Remarks about the forum

[mr jjj]

@Alan >> I put this here, its easier away from all the other roulette stuff. I want to make sure I understand regarding THIS board......its much like WoV(?) No real individual thought is allowed. If it (a roulette method) is not mainstream, the author WILL get attacked, gang-like tactics.

Everyone here kind of pats each other on the back and remarks how swell they are. So if I (or this Rob guy) want to talk methods, SO WHAT? How does that HURT anybody? Does it feel better, inside, to ALL that agree with each other? I might of read two of Robs posts but I admire the guy for posting whats on his mind. If people like myself or Rob are not here, what do you guys do with your free time? (lol) Its kind of like....you *WAIT* for posts like this, you NOW have something extra to do.

Sounds kind of odd, hey? I'll tell you what I do at the other roulette boards. I watch out (best I can) for swear words etc. After that, I read a few of the suggested posted methods. I disagree with probably 85% of them. What would be the POINT of me ATTACKING the author? Maybe I should start? Am I missing something fun?

When I read a method I dont agree with....guess what? .....I dont play it. There are a TON of posts (not here) with claims of this or that, so what, those posts dont hurt me. I still read over at WoV and its still solid comedy. Those guys wait and wait and wait. As soon as something is one degree OFF, they ATTACK, its just strange. Message boards are not d**k swinging contests (lol) I had a good friend tell me months ago, so what if others dont BELIEVE or participate in certain roulette methods, I lose NOTHING.

To get real technical, I actually gain, I dont lose. What do I gain? More free time because of less (or none at all) arguing. I do quite well with roulette for TWO reasons >>

A) Trial & error.

B) I do things that you (you all) are not willing to do. In a goofy way, thats a good thing. I would not want 5 Kens at the same table, at the same casino at the same time. I need guys like ya'll at the casino, it benefits me, strange as that might sound.

Ken

[Alan Mendelson]

I moved your post above to this Forum because it is a more appropriate location for it.

First of all, I think there is a lot of individual thought here. I think the problem you are running into is that your individual thought about roulette is not the individual thought of the others on the Forum.

I am always interested in learning about new systems or methods or ways of playing or strategies, so I welcome your comments. I still want to know why your method of seeing certain numbers that have appeared in the last xx-number of spins on roulette will mean that certain other numbers will appear on future spins? You never really answered my question, but if you did, the response was hidden in the other discussion.

Roulette has never really been discussed as a system or methodology in gambling except in regards to detecting or wheel bias. So again, if you have a method that can detect or predict future results, please spell it out. And I am going to ask that you spell it out exactly and skip what the others might say or criticize you for. Ignore them and put your method on the record here.

Thanks.

[redietz]

I think one thing to consider, mr. jjj, is that individuals are concerned that people reading the forum will quickly and whole hog adopt someone's method and use it. So criticisms aren't necessarily meant to skewer you, but to protect readers who don't actually post or who are new to the forum from doing something that -- from a raw statistical perspective -- is not a good idea. Think of it this way -- if you were a casino manager trying to amp up your place's income, it would help to post a bunch of questionable and money-sucking methods all over the internet. You could just keep trying to get people to lose money faster. So, in that, sense, the criticisms aren't aimed at you, but are aimed at protecting readers.

Now I haven't said anything about roulette because, guess what, I know nothing about roulette. I can't knock your results if those results are legit, just as I can't knock Rob's results, although I can criticize his method (on occasion) because I do know a bit about video poker.

I can tell you, from what I saw at the Wizard's forum, this is far less of an overrated Mensa clusterf**k than that place.

So don't get your knickers in a twist. Keep trucking. I'd add another friendly cliche, but I'm all out.

[regnis]

I am going to disagree with Alan and Red. This is a pretty intelligent group on this forum, and certainly not a group that all agrees with and strokes each other. But triple j came in here all full of himself and with arrogance and attitude that was off putting. Then, he threw around faulty odds and "methods" that are contrary to the math. So no one with any intelligence would accept his method.

I will still ask him to explain why the 3rd number in the street is more likely to hit then any other number. Each number has the same odds on each spin (unless the wheel is biased or the dealer is biased or can be read. If you want us to consider your method, give us an intelligent answer to that question. If not--you get what you deserve.

[Alan Mendelson]

I am not going to defend mr jjj for his strategy because I really don't know what it is and I would also like to know why he thinks "streets" will be "completed"? I have asked him several times and he still hasn't given me an answer that I can recognize as an "answer."

However, I do want to say that it is not uncommon at all for even experienced gamblers to make mistakes about quoting odds and payoffs. In craps there are many experienced players who don't understand what ten-to-one vs ten-for-one means, nor can they figure the payoffs on don't come odds bets (which pay the reverse of true odds).

My point is its easy and common to make mistakes about quoting odds. I think we've all made the same or similar mistakes from time to time. And most importantly, he might not be able to express odds but I certainly hope he can do a better job explaining his method or system or whatever he wants to call it, because I still don't know why past results will determine future results.

[a2a3dseddie]

Alan,

JJJ has said that he has played roulette "professionally" for 15 years and studies the game 25 hours each week. He also has stated that all of his "roulette buddies" are in agreement with him concerning what he believes are the correct odds in roulette. Do you really think he was serious? Is it really possible for someone to still be that ill-informed after almost 20,000 hours of study, practice and research? The guy was obviously trolling / punking / lying / joshing / mocking the people of the board.

Several people here asked him to explain why his method works. You yourself asked him to explain it many times across all of his threads. He never answered. Why? Just like you wrote earlier, sometimes saying nothing at all says it all.

P.S. Although I know you checked IP addresses, it is quite coincidental that JJJ's posts started after Rob stopped, and when JJJ's posts stop, Rob starts up again. Just sayin....

[Alan Mendelson]

His IP address checks out with Milwaukee, Wisc.

[Rob.Singer]

And there you have it again--someone else being touted as me.

Jatki's real name is (or was, if he's still alive since in my last contact with him he was gravely ill) Virgil, and I devised a spoof on arci whereby I gave jatki permission to post as me while we were off in the RV travelling up thru S. Dakota etc. It drove arci nuts, which of course was the purpose, because he's spent his night's awake worrying about various posters who said anything intelligent about RS and my vp approach. It caught arci off guard, because he actually wanted to believe I was using JATKI as an alias! Such fond memories....

[arcimede$]

Nice try, speedo. I made it perfectly clear that jatki was posting your comments under his id. You got caught then just as you have been many other times. You denied it until Alan demonstrated you were using the same ip address. Nice of you to bring up one of your most embarrassing moments and give me chance to mock you again. One can only wonder how stupid you are to think you could get away with this revisionist nonsense.

Not to mention the fact you don't understand what 'spoof" means. Talk about a real doofus.

[Rob.Singer]

I see arci has not yet learned how his lies always come back to haunt him One can only wonder how many challenges he must be going thru that are making him be off his guard. Of course, other factors may be involved. Like someone else's ROYALS!....

[redietz]

I was here for the jatki nonsense. It was not Rob's finest moment. So, yeah, that was a tad revisionist. Good try, though.

[Rob.Singer]

Certainly, arci needs help getting thru his days, and I've had so much fun making them as difficult as possible But I won't spoil your efforts any further. However, the REAL fun around here revolves around the reason everyone comes here: to witness the VP success of RS! So many ways to hurt poor arci.... Please come up with some support for him where he really, really needs it.

[Alan Mendelson]

In the meantime, mr jjj still has not returned. Rob, was your trip to Northern Cal or to Wisconsin? LOL Or did you get one of your friends/relatives there to post for you?

[Rob.Singer]

N. Calif., and even arci can tell--if he wants to--that the jjj guy wastes too much time on a forum to have even a chance of being me. Who's accusing me of this anyway? I don't read much when I'm away from here and then return.

[Alan Mendelson]

No one accused you of being mr jjj. In fact, I was the one who pointed out that mr jjj and you have not used the same IP addresses, meaning there was no "Internet trail" linking the two of you. But... if you happened to have been in Wisconsin for a few days....

[arcimede$]

Rather than being Singer, I have stated jjj was making fun of Singer. Whether he knew it or not, he did a good job of showing everyone how silly the claims of the mathematically challenged can be.