NHL ARVs

tbone

Active Member
I haven't done any sports ARVs in a while so I thought I would give some a try.

LA wins over NYI
Carolina wins over NJ
Tampa wins over Panthers
Anahein wins over Blues

Coyotes win over Nashville - kind of an odd one. One of the targets was an apple and I AOLed an apple (Nashville target) but the session better represented the other target. Maybe a tie?

Dallas wins over Vancouver - feeling pretty drained by this one and got elements of both targets, so I'm not sure I will bet this.
 

tbone

Active Member
lol 1 for 5 so far. Now I remember why I don't do sports ARV. I need to remind myself every now and then. ;D
 

Gene_Smith

Administrator
Staff member
Well look on the bright side Tbone, if you can maintain this and consistantly get it wrong 80% of the time I think you'll quickly find a LOT of people willing to pay you for those picks.

Gene
 

tbone

Active Member
Actually, by the time the final game finished I was 1 for 6, which was over 80%. ;D I suspect something dreadfully wrong with my sports ARV method. I'm guessing in the cue or labelling of the folders. Ah well, it was just a lark for a Saturday afternoon. Back to the currency trading.

Oh,BTW, the one where I got the strong AOL of the apple is the one I got right. Curiouser and curiouser.
 

njbr

New Member
tbone said:
Actually, by the time the final game finished I was 1 for 6, which was over 80%. ;D I suspect something dreadfully wrong with my sports ARV method. I'm guessing in the cue or labelling of the folders. Ah well, it was just a lark for a Saturday afternoon. Back to the currency trading.

Oh,BTW, the one where I got the strong AOL of the apple is the one I got right. Curiouser and curiouser.

I've you're consistent at 1/6 then I don't think your doing anything wrong ... in my initial ARV experience i was consistent at 4/5 prior to wagering ... as soon as i started doing wagers on the outcomes my results flipped to 1/5 ..... so i thought I'd be smart and wager on the opposite of my outcomes (and that didn't work either) ..... isn't ARV fun :)
 

Marv_Darley

New Member
Staff member
In the past week I have placed 3 bets:

1) First was a random UNDER/OVER punt just to clean out the last £1.50 in my account. SUCCESS
2) I then just randomly stuck my £3 on the nose of a greyhound favourite, who won. SUCCESS
3) Then stuck my £6.50 on an carefully calibrated ARV-based prediction...and lost it all. ;D ;D
 

njbr

New Member
Marv said:
In the past week I have placed 3 bets:

1) First was a random UNDER/OVER punt just to clean out the last £1.50 in my account. SUCCESS
2) I then just randomly stuck my £3 on the nose of a greyhound favourite, who won. SUCCESS
3) Then stuck my £6.50 on an carefully calibrated ARV-based prediction...and lost it all. ;D ;D
LOL !
 

Red_Star

New Member
tbone said:
lol 1 for 5 so far. Now I remember why I don't do sports ARV. I need to remind myself every now and then. ;D

Hey keep trying, you will get it eventually! How are you self tasking this stuff? I think it takes a LOT of courage to step up and openly declare your predicted results. Try for point spread next time, maybe you will have better luck? Also if it's a tied/over time/extra inning game the odds are usually X4! You sir talk the talk and walk the walk, that alone takes a lot of guts. I did an similar thing in one of the posts on an NFL game, so yeah I know the bitter taste of failure but it's not going to discourage me from trying and I hope it won't discourage you as well.
 

PJ

Administrator
Staff member
tBone, tell me your protocol for this. Are you working alone? Because you know, the original protocol for ARV very pointedly did NOT let the viewer see the 'photo that was not the target' -- way too much noise effect.

If you like ARV I'll invite you to Risk Intuit later this year (after everything else gets put back together maybe I can finish it). One of the several goals for it was to make it so that even outside 'teams' (the larger the project/team/tasks, the more major the time/organization savings of using the software), that maybe 3 people could work interactively and each have their 'own' Projects to choose a 1 in 3 role for (PM, viewer, or judge) and do the other roles in the other 2 projects.

ARV targets, also, are not like regular RV targets (well not ideally). According to McMoneagle they are by far best when they are a totally specific focus, no extranneous stuff, preferably close up, preferably dynamic and/or with a super clear shape/pattern. I think this helps them be distinct from one another and might reduce viewer noise as well a bit. Over at Greg K's remote-viewing.com site, on this page: http://www.remote-viewing.com/slideshow/index4.html and I think some others, there are examples of session successes he had and you can kind of get an idea of what -- for HIM as a viewer -- "came through most clearly."

You can see in the dojo that some viewers do quite well with certain elements, genres, etc. and not so well with others. Viewers are individual, so it also might help to consider not just factors like the entropy and feedback of the target but in your regular viewing, what kind of things have come through best for you -- especially repeatedly.

Just a thought! Tell us how you're going about this?

PS Which is working fabulously well as reverse psi, although that's not what you want, I realize --

PPS Marv your post made me snort! Maybe flipping a coin . . .

PPPS njbr: so there is just no hope? ;D ;D
 

tbone

Active Member
It might be interesting to try Risk Intuit. I work alone. I rarely do sports wagering anymore for several reasons. First off, I suspect with ties it is no longer a binary choice. Next the only way I have to bet is through our sports betting lottery which requires you to bet on at least 3 different games per ticket. That means at least 3 views per ticket. I prefer to view as close to the bet as possible (timewise)so I find it draining to do that much. I find Forex is a much better betting system. I can do my view and place a bet within about 20 minutes right from home. If I do it in the morning it usually plays out in less than an hour.

I have about 70 sets of pictures and I use a random number generator to select which ones I will use. I usually do one ARV per day five days a week, so that gives me about 3 months worth of target.

As to the viewer not seeing the wrong photo because of noise, I wonder if the medicine isn't worse than the cure. Sometimes there are elements that I run into that I wouldn't always put down on paper, but I will recognize them when I judge the pictures. Sometimes I will get a brief AOL type of flash and if that AOL is one of the targets it is usually the correct one. That actually happened this morning. It would be very difficult to convey that to a judge, especially since I try to keep my sessions under 5 minutes. I really don't find too much noise, but since I have never done it any other way how can I compare? :)
 

AlexDiC

New Member
We picked the nhl kings to win lasting night and they did. I'll post the work Monday when I return to my office.
 

AlexDiC

New Member
Roger That. You truly are a Leaf fan.... and very helpful insight.

But what if the Maple Leafs don't win every single game they play (which, sorry to say they don't) OR you are wagering the LA Kings.... and you would want to know which games they win and which they don't.

That is why we remote view the game results in advance.

I can't believe I'm writing this... oboy...
 

AlexDiC

New Member
The "open wire" supports of the awning at the entrance (you have to look closely) was acquired to make the identification of the LA Kings to win at PNC Arena Friday Night. Turns out of the 5 teams on our card, only 2 won and we RVed one to the winners.. Ha...

Perhaps what might not be clear is we are doing these sessions and have a very defined and limited group of arena that we are attempting to match up our work to. As example: The remaining card was: BB&T Center, MTS Centre, Busch Stadium and Scotiabank Saddledome. Comparing those arenas... only the PNC Arena was a fit for our RV sessions.. therefor the pick.
 

Attachments

katzenhai2

Ambassador
I'm not sure it was mentioned earlier but where do you see the difference in your method and the following cue:

"Next <Team A> vs. <Team B> NFL game / winning team's home town / most recognizable feature"

..beside the fact that here is a feature of the teams home town viewed.
 

AlexDiC

New Member
fundamental... we do not use the "way too closely associated" team A versus Team B approach. We also target the facility where the win occurs, which is one building versus an entire home town..

So when I receive data we look at only 5 (hopefully) distinctly different building architectures to identify the target. Look at the postings... once you relieve I am only matching the data to 5 potential targets versus all of the buildings in the entire City of Baltimore (for example) it becomes a simple task. As example: If we have 4 open stadiums and one dome on the card. and viewers are all sketching domed stadiums..

it's pretty dam simply to conclude the optimal winning team is the one we picked playing in the dome...... right? Really basic stuff.

I trust that helps.. Alex
 

AlexDiC

New Member
We acquired the Maple Leafs to win last night at Air Canada Centre... I know, I know, "Tbone" you didn't need my RV to tell you that.
 
Top