Randomness Effectiveness Versus Visual Ballistics Effectiveness

[bombus]

Same goes for VB players.

What % of the game plan is typically spent in "virtual mode", or, "not betting - watching" mode.

[Spike!]

The way spike talks, randomness is never in any state other than random. >>

How could it be anything but random? But there are different states of random, chaos is one of them. Would you call 12 reds in a row chaotic? I don't think anybody would. Chaotic to me means urreadable, in case you're wondering.

<< That would make guessing when not to bet even more important than guessing what to bet on.>>

The times to bet so overwhelm the times not to bet that its really not an issue for me.

>>If not betting is an important part of the equation, then what % of the educated guessing game plan is stuck in virtual mode?>>

Not betting is not an issue and virtual betting for me is nonexistant. But thats just my method, Gizmo bets differently and he has times when he bets virtually, I believe.

[Spike!]

Gizmo Wrote: I wonder why some people reject opportunity while embracing something as worthless as VB? >>

Because they can see and touch VB, they have to believe it. Like those kids who rode that short blue bus to school, and the teacher couldn't just hold up an orange and show them, she had to pass it around so they could touch and smell it.

VB players were short bus riders, scarred for life as unbelievers.

[bombus]

What would you deem a chaotic state for randomness?

Is it a choppy condition across the EC's, or a mixed condition - chops & runs across the EC's, what?

[Kelly]

In VB only the scatter part is "guess work", so generally, if nothing has changed one would need to stick to the scatter analysis because it is based on physics. If one starts chasing the "wrong bounce lenghts", sometimes you would be chasing and always be one step behind.   If the physics still apply and the ball comes down as expected, one would have to sit out fluctations or eventually hedge with a wider sector than normal. If the ball doesn`t come down as expected, you might go in to watching mode for a little while.

The random guess work doesn`t apply to VB only facts. Random reading is a forum invention that will never be exploited or shown in real life. Just a idendity creation for some people that needs the attention.

[Spike!]

Some string of outcomes that I can't read is chaotic to me. If you can't read any of it, then its all chaotic to you.

[Spike!]

>>Random reading is a forum invention that will never be exploited >>>

Spoken like a lifetime short bus rider, Kelly. You can't do it so nobody can. I exploit random every day, but you can't see it, so for you it doesn't exist. There's no teacher to pass the orange around the class so they can verify its reality.. Pity...

[Kelly]

" I exploit random every day"

What ever.  Don`t really give a shit about your fantasys.

[Spike!]

Don`t really give a s**t about your fantasys.>>>

As long as the casino keeps paying me, I'll keep it alive. 

[gizmotron]

Once in an effective state, how many wrong guesses or decisions would it take to identify the fact that randomness has put the premise into a non-effective state?

That's exactly what I ask myself in real time. Sometimes the answer is slightly different for each situation. The smart player gets out of the way of the downturns. There are several ways to do that. Roulette always has something better going on in it. In Baccarat you only have one single data stream.

[Herb6]

 

[bombus]

Can I quote you on that?

*Disclaimer*... Not necessarily the opinion of bombus... Bwahahaha!

[Nathan Detroit]

 Never outsmart the wheel ! Otherwise 

[Noble Savage]

Same goes for VB players.

What % of the game plan is typically spent in "virtual mode", or, "not betting - watching" mode.

About 15%. I don't bet when:

1) I just sat at the table and I'm reading what type of conditions I'm dealing with (every wheel is unique) and how my method is performing on them so I can gauge a few things.
2) There is a significant change in conditions mid-session (e.g. dealer change, ball switch, etc.), I stop and re-observe/re-gauge my method.

But there are different states of random, chaos is one of them. Would you call 12 reds in a row chaotic?

lol you say randomness is always random, but then make it sound as if randomness is sometimes random and sometimes not.

Why do you think 12 reds in a row is any more special than any of the other possible 12 spin sequence?

Bottom line is:

If you observe the random stream of Red/Black outcomes and apply a bet selection to them, the results of that bet selection would be a new EC random stream.

If you observe the random stream of Red/Black outcomes and assign a different label to each "state" you think you see (trendiness, choppiness, patterns, absence of any visual patterns, etc.), then the results would be a new random stream where each random variable is one of those labels/states (with unpredictable length and frequency).

So basically whatever you observe and whatever you label it you always end up back where you started. I.e. you only end up with a new random stream, I.e. you don't change anything.

Sorry Spike for being such a fantasy-killer, but randomness is always random.

[gizmotron]

Why do you think 12 reds in a row is any more special than any of the other possible 12 spin sequence?

...So basically whatever you observe and whatever you label it you always end up back where you started. I.e. you only end up with a new random stream, I.e. you don't change anything.

With 12 reds in a row I would have 7 attacking wins and 1 attacking loss. 

...and all that without changing anything.

[gizmotron]

-