EvenBob
Quote: EvenBob
I wonder how many more times I'll have to explain this. Sigh. You cannot do that online, make bets in the thousands of dollars and get rich it will shut you down.
Blah blah blah excuses excuses excuses. More proof you have no idea what you're talking about.
People bet high stakes Roulette online all the time. There are online casinos with max limits of tens and hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Quote: TigerWuQuote: EvenBob
I wonder how many more times I'll have to explain this. Sigh. You cannot do that online, make bets in the thousands of dollars and get rich it will shut you down.
Blah blah blah excuses excuses excuses. More proof you have no idea what you're talking about.
People bet high stakes Roulette online all the time. There are online casinos with max limits of tens and hundreds of thousands of dollars.
link to original post
Because everybody knows that's what online casinos are for so you can consistently win large amounts of money and get rich. You have no idea what you're talking about. There's an online casino expert on another forum who says he thinks I'm lucky they're still letting me play for the amounts I'm doing now,
Posting also for Evenbob who declined to do the maths, but who might find an amateur math guy's workings of interest.
It's just some non-judgemental observations and some Math stuff.
Quote: TigerWuQuote: EvenBobQuote: TigerWuQuote: EvenBobRounded off the odds are always 50/50 but by making a non-random bet against random outcomes occasionally my edge is better then the casinos edge.
link to original post
The casino edge in Roulette is -5.26%.
Are you claiming that you can get an edge of between -5.26% and 0, or are you claiming you can get an edge of >0?
link to original post
I don't understand the question.
link to original post
You said your edge is better than the casino's edge in certain circumstances.
The casino's edge in Roulette is -5.26%.
What do you estimate your edge to be in those certain circumstances? For example, -4.26%? -0.35%? +2.5%? Etc.?
link to original post
Quote: EvenBobI have an 80% chance of being right when I make a bet, but I have a 100% record of winning the session.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: AxelWolfBob, I would appreciate it if could answer the question without telling me it's easy to figure out or whatever. It's a relatively simple question with a fairly simple answer.
link to original post
I am reluctant to talk about the edge because there's more than one way to arrive at it and whatever I post you're going to jump all over it and say, that's wrong! I know this because it's happened before. I make no apologies for not being a math person because knowing math has nothing to do with beating roulette. In fact it is a hindrance. You know what my edge is because you know what my hit rate is. You want me to commit to a number because you want to see me screw up and I'm not falling for that one again.
link to original post
EvenBob has already pointed out that he's not a maths guy
Quote: EvenBobI make no apologies for not being a math person because knowing math has nothing to do with beating roulette. In fact it is a hindrance.....
But I don't need to know any of that to be a great driver just like I don't need to know any math in roulette to beat It.
link to original post
We don't need to understand his method or his motivation for posting here. We just have to accept his assertion that on an event with an undisputed probability of 47.4% of happening, EvenBob has an 80% probability of calling the outcome correctly.
I believe that that is his assertion. Is that a correct interpretation, EvenBob?
I'm not really great at stats, but maybe someone can check my working (Double 0 roulette, US rules, Red or black)
Probability of Red on next spin = 18/38= 47.37%. I don't think Anyone is disputing that.
Probability of Red on next spin if EvenBob says it will be Red. (for whatever reason) = 80% (Do I understand correctly, EvenBob?)
Return on a 1 unit stake on red if it comes up red = 2 units
Return on a 1 unit stake on red if it doesn't come up red = 0 units
Expected Return, if we don't see EvenBob's wager = 2X18/38+ 0*20/38 =0.94736842105
House Edge, if we don't see EvenBob's wager = 100-94.737 = 5.264%
Are we all in agreement, so far?
Expected Return if we bet the opposite to what EvenBob calls = 2x(20%) + 0x(80%) = 0.40
House Edge on bets where we bet opposite to what EvenBob calls = 100 - 40 = 60%
Someone check my Math there?
Expected Return FOR EvenBob or anyone betting the same as EvenBob = 2x(80%) + 0x(20%) = 1.6
House Edge AS EXPERIENCED BY EvenBob or anyone betting the same as EvenBob = 100 - 160 = -60%
Someone check my Math there?
If House Edge is -60% then that's the same as EvenBob's advantage of 60%
Am I using the right terminology Did I calculate EvenBob's advantage correctly?
I invite EvenBob to confirm that I interpret his assertions correctly.
I Invite 'Maths Guys' to check my calculations and terminology.
In a different thread he's claimed a 70% advantage.Quote: OnceDearPosting for the benefit of TigerWu and AxelWolf, who seem to not understand how EvenBob has answered them.
Posting also for Evenbob who declined to do the maths, but who might find an amateur math guy's workings of interest.
It's just some non-judgemental observations and some Math stuff.Quote: TigerWuQuote: EvenBobQuote: TigerWuQuote: EvenBobRounded off the odds are always 50/50 but by making a non-random bet against random outcomes occasionally my edge is better then the casinos edge.
link to original post
The casino edge in Roulette is -5.26%.
Are you claiming that you can get an edge of between -5.26% and 0, or are you claiming you can get an edge of >0?
link to original post
I don't understand the question.
link to original post
You said your edge is better than the casino's edge in certain circumstances.
The casino's edge in Roulette is -5.26%.
What do you estimate your edge to be in those certain circumstances? For example, -4.26%? -0.35%? +2.5%? Etc.?
link to original postQuote: EvenBobI have an 80% chance of being right when I make a bet, but I have a 100% record of winning the session.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: AxelWolfBob, I would appreciate it if could answer the question without telling me it's easy to figure out or whatever. It's a relatively simple question with a fairly simple answer.
link to original post
I am reluctant to talk about the edge because there's more than one way to arrive at it and whatever I post you're going to jump all over it and say, that's wrong! I know this because it's happened before. I make no apologies for not being a math person because knowing math has nothing to do with beating roulette. In fact it is a hindrance. You know what my edge is because you know what my hit rate is. You want me to commit to a number because you want to see me screw up and I'm not falling for that one again.
link to original post
EvenBob has already pointed out that he's not a maths guyQuote: EvenBobI make no apologies for not being a math person because knowing math has nothing to do with beating roulette. In fact it is a hindrance.....
But I don't need to know any of that to be a great driver just like I don't need to know any math in roulette to beat It.
link to original post
We don't need to understand his method or his motivation for posting here. We just have to accept his assertion that on an event with an undisputed probability of 47.4% of happening, EvenBob has an 80% probability of calling the outcome correctly.
I believe that that is his assertion. Is that a correct interpretation, EvenBob?
I'm not really great at stats, but maybe someone can check my working (Double 0 roulette, US rules, Red or black)
Probability of Red on next spin = 18/38= 47.37%. I don't think Anyone is disputing that.
Probability of Red on next spin if EvenBob says it will be Red. (for whatever reason) = 80% (Do I understand correctly, EvenBob?)
Return on a 1 unit stake on red if it comes up red = 2 units
Return on a 1 unit stake on red if it doesn't come up red = 0 units
Expected Return, if we don't see EvenBob's wager = 2X18/38+ 0*20/38 =0.94736842105
House Edge, if we don't see EvenBob's wager = 100-94.737 = 5.264%
Are we all in agreement, so far?
Expected Return if we bet the opposite to what EvenBob calls = 2x(20%) + 0x(80%) = 0.40
House Edge on bets where we bet opposite to what EvenBob calls = 100 - 40 = 60%
Someone check my Math there?
Expected Return FOR EvenBob or anyone betting the same as EvenBob = 2x(80%) + 0x(20%) = 1.6
House Edge AS EXPERIENCED BY EvenBob or anyone betting the same as EvenBob = 100 - 160 = -60%
Someone check my Math there?
If House Edge is -60% then that's the same as EvenBob's advantage of 60%
Am I using the right terminology Did I calculate EvenBob's advantage correctly?
I invite EvenBob to confirm that I interpret his assertions correctly.
I Invite 'Maths Guys' to check my calculations and terminology.
link to original post
Hit rate =80%
However, didn't he claim he wins 100% of his sessions? Not even MDawg claims that.
Quote: AxelWolfIn a different thread he's claimed a 70% advantage.Quote: OnceDearIf House Edge is -60% then that's the same as EvenBob's advantage of 60%
Am I using the right terminology Did I calculate EvenBob's advantage correctly?
I invite EvenBob to confirm that I interpret his assertions correctly.
I Invite 'Maths Guys' to check my calculations and terminology.
link to original post
link to original post
Not a paradox.
EvenBob has already admitted to not being a maths guy and we all know that I'm rubbish at Math, too. So between EvenBob's 70% and my 60%, then either or both of us could have got it wrong. Or, maybe as EvenBob said, there are different ways of working it out.
I don't think EvenBob would disagree with my assessment, so long as I understand his assertions correctly and have been faithful to conventional maths. I'm happy to be corrected.
If his assertion that he calls these bets with 80% hit rate is true, and if my 60% advantage calculation is correct, then that 60% player advantage would make it almost inevitable that he would have a 100% session rate.
You should know that, AxelWolf. You and I would kill for a 60% player advantage and would keep playing till we won our session.
Quote: AxelWolf
However, didn't he claim he wins 100% of his sessions? Not even MDawg claims that.
link to original post
Yes, EvenBob claims a 100% session win rate. I tried to go back and browse around to find out where he first said that, but there are so many pages in this thread....
Quote: OnceDear
EvenBob has already admitted to not being a maths guy and we all know that I'm rubbish at Math, too.
link to original post
He admits to not being a math guy and yet when we point out how some of his claims are mathematically impossible he gets all defensive and tells us we don't know what we're talking about....LOL
Quote: TigerWu
Yes, EvenBob claims a 100% session win rate. I tried to go back and browse around to find out where he first said that, but there are so many pages in this thread....
EvenBob said he wins 100% of sessions. But as any maths guy will tell you, if you can call 'even chance' bets with 80% success, and flat bet them, that is almost inevitable.
Quote: OnceDear
EvenBob has already admitted to not being a maths guy and we all know that I'm rubbish at Math, too.
link to original post
Quote: TigerWu
He admits to not being a math guy and yet when we point out how some of his claims are mathematically impossible he gets all defensive and tells us we don't know what we're talking about....LOL
link to original post
No. EvenBob never challenges math. He generally doesn't 'do math' (Is that fair evenBob)
He dismisses math of being of no interest to him.
I rather think he tells us that we don't know what HE IS talking about. Subtly different.
Anyhow. I HOPE that EvenBob will proof read my post and give a thumbs up to my understanding. I also hope that some maths guys will check my working out and my terminology.
I've not disagreed with either side. I STARTED from the assertion that EvenBob calls EC bets with 80% hit rate.
How he does his 'Educated Guessing, is another thing altogether.
We could call THAT EDUCATED guessing.
Quote: OnceDear
I've not disagreed with either side. I STARTED from the assertion that EvenBob calls EC bets with 80% hit rate.
How he does his 'Educated Guessing, is another thing altogether.
link to original post
Yes 80% is correct in a online casino not a land-based casino. The 80% is only true in certain situations this is why I'm really big on situational awareness when playing. If you throw the zeros out for convenience there's always a 50-50 chance that I will be wrong on every spin. But certain situations happen in the outcomes to give me a better edge for a very short time. For my own convenience I look at it like the law of inertia even though I know it's not. Once something is set in motion it tends to stay in motion sometimes in roulette. Sometimes you get a combination of events were the tendency more often than not in the extreme short-term is to keep going rather than stop. In the long-term this would never work because in the long-term everything equals out but we can only play in the extreme short-term where anything can happen. This kind of talk makes a math person scream at the top of his lungs and pull his hair out. I totally understand that. I'm not beating the odds I'm simply taking advantage of situations where the odds might briefly be in my favor. Does a person on a lucky streak beat the odds? Nope. But he sure did something, he briefly had the game going in his favor. All I've done is figure out where I can do that without depending on luck and instead depending on skill.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: OnceDear
I've not disagreed with either side. I STARTED from the assertion that EvenBob calls EC bets with 80% hit rate.
How he does his 'Educated Guessing, is another thing altogether.
link to original post
Yes 80% is correct in a online casino not a land-based casino. The 80% is only true in certain situations this is why I'm really big on situational awareness when playing.
link to original post
EvenBob.
Let's be crystal clear and see if we can get everything in agreement.
We KNOW that under many, most situations, you don't have enough of the right kinds of patterns to make a good bet. I accept that. So you don't bet on rubbish.
You can't call 80% of ALL roulette spins with any particular advantage, especially when you don't see a favourable pattern.
Are we still in agreement
For many spins, because no useful pattern has revealed itself, you have no advantage and you acknowledge there's nothing to guide your educated guess. AND on those occasions you DO NOT BET!?
BUT.
When you see a suitable opportunity and a really meaningful pattern, you will have a brief advantage, which you put down to inertia, and so you DO bet. It might be infrequent. It might barely be once a day. But you see that the situation is good and you wager... A flat bet. Heck. You might have your pattern and still lose, but mostly, you will call it right and you will win?
And finally, just so we agree crystal clear...
When you do your flat bet, 80% of the time, you call it right.
Not 100%
Not 47%
But give or take a pinch.
80%
80% of the even chance games THAT YOU DECIDE TO WAGER ON, you will win. In the online games that you play.
Are we in absolute harmony and agreement?
Quote: OnceDearQuote: EvenBobQuote: OnceDear
I've not disagreed with either side. I STARTED from the assertion that EvenBob calls EC bets with 80% hit rate.
How he does his 'Educated Guessing, is another thing altogether.
link to original post
Yes 80% is correct in a online casino not a land-based casino. The 80% is only true in certain situations this is why I'm really big on situational awareness when playing.
link to original post
EvenBob.
Let's be crystal clear and see if we can get everything in agreement.
We KNOW that under many, most situations, you don't have enough of the right kinds of patterns to make a good bet. I accept that. So you don't bet on rubbish.
You can't call 80% of ALL roulette spins with any particular advantage, especially when you don't see a favourable pattern.
Are we still in agreement
For many spins, because no useful pattern has revealed itself, you have no advantage and you acknowledge there's nothing to guide your educated guess. AND on those occasions you DO NOT BET!?
BUT.
When you see a suitable opportunity and a really meaningful pattern, you will have a brief advantage, which you put down to inertia, and so you DO bet. It might be infrequent. It might barely be once a day. But you see that the situation is good and you wager... A flat bet. Heck. You might have your pattern and still lose, but mostly, you will call it right and you will win?
And finally, just so we agree crystal clear...
When you do your flat bet, 80% of the time, you call it right.
Not 100%
Not 47%
But give or take a pinch.
80%
80% of the even chance games THAT YOU DECIDE TO WAGER ON, you will win. In the online games that you play.
Are we in absolute harmony and agreement?
link to original post
On average in the long run if I bet 10 times I will win eight of them. Of course it never works like that I might win 14 in a row lose one win two more lose one. It all works out. And yes I only make a bet if virtual playing shows me that the outcomes are playing my game. I have a very specific game that I play against the outcomes in roulette if it's not playing that game I have nothing to bet on. Knowing when not to bet is a gigantic advantage because it preserves your bankroll. It's exactly like in card counting the counter knows when not to place his big bets. This is a huge advantage because the casino is built around the players who play every single outcome of every game. If you have found a way around that you are their worst enemy.
We would kill for a 20% player advantage in roulette. I'm surprised no one has tracked down EvenBob and tortured it out of him.Quote: OnceDearYou and I would kill for a 60% player advantage and would keep playing till we won our session.
link to original post
Quote: AxelWolfWe would kill for a 20% player advantage in roulette. I'm surprised no one has tracked down EvenBob and tortured it out of him.Quote: OnceDearYou and I would kill for a 60% player advantage and would keep playing till we won our session.
link to original post
link to original post
You still don't get it, you can't teach it all you can do is point the way for somebody if they're willing to take the time to start looking at outcomes. There are no rules, there's nothing to tell anybody that they could use. You can't say wait for a b and c and then bet because it doesn't work that way. Somebody could take me to the casino at gunpoint and make me play and if it wasn't playing my game I got nothing to bet on.
Quote: EvenBob
You still don't get it, you can't teach it all you can do is point the way for somebody if they're willing to take the time to start looking at outcomes. There are no rules, there's nothing to tell anybody that they could use. You can't say wait for a b and c and then bet because it doesn't work that way. Somebody could take me to the casino at gunpoint and make me play and if it wasn't playing my game I got nothing to bet on.
link to original post
Thanks EvenBob,
Have we had enough "No you can't - Yes I can, trust me" challenges?
So, we are in total agreement about the effect of your method?
Nobody has yet pulled me up on my maths where I calculated your player advantage of 60%, so we can probably use that.
Now.... The method is something you cannot teach?!
It's something that one needs to go out and discover for himself and you encourage our readers to go and observe lots and lots of online roulette spins and maybe after many years, they will be as skilled at guessing roulette spins as you are.
So, again.
There are no rules to the 'Method'
You cannot teach the 'method'?
We cannot learn the 'method'?
Anyone with the right mind-set or whatever it is, can discover the method for himself?
You encourage others to learn this method for themselves?
The 'method' pays your bills, but you are not so greedy as to want to monetize it big-time?
Have we had enough "No you can't - Yes I can, trust me" challenges?
A reminder....
.... Why does this thread exist?
Quote: EvenBob...I am now willing to answer questions about how I get an 80% hit rate. Obviously I'm not going to answer questions like what's the combination to the safe but I will tell you how the safe works, I will tell you what I do and what I look for to get an 80% hit rate. You will have to figure the rest out for yourself. Never again can anybody say but I don't talk about what I do that I just brag about results.
link to original post
So, tell me EvenBob... What do you do and what do you look out for to get an 80% hit rate?
Never let it be said that you don't talk about what you do.
Never let it be said that you just brag about results.
And anyone who doesn't believe the 80% hit rate can just jog on, because this is not a demonstration, nor challenge, nor proof, nor debate. EvenBob has said that's not what he intends to engage in.
Have we had enough "No you can't - Yes I can, trust me" challenges?
Jog on, naysayers. Nothing for you to see, here. Move along!
EvenBob is not going to argue his case. The casinos give him money and he only needs to prove it to them.
Make space in this thread for EvenBob and those who believe him and seek his wisdom.
Gather round believers and seekers of the Method. Listen to EvenBob. He has claims he has a 80% hit rate on even chance bets.
Naysayers. Jog on.
There you go EvenBob. The floor is all yours. $:o)
Caveat Emptor.
Disclaimer:
This is NOT a recommendation or endorsement. I have ZERO knowledge about EvenBob's 'Method'
I have ZERO belief in ANYONE's ability to call Even Chance bets with 80% success rate.
I believe someone earlier who suggested that one is unlikely to call 228 Even chance roulette bets with 80% success. How unlikely? Quite unlikely.
Quote: WizardThe odds are comparable between 18 yo's and an 80%+ success rate over 228 even-money roulette bets on a double-zero wheel.
To be specific, the odds of the 18 yo's are 1 in 39,346,408,075,296,600,000,000.
The odds of 181 or more wins in 228 bets (79.39% win rate) are 1 in 33,820,836,576,546,000,000,000
The usual apologies for only about 15 decimal places of precision. Blame Microsoft.
link to original post
Mind you, he also said,
Quote: WizardAs to ridiculous claims, let me make clear they are allowed on this forum. Alan's 18 yo's has set the precedent on that. Those who disagree are welcome to challenge the claims or ignore them.
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." -- Carl Sagan
link to original post
Which sort of encouraged the challenging of EvenBob's claims.....
..... Did that sort of put us off topic? A genuine question.
Have we had enough "No you can't - Yes I can, trust me" challenges?
Several years ago, while at a craps table in Biloxi, there was a player that I watched whose play was really unusual. I had occasion to talk with him about how he approached the game. While I could verify the current session, I could not verify the totality of his claims which were that he never lost a session playing craps.
He bought in for $5,000 each session.
He would write down every toss outcome (number thrown).
He would only Place Bet one number after the point was established never betting the PL or odds.
He would play for at least 5 hours. (Something I could never do.)
He would bet ONLY when he thought his PB would be tossed based on the history of the previous tosses which means he might NOT bet for several hands and/or many minutes of playing time perhaps 3-5 bets per hour.
He would bring down his bet after each win.
I did not notice if he Martingaled but his bets were black chips. He was quiet and calm and pretty much unassuming with the exception of his tray filled with black and purple chips.
I would not have the patience it would take to pursue this strategy, but perhaps there might be a craps player forum member that could try it.
tuttigym
Quote: TigerWuQuote: lilredrooster_____________
EB's massive outpouring of nonsense has significantly impacted this site in a negative way
.
link to original post
The mods don't seem to care. "Block him and move on" seems to be the typical response. But like you're implying, people will randomly stumble across this website from a Google search or something, see the nonsense posts, and get turned off from the site.
link to original post
As far as I know, being wrong is not a rule violation.
Counterpoint:
Why would someone attempt to refute an idea that others have already debunked quite effectively?
It seems there's a lot of "is not", "is so!", "prove it!", "no, you!" discourse. (I paraphrase here.)
My "+1!!!" would hardly seem to make a dent.
Quote: Dieter
As far as I know, being wrong is not a rule violation.
link to original post
Probably not, but I just agree with lilredrooster; many of EB's posts are having a detrimental effect upon the quality of this forum. Even if he is "technically" not breaking any rules, then okay, but the stigma is still there. If the mods/administrators/owners are okay with that, then I guess I have nothing more to say on the matter.
Quote: OnceDearHave we had enough "No you can't - Yes I can, trust me" challenges?
Quote: EvenBob
You still don't get it, you can't teach it all you can do is point the way for somebody if they're willing to take the time to start looking at outcomes. There are no rules, there's nothing to tell anybody that they could use. You can't say wait for a b and c and then bet because it doesn't work that way. Somebody could take me to the casino at gunpoint and make me play and if it wasn't playing my game I got nothing to bet on.
link to original post
Thanks EvenBob,
Have we had enough "No you can't - Yes I can, trust me" challenges?
So, we are in total agreement about the effect of your method?
Nobody has yet pulled me up on my maths where I calculated your player advantage of 60%, so we can probably use that.
Now.... The method is something you cannot teach?!
It's something that one needs to go out and discover for himself and you encourage our readers to go and observe lots and lots of online roulette spins and maybe after many years, they will be as skilled at guessing roulette spins as you are.
So, again.
There are no rules to the 'Method'
You cannot teach the 'method'?
We cannot learn the 'method'?
Anyone with the right mind-set or whatever it is, can discover the method for himself?
You encourage others to learn this method for themselves?
The 'method' pays your bills, but you are not so greedy as to want to monetize it big-time?
Have we had enough "No you can't - Yes I can, trust me" challenges?
A reminder....
.... Why does this thread exist?Quote: EvenBob...I am now willing to answer questions about how I get an 80% hit rate. Obviously I'm not going to answer questions like what's the combination to the safe but I will tell you how the safe works, I will tell you what I do and what I look for to get an 80% hit rate. You will have to figure the rest out for yourself. Never again can anybody say but I don't talk about what I do that I just brag about results.
link to original post
So, tell me EvenBob... What do you do and what do you look out for to get an 80% hit rate?
Never let it be said that you don't talk about what you do.
Never let it be said that you just brag about results.
And anyone who doesn't believe the 80% hit rate can just jog on, because this is not a demonstration, nor challenge, nor proof, nor debate. EvenBob has said that's not what he intends to engage in.
Have we had enough "No you can't - Yes I can, trust me" challenges?
Jog on, naysayers. Nothing for you to see, here. Move along!
EvenBob is not going to argue his case. The casinos give him money and he only needs to prove it to them.
Make space in this thread for EvenBob and those who believe him and seek his wisdom.
Gather round believers and seekers of the Method. Listen to EvenBob. He has claims he has a 80% hit rate on even chance bets.
Naysayers. Jog on.
There you go EvenBob. The floor is all yours. $:o)
Caveat Emptor.
Disclaimer:
This is NOT a recommendation or endorsement. I have ZERO knowledge about EvenBob's 'Method'
I have ZERO belief in ANYONE's ability to call Even Chance bets with 80% success rate.
I believe someone earlier who suggested that one is unlikely to call 228 Even chance roulette bets with 80% success. How unlikely? Quite unlikely.Quote: WizardThe odds are comparable between 18 yo's and an 80%+ success rate over 228 even-money roulette bets on a double-zero wheel.
To be specific, the odds of the 18 yo's are 1 in 39,346,408,075,296,600,000,000.
The odds of 181 or more wins in 228 bets (79.39% win rate) are 1 in 33,820,836,576,546,000,000,000
The usual apologies for only about 15 decimal places of precision. Blame Microsoft.
link to original post
Mind you, he also said,Quote: WizardAs to ridiculous claims, let me make clear they are allowed on this forum. Alan's 18 yo's has set the precedent on that. Those who disagree are welcome to challenge the claims or ignore them.
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." -- Carl Sagan
link to original post
Which sort of encouraged the challenging of EvenBob's claims.....
..... Did that sort of put us off topic? A genuine question.
Have we had enough "No you can't - Yes I can, trust me" challenges?
link to original post
Am I supposed to respond to this? I read the whole thing twice and I don't know what you want so I don't know what to say. It's all over the place.
Quote: TigerWuQuote: Dieter
As far as I know, being wrong is not a rule violation.
link to original post
Probably not, but I just agree with lilredrooster; many of EB's posts are having a detrimental effect upon the quality of this forum.
Really? Could you name a couple of those detrimental effects because I have no idea what you're talking about. You don't have to name them all just a couple. Give me an idea what you're talking about.
Quote: tuttigymI have refrained from challenging EB on his play or statements simply because I cannot personally verify his assertions. The pissing contest is truly amusing.
Several years ago, while at a craps table in Biloxi, there was a player that I watched whose play was really unusual. I had occasion to talk with him about how he approached the game. While I could verify the current session, I could not verify the totality of his claims which were that he never lost a session playing craps.
He bought in for $5,000 each session.
He would write down every toss outcome (number thrown).
He would only Place Bet one number after the point was established never betting the PL or odds.
He would play for at least 5 hours. (Something I could never do.)
He would bet ONLY when he thought his PB would be tossed based on the history of the previous tosses which means he might NOT bet for several hands and/or many minutes of playing time perhaps 3-5 bets per hour.
He would bring down his bet after each win.
I did not notice if he Martingaled but his bets were black chips. He was quiet and calm and pretty much unassuming with the exception of his tray filled with black and purple chips.
I would not have the patience it would take to pursue this strategy, but perhaps there might be a craps player forum member that could try it.
tuttigym
link to original post
If he was writing down every outcome and he only bet occasionally he obviously has a method that probably uses patterns that he see's in the outcomes. Pattern play can be used in many places. I tried it in 2013 betting the over/under in baseball games with some success. I gave it up because it was just too much work recording all that information everyday. It took too long and I got bored with it.
Quote: EvenBobReally? Could you name a couple of those detrimental effects because I have no idea what you're talking about. You don't have to name them all just a couple.
Primarily embarrassment.
This forum was started as an adjunct to WoO, which is about as "math-based" as it gets; allowing superstitious drivel such as EB spews not only detracts from what this board is about, it spits in the face of most long time members due to both its innumeracy and its idiocy.
Thanks for asking, EB.
Quote: MrVQuote: EvenBobReally? Could you name a couple of those detrimental effects because I have no idea what you're talking about. You don't have to name them all just a couple.
Primarily embarrassment.
This forum was started as an adjunct to WoO, which is about as "math-based" as it gets; allowing superstitious drivel such as EB spews not only detracts from what this board is about, it spits in the face of most long time members due to both its innumeracy and its idiocy.
Thanks for asking, EB.
link to original post
Quote: TigerWuQuote: MrVQuote: EvenBobReally? Could you name a couple of those detrimental effects because I have no idea what you're talking about. You don't have to name them all just a couple.
Primarily embarrassment.
This forum was started as an adjunct to WoO, which is about as "math-based" as it gets; allowing superstitious drivel such as EB spews not only detracts from what this board is about, it spits in the face of most long time members due to both its innumeracy and its idiocy.
Thanks for asking, EB.
link to original post
link to original post
Quoting somebody else's ridiculous post is not telling me what I asked. Name a couple of the detrimental effects, you can't do it because you have no idea what you're talking about.
Quote: EvenBobq]
Quoting somebody else's ridiculous post is not telling me what I asked. Name a couple of the detrimental effects, you can't do it because you have no idea what you're talking about.
link to original post
Here is something you can't ignore. This thread has only been up for a couple of weeks and it already has over 1,100 posts and almost 30,000 views. People are interested in this, and you just can't stand that so you want to make it go away. 30,000 views in a couple of weeks is huge.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: TigerWuQuote: MrVQuote: EvenBobReally? Could you name a couple of those detrimental effects because I have no idea what you're talking about. You don't have to name them all just a couple.
Primarily embarrassment.
This forum was started as an adjunct to WoO, which is about as "math-based" as it gets; allowing superstitious drivel such as EB spews not only detracts from what this board is about, it spits in the face of most long time members due to both its innumeracy and its idiocy.
Thanks for asking, EB.
link to original post
link to original post
Quoting somebody else's ridiculous post is not telling me what I asked. Name a couple of the detrimental effects, you can't do it because you have no idea what you're talking about.
link to original post
BZZZZZT. Logical fallacy. You lose.
"Ad hominem attacks — Criticizing the messenger in the absence of a counter-argument related to the fact being discussed."
MrV already answered your question better than I could have. If that upsets you, that's your problem, not mine.
P.S. Hey mods, I've lost track of the number of times EvenBob has said "you have no idea what you're talking about" to me and other members here. This is just straight up insulting, and further proves MrV's point.
Quote: EvenBob
Here is something you can't ignore. This thread has only been up for a couple of weeks and it already has over 1,100 posts and almost 30,000 views. People are interested in this, and you just can't stand that so you want to make it go away. 30,000 views in a couple of weeks is huge.
link to original post
God, this is pathetic....LOL.....
Dude, how old are you? You're a grown man, older than most everyone here, and you're going off about internet views like a teenager. Go make a Tik Tok or something if that's what you're concerned about.
Quote: TigerWuQuote: EvenBobQuote: TigerWuQuote: MrVQuote: EvenBobReally? Could you name a couple of those detrimental effects because I have no idea what you're talking about. You don't have to name them all just a couple.
Primarily embarrassment.
This forum was started as an adjunct to WoO, which is about as "math-based" as it gets; allowing superstitious drivel such as EB spews not only detracts from what this board is about, it spits in the face of most long time members due to both its innumeracy and its idiocy.
Thanks for asking, EB.
link to original post
link to original post
I knew you couldn't come up with even one, that was obvious.
Quoting somebody else's ridiculous post is not telling me what I asked. Name a couple of the detrimental effects, you can't do it because you have no idea what you're talking about.
link to original post
BZZZZZT. Logical fallacy. You lose.
"Ad hominem attacks — Criticizing the messenger in the absence of a counter-argument related to the fact being discussed."
MrV already answered your question better than I could have. If that upsets you, that's your problem, not mine.
P.S. Hey mods, I've lost track of the number of times EvenBob has said "you have no idea what you're talking about" to me and other members here. This is just straight up insulting, and further proves MrV's point.
link to original post
Quote: TigerWuQuote: EvenBob
Here is something you can't ignore. This thread has only been up for a couple of weeks and it already has over 1,100 posts and almost 30,000 views. People are interested in this, and you just can't stand that so you want to make it go away. 30,000 views in a couple of weeks is huge.
link to original post
God, this is pathetic....LOL.....
Dude, how old are you? You're a grown man, older than most everyone here, and you're going off about internet views like a teenager. Go make a Tik Tok or something if that's what you're concerned about.
link to original post
You act like nobody's interested in this thread my point is there's a ton of people interested in it. And here's why. I know what I'm talking about because I do what I actually say I do. I can occasionally bet non randomly against random outcomes and this throws your math out the window. Try this. Let's say you have a dealer who can section shoot with great accuracy into the 9 numbers where the 0 is on a single 0 wheel. You know him he's a friend of yours and you make a deal that he will signal you when he is going to do this and so you bet heavily in that section. What you've done is found a way to bet non randomly against random outcomes. So the math that was figured on betting randomly is worthless on that bet you make. I have found a way to distinguish between when the wheel is producing less chaotic outcomes then it does normally and I found a way to exploit this. Roulette outcomes go in waves, up and down, chaotic and non chaotic. I find certain patterns that I'm familiar with that are happening in conjunction with other patterns and I'll make a single bet for that pattern to continue for one more spin. I never ever ever bet that a pattern will end, how do I know when is going to end. All I'm hoping for is that it will continue. Even when I use the 25 Reds example and I say it's time to start looking at black I never said it's time to bet on black. I wait for black to show on its own and after it has that's when I start looking for my bet for black to continue. I'm sure you don't understand what I've just given you, you'll dismiss it out of hand as usual. But I guarantee there are some people in those 30000 viewers who will be able to use this information. I have already heard from several people in private messages they're very interested in what I do. But they don't dare post here because they don't want to be dragged through the mud like I am every day.
MDawg EvenBob, Don't go thinking that 30,000 views is actually views. I wrote about this before. Any and all actions that make your browser bar change/think(not sure the correct term) while in a thread will count as a view(unless something has changed). Just to make this post alone it probably counted as 4 or 5 + views.Quote: EvenBobQuote: EvenBobq]
Quoting somebody else's ridiculous post is not telling me what I asked. Name a couple of the detrimental effects, you can't do it because you have no idea what you're talking about.
link to original post
Here is something you can't ignore. This thread has only been up for a couple of weeks and it already has over 1,100 posts and almost 30,000 views. People are interested in this, and you just can't stand that so you want to make it go away. 30,000 views in a couple of weeks is huge.
link to original post
edit to add:
People are interested in train wrecks and drama.
Tack on another 3- 5 views.
Quote: AxelWolfMDawg EvenBob, Don't go thinking that 30,000 views is actually views. I wrote about this before. Any and all actions that make your browser bar change/think(not sure the correct term) while in a thread will count as a view(unless something has changed). Just to make this post alone it probably counted as 4 or 5 + views.Quote: EvenBobQuote: EvenBobq]
Quoting somebody else's ridiculous post is not telling me what I asked. Name a couple of the detrimental effects, you can't do it because you have no idea what you're talking about.
link to original post
Here is something you can't ignore. This thread has only been up for a couple of weeks and it already has over 1,100 posts and almost 30,000 views. People are interested in this, and you just can't stand that so you want to make it go away. 30,000 views in a couple of weeks is huge.
link to original post
edit to add:
People are interested in train wrecks and drama.
Tack on another 3- 5 views.
link to original post
It says almost 30,000 views that's good enough for me. I would say something was black and you would say it's white, who cares. If it wasn't somewhat accurate they wouldn't have it there.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: EvenBobq]
Quoting somebody else's ridiculous post is not telling me what I asked. Name a couple of the detrimental effects, you can't do it because you have no idea what you're talking about.
link to original post
Here is something you can't ignore. This thread has only been up for a couple of weeks and it already has over 1,100 posts and almost 30,000 views. People are interested in this, and you just can't stand that so you want to make it go away. 30,000 views in a couple of weeks is huge.
link to original post
Arguing on internet forums has long been a popular pastime.
People could be interested in roulette divination, or people could just be watching the fight.
Quote: DieterQuote: EvenBobQuote: EvenBobq]
Quoting somebody else's ridiculous post is not telling me what I asked. Name a couple of the detrimental effects, you can't do it because you have no idea what you're talking about.
link to original post
Here is something you can't ignore. This thread has only been up for a couple of weeks and it already has over 1,100 posts and almost 30,000 views. People are interested in this, and you just can't stand that so you want to make it go away. 30,000 views in a couple of weeks is huge.
link to original post
Arguing on internet forums has long been a popular pastime.
People could be interested in roulette divination, or people could just be watching the fight.
link to original post
Or some of them could be seriously interested in what I have to say as the PM's that I'm getting prove. I've heard from six different people so far and two of them only wrote me twice and dropped off but I hear from the others on a somewhat regular basis.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: DieterQuote: EvenBobQuote: EvenBobq]
Quoting somebody else's ridiculous post is not telling me what I asked. Name a couple of the detrimental effects, you can't do it because you have no idea what you're talking about.
link to original post
Here is something you can't ignore. This thread has only been up for a couple of weeks and it already has over 1,100 posts and almost 30,000 views. People are interested in this, and you just can't stand that so you want to make it go away. 30,000 views in a couple of weeks is huge.
link to original post
Arguing on internet forums has long been a popular pastime.
People could be interested in roulette divination, or people could just be watching the fight.
link to original post
Or some of them could be seriously interested in what I have to say as the PM's that I'm getting prove. I've heard from six different people so far and two of them only wrote me twice and dropped off but I hear from the others on a somewhat regular basis.
link to original post
30,000 views and six PM's.
You may have a great future in advertising.
It has nothing to do with YOU saying black and me saying white. The fact that I have brought this up more than once in the past shows evidence of that. I believe I gave a breakdown of almost everything that creates a view things like editing a post, hitting the back or forward button adding a picture, thanking a post(I think)Quote: EvenBobQuote: AxelWolfMDawg EvenBob, Don't go thinking that 30,000 views is actually views. I wrote about this before. Any and all actions that make your browser bar change/think(not sure the correct term) while in a thread will count as a view(unless something has changed). Just to make this post alone it probably counted as 4 or 5 + views.Quote: EvenBobQuote: EvenBobq]
Quoting somebody else's ridiculous post is not telling me what I asked. Name a couple of the detrimental effects, you can't do it because you have no idea what you're talking about.
link to original post
Here is something you can't ignore. This thread has only been up for a couple of weeks and it already has over 1,100 posts and almost 30,000 views. People are interested in this, and you just can't stand that so you want to make it go away. 30,000 views in a couple of weeks is huge.
link to original post
edit to add:
People are interested in train wrecks and drama.
Tack on another 3- 5 views.
link to original post
It says almost 30,000 views that's good enough for me. I would say something was black and you would say it's white, who cares. If it wasn't somewhat accurate they wouldn't have it there.
link to original post
Test it yourself. Why not have it there? It makes everything seem bigger than it actually is. That's great for a website.
Quote: AxelWolfIt has nothing to do with YOU saying black and me saying white. The fact that I have brought this up more than once in the past shows evidence of that. I believe I gave a breakdown of almost everything that creates a view things like editing a post, hitting the back or forward button adding a picture, thanking a post(I think)Quote: EvenBobQuote: AxelWolfMDawg EvenBob, Don't go thinking that 30,000 views is actually views. I wrote about this before. Any and all actions that make your browser bar change/think(not sure the correct term) while in a thread will count as a view(unless something has changed). Just to make this post alone it probably counted as 4 or 5 + views.Quote: EvenBobQuote: EvenBobq]
Quoting somebody else's ridiculous post is not telling me what I asked. Name a couple of the detrimental effects, you can't do it because you have no idea what you're talking about.
link to original post
Here is something you can't ignore. This thread has only been up for a couple of weeks and it already has over 1,100 posts and almost 30,000 views. People are interested in this, and you just can't stand that so you want to make it go away. 30,000 views in a couple of weeks is huge.
link to original post
edit to add:
People are interested in train wrecks and drama.
Tack on another 3- 5 views.
link to original post
It says almost 30,000 views that's good enough for me. I would say something was black and you would say it's white, who cares. If it wasn't somewhat accurate they wouldn't have it there.
link to original post
Test it yourself. Why not have it there? It makes everything seem bigger than it actually is. That's great for a website.
link to original post
I'm taking it at face value at 30,000 views because you look at everything negatively you look at everything like the glass is half-empty. You will do and say anything to cast gloom on this thread and I'm not falling for it. I think it's under counting I think it's more like 35000 views.
Quote: EvenBob
It says almost 30,000 views that's good enough for me.
Cat: According to my calculations your data is off by a factor of 5.
Bob: That's good enough for me!!!
The Donkey. And you sir, may have this one if you wish "The One Unit Bandit"
Quote: rainmanWell Bob every great AP ends up with a nick name. The captain, The Dominator, I think Axel is called
The Donkey. And you sir, may have this one if you wish "The One Unit Bandit"
link to original post
The Donkey? In some countries they call that by a different name.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: rainmanWell Bob every great AP ends up with a nick name. The captain, The Dominator, I think Axel is called
The Donkey. And you sir, may have this one if you wish "The One Unit Bandit"
link to original post
The Donkey? In some countries they call that by a different name.
link to original post
Poker refrence, Axel will be amused.
That's Captain(Morgans) Donky, Sir.Quote: rainmanQuote: EvenBobQuote: rainmanWell Bob every great AP ends up with a nick name. The captain, The Dominator, I think Axel is called
The Donkey. And you sir, may have this one if you wish "The One Unit Bandit"
link to original post
The Donkey? In some countries they call that by a different name.
link to original post
Poker refrence, Axel will be amused.
link to original post
I like "ONE unit Wonder"Quote: rainmanWell Bob every great AP ends up with a nick name. The captain, The Dominator, I think Axel is called
The Donkey. And you sir, may have this one if you wish "The One Unit Bandit"
link to original post
As in one unit total.
Unless and until Bob posts an AxelWolf cartoon, I'm outta here!Quote: AxelWolfQuote: EvenBob
It says almost 30,000 views that's good enough for me.
Cat: According to my calculations your data is off by a factor of 5.
Bob: That's good enough for me!!!
link to original post
Btw, is that calico part mountain lion or something? He's huge!
Quote: EvenBob
Here is something you can't ignore. This thread has only been up for a couple of weeks and it already has over 1,100 posts and almost 30,000 views. People are interested in this, and you just can't stand that so you want to make it go away. 30,000 views in a couple of weeks is huge.
link to original post
It only has those numbers because you made an extraordinary claim in the OP and refuse to acknowledge the math of the game you claim to have essentially solved. People's questions get answered "Dude trust me" and you say the math is meaningless.
Quote: AitchTheLetterQuote: EvenBob
Here is something you can't ignore. This thread has only been up for a couple of weeks and it already has over 1,100 posts and almost 30,000 views. People are interested in this, and you just can't stand that so you want to make it go away. 30,000 views in a couple of weeks is huge.
link to original post
It only has those numbers because you made an extraordinary claim in the OP and refuse to acknowledge the math of the game you claim to have essentially solved. People's questions get answered "Dude trust me" and you say the math is meaningless.
link to original post
Please point out where I refuse to acknowledge the math of the game, it's practically all I talk about. The math is arrived at by betting randomly against random outcomes and I find a way to occasionally bet non randomly so that changes the math in my favor once in awhile. It is assumed that you can only bet randomly and this just isn't true.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: AitchTheLetterQuote: EvenBob
Here is something you can't ignore. This thread has only been up for a couple of weeks and it already has over 1,100 posts and almost 30,000 views. People are interested in this, and you just can't stand that so you want to make it go away. 30,000 views in a couple of weeks is huge.
link to original post
It only has those numbers because you made an extraordinary claim in the OP and refuse to acknowledge the math of the game you claim to have essentially solved. People's questions get answered "Dude trust me" and you say the math is meaningless.
link to original post
Please point out where I refuse to acknowledge the math of the game, it's practically all I talk about. The math is arrived at by betting randomly against random outcomes and I find a way to occasionally bet non randomly so that changes the math in my favor once in awhile. It is assumed that you can only bet randomly and this just isn't true.
link to original post
It's your method of being able to predict outcomes because of patterns from prior spins.
This doesn't exist. You saying it does exist doesn't change the fact it doesn't.
Because it doesn't exist, the math is unchanged because every independent spin at roulette is random.
Strangely or perhaps purposefully you point to gambling games like Blackjack where the cards dealt from successive games in a deck are not independent as your proof.
It's pure hucksterism.
Quote: darkoz[It's pure hucksterism.
With a dollop of ignorance and a tad of aggrandizement: shaken, not stirred.
"Whoa, this concoction is hard to swallow!"
Quote: darkozIt's your method of being able to predict outcomes because of patterns from prior spins.
This doesn't exist. You saying it does exist doesn't change the fact it doesn't.
link to original post
Of course it exists I use it everyday and I'm explaining it to you as I go along. And I'll keep explaining and you will keep saying it doesn't exist because it doesn't fit your narrative. You're trapped in a cage of confirmation bias and you don't see a way out of it so you just deny the existence of what is right in front of you. This is obvious. Every post you make on this subject is just you trying to confirm your beliefs to yourself. I could take you to the casino 20 times in a row and win 20 times in a row and you still wouldn't believe it. I guarantee you this would happen.
