Results using Marty Rosenblatt's latest 1ARV Protocol

RV Protocol

GO VIEW! @TKR's dojo

Project Home Page

RV webForum (here!)

Email: @Yahoo|@Google

Help make it possible for everyone!

TKR is Funded by:
PJ of Dojo Psi

Simple Session

CS Labs
Ingo Swann
Joe McMoneagle

Baylands Nature Preserve
Pete's Harbor Restaurant
Lucid Dream Example
Radio Listening Post
Test-Bed Trials
Video ABC Put to the Test

P.I.A.

Greg K's ARV Trials

RV Roast (alt)

RV Library

[(gentleflower) alexispoquiz]

Thanks for keeping us updated Jon : )

[Jon K]

Marty Rosenblatt has posted a new issue of his ezine. The 1ARV groups continue apace - there are 8 of them now. The accuracy rate is off slightly at 63% but that is still a very high rate, and is significant statistically - and practically as well. There is now a lively discussion going on in one group - AJ1ARV, which has 3 to 4 viewers and - something new - c. 10 AJers (judges of the sessions). The discussion is about scoring methods and standards and, recently, photosite criteria.

Marty also includes a link to a collection of the pasteups he has done of numerous successful group predictions - including what he calls bleed through. This is when knock-your-socks-off data from one session indicates the other photosite.

http://p-i-a.com/Magazine/Issue36/Connections_36.html

[Jon K]

To get a sense of how impressive the current 1ARV accuracy rate of 63% is for predictions of outcomes, take a look at this study:

http://forum.sbrforum.com/service-plays/1555389-pregame-pros-updated-records-through-02-02-2012-a.html

33 touts (those who sell sports predictions) were tracked by a third party. Over the course of about 26,000 predictions, the touts were accurate 51.5% of the time. 10 came out ahead (money waged and won), 23 were in the red. The top individual accuracy rate was 55.4%.

The 1ARV rate is all the more significant because viewers of varying degrees of training and experience  have been involved. Marty has run it as a very open democratic process with the viewer in charge.

It is true that the 63% rate is based on a limited number of predictions (137). However the number of trials has well surpassed lower limits for statistical significance (around 30 trials) with odds against chance of 567.2 to 1. Until recently the rate was around 68% and Marty and we 1ARVers are looking to move the rate back up to 70%, and higher. Discussions of scale criteria for scoring are going on in a new group AJ1ARV (3 or 4 viewers and 10-12 judges) as well as a discussion on types of targets, towards that end.

Jon

P.S. See also this interesting article about deception among the touts:
http://deadspin.com/5907732/in-the-realm-of-gambling-message-boards-anyone-could-be-the-next-sarah-phillips

Thanks to Tom A of the 1ARV groups for the links.

[(gentleflower) alexispoquiz]

Thanks Jon! This is exactly what I needed! My friend totally blew off the +60% success rate. Telling me that it wasn't all that good. Comments like... it's only slightly better than chance.... in which I could only respond with... wow. As much as I would like to retort back at my friend for being a douche-bag... I have to bite my tongue. He was just being honest.

I personally feel that even 80% is not good enough.

95% That's where we need to be. HAHAHAHA

Obviously this guy <----  hasn't been doing ARV long enough

[Daz]

Look, I applaud anyone playing around with any form of Rv but I ask this - would we accept and be thrilled about a 63-70% accuracy rate for all other uses of RV - I know I'm not. I just don't think its anything more than what rv has always offered.

Daz

[Jon K]

Daz,

Here's a comment by Tom A posted on a FB page, about this. Tom has been very active for a long time in ARV efforts and is the guy who sent me the links. He placed pretty high in a national contest on horse-racing using ARV (see ARV4Fun) and he knows statistics.

"As far as return-on-investment (ROI - net per dollar wagered) goes, the 33 touts averaged -5% (loss), with the best of them realizing +11% (profit). Odds are not currently tracked for 1ARV predictions, but if one assumes "20 cent lines", with average odds of 10-to-11 (0.91 to 1), the formula ROI = (win %) * (avg odds) - (loss %) gives 0.63*0.91-0.37= +20% profit, nearly double the best of them.... maybe we have something here?"

In short, there is a very strong practical application here. Already.

Naturally, we all want better - return to 70%, extend to 80% (- go Alexis!) As I've mentioned, if we can get to c. 80% then we can use ARV for any binary question with some reasonable expectation of success.

There are a good number of people involved in viewing, judging and discussing Marty's revised 1-year-old 1ARV protocol, and ideas to further improve it have been under discussion. It's lively, and productive. Alexis has come up with a new evaluation flow chart after months of work - go LXS! It's been shown that displacement can "be your friend" and there are ideas afoot about how to deepen that effect. It's a very enjoyable multi-team effort. (And remains open to people who are interested in joining. For anyone interested - some taking part have little training or experience; others have a lot.)

Jon

P.S. With regard to accuracy rates and their use in "regular RV", there is debate about it, as you know. Sometimes just one piece of data or cluster of data is what you or the client needs, regardless of the overall success rate of the totality of the data. Certainly the higher percentage of data that is accurate the better, and I know you have achieved high rates and have been quite successful in your client work. In ARV we have a different situation in that even with the current rate of success we have an immediate practical (and major) application, surpassing that of most if not all of those who try to pass themselves off as professionals in the field.

Username:
Password: