It is just a matter of knowing what the wheel is throwing at the time.

[Mike]

To give you the benefit of the doubt, maybe you're using "random" and "independent" in ways other than the standard definitions. What do you understand by these terms?

Independent outcomes means that the past has no relevance to the future, which means that taking past data into account cannot have any use - it simply isn't relevant. You deny this, so you can't at the same time say that spins are independent and you use past results to get a better result than expectation predicts - at least if you are using the standard definition of independence. That much should be clear to everyone.

[cheese]

the goal is to find patterns which will either continue or change with some reliabiltiy,

Why do you assume I play patterns? If you play patterns, its like an American football team with only one play, instead of a book of plays. I used the cloud thing as an example of a game to play with clouds, not roulette. You have to have a book of plays to beat roulette, not just rely on one strategy.

[cheese]

Independent outcomes means that the past has no relevance to the future, which means that taking past data into account cannot have any use

Independent means unconnected to another spin, random stands alone. Thats why I can take results from two different wheels at the same time and get the same results. Random clouds have no connection to faces, but you can see faces there if you want. I never predict, I guess. Past spins have no obvious relevance, unless you find an out of the box way to make them relevant. You're far better off approaching something with an "I wonder if" attitude, instead of an "I know it can't be done" mindset. Thats what I did.

[Mike]

Why do you assume I play patterns?

Use whatever word you prefer instead of "patterns". You just said in a previous post that you have a bet for every situation. What is a "situation"? it isn't too much of a stretch to call a situation a "pattern".

I used the cloud thing as an example of a game to play with clouds, not roulette.

And you just said that "Now you'll say "Oh, its not the same at all! Roulette is totally different!" No, its not."

So now you are backtracking and say it ISN'T like roulette?

See what I mean people? it's a complete brainf*ck. 

[Mike]

Past spins have no obvious relevance, unless you find an out of the box way to make them relevant. You're far better off approaching something with an "I wonder if" attitude, instead of an "I know it can't be done" mindset. Thats what I did.

Ok, so  now I know where you are. You are saying that past spins are NOT independent and that they can point to future outcomes (but you have to think out-of-the-box). Then why do you attack every system player by pointing out that nothing is predictable? it seems like you want to have your cake and eat it too.

[cheese]

So now you are backtracking and say it ISN'T like roulette?

A 'situation' is the next bet. Either you have blinders on, or I don't explain very well. The only thing clouds have in common with roulette is they are both random. You say past spins are useless and can't be used. I say I invented a game inside the game of roulette. Like you can invent a game inside random cloud formations called Finding Faces.  Random events (like clouds) CAN be used for a game, and so can random roulette spins.

[cheese]

You are saying that past spins are NOT independent and that they can point to future outcomes

I'm saying no such thing. In fact, I say over and over that spins are TOTALLY independent. They're so independent I can take unconnected spins from two unconnected wheels and put them together and get the same results. They don't point to anything, they point to nothing. Its what you do with them, its the game you concoct, that allows you to make a guess (never a prediction) as to the next outcome. Like everybody else, you have a concept in your head that in order to make accurate guesses, things have to be connected. They don't. One of the longest lessons I had to learn about roulette was, that spins are totally unique and independent from each other. Lots of people say it, but they don't really believe it.

I post for my own edification, not yours or anybody else's. I'm not messing with you, I'm not kidding around. When I write about this stuff it helps me get better at it. If you get something out of it, or not, is your business. Either is fine with me.

[Mike]

A 'situation' is the next bet.

So what does it mean when you say you have a bet for every situation? it doesn't make sense. 

[Mike]

In fact, I say over and over that spins are TOTALLY independent. They're so independent I can take unconnected spins from two unconnected wheels and put them together and get the same results. They don't point to anything, they point to nothing.

Then why bother to look at past spins? you could make a game which doesn't depend on looking at the history, and because spins are totally unconnected, you should get the same results.

[gizmotron]

Why do you assume I play patterns? If you play patterns, its like an American football team with only one play, instead of a book of plays. I used the cloud thing as an example of a game to play with clouds, not roulette. You have to have a book of plays to beat roulette, not just rely on one strategy.

That is the most you have ever posted about this in five years. It's also way to much to go hunting for with a computer program. I'll bet I can list most of all my plays and it would not give anything away. It would be far too much to learn in a few days. Almost everyone would give up. There is no way that you taught me my book. I know this because you never share anything much. You know it too.

[gizmotron]

You're far better off approaching something with an "I wonder if" attitude, instead of an "I know it can't be done" mindset. Thats what I did.

That's what I did too. I don't recall you guiding me to do that. Could you please explain that to me? I'll admit you taught me to do this if you can show me where you shared it with me. You claim you have always been suspicious of me and my motives. That tells me that you would have not taught me this.

[gizmotron]

I post for my own edification, not yours or anybody else's. I'm not messing with you, I'm not kidding around. When I write about this stuff it helps me get better at it. If you get something out of it, or not, is your business. Either is fine with me.

So what edification do you get out of having taught me everything I know about Roulette while at the same time keeping that mantra, "never wise up a chump?"

I learned everything I know by practicing, playing, and thinking about things I've written and also seen in discussion forums. The exact same thing you did. By your own admission you have improved in the past five years yourself.

[VKM]

Mike,

You've made your conclusions based on past information....

Important information that you do not know is, what the game within the game that cheese plays is, and how does he play it.

It appears to me that you are so comfortable with your conclusions that you are willing to argue your points even though you lack that and possibly other important information.

It's not working.


VKM

[gizmotron]

So what does it mean when you say you have a bet for every situation? it doesn't make sense.  

Want to see a monster sized list?

Monster List:

Does the doz group continue to single?
Does a bet on the doz group for singles keep losing when tried?
Does the doz group singles break at 4,5,6,7,8 with a global repetition?
Does the doz group have a domination at 80% or better?
Does the doz group have a possible sleeper?
Does start bets on doz group sleepers always lose?
Does one section of the doz group only hit as a single, double?
Is there a global effect evident for any of the above conditions?
Is there a string of singles while there is also a sleeper in the doz group?
Is there any repeating pattern in the doz group?
Is the doz group absent from any formations?
Is there a swarm of doubles in the doz group?
It there a single dozen in the doz group that is dominant 80% or more?
What happened in the last three spins?
Did the very last spin win or lose?
Does a global effect in the doz group also occur in the col group?
Was the last two spins in the doz group single or double?
Was the last two spins in the doz group still a sleeper on one section?
Was the last three spins in the doz group single or double?
Was the last three spins in the doz group still a sleeper on one section?
Is there a streak of lost bets?
Is there a streak of winning bets?
Did I lose the last bet?
Did I win the last bet?
Did I reach my goal on the last bet?

Now do this for the columns group, and for each of the EC's groupings also.
Do it for each spin.

If you lose doing this then you are missing something.
You are failing to consider something.

[curious]

You can find patterns in past spins just like you can find faces in clouds, so I don't say that they are different. If your "game" is to find faces or patterns then you've succeeded, but the cloud game IS different from roulette in that with roulette you're not merely seeking to identify a static pattern; the goal is to find patterns which will either continue or change with some reliabiltiy, given some state of history.  In the "faces in clouds" game it would be like seeing Mark Twain in a cloud and then guessing successfully that it will change to Abraham Lincoln. You're claiming that you can do just that (or the analogous situation in roulette).

No one can do this.  If I see 6 reds in a row on the electronic board that doesn't mean that the next spin will be red. It also doesn't mean that the next spin will be black.

[curious]

-