Not only have we lost Mr Chips......

[Spike]

It doesn't mean that there are no rules though>>

But there are no rules. I played 2 shoes on Dublin tonight, bet 26 times, lost 6. I was thinking about what I was doing as I was playing. Not once did I say to myself "ABC has happened, time to bet." I bet most of the time without really knowing why. It comes from practice, from looking at hundreds of thousands of outcomes. Random often has a certain rhythm to it that you can spot if you have a lot of experience. It doesn't always work, but thats OK. Its like the experienced cops you hear about that can spot criminal types without really knowing the reason. Its just instinct that comes from experience. Thats all. Educated guessing.

[ryan08]

If a non-mechanical system is one in which you make decisions, it begs the question - what is the basis for your decisions? If the difference between mechanical and non-mechanical is only the complexity and number of rules, then there must come a point in the evolution of your game where you abandon the fixed rules because they are too numerous and/or complex, and by doing so step into "educated guessing" territory. But the rules are still there, they're just not explicitly spelled out. To use a Psychologist's term, you play by the "gestalt". It doesn't mean that there are no rules though, it just means they are more "fuzzy".

put it this way, VB requires you to use your judgement alone, there are no rules, just ways to calculate your bet so there are no complexities really, but its classed more as a method than a system. victors lw's uses rules to follow, but also has exit strategies that the player decides at his descretion, that would make it a non mechanical system as its down to the player when to attack and when to lay off. the martingale system is fully mechanical because you follow a set of rules and dont deter from them.

hope that makes sense but yours efforts should be used on trying to win money rather than disputing what makes a system mechanical or non mechanical as it doesnt really have any relevance in the way you would play your game.

[bliss]

the martingale system is fully mechanical because you follow a set of rules and dont deter from them.

I'm talking about how you select your bets, the martingale isn't a system in that sense, just a staking plan or MM.

yours efforts should be used on trying to win money rather than disputing what makes a system mechanical or non mechanical as it doesn't really have any relevance in the way you would play your game.

People talk about mechanical and non-mechanical systems, I'm interested in what they mean by it, that's all. They claim that mechanical systems can't win but non-mechanical systems can, so it would seem that it does have some relevance if you're interested in winning money.

[ryan08]

I'm talking about how you select your bets, the martingale isn't a system in that sense, just a staking plan or MM.

im just using it as a simple example, i know its not classed as a system.

People talk about mechanical and non-mechanical systems, I'm interested in what they mean by it, that's all. They claim that mechanical systems can't win but non-mechanical systems can, so it would seem that it does have some relevance if you're interested in winning money.

the theory behind a working mechanical system is that it can be played exactly the same anytime you join the game so its basically a set mold for all eventualities and situations, i know this doesnt exist, some people think differently but its just simply not possible. a non mechanical system has the basic rules but they have extra sets maybe which are variable depending on the situation.

simple way to look at what i mean is think of mechanical as a 2 dimensional system, and a non mechanical system as 3 dimensional, the non mechanical you have more room to move etc,

[Gavioli]

im just using it as a simple example, i know its not classed as a system.


the theory behind a working mechanical system is that it can be played exactly the same anytime you join the game so its basically a set mold for all eventualities and situations, i know this doesn't exist, some people think differently but its just simply not possible. a non mechanical system has the basic rules but they have extra sets maybe which are variable depending on the situation.

simple way to look at what i mean is think of mechanical as a 2 dimensional system, and a non mechanical system as 3 dimensional, the non mechanical you have more room to move etc,

So you are saying that if i play the same event, with more rules then one, depence on the situation, then this is non mechanical system.

Example:

Mechanical = 2 dimensional

123 -->rule 1
231 -->rule 1
312 -->rule 1
132 -->rule 1
321 -->rule 1

Non mechanical = 3 dimensional

123 -->rule 1
231 -->rule 2
312 -->rule 3
132 -->rule 4
321 -->rule 5

So correct me if im wrong, but for me these are both mechanical selections, because you always follow the same rules and non mechanical system is guessing.

Cheers

[bliss]

Gavioli, I agree with you that they are both mechanical systems.

Random often has a certain rhythm to it that you can spot if you have a lot of experience.

How many past decisions do you look at before you make your next bet? or does it vary?

[gizmotron]

How many past decisions do you look at before you make your next bet? or does it vary?

Let's look at it in reverse. If I see a certain condition, then simply put, I go ahead and bet the recommended way. If it makes less than it should then the condition did not exist. What's more important, the condition or the trigger?

[bliss]

What's more important, the condition or the trigger?

You seem to be making a distinction between a "condition" and "trigger", but I don't see it, because you said:

If I see a certain condition, then simply put, I go ahead and bet the recommended way.

That's why I said in a previous post: "The criteria IS the trigger."

What is the "recommended" way?

So the number of spins you look back is irrelevant, it could be 50 spins or 10, it all depends on what pattern presents itself?

[gizmotron]

You seem to be making a distinction between a "condition" and "trigger", but I don't see it, because you said:

That's why I said in a previous post: "The criteria IS the trigger."

What is the "recommended" way?

So the number of spins you look back is irrelevant, it could be 50 spins or 10, it all depends on what pattern presents itself?

The quality, context, and duration are only part of the traits or characteristics of criteria. If "criteria" is the focus then what is "the recommended way?" Strategy comes from an obvious understanding of the phenomenon being observed. Many times the simplest approach is the best approach. I can attempt to put all that into a computer program. It should capture every exact conditionality but it would miss all close similarities to the exact conditions. The human brain has no trouble with this. The more conditions that are part of an expert system then the more exacting functions can execute the desired result. So a computer would be a trigger based system and a human brain would be capable of minor adjustments while evaluating the quality, context, and duration of any criteria. So criteria and the recommended way are a moving target and a loosely constructed set of suggestions to implement a plan based on experience. When Spike says "practice practice practice" he is not leading you off course. I know. I did it. I took my experience and honed it into a working method.

Success comes from changing after every spin. If you continue then that is because the criteria and the recommended way suggest to continue. Brainless rule based systems can be used this way too. If you have a system that can utilize interruptions and some kind of step recovery methods then you can use such a system by discovering favorable times for continuing or interrupting. In that way you have combined triggers with what you might call awareness & decisions? It's pretty funny because it sounds like the difference between being human or being a robot. Do I want to bet by awareness & decisions or like a robot expecting one day to be rich? I believe I have covered the later under the heading of baloney festivals. I hope you don't begin to think that this a chase around the forest stumbling into new terms. I'm clearly sharing concepts. If being able to relate to those concepts  causes difficulty in those reading it then I have accomplished my goal. You must earn your knowledge. I'm sure that this is not too difficult for you Bliss. Now, can you contain it? There is a value in having an opportunity to execute your plan. Gambling should not be a government sponsored program where everyone gets a chunk of the pie. It should be for those that earn it.

What trigger is everyone knowing a secret system that beats the casinos? That would be Russian Roulette wouldn't it?

[bliss]

Gizmo, nice post. 

I do, in fact, know exactly what you're saying. I think my problem (if you can call it that) is that I'm experiencing some kind of tug-of-war between the left brain and the right brain. 

The fact is, I've been receptive to Spike's approach for quite a while, almost as long as he's been around the forums. There's something in it, of that I'm certain, but the logical, analytical side (left brain) is very very suspicious of this. That's why I find the idea of validating the right brain's "discovery" by writing a computer program to "prove it", very appealing. I think I used to be more of a "right-brainer" than a "left-brainer", but I had much of it "educated" out of me when I went to Uni. Since then, life hasn't been nearly so much fun, lol.

This is interesting: nolinks://nolinks.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,22556281-661,00.html

No matter how hard I try, I can't see the dancer turning anti-clockwise. Also, I'm left-handed (the right brain is supposed to control the left side of the body, and vice versa). Any other lefties here? - Spike?

What trigger is everyone knowing a secret system that beats the casinos? That would be Russian Roulette wouldn't it?

But if success comes from practice, and practice alone, how can you give anything away? you can't practice for someone.

[Spike]

Watch the players on Dunlin. Last night there was 15 bankers in a row and from the 8th on, the table was packed with Asians. After every win they would all immediately thrust their hands out to Banker again. When the run was over and it went back to chops, they were all confused. There was no confidence, the bets were mixed, they wandered away. You could see the change in their attitude and demeaner. They have trained themselves on a very small part of random, that sometimes it streaks. So when the streak isn't present, they can barely stay even. There is a lot more to random than streaks.

[Herb]

I'm left handed and upside down.

No matter how hard I try, I can only see the clockwise dancer.

[TwoCatSam]

All........

The dancer is quite a mind-bender.  I am able to switch her, but not at will.

What I do is focus concentration on her right foot only.  When it seems she is not really turning 360, but 180 and back, she seems to switch from CW to CCW.  Watch her toes; she seems to be just twisting her foot from right to left and suddenly from left to right and that's when the rotational switch occurs. 

She is always CW when I open the program.

I can't wait to show this to other people.  How interesting would this be for two people to see two different motions?  Can't be both----can it?

Sam

[gizmotron]

But if success comes from practice, and practice alone, how can you give anything away? you can't practice for someone.

There it is. But I could tell my preferred strategy and I haven't. That could be practiced. I'm moving all over the table and the outside bets to mask my play and my logic. If I win, the pits are watching. If I can do that to many times and to high amounts then it will lead to me being asked to play elsewhere. If 20 people come in and do the same thing then the casinos around the world are going to have a discussion. They have proved that too, in practice.

It's what you practice. You do know that this discussion ends here for me don't you? This is as far as Spike or I have ever gone. It's been at this point for about a year. You must find for yourself the working bet by bet strategy. I did try the ECs, as Spike recommended. Practicing that taught me my strategy. I applied that to what I had the most experience at in the last 30 tears. Now, I have what I just absolutely love.

[Herb]

Looking at the feet is the solution to changing her.

[Herb]

-