As I've mentioned before - just cited two examples of people who have made considerable money at below 62%.

In fact, my understanding is that pro gamblers never exceed 62% over the long haul. They are lucky to get above 55%, even with all that inside pro info. They make money by making a great many large bets. Talking about companies here, not individual gamblers. There are far more companies doing this than I would have suspected.

Since we don't want to do that many ARV sessions each week, we want a much higher rate of success. Besides it is only when we have higher rate (e.g. 80%) that we can apply ARV to a broad range of questions, not just these sports outcomes, and be reasonably certain of the answers. That's my goal in ARV (one of them).

Jon

Yes, you can download the app free onto an iPhone.

At the SF Expo a few weeks ago Russ Targ said that it's available only for iPhone. He paid quite a bit, he said, to have someone program it for the iPhone, is making it available for free, has no plans to make it available for other platforms.

I tried it a couple of years ago and it showed hits after just a few pushes to say that psi ability was detected. You can keep going and see if you can get a higher rating.

Jon

My most successful sports wagering was done with Dames' straight RV cue for the most prominent feature of the winning team's city.  The success faded about as quickly as initial ARV success fades.

Marty Rosenblatt just posted the latest stats from APP:

"APP's other Groups' Hit rate for 217 two-choice ARV sports predictions over the past 20 months is 62% which has odds versus chance of over 3,000 to 1.  This means a 18% profit per dollar wagered for equal bets at average odds of 10-to-11, which is the case for most of our Over/Under picks."

Some sports pros stay in business (big business) with a success rate of 53-55% by  placing many very large bets. One would do even better at 62%. Not "optimal", but productive. As the APP trials show, ARV doesn't always fade. It may hover around 62-65% - several examples of that now.

Jon

I think that's a brilliant idea, Alex.

Also, the idea could be applied in other ways. For example, to things/people that are numbered. Some viewers might be better at one type of number association than another.

Players in sports have uniform numbers. Each player would represent a specific lottery number. The uniform number and other indicators such as team, home country/state, etc. could be added to the cue.  

There are lots of "top ten" lists - they could be used for the Pick 3 or Pick 4.

Jon

Alex,

Read the summary of Greg K's 13-year ARV experiment - link is on his web site. A peer-reviewed article.

http://www.remote-viewing.com/indexmain.html

Greg K made c. $146K. Binary ARV, self-judging.

In addition, at least one very large-bet sports pro has switched to ARV and is doing better than he was with just high-end inside sports info.

That's two examples I know of - Greg K's work has been very well known and followed for years now.

ARV can indeed be made to work - and to make substantial sums, with existing protocols.

Jon

It's been a successful week for the Applied Precognition Project. The team (9) of viewers and judges successfully predicted that the Saddlecloth of the winning horse (Orb) would be even, rather than odd.

One member, Russ, all by himself using dowsing predicted that Orb would win. Way to go, Russ!

There were also other hits, all of which can be seen at ARV4Fun.
http://arv4fun.com/arv4fun/

Jon

(A post by Marty Rosenblatt...)

The Kentucky Derby is a fun horse race. So it makes sense to use our Wild Card Preview (WCP) protocol to make a prediction...and an exciting prediction it is...for the Saddlecloth Odd or Even Number on the winning horse! Hey, think of the Odd vs. Even as a team competition (^_^)

APP <http://appliedprecog.com/> is pleased to have this free webinar where we will predict the Saddlecloth winner using the WCP 1ARV protocol that has a 73% Hit Rate in the last round of 20 trials (11 Hits, 4 Misses, 5 Passes). This is the same protocol that will be used in our Applied Precognition Workshops with Joe McMoneagle (Dean Radin is the Guest Speaker) <http://appliedprecog.com/Workshops/2013/> in Las Vegas this June 19 - 23.

We have 5 viewers who will be providing the RV transcripts and 4 Analyst/Judges - redundancy is one of the key elements in the WCP protocol*. If you would like to learn about this protocol and/or receive the specific saddlecloth prediction, please join us - email me (marty@...) and I will send you the webinar logon info.

. Webinar begins Saturday, May 4, at 2:00pm PT (5:00pm ET)

. Post time for the Kentucky Derby is approximately 3:24 pm PT (6:24pm
ET).

. During the webinar but before Post time, the independent Analyst/Judges predictions will be compared and a final Group Prediction will be made. You will see all the data and can, or not, wager based on your analysis of the data.

Keep Precoging,

Marty

* There are several examples of ARV protocols with longish-term Hit Rates at the 65% or so level. Why do I believe that WCP can get us to the 80% level?

1. WCP is tuned-in to the subconscious-mind aspects of precognition using two Unitary ARV taskings/coordinates (TRNs) for redundancy - one tasking associated with Odd and one with Even in this saddlecloth case.

2. Fun approach with the viewer receiving the Wild Card (WC) Target before the Outcome, which permits the viewer to make an independent judgment/prediction concerning the Outcome. For example, those impressions, precepts, etc, that viewers often sense and don't write down can be used by the viewer to predict which transcript will be associated with the Wild Card Target.

3. The subconscious "information" concerning the WC Target is being shared as soon as logically possible...after the viewer has done the two precog sessions for the two Targets. {Warning - probably don't read the next 2 sentences since they involves Quantum Mechanics (QM) ...sorry :-) }

The logic for sharing the Target as soon as possible makes good sense especially on a QM level. In QM, this is analogous to putting another measuring device in front of the final "detector" (similar to the final "FeedBack"), which is now done in sophisticated 2-slit QM experiments.

Having said this, I also believe that a key part of success with WCP, or any protocol, will be "just do it" with a positive confident attitude. Attitude along with intention, attention, and expectation are probably more important than the details of any protocol. However, it is also probably true that some protocols will enable some viewers to reach the 80% Hit level easier than other protocols based on the viewer's belief system, etc...the viewer is indeed in charge...the viewer must feel comfortable.

I think he probably felt that offering three ways we could get the information fit the occasion - a group of people new to remote viewing. That was enough to grasp during a one-hour lecture. Plus he stressed his science credentials throughout - didn't want to seem too woo-wooy even at this UltraWooWoo extravaganza, I believe.

It was a buzzing booming confusion at the Expo - the 60's transformed into 21st century New Age products and processes- so I stopped in at the KPFA booth - local progressive radio - for "sanctuary" - asked if I could take a breather there. I asked one of the volunteers what she thought of the Expo - they were one of two politically oriented booths out of about 200 (?). She said, well, she was a body worker so was familiar with all this... no problem. I said I was a remote viewer but still it took me aback.

Lots of claims, nostrums, cures, readings, wild costumes, etc. - but at least directed toward healing, new paradigms, spiritual dimensions. Good to see it all there. A vast undercover stratum of society - never gets covered in the media of our militaristic Corporate-National Security State. And some of it actually works.

Jon K

P.S. Hmm, come to think of it, why didn't I put up an RV table there? There was none. Only Russell Targ's hour and a half was on RV. (Rejoinder: costs several hundred $ for a booth.)

At the recent Expo in San Francisco, Russell Targ referred several times to an 8th century work,  Padmasambhava, "Self Liberation Through Seeing with Naked Awareness" and he cites the author in his latest book,  "The Reality of ESP".

http://www.fodian.net/world/zzgse.html

Russell said it was harder reading than his book. Maybe, but it is very clear at times, and not very long. Actually, I thought it would have more that was akin to remote viewing, based on what Russ Targ had said. Great on "naked awareness" though!

My friend and outstanding remote viewer Don Walker was the first person to recommend reading of "The Yoga Sutras" of Patanjali with RV in mind, particularly in re: the Siddhis:

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/yogasutr.htm

These sutras do seem, to me anyway, to have more relevance to remote viewing.

William Braud has a fascinating piece online titled:  Patanjali Yoga and Siddhis: Their Relevance to Parapsychological Theory and Research (2006).

http://www.infinityfoundation.com/mandala/h_es/h_es_patanjali_yoga_and_siddhis.htm

- Jon K

I wrote this up, posted on Facebook and then came across BK's detailed report. I was surprised to see Russ Targ had used the same object for us to remote view, 7 years later.

Jon

*******************

For those new to the field, here's a brief account of pioneer Russ Targ leading an informal remote viewing by the audience at the New Living Expo in San Francisco today. After an hour recounting the SRI days with Pat Price, Hal Puthoff, Hella Hammid, Joe McMoneagle from 30 years ago, Targ then guided the audience to remote view an object he had placed in a container. He did not show the container, so we wouldn't know the size nor try to look into it with Superman-like x-ray vision.

He said we could get the information about the object in three ways in this instance. First, by reading his mind, telepathy; second, by direct interaction with the object, clairvoyance. Third, by going into the future and accessing the feedback we would be getting in a few minutes. How does it feel in your hand? You'll get to touch it shortly. He suggested taking a few deep breaths, then describing this "object that needed a description". Don't try to name it; just describe it. Draw what comes up on your "mental screen". After letting us record data for a few minutes, he had us take a break, clear our minds, and come back to the object. We wrote more data. He then said to take a second break and come back a third time, which we did.

Targ then revealed the object, which was the iconic casting of Shiva dancing within an ornate circle. He asked how many got "metal"? About two-thirds did. He asked how many got that the object was heavy. Again, two thirds did. He had said that about half of us would get good descriptions, and he estimated that two-thirds did get two of the main features of the object and seemed happy with that. It doesn't appear, from the volunteers who reported their sessions, that anyone drew anything much like the object. I know I didn't, although I too had "metallic", "brass" and "heavy".

Someone asked if there was a professional teacher of remote viewing from whom one could learn. Targ said that there was a fellow in Austin, Texas named Paul Smith but that remote viewing was simple and could be easily learned. He then suggested one could learn from his latest book, which was on sale just behind the curtain.

Someone asked why even bother to remote view? Russ Targ replied that it was useful for such things as finding your keys if you lose them, finding a parking space in San Francisco, winning $120,000 as he had in the silver futures, and most important of all, for finding out who you are.