A fun system for the trend followers

[Bayes]

Wow, this is real pot kettle black moment Spike. 

I don't have a box

Except the one you've just put me into.

So he makes huge generalizations to gloss over what I say

No, I don't gloss over what you say. I question it, but never get answers which make any sense. As Mistarlupo says, you'd make a great politician because you're more slippery than a box of eels. You constantly contradict yourself and none of your huge generalizations are supportable, at least I can back mine up with facts.

When your contradictions are pointed out to you, you simply ignore them. It's not possible to have a meaningful dialogue with someone like you.

[Spike!]

You constantly contradict yourself>>>

Really? Please post some of the most glaring contradictions so I can see what you mean. Someone is always accusing me of this and I always ask to see them, and they never respond. Its an old debate trick, accuse your opponent of contradictions to discredit him, and then 'not have them in front of you' when asked what they are.

You hear this on radio talk shows all the time. A caller will accuse the host of being a racist and the host demands to hear some of the things he's said to make the caller think that, and the caller can never come up with even one.

[Bayes]

Please post some of the most glaring contradictions so I can see what you mean.

It won't make any difference, because your purpose here is not to engage in discussion, but to be a troll. If I point out any contradictions you'll just accuse me of misinterpreting what you said (you always turn it back to the poster because that's what trolls do).

You have a habit of saying the maths is absolute, but that there is an exception - namely that the maths 'goes out the window' if you learn to 'read' random. So the maths mysteriously never applies to what you do, but it does everyone else. This is great because it allows you to trash others safe in the knowledge that the maths is on your side, but you are always immune from any criticism because of the 'exception' - which is itself  a contradiction.

Another example: You say that 'your method cannot be taught, but it can be learned if you practice enough' or words to that affect. But, at the same time, you are (apparently) terrified that your method will be reverse engineered (even though anyone who ever plays anywhere other than at home in private is vulnerable to this). Again, this is convenient because it means you never have to give any evidence or demonstrate your claims (unless the tester is willing to pay some absurd amount for it), but the contradiction lies in the fact that if you never use 'triggers' or rules, and never bet the the same way even when the 'history' is the same, and the method cannot be taught (ie; it's a skill, not a system), then why should you be concerned that others will steal it?

[Spike!]

So the maths mysteriously never applies to what you do, but it does everyone else.>>

I have the edge, they don't. End of mystery.

>>you are (apparently) terrified that your method will be reverse engineered >>

Cautious is a better word. Reverse engineering can indeed send someone down the right path to practice what I practice. Why wouldn't it?

Anything else? I'm an hour late for the casino, gotta go..

[medo]

I have the edge, they don't. End of mystery.


[/quote]
YOU HAVE NOTHING--ONLY EMPTY TALK
Changing your avatars every few days,shows me where you
come from.

[medo]

-