• Tired of the same old junk already proven ineffective? Here you can discuss NEW approaches, with other people who think outside the box.

Ideas Is luck measurable?

Trinsic

New Member
Messages
14
Likes
0
#1
I know it may sound a little bit stupid but it may be the case that lucky something that changes based on our beliefs

Research the double slit experiment and see how our beliefs and perceptions can change reality. It's not science quackery it looks like there is some truth to it.

 
Messages
183
Likes
18
#3
There's a lot we know very little about. "We don't know what we don't know".

A lot of professional players will agree that there really appears to be some truth to the notion that our thoughts have influence on reality. The classic example for roulette players is you were just thinking about a number, and it just popped into your head. And then that number wins next.

Is it coincidence? To know for sure, you'd need to do so much testing that it wouldn't be very practical. So the theories are difficult to prove. For myself personally, I believe there is truth to it all. There is substantiating information in the double slit experiment you highlighted.

I've seen enough to believe reasonably precognition at least is a real thing. But developing it is another thing. Before anyone dismisses it, wait to see the information I have. I explained some of it on rouletteforum.cc and will publish here too, and more.
 
Messages
183
Likes
18
#4
Also to clarify, precognition and influencing game outcomes are two different things. Most people wouldn't touch the concept out of fear of ridicule. I couldn't care less about what people think reality is. I base my opinions on a scientific approach, as will be clear in the information I'll publish soon.
 

clyne

New Member
Messages
78
Likes
1
#5
I've watched the video and I like the bit where the electron 'behaves' differently when a measuring device is used. To some extent, I think there's some truth to your statement. I think the strength and/or intensity of our thoughts has an influence on the outcome of an event.
 
Messages
150
Likes
8
#6
I've seen enough to believe reasonably precognition at least is a real thing. But developing it is another thing. Before anyone dismisses it, wait to see the information I have.
I am a skeptic with my beliefs based on statistics and not the paranormal. But will read whatever data you have to offer.

" Luck is nothing more than probability taken personally! "
 
Messages
183
Likes
18
#7
Nothing is above the laws of physics. Anyone that thinks otherwise is fooling themselves. If findings dont coincide with any current model of physics, then the model is wrong. Unless of course the experiment wasnt conducted correctly.

The term "Paranormal" is meaningless to me. Something is either real or not real.

Im sure youve come accross people who believe things without solid foundation. Im not one of them. There is real foundation. I havent had time to explain more yet but will soon.
 
Messages
183
Likes
18
#8
Keep in mind radio waves were once science fiction too. Theres a hell of a lot we dont understand yet. But the effects are observable. The double slit experiment is a good example.
 

June

New Member
Messages
200
Likes
2
#9
I like your example of the double split theory, however, does the same happen if you move the recording farther away from the slits? I would think that the act of the device being so close would interrupt the electrons. Moving it farther away should relieve that problem.
 
Messages
241
Likes
5
#10
Luck can be measurable if you subscribe to the theory that we make out our luck. In other words, you can only measure the outcomes of an activity when all of the actions of that activity are purposeful.
 

June

New Member
Messages
200
Likes
2
#11
My luck sure is measurable and it's all bad. I am historically unlucky compared to my friends. I rarely have big wins and small wins are not really that often either. I don't know if I just have bad aura or what but it seems like the machines just don't like me.
 
Messages
2
Likes
0
#12
"The observer collapsed the wave function…" and that vid collapsed my brain!

Really interesting that the general interactions in our everyday lives shed but a scintilla of light on the intricate nature of the science that surrounds us. It's started me thinking about parallel universes and that perhaps every aspect of our lives has multiple possible simultaneous outcomes that essentially split into parallel universes at every instant of existence.

I think I need a cup of tea after that :)
 
Messages
39
Likes
0
#13
There's a lot we know very little about. "We don't know what we don't know".

A lot of professional players will agree that there really appears to be some truth to the notion that our thoughts have influence on reality. The classic example for roulette players is you were just thinking about a number, and it just popped into your head. And then that number wins next.

Is it coincidence? To know for sure, you'd need to do so much testing that it wouldn't be very practical. So the theories are difficult to prove. For myself personally, I believe there is truth to it all. There is substantiating information in the double slit experiment you highlighted.

I've seen enough to believe reasonably precognition at least is a real thing. But developing it is another thing. Before anyone dismisses it, wait to see the information I have. I explained some of it on rouletteforum.cc and will publish here too, and more.
Newtonian physics denies that luck is other than a statistical fluctuation. Lorenz-Fitsgerald equations did not help much. These were expanded into what we call Eisensteinian physics. This didn't help much either. We are stuck with such things as the Laws of Thermodynamics. Since ancient times there have been instances that appear outside of the MEST (Matter, Energy, Space, Time) universe as we understand it. For convenience, these may be called synchronicities. These have exceedingly rare probabilities. Some ancient texts teach that all matter is dead. It is only used by life and when life abandons matter, it returns to being dead. One rational body of thought about requires a reorganization of how we think of MEST and unknown intelligence or organization.

We see intelligence (organizing force?) manifested among all particles in the universe. The argument is that particles should operate randomly without organizing force. Atoms (incredibly complex small things) or spiral universes do not exist without organizing force (intelligence?). MEST is plastic, subject to organization by (intelligence?). Production of life required the coming together of a few hundred different types of molecules. This is an incredible example of synchronicity, statistically so improbable that it would not be likely to occur with in the span of existence accorded the MEST universe.

Fast forward a billion years or so from the beginnings of life on earth. Discrete species are present. Life (organization?) once present, learned and developed methods of adaptation and to carry forward into greater complexity. The species Human became analytically aware which implies the ability to control or operate MEST. Those who create fortunes or overcome obstacles have one thing in common, they believed they could. MEST does not require that such actions be socially beneficial and we have scoundrels and saints.

Does telepathy or telekinesis exist? Raise your arm. This answers the question. Non matter (intelligence) controlled matter. The arm raised because you believed it would. What has this to do with "Luck?" If you believe that you can have it, you probably will. If you believe it doesn't exist, for you it won't. Possibly card counting, setting the dice, predicting Roulette spins work better for some than others because they believe it. It appears there is an organizing force (life) present throughout the universe. It appears that some have learned at least some of "the music of the spheres" and can develop control or organization beyond that which most of us consider possible.

This body of thought is in conformance with ancient science as related in the first 26 verses of the Book of Genesis, it is an interpretation and only one guideline for future development. Your questions are valid. A person cannot find an answer without first asking a question (and the answer may be in plain sight). I think that if you believe that you can find an answer, you will.
 
Messages
39
Likes
0
#14
Newtonian physics denies that luck is other than a statistical fluctuation. Lorenz-Fitsgerald equations did not help much. These were expanded into what we call Eisensteinian physics. This didn't help much either. We are stuck with such things as the Laws of Thermodynamics. Since ancient times there have been instances that appear outside of the MEST (Matter, Energy, Space, Time) universe as we understand it. For convenience, these may be called synchronicities. These have exceedingly rare probabilities. Some ancient texts teach that all matter is dead. It is only used by life and when life abandons matter, it returns to being dead. One rational body of thought about requires a reorganization of how we think of MEST and unknown intelligence or organization.

We see intelligence (organizing force?) manifested among all particles in the universe. The argument is that particles should operate randomly without organizing force. Atoms (incredibly complex small things) or spiral universes do not exist without organizing force (intelligence?). MEST is plastic, subject to organization by (intelligence?). Production of life required the coming together of a few hundred different types of molecules. This is an incredible example of synchronicity, statistically so improbable that it would not be likely to occur with in the span of existence accorded the MEST universe.

Fast forward a billion years or so from the beginnings of life on earth. Discrete species are present. Life (organization?) once present, learned and developed methods of adaptation and to carry forward into greater complexity. The species Human became analytically aware which implies the ability to control or operate MEST. Those who create fortunes or overcome obstacles have one thing in common, they believed they could. MEST does not require that such actions be socially beneficial and we have scoundrels and saints.

Does telepathy or telekinesis exist? Raise your arm. This answers the question. Non matter (intelligence) controlled matter. The arm raised because you believed it would. What has this to do with "Luck?" If you believe that you can have it, you probably will. If you believe it doesn't exist, for you it won't. Possibly card counting, setting the dice, predicting Roulette spins work better for some than others because they believe it. It appears there is an organizing force (life) present throughout the universe. It appears that some have learned at least some of "the music of the spheres" and can develop control or organization beyond that which most of us consider possible.

This body of thought is in conformance with ancient science as related in the first 26 verses of the Book of Genesis, it is an interpretation and only one guideline for future development. Your questions are valid. A person cannot find an answer without first asking a question (and the answer may be in plain sight). I think that if you believe that you can find an answer, you will.
There are scientific indications, but no proof that can be reduced to understandable, workable equations. Popular information includes such things as prayer, reading auras, dousing, psychic projection, telekinesis, teleportation, visions, automatic writing, ghosts and googlies, dreams, remote viewing and a whole hodgepodge collection of anecdotes. These have been with use throughout our recorded histories.

What is the significance to betting and luck? Quite a bit, if it can be developed. You are not able to take a forked peach stick or a pendulum to a betting table. Quite some years ago, I read of dousing by use of developing your fingers into a sort of yes/no machine. This is not visible and permitted at all betting tables. I have no opinion about is effectiveness. I have written of this in my books on betting. It seems time to actually do field research rather than just speculating about it. I will write a booklet describing finger twitch dousing, how to develop it and how to apply it to the big four betting games. I will lodge the booklet on both ClickBank and JVZoo with a sales price of $2.99. This may not produce a large volume of volunteers, but some affiliate sales will expand the base number. The sales price is sufficiently low that there should be few refunds.

A purchaser will have a description of how to bet, a method of keeping records and an Attack betting algorithm that should produce a break even if the test is null. Bettors will be using their own money, we don't want them to lose money if the test fails. If a bettor loses money, possibly he or she is working against themselves. If a bettor gains successfully, possibly he or she has developed the skill. We can have no control of the number of people that actually do or do not develop the skill and we can have no control of who does or who does not respond. Few reports of testing are expected from anyone until they have had the procedure in their hands for at least a month. We cannot assume that those who do not send back a description of their results have either failed or succeeded. We cannot assume that those who send back a description of their results are a representative sample of the population. The test is statistically flawed before we start. Before responding, we would like for a bettor to make 1,000 bets. For that individual, if the results have improved or failed to improve when the first five hundred bets are compared to the second five hundred bets, the results should be informative. Based on the results that are returned to me, some decent anecdotal information should be obtained which I will share.

It will take a couple of weeks for me to actually write the booklet and lodge it with vendors. If you or anyone that you know is interested in this test, send an email to drlarryhaight@yahoo.com and I will respond with a link where they can get the booklet. I do not have resources to send the booklet from my personal address.
 
Messages
39
Likes
0
#15
I am a skeptic with my beliefs based on statistics and not the paranormal. But will read whatever data you have to offer.

" Luck is nothing more than probability taken personally! "
As described below, I am beginning a study that is statistically flawed from the inception. I don't apologize for this, the data to be studied is a statistical abnormality. Without significantly more resources (like the supposed CIA studies of Remote Viewing) than I have, I cannot do more than an anecdotal study. I have no opinion of the results. As a statistic, anecdotes are subject to challenge. I have not personally done any testing and have no such paranormal skills at this time and do not make any claims. If you have any suggestions about how the study might be improved, I welcome your response to my personal email: drlarryhaight@yahoo.com Thx
 
Messages
39
Likes
0
#16
I know it may sound a little bit stupid but it may be the case that lucky something that changes based on our beliefs

Research the double slit experiment and see how our beliefs and perceptions can change reality. It's not science quackery it looks like there is some truth to it.

I am conducting open experimental research. I am downloading parts of a booklet: HAIGHT ON PRECALL FOR BACCARAT.

PRECALL AS A BET SELECTOR

The term precall is from a work that describes memory as extending into both the past and the future.You recall the past and precall the future. The past is fixed but the future remains plastic. Precall does not extend very far into the future.

Statistical studies tend to indicate no particular ability in the majority of people, but often isolate a very few people that appear to have greater than probable results. Study of specific individuals is considered to devolve into anecdotal evidence.

John Logan (a good friend, deceased) told of watching a man correctly call every card as dealt from a shuffled deck; twice. I did not see this, but when John reported, it could be taken to the bank. Some people can see through cards.

The ability does exist. Absent a mutation, if one person has the ability, then most people should possess it although the ability might be latent.

The art of dowsing is an established fact, more or less available to aware people. Non urbanized people of desert climates are more successful at locating water than their urbanized counterparts. In the words of an ancient, “Some people have it, some don’t.”

Humans developed a high degree of analytical ability, a great ability when facing unknown circumstances. With intelligence comes the ability to question and to analyze.

It seems that analytic intelligence is a parallel survival ability and in most instances is superior to intuition. When analytic intelligence is compared to intuition, sometimes, it is inferior. It appears that development of analytic ability is destructive of psychic reception. It is questionable to the analytic mind that psychic ability exists or that if it exists, that it can be controlled.

It appears the operator must have belief the operation will succeed or it will not. If you don't believe that the ability exists for you, then it surely will not. Analytic intelligence tends to reject non explained data as superstition. Do we have an additional sense present? Maybe, maybe not.

To achieve certainty, we need to test for ourselves using ourselves as the guinea pig.


A live casino table game is an ideal testing platform.

We need a physical devise as a marker to which we can attach number, so we can test. We can’t take a forked peach stick or a pendulum to the betting table, even for research. Of all the markers possible, using twitching of fingers as a dowsing instrument may the best mechanical devise.

Finger twitching is the creation of a "yes/no" machine.

A twitch of the right index (or other finger, at your selection) finger might indicate “yes,” absence of the twitch might mean “no.” The question to be asked might be “will Player win this hand?” or “will Banker win this hand?” A finger from each hand may be used, one hand for one side of a paired chance. A twitch from the opposite hand would be for the opposite side.

Finger dowsing is an “out of casino” practice that may be developed for any form of “yes” or “no” decision.

Breathe: Inhale deeply, possibly with eyes partially or completely closed.

Closing ones eyes closes out much external stimuli and puts one in an Alpha state. Training to consciously enter Theta is beyond our pay grade.

Begin the exhale as a relaxation and aim simultaneously. Aim is the question, will Red win? If a bet on Red will win, the right finger will twitch. A failure of Red to win will produce a twitch of the left finger.

If an answer has been produced (or forced, more about this later), place the indicated bet and then wait for the results.

Wash and recycle. If you practice this (with a bit of care), you will be unobserved in the casino. I’ve never tried to develop the skill, but there is evidence against ridiculing the technique.

Five to ten days before a casino visit, start an auto programing technique. If you are relaxed and close your eyes, you automatically go in to a mental state where you have brain waves in the alpha category.

While relaxed in alpha (during the day, just prior to going to sleep, possibly in a dream state), state to yourself,

"I am the source of my future. I have access to all knowledge. When I ask a question that has a "yes" answer, my right index finger will twitch. If the answer is "no," my left index finger will twitch."

Spend one to five days with alpha programing to develop the yes/no machine. As an intermediate exercise, verbally ask yourself, is 4 + 2 equal to six? If your right index finger does not twitch, you cause it to twitch. A twitch can be minor, just so that you can feel it. Ask yourself is 4 + 2 equal to eight? If your left index finger does not twitch. These exercises may be done at anytime of the day as long as you are calm and relaxed.

Use the yes/no machine on a regular basis. Ask "Is this melon ripe?" "Is this product any better than the cheaper one?'' "Is that a cop car following me?" When you ask a question, if there is no finger twitch, twitch the finger that you think is appropriate. Continue until you constantly get finger twitches. This is a bit like conditioning exercises where when the bell rings, the dog salivates.

These exercises conform with what is called neurolinguistic programing, NLP for short. The exercises combined with the alpha programming is believed to set up neural circuits that connect you and your latent ability to the physical mechanism of the finger twitch.

How often to run the alpha programming is a puzzler. There different answers. Once may be enough if there is sufficient positive intent that the command be obeyed.

Twenty times may not be enough if you do not believe the technique will work. If you believe the technique will work for you and continuously install the mantra, your mind may interprets this as your being unconvinced it may not work. The human mind only needs one exhibit to learn. Practice may or may not make perfect.

Practicing with intermediate finger twitches may obviate the need of belief. Apparently, the practice of dowsing requires belief by the operator. Had ye the faith of a mustard seed...

I am informed of tests that show some preceptors unknowingly predict for their own failure. Their results are statistically less than a result obtained by chance.

If you choose to try to develop the technique, use a decent attack algorithm while testing. This should provide a break even or some winnings if the tested game is of at near equal unity (the chance expectation). Why Attack rather than defense? Your mind set is that you are attacking the universe rather than defending against it.

A yes/no machine is a tool. Humans are tool makers.
 
Last edited:
Messages
39
Likes
0
#17
I am conducting open experimental research. I am downloading parts of a booklet: HAIGHT ON PRECALL FOR BACCARAT.

PRECALL AS A BET SELECTOR

The term precall is from a work that describes memory as extending into both the past and the future.You recall the past and precall the future. The past is fixed but the future remains plastic. Precall does not extend very far into the future.

Statistical studies tend to indicate no particular ability in the majority of people, but often isolate a very few people that appear to have greater than probable results. Study of specific individuals is considered to devolve into anecdotal evidence.

John Logan (a good friend, deceased) told of watching a man correctly call every card as dealt from a shuffled deck; twice. I did not see this, but when John reported, it could be taken to the bank. Some people can see through cards.

The ability does exist. Absent a mutation, if one person has the ability, then most people should possess it although the ability might be latent.

The art of dowsing is an established fact, more or less available to aware people. Non urbanized people of desert climates are more successful at locating water than their urbanized counterparts. In the words of an ancient, “Some people have it, some don’t.”

Humans developed a high degree of analytical ability, a great ability when facing unknown circumstances. With intelligence comes the ability to question and to analyze.

It seems that analytic intelligence is a parallel survival ability and in most instances is superior to intuition. When analytic intelligence is compared to intuition, sometimes, it is inferior. It appears that development of analytic ability is destructive of psychic reception. It is questionable to the analytic mind that psychic ability exists or that if it exists, that it can be controlled.

It appears the operator must have belief the operation will succeed or it will not. If you don't believe that the ability exists for you, then it surely will not. Analytic intelligence tends to reject non explained data as superstition. Do we have an additional sense present? Maybe, maybe not.

To achieve certainty, we need to test for ourselves using ourselves as the guinea pig.


A live casino table game is an ideal testing platform.

We need a physical devise as a marker to which we can attach number, so we can test. We can’t take a forked peach stick or a pendulum to the betting table, even for research. Of all the markers possible, using twitching of fingers as a dowsing instrument may the best mechanical devise.

Finger twitching is the creation of a "yes/no" machine.

A twitch of the right index (or other finger, at your selection) finger might indicate “yes,” absence of the twitch might mean “no.” The question to be asked might be “will Player win this hand?” or “will Banker win this hand?” A finger from each hand may be used, one hand for one side of a paired chance. A twitch from the opposite hand would be for the opposite side.

Finger dowsing is an “out of casino” practice that may be developed for any form of “yes” or “no” decision.

Breathe: Inhale deeply, possibly with eyes partially or completely closed.

Closing ones eyes closes out much external stimuli and puts one in an Alpha state. Training to consciously enter Theta is beyond our pay grade.

Begin the exhale as a relaxation and aim simultaneously. Aim is the question, will Red win? If a bet on Red will win, the right finger will twitch. A failure of Red to win will produce a twitch of the left finger.

If an answer has been produced (or forced, more about this later), place the indicated bet and then wait for the results.

Wash and recycle. If you practice this (with a bit of care), you will be unobserved in the casino. I’ve never tried to develop the skill, but there is evidence against ridiculing the technique.

Five to ten days before a casino visit, start an auto programing technique. If you are relaxed and close your eyes, you automatically go in to a mental state where you have brain waves in the alpha category.

While relaxed in alpha (during the day, just prior to going to sleep, possibly in a dream state), state to yourself,

"I am the source of my future. I have access to all knowledge. When I ask a question that has a "yes" answer, my right index finger will twitch. If the answer is "no," my left index finger will twitch."

Spend one to five days with alpha programing to develop the yes/no machine. As an intermediate exercise, verbally ask yourself, is 4 + 2 equal to six? If your right index finger does not twitch, you cause it to twitch. A twitch can be minor, just so that you can feel it. Ask yourself is 4 + 2 equal to eight? If your left index finger does not twitch. These exercises may be done at anytime of the day as long as you are calm and relaxed.

Use the yes/no machine on a regular basis. Ask "Is this melon ripe?" "Is this product any better than the cheaper one?'' "Is that a cop car following me?" When you ask a question, if there is no finger twitch, twitch the finger that you think is appropriate. Continue until you constantly get finger twitches. This is a bit like conditioning exercises where when the bell rings, the dog salivates.

These exercises conform with what is called neurolinguistic programing, NLP for short. The exercises combined with the alpha programming is believed to set up neural circuits that connect you and your latent ability to the physical mechanism of the finger twitch.

How often to run the alpha programming is a puzzler. There different answers. Once may be enough if there is sufficient positive intent that the command be obeyed.

Twenty times may not be enough if you do not believe the technique will work. If you believe the technique will work for you and continuously install the mantra, your mind may interprets this as your being unconvinced it may not work. The human mind only needs one exhibit to learn. Practice may or may not make perfect.

Practicing with intermediate finger twitches may obviate the need of belief. Apparently, the practice of dowsing requires belief by the operator. Had ye the faith of a mustard seed...

I am informed of tests that show some preceptors unknowingly predict for their own failure. Their results are statistically less than a result obtained by chance.

If you choose to try to develop the technique, use a decent attack algorithm while testing. This should provide a break even or some winnings if the tested game is of at near equal unity (the chance expectation). Why Attack rather than defense? Your mind set is that you are attacking the universe rather than defending against it.


A yes/no machine is a tool. Humans are tool makers.

SKILL DEVELOPMENT AND TESTING

MINI-BACCARAT:

Bets normally have a $5 minimum. For skill development and testing, use the minimum bet size possible. Always "buy in" for 40 times your minimum bet ($200 for $5 bettors). Do not attempt to bet in a live game unless in a calm and relaxed mood. You should have completed an Alpha program for from one to twenty days immediately prior to a casino test.

Prior to a deal, mentally ask "Will Banker win?" If a twitch of the right finger, bet $5 on Banker. If no twitch, mentally ask "Will Player win?" A recommended betting strategy is to bet $5 after every loss. Bet $10 after every win based on finger twitch for that deal. This betting strategy is the least costly method known to isolate the accuracy of finger twitching. If ability is present, after 200 bets (about one hour), there should be winnings.

BACCARAT:
Bets normally have a $20 minimum. "Buy in" is 40 times the base bet or $800. Do not attempt to bet in a live game unless in a calm and relaxed mood. You should have completed an Alpha program for from one to twenty days immediately prior to a casino test.

Prior to a deal, mentally ask "Will Banker win?" If a twitch of the right finger, bet $20 on Banker. If no twitch, mentally ask "Will Player win?" If no twitch, ask "Is the next spin a tie?" If you get a twitch, put a bet on tie.

A recommended betting strategy is to bet $20 after every loss. Bet $40 after every win based on finger twitch for that deal. This betting strategy is the least costly method known to isolate the accuracy of finger twitching. If ability is present, after 200 bets (about 3-4 hours), there should be winnings.

Conducting the test:

Live Mini-Baccarat games normally have free "score cards" where you can write down your bet and mark whether it won or lost.

Take a 3" x 5" spiral bound tablet with you to the table to use if the table does not have the cards. Draw a vertical line in the tablet. (a tablet can accommodate two or three such lines) One side will be labeled P (for Player) and the other side labeled B (for Banker). Use the same tablet for both Mini-Baccarat and Baccarat. A three column ledger entry sheet that fits on a 3" x 5" page is shown below. Using this format, about 75 bets may be recorded on a single page of the tablet.

/////My word processor did not transfer the image////


A test of 50 bets is meaningless. Do not attempt to do an analysis of less than 100 events. If a test was a break even or a slight loss, split the 100 bets as 1 - 50 and 51 - 100. One or the other half will have a greater number of hits than the other.

Sometimes the first half will out perform the second half, indicating fatigue or system lapse. Something is wrong. It may be as simple as losing belief or attention span at the table. There should be no fatigue factor dealing with system twitch. Take a long break.

As a test, your next session should only be fifty bets. If the second half of the test shows greater accuracy than the first half, it may indicate that performance is increasing with practice.

If the 100 bet series produces break even, or a profit, start using a 200 bet session. Stick with 50 - 100 bet tests if results are not indicative of expected gain.

The longer the test, the more significant can be the results. Even with a 100 bet test, almost anything can happen, purely the result of randomity. With a 200 bet series, results start tending toward an expected result. Results become believable if you have five 200 bet series, that is 1,000 bets.

Betting routines are strange creatures. A change that appears logical sometimes produces poor results. Sticking to the betting program as described is recommended throughout the first 1000 bet test.

If you do not have substantial winnings (a 5% ROI) during the 1000 bet test, do not vary from the betting algorithm until further testing.

If you have significant winnings, for your next test, consider use of the simple Attack Galloping Martingale. Each winning bet is parlayed and an additional bet added. This is a simple betting pattern (originally designed for betting race horses), easily applied at a betting table.

The simple Attack Galloping Martingale:

Bet 1 chip after all losses. Bet 3 chips after a win in the direction indicated by finger twist.

Extended Attack Galloping Martingale:

By chance, you should have a run of three wins in a row 1 time in every 8 starts. Count your series of three wins in a row throughout the last 600 bets of the 1000 trials. By chance, expect about 70-75.

The galloping martingale is to bet 3 chips after the first win, 7 chips after the second win. If successful the net win is 11 chips. 70 wins of 11 chips would produce a net 770 chips (with $5 chips, $3850), yielding profit of 170 chips (@ $5 chips, $850) above the 600 chips invested.

The galloping martingale is about breakeven at chance and is considered a safe algorithm. Extended Attack Galloping only wins at the same rate as betting 3 chips after a win, but comes into its own if you score above 80 series of 3 during the 600 bets.

If you have 60 runs of 4 wins in a row, it is feasible to have a 3 bet accelerated parlay, that is Bet 3 chips after the first win, Bet 7 chips after a win of the 3 chip bet, Bet 15 chips after a win of the 7 chip bet. Winning 4 times in a row would produce a net 26 chip gain. 60 wins of 26 chips equals 1680 chips, less the 600 chip cost, a net gain of 1080 chips, @ $5 chips, a $5400 gain.

Go-go bet acceleration is warranted only if you have a much greater than average hit ratio.

It would be appreciated that after you complete a 1000 bet series, that you email drlarryhaight@yahoo.com with the statistics, successful or unsuccessful. I would like to hear of the length of winning and losing series of three or more wins or losses in a row. I would also appreciate any additional comments about the validity or lack of validity of the routines as you applied them.

CAVEAT


Scientists always question. When we come to an event that requires belief, we do not believe. We test to form hypotheses.

I personally have no more control of paranormal events than your average doorknob. I have experienced synchronicity of events that I consider inexplicable. Some were forecasts of the future.

We can know the future before it comes into being. I knew that I would see age 76 over 40 years ago. I saved a bundle on life insurance premiums that I never purchased.


Do I personally guarantee your success? Not on your unstained bippy. If it don't work for me, and I do not expect success, how can I guarantee your success? We deal with terra incognita. We should not avoid it. We walk into this future together.




Books by Larry D. Haight, PhD



HAIGHT ON ART OF INVESTMENT, casino table games

HAIGHT ON CASINO BACCARAT, the Art of Investment

HAIGHT ON CASINO BLACKJACK, the Art of Investment

HAIGHT ON CASINO CRAPS, the Art of Investment

HAIGHT ON CASINO ROULETTE, the Art of Investment


You are invited to preview these books (both as eBooks and paperbacks) at

amazon.com/author/larryhaight

If the link is not clickable, just copy and past the link into your browser.

You may find an honest online casino that is a legal betting venue for USA bettors on my website: haightoninvestment.com
 
Messages
11
Likes
2
#18
Have to agree with the consensus here. While there are examples of people with more positive mindsets achieving more, I cannot see how this would influence games like roulette.

In some instances, having a positive psychology can make you approach things with a different perspective and see things differently, but a ball spinning on a mechanical wheel, I don't believe it has the power to impact that.

They say work hard, play hard and those who work the hardest reap the most rewards - that's more likely to impact your gambling return. If you have taken the time to work hard at knowing the industry, how the games work, which casinos are the best to play in etc. you're more likely to have better returns. But again, this is not luck. In my opinion, there is no such thing as luck! Just hard work and experience.
 
Messages
39
Likes
0
#19
Have to agree with the consensus here. While there are examples of people with more positive mindsets achieving more, I cannot see how this would influence games like roulette.

In some instances, having a positive psychology can make you approach things with a different perspective and see things differently, but a ball spinning on a mechanical wheel, I don't believe it has the power to impact that.

They say work hard, play hard and those who work the hardest reap the most rewards - that's more likely to impact your gambling return. If you have taken the time to work hard at knowing the industry, how the games work, which casinos are the best to play in etc. you're more likely to have better returns. But again, this is not luck. In my opinion, there is no such thing as luck! Just hard work and experience.

Yours is a comfortable opinion. From an accounting standpoint, "Luck" is a zero sum statistic. One side is as unlucky as the other is lucky. I would never consider (or write about) a betting system that relied upon "being lucky." It would not have an accounting base. I know of no good method of measurement. Wins and losses are sporadic. There is no good reason to think that "luck" as a variable force exists.

There are too many documented studies of "paranormal" events to discount that some people sometimes exhibit knowledge or abilities that are beyond human kin. I don't think "positive psychology" has any effect on a roulette wheel, dice or a horse. I am qualified to make the statement. I hold a B.S. (psychology) and an M.S. (psychology). I think it may be possible that people develop latent abilities. Your expression: "Just hard work and experience." is a case in point. You describe how to improve an ability. Accounting readily accepts that hypothesis. My PhD (business administration) accepts that hypothesis.

We are still stuck with "It takes one white crow to disprove the hypothesis that all crows are black." I have written the four booklets mentioned above and they are now (I think) available on JVZoo and ClickBank. I would make them available for free but because of affiliate costs, $2.95 is as close to free as I can make them. They describe how to develop "Precall" and recognize is (via dowsing) for specific games. They do not "open the skies and let wonders in." They describe how one can develop and test for themselves. I cannot predict that anyone will be successful but I can predict that unless one considers and idea and tests for themselves, they will never know for sure.

As a side note, I doubt the exercises described would have value to either you or myself. It seems that rational thinking inhibits development of latent abilities (if they exist at all). I have no disagreement with the statements that you raised. Your approach is that which I have followed all of my life. "You and I think, we do not believe" or at least not until someone hits us over the head with a two by four.
 

RJR

New Member
Messages
1
Likes
0
#20
Our beliefs and meta-beliefs form our reality, how we perceive the world and us. These beliefs filter and cancel out data in a way that we will not become aware of it. That is true for gambling too. There is too much data for our consciousness to process it. So in reality we gamble according to what we belief about a game. But anyone can learn to how to install the right beliefs in his own mind and get into a mental state which allows to perceive subliminal cues and pattern in order to improve the gambling results.
 
Top