Popular pages:

Roulette System

The Roulette Systems That Really Work

Roulette Computers

Hidden Electronics That Predict Spins

Roulette Strategy

Why Roulette Betting Strategies Lose

Roulette System

The Honest Live Online Roulette Casinos

This is how any serios attempt beat an random game - the challange at GG.

Started by lucky_strike, September 24, 2009, 10:59:23 AM

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Number Six

Yes, but what is the reason? Is is (a) to prove the law of series is a credible theory about which to design a betting method (b) to prove you can consistently win with ECs or (c) to prove the existence of series trends?

It seems from the GG thread that the method in question has already been tested and I suspect the results were negative. Why should they be different this time around?

lucky_strike


This is how i grasp it and want to test and see how the outcome will be with statistacal results.

1) I only have statistics with an positive expectation and want to see if there is an significant change made with an larger statistical sampel.

2) The test depends on many things and how you apply the correct values and how you overcome the house edge.
I don't trusth some one else statistical results i want my own based upon the knowledge i have gain about the concept.

3) Yes it is an attempt no more or less.

4) Why i do this is because i have more then i can take about all the opinions regarding how the random flow unfold it self.
So i want to show every one statistical results if it can be an slight positive gain using an value, math, probability, variance with the very best knowledge there is about the subject (my opinions).

I think there is many members here that would like to read the result of that kind of test.
If not, then i am wrong.

LS

bliss

Quote1) I only have statistics with an positive expectation and want to see if there is an significant change made with an larger statistical sampel.

LS, how many placed bets have you made so far in your testing and what is the SD/chi-square? this is all flat-betting right?

lucky_strike


I send them, email and i made a post at GG about the error message.

LS

kav

Quote from: Number Six on September 24, 2009, 06:59:57 PM
Yes, but what is the reason? Is is (a) to prove the law of series is a credible theory about which to design a betting method (b) to prove you can consistently win with ECs or (c) to prove the existence of series trends?

It seems from the GG thread that the method in question has already been tested and I suspect the results were negative. Why should they be different this time around?

if you don't care, why do you care?

sky1

Hey lucky s

Go back to the GG that';s were you belong.  You're not welcome here if you talk about places like the G G , That's the rat trap This is where people post  the good  Take a F'in walk

Number Six

Quote from: kav
if you don't care, why do you care?

Is this some new dialect of English? Because to me it sounds like bollocks

Quote from: sky1
Hey lucky s

Go back to the GG that';s were you belong.  You're not welcome here if you talk about places like the G G , That's the rat trap This is where people post  the good  Take a F'in walk

Wendel again? Has that illiterate feel about it.

Spike

>>It seems from the GG thread that the method in question has already been tested and I suspect the results were negative. Why should they be different this time around?>>>

You just don't get the spirit of the thing. It gives people something to do. I already know the results, but I'm sworn to secrecy..

kav

Quote from: Number Six on September 25, 2009, 06:55:43 PM
Is this some new dialect of English? Because to me it sounds like bollocks


It is your post put plainly. So you see you don't make sense - or in your own words, you sound like bollocks.

Number Six

Quote from: kav
It is your post put plainly. So you see you don't make sense - or in your own words, you sound like bollocks.

So you've got the hump because you don't know the difference between random outcomes and dealer signature?
How old are you? a) under 12 b) under 12 or c) under 12?


xman1970

@ Number 6

xxx & sky 1 BOTH banned because they have same IP address @ wendal / WWM

I'm re banning as soon as I spot Em  :good:

kav

Quote from: Number Six on September 25, 2009, 07:18:13 PM
So you've got the hump because you don't know the difference between random outcomes and dealer signature?
How old are you? a) under 12 b) under 12 or c) under 12?



I guess this post is evidence to your maturity.


Marven

-