendetta against AP. Why not just keep quiet and do what you do. If you are so successful as you claim then why bother with Kelly? One thing I know. There is not one system player I know that is winning in the longrun.

I dislike AP, no big deal. Its not much different from the AP (cough) crew slamming method threads but I dont hear alot regarding that. As far as Kelly goes. He's a decent guy who CHOSE to respond to my post(s), I did not force him.

I half agree with you and have posted this in the past......Whether I get slammed or not really means nothing. Even the people that agree with me, its not that important. The ONLY important thing to ANY gambler, playing ANY game, your wallet needs to be a bit thicker walking OUT of the casino. That is my MAIN concern, not message boards.

Ken

Quote from: Mr J on July 21, 2011, 05:21:09 PM
Wrong, in a *FEW* situations, past numbers are useful. We can do this for months if you want to. So I could ask you......what AP (cough) style of game do you play? Can you post the EVIDENCE that you do 'well' playing it?
Thanks buddy.

Ken

And how exactly could I post the evidence that I do well playing biased wheels? it would be meaningless. The point is, AP is based on physics and so can at least work in PRINCIPLE. For something to work, it has to AT LEAST work in principle. This rules out methods based on stats or ONLY looking at past results because the logic is flawed. If it can't work in principle, it can't work in practice. Like it or not, that's a fact, not an OPINION.

@I Have Cookies >> You could of saved yourself all that time regarding your post.

Do me a favor, next time say....."Ken you lose at roulette and are a bullsh****r".

Its much quicker, I won't mind and I appreciate your view.

The *ONLY* thing I have ever disliked.....is when someone tells me to PROVE something but THEY dont have to follow the same rules. Other than that, I do 'well' and answer to nobody. You guys are so damn scared of roulette, it kills me.  :girl_wacko:
 

The MATH experts are TERRIBLE at gambling. All they see are obstacles. You would think they would be the BEST but its quite the opposite.

Ken

 "so can at least work in PRINCIPLE" >>> Would you say thats the same thing as THEORY?

Ken

"Ken you lose at roulette and are a bullsh****r".  Yes that is true - but there is also others who read what i wrote and maybe at least 1 out of 10 starts to wake up from what they are doing.
And i like you are free to write when ever i like to do so.

I feel different about you have to prove anything as it would be worthless and same shit every one post about.
You have nothing that produce any better result then any other roulette system at this site.

Now there is nothing to be afraid of and sure there should be pepole play roulette, as long they don't start to dream about quiting work and play for a living :-)

Thank you for your opinion and have a great day.

Ken

Quote from: Mr J on July 22, 2011, 12:53:09 PM
"so can at least work in PRINCIPLE" >>> Would you say thats the same thing as THEORY?

Ken

I suppose you could say that, but it's not what you want it to be. By 'in principle' I mean that the potential to get an advantage is there. This is the case with Blackjack and Poker and the application of physics to roulette wheels. It's impossible to get an advantage assuming a random wheel (which is what you do) and betting based merely on past results or statistics. There isn't a difference between theory and practice, which is what you'd like to think.

"Theoretically" someting could be true because of a theory created by someone based on tue principles or laws.

You do post alot of methods or systems Mr. J. Would be interesting (and beneficial) to the rest of us if you could put down your theory about your methods in words. If your theory is wrong in principle then I guess you are wrong. I mean a theory is basically constructing a story, why something should happen, by using relevant laws and assumptions (based on reality). If any weakness is spotted then the theory goes out the window.

Like I have said. I would be interested in your thinking and whether your theories have substance or whether it is dry air. Anyone can post a system or six and say that you should only play it on the upturns and not the drawbacks. Anyone could justify a system to work. What I am interested is more. "Why must a system work?" And that as you have compared it to theory might just be my cuppa tea. So please post your theories why your various systems work. Sure there will be more than one interested party.

Nice post, System.  :thumbsup:

AP is based on Physics, the principles of which cannot be denied. What are "methods" based on? the "law" of averages? that's only a popular term for the gambler's fallacy.

Ken's position reminds me of that line in "The Hitch-hiker's Guide to the Galaxy" :

"In cases of major discrepancy, it's always reality that's got it wrong".  ;D

"WHY does a system work " should be  of paramount  importance to any player. :ok:



Nathan Detroit
HAPPY WINNINGS!!!

@System, Mike & Nate >> "So please post your theories why your various systems work"...........I have brought this subject up in the past already. The issue is, its a set-up, thats why I dont attempt it. The anti-method folks are looking for KEY WORDS in the explanation of WHY a method 'should' work. I *NEVER* include those words when I post a method, at least give me that much.

So you want to hear something like........"you see guys, if you bet on xxx, 4 spins after xxx this happens, you'll have a much higher probability of those numbers hitting".

Am I fu***n stupid? Dont disrespect me like that. Snowman was the master at trying to get me to say 'certain' things, it never worked and over time he kind of backed down from it. There is not ONE method posted (from anybody) that an AP (cough) guy is gonna say......."oh that makes perfect sense, I'm gonna start playing that"!!

Quit trying to 'trap' me. Yes, I post a method or two based on SOMETHING, not based on it being a HG because of course there is no such thing. Play it, dont play it, I dont care. At least I have the NUTS to post something. I dont HIDE in waiting so I can attack others.

Ken

Hi Mr. J,

terribly sorry if you feel it was a trap. The thing is that you have really said nothing in all your posts. The most valuable part was when you asked if principles and theory was the same thing thus implying that your theories were sound. That is why I was delighted when you mentioned theory.

You ask for proof from AP guys but cannot supply your own 'theories' why your systems should work. You say you should not be disrespected. Well I believe nobody should but having said that I believe respect should be earned and not demanded. You mention "I dont HIDE in waiting so I can attack others." Sadly the only attacking seems to be you on guys like Mike and Kelly. What I have seen is that they genuinely want to educate. Seriously, one should listen to all maybe something can be learned. You seem to be more focused on discrediting AP. Sad.

Its almost 2:30am, I'll respond tomorrow. On my terms, not yours.

Ken   :give_rose:

Quote from: System on July 25, 2011, 03:19:10 AM
The most valuable part was when you asked if principles and theory was the same thing thus implying that your theories were sound. That is why I was delighted when you mentioned theory.

Ken will no doubt correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think that's what he was implying. By mentioning THEORY, he was trying to imply that AP is ok in theory, and maybe it worked in 1923, but not now. What he doesn't understand is that yes, modern wheels are very different from what they were, but the PRINCIPLES on which AP is based (ie; physics) haven't changed. However, statistics and looking at past spins weren't valid principles for increasing the accuracy of predictions in 1923, and they NEVER will be.

Quote from: Mr J on July 25, 2011, 04:27:50 AM
Its almost 2:30am, I'll respond tomorrow. On my terms, not yours.

Ken   :give_rose:

Whatever Mr. J, whether you respond on my terms, or your terms, or Santa Clause's terms who cares and what is the relevance on who's terms you are posting on? What are my terms? lol  ;D

Mr. J look at this sentence you posted:"The anti-method folks are looking for KEY WORDS in the explanation of WHY a method 'should' work. I *NEVER* include those words when I post a method, at least give me that much."  I personally think that you don't have shit. You accuse others of being evasive when you yourself is just that. People in glass houses right?

QuoteYou ask for proof from AP guys but cannot supply your own 'theories' why your systems should work. You say you should not be disrespected. Well I believe nobody should but having said that I believe respect should be earned and not demanded. You mention "I dont HIDE in waiting so I can attack others." Sadly the only attacking seems to be you on guys like Mike and Kelly. What I have seen is that they genuinely want to educate. Seriously, one should listen to all maybe something can be learned. You seem to be more focused on discrediting AP. Sad.

The funny thing is, the last person i would wanna discuss AP tecknickes with is Ken, but he also happens to be the one that i discuss it the most with.  Mind you, im not coming on to him. The all time king of hate towards AP is not able to have a discussion without talking about it.   I would not open a topic on the subject anymore but if someone asks a decent question i will answer or if someone got something wrong, i will put him back on track if i can do it 5 - 6 lines. And of course if someone calls me a liar for believing in gamblers fallacy, i might want some proof that im actually lying. 

Quote from: Kelly on July 25, 2011, 11:18:12 AM
The funny thing is, the last person I would wanna discuss AP tecknickes with is Ken, but he also happens to be the one that I discuss it the most with.  Mind you, im not coming on to him. The all time king of hate towards AP is not able to have a discussion without talking about it.   I would not open a topic on the subject anymore but if someone asks a decent question I will answer or if someone got something wrong, I will put him back on track if I can do it 5 - 6 lines. And of course if someone calls me a liar for believing in gamblers fallacy, I might want some proof that im actually lying. 

Decent post and point taken. :thumbsup:

The wheel is like a stock market........ Some number(s) are worth more.

"Mr. J look at this sentence you posted:"The anti-method folks are looking for KEY WORDS in the explanation of WHY a method 'should' work. I *NEVER* include those words when I post a method, at least give me that much."  I personally think that you don't have shit. You accuse others of being evasive when you yourself is just that. People in glass houses right"? >>>


Sorry about that, was painting all day yesterday, today and more tomorrow. I'll go on and on, thats cool with me bro. I am 100% correct....."The anti-method folks are looking for KEY WORDS in the explanation of WHY a method 'should' work". <<< Let me ask you this. Of ALL the methods you have ever read, from any poster, which one would you agree with regarding.......a proper explanation of 'why' it works?

In other words, lets not focus on you slamming me, what other methods do YOU 'agree' with?? My point? Lets try this again for the slower crowd. You WANT so bad for me to say CERTAIN things in order for you to pounce!! I won't say those things and it drives you nuts!!!  :sarcastic: *NO* method on this planet is perfect, never will be. I get asked a certain question alot so I'll throw the SAME question back at any AP (cough) person.......with your AP (cough) skills, do you feel you BEAT roulette?

Ken

"Ken will no doubt correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think that's what he was implying. By mentioning THEORY, he was trying to imply that AP is ok in theory, and maybe it worked in 1923, but not now" >>> Correct Mike.

Ken

Quote from: Kelly on July 25, 2011, 11:18:12 AM
The funny thing is, the last person I would wanna discuss AP tecknickes with is Ken, but he also happens to be the one that I discuss it the most with.  Mind you, im not coming on to him. The all time king of hate towards AP is not able to have a discussion without talking about it.   I would not open a topic on the subject anymore but if someone asks a decent question I will answer or if someone got something wrong, I will put him back on track if I can do it 5 - 6 lines. And of course if someone calls me a liar for believing in gamblers fallacy, I might want some proof that im actually lying. 

No hate towards AP (cough). My gripe is the same. Its your inability to admit that you are lazy when it comes to TRYING to create something.....a decent method only through a TON of trial & error. Its not that you guys dont agree with methods per say, its that you threw in the towel way too early, so then the finger pointing starts. If I have to PROVE that I do 'well' with methods....SO DO YOU!!!!!! Same rule for everybody. Using AP (cough) is NOTHING MORE than gamblers fallacy. Always has been, always will be. Using past numbers under a FEW examples is VERY useful. Tell me I'm wrong 532 times and I'll tell you that you're wrong 532 times. Your BIAS is terrible these days Kelly/Snowman.

A couple numbers hitting *ALOT* in the last 25 spins (est.) compared to a couple numbers that have NOT hit in the last 300 spins, yeah, they're both the same.  ::)  :girl_wacko: The math 'experts' are the LAST guys you wanna listen to folks, TRUST ME ON THAT !!!


Ken

At what stage  did  1923  enter the picture ?  Am I missing something along the   historical path ?

N.D.

(lol), not really, I could of picked 1982 instead. My point being, the difficulty of AP (cough) BACK THEN compared to now. 'They' will even ADMIT to that.

Ken

Quote from: Mr J on July 26, 2011, 09:25:48 PM
(lol), not really, I could of picked 1982 instead. My point being, the difficulty of AP (cough) BACK THEN compared to now. 'They' will even ADMIT to that.

Ken

:) I have looked at your systems and there is no advantage over the house. Some of your so-called new ideas have been done before. Fact remains is that you have nothing and you are attackincking others to try and conceal that fact.

Quote from: System on July 27, 2011, 03:14:37 AM
:) I have looked at your systems and there is no advantage over the house. Some of your so-called new ideas have been done before. Fact remains is that you have nothing and you are attackincking others to try and conceal that fact.

A) I dont play systems, I play methods.

B) There is no form of gambling (even AP) with an 'advantage over the house'.

C) I dont post the TITLE.....'new ideas' in the thread of my methods.

D) You dont know that everything has been done before. If so, prove it. Sound familiar?

E) Have nothing? I appreciate your opinion. I do quite 'well', thanks for your interest.

F) I dont 'attack' others. I RESPOND to posts, does that COUNT as an attack? We need some solid definitions please.

G) What is your style of play for roulette?

Ken

 ;D My style of play is "The Mr. J - collection of systems methods"  Been doing really badly with it. Thought I especially will go for it because your stuff aint systems; THEY ARE METHODS!  ;) Please explain to me how your 1.2.3 rule system methods are different from systems?  :pleasantry:

I have now moved on and I'm playing my own systems methods, system-methods, or method-systems.

Still fail. Time to start looking into your cough Ken for some sense. Kelly, Mike, "I have Cookies" and co. seem to be the only ones that really talk sense and know something. It is never too late to learn J. Listen to your cough for god's sake. It makes alot more sense than your ramblings!  :thumbsup:

A) You are a member from the past.....100% positive on that. Yep, either someone who received no respect OR someone who was banned.

B) You never answered me and I know why. Because then, YOU would be under scrutiny in terms of how you play.
Its always a FUNNY subject. Posters that INSULT others *BUT* do not have the nuts to lay everything out in the open. As much as I cant stand Kelly, at least he lays it out.  Still waiting for that answer System.  :haha:

Ken

 :) If you see those as insults then you are more childish than first impressions. (which is then off the scales)

What question did I not answer? And why are you asking so many questions? Why are you demanding answers whereas you cannot answer the question I asked you? You conveniently sidestep it by saying you won't let yourself open by posting keywords or something. You have not answered one simple question. Ken. Grow up mate. Try and have a discussion with others and not a discussion with yourself because that is what you are doing.

You aske questions yet have no interest. Twocando answered you and you just told him you do not believe him. Come on man where the F*ck are you hoping to go with this? Surely there are easier ways to get attention.

They are insults from you and it still stands. Question you did not answer? I asked what is your style of play for roulette? Let me guess, standard BS answer: You really dont play roulette but you like talking about it. Thats what I call.....the 'I'm covered answer'.  :sarcastic:

What question for me? Why do I think xxxx method will work, was that the UNANSWERED question? If so, I said......its a LOADED question and I ALSO stand by that statement. Dont think you can paint me into a corner rookie. I'm way ahead of you. If I say......there's really no math behind xxxx method. Then YOU think you 'got me'.  :girl_wacko:  If I say xxxx is a great method, go ahead and test it.

You test it and it cant even pass  163 spins, then you AGAIN think you 'got me'.

Its a valid try on your part but you better switch to plan 'B' or something. Reading your posts, you sure do sound like someone I know.  :thumbsup: Do I care? Nope. How my wipes after sh****ng is more important than you. You won't slow me down from posting, stop waiting for it. AP (cough) is a load of BS guys, dont fall for it.

Ken

Quote from: Mr J on July 30, 2011, 10:32:33 AM
They are insults from you and it still stands. Question you did not answer? I asked what is your style of play for roulette? Let me guess, standard BS answer: You really dont play roulette but you like talking about it. Thats what I call.....the 'I'm covered answer'.  :sarcastic:

What question for me? Why do I think xxxx method will work, was that the UNANSWERED question? If so, I said......its a LOADED question and I ALSO stand by that statement. Dont think you can paint me into a corner rookie. I'm way ahead of you. If I say......there's really no math behind xxxx method. Then YOU think you 'got me'.  :girl_wacko:  If I say xxxx is a great method, go ahead and test it.

You test it and it cant even pass  163 spins, then you AGAIN think you 'got me'.

Its a valid try on your part but you better switch to plan 'B' or something. Reading your posts, you sure do sound like someone I know.  :thumbsup: Do I care? Nope. How my wipes after sh****ng is more important than you. You won't slow me down from posting, stop waiting for it. AP (cough) is a load of BS guys, dont fall for it.

Ken

I'm not trying to put you in a corner at all. I just want to know your theory behind your systems aka methods. If it is valid then all will be nterested even APguys. The thing is that everyone that knows roulette knows you have nothing. You can call me a rookie and accuse me of not playing the game and I cannot disprove you. What I will tell you is that I play at least 3 x a week. For real in B&M casinos. Now that is a fact and you cannot disprove me. The question is, with your so-called knowledge and claims it is pretty clear that you do not play for real. If you do your so-called thick wallet is only in your mind. It is clear that you are only an antagonist and have no clear grounds to base your so-called questions. You still haven't answered the question I asked you. You sidestepped again. So if you can side ste, why does anyone have to answer your questions? You should go and sit down and have a hard think of what you are doing because it is not coming over very cleverly.

"I play at least 3 x a week. For real in B&M casinos. Now that is a fact and you cannot disprove me" >>> Again, I look for consistency. Soooo, if I said I do *VERY* well playing methods, I shoot it back to you and say....you cannot disprove me! Correct? Same rule for everyone.  :sarcastic:

"with your so-called knowledge and claims it is pretty clear that you do not play for real" >>> I respect your opinion, thank you.

I answered your question. Ohhh, I get it. This is your way OUT of answering mine.  :sarcastic: :sarcastic:

Your style of roulette play is what? There are *KEY* words you want me to say, so you can ATTACK. It won't happen rookie, stop waiting for it.

Ken

@System (aka: past poster) >> Do you feel you have 'beat' roulette?

Ken

Quote from: Mr J on July 30, 2011, 11:58:43 AM
"I play at least 3 x a week. For real in B&M casinos. Now that is a fact and you cannot disprove me" >>> Again, I look for consistency. Soooo, if I said I do *VERY* well playing methods, I shoot it back to you and say....you cannot disprove me! Correct? Same rule for everyone.  :sarcastic:

"with your so-called knowledge and claims it is pretty clear that you do not play for real" >>> I respect your opinion, thank you.

I answered your question. Ohhh, I get it. This is your way OUT of answering mine.  :sarcastic: :sarcastic:

Your style of roulette play is what? There are *KEY* words you want me to say so, you can ATTACK. It won't happen rookie, stop waiting for it.

Ken

Come on Ken,

So anyone canjust say there opinion are top sectret and that that is that. How can you expect anyone to answer you if you cannot answer them? Give it a rest Ken. Go your way with gusto and joy. Really I have no problem with that, neither would Kelly and co. Just don't expect answers (which you have no interest in anyway) if you are not willing to answer from your side. Simple.

So anyone canjust say there opinion are top sectret and that that is that. How can you expect anyone to answer you if you cannot answer them? Give it a rest Ken. Go your way with gusto and joy. Really I have no problem with that, neither would Kelly and co. Just don't expect answers (which you have no interest in anyway) if you are not willing to answer from your side. >>>> Nice try, I answered you already. Still waiting on you sir:

A) Your style of roulette play is what?

B) Do you feel you have 'beat' roulette?

Ya see guys, he won't answer these two questions for a REASON. He knows the reason, I know the reason.

Ken

Would you say that you agree with this? >>

"If I say......there's really no math behind xxxx method. Then YOU think you 'got me'.    If I say xxxx is a great method, go ahead and test it.

You test it and it cant even pass  163 spins, then you AGAIN think you 'got me'."

Ken

I have not beaten the game of roulette sufficiently. Far from it. I have good days and not so good days. The difference is that I know why. You don't. You live in a dream world and unfortunately are influencing other system players in believeing that they can win in the longterm. Which they won't. I'll go further. People are only subject to the 2,7% house edge if they have sufficient bankroll, otherwise they will loose way more.

Forget about the math. Show me why your system works. We all would like to see. No AP guy will dispute it if you can prove it. Simple.

systems / methods can work if you use AP or VB.

The best is Pierre Basieux and Kimo Li

Math will take a big bankroll, but then it will work.

"I have not beaten the game of roulette sufficiently" >>> That is the most PC answer I have ever read.  :sarcastic: Good news for you (same rule for all)........I also have not beaten the game of roulette sufficiently.

"I have good days and not so good days" >>> HEY, ME TOO.

"unfortunately are influencing other system players in believeing that they can win" >>> You're half correct. What I am TRYING to do is tell the method guys, dont fall for this AP (cough) BS, they will be disappointed in the end. Dont be lazy trying to create a 'decent' method. The information is out there, look hard and put in a TON of hours. Trial and error guys!!!!

Ken

Quote from: Twocando on July 30, 2011, 12:27:13 PM
systems / methods can work if you use AP or VB.

The best is Pierre Basieux and Kimo Li

Math will take a big bankroll, but then it will work.

Your AP (cough) tactics are nothing more than gamblers fallacy. Just about everybody knows this. :give_heart:

Ken

STILL WAITING

Would you say that you agree with this? >>

"If I say......there's really no math behind xxxx method. Then YOU think you 'got me'.    If I say xxxx is a great method, go ahead and test it.

You test it and it cant even pass  163 spins, then you AGAIN think you 'got me'."

Ken

Quote from: Twocando on July 30, 2011, 12:27:13 PM
systems / methods can work if you use AP or VB.

The best is Pierre Basieux and Kimo Li

Math will take a big bankroll, but then it will work.

point taken and I do agree

AND you are a virgin at roulette, you know that someone is going to F you.

:yes: :yes: :yes: :yes: :yes: :yes: :yes:

I will play 4 numbers for 10 spins. Send me your 100 spins. Then I'll show you.

o sorry you don't have spins, not going to any casino. Just on the computer.  :P :P :P

May I use my own spins?

Your own spins? Thats fair.  :sarcastic: I play on a 00 wheel, you said you wanted results from a 0 wheel, correct?

QUESTION: Lets say I gave you results from a 0 wheel, lets say the 9, 18, 29 were hitting quite a bit. Would you say thats a bias wheel BASED ON 100 spins?

Ken

Ken, I really do not know what to say to you anymore. You obviously have a very narrow mindset. As far as I know system creation is much simpler than mastering AP. If you cannot see that well that just confirms you have no idea about AP and definately have no idea of roulette. Ken in plain words. You are an incompetent main stream system roulette player (not that there are competent system players around)

Quote from: System on July 30, 2011, 12:45:18 PM
Ken, I really do not know what to say to you anymore. You obviously have a very narrow mindset. As far as I know system creation is much simpler than mastering AP. If you cannot see that well that just confirms you have no idea about AP and definately have no idea of roulette. Ken in plain words. You are an incompetent main stream system roulette player (not that there are competent system players around)

Reply #133...still waiting. Nope, creating a 'decent' method is hair pulling and MOST do NOT have the stomach/time/BR for it so whats the solution in order to vent?

Easy, just say your into AP (cough) but cant prove a thing and nothing can be tested....THATS THE EASY WAY out of the conversation.

"You are an incompetent main stream system roulette player" >>> Thank you for your opinion sir.

Ken

if 9 18 29 hits with in a gap of 9 spins Why are you still looking for bias.

31 9 22 18 29 7 = 6 numbers

100 divided by 9 = 11....

BY look at the spins with vibi/ VB or AP you can calculated the next out number or sector.
If the speed stays the same and the direction of the ball will the next number sector change the whole time?

Send me 100 spins from 00 or single and I'll show you who bias.

Quote from: Mr J on July 30, 2011, 12:51:24 PM

Reply #133...still waiting. Nope, creating a 'decent' method is hair pulling and MOST do NOT have the stomach/time/BR for it so whats the solution in order to vent?

Easy, just say your into AP (cough) but cant prove a thing and nothing can be tested....THATS THE EASY WAY out of the conversation.

"You are an incompetent main stream system roulette player" >>> Thank you for your opinion sir.

Ken

reply 133, sorry Ken but I cannot answer that becasue of keywords which you will be looking for to pull me into a trap so that is that. I will not be pulled into a trap!  :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Thats what I thought rookie.  :sarcastic: You won't answer it because YES, you know I got ya then. Smart on your part, I'll give you that much.

Ken

It was a nice try but THIS is reply 133 >>

STILL WAITING

Would you say that you agree with this? >>

"If I say......there's really no math behind xxxx method. Then YOU think you 'got me'.    If I say xxxx is a great method, go ahead and test it.

You test it and it cant even pass  163 spins, then you AGAIN think you 'got me'."

Ken

Quote from: Mr J on July 30, 2011, 01:13:04 PM
Thats what I thought rookie.  :sarcastic: You won't answer it because YES, you know I got ya then. Smart on your part, I'll give you that much.

Ken

lol...then I have got you too. Remember; no keywords from your side..

Hi system

Yes this is a trap

He wants to know how AP works. Not a good idea to post more on this.

DS AP Bias is just words for him.

Even if I tell him to take a diamond on the wheel and count 4 laps of the ball and on the fourth one spot the number he will have no idea what to do with it.

As long as ALL definitions and standards for ALL players is even, I'm cool with that. My issue is when the AP (cough) crew think they can GET AWAY with certain aspects of posting. Not on my watch Suzie.

Ken

Quote from: Twocando on July 30, 2011, 01:19:51 PM
Hi system

Yes this is a trap

He wants to know how AP works. Not a good idea to post more on this.

DS AP Bias is just words for him.

Even if I tell him to take a diamond on the wheel and count 4 laps of the ball and on the fourth one spot the number he will have no idea what to do with it.

Again, point taken. You are right. Ken knows nothing.

Quote from: Twocando on July 30, 2011, 01:19:51 PM
Hi system

Yes this is a trap

He wants to know how AP works. Not a good idea to post more on this.

DS AP Bias is just words for him.

Even if I tell him to take a diamond on the wheel and count 4 laps of the ball and on the fourth one spot the number he will have no idea what to do with it.

"He wants to know how AP works" >>> Gamblers fallacy? No thanks.

"Not a good idea to post more on this" >>> And this is bad, why? I love your suggestion.

Ken

Quote from: Mr J on July 30, 2011, 01:23:26 PM
"He wants to know how AP works" >>> Gamblers fallacy? No thanks.

"Not a good idea to post more on this" >>> And this is bad, why? I love your suggestion.

Ken

OMG, are you actually realizing what you are saying? Do you know what gambler's fallacy is? Man, obviously not.

Quote from: System on July 30, 2011, 01:26:25 PM
OMG, are you actually realizing what you are saying? Do you know what gambler's fallacy is? Man, obviously not.

Unless you are in DENIAL, AP (cough) relies heavily on gamblers fallacy. Sorry to rain on your parade.

Ken

Quote from: Mr J on July 30, 2011, 01:21:04 PM
As long as ALL definitions and standards for ALL players is even, I'm cool with that. My issue is when the AP (cough) crew think they can GET AWAY with certain aspects of posting. Not on my watch Suzie.

Ken

Get away with what ken? Please do us a favour and say what that is. I would like to know as well.

I would like to chat with you guys on skype.

There is only 1 way in beating the wheel. Send me your skype name please.

It has been explained to you about 10 times now:

1. Do we use past numbers to find a tilted wheel. No.

2. Do we use past numbers to find a visual bias. No.

3. Do we use past numbers to find an average bounce lenght. No.

4. Do we use past numbers to find a particular ball speed. No

5. Do we use past numbers to find the rotor speed. No.


Whats your IQ for god sake. (If you got one)

Quote from: System on July 30, 2011, 01:41:27 PM
Get away with what ken? Please do us a favour and say what that is. I would like to know as well.

Slamming method posts but its not ok for the opposite to happen. Insisting on answers but the AP (cough) crew won't answer the same things. Same definitions for ALL.

Ken

Quote from: Kelly on July 30, 2011, 01:45:33 PM
It has been explained to you about 10 times now:

1. Do we use past numbers to find a tilted wheel. No.

2. Do we use past numbers to find a visual bias. No.

3. Do we use past numbers to find an average bounce lenght. No.

4. Do we use past numbers to find a particular ball speed. No

5. Do we use past numbers to find the rotor speed. No.


Whats your IQ for god sake. (If you got one)

I'm glad you're here Kelly, these guys need backup help.

Ken

1. Do we use past numbers to find a tilted wheel. No.

2. Do we use past numbers to find a visual bias. No.

Do NOT ask me to go looking for the past posts BUT there were some AP guys posting that said, you must use a few past numbers. Maybe not alot but it is NEEDED.

Ken

So where is it you see gamblers fallacy in advantage play ?  When i track for wheels i rarely not down 1 SINGLE NUMBER before i know which wheel i will go at first.

Quote from: Kelly on July 30, 2011, 01:51:33 PM
So where is it you see gamblers fallacy in advantage play ?  When I track for wheels I rarely not down 1 SINGLE NUMBER before I know which wheel I will go at first.

COME ON KELLY. You might not like the title of gamblers fallacy but you know damn well it is. If you're proud of it, not a big deal but dont deny it. You're better than that.

Ken

go for it ken then you've got something to do.

VB works on the spin.

bias is on the wheel of there is something causing it to land more in a sector than others.

DS is the distance from the release to the next number.

so a dealer can be bias with his/her spin? yes

Ping pong between sectors. or even going back to a sector. speed and release of the ball.

Quote from: Mr J on July 30, 2011, 01:56:19 PM

COME ON KELLY. You might not like the title of gamblers fallacy but you know damn well it is. If you're proud of it, not a big deal but dont deny it. You're better than that.

Ken

Ken, if you do not know what Gambler's fallacy is then I'm afraid you are lost. Gamblers' fallacy do not apply to AP because of physics. VB, I know +/- where the ball will drop. Bias, I know that the wheel is faulty so certain numbers will occur more. DS. The dealer has a signature. In other words, Whether you look at numbers from numbers or sectors from sectors. The last being the least of the recognized AP techniques I think. I wish I was competent in AP techniques. One day I will be.

 :) Ken. I'm an system player combined with some DS. I would love to learn more about AP. Would you mind if I contact you? Would you please give me a avenue of communication? email, MSN, Skype etc.

Quote from: System on July 30, 2011, 02:03:41 PM
Ken, if you do not know what Gambler's fallacy is then I'm afraid you are lost. Gamblers' fallacy do not apply to AP because of physics. VB, I know +/- where the ball will drop. Bias, I know that the wheel is faulty so certain numbers will occur more. DS. The dealer has a signature. In other words, Whether you look at numbers from numbers or sectors from sectors. The last being the least of the recognized AP techniques I think. I wish I was competent in AP techniques. One day I will be.

Follow along please.....if you're gonna continue to slam method posts, I call you out regarding your gamblers fallacy style of play. Like it, dont like it, I dont care.

Ken

I have a question/point, maybe someone can help me out. You notice that on MY recent threads, I get ATTACKED from others. Thats fine but where are YOUR threads, me attacking you? Can you point those out for me, thanks.

Ken

Quote from: Mr J on July 30, 2011, 02:23:10 PM
I have a question/point, maybe someone can help me out. You notice that on MY recent threads, I get ATTACKED from others. Thats fine but where are YOUR threads, me attacking you? Can you point those out for me, thanks.

Ken

Every thread asking a question, is attacking. Simply because your questions is not to learn but to attack. You, say you will not answer questions because of "keywords" and that it will be attacked. Simply you are a classic example of someone trying to attack AP keywords. The sad part is that you have no basis. You throw around words like Gambler's fallacy towards AP whereas that is totally reversible. Ken, you know as well as I do that you are a fake. You are not winning at roulette. You pretend to be. You divert questions put to you but feel that answers put by you should be answered. Ken. I really do not know what to say anymore except for the fact that there has not been one person to back you. Yes you are right, you do not need anyone to back you. Don't you for one second believe that if nobody is backing you, that no person is actually believieng what you are saying? Ken I'm afraid that your time is short.

Lets try again......where are YOUR threads, me attacking you?

Ken

QuoteCOME ON KELLY. You might not like the title of gamblers fallacy but you know damn well it is. If you're proud of it, not a big deal but dont deny it. You're better than that.

As soon as you tell me where i use past numbers and for what, you can call AP for gamblers fallacy. Until then you just sound rather silly. 

Its a bit awkward but i actually got the feeling that im too intelligent to understand you.   

Quote from: Mr J on July 30, 2011, 02:58:31 PM
Lets try again......where are YOUR threads, me attacking you?

Ken

It is difficult explaining. But at the same time it is quite clear, you are attacking the AP (cough) people.

You ask what posts? Every post.

Quote from: Kelly on July 30, 2011, 03:03:52 PM
As soon as you tell me where I use past numbers and for what, you can call AP for gamblers fallacy. Until then you just sound rather silly. 

Its a bit awkward but I actually got the feeling that im too intelligent to understand you.   

I did NOT say you. Please quote correctly. I said.....there are past posts saying that a person needs a FEW spins to spot a bias. Either way, AP (in general) is gamblers fallacy, everybody knows this.

Ken

Quote from: System on July 30, 2011, 03:04:33 PM
It is difficult explaining. But at the same time it is quite clear, you are attacking the AP (cough) people.

You ask what posts? Every post.

ATTACKING ON ANOTHER PERSONS THREAD. Sound better? I got all day for this. STILL WAITING >> So where are *YOUR* threads, me attacking you?

Ken

Quote from: Mr J on July 30, 2011, 03:09:18 PM
ATTACKING ON ANOTHER PERSONS THREAD. Sound better? I got all day for this. STILL WAITING >> So where are *YOUR* threads, me attacking you?

Ken

So what? Should we all ignore your posts? Should we all just open new threads in our names? Would that justify it?  So, in this forum, do not answer other;s threads? Start your own?

YES or NO, do you have your OWN threads, me attacking you? Simple question.

Ken

Quote from: Mr J on July 30, 2011, 03:21:32 PM
YES or NO, do you have your OWN threads, me attacking you? Simple question.

Ken

Ken you have run out of ideas.

Ok cool, I ran out of ideas. I asked maybe 5 times now, will you point out those threads to us, thanks!

Ken

Quote from: Mr J on July 30, 2011, 03:26:48 PM
Ok cool, I ran out of ideas. I asked maybe 5 times now, will you point out those threads to us, thanks!

Ken

And I told you that i will not go through past posts. Why don't you post them?

They are not posts. They would be threads started by YOU, with me attacking you. Where are they sir?

Ken

Yes you need to see the wheel spin to spot the bias, you don`t need the outcome numbers. There is a HUUUUGE difference. You really try to bend the truth in every way you see fit to match your agenda.

Quote from: Mr J on July 30, 2011, 03:30:39 PM
They are not posts. They would be threads started by YOU, with me attacking you. Where are they sir?

Ken

You know what? If it is not removed, others will read all. No more has to be said.

Quote from: Kelly on July 30, 2011, 03:33:23 PM
Yes you need to see the wheel spin to spot the bias, you don`t need the outcome numbers. There is a HUUUUGE difference. You really try to bend the truth in every way you see fit to match your agenda.

The only agenda going on is the AP (cough) crew trying to convince hard working method guys that they cant win. Now THATS an agenda. Good luck with that BTW, you'll need it.  :haha:

Ken

Quote from: System on July 30, 2011, 03:34:31 PM
You know what? If it is not removed, others will read all. No more has to be said.

I dont think many members here are interested in gamblers fallacy. Leave it up, delete it, nobody cares.

Ken

Quote from: Mr J on July 30, 2011, 03:37:07 PM

The only agenda going on is the AP (cough) crew trying to convince hard working method guys that they cant win. Now THATS an agenda. Good luck with that BTW, you'll need it.  :haha:

Ken

"Hard working System creators? be honst with yourselves.  How many of you have created  something new? Just be honest. What system have you created? Have you tested it decively? Don't believe i Ken. I't's all BS

Well, most of them can`t thats obvious when you see them drive off the parking lot in old beat up Toyota Corrollas wearing crappy shirts etc.  You do occasionally see a happy player at the table with his system method notebook, but you also see the same guy withdrawing cash at the ATM machine at 1 oclock at night.

You are drawing a picture of something that really isn`t happening in real life.

Good luck to you too, you really really really need it.

Quote from: System on July 30, 2011, 03:47:28 PM
"Hard working System creators? be honst with yourselves.  How many of you have created  something new? Just be honest. What system have you created? Have you tested it decively? Don't believe I Ken. I't's all BS

Where did I say.....'System creators'? Please quote correctly. Yeah thats fair. Have method guys direct you to THEIR thread so you can ATTACK them, you have zero class sir.

Ken

Quote from: Kelly on July 30, 2011, 03:47:57 PM
Well, most of them can`t thats obvious when you see them drive off the parking lot in old beat up Toyota Corrollas wearing crappy shirts etc.  You do occasionally see a happy player at the table with his system method notebook, but you also see the same guy withdrawing cash at the ATM machine at 1 oclock at night.

You are drawing a picture of something that really isn`t happening in real life.

Good luck to you too, you really really really need it.

I make (net) more than you do at roulette AND I dont have to travel around the country to do so.  :sarcastic:

Ken

Interesting....99 posts from System BUT only 1 thread started. Sounds about right.

Ken

Yeah i also know a guy who hates to travel, mostly because the bus ticket would take hes dinner money.  Im pretty sure that if you could afford it you would be in Thailand 14 days a month.  Why aren`t you ?

My 4 year old has already seen 11 different countrys.  You think she hates me for that ? She LOVES it. The most well behaving child in the air plane EVERY time.  Im glad she don`t have to grow up only seeing streets and backyards in the same old crappy outskirt town. 

Admit it, you would be travelling if you could afford it. For some reason you cant, makes you wonder don`t it....

And Kelly.....472 posts BUT 8 threads started. This is the typical MO for people that ATTACK others. Look at cupcake from GG. A ton of attack posts but how many threads did the guy start? Same old BS.

Ken

Quote from: Mr J on July 30, 2011, 03:52:00 PM
I make (net) more than you do at roulette AND I dont have to travel around the country to do so.  :sarcastic:

Ken

Ken I should of been away awile againe. Well done. You have my attention again.

Sorry to say but it has been along time to go. You are irrational. You are controversial. But not exclusive. You have been found out. *modified by mod* Please behave

Too vague Kelly. I said nothing about traveling sucks. Seeing different things is awesome, I agree BUT to do it in search of a bias wheel...... :girl_wacko:

Ken

Quote from: System on July 30, 2011, 04:03:42 PM
Ken I should of been away awile againe. Well done. You have my attention again.

Sorry to say but it has been along time to go. You are irrational. You are controversial. But not exclusive. You have been found out. You are a fake. you are a dummy. People ignore this wannabe.

Ummm ok, sounds great. The truth sucks for you, dont BLAME me for your loses at the casino. It is NOT my fault.

Ken

 ;D you are the joke mate.

No one on this forum will believe you after reading these threads.

Quote from: System on July 30, 2011, 04:11:31 PM
;D you are the joke mate.

No one on this forum will believe you after reading these threads.

These threads expose ONE thing, the anti-method crew has zero class. They ATTACK because they are not in the spotlight here...FACT.

Ken

Quote from: Mr J on July 30, 2011, 04:13:29 PM
These threads expose ONE thing, the anti-method crew has zero class. They ATTACK because they are not in the spotlight here...FACT.

Ken

Yes, they attack because Ken is not in the SPOT LIGHT... Come on fokes who the F cares about a person called Ken.

Ask the real deal people about roulette, not the fakes like Ken.

I admit im not a moderator on as many boards as you are. It really kills me.  Talk about who needs the spotlight.  You probably feel you are somehow superior to other forum members.

If you cant get respect other ways: Be a moderator. Makes you feel like you are someone on the site. LOL, you are someone, just not someone with a touch of class...

"they attack because Ken is not in the SPOT LIGHT" >>> I think you need a nap or something.

100% FACT >>  They ATTACK because they are not in the spotlight, HERE.  :-X

Ken

Quote from: Kelly on July 30, 2011, 04:22:39 PM
I admit im not a moderator on as many boards as you are. It really kills me.  Talk about who needs the spotlight.  You probably feel you are somehow superior to other forum members.

If you cant get respect other ways: Be a moderator. Makes you feel like you are someone on the site. LOL, you are someone, just not someone with a touch of class...

Many boards? Two.


"You probably feel you are somehow superior to other forum members" >>> Nope but I am the opposite type of mod that Snowjob was/is. Very bias that guy. Myself? All rules are the same for everyone and YOU HATE THAT.

Ken

You'll never stop me from spreading the word.....AP (cough) is fine in theory ONLY.

Ken

Same rules and i hate that ? I haven`t got a clue what you talk about and i doubt you do.  I offered to open all records if you did the same.   Whatever it is you think i don`t wanna do that i demand you do, i honestly haven`t got a clue.  You are the first person that i don`t understand where im sitting with a feeling that its because im too intelligent.  Mind you i try to meet people eyeball to eyeball in all aspects but you somehow fall right through.   

Never mind, you play your AP schedule, for whatever reason when you hate it so much.

The only person confused here is me....I dont have a clue what you are talking about sir? If you want to continue your QUEST with AP (cough), nobody is stopping you. Have a blast with it but dont try and JAM IT down the throats of method posters. Am I asking alot from you? I dont think so.

Ken

LOL, i give up.  YOU keep posting questions to the ap crew, not me.  Damn, im not used to doors that talks back at me. In trotlodytish.

Quote from: Kelly on July 30, 2011, 05:11:39 PM
LOL, I give up.  YOU keep posting questions to the ap crew, not me.  Damn, im not used to doors that talks back at me. In trotlodytish.

You ARE part of the AP (cough) crew, correct? What is your issue?

Question for you cause System REFUSED to answer. Can you name me any of YOUR recent threads that I attacked you on? Thanks buddy.

Ken

folks please. try to refrain from personal attacks, and keep it more on roulette subjects. this forum is not about personality discussion, but rather about roulette. When people start calling each other names, it is leading to nowhere. let's get along.  thanx

Ken, what do u mean? u think that APs don't win consistently? i am pretty sure they do. but they must be very skillful to do it. I don't understand what your argument with Kelly  is about, but there is no much doubt that he knows the stuff and uses it.

it does not mean that system players are always losing though.

 

QuoteCan you name me any of YOUR recent threads that I attacked you on? Thanks buddy.

Im not really a thread starter, 9 out of 10 of my posts is responses to you. Usually some sort of explanation in what is obviously something where you want me to say that "you need to travel", "you need past numbers", "prove that you do well".

I have not backed down from any of your requests on the contrary i have explained and backed everything up, just once i have asked you to back up why its better to play the hot numbers in the last 25 spins, which you so far have refused.  Not even a reason why they should be better is given.

Come down from your high horse, you are not being picked on by the big boys.  You have by now requested a ton more information from me, than i have requested from you. If you wanna continue this, you have to   live up the standards you require from us.

Iggi, there  are good and bad advantage players. We have in northern europe a bunch of AP`s that could just as easyly end up in the poor house.  They might, they might not. But their play style is extremely aggressive and under good conditions they win heavyli. But they are tolerated most of the times because they also sometimes lose heavyli because they tends to raise their bets under negative fluctations.  They are determined to win, even if they have to run a tank through the walls and it IS dangerous. But they are still active and as i understand it, still with huge profits. 

Personally i would have been a nervous wreck the way they do it.

I have been PM'd and personally warned by mod.

So I will not be responding to any of Ken's posts anymore.

Troublemaker you  :)

Quote from: Kelly on July 31, 2011, 07:38:29 AM
Troublemaker you  :)

;D

BMX Flatland Best rider? (nolinks://nolinks.youtube.com/watch?v=A2LTVhqHAdo#)

Quote from: System on July 31, 2011, 07:04:19 AM
I have been PM'd and personally warned by mod.

So I will not be responding to any of Ken's posts anymore.

System, just no names calling or personal attacks pls, other than that nobody wants to cut off your arguments and reasons. it was not supposed to shut you up. thanx for understanding, bud. All i want is just to prevent this discussion going into a drain with mutual insults and hostility. I am pretty sure we can be gentlemen while defending our opinions.

Hell Mr J,

Back to your original point ...

QuoteMy point? Its comical that when the AP (cough) crew use PAST RESULTS, its somehow BETTER or more acceptable.....God like almost (lol).


When a hard working method guy wants to use those EXACT SAME numbers, for some reason HE is using gamblers fallacy and destined to lose. Hmmmm, I'm a bit confused.

I am intrigued by the observation you have stated.  I agree, why is that? I think each group are in denial.  The fact of the matter is past numbers is just that, past numbers.

I have used past numbers to study pattern development.  I have categorically labelled these patterns.

The fact that this method requires the study of past numbers to develop patterns still falls in the mind set of the gambler's fallacy.

However, I do not use a method that requires past numbers .  I do not need a method or "AP (cough)".  I simply jump on any table and bet according to law of distribution, using a concept I call STAMP.

Please don't ask me about STAMP.  My point is each group uses past numbers to determine the outcome and both is no better than the other.

Kimo Li

Was real busy, sorry. Listen guys, I am repeating myself.......If the AP crew want to continue doing what they claim to do, I DON'T CARE, HONESTLY. Start MANY AP threads at this board, have a blast, you'll get ZERO insults from me  on YOUR threads. My biggest complaint has been the same for years.

A) I have to prove something while you do not. Just because your 'style' of play is GREAT in theory does NOT mean you actually do it. Its funny....if I say I do 'good' at this game, I hear that I have to prove it. If the AP crew say they do 'good' at this game and I say BS, I have to disprove them wrong.  :girl_wacko:

B) Definitions: Over time, I have noticed that the definitions of certain things (words) are far different from the AP crew and method guys. I INSIST in fairness, same rules/definitions for everyone.

Those are kind of my biggest sticking points, NOTHING MORE than that. Is it a huge deal? Heck no, I'm not losing sleep over it and I do *NOT* want to argue about it. As for Kelly.......he is one of maybe 3 AP guys I can tolerate. He is the ONLY AP guy I would love to have a couple beers, have a lunch with him and shoot the breeze with him regarding AP and roulette in general.

Ken

"I am intrigued by the observation you have stated.  I agree, why is that? I think each group are in denial.  The fact of the matter is past numbers is just that, past numbers" >>> I agree Kimo Li.

Ok, it might be debatable if past numbers are useful or not, however, I think its a slam dunk saying that both crews to SOME DEGREE (even if small) use past numbers. I am not saying the past 400 numbers, lets clear that up.

Ken