Royal Panda roulette

Author Topic: Luck is No Lady  (Read 2590 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Romn.Paras

  • Moderator
  • New
  • *****
  • Posts: 88
  • Thanked: 17 times
Luck is No Lady
« on: March 29, 2016, 03:12:54 AM »
Hello Friends.  I am currently reading a book titled "How to Win What You Want" by Kenneth Goode.  I highly recommend reading this book.  There is an interesting section in the book I wanted to share with you all.

In the book on page 132, the author is following up on a study by Maurice Maeterlink.  He once made an exhaustive study of all the systems ever invented for breaking the bank at Monte Carlo.  Any system, he found, might be successful for a short time---NOT because of any superiority of play but, as we notice in the penny tossing analogy, on account of a short time favorable above-the-average flow in its direction.  On the contrary, any system, no matter which or what, that stayed in long enough to average out with the bank's average would go broke as surely as a player blindfolded.  Maeterlink's scientifically founded and philisophically reasoned conclusion is valuable.  There's only one element in luck worth a moment's consideration. Let luck lead you. Play with impunity so long as you are winning. Quit the moment you begin losing. Never try to force your fortunes. 

I think he makes a good point. What are your thoughts on this topic? 



 

kav

  • www.Roulette30.com
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1935
  • Thanked: 924 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: Luck is No Lady
« Reply #1 on: March 29, 2016, 03:51:47 AM »
Nice To hear from you Romn,

I agree and disagree.
I believe what the author says works.
But I have found out that patience and determination work too.

Btw, let me share one of my favorite quotes about luck:
 'Luck always seems to be against the man who depends on it.'
 
 

BlueAngel

  • I always express my opinion
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1571
  • Thanked: 239 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Do you want truth? You cannot handle the truth!
Re: Luck is No Lady
« Reply #2 on: March 29, 2016, 03:55:28 PM »
Hello Romylus, long time no see!

If you believe so then that's your reality...you see every individual forms certain beliefs according their level of conciousness and perception.

In other words the time you determine something as impossible, it becomes your personal barrier.

What you and the book are declaring are true, but not the only one...

There would be no progress in our civilization and technology if there was not a belief, faith that what we can see and already know is the ONLY reality...

Something which is extremely rare it's not synonymous to non existent, if I was telling you that I've witnessed UFO's, several times (not videos & TV) would you believe me?

The fact that it's a rare phenomenon does it make it less credible?

Also I'd like to end my post with 3 facts:

First, the 99% of the systems described in the book "Monte Carlo anecdotes" are about EC bets.

Second, that book has been written more than a century ago.

Third, if there was more or less a few hundreds of individuals around the world who make a living out of gambling, would you expect them to make it public knowledge? Why to do so?
They have no interest by doing so, actually the opposite...

 

scepticus

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2078
  • Thanked: 434 times
Re: Luck is No Lady
« Reply #3 on: March 29, 2016, 04:45:46 PM »
" Third, if there was more or less a few hundreds of individuals around the world who make a living out of gambling, would you expect them to make it public knowledge? Why to do so? They have no interest by doing so, actually the opposite... ;)  "

Spot on ! BA Spot on ! It would be like killing the goose that lays the Golden Eggs  !
« Last Edit: March 29, 2016, 09:13:31 PM by kav »
 

kav

  • www.Roulette30.com
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1935
  • Thanked: 924 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: Luck is No Lady
« Reply #4 on: March 29, 2016, 09:24:03 PM »
Winning at roulette is not a black or white thing.

Like starting a business, stock trading, robbing a bank and every other endeavor in life, there is no 100% certainty. It is possible even the same person to both win and lose, as it is possible for businessmen, robbers or hedge fund managers or traders. Do you know how many millionaire businessmen or traders have made disastrous business decisions or trades? The roulette player with the golden goose system or method does not exist. As it does not exist the golden goose businessman or trader or anyone. Wake up! Even roulette cheaters who had made real money by various methods of cheating eventually got caught.

It is always an endeavor. A challenge. And a risk. It much more than just knowledge or "a system".
Like EVERY THING in this life.

The "winning system" as you imagine it, does not exist. You are asking for 100% foolproof recipes. There's none. Even if these individuals explained to you how they play, you couldn't replicate their success. Because success is much more than a recipe.

« Last Edit: March 29, 2016, 09:35:08 PM by kav »
 

Romn.Paras

  • Moderator
  • New
  • *****
  • Posts: 88
  • Thanked: 17 times
Re: Luck is No Lady
« Reply #5 on: March 29, 2016, 09:55:59 PM »
Hi Kav, and Blue Angel!  It is so nice to hear from the both of you!  I always enjoy your input and insight on issues!  I feel that all of us are on the same page when it comes to not only roulette or gambling, but in life.

Kav, I absolutely love your videos like that!  They are very well put together and make a person stop and think.  I like your perspective on gambling and I can relate to alot of what you say. 

Blue Angel,  it has been a long time my friend.  I hope all is well with you.  I enjoy your perspectives as well.  Both you and Kav help make me a stronger person and I appreciate all of your insights and philosophies.

The one study I was referring to in the book dealt with an interesting series of scientific penny tossings.  In some 10,000 tosses the final score came out, as expected, evenly at 5,000 heads and 5,000 tails.  But in the individual
series of 100 tosses(count was kept in units of 100) the relation between the two sides once fell so low as 19 tails and 81 heads!  Matching pennies, here, at say $1 a toss, you would, of course, come out even if you stayed at it until the series ended.  On the other hand, unless a big bankroll backed your faith in the law of averages, you might easily go broke by hitting in close succession two or three of these series wherin the normally to-be-expected 50-50 break of heads and tails was running against you at the rate of 80-20 or 70-30.

What I find interesting here is that there are many similarities between this study and roulette.  Roulette adds a few more wrinkles into the equation by adding a 0 and a 00.  It also adds a table limit which affects the equation.  I think the one thing we can agree on is that before we attempt to play roulette, we must have a bankroll that is big enough to play effectively.  This presents another question. 

How big of a bankroll should one have before attempting the game of roulette?  My general rule when I play is to have a bankroll that is between 100 to 200 times the minimum bet.  What is your philosophy on how big your bankroll should be before we commence playing?  I would be interested to hear your input on this. 

 

BlueAngel

  • I always express my opinion
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1571
  • Thanked: 239 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Do you want truth? You cannot handle the truth!
Re: Luck is No Lady
« Reply #6 on: March 29, 2016, 10:53:01 PM »
Hi Kav, and Blue Angel!  It is so nice to hear from the both of you!  I always enjoy your input and insight on issues!  I feel that all of us are on the same page when it comes to not only roulette or gambling, but in life.

Kav, I absolutely love your videos like that!  They are very well put together and make a person stop and think.  I like your perspective on gambling and I can relate to alot of what you say. 

Blue Angel,  it has been a long time my friend.  I hope all is well with you.  I enjoy your perspectives as well.  Both you and Kav help make me a stronger person and I appreciate all of your insights and philosophies.

The one study I was referring to in the book dealt with an interesting series of scientific penny tossings.  In some 10,000 tosses the final score came out, as expected, evenly at 5,000 heads and 5,000 tails.  But in the individual
series of 100 tosses(count was kept in units of 100) the relation between the two sides once fell so low as 19 tails and 81 heads!  Matching pennies, here, at say $1 a toss, you would, of course, come out even if you stayed at it until the series ended.  On the other hand, unless a big bankroll backed your faith in the law of averages, you might easily go broke by hitting in close succession two or three of these series wherin the normally to-be-expected 50-50 break of heads and tails was running against you at the rate of 80-20 or 70-30.

What I find interesting here is that there are many similarities between this study and roulette.  Roulette adds a few more wrinkles into the equation by adding a 0 and a 00.  It also adds a table limit which affects the equation.  I think the one thing we can agree on is that before we attempt to play roulette, we must have a bankroll that is big enough to play effectively.  This presents another question. 

How big of a bankroll should one have before attempting the game of roulette?  My general rule when I play is to have a bankroll that is between 100 to 200 times the minimum bet.  What is your philosophy on how big your bankroll should be before we commence playing?  I would be interested to hear your input on this.

About your question I think there is no "1 size fits all" if you get my drift...

For example if you are playing EC's, the 100, even 200 times your minimum it's insufficient in my opinion.

Of course depends also from the kind of progression and if you bet flat stakes, by betting flat your low's and high's will be smoother, while betting with an aggressive progression your lows will be lower and your highs higher.

Consider progression like a gun, consider bankroll like an army, a big army alone cannot guarantee the win, if you don't use your gun properly it could be turned against you...

Progression declares indirectly that you know when you are going to win, within a specific range of spins to be precise.

If we knew, within a range of spins, that a win would happen, would we bet our house on that spin, or range of spins??

Do you get my point?
 

BlueAngel

  • I always express my opinion
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1571
  • Thanked: 239 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Do you want truth? You cannot handle the truth!
Re: Luck is No Lady
« Reply #7 on: March 29, 2016, 10:56:51 PM »
Quote
Winning at roulette is not a black or white thing.

Like starting a business, stock trading, robbing a bank and every other endeavor in life, there is no 100% certainty. It is possible even the same person to both win and lose, as it is possible for businessmen, robbers or hedge fund managers or traders. Do you know how many millionaire businessmen or traders have made disastrous business decisions or trades? The roulette player with the golden goose system or method does not exist. As it does not exist the golden goose businessman or trader or anyone. Wake up! Even roulette cheaters who had made real money by various methods of cheating eventually got caught.

It is always an endeavor. A challenge. And a risk. It much more than just knowledge or "a system".
Like EVERY THING in this life.

The "winning system" as you imagine it, does not exist. You are asking for 100% foolproof recipes. There's none. Even if these individuals explained to you how they play, you couldn't replicate their success. Because success is much more than a recipe.
Kav

Don't be so certain about it...like I told Rom, there's NOT "1 size fits all"...
 

kav

  • www.Roulette30.com
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1935
  • Thanked: 924 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: Luck is No Lady
« Reply #8 on: March 29, 2016, 11:16:47 PM »
Kav
Don't be so certain about it...like I told Rom, there's NOT "1 size fits all"...
My post is all about uncertainty.
« Last Edit: March 29, 2016, 11:19:09 PM by kav »
 

scepticus

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2078
  • Thanked: 434 times
Re: Luck is No Lady
« Reply #9 on: March 29, 2016, 11:55:40 PM »
Winning at roulette is not a black or white thing.

Like starting a business, stock trading, robbing a bank and every other endeavor in life, there is no 100% certainty. It is possible even the same person to both win and lose, as it is possible for businessmen, robbers or hedge fund managers or traders. Do you know how many millionaire businessmen or traders have made disastrous business decisions or trades? The roulette player with the golden goose system or method does not exist. As it does not exist the golden goose businessman or trader or anyone. Wake up! Even roulette cheaters who had made real money by various methods of cheating eventually got caught.

It is always an endeavor. A challenge. And a risk. It much more than just knowledge or "a system".
Like EVERY THING in this life.

The "winning system" as you imagine it, does not exist. You are asking for 100% foolproof recipes. There's none. Even if these individuals explained to you how they play, you couldn't replicate their success. Because success is much more than a recipe.

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/NIIelgAU7f8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Kav
I think you have misunderstood BA's point.
His point was hypothetical. "IF" there were players making a living by betting on roulette it would be foolish to tell others their method.
I agreed. Don't you ?
We never said that we were looking for the Holy Grail so I don't understand why you should think we were . Particularly when I had previously
 said that there can be none because of " variance ".The best  we can expect to do is profit consistently and let an uncertain future decide.
As for a " winning system" .It depends on how you interpret it. You are selling a " winning system" are you not ?
So how do you define a "winning system " if it is not a system that has been  profitable over a reasonable time scale  ?
 

scepticus

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2078
  • Thanked: 434 times
Re: Luck is No Lady
« Reply #10 on: March 30, 2016, 12:07:28 AM »
Romm
I think you  should be more critical in your readings . Critical in the sense of " critique ".
How can anyone KNOW all the systems for beating Monte Carlo so his analysis is flawed
from first base , If he is talking about all the methods he KNOWS -that is a different matter,
Heads and tails equalise EXACTLY over 10,000 tosses of a coin ? I doubt it for that WOULD  be a Black Swan.
Check out Borel's Long Run. 
 

BlueAngel

  • I always express my opinion
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1571
  • Thanked: 239 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Do you want truth? You cannot handle the truth!
Re: Luck is No Lady
« Reply #11 on: March 30, 2016, 01:20:40 AM »
Very valid and accurate points Scep.  8)
 

dobbelsteen

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1500
  • Thanked: 480 times
Re: Luck is No Lady
« Reply #12 on: March 30, 2016, 09:00:48 AM »
Systems can never promise a profit. A strategy with hit and run played by a experience player can be very profitable.
This method can not make you a millionair.

The performance of every chance is a wave. That means that after every trough or crest the result will crossline the zero ax. Flat betting after a crest or trough and stop at zero give a profit
The number of spins between a crest and trough is uncertain. The features for long run and short run are noet the same.
Study the long and short theory.
 

scepticus

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2078
  • Thanked: 434 times
Re: Luck is No Lady
« Reply #13 on: March 30, 2016, 05:32:05 PM »
Systems can never promise a profit. A strategy with hit and run played by a experience player can be very profitable.
This method can not make you a millionair.

The performance of every chance is a wave. That means that after every trough or crest the result will crossline the zero ax. Flat betting after a crest or trough and stop at zero give a profit
The number of spins between a crest and trough is uncertain. The features for long run and short run are noet the same.
Study the long and short theory.

Dobbelsteen
"No system can guarantee profit " ?
Agreed .Because of the randomness / variability of the wheel.

"  Hit and Run can provide a profit ?"
Agreed. You and I and others in the forum do.

Study the Short Run ?
Agreed.

Study the Long Run?
Why, when we won't live to see the Long Run ?
So far as I am concerned  The Long Run  only means that the odds are against us winning  .What else does The Long Run " prove " ? As gambling is all about betting AGAINST the odds on offer - and we ARE gamblers - telling us that we are gambling is  nonsense .

We live in The Short Run - We bet in The Short Run .So  why should we listen to self- important  poseurs who claim that The Long Run will destroy our bankroll and our profits - EVENTUALLY? Classroom  maths are not always applicable in the real world. Probability Theory is a tool to be used but is not The Holy Grail  of certaintythat our critics claim for it.
« Last Edit: March 30, 2016, 05:35:42 PM by scepticus »
 

Romn.Paras

  • Moderator
  • New
  • *****
  • Posts: 88
  • Thanked: 17 times
Re: Luck is No Lady
« Reply #14 on: March 31, 2016, 02:48:44 AM »
I think all of you make very valid points.  That is what makes this game so fascinating.  There is no one way to approach the game.  I really enjoy the intelligent conversation and input from all of you that have participated.