G.U.T. C B A

[winkel]

Thank God it´s Christmas,

at least someone saw what jumping can change in the trot. 

so it is always better to jump than to hang on a losing trot or sweating over a double-crossing to bet

br
winkel

[TwoCatSam]

YOU GUYS OWE IT TO WINKEL AND KFS TO WATCH THIS VIDEO

Hi guys and guts..

Sorry about that shout out, but please spend ten minutes or less and watch this video.

Sam

nolinks://nolinks.motionbox.com/external/hd_player/type=hd,video_uid=0a9cddb71919e6c487

[Kon-Fu-Sed]

Great video, Sam,

From "Good grief" to "We're making bucks now"



Just a small detail: You don't have to comma-separate the numbers.
The "separate by anything" really means that: a space, a character, line-brake - whatever.
Several of each... That's OK.
Mix as you like: As long as there are numbers in there, they will be found.

Consequently you can also write notes - as long as it's text-only


/KFS

[TwoCatSam]

KFS

Leave it to me to find the hard way to do anything!! 

Now guys and guts, you don't even have to comma-ize the thing; just cut and paste!

Thanks KFS

Sam

[TwoCatSam]

Well, I tried it the new way.

Just cut and paste and run the numbers.  Then delete the top number and go again.  Then delete..........

Fast Mother Goose!!

I have all my Track4 results files in a folder.  Is there any way to upload the folder or must I upload each session individually?

Sam

[TwoCatSam]

nolinks://nolinks.youtube.com/watch?v=9aJTIbrGDzY

[The Spiders Kiss]

Sam,
Thank you.This is very informative.And thanks for the youtube version!!
TSK 

[TwoCatSam]

You're  welcome, TKS..

Just remember guys, no commas needed and just delete the top number.

Sam

[madupz4]

@All

But remember always using this nice thing:

these clinical test-rules are only made up for testing. It is not the game!

The G.U.T needs human decisions due to what I call "What is going on"
This tool by KFS allows everybody to watch when or why a 50-spin-trot is losing

Your decisions might be:
Stopping to play in a Plus
Stopping the game in a Minus
Bet or bet not a crossing due to the way it came up, where it came up

As KFS also proofed: betting every crossing over a long period will lead to -2,7%.

only

[highlight]Your decisions will make you win[/highlight]

These decisions can be made by logical examination not by "guessings"
These examinations you can make and learn by using this tool
and last but not least by watching the videos made by TwoCatSam, thanks for that again!

Fun to everyone
and
Merry Christmas and a happy and prosperous New Year

br
winkel

Winkel,

If the GUT needs "human decisions" to work effectively, how do you explain your high profits in Touchbet, live wheel and RNG using the CLINICAL testing only, without any "human decisions?"

When you initially started your clinical testing you stated that you can consistantly win without any human decisions by simply betting every crossing.  Are you taking this back?  Are you admitting that over the long term this is not the case and you will eventually lose?

[winkel]

Hi madupz,

no I´m not taking back anything I said.

presenting a strategy claiming it wins on "human decision" would´nt be accepted, cause everybody would say it couldn´t be adapted.

so the strategy has to have a certain potential practicing it in a clinical test-way.

We have to face, as proven, that every betselection is facing the -2,7 in a long run.
so the strategy has to have a "rule" to see a losing streak and to get out of its way and have the guarantee, that you can get out of its way.

So I say again:
You can bet every crossing if there is a crossing
You will win and lose but win more than you lose
You can bet with mistakes it won´t change anything
If you are in doubt or a losing streak just jump or quit

This is what I said from the beginning, didn´t I?

G.U.T has the rules and the ability to raise your wins by:
playing it not for any certain number of spins
by starting at any point of a trot or permanence
by reducing losses and raising wins

Who needs iron rules will lose in the long run
Everybody who can read what is going on and react in "any way" will be succesful.

Anything else cannot create a Holy Grail.
This one is a Holy Grail

br
winkel

[Herb]

Wow, such a staggering waste of time.  It could have easily been avoided.  Had you been less arrogant and taken the time to read and learn from people like Dr. Edward Thorp and others that have long since traveled this path before you, then you could have easily avoided this blunder.   Do you remember people telling you that roulette is a game of independent trials?

In the future, rather than attacking people that are offering you advice, take the time to read and study what other people have written on the subject.

This one was definitely not a "Holy Grail".

Best of Luck. 

-Herb

[madupz4]

You're  welcome, TKS..

Just remember guys, no commas needed and just delete the top number.

Sam

TCS,

I did some testing on this with your numbers and in 2 sessions the results were over +30 profit when the "double bet" box was unchecked.  When I ran the same exact numbers with the double bet bet box checked the result was -5 and -20.

So in these two sessions, the results were better when we only bet on one crossing even when there were a possible of more than one.

[TwoCatSam]

madupz4

As per my usual Samish self, I did not read much of the instructions, so I have no idea about "double bet".    Guess I'd better go back and read the post!

Sam

[Kon-Fu-Sed]

Well now, winkel,


These are your own words from YOUR OWN thread regarding the clinical test and nothing else:

In reply #77 on: September 17, 2008, 12:49:06 PM you wrote:
But this is a [highlight]clinical test with iron rules[/highlight], just to show it wins more than it loses even [highlight]with no human interactions[/highlight]


In reply #194 on: October 13, 2008, 08:11:17 PM you wrote:
There may be times of losses, but long term it wins more often than it loses.
[highlight]this test is very clinical no gamblers intelligence in it.[/highlight]


And now you say it can't win without "human decision"?
Am I misunderstanding something?
/Kon-Fu-Sed

[winkel]

Hi KFS,

it must be my English, that I cannot explain this "contradiction"

1. G.U.T wins in the clinical way, but played "very long Term" it is bound to lose -2,7 as you proved.
2. As with other systems we have to find something "winning" first of all and then we have to look, how we can avoid running into losing streaks, which are the "normal way and following the statistical rules".

Some of my writings, I confess, are advertising as well.
And please notice: My explanations so far are still an "advanced way" of playing the G.U.T and not yet the "professional way".

with G.U.T and studying the trots, Roulette is still an game of independent trials, but you have the tools to change it to a game of skills.
Playing chess with Bobby Fisher and to win is luck. Except you studied the game and trained your skills like Kasparow or any other did.

br
winkel

[winkel]

-