Here's one I just came across, never read it before:
{Gambler's Fallacy - the player is more likely to lose following a win, and more likely win following a loss.}
Is there no end to this? Everything in gambling falls under somebodys dumbass idea of what GF means. What it comes down to is, it means anything you want it to, therefore it has no meaning at all. :scratch_ones_head: :good:
Focus on the word "Fallacy" is basically "misconception". Put "Gambler's" in front of it, and you get GAMBLER'S FALLACY. I dont understand the debate about this - it's a simple thing. The most common fallacy about roulette is something like red has a greater chance of spinning next after say 10 blacks.
Quote from: Steve on July 05, 2010, 02:15:53 AM
Focus on the word "Fallacy" is basically "misconception". Put "Gambler's" in front of it, and you get GAMBLER'S FALLACY. I dont understand the debate about this - it's a simple thing. The most common fallacy about roulette is something like red has a greater chance of spinning next after say 10 blacks.
The point I'm making is, there isn't just one GF, there are lots of them. Like everything else in gambling, you can't nail it down, its open to interpretation. Goofy GF's, wishy washy math, improbable probability, and everybody is an expert. No wonder you can get away with murder and everybody thinks you're crazy. :haha:
Quote from: Spike! on July 05, 2010, 02:35:45 AM
Like everything else in gambling, you can't nail it down, its open to interpretation.
Except 'educated guessing', of course. That's crystal clear - no fuzziness there! :lol:
Quote from: Spike! on July 05, 2010, 02:35:45 AM
{Gambler's Fallacy - the player is more likely to lose following a win, and more likely win following a loss.}
Don't believe everything you read on the internet. Where did you get that from? It has nothing to do with GF, but it's true if the game has longer losing streaks than winning streaks.
I always thought the gamblers fallacy term was originally aimed directly at the martingale progression.
Quote from: Bayes on July 05, 2010, 04:35:50 AM
Except 'educated guessing', of course. That's crystal clear
By its very nature EG is not exact, how could it be. It fits right in with the slipshod, cobbled together, loose fitting rules to live by in gambling..
Quote from: bombus on July 05, 2010, 05:43:10 AM
I always thought the gamblers fallacy term was originally aimed directly at the martingale progression.
I've seen it applied there as well. It must be obvious by now that GF is a catch all meaningless term used to describe whatever you like in gambling. I'm sure I'll find many other ways its been used if I just keep looking. Put all those people in one room and they will argue till sundown over who's right. In a way Herb is right to make the comment 'its gamblers fallacy' in almost every post, it covers everything like a blanket.
You can honestly say that me bringing this up is just another form of GF. :lol: :lol: :lol:
Whatever staking plan you use is irrelevant to the gambler's fallacy, which is a logical error (the gambler is being inconsistent).
The fallacious gambler takes the following steps in his thinking:
1. I think this is a fair roulette wheel.
2. I have just seen 10 blacks in a row.
3. Since the wheel is fair, black and red come up equally often.
Therefore:
4. red has to come up pretty soon.
5. I'd better start betting red.
6. Maybe red won't come up in the next spin, but a lot of reds have to come up soon.
A 'fair' wheel means two things: there is no bias, and spins are independent (whatever has occurred makes it no more or less likely that anything else will occur).
The gambler's fallacy doesn't involve bias, only independence. The inconsistency comes from the fact that his premises are:
- The setup is fair.
- There have been 10 blacks in a row.
From that he concludes that some reds must turn up soon. But this would only be true if outcomes were not independent, which is inconsistent with the first premise.
In fact, it can be shown that in a negative expectation game, bold (aggressive) staking is best, timid staking is worst. If you have a positive expectation the best staking plan is a form of % staking (like the kelly criterion). But if you have more losses than wins (as in roulette even chances), you're better off raising stakes after losses, not wins (because the winning streaks are shorter than the losing streaks).
5. I'd better start betting red.
6. Maybe red won't come up in the next spin, but a lot of reds have to come up soon.>>
Thats certainly a popular version, but its just a version. There are at least half a dozen and they all differ. Like everything else in gambling, nobody really knows whats going on, they just think they do..
Quote from: Spike! on July 05, 2010, 06:35:26 AM
Thats certainly a popular version, but its just a version. There are at least half a dozen and they all differ.
What other versions are there? the 'version' you posted in the first post isn't GF at all, in fact it's the truth for roulette ECs.
Basically any belief that you can beat a random game with negative expectation is a fallacy, or gambler's fallacy, or whatever fallacy you call it.
I think you dedicate too much attention to these terms & definitions, Spike.
Quote from: mistarlupo on July 05, 2010, 10:05:35 AM
Basically any belief that you can beat a random game with negative expectation is a fallacy, or gambler's fallacy, or whatever fallacy you call it.
I think you dedicate too much attention to these terms & definitions, Spike.
Exactly! Any belief about the game that you can win seems to be Gamblers Fallacy! That makes the term devoid of any real meaning. And its not ME thats obsessed with terms, its all the 'experts' who always try and put me in my place with meaningless terms like GF. If everything is GF, then nothing is..
Quote from: mistarlupo on July 05, 2010, 10:05:35 AM
Basically any belief that you can beat a random game with negative expectation is a fallacy, or gambler's fallacy,
This just isn't true. The gambler's fallacy is very specific, and it's about independence. I can't really explain it any more clearly than I have.
There are lots of other ways you can tackle roulette without committing the gambler's fallacy, and I'm not just talking about AP.
Quote from: Bayes on July 05, 2010, 12:35:00 PM
This just isn't true. The gambler's fallacy is very specific, and it's about independence. I can't really explain it any more clearly than I have.
There are lots of other ways you can tackle roulette without committing the gambler's fallacy, and I'm not just talking about AP.
LOL!! You're making my point perfectly! Nobody can agree on what GF is, so its meaningless. I read the most well written article on gambling and the guy will have an off the wall GF. And you people love to tell ME I'm full of it..
What the hell are you talking about? It's not a question of people agreeing what it is. There is one definition of the gambler's fallacy, I can't help it if people don't understand it.
Still waiting for those 'other versions'...
You see, this is where you demonstrate your ignorance. You think it's a matter of the 'experts' making up some rule which is totally arbitrary and if they don't all agree on it then it must be false or meaningless.
Some people still believe the earth is flat. Because not everyone agrees that it isn't does that make the geometry of the earth 'meaningless'? according to you it does. :lol:
Quote from: Bayes on July 05, 2010, 01:03:13 PM
What the hell are you talking about? It's not a question of people agreeing what it is. There is one definition of the gambler's fallacy, I can't help it if people don't understand it.
Still waiting for those 'other versions'...
But they feel the same way when you don't understand theirs, don't you see? I posted a list of other versions last week, my favorite is just believeing you can win is GF. The big blanket theory..
There is not 'theirs' and 'mine', there is just what there is. At the top of this thread you posted what you believed was a 'version' of GF, but wasn't.
You seem to live in world where there is no objective truth, it's just dog eat dog, opinions and egos battling against each other. That's pretty sad.
Whether or not it is GF/IGF by the book, it is again a fallacy. We might be fooled by randomness in many ways.
Quote from: Bayes on July 05, 2010, 12:35:00 PMThere are lots of other ways you can tackle roulette without committing the gambler's fallacy, and I'm not just talking about AP.
Well, glad you have 'lots' of options, I would say just
few in my notebook but none of them
practical. For now. So yeah, I agree on that not
everything is gambler's fallacy.
Quote from: Bayes on July 05, 2010, 01:19:08 PM
There is not 'theirs' and 'mine', there is just what there is. At the top of this thread you posted what you believed was a 'version' of GF, but wasn't.
You seem to live in world where there is no objective truth, it's just dog eat dog, opinions and egos battling against each other. That's pretty sad.
Stop it, Bayes, I'm laughing so hard I can't see the keyboard. You think its SAD that everybody doesn't agree with you and I think its funny? You MathBoyz really do have a religion, thats just what a religious Christian says when you don't accept Jesus. They feel 'sad' for you, boo hoo. You can't nail gambling down, everybody seems to have their own unprovable viewpoint, just like a religion. Sad indeed..
Quote from: Spike! on July 05, 2010, 02:06:07 PM
You think its SAD that everybody doesn't agree with you and I think its funny?
You just don't get it. It's not about me or anyone's opinion. :ok:
Quote from: mistarlupo on July 05, 2010, 01:19:30 PM
Well, glad you have 'lots' of options, I would say just few in my notebook but none of them practical.
Yes, just a few. :)
:good:
Its not about who's right or wrong or who's practical. Its about confusion. You say 'poor Spike, he never understands'. I say POOR YOU, its obvious that there are so many points of view on the subject because so much is left open to intrerpretation. If we were discussing the principles of flight, those are LAWS, there wouldn't be 10 different opinions. But the 'laws' of gambling are so squishy, so wishy washy, that it invites different 'schools' of thought. And just like a religion, you find each other and hang out, so you can give each other reassurance.
Everything I do, every bet I make violates some form of somebodys Gamblers Fallacy. So to me, YOUR version of GF, to me, is in itself the real GF. Because whatever magical powers you think past results have because their independent, ain't true. Very funny indeed...
Again spike, according to you 99% of the world population must be math boys because they don`t believe past spins shows you anything. I haven`t seen anyone around here show me that past spins have any relevans, have you ?
There are some low intelligences sqeeking about something big (cough), but i don`t know what it is, because they keep running away when i ask them to show me that the entire world is wrong in their beliefs.
Im an open mind, i will believe you if you can prove everyone wrong, but thats not gonna happen, i wonder why.
There are some low intelligences speaking about something big (cough), >>
(https://www.vlsroulette.com/proxy.php?request=nolinks%3A%2F%2Fi966.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fae145%2FRose4Spice%2F4%2520Rose%25202010AD%2FRosesPoiticalCar2ns%2Fliberalidiotposter.jpg&hash=59f61aa09f7c0e4350d31663638453de4f791932)
Again, you're appealing to others points of view to justify your agenda. Just because something isn't well understood by the lay public doesn't mean its invalidated. People who are ignorant of the laws of flight may well have different opinions, but only one set of them will be correct (the 'opinions' which correspond to the reality of flight).
You're demanding that probability be able to predict a future random event, otherwise it's useless, of no value whatsoever. Do you realise how absurd that is?
Quotewhatever magical powers you think past results have because their independent, ain't true.
What a laugh. YOU are the one giving past results magical powers. Somehow the universe has mysteriously preordained a particular outcome as being more likely than another, even though
physically every possible outcome is equally likely, and you have the ability to tune into it.
Is this GF?
You take 4 groups of 9 numbers and watch the first spin.
Let's say group 1 hits. At this point, which of the 4 groups is more likely to hit twice in the next 3 spins?
You watch another spin.
Let's say group 2 hits. At this point, which of the 4 groups is more likely to hit twice in the next 2 spins?
You're demanding that probability be able to predict a future random event,>>
No, I'm demanding to know how probability effects the next spin or the next 100 spins. If the answer is 'not at all', then don't bother me with it. Because I keep up with the wheel on a spin to spin basis, probability has no effect on what I do at all. If thats boring, oh well. The truth tends to bore people..
You are right, probability doesn`t affect our play either, so why do you keep bringing it up if we all agree ?
Spike,
This poster of the liberal surely is right on the money !!!! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
The only question remaining : What is a good liberal ???
Nathan Detroit
Quote from: bombus on July 05, 2010, 07:37:11 PM
Is this GF?
You take 4 groups of 9 numbers and watch the first spin.
Let's say group 1 hits. At this point, which of the 4 groups is more likely to hit twice in the next 3 spins?
You watch another spin.
Let's say group 2 hits. At this point, which of the 4 groups is more likely to hit twice in the next 2 spins?
- Yes it's GF
- Neither
- Neither
:ok:
Quote from: Nathan Detroit on July 05, 2010, 07:51:46 PM
The only question remaining : What is a good liberal ???
I'm not American, nor am I a liberal. But I know this:
Republicans are a bunch of f**ktards.
Quote from: bombus on July 05, 2010, 07:37:11 PM
Is this GF?
You take 4 groups of 9 numbers and watch the first spin.
Let's say group 1 hits. At this point, which of the 4 groups is more likely to hit twice in the next 3 spins?
You watch another spin.
Let's say group 2 hits. At this point, which of the 4 groups is more likely to hit twice in the next 2 spins?
This produce a skillfull guess:
Once more again. I believe nobody read it when i first wrote it.
The wheel (0 wheel, by the way) has 4 sectors:
sector 1 numbers 32 till 34
sector 2 numbers 6 till 10
sector 3 numbers 5 till 9
sector 4 numbers 22 till 26
Number 0 doesnt belong to any sector, ok?
Then every sector has 3 sections (12 sections represent 4 sectors). The first belonging to sector 1 is 32, 15 and 19.
2 more sections for this sector and so on for the remaining 3 sectors.
Then every section has 3 diferent positions of numbers. Every position of number covers 12 numbers.
There are 3 matrices to track:
first matrix record sectors
second matrix records sections
third matrix records positions of numbers
Every matrix is a cube recording 3x3 outcomes.
Now try to follow the patterns produced by the tendency created in vertical and horizontal reading of the matrices.
Last, the solution to select the bet comes from combining 2 2 1 out of the 3 matrices. The result is you have 4 numbers to bet every stake you want to put into play.
This is a winning method but it requires observation and some calculation too.
Im not going to debate over it. You or whoever read it can take it or dismiss it.
This is worth much more than last 1.500 posts ive read here till now.
And yes, this way past spins tell you a lot what is happening in the matrices. Coincidence? Sure.
Cheers,
Carlos.
Republicans are a bunch of f**ktards.>>
Well, I guess that covers it. Thanks for being so detailed. What country are you in?
North Korea. :diablo:
(don't worry I'm kidding)
Its becoming obvious that wherever it is, you're embarrassed to say it. I've asked several times and you just ignore it. I'm American and proud of it. Too bad you can't be proud of your country, thats pretty sad..
Quote from: Noble Savage on July 05, 2010, 08:17:53 PM
North Korea. :diablo:
(don't worry I'm kidding)
I believe your national soccer team coach is Capello. Right? ;D
Quote from: Spike! on July 05, 2010, 08:24:04 PM
Its becoming obvious that wherever it is, you're embarrassed to say it. I've asked several times and you just ignore it. I'm American and proud of it. Too bad you can't be proud of your country, thats pretty sad..
haha! You're amazing.
It's just that you're the kind of self-righteous jerk who would use whatever he knows about a person (even if it's a cool thing like tornado-hunting) to make fun of him in forums.
All you need to know is that I'm from the free-er world. :sarcastic:
Quote from: Carpanta on July 05, 2010, 08:24:29 PM
I believe your national soccer team coach is Capello. Right? ;D
North Korea's? I don't know. But I know the poor guys are probably locked by the government in some camp right now as a punishment for their weak results in the world cup. I also know that their team's games were not locally broadcasted, unless they win, in which case they would broadcast a recording of the match. (national pride?)
What a sick government. ???
All you need to know is that I'm from>>
I've been on the net since 92 and have never ever seen anybody before you who was so embarrassed about his own country that he refused to say what it is. Must be a swell place. I'm from the most hated country on earth, and I could care less if people know I'm from here. You talk about people making fun of you, but its just fine when you use your knowledge of where I'm from to trash Republicans. So its the ol double standard, huh. Picture a chicken clucking..
Quote from: Spike! on July 05, 2010, 08:53:51 PM
I've been on the net since 92 and have never ever seen anybody before you who was so embarrassed about his own country that he refused to say what it is.
Yeah right. Accept your own assumptions/delusions as truth, as usual. ;D
Quote from: Spike! on July 05, 2010, 08:53:51 PM
use your knowledge of where I'm from to trash Republicans.
I couldn't care less what political party you follow. But the real truth behind the republican party, its motives and doings are pretty clear.
The thing is, you never told me you were republican, I simply knew because you have an aura of self-righteous/political/jerk-like/holier-than-thou attitude all around you.
Talk about an educated guess. ;D
The point is, you're ashamed of where you live. Pretty pathetic, but it explains a lot. Maybe you can move to America some day and get some pride.
Oh get a job... ::)
What's pathetic is you and your lies. Seriously, you need professional help.
[img]nolinks://images.sodahead.com/polls/000929007/delusional_disorder_grandiose_type_xlarge.jpeg[img]
Quote from: Noble Savage on July 05, 2010, 09:15:48 PM
The thing is, you never told me you were republican, I simply knew because you have an aura of self-righteous/political/jerk-like/holier-than-thou attitude all around you.
Yeah, take those freaks that think we got into the Iraq war because of oil. We only have 10% of the Iraq contracts with American companies. The other 90% goes to the rest of the world. We don't own any of the oil fields/wells/ or refineries there. America is just a shabby player in the history of doing things. They don't conquer and exploit for spoils. We go out of our way to turn things back over to those that we have defeated and even help them rebuild. We rebuilt Germany and Japan after we defeated them. We left Bosnia and Grenada. We will leave Iraq and probably leave Afghanistan too. But look at Great Britain. They took over India and remained as conquerers for more than 90 years. The Romans conquered Europe and kept it for themselves. The Russians took over half of Asia and kept it. We even built the Panama Canal and gave it back to that country. We fought for and protected the Philippians and left agreeable when they asked us to. We are still protecting South Korea. Don't even bring up Israel.
Here is some more for your pipe to smoke. It turns out that many black people in America were heroes of the Revolution and there was no inequality until people like Woodrow Wilson started his propaganda to divide the country. Well we are going to take back the lost patriots of the Revolution. We are going to put an end to the race bating poverty pimps. The only victimized people here are the fools that believe the propaganda and act on it. America has been under the effect of a well orchestrated propaganda attack. But now the truth is coming out. Everyone is going to be very angry. The liberals and progressives have a lot of explaining to do.
Gizmo,
Well said !!
Nathan Detroit
Thank you for sharing this information Carlos.
It is VERY VERY useful.
Best wishes
Benjamin
There are 23,107 definitions of gamblers fallacy. Anything not related to AP is gamblers fallacy. :taunt: Ken
AP has an edge that beats roulette. That edge can be built up upon a skillful way to find the proper bet selection to put into stake in next spin(s). It is based on tracking tools, a thorough understanding of numbers distribution around the wheel and accurate calculation. No VB is needed when working with this method.
If you dont mind Mr J it is very obvious AP is the only way to beat roulette. But AP doesnt apply to one unique method, i just know one but there can be more as well.
Thank you for sharing this information Carlos.
It is VERY VERY useful.
Best wishes
Benjamin
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This produce a skillfull guess:
Once more again. I believe nobody read it when I first wrote it.
The wheel (0 wheel, by the way) has 4 sectors:
sector 1 numbers 32 till 34
sector 2 numbers 6 till 10
sector 3 numbers 5 till 9
sector 4 numbers 22 till 26
Number 0 doesn't belong to any sector, ok?
Then every sector has 3 sections (12 sections represent 4 sectors). The first belonging to sector 1 is 32, 15 and 19.
2 more sections for this sector and so on for the remaining 3 sectors.
Then every section has 3 diferent positions of numbers. Every position of number covers 12 numbers.
There are 3 matrices to track:
first matrix record sectors
second matrix records sections
third matrix records positions of numbers
Every matrix is a cube recording 3x3 outcomes.
Now try to follow the patterns produced by the tendency created in vertical and horizontal reading of the matrices.
Last, the solution to select the bet comes from combining 2 2 1 out of the 3 matrices. The result is you have 4 numbers to bet every stake you want to put into play.
This is a winning method but it requires observation and some calculation too.
Im not going to debate over it. You or whoever read it can take it or dismiss it.
This is worth much more than last 1.500 posts ive read here till now.
And yes, this way past spins tell you a lot what is happening in the matrices. Coincidence? Sure.
Cheers,
Carlos.
Happy to know you caught it Benjamin. Now add only shown numbers to this strategy.
Be lucky mate.
Cheers,
Carlos.
Hi Carpanta,
Thanks for posting this method, but I'm confused. . .
If there are only 4 sectors, how come the matrix for it is a 3x3 cube? Please could you post the matrices?
Also, what do you mean by "combining 2 2 1 out of the 3 matrices"?
Is this related to Kimo Li's method?
Thanks in advance.
"it is very obvious AP is the only way to beat roulette" >>> Whatever helps you sleep better at night bro. :good: I know I win (without AP), thats the important thing to me. Ken
Quote from: Mr J on July 25, 2010, 03:19:53 PM
Whatever helps you sleep better at night bro. :good: I know I win (without AP), thats the important thing to me. Ken
Lol Mr J. What apply for you then the best for you. I believe it true and fair. I dont pretend what i assume is carved in stone for the ages to come.
Cheers,
Carlos.
Quote from: Mike on July 25, 2010, 02:24:52 PM
Hi Carpanta,
Thanks for posting this method, but I'm confused. . .
If there are only 4 sectors, how come the matrix for it is a 3x3 cube? Please could you post the matrices?
Also, what do you mean by "combining 2 2 1 out of the 3 matrices"?
Is this related to Kimo Li's method?
Thanks in advance.
Hi Mike,
Have a look to my last 20 posts or so and you'll see your answers should be properly answered.
Matrices:
xxx xxx xxx
xxx xxx xxx
xxx xxx xxx
Cubs 3x3 tracking vertically wiht both vertical and horizontal reading.
Work on it and try to figure out things. In a way Kimo's teaching is behind this stuff.
Hello Carpanta,
Thank you very much for sharing. I don't know if I did it right, I just won 140 units flat betting on 4 numbers in the B&M casino a few hours ago. I tracked the 3x3 matrices and look for repeat on the vertical and the horizontal columns. I choose 4 numbers from 2 sectors, 2 sections and 1 position based on horizontal and vertical repetition. I stop on a hit or bet 9 spins maximum if no hit. On a hit I stop betting and wait for the remaining 9 spins to complete before making a new decision. If not qualified after 9 spins, I re track a new set of 9 spins. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Thanks and Regards
sniper
Hi Sniper, nice to know you've been so fortunate. I believe you do quite well with the method. But why waiting to close the cube after a hit without staking?. Separate cubes 3x3 are designed to have a gap every 3 lines to have a better view of the scheme but not for other purposes. I suggest a mild progression every pair of numbers from the 4 chosen to put into play just to raise your winnings quicklier. Play when you see consistent patterns keeping on.
All this has to do with chance rythms producing consistent threads from time to time. Just take profit of them.
Regards,
Carlos.
Hello Carpanta,
Thanks for your quick reply and thanks for your good advise. I am still not sure what pattern to look out for. I know I am just guessing when I played in the casino just now. I only look for repetition on the vertical and horizontal column. I must be lucky to win. I have followed Kimo Li's matrix and read his book several times and still trying to figure out a winning method. I followed each and every post related to this subject over most of the forums and still can't find a consistent way to play. Though I have not played long enough, I realized that your method of tracking is quite reliable and consistent. I am still learning how to use it. I can see the strength in your tracking method while I was playing.
Thanks and Regards
sniper
If you were looking for a repeat in vertical and/or horizontal reading then you were not guessing, werent you?
Better to say you were waiting to be fortunate enough meeting a coincidence. And coincidences exist i believe.
You are doing well that way. Dont let you be misled by words like patterns, threads if that is the point.
Hello Carlos,
Thank you very much. I got it now! I will spend more time working on it. Best wishes and best of luck to you and your family.
Regards
sniper
keep going sniper :-)
thanks for your sharing Carlos.
cheers
Hello loungeplayer,
Congratulation on your success!
Regards
sniper
hi Sniper, thanks. I am still learning...
I believe Carlos is more accurate with his current method. Also want to thank Kimo for his sharing of knowledge and ideas.
Quote from: Mr J link=topic=16616. msg116044#msg116044 date=1280081993
"it is very obvious AP is the only way to beat roulette" >>> Whatever helps you sleep better at night bro. :good: I know I win (without AP), thats the important thing to me. Ken
plenty of people win all the time without using ap. anyone who walks up to a roulette table can see it happen all the time. why the debate?
Because those same people who you see win at the tables today win 5k and loose 7 k tomorrow. Very few people who play roulette admit when they loose.
Thats an OPINION Jakkalsdraai, which we all appreciate, thank you. Just the same as AP (cough). Lots of talk about chocolate covered dreams of making decent money using such non-sense as AP. I'm sure AP (cough) worked fine in 1924. What happens after people FAIL at creating a decent method? They HIDE behind....Bu Bu Bu Bu BUT, I'm an advantage player, really I am, all is well. :sarcastic: Ken
That is your OPINION Ken, which we all appreciate, thank you. Yet whether you like to believe that AP techniques work or not, you yourself definately have no experience with AP. This is pretty clear to me anyway. So how can you form an OPINION about something you pretty much know nothing of?
Your logic is flawed. Just because I have never studied AP? I have also never slapped a grizzly bear on the nose but I know when something is wrong/stupid. AP (cough) is a joke and MOST experienced gamblers know that. This is 2010, not 1924. Ken
Again that is your OPINION. Thank you for that! You might THINK that my logic is flawed but I know that yours is non-existant. Guess that is an OPINION as well.
What you know of AP like you have admitted yourself is zip. Maybe first understand something before attacking it. :whistle:
Jackkal
Do u remember that I tought U some things in AP?(VB)
Anyway My expirience and training in VB is very good.
Till now(and maby forever) the VB and the Bias play is the ONLY way to gain a real advantage!
But now days it is a very difitult task...if not an impossible....
The only way for an AP to succed these days is to have HUGE patience and HUGE mood to search among a lottttttt of wheels to find the very rare good conditions.
The APer must also have the money and the mood and the time to travel the world to find these rare conditions.
He must also have the patience and the mood to play the "Cat and Mouse" game with the Casino eyes from the sky and Pit bosses.
As I have posted a lot of times the AP was perfect way to make u Rich before the 80s....because:
Casinos wasn t aware of what give the advantage to these players,because they didn t know for sure that there were AP....
If the AP was still a way to make steady money,There wouldn t be sellers that would sell their VB methods and their RCs....
Casinos know all now...until a new way will be descovered,these ways of AP is a past...
I am WITH the APers and not AGENSTS them!
Do u think that it is a good thing for me to be trained for 2 years in it and now NOT having the Conditions to make the money and the time that I spent on it give me the JUICES that I was expecting?
But I don t feel sad about it...because learning how to calculate 2 oposite objects with various speeds and adding a distance was for me a GREAT thing that made my phisics horisons wider. ;)
So far I have been to 4 different casinos around here. All of them had wheels or a wheel with the correct conditions.
Except for myself I have met up with some other guys from all over the World and in first World Countries (Not physically met but on MSN) They all have there places where they go and play. Yes you taught me some basics (basically all from Jafco without his cards) but now I have more advance methods taught and being taught to me by these gentlemen. Still I am but a novice but I'm already doing well.
It's al about patience, persistance and being professional.
Before 6 months I bought a Wheel.I needed to extent my skills and play in various tilts ,rotor speeds and scatters..
I was giving to the wheel 1 pin tilt and 2 pins tilt...I can playVB with a VERY High margin!
I had tested all the FFs Roulette computers and I am having better advantage from them and I am also ready to play in about 10 spins (strike point) wile with the FFs I have to do PS and PS and all the time retune!
With VB I can play without effort....It has become my 2nd nature! Give me a wheel with DD(1 or 2) and a reasonable scatter and I will make U millions!!!!
But when I am going to my 2 local casinos that they have 30 wheels each I can t find ANYWARE the corretc condition to give with VB at least a LITTLE advantage!
The balls are JUMMPING like CRAZY!!!! No tilts!!!!!
I found 1 time a wheel that was hitting 6 of 10 in the same DD...and I recoreded about 60 spins...the TILT was still there after 60 spins.....I said to my self..."Oh my God I will come back tomorow and I make MILLIONS! ;D
And in the next day the same wheel(I observed the scars) was LEVELED!!!!
So I just went homme without playing a single spin.....
HOW can I drive a FERRARY without having the write ROADS???
Jakkal
U are very new to this...time will show U everything.....
We have a wise phraze here " In the position that U are now I was before and where i am now u will come later"
Teo I know how long you have been around. I am also on Forester's forum. What you think I know and what I know are two different things believe me. Anyhow I'm not having a pissing contest. I definately did not have Jafco's stuff so you definately helped me there.
I never gave u Jafco cards....I just told u how to make ur own cards...which is better!
Teo....let's leave it there mate. I know what is written in the Jafco course. Someone was so kind as to show me. And yes you never gave me the cards. That is correct. You did however claim these methods to be your own cause you knew I did not have Jafco's stuff at the time. You deceived me by claiming to be somebody else and you also made some incredible claims .... remember? Again though even through all of the lies and BS I still appreciated the couple of lessons. It definately did give me insight in saving time with rotor timing.
Having said all of that. I don't for on second believe that you are such a great (second nature) vb expert as you claim.
Let's leave it there though.
LOL
As I told u time will show u if u can make steady income with VB.
Ps.The way that I told u how to make cards for rotor I never claimed that this is MY way....This is the way of every VB player..they just memorize the positions without having to make cards..this is the how I am doing it now(without cards)...but the cards is the biggeners way....
I am, glad that I helped u....
Lol, you might just be the most thick skin person I know. Water of a duck's back come's to mind ;D
I am sorry I didn t understand what u ment..as my english aren t so good....
Also If u wre so happy with VB...u wouldn t still search the Kimo li stuff ;D ;D ;D
U are just a lost person in everything that matters of roulette......The only way for u is to stop playing Roulette.
Jakk mate, you don't understand. If viper can't do it, no body can!
lol :)
Fooking teenagers. . .
EXACTLY!
Quote from: NS on August 04, 2010, 11:05:33 AM
Jakk mate, you don't understand. If viper can't do it, no body can!
lol :)
Fooking teenagers. . .
Hahhahahahaha ;D
On the button
I just thought of this...... Isn't AP (cough) gamblers fallacy as well? :sarcastic: I think I could be right on this! :dance1: Ken
Quote from: Mr J link=topic=16616. msg117379#msg117379 date=1281108908
I think I could be right on this! :dance1: Ken
Now watch how the AP (cough) guys scramble. Damage control. :swoon: Ken