That's right. This is the stuff that Spike / cheese says is worthless. My algorithm is now working to the point that it uses a mechanical method to produce these three high quality states. They are consistent because the rules that cause them are consistent too. My method has always been about the randomness of those three states. Spike never advised me on that. In fact he totally rejects it.
It is in these three states where I found the most valuable information regarding reading randomness too. That's where I get my winnings from. There is no credible way for Spike to pass judgment of me with his total disregard for this method. He is completely clueless and has always been clueless. I've always known that too. And I taught this to all my students. Spike thinks that a few people that can't do something makes up all the truth there is to know about these three states.
I've never heard one constructive thing from him other than his negativity. There is nothing in all the archives regarding his contribution that led me to discover this. I don't care about the process that gets me to these three states. I just care about the randomness of these three conditions. The only thing that matters is playing the trend that the effectiveness is producing. It can be from anything including the dozens, the columns, or the three EC's.
This is yet another area of difference between my method and Father Roulette's. I also don't stick to just a single flat betting level. I use two levels. So there is very little in common with whatever Spike is claiming that he taught me and what I actually do. As far as I can see, none of what I do comes from him.
Here is the software working:
<<<< -- Winner! -- >>>>
-----------------------
Your running total is now at 10
Place a bet of 10 on Dozen 2
Place a bet of 10 on Dozen 3
------------------------------------
<<<< -- Winner! -- >>>>
-----------------------
Your running total is now at 20
Place a bet of 10 on Dozen 2
Place a bet of 10 on Dozen 3
------------------------------------
<<<< -- Winner! -- >>>>
-----------------------
Your running total is now at 30
Place a bet of 10 on Dozen 2
Place a bet of 10 on Dozen 3
------------------------------------
<<<< -- Winner! -- >>>>
-----------------------
Your running total is now at 40
Place a bet of 10 on Dozen 1
Place a bet of 10 on Dozen 2
------------------------------------
<<<< -- Winner! -- >>>>
-----------------------
Your running total is now at 50
Place a bet of 10 on Dozen 2
Place a bet of 10 on Dozen 3
------------------------------------
<<<< -- Lost! -- >>>>
-----------------------
Your running total is now at 30
Place a bet of 10 on Column 2
Place a bet of 10 on Column 3
--------------------------------------
<<<< -- Winner! -- >>>>
-----------------------
Your running total is now at 40
Place a bet of 10 on Column 2
Place a bet of 10 on Column 3
-------------------------------------
<<<< -- Winner! -- >>>>
-----------------------
Your running total is now at 50
Place a bet of 10 on Column 2
Place a bet of 10 on Column 3
--------------------------------------
<<<< -- Winner! -- >>>>
-----------------------
Your running total is now at 60
Place a bet of 10 on Dozen 1
Place a bet of 10 on Dozen 2
------------------------------------
Quote from: Gizmotron on April 09, 2011, 03:03:17 AM
My method has always been about the randomness of those three states.
The 'three states' happen to everybody in every random game. Everybody is either winning, winning and losing, or losing. All the time. The only time this wouldn't happen is if you have the edge. If you see them happening, you don't have the edge, or enough of an edge to matter. Thats a fact.
Quote from: cheese on April 09, 2011, 03:32:59 AM
The 'three states' happen to everybody in every random game. Everybody is either winning, winning and losing, or losing. All the time. The only time this wouldn't happen is if you have the edge. If you see them happening, you don't have the edge, or enough of an edge to matter. Thats a fact.
Go away. I don't care if you think you have an edge. I'm not interested in your thinking. You play 30 to 40 spins to win 5 - 7 units. Sure you have an edge. You never see the three states because you are so good. Only I don't care. And there are no facts in anything that you just said. The absence of any facts or data is almost blinding it so crystal clear.
What's missing from your ignoramus conclusion is that "everybody in every random game" doesn't deal with it the way that I do. In fact only a few do. It's clear that you think your edge frees you of that necessity. And that clearly makes you ignorant of dealing with it. So go away Father Roulette. You are nothing but a pest.
Quote from: Gizmotron on April 09, 2011, 03:58:27 AM
What's missing from your ignoramus conclusion is that "everybody in every random game" doesn't deal with it the way that I do.
The only way to deal with it is to make it go away. To get into a 'state' where you see nothing but winning and occasional winning and losing winning and losing. There are no losing streaks, that only happens when you don't have a handle on the game. Your goal should never be to win as much as possible, but to not lose as much as possible. Do that, and the winning takes care of itself.
Quote from: cheese on April 09, 2011, 04:08:25 AM
The only way to deal with it is to make it go away. To get into a 'state' where you see nothing but winning and occasional winning and losing winning and losing. There are no losing streaks, that only happens when you don't have a handle on the game. Your goal should never be to win as much as possible, but to not lose as much as possible. Do that, and the winning takes care of itself.
Preach it Father Roulette. Oh what a great revelation.
I've been teaching about change and changing all along. I know about the need to adapt and change. You act like I'm forced to go through those bad conditions with wild losses. I'm not.
If you have only winning streaks then why does it take you 30 to 40 spins to get 5 - 7 units up? Something is very fishy here regarding that.
Quote from: Gizmotron on April 09, 2011, 04:16:39 AM
If you have only winning streaks then why does it take you 30 to 40 spins to get 5 - 7 units up? Something is very fishy here regarding that.
You have to quote me accurately. If you check, you'll see I said it USUALLY takes MUCH LESS than 30 spins to reach my goal. Sometimes there are zeros to deal with and one zero eats up 2 spins. In 30 outcomes there can easily be 4-8 zeros sometimes, they eat up a lot of spins.
Quote from: cheese on April 09, 2011, 04:23:25 AM
You have to quote me accurately. If you check, you'll see I said it USUALLY takes MUCH LESS than 30 spins to reach my goal. Sometimes there are zeros to deal with and one zero eats up 2 spins. In 30 outcomes there can easily be 4-8 zeros sometimes, they eat up a lot of spins.
Well you've wrecked another thread. That's what you do.
Quote from: Gizmotron on April 09, 2011, 04:30:07 AM
Well you've wrecked another thread.
How so? All I'm doing is stating things as they truly are. I study roulette all day, every day. Its all I do. Whats wrong with discussing it, I don't object when you post in my threads, I welcome all suggestions. Here's the thing, Gizmo. If you're right, you will always have all the right arguments. Nobody can ruin a thread, because you have all the right answers. Like I did on GG, in 16,000 posts. Go thru them and see if I ever complained once about anybody posting. I never did, and they gave me a really hard time.
Gizmotron
just what are you trying to achieve on these roulette forums ?
Quote from: zippyplayer on April 09, 2011, 08:40:29 AM
Gizmotron
just what are you trying to achieve on these roulette forums ?
Legacy. I found out I have heart disease. I learned just about everything from some advice I got 20 years ago and from my own playing experience with hot number detection. The hot number detection is tedious and time consuming. It turns out that the things that make that beatable apply to the EC's as well. I had become very good at the dozens and the columns betting 24 numbers at a time. Then four years ago I began seeing what people on forums were talking about. Before that I had more than 30 years experience. That included more than 12 years working with computers to write my own simulations that involved basic binomial distribution.
I started here and then basically went over to the more caustic GG. I learned a few things along the way. People will only take on learning something needed only when they are at a stage to accept it and to move on to it. Most people are still looking for a set of rules that will lead them to consistent wins. They want Roulette to be an ATM machine. I tried to tell people about the miraculous effect of Elegant Patterns. But that was rejected. I tried to talk about reading randomness but that was mostly rejected by just about everyone. Hot numbers hardly ever came up.
So I tried something new after I found out that I would probably be dead in about ten years or less. I took on serious students that actually wanted to learn about what I knew was the only working way to beat Roulette outside of physics computers and specially gifted wheel clockers. Roulette is random. To beat it you must understand its characteristics that often repeat themselves or that travel in clusters or patterns. I was tired of arguing. It was time to prove my point to a few and to see if they could actually learn it and make use of it.
During that process I became aware of just how difficult it is for the new students to concentrate and see all the characteristics of randomness. I'm sure that had a fatiguing effect on almost all of them. By the time I got to the layer for tracking the quality of a session and it's current state of effectiveness the conversations became shorter and somewhat glazed over.
I was talking with Mike about something on this forum when it hit me to go ahead and build an algorithm that couldn't get tired out from learning fatigue. The goal of my ten students was to give myself a legacy. I wanted the knowledge to be known. So I set out to solve some of the accusations coming at me. If I could control hackers from not reading my source code and I could prevent hackers from distributing keys to my software then I could make a demonstration of my concepts that would come out slowly and just for a few people at a time. It's a far better legacy if only a few people at first take advantage of this.
There's one huge bonus in all this. I get to prove Spike is a liar. He says that I rip people off. In fact he thinks I ripped him off for all my ideas. He's a proven Dumbo when it comes to probability and arithmetic. He has no experience teaching his secrets to anyone. All I ever got from him was to take what I already knew about the dozens and columns and to attempt to apply it to the EC's with flat betting. He shared that information freely on at least two forums. Now he claims I ripped it off from him. Spike is just a bonus feature of all this.
The software demo is my proof of concept argument. It's to settle things once and for all time. You people at this forum are the only participants. Like it or not things around here will change. I will have done this and you will know it or I will fail and you will know that. There is no other way this can end. Spike is nothing more than a person that loves to wreck other people talking with each other. He's just a selfish and jealous child in an adult form. That makes him obnoxious. He's already trashed this thread. So I'm going to avoid him when ever possible. He has nothing new to add to these discussions. It's always the same old crud from him. I moved away from not sharing to sharing what I know. That's because this is difficult enough for only a few to be good at it. Now my software, that's a different story. It doesn't get tired. And it can be used to play any on-line casino. My software might not reach it's goal in 30 to 40 spins but it will in 100 spins most times. I'm sure that winning a three hour session is beneath that altruism of Father Roulette and his Zen of perfection. I'm sure we will all hear about that once the demo trials start. I'll have this done in less than 2 1/2 weeks. Then the real fun will start.
Quote from: Gizmotron on April 09, 2011, 12:57:16 PM
I get to prove Spike is a liar.
When does that start? Did I miss it?
As far as your legacy goes, don't worry, its intact. No worries there..
Quote from: cheese on April 09, 2011, 08:38:33 PM
When does that start? Did I miss it?
As far as your legacy goes, don't worry, its intact. No worries there..
The thread wrecker strikes again.
=============================================
This is an untested Beta. It might have bugs. It has never locked up. There are no memory leaks. Please report feature requests. It's intentionally minimal.
nolinks://home.earthlink.net/~gizmotron/getbetaGBB.exe (nolinks://home.earthlink.net/~gizmotron/getbetaGBB.exe)
This is a self extracting archive. It contains a simple installation program. It will place a shortcut icon on your desktop. It comes with an un-installer in your programs folder.
Quote from: Gizmotron on April 09, 2011, 08:42:20 PM
The thread wrecker strikes again.
Well, you said you were going to prove I'm a liar and I was wondering if that started yet, so far I've missed it.
Quote from: cheese on April 09, 2011, 08:44:23 PM
Well, you said you were going to prove I'm a liar and I was wondering if that started yet, so far I've missed it.
Exhibit A: My software is no longer Vaporware. It's Beta testing now. It's a public Beta test too.
You said it would never happen. You are a liar and you will always be one.
=============================================
This is an untested Beta. It might have bugs. It has never locked up. There are no memory leaks. Please report feature requests. It's intentionally minimal.
nolinks://home.earthlink.net/~gizmotron/getbetaGBB.exe (nolinks://home.earthlink.net/~gizmotron/getbetaGBB.exe)
This is a self extracting archive. It contains a simple installation program. It will place a shortcut icon on your desktop. It comes with an un-installer in your programs folder.
Quote from: Gizmotron on April 09, 2011, 08:51:10 PM
Exhibit A: My software is no longer Vaporware. You said it would never happen.
You just said you don't know if it wins or loses, so its not the software you promised. You said it would pick the correct bet more often than not and this clearly doesn't do that. So I was correct, it will never happen.
Quote from: cheese on April 09, 2011, 08:53:47 PM
You just said you don't know if it wins or loses, so its not the software you promised. You said it would pick the correct bet more often than not and this clearly doesn't do that. So I was correct, it will never happen.
That proves nothing. People will test this. They will decide. I just did all this work. My testing of it would just be ridiculed by you anyway. So I decided to take the chance that I was right when I wrote it. I have the guts to put it out there as is. You are grasping at straws at this point. I delivered the goods. If it needs a quick fix I'll hear about it soon enough. But not from you. You are afraid of it. That is so clearly easy far anyone to see.
=============================================
This is an untested Beta. It might have bugs. It has never locked up. There are no memory leaks. Please report feature requests. It's intentionally minimal.
nolinks://home.earthlink.net/~gizmotron/getbetaGBB.exe (nolinks://home.earthlink.net/~gizmotron/getbetaGBB.exe)
This is a self extracting archive. It contains a simple installation program. It will place a shortcut icon on your desktop. It comes with an un-installer in your programs folder.
I agree for a successful roulette play you must know the features of a random sequence.I have read the whole thread looking for the three states.I did not find them.Please definite the three states.I found also somethings about special rules.Where can I find this rules.I know a lot about the maths and statistic but this thread is a big puzzle.
Quote from: schoenpoetser on April 10, 2011, 08:37:35 AM
I agree for a successful roulette play you must know the features of a random sequence.I have read the whole thread looking for the three states.I did not find them.Please definite the three states.I found also somethings about special rules.Where can I find this rules.I know a lot about the maths and statistic but this thread is a big puzzle.
The three states are:
1.) Works very good
2.) Works very bad
3.) Works both good and bad mixed together at times
There are no rules. The machine executes a set of commands, gathers data, and then executes more commands. That makes it a rule based method. It must go through downturns. There is nothing in this yet to avoid downturns. It's a full public beta test.
My three states:
1) I know a lot about roulette.
2) No system or device can beat the house edge.Strategiescan do it.
3) I am very successful
Not convinced ask for a demonstration
Gizmotron
' Legacy. I found out I have heart disease. I '
Thats as far as i got
this flys in the face of everything youv written but there you are
Quote from: zippyplayer on April 11, 2011, 06:51:59 AM
Gizmotron
' Legacy. I found out I have heart disease. I '
Thats as far as I got
this flys in the face of everything youv written but there you are
Believe me, you don't want to go any farther into it. Gizmo wants to make a name for himself in the roulette world, he said it here, and he's said it to me in emails a dozen times. Take everything he says with a grain of salt.
Quote from: RobbieD on April 11, 2011, 05:05:44 AM
Having downloaded the software, what does one do with it? A newbie question I know.......
You need to go find some spins that you can enter one at a time. Second, you must be connected to the internet. Third, you press the start button. Then you enter at least 12 spins, one at a time. Then you keep going to see if you win or lose. Just enter a spin and then press the Spin button. The software tells you how the session is doing.
Quote from: zippyplayer on April 11, 2011, 06:51:59 AM
Gizmotron
' Legacy. I found out I have heart disease. I '
Thats as far as I got
this flys in the face of everything youv written but there you are
Let me try this another way. I want this first ascent. I'm too old to climb any more real mountains anymore. It's a harmless game where most people lose anyway. If I get a winning strategy out there among a few players they will be able to tell the story. It just might be that Cheese is correct. You might need to play a game within the game. You just need to play the right game. It came to me last night what that game might be for me. Spike / cheese has never even hinted at what it might be. He did suggest to me once that I got real close to it once. But I couldn't remember where that might be or what it might of meant. But I do see now something from the past that fits that. It doesn't have to though. I'll be testing this over the next few days with my software. Because of this discovery I have given up on two level betting.
Quote from: cheese on April 11, 2011, 07:56:10 AM
Believe me, you don't want to go any farther into it. Gizmo wants to make a name for himself in the roulette world, he said it here, and he's said it to me in emails a dozen times. Take everything he says with a grain of salt.
Oh, yes, more great advice from Father Roulette. I became a known expert in many fields and skills required to perform professionally in those fields. The list is huge compared with most people's individual achievements. I know this because I took a real test on how interesting my life compares with the baseline average of others accumulative, according to the test givers. So I know from experience that you must make many mistakes on the way to becoming an expert.
I learned that most people don't give a damn what others do or did. Luckily I learned that fact very early in my efforts to do things. Fail or succeed, I'm pressing on with Roulette. I'm not doing this for your gratification. I don't really care what your opinion is. If you want to poster yourself as some how being informed, correct, and full of wisdom and then I don't see you working on any new ideas or contributing to any effort to crack this game then I'm not worried about being beat by you to any successful solution to beating this game of Roulette. At worst you can complain about the difference between AC and DC power-lines Like Edison & Tesla did for years. That will be really funny watching you complain that it was all your idea. If so it was an idea you kept to yourself while others figured it out on their own. Game within a game was a hint. You let that cat out of the bag. It's in the public domain now. It's really your fault not mine. :o
Quote from: Gizmotron on April 11, 2011, 10:53:53 AM
. So I know from experience that you must make many mistakes on the way to becoming an expert.
Let us know when you get there.
Quote from: cheese on April 11, 2011, 05:30:47 PM
Let us know when you get there.
Maybe I just got there.
I became a known expert in many fields and skills required to perform professionally in those fields. The list is huge compared with most people's individual achievements. I know this because I took a real test on how interesting my life compares with the baseline average of others accumulative, according to the test givers. So I kn '
This is'nt tongue in cheek is it ! You mean it !
This is just an insult.
Quote from: zippyplayer on April 11, 2011, 08:44:47 PM
This is'nt tongue in cheek is it ! You mean it !
This is just an insult.
Haven't you heard the phrase been there done that? You don't get anywhere unless you are willing to make mistakes. If living my life turns out to be an insult to you then I'll take that too. I'll bet you have some altruistic philosophy that seeks self denial or some strange belief like that.
Quote from: zippyplayer on April 11, 2011, 08:44:47 PM
I became a known expert in many fields and skills required to perform professionally in those fields. The list is huge compared with most people's individual achievements.
Like what? Many fields? The list is huge? Give some examples. Everybody on the internet is a former astronaut and a former Navy Seal.
Gizmotron
Haven't you heard the phrase been there done that? You don't get anywhere unless you are willing to make mistake '
You set yourself above everybody and talk down to everybody.
It's insulting.
Quote from: zippyplayer on April 11, 2011, 08:44:47 PM
I became a known expert in many fields and skills required to perform professionally in those fields. The list is huge compared with most people's individual achievements.
Give some examples. If the list is huge, how hard can it be.
Quote from: cheese on April 12, 2011, 05:39:50 AM
Give some examples. If the list is huge, how hard can it be.
There was a huge full page, both sides of a newspaper questionnaire. It had about 100 questions. I filled it out and scored 10 times the average exciting life score.
Have you ever been paid to be in a Hollywood movie? Yes I was in Lethal Weapon III. I was a paid extra.
Have you ever been in a professional race? Yes, The men's downhill at the world cup.
Have you ever won a tournament. Yes, a Bowling Tournament, two years in a row. 500 people in tournament.
I won my flight in the golfing men's club year end tournament also.
Have you ever been on TV? Yes more than 22 times.
Have you ever almost died? Yes, I misjudged a jump at Bear Valley skiing once. I flew about 300 ft on alpine skis and landed right in front of a pile of rocks. I've had a head on collision in a car. I had a very dangerous rock climbing accident. I've done several do or die ski descents. I sailed a very small windsurfer out of the Golden Gate on a monster wave day. I've had three first ascents.
I worked in the music industry for two years. I met more than 100 celebrities and professional sports people. My musicianship is on a few albums.
I've defended myself in court, as a building contractor, I won.
I designed many houses and built them. I designed and built several recording studios. One of those studios was a world class studio.
I acted in a play, once.
I flew several aviation stunts, one that was possibly a first in aviation.
I SCUBA dived to 205 ft deep in Lake Tahoe in February on one tank.
I was head chef at an annual gathering of 200 people.
I took kids to summer camp.
I jumped off of a 105 ft bridge into water five times in one afternoon. I jumped off of an 85 ft bridge into 8 ft of water in the Stanislaus River at Calaveras Big Trees. That had a solid granite bottom.
I invented a new kind of browser for a new kind of a use for the internet. I delivered that browser to Mac OSX and Windows computers with cross platform file sharing over the internet.
I crossed the high Sierra on foot in a Blizzard. I climbed over twenty mountains.
I was in a Karate match, I lost in the third round.
I attempted to build software that could beat Roulette and failed publicly.
I scored more than 1000 points in a test that gave anyone with 100 points a very interesting life. So did my brother. In fact the book is thick on all my brothers and sister.
Gizmo,
But, what have you done lately? lol
Seriously, that is very impressive. I recognized your genius the first time I read a post of yours a few years ago.
Been a fan ever since.
VKM
Quote from: VKM on April 12, 2011, 11:14:33 AM
Gizmo,
But, what have you done lately? lol
Seriously, that is very impressive. I recognized your genius the first time I read a post of yours a few years ago.
Been a fan ever since.
VKM
It's an absolute blast having this blow up in my face, twice. First that lame-o progression in the live demo and now this. I know I'm alive. I win the "face to the glass award" this year. It's awarded for the very best stage appearance death by any entertainer that year at the company year end party. It's symbolic. You press your face right up to the nose of a Mitchell B-25 bomber and then auger into the ground with your face hitting the ground first. I definitely won that one.
Gizmo,
The desire to do something and the belief that you can do it is the beginning of most accomplishments. With those two things it's still possible to fail, but without those two things failure is almost certain.
Because you are not afraid to fail, you are not afraid to try. I like that about you. The good thing about not giving up too soon is that success can be right around the next corner.
VKM
VKM, Ok, but I'm not going to put a "Monster List" set of instructions in a nebulous computer algorithm any time soon. My head would pop. In fact it would be overwhelming shortly after starting. It's too much for one man. I did this before already. Never again.
Gizmo,
Got it. I was speaking in general, not this last thing in particular. Even though I am well aware that this latest experience could lead to something else that might even be better.
VKM
Quote from: Gizmotron on April 12, 2011, 10:06:24 AM
There was a huge full page, both sides of a newspaper questionnaire. It had about 100 questions. I filled it out and scored
I was asking Zippy, not you. BTW, you forgot to add what you had for breakfast to the list.
Quote from: cheese on April 12, 2011, 02:32:55 PM
I was asking Zippy, not you. BTW, you forgot to add what you had for breakfast to the list.
You might have been asking zippy but it was my quote. Where you asking zippy to answer what I said? Actually it looks like your were challenging him. Yes, let's see that. I had scrambled eggs, fried potatoes with onions, and Bloody Mary mix on the rocks.
Re: The Three States
« Reply #37 on: April 12, 2011, 12:32:55 PM »
Reply Quote
Quote from: Gizmotron on April 12, 2011, 08:06:24 AM
There was a huge full page, both sides of a newspaper questionnaire. It had about 100 questions. I filled it out and scored
I was asking Zippy, not you. BTW, you forgot to add what you had for breakfast to the list.
thought I was quoting wonderman---my apols for not making it clear
as for post 31
YAWN
Quote from: zippyplayer on April 12, 2011, 03:45:47 PM
...thought I was quoting wonderman---my apols for not making it clear
Oh shit, is there someone out that has blown me off the stage? That figures.
Quote from: zippyplayer on April 12, 2011, 03:49:38 PM
as for post 31
YAWN
as for post 40
Been there, done that.