I am constantly pushing to try and come up with methods that can outdo the ones I have. I think I may have found two that are very strong. Both work within the CODE 4 matrix. Neither are to be treated as HIT AND RUN. The one I present tonight does require a three step progression. But from what I have seen so far I think its well justified. Welcome to TRILOGY.
THE RULES...
1, You record spins like you would for CODE 4 in a four wide matrix. Example below.
1,C,3,A
2, You now start recording spins under your starting line as you would for a CODE 4 matrix until you have two non matches like the example below.
1,C,3,A
1,B,3,B
2,*-----------This is your trigger for bet 1.
3, Using the classic three step progression 1,1,---3,3,---9,9, we now take our first attempt to complete a trilogy of non matches.
4, You usually win on the first attempt. But if you don't you continue tracking spins until you have your next qualifier and then bet step two of the progression.
5, In 150 recorded fresh games 20 played for real. There has always been at least one trilogy of non matches inside that 20 spin frame. And the 26 unit progression hasn't lost yet. Wading though about 400 CODE 4 games I found two losses.
I believe that this is stronger than trying to outlive a straight line. Because of how percentage works within that 20 spin frame. A winning streak of 3 plus is always coming but you just don't know where. And often it bleeds onto two lines. That's why this works.
As always questions are welcome.
RESULTS UPDATE FOR 31/05/2012
TOTAL GAMES TESTED/PLAYED 150
TOTAL GAMES WON 150
TOTAL GAMES LOST ZERO
STRIKERATE 100%
BALANCE 20 UNITS PLUS.
BREAKDOWN OF WINS.
STEP 1 WINS=78
STEP 2 WINS=46
STEP 3 WINS=26-----LOSSES ZERO.
Thanks for your work and especially for having so much imagination Mr. Johnlegend.
I do not understand English very well, so much we appreciate you ilustrate us with a larger example. :)
Quote from: jarabo002 on May 31, 05:23 PM 2012
Thanks for your work and especially for having so much imagination Mr. Johnlegend.
I do not understand English very well, so much we appreciate you ilustrate us with a larger example. :)
Hello and thanks
Below is a complete 20 spin game of TRILOGY
1,C,3,B
3,A,2,A----WON BET ONE DOZEN 2
3,B,3,A
2,B,3,Z
3,B,3,B
3,A,2,C----GAME COMPLETE we record the entire 20 spins for records even if we win/lose earlier in the frame. As you can see there were eventualy two possible wins in that one twenty spin frame. We only chase one win a frame.
Hi JohnLegend,
Thank you for this latest and new approach. Those results are superb!
Also thanks for example 20 spin game of TRILOGY which makes it quite clear.
After game complete (20 spins) do you begin a new frame straight away or does it not matter?
A.
Perhaps 3Peat from the Jordan era is a better title :)
Many thanks again JohnLegend.
I hope that players which feel that this method is not effective only comment about this a couple of times and leave it be.
JL, is it not important to play in the CODE 4 format of two back to back games and virtually playing 2 more lines/codes, ? With this I mean your tested games were of CODE 4 hit and run games of this format.
Quote from: atlantis on May 31, 05:49 PM 2012
Hi JohnLegend,
Thank you for this latest and new approach. Those results are superb!
Also thanks for example 20 spin game of TRILOGY which makes it quite clear.
After game complete (20 spins) do you begin a new frame straight away or does it not matter?
A.
Hello Atlantis you had a part in this method as did AMK. Its been staring me in the face for ages. You play on and on if you like. Me personally I will play my classic 20 a day. But from what Ive seen this is a winner longterm. As always time will give me the number for strikerate.
Quote from: amk on May 31, 05:52 PM 2012
Perhaps 3Peat from the Jordan era is a better title :)
Many thanks again JohnLegend.
I hope that players which feel that this method is not effective only comment about this a couple of times and leave it be.
JL, is it not important to play in the CODE 4 format of two back to back games and virtually playing 2 more lines/codes, ? With this I mean your tested games were of CODE 4 hit and run games of this format.
Hi AMK 3PEAT LOL I think TRILOGY has a more classic feel about it. You play unitl you fall asleep if you like AMK. Ive had my fill of the likes of Bayes saying only hit and run can work for JL he is lucky or a liar. So any method I bring here from now on wont need hit and run. It will be able to generate profit anytime. This is the first. Ive played 20 games on the trot today and it was never tested. All won in two attempts. Ive waded through over 400 code 4 results and found two losses. Both had zeros interuppting the flow. That 26 units is going to be at least doubled longterm with this AMK..
I dont want any excuses from the usual crowd.
Hi JL,
Here is my first attempt:
2b1c
3c2a - won at step 1 - doz 2
2b3z
1a1b
2z3c
In the above 20 spins there appears to be only one qualified win - A vertical match followed by 2 non-matches (trigger) did not occur after the win for the rest of the frame. Is that right? Thanks.
A.
Quote from: atlantis on May 31, 06:11 PM 2012
Hi JL,
Here is my first attempt:
2b1c
3c2a - won at step 1 - doz 2
2b3z----------------------------------Dozen 3 another potential win
1a1b----------------------------------Dozen 1 another potential win
2z3c
In the above 20 spins there appears to be only one qualified win - A vertical match followed by 2 non-matches (trigger) did not occur after the win for the rest of the frame. Is that right? Thanks.
A.
Right under the line you indicated a win Atlantis there was another potential win DOZEN 3 where I've indicated. And another with DOZEN 1 in the line below that. But you are only after ONE win per frame from left to right no vertical in this one Atlantis. Its a constant I've seen for ages. Only now I've realized its so natural to random and Mr percentage. We don't know where but the vast majority of the time that Trilogy is coming and our BR will grow as a result.
VERY NICE!
I like the randomization quality of the bet, not to mention the abandon of H&R strategies.
I am not so sure about the ALL IN progression, have to test it and see the kind of LW registry this bet delivers. Depending on that i would work out a money management and stop-loss to catch the gaussian bell curve. I believe this is cool procedure to any system.
Inevitably reverse mode will be approached =)
Good Job John.
Quote from: albertojonas on May 31, 06:24 PM 2012
VERY NICE!
I like the randomization quality of the bet, not to mention the abandon of H&R strategies.
I am not so sure about the ALL IN progression, have to test it and see the kind of LW registry this bet delivers. Depending on that i would work out a money management and stop-loss to catch the gaussian bell curve. I believe this is cool procedure to any system.
Inevitably reverse mode will be approached =)
Good Job John.
Thankyou Albertojonas I will be off on a mini vacation in the morning people so ask your questions but dont get frustrated if I dont get straight back. All will be anwsered eventually. Many thanks.
Hi John,
Thought I understood it but I'm afraid I don't follow you... How and why did the other bets qualify?
Oh wait a minute... I think I gottit! You are not waiting for a *match* to occur first between qualifiers then?
A.
Quote from: atlantis on May 31, 06:30 PM 2012
Hi John,
Thought I understood it but I'm afraid I don't follow you... How and why did the other bets qualify?
A.
Anytime you have this examples below.
1,B,3,A
2,C*-----------We now bet the next spin won't be DOZEN 3. Or like below
2,A,1,B
2,A,2,C
*---------------We now bet that the next spin won't be DOZEN 2. We are only after one win in any 20 spin frame Atlantis always horizontaly left to right. It just so happenned there was three winners in your example. But we only chase one win. That's because that's the constant I've identified. A high number of 20 spin frames have at least one trilogy in them. Enough to make a profit. Which is what we want ultimately.
Quote from: Johnlegend on May 31, 06:27 PM 2012
Thankyou Albertojonas I will be off on a mini vacation in the morning people so ask your questions but don't get frustrated if I don't get straight back. All will be anwsered eventually. Many thanks.
You know i like to play around with random vs random bets.
I have no questions, just offering to tune this randomization idea to anything near a long term profit system.
I believe every good system should have 2 or 3 mm styles, from the most conservative to the most agressive. Sometimes this involves changing triggers also.
I like the way tendency is incorporated.
I like the way the attack is made after a Loss you wait for next trigger.
I Like the way you establish a window frame for the attack to occur -20 spins. This allows to multi step progressions in case of a loss.
I can see the potential in this. For a very conservative style, one would wait for that to occur in a 20 spin frame, then hope for correction.
Maybe you will crucify me for this, but i believe this is your best creation so far. =)
Have a nice Vacation! :thumbsup:
Cheers
Quote from: albertojonas on May 31, 06:37 PM 2012
You know i like to play around with random vs random bets.
I have no questions, just offering to tune this randomization idea to anything near a long term profit system.
I believe every good system should have 2 or 3 mm styles, from the most conservative to the most agressive. Sometimes this involves changing triggers also.
I like the way tendency is incorporated.
I can see the potential in this.
I like the way the attack is made after a Loss you wait for next trigger.
Maybe you will crucify me for this, but i believe this is your best creation so far. =)
Have a nice Vacation! :thumbsup:
Cheers
I believe you are right Albertojonas, because it feels so natural to the flow of results. We arent asking random to deliver anything in a specific place or timeframe. Just allowing it to do its thing and pick off the winner in one to three attempts.
Quote from: Johnlegend on May 31, 06:36 PM 2012
Anytime you have this examples below.
1,B,3,A
2,C*-----------We now bet the next spin won't be DOZEN 3. Or like below
2,A,1,B
2,A,2,C
*---------------We now bet that the next spin won't be DOZEN 2. We are only after one win in any 20 spin frame Atlantis always horizontaly left to right. It just so happenned there was three winner in your example. But we only chase one win. that's because that's the constant I've identified. A high number of 20 spin frames have at least one trilogy in them. Enough to make a profit. Which is what we want ultimately.
Hi John,
Only one win - that's fine with me.
Just to clear it up - after the first win you continue recording... so do you wait for 2 vertical non matches or a vertical match followed by 2 vertical non matches?
What or how is the TRIGGER applied...?
A.
Quote from: atlantis on May 31, 06:41 PM 2012
Hi John,
Only one win - that's fine with me.
Just to clear it up - after the first win you continue recording... so do you wait for 2 vertical non matches or a vertical match followed by 2 vertical non matches?
A.
i believe you should wait for the 20 spins window to finish, but JL will tell. O0
Quote from: albertojonas on May 31, 06:46 PM 2012
i believe you should wait for the 20 spins window to finish, but JL will tell. O0
Well I do Albertojonas. But since this isnt HIT AND RUN lets see how it stands up to overflow and continous play.
Quote from: Johnlegend on May 31, 06:51 PM 2012
Well I do Albertojonas. But since this isnt HIT AND RUN lets see how it stands up to overflow and continous play.
Hi JL,
OK. When you're just recording the results after a win how do you search for next qualifier within the 20 spin frame? For instance let's say I win or lose on spin 8... How do I identify any other possible bets/winners for the rest of that 20 spin grid? thanks.
A.
Quote from: atlantis on May 31, 06:54 PM 2012
Hi JL,
OK. When you're just recording the results after a win how do you search for next qualifier within the 20 spin frame?
A.
You don't search Atlantis you allow random to deliver it to you like this example
1,C,3,A----First game commences here.
2,B,2,A----Two non matches with dozen 2 and coumns B WIN BET 1 DOZEN 2
1,C,3,B----New game commences here
1,C,2,A----Two non matches with dozen 2 and column A
3,B,2,B----WIN BET 1 DOZEN 3
Like that although up to now I've just tagged 20 spin frames together. No crossflow playing. And as you know my results for CODE 4 are Hit and Run based.
Well done JL!!! As you know I can only play/test at a live casino but REALLY like this approach as well(I am not suprised). As you know I am having great results with the others and look forward to the same here!! Well done!!!!
Quote from: Chauncy47 on May 31, 07:06 PM 2012
Well done JL!!! As you know I can only play/test at a live casino but REALLY like this approach as well(I am not suprised). As you know I am having great results with the others and look forward to the same here!! Well done!!!!
Thanks Chauncy I know you will do well with this its very natural. So natural I couldnt see it until recently. Sometimes we try to be too clever when random and Mr percentage are showing us their behaviour, but we are trying to fight them with some clever method. TRILOGY. Is going with the flow. And thats its strength I think.
Quote from: Johnlegend on May 31, 07:06 PM 2012
You don't search Atlantis you allow random to deliver it to you like this example
1,C,3,A----First game commences here.
2,B,2,A----Two non matches with dozen 2 and coumns B WIN BET 1 DOZEN 2
1,C,3,B----New game commences here
1,C,2,A----Two non matches with dozen 2 and column A
3,B,2,B----WIN BET 1 DOZEN 3
Like that although up to now I've just tagged 20 spin frames together. No crossflow playing. And as you know my results for CODE 4 are Hit and Run based.
Hi JL,
Quote
4, You usually win on the first attempt. But if you don't you continue tracking spins until you have your next qualifier and then bet step two of the progression.
Hi JL,
Ahhh! I see. Just one final thing suppose I LOST the first bet.. Can you give example of that?
Would I start a new game from the next line?
1,C,3,A----First game commences here.
2,B,3,A----Two non matches with dozen 2 and coumns B LOST BET 1 DOZEN 3
1,C,3,B----New game commences here RIGHT??
1,C,2,A----Two non matches with dozen 2 and column A
3,B,2,B----WIN BET 2 (3-3) DOZEN 3
A.
JL you said:
Anytime you have this examples below.
1,B,3,A
2,C*-----------We now bet the next spin won't be DOZEN 3. Or like below
From your example:
1,B,3,A
2,C,3,B THIS IS A LOSS ON DOZEN 3 (we had two qualifying non matches)
1,B,3,C THIS IS A LOSE ON DOZEN 3 AGAIN (we had two qualifying non matches)
1,C,2,B THIS IS A WIN ON COLUMN B (we had two qualifying non matches after dozen 1 repeated)
As some of you know there is a competition going on on the old VLS forum.
I will use the spins provided there to illustrate this method.
This are Game3 spins so far
=
5 games
.............................................
[attachimg=1]
[attachimg=2]
Quote from: atlantis on May 31, 07:13 PM 2012
Hi JL,
Hi JL,
Ahhh! I see. Just one final thing suppose I LOST the first bet.. Can you give example of that?
Would I start a new game from the next line?
1,C,3,A----First game commences here.
2,B,3,A----Two non matches with dozen 2 and coumns B LOST BET 1 DOZEN 3
1,C,3,B----New game commences here RIGHT??
1,C,2,A----Two non matches with dozen 2 and column A
3,B,2,B----WIN BET 2 (3-3) DOZEN 3
A.
Okay Atlantis this one of my real results from my 150.
2,C,2,A----Lead off line
1,B,2,A----Bet 1 DOZEN 2 LOST
1,B,3,A
1,C,2,A----Bet 2 COLUMN A LOST
2,B,3,B----Bet 3 DOZEN 3 WON.
2,A,2,C----20 SPIN FRAME COMPLETE
Upon losing the first bet you simply wait for random to show you the next two non matches. Because a typical breakdon for non matches to matches is usually something like 13/7 Its highly likely a TRILOGY of non matches. will make up that split we just don't know where. But the vast majority of the time we will nail it in a maximum of three shots.
hi, JL
this is right:
2a2c
3c3a < won with 3 dozen
302c
3b1a
2a1a
2b1a
2b20
3c3a < won with 3 dozen
3c1a
1a3b ?
thank you,
biagle
Quote from: biagle on May 31, 07:28 PM 2012
hi, JL
this is right:
2a2c
3c3a < won with 3 dozen
302c
3b1a
2a1a
2b1a
2b20
3c3a < won with 3 dozen
3c1a
1a3b ?
thank you,
biagle
Yes Biagle spot on. Where you have the ? Yes thats a win if you started a new game within the 20 spin frame.
amk wrote:
Quote
1,B,3,A
2,C,3,B THIS IS A LOSS ON DOZEN 3 (we had two qualifying non matches)
1,B,3,C THIS IS A LOSE ON DOZEN 3 AGAIN (we had two qualifying non matches)
1,C,2,B THIS IS A WIN ON COLUMN B (we had two qualifying non matches after dozen 1 repeated)
Hi amk,
After the loss on dozen 3 in line 2 you don't seem to have counted the vertical non-match A-B which follows it towards the next qualifier which would be a bet on cols A and B at position 2 on line 3...
Is that right?
I still don't geddit!? - UNLESS after a win/loss you are then waiting for the NEXT LINE before searching for new qualifier?
A.
Quote from: amk on May 31, 07:20 PM 2012
JL you said:
Anytime you have this examples below.
1,B,3,A
2,C*-----------We now bet the next spin won't be DOZEN 3. Or like below
From your example:
1,B,3,A
2,C,3,B. THIS IS A LOSS ON DOZEN 3 (we had two qualifying non matches)
1.(B),3,C THIS IS A LOSE ON DOZEN 3 AGAIN (we had two qualifying non matches)
1,C,2,B THIS IS A WIN ON COLUMN B (we had two qualifying non matches after dozen 1 repeated)
YES Atlantis is right your next bet was Column B on the third row which you won
Because you can start a game on one row and finish it on the row below. Thats why this is so strong I think its going with randoms natural flow. Not fighting it and hoping for something to happen or not happen in any specific place.
This is Triology applied to the real spins taken from the competition that is happening currently at the other VLS forum.
Results for GAME 1
[attachimg=1]
[attachimg=2]
Quote from: albertojonas on May 31, 07:42 PM 2012
This is Triology applied to the real spins taken from the competition that is happening currently at the other VLS forum.
Results for GAME 1
[attachimg=1]
[attachimg=2]
Nice graphics Albertojonas. Okay Im off to bed gotta be at airport early. Talk when I get back all the best people.
JohnLegend wrote:
Quote
Okay Atlantis this one of my real results from my 150.
2,C,2,A----Lead off line
1,B,2,A----Bet 1 DOZEN 2 LOST
1,B,3,A
1,C,2,A----Bet 2 COLUMN A LOST
2,B,3,B----Bet 3 DOZEN 3 WON.
2,A,2,C----20 SPIN FRAME COMPLETE
Upon losing the first bet you simply wait for random to show you the next two non matches
Thank you. I could now follow that with the understanding that you are using continuous flow across the lines. I am no longer confused.
Wonderful stuff! :)
A.
This is Triology applied to the real spins taken from the competition that is happening currently at the other VLS forum.
Results for GAME 2
[attachimg=1]
[attachimg=2]
after 15 TRILOGY "windows"
13 Wins
6 Losses
it means a profit of +1 unit flat betting
it means -13 units with the suggested progression :sad2:
As i promptly mentioned the mm should be tuned.
Lanky's Divisor would do the trick.
A conservative style would be attack the game after 2 or 3 Losses and it should work just fine, despite the time consumption.
Think of it as one more piece of your arsenal when playing matrix type systems.
Cheers
This is what I don't understand (so maybe JL or someone else can explain it better to me).
What difference does it make to wait for the triggers? Would the results be the same simply by playing FTL? In my opinion, I would think all the triggers do is delay the amount of betting you do, therefore slowing down the wins and loses.
I've noticed that JL talks alot about Percentages, so maybe that's why, but perhaps he could explain it better to me. If so, thanks.
I only bring this up because AJ mentioned Lanky's Divisor Plan which he used to great success on the dozens, and he didn't wait for triggers like this system is suggesting.
MM
Quote from: mattymattz on May 31, 08:21 PM 2012
I only bring this up because AJ mentioned Lanky's Divisor Plan which he used to great success on the dozens, and he didn't wait for triggers like this system is suggesting.
MM
LOL
You are a very nice player too. I am enjoying your company. As for the divisor plan, i do not use it too often =)
but i get your point.
Alberto,
I want to make a suggestion that some might find worth testing. I posted a money management progression called the forced win progression. It is based on the idea of betting on even chances 1 then 2 then 3 then 4 then 5 etc... win or lose until you finally reach a new high, then reset to 1.
I adapted it to double dozens as follows: bet 1-1 then bet 1-1 then bet 2-2 then bet 2-2 then bet 3-3 then bet 3-3 then bet 4-4 then bet 4-4 then bet 5-5 etc... win or lose until you finally reach a new high, then reset to 1-1.
The following is your win loss record for the 3 posts based on the real spins from VLS:
W 1-1 +1 Reset +1
L 1-1 -2
L 1-1 -4
L 2-2 -8
W 2-2 -6
W 3-3 -3
L 3-3 -9
W 4-4 -5
W 4-4 -1
W 5-5 +4 (Note: you could only bet 2-2 to just reach +1) Reset +2 (or +5)
L 1-1 -2
L 1-1 -4
W 2-2 -2
W 2-2 0 (Note: you could bet 3-3 next since you haven't reached + yet) Reset
W 1-1 +1 +3
W 1-1 +1 +4
W 1-1 +1 +5
W 1-1 +1 +6
We never had to bet too much and we didn't get too far in the hole. I know there will be times when our bet sizes do get larger and we do go deeper in the hole, but if the strike rate stays this high, it shouldn't get into trouble too often.
Cheers,
GLC
Quote from: Johnlegend on May 31, 05:05 PM 2012
RESULTS UPDATE FOR 31/05/2012
TOTAL GAMES TESTED/PLAYED 150
TOTAL GAMES WON 150
TOTAL GAMES LOST ZERO
STRIKERATE 100%
BALANCE 20 UNITS PLUS.
BREAKDOWN OF WINS.
STEP 1 WINS=78
STEP 2 WINS=46
STEP 3 WINS=26-----LOSSES ZERO.
I dnt think it has any diff than CODE4, but just an advise , why you are talking about money management and using that dangerous progression ? and the others also didnt notice that betting FOR it would benefice more !
the win at step one almost is 50% of your total GAMES, second and third are not far away between them. bet FOR with a simple progression 1-1-1-2 if you insist with this kind of system. I dnt understand why the others didnt see that!!!??
and by the way it doesnt make any difference to wait 2 or 20 or 1000 spins... trials are independents and MuExcl.
Quote from: GLC on May 31, 09:57 PM 2012
Alberto,
I want to make a suggestion that some might find worth testing. I posted a money management progression called the forced win progression. It is based on the idea of betting on even chances 1 then 2 then 3 then 4 then 5 etc... win or lose until you finally reach a new high, then reset to 1.
I adapted it to double dozens as follows: bet 1-1 then bet 1-1 then bet 2-2 then bet 2-2 then bet 3-3 then bet 3-3 then bet 4-4 then bet 4-4 then bet 5-5 etc... win or lose until you finally reach a new high, then reset to 1-1.
The following is your win loss record for the 3 posts based on the real spins from VLS:
W 1-1 +1 Reset +1
L 1-1 -2
L 1-1 -4
L 2-2 -8
W 2-2 -6
W 3-3 -3
L 3-3 -9
W 4-4 -5
W 4-4 -1
W 5-5 +4 (Note: you could only bet 2-2 to just reach +1) Reset +2 (or +5)
L 1-1 -2
L 1-1 -4
W 2-2 -2
W 2-2 0 (Note: you could bet 3-3 next since you haven't reached + yet) Reset
W 1-1 +1 +3
W 1-1 +1 +4
W 1-1 +1 +5
W 1-1 +1 +6
We never had to bet too much and we didn't get too far in the hole. I know there will be times when our bet sizes do get larger and we do go deeper in the hole, but if the strike rate stays this high, it shouldn't get into trouble too often.
Cheers,
GLC
What can I say?
Mr. GLC, you are a f****ng genious!!! :thumbsup: :love:
Quote from: jarabo002 on May 31, 11:05 PM 2012
What can I say?
Mr. GLC, you are a f****ng genious!!! :thumbsup: :love:
oooh you didn't know he was yet?
I think that this progression makes sense. Of course if we get an excellent strike rate here then we will be ahead no matter what progression we use.
Okay,
I get the system and like it so far, but what about the green goblin :twisted:.
Let say:
1A2B
20*---------(bet doz 1-3 or skip and wait until the zero is gone in the tracking or skip the zero and wait for the next number in place for the zero).
Peauke
Quote from: peauke on Jun 01, 05:05 AM 2012
Okay,
I get the system and like it so far, but what about the green goblin :twisted: .
Let say:
1A2B
20*---------(bet doz 1-3 or skip and wait until the zero is gone in the tracking or skip the zero and wait for the next number in place for the zero).
Peauke
I think that you need 2 wait 4 answer from John. My guess is that if 0 hits we start tracking from d beginning. You need 2 consecutive non-matches not involving 0.
Quote from: GLC on May 31, 09:57 PM 2012
Alberto,
I want to make a suggestion that some might find worth testing. I posted a money management progression called the forced win progression. It is based on the idea of betting on even chances 1 then 2 then 3 then 4 then 5 etc... win or lose until you finally reach a new high, then reset to 1.
I adapted it to double dozens as follows: bet 1-1 then bet 1-1 then bet 2-2 then bet 2-2 then bet 3-3 then bet 3-3 then bet 4-4 then bet 4-4 then bet 5-5 etc... win or lose until you finally reach a new high, then reset to 1-1.
The following is your win loss record for the 3 posts based on the real spins from VLS:
W 1-1 +1 Reset +1
L 1-1 -2
L 1-1 -4
L 2-2 -8
W 2-2 -6
W 3-3 -3
L 3-3 -9
W 4-4 -5
W 4-4 -1
W 5-5 +4 (Note: you could only bet 2-2 to just reach +1) Reset +2 (or +5)
L 1-1 -2
L 1-1 -4
W 2-2 -2
W 2-2 0 (Note: you could bet 3-3 next since you haven't reached + yet) Reset
W 1-1 +1 +3
W 1-1 +1 +4
W 1-1 +1 +5
W 1-1 +1 +6
We never had to bet too much and we didn't get too far in the hole. I know there will be times when our bet sizes do get larger and we do go deeper in the hole, but if the strike rate stays this high, it shouldn't get into trouble too often.
Cheers,
GLC
GLC, it is a great suggestion! It is the betting progression that I use here in the States at the live casino's for all of the Hit & Run methods I play. Because wins come on the first spin so often, it's a great strategy, especially for me with $5 min bets. Just sharing ... Have a good weekend!
Quote from: peauke on Jun 01, 05:05 AM 2012
Okay,
I get the system and like it so far, but what about the green goblin :twisted: .
Let say:
1A2B
20*---------(bet doz 1-3 or skip and wait until the zero is gone in the tracking or skip the zero and wait for the next number in place for the zero).
Peauke
I certainly don't speak for John, but in systems like these I consider the zero a non-event unless it comes during the betting.
Sam
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Jun 01, 03:57 AM 2012
I think that this progression makes sense. Of course if we get an excellent strike rate here then we will be ahead no matter what progression we use.
True enough RBH. No progression is going to be foolproof. Each has it's own unique sequences of losses vs wins that will cause it to tank if the sequence lasts long enough. Remember, Alberto was +1 flat betting. Maybe the strike rate is good enough for flat betting. That would be the safest way to play.
I was considering the gambler's ruin formula and was reminded once again that we can go bust if we don't have enough bankroll even if we have a small advantage instead of a small disadvantage. That's why the casino always wins. They never run out of money so they're still playing when their winning streak finally comes around.
With gambler's ruin in mind, we shouldn't try any system without adequate bankroll to withstand the natural and expected ups and downs in a game like roulette.
The larger the bankroll, the better the chance that we will survive a downturn and come out on top.
I'm liking the idea of setting a stop loss of say 225 units and if we get down 150 units, drop back to where we were when at -75 units and see if we can recover the -75 units. If we do, we can try to recover again for a full recovery. If we don't make it the second time, we will have broken even when back to -150 and can try again.
If we drop back to -150 on the 1st try at recovery, we will have lost our -225 units and will just have to reset and hope to recover starting at 1-1. The grind will begin.
Just some bet progression thoughts. If it's not a winning system, this progression won't make it one.
Remember, if we play slots we start out losing and then hope to hit a jackpot for a good win. With this system we start out winning and hope to not hit a losing progression for quite a while. There's always one waiting for us, unless we have the luck of Rielly.
Cheers,
GLC
I'm really wondering HOW JL can win 150 games without losing and me sitting down to lose my SECOND game. He must have a secret.
hi , can someone explain the system to me ,
1 c 3 a
1 b 3 b
2 x trigger for bet
what bet do i do , also , what is 2 non matches , are they vertical or horizontal , regards J
Quote from: Rolletti on Jun 02, 01:41 AM 2012
I'm really wondering HOW JL can win 150 games without losing and me sitting down to lose my SECOND game. He must have a secret.
Thats roulette my friend. You might go now 300/0. ;D
Record spins like you would for CODE 4 in a four wide matrix. Example below.
1,C,3,A
You start recording spins under the starting line as you would for a CODE 4 matrix until you have two consecutive non matches to the line directly above like the example below.
1,C,3,A First reference pattern
1,B,3,B
2, This is your trigger for bet 1.
Classic three step progression 1,1,---3,3,---9,9. The bet is to complete a trilogy of non matches.
If one step is lost, continue tracking spins until the next qualifier, again two consecutive non matches to the line directly above, and then bet the next step of the progression.
There should always been at least one trilogy of non matches inside a 20 spin frame.
I believe that this is stronger than trying to outlive a straight line because of how percentage works within that 20 spin frame.
1,C,3,B
3,A,2,A----WON BET ONE DOZEN 2
3,B,3,A
2,B,3,0
3,B,3,B
3,A,2,C----GAME COMPLETE Record the entire 20 spins for records even if win/lose earlier in the frame. There were eventually two possible wins in that one spin frame. Only chase one win a frame.
Cheers , Will give it a go
Quote from: Rolletti on Jun 02, 01:41 AM 2012
I'm really wondering HOW JL can win 150 games without losing and me sitting down to lose my SECOND game. He must have a secret.
Hi Rolleti the only thing I do differently that say Albertjonas's testing with blocked back to back sets of 20 spins didn't. Is if I play three consectutive games which is my maximum a test or session I'm using the last row of the previous game as my starting line on the new game.
I've seen two losses on my CODE 4 results over 400 games but they are singular Hit and Run style. But overall I believe 50/1 minumum should be achieveable longterm. That said I could never sit there and play 20 games in a row. Although I did on Friday for testing purposes. So even though I'm not pushing this as Hit and Run. It may yield a better result played in smaller batches.
Remember eventually random can break any pattern of realistic betting cycles. This is no different. This we know or should. But overall profit should be obtainable. And I really like GLCs money management idea. I have a few of my own I will elaborate on when I get back.
the 26 unit idea was just to get the ball rolling.
Actually looking over Albertojonas test results from VLS he has made an error or misunderstood the testing parameters. Look below. At the section he thougt he found three consectuve losses in. There is always a lead off line that isnt part of the 20 spins as you have to always have a line above to oppose..
1,A,1,B----LEAD OFF LINE FROM PREVIOUS GAME
1,C,3,A----Column A is a winner.
2,B,3,A----Eventual winning streak of five non-matches.
3,C,3,C
3,A,1,C
2,A,1,C
Also the eventual total tally of non matches is the worst split ive yet found 11/9. Two extremes my testing have thrown up are. 11/9 to 18/2 Interesting?? I think so. And thats the reason for those who are asking why not bet for instead of against. WE DONT. You might have to wait 10/11/12/13/14 spins for a match. I have recorded 9 games of 16/4 to 18/2 in splits.
Thanks JL.
Any rules how to treat ZERO?
Quote from: Rolletti on Jun 02, 05:15 AM 2012
Thanks JL.
Any rules how to treat ZERO?
Yes void it. And wait for a fresh two non matches. Interestingly enough the two losing games ive found from CODE 4 both had zeros in the mix. And poor splits of 11/9 and 12/8.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jun 02, 04:59 AM 2012
Actually looking over Albertojonas test results from VLS he has made an error or misunderstood the testing parameters. Look below. At the section he thougt he found three consectuve losses in. There is always a lead off line that isnt part of the 20 spins as you have to always have a line above to oppose..
1,A,1,B----LEAD OFF LINE FROM PREVIOUS GAME
1,C,3,A----Column A is a winner.
2,B,3,A----Eventual winning streak of five non-matches.
3,C,3,C
3,A,1,C
2,A,1,C
Also the eventual total tally of non matches is the worst split I've yet found 11/9. Two extremes my testing have thrown up are. 11/9 to 18/2 Interesting?? I think so. And that's the reason for those who are asking why not bet for instead of against. WE don't. You might have to wait 10/11/12/13/14 spins for a match. I have recorded 9 games of 16/4 to 18/2 in splits.
I will re do the sessions as per your recommendation, JL :thumbsup:
@GLC
As you know i am a big fan of your work and i like this progression to be tested also, as it seems very effective for the LW registry this bet gives. Provided we have the bankroll.
link:://rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=7859.msg71559#msg71559 (link:://rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=7859.msg71559#msg71559)
Great stuff!
He must have a secret.
He does, indeed!
TwoCat
ok hows everyone doing testing this? at the moment iv,e doubled my bankroll ...I'm using this system plus using warriors hybrid system...as well as using warriors system using these rules also..altogether 3 systems on the go ..slow but very easy ...if i lose the 1st bet on 1 system i simply double the bet not triple on all systems ...same if i lose 2 or 3 in a row just going for a double win...I've posted a link on here to that kind of progression and at moment is working fantastic....
stake spin result running balance
2 loss - 2
4 loss -6
8 loss -14
16 loss -30
32 loss -62
64 loss -126
128 win -62
128 win +2
Quote from: 6th-sense on Jun 02, 10:21 AM 2012
ok hows everyone doing testing this? at the moment iv,e doubled my bankroll ...I'm using this system plus using warriors hybrid system...as well as using warriors system using these rules also..altogether 3 systems on the go ..slow but very easy ...if i lose the 1st bet on 1 system i simply double the bet not triple on all systems ...same if i lose 2 or 3 in a row just going for a double win...I've posted a link on here to that kind of progression and at moment is working fantastic....
stake spin result running balance
2 loss - 2
4 loss -6
8 loss -14
16 loss -30
32 loss -62
64 loss -126
128 win -62
128 win +2
Are you serious?
:-X
Absolutley using all three systems is working like a charm... Remember i,n going for a double win anywhere along the line ,, really easy at moment..would also like to add that using the selection of this bet combined with warriors hybrid system flat betting is ahead on my stats at the moment though i,m using the progression i posted at moment... Try it with all three bets then see what you think :thumbsup:
As per request i attach the grid i used for trilogy!
Cheers
Testing with 'thepilot's' results from the code4 thread and using GLC suggested progression:
B3A3
B1A2
A1B1 - lost (1-1) -2
C2C2 - w+1 (1-1) ; w+2 (2-2) +1
C1B1 - w+1 (1-1) +2
C3B2
B3B3
B1C2 - w+1 (1-1) +3
A1A3
C1C3 - w+1 (1-1) +4
A3A3
C1B3 - w+1 (1-1) +5
B2A2 - w+1 (1-1) +6
B3C2 - lost (1-1) +4
B1B1 - w+1 (1-1) +5
A1C2
B2A2 - w+1 (1-1) +6
C2B3
B3C1 - w+1 (1-1) +7
A3A3 - lost (1-1) +6
A3A2
A1C1 - w+1 (1-1) +7
B2A3 - w+1 (1-1) +8
C1C1 - w+1 (1-1) +9
A2A1 - w+1 (1-1) ; lost (1-1) +8
A1C1
A2A1 - lost (1-1) +6
C2B3
B1C2 - w+2 (2-2) ; w+2 (2-2) +10
B2B3 - w+1 (1-1) +11
C3A2
A2B1 - w+1 (1-1) +12
B1B1 - w+1 (1-1) +13
B3C1 - lost (1-1) +11
C1C2 - lost (1-1) +9
A3B3
C1A1 - w+2 (2-2) +11
C3B2 - w+2 (2-2) +13
B2B2 - lost (1-1) +11
B1C3 - w+1 (1-1) +12
A1A1
C3B3 - w+2 (2-2) +14
C1B1
A1C3 - lost (1-1) +12
A2B3 - lost (1-1) +10
A1A1
B1A3
B1A2
C2A3 - w+2 (2-2) +12
A1C1 - w+2 (2-2) +14
+14 (+8 if using JL's stop at a win each frame)
A.
Hi,
Thanks for this great system JL :thumbsup:
I tried it betting continually - no lead off etc.
Here are the results: WLWWLWWLWWWWWWWWWWLWLLLWW. Two of the L's were zeros. Just thought i would try it this way for fun but for real money RNG.
Will now test it the JL'S way but with GLC suggested progression.
Cheers.
About 150.000 spins real wheel B&M Casino.
Tested about 5000 games continouse play shows positive result.
Same spins but played as per JL rule: Only ONE win within 20 spins frame.
@Rolletti
Would you be able to send me a file of the data that makes the charts you've just posted here?
The way they move, it appears to me that they could benefit from some kind of moving average.
I'd like to run a little experiment in Excel.
TIA
~Still
Here the spins.
Quote from: Shogun on Jun 03, 08:23 AM 2012
Hi,
Thanks for this great system JL :thumbsup:
I tried it betting continually - no lead off etc.
Here are the results: WLWWLWWLWWWWWWWWWWLWLLLWW. Two of the L's were zeros. Just thought i would try it this way for fun but for real money RNG.
Will now test it the JL'S way but with GLC suggested progression.
Cheers.
Thankyou Shogun,
The thing I suggest for all is to STAY WITH THIS. Over a long period of games. Whether you are testing for fun or decide to play for real. that's when you will realize its strength. Another way to stake it would be as follows
1,1----2,2,----4,4,=14 units risk
A one unit profit on the first trigger. Break even on the second trigger and take a 2 unit loss on the third trigger. Or a 14 unit loss if we lose the whole game. The idea is that most wins come on the first two triggers. And recovery will be easier than 26 units.
I'm trying to gauge the longest wait between first trigger wins. I believe doing so will allow me to perfect staking for this method.
Quote from: mattymattz on May 31, 08:21 PM 2012
This is what I don't understand (so maybe JL or someone else can explain it better to me).
What difference does it make to wait for the triggers? Would the results be the same simply by playing FTL? In my opinion, I would think all the triggers do is delay the amount of betting you do, therefore slowing down the wins and loses.
I've noticed that JL talks a lot about Percentages, so maybe that's why, but perhaps he could explain it better to me. If so, thanks.
I only bring this up because AJ mentioned Lanky's Divisor Plan which he used to great success on the dozens, and he didn't wait for triggers like this system is suggesting.
MM
Hey JL,
I posted the above a while back and never got an answer. Maybe you missed it. Could you have a read through it and hopefully answer?
Thanks,
MM
Quote from: mattymattz on Jun 04, 11:57 AM 2012
Hey JL,
I posted the above a while back and never got an answer. Maybe you missed it. Could you have a read through it and hopefully answer?
Thanks,
MM
In Trilogy the triggers are necessary to signal a bet Mattymattz.
Maybe you cannot understand their value in Trilogy. Let me see if you can understand their value in my upcoming method CODE 20.
Percentage betting, is identifying a very common breakdown within set parameters. Then forging a method to exploit it. Example below
1,A,2,C----lead off line
1,A,3,B----Two matching triggers signal start of up to 18 bet game.
2,B,3,C
2,B,1,A
1,C,2,A
1,B,1,C----Eventual 20 spin frame split of 13/7
Now in several hundred tests I've had splits anything from 11/9 to 18/2. 13/7 being a common split. From these findings within that set frame. I can see a way to turn an overall profit even to level stakes.
For instance that game above, if all 20 spins had been played without the two triggers the result would have been as follows.
7X2=14----13X1=13----BALANCE -1 UNIT
Now the result with those two triggers
5X2=10----13X1=13----BALANCE +3 UNITS
Your sacrifice in TIME in waiting for those two triggers is rewarded with a 3 unit profit over the remaining 18 spins to level stakes. That is the value of triggers in CODE 20. Add to that two staking tiers. So you play at one level and drop to a lower level upon a win. And you have another winning method. That will secure an overall profit to level stakes. I've long believed in percentage betting. And AMKs alternating Dozens and Columns. Give very positive consistent breakdowns just asking to be exploited.
The full method rules will be posted tomorrow.
i,m surprised no one cottoned onto this ages ago jl....i think one game should be played at even stakes...if down ..next game of 20 at 2 units ...etc very hard to lose,,,,also this could easily be applied to warriors hybrid system which gives you 2 betting opportunities...using his system and this one at the same time..
warriors system seems to be left on the back shelf but this is basically the same with a time frame thrown in...
its probably the best at the moment of all matrix methods..
:thumbsup:
Quote from: 6th-sense on Jun 05, 06:18 AM 2012
I'm surprised no one cottoned onto this ages ago
They have. There's a system called "project 202" which has been around for years, I think it may even be on the forum somewhere. The author makes grandiose claims (don't they all?), but the system fails to live up to them. Steve used to have a free system on his site which involved betting 1 unit for 100 spins on an EC and then if you were down a certain % you would increase the bet to 2 units until you were in profit. It seems like a sensible idea, but it's not as simple as you might think to make it effective because quite often the next 100 spins won't give you enough to make back your losses, even with the increased stake, and because you're flat betting most of the time, you're not getting much of a ratchet effect.
yep bayes i have read that..but rules are applying on this system and a different layout reading the results...unlike the last system jl rushed into this one does have some merit...if you have any old data just look into them and test also with divide and conquer..
best of all do it with warriors system u have nothing to lose except a bit of time studying :o
Quote from: 6th-sense on Jun 05, 06:18 AM 2012
I'm surprised no one cottoned onto this ages ago jl....i think one game should be played at even stakes...if down ..next game of 20 at 2 units ...etc very hard to lose,,,,also this could easily be applied to warriors hybrid system which gives you 2 betting opportunities...using his system and this one at the same time..
warriors system seems to be left on the back shelf but this is basically the same with a time frame thrown in...
its probably the best at the moment of all matrix methods..
:thumbsup:
Hello 6TH SENSE. No ones really cottoned on because on the face of it. It seems too simple. Remember Einstein and every maths head on the planet says. You ain't going nowhere but down with this game called roulette longterm. So too many minds bring that negative thinking to the game to start with.
Applied to an even chance over 100 spins as Bayes already pointed out this COULDNT WORK. I know that already. I've tested PLENTY. But using a smaller frame. One fifth of the ultimate percentage marker. And using two triggers. And the alternating Dozens and Columns. It becomes a different ball game alltogether. don't get me wrong you will still have losing games. Anytime you hit that 11/9 or worse. But one other mechanism I haven't explained yet is the GAME LOCK.
Which you will implement anytime you are 3 units up inside that frame. The game is OVER. What this means ultimately is. Even frames that would result in a 12/8 split meaning BREAK EVEN. Could be winning games to level stakes. Because quite often you will find yourself riding a 3/4/5/6/7/8/ or more winning streak. That will put you in positive numbers before the conclusion of the frame.
I've now played 40 real games for CODE 20. And over a quarter of them haven't gone beyond the 5th spin. Because I attained my 3 unit profit lock in the first 3 spins. Its a thing of beauty IF you can stay with it. But never has that two letter word had more signifigance than in the game of roulette.
Warriors Hybrid method indeed looks very good. But again we are always trying to get the message across against jaded negative thinkers. And that's always going to be an uphill struggle. Only a few will emerge with the necessary mindset to make it in this game. It will always be that way. ALWAYS...
you are right there jl...and its an unfortunate thing negativity..i don,t mean to push warriors system on here only that rules from this makes warriors system even more effective..
it passses the time playing 3 slow systems at once..look forward to hearing the rest
Quote from: 6th-sense on Jun 05, 08:00 AM 2012
you are right there jl...and its an unfortunate thing negativity..i don't mean to push warriors system on here only that rules from this makes warriors system even more effective..
it passses the time playing 3 slow systems at once..look forward to hearing the rest
Don't worry about time 6th sense. Worry about winning. When I first started winning consistently with roulette. A friend one day asked me how much do you aim to win a day?. When I replied 3 units. He started laughing (Typical response) I responded. 3 units is nothing. But if you can win it everyday. And I mean everyday for 100 days. What do you have?
300 UNITS. And you have generated a decent bankroll from nothing. That played with a good method will overall grow and grow. Until you can increase your unit VALUE.
Now this is a stumbling block for many. I've heard it so many times even on this forum. Theres no patience everyone wants to win loads yesterday. And the opposite will happen. If you aim for 3 units a day to start with you are on the right track. From little acorns grow mighty oaks.
If you can really do the 100 day/session test. You will never look back. And you won't be playing with your original risk. You will be playing with your winnings. And that's a sweet feeling. Okay 6TH SENSE. The full method rules on a fresh thread will hit the forum later. And this is my last method to be presented for the forseeable future. I can't do anymore. Its all here now on this forum. Its up to the individual to put the time in or not.
i already do play with my winnings and yes it is a nice feeling...i was using the progression i posted 1st time round got a bit scary but never lost..so for my heart i,m taking it slower as nothing really to lose but just stopping each session on a plus regardless how early it is...each 10 units is a milestone..but none the less its my 10 units now..thats the way to think..the trick is to learn the bet and climb off the arc of winning before following the trend down into losses.....how? using the very stats in front of you as you are playing seeing the trend.........patience...is the key
Quote from: 6th-sense on Jun 05, 08:25 AM 2012
i already do play with my winnings and yes it is a nice feeling...i was using the progression i posted 1st time round got a bit scary but never lost..so for my heart I'm taking it slower as nothing really to lose but just stopping each session on a plus regardless how early it is...each 10 units is a milestone..but none the less its my 10 units now..that's the way to think..the trick is to learn the bet and climb off the arc of winning before following the trend down into losses.....how? using the very stats in front of you as you are playing seeing the trend.........patience...is the key
ABSOLUTELY 6TH SENSE. You have got the right mind for this game. One of the few.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jun 05, 08:18 AM 2012
don't worry about time 6th sense. Worry about winning. When I first started winning consistently with roulette. A friend one day asked me how much do you aim to win a day. When I replied 3 units. He started laughing (Typical response) I responded. 3 units is nothing. But if you can win it everyday. And I mean everyday for 100 days. What do you have?
300 UNITS. And you have generatted a decent bankroll from nothing. That played with a good method will overall grow and grow. Until you can increase you unit VALUE.
Now this is a stumbling block for many. I've heard it so many times even on this forum. Theres no patience everyone wants to win loads yesterday. And the opposite will happen. If you aim for 3 units a day to start with you are on the right track. From little acorns grow mighty oaks.
If you can really do the 100 day/session test. You will never look back. And you won't be playing with your original risk. You will be playing with your winnings. And that's a sweet feeling. Okay 6TH SENSE. The full method rules on a fresh thread will hit the forum later. And this is my last method to be presented for the foreseeable future. I can do anymore. Its all here now on this forum. Its up to the individual to put the time in or not.
Hi JL... you are spot on with your comments and I would like to add to your post. Patience, discipline and the proper mindset are absolutely KEY! If I may twist your words a bit from above and change them from "Worry about winning" to
"Expect to Win" I started this journey with 200 unit and have grown my BR significantly and have not looked back since the start. You are also right about winning and the element of time. There are some days I walk out of the casino with a loss or just broke even, but those days are far and few between in the big picture. The only thing I have done a bit different is that I have tweaked my own betting strategies to accommodate for the Double Zero's from time to time. As you have said before, this needs to be looked at in weeks and months and that's part of the discipline if you choose to play this way. I don't know about you JL, but I now view winning as the easy part and I focus on my discipline on the rules while engaged in play and my emotions during the game, while also being the best observer I can during my time on the floor looking for the little things to give me an edge in the world of randomness!
Hi JL,
CODE20 looks great! And I agree with you about the "game lock" strategy. Very wise. Even though I think I figured it out from your post I will definately look forward to the full rules of play when you post them - but from what I've seen it's a neat idea. :)
A.
Quote
1,A,2,C----lead off line
1,A,3,B----Two matching triggers signal start of up to 18 bet game.
2,B,3,C
2,B,1,A
1,C,2,A
1,B,1,C----Eventual 20 frame split of 13/7
Hi JL,
Interesting that it's kind of playing TRILOGY at the same time!!
Did you notice if you played a bet after a qualifying sequence of MATCH followed by 2 NON-MATCHES that those particular events happened 3 times and the 3 bets won?
I highlighted these "trilogy-type" bets below:
1,A,2,C----lead off line
1,A,3,B----Two matching triggers signal start of up to 18 bet game.
2,B,3,C won pos1
2,B,1,A
1,C,2,A won pos1
1,B,1,C won pos4 ----Eventual 20 frame split of 13/7
A.
Quote from: Chauncy47 on Jun 05, 08:43 AM 2012
Hi JL... you are spot on with your comments and I would like to add to your post. Patience, discipline and the proper mindset are absolutely KEY! If I may twist your words a bit from above and change them from "Worry about winning" to "Expect to Win" I started this journey with 200 unit and have grown my BR significantly and have not looked back since the start. You are also right about winning and the element of time. There are some days I walk out of the casino with a loss or just broke even, but those days are far and few between in the big picture. The only thing I have done a bit different is that I have tweaked my own betting strategies to accommodate for the Double Zero's from time to time. As you have said before, this needs to be looked at in weeks and months and that's part of the discipline if you choose to play this way. I don't know about you JL, but I now view winning as the easy part and I focus on my discipline on the rules while engaged in play and my emotions during the game, while also being the best observer I can during my time on the floor looking for the little things to give me an edge in the world of randomness!
Hi Chauncy47, you are an inspiration to me even. To hear of someone consistently beating the hardest thing in gambling. A DOUBLE ZERO WHEEL. Is fantastic. And it shows theres no excuses. If you have it inside of you. You are going to beat this game longterm. ABSOLUTELY...
Quote from: atlantis on Jun 05, 09:21 AM 2012
Hi JL,
Interesting that it's kind of playing TRILOGY at the same time!!
Did you notice if you played a bet after a qualifying sequence of MATCH followed by 2 NON-MATCHES that those particular events happened 3 times and the 3 bets won?
I highlighted these "trilogy-type" bets below:
1,A,2,C----lead off line
1,A,3,B----Two matching triggers signal start of up to 18 bet game.
2,B,3,C won pos1
2,B,1,A
1,C,2,A won pos1
1,B,1,C won pos4 ----Eventual 20 frame split of 13/7
A.
Hi Atlantis EXACTLY. They say you should think outside of the box. To come up with the great stuff. In this case its thinking inside the box. I love scrutinizing that 20 spin frame. Game after game. It becomes very readable and the methods create themselves as a result.
TRILOGY and CODE 20. Both came to me in the same session. And its because Mr percentage, randoms keeper, works hard to keep it in balance no matter how all over the place he may go. That profit making methods become possible. Even at level stakes.
I'm only about an hour away from dropping CODE 20 on the forum. Just writing down the key rules...
John,
Are you a motivational speaker in real life? You're not really Tony Robbins are you?
Sam
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jun 05, 12:44 PM 2012
John,
Are you a motivational speaker in real life? You're not really Tony Robbins are you?
Sam
No Sam im a simple guy who knows what is and what isnt possible with this game. I dont and never/have/will bow to math based thinkers like yourself. Because you are completely off course in your assumptions. And too set in your ways to ever go forward.
Just wanted to post an example of the trilogy variation idea which I referred to in an earlier post before I forget it - so just recording here... (hope you don't mind John)
I changed the TRIGGER to>>>
Betting only once after ONE vertical MATCH + 2 vertical NON-MATCHES.
(I would use the GLC suggested prog)
3 A 2 C
1 0 1 B
3 C 2 A
1 B 2 B
2 C 3 A - w @ pos2 +1
3 B 3 C
3 C 2 B - w @ pos4 +2
1 C 3 A
3 A 2 B - w @ pos1 +3
1 C 1 B
3 B 1 C - l @ pos3 +1
3 A 1 C
2 A 2 B
3 C 1 A - w @ pos1 +2
0 A 3 A
2 C 1 C - w @ pos4 +3
1 B 3 A
1 B 2 C
3 C 1 C - w @ pos1 +4
A.
Quote from: atlantis on Jun 05, 02:12 PM 2012
Just wanted to post an example of the trilogy variation idea which I referred to in an earlier post before I forget it - so just recording here... (hope you don't mind John)
I changed the TRIGGER to>>>
Betting only once after ONE vertical MATCH + 2 vertical NON-MATCHES.
(I would use the GLC suggested prog)
3 A 2 C
1 0 1 B
3 C 2 A
1 B 2 B
2 C 3 A - w @ pos2 +1
3 B 3 C
3 C 2 B - w @ pos4 +2
1 C 3 A
3 A 2 B - w @ pos1 +3
1 C 1 B
3 B 1 C - l @ pos3 +1
3 A 1 C
2 A 2 B
3 C 1 A - w @ pos1 +2
0 A 3 A
2 C 1 C - w @ pos4 +3
1 B 3 A
1 B 2 C
3 C 1 C - w @ pos1 +4
A.
Nice work Atlantis. I will side test that as I play the games.
OK John - glad you found it interesting.
A.
Hi John,
I've done several tests today with live numbers using the variation rules and the news isn't so good...
There were 2 strings of 5 and 6 back to back losers resulting in -18 and -24 respectively. Those losing runs could continue... If I'd been playing for real I would have been disappointed at losing so badly.
I do not think random can be beaten this way and I think it more luck than anything else with my earlier few tests that showed small profits. Anyway, the upshot is I now propose to cancel further testing on the variation and stop wasting my time on it. (the variation idea, that is)
Cheers,
A.
PS. Maybe it's better to bet for a MATCH (1 dozen bet) something like with the reverse code 6 idea:
link:://rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=6875.0 (link:://rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=6875.0)
However, even with that and starting after 3 virtual non-matches I've gone over 15 steps without a winning match... That is what can happen and what you are up against!
RESULTS UPDATE FOR TRILOGY FOR 6/06/2012
TOTAL GAMES PLAYED 120
TOTAL GAMES WON 117
TOTAL GAMES LOST 3
STRIKERATE 39/1
BALANCE 51 UNITS PLUS
BREAKDOWN OF WINS
STEP 1 =64
STEP 2 =37
STEP 3 =14----LOSSES 3
The method has suffered three losses now over 120 REAL games played. I still think its very good. The thing to perfect is the staking plan. At present I am still using the 3 step 26 unit risk. And trebling that immediately after a loss for one game. Any suggestions for staking plans are welcome And I will experiment to find the best one.
Hello John!
Maybe pass 1 virtual lost and start play?
Quote from: donik7777 on Jun 06, 09:55 PM 2012
Hello John!
Maybe pass 1 virtual lost and start play?
Good suggestion Donik7777. I am in two schools of thought at the moment. Either targetting just the first step as about 50% of my wins come there. Or as you suggested targetting the second and third and again they collect about 50% of the wins.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jun 06, 04:07 PM 2012
RESULTS UPDATE FOR TRILOGY FOR 6/06/2012
TOTAL GAMES PLAYED 120
TOTAL GAMES WON 117
TOTAL GAMES LOST 3
STRIKERATE 39/1
BALANCE 51 UNITS PLUS
BREAKDOWN OF WINS
STEP 1 =64
STEP 2 =37
STEP 3 =14----LOSSES 3
The method has suffered three losses now over 120 REAL games played. I still think its very good. The thing to perfect is the staking plan. At present I am still using the 3 step 26 unit risk. And trebling that immediately after a loss for one game. Any suggestions for staking plans are welcome And I will experiment to find the best one.
Taking DONIK7777s suggestion to start play after a virtual trigger has really improved the strikerate over the last 80 games played.
RESULTS UPDATE FOR TRILOGY FOR 12/06/2012
TOTAL GAMES PLAYED 200
TOTAL GAMES WON 197
TOTAL GAMES LOST 3
STRIKEARATE APPROX 66/1
BALANCE 131 UNITS PLUS
BREAKDOWN OF WINS AFTER VIRTUAL TRIGGER
STEP 1=58
STEP 2=20
STEP 3=2
The virtual trigger of course increases waiting time for play. But it is worth it to me if the strikerate improves as it has already. Without that virtual trigger. The two wins on step 3 would have been two losses. Very good suggestion DONIK7777. Many thanks.
hi, virtual triger is this:
1a2c
2c(no bet)1(no bet?)a
3a1(bet against a?)
biagle
Quote from: biagle on Jun 12, 04:46 PM 2012
hi, virtual triger is this:
1a2c
2c(no bet)1(no bet?)a
3a1(bet against a?)
biagle
1A2C
2C1C----Virtual Trigger 2C
3A3A----Trigger 1 3A----Win Dozen 3.
Thanks John for job!
I posted new topic about %, if we find break point like this
step 2 step -20,
3 step -2
(usually have to be 3 times less every next steps if 66%).
And we have to go home after 3 units, then we be positive in long term.
Sorry John how you play trilogy nit and run?
Taking DONIK7777s suggestion to start play after a virtual trigger has really improved the strikerate over the last 80 games played.
That's the big problem, Dr.John. Every swingin' dick that comes along gives you a new idea. You are morphing the system to fit the data.
Sam
Hello Cat!
What you do want to say about game?
Maybe you help us?
don
In my opinion, when you post a system you post a hard and fast set of rules. You should have done your homework and have an idea of what your system can and cannot do. When you modify those rules to suit the whim of every "tweak" that comes along, you are retrofitting your system to the data. The next set of data will be different. Then you retrofit again. You will never get anywhere.
Been there; done that!
Sam
Sam few methods are the finished product. If theres room for improvement, I will always make a change, Thats the reason to share,
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jun 13, 12:44 AM 2012
Sam few methods are the finished product. If theres room for improvement, I will always make a change, that's the reason to share,
nice to see you JL modest like this. one should admit the imperfections of their systems.
you will get more help and ideas to improve your play this way.
cheers
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jun 13, 12:44 AM 2012
Sam few methods are the finished product. If theres room for improvement, I will always make a change, that's the reason to share,
That's the way JL....LV and Macao will wait for now,
but we will get there.
Yes Vile first it must become common knowledge this game can be beaten, You have a method that can do it and I have a few, Converting the thinking of more people is the hard work,
Hello John!
How do you play hit and run?
Hello Donik7777 hit and run in its purest form , means playing one game of a method then shutting it down, Come back a bit later or switch wheels, Most say it offers no advantage over continous play, But ive attained results using it that I couldnt when I played long sessions,
John
Not just you--but many--post a system. I try to follow the rules they lay out. The rules change.
Do I start over from spin one? Then I have a whole new system! If I don't start over, then I'm retrofitting the system.
Any person can say as they wish. Double-blind studies will bear me out on this one. When you start a test, you do not bastardize the rules along the way. When the doctors decide on people weighing only 150 pounds or less, they don't toss in a few 200-pounders along the way. In fact, they don't add any!!
Let's be scientific.
To you specifically: You post a system that is the cat's meow and will win going away. Now you say there's always room for improvement. Consider this old Chinese proverb: The man who chases two rabbits catches neither.
Sam
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jun 13, 08:37 AM 2012
Hello Donik7777 hit and run in its purest form , means playing one game of a method then shutting it down, Come back a bit later or switch wheels, Most say it offers no advantage over continous play, But I've attained results using it that I couldnt when I played long sessions,
Donik7777
What hit and run does is try to out run the devil. Can't do it.
H&Rers hope to play their game, make their money and leave before the wheel turns against them. That part I have no problem with as you can bet if the wheel is going your way, it will turn on you. Where I part company is they will never admit that the minute they sit down, the run from hell could start. You simply cannot judge when the numbers are going to go against you. I've explained this logically for years.
No one attacks the logic; they just attack me.
But, hey, try it! There are harder ways to lose!
Sam
Sam im sorry I dont DO everything to suit you, You have to let go of your stiff logical thinking, Because what im going to do over the coming months on Bayes RNG program will throw all known logical thinking out of the window, When you know you can beat this game, you can never take logic as applied to roulette seriously ever again,
John
It's not my stiff, logical thinking. It is the way proper tests are conducted. For anyone to take you seriously, you must use a valid testing method.
On the other forum, such a test is taking place. Bombus is the provided or numbers. He has a hash mark--whatever that is--to later prove he did not cheat.
VLS proposed just such a program as Bayes is writing. Must be nearly three years ago. It was where any person could use it and there could be no cheating. These are the things I believe in.
Over the years, I have offered to meet people in the Dublin on-line casino and prove a system. We can meet at spin x,xxx,xxx and begin there +5 spins. I will win or lose and no one can say I fudged the numbers.
But they will say the person watching was my friend and it's all fake.
VLS and now Bayes have the right idea.
I am so looking forward to this.
Sam
I agreed to do this test to show that roulette was never unbeatable, The mind of most players is simply not prepared for the game, The hunan factor I always talk of is the difference between a winner and a loser, How long you play the game, When to stop, Undstanding the virtual saturation point of your method, A new way of thinking, Not being caught up in old habits and beliefs, That have hindered real progress from filtering down to more players,
John can you give results trilogy without hit-run?
Its getting ridiculous here. So now we have 1 extra trigger n yr strike rate improved dramatically at least 4 80 games which is nothing 4 any testing standards ? ;D I guess u r pretty desperate 2 improve yr system 2 act on any improvement suggestions.
Congrats Donik u made it much better system but still very susceptible.
Its getting ridiculous here.
That's because the rules should say.......do x y and z for N number of spins.
Don't tweak; don't modify; don't even pick your nose---just follow the rules.
Here's an idea: change the rules every time the dog scratches!! Man, that's random!!
Sam
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jun 15, 11:34 AM 2012
Its getting ridiculous here.
That's because the rules should say.......do x y and z for N number of spins.
Don't tweak; don't modify; don't even pick your nose---just follow the rules.
Here's an idea: change the rules every time the dog scratches!! Man, that's random!!
Sam
There are no set rules to winning at roulette Sam that's THE EXACT POINT. You morph and switch however many times its requires to enter profitville. Remember what I told you about your STIFF LOGICAL THINKING. This is the point in hand. Loosen up. Nobody beats this game when they think like you. NOBODY.
Well see how big I have to make the bankroll on Bayes game before some degree of respect is forthcoming even from the likes of you Sam. That's why I've agreed to do this. Because A, I know I CAN. And B, there will be no room left for excuses from the likes of you Sam. A large slice of humble pie awaits many on this forum.
You poor deranged man......
Respect is earned. Not by obfuscation and bloviation.
We shall patiently wait for you to take Mr. Bayes program to the woodshed!
Sam
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jun 15, 02:14 PM 2012
You poor deranged man......
Respect is earned. Not by obfuscation and bloviation.
We shall patiently wait for you to take Mr. Bayes program to the woodshed!
Sam
Yes you do that Sam. Like I said I call the shots here Im on the line. When I get the hard nosed math boys like you showing some respect. And admitting you didnt know it all. I will mellow out. And we will take a look at what you propose. Until that time. The status quo isnt for changing.
And we will take a look at what you propose
You will never take a look at what I propose as it is a fair test and you would run from a fair test like it was a pit bull.
Did this thought ever cross your jaded mind: Sam could win big money with my system and he'd have tell everyone!
No it did not as you know the system will fail.
You're beat, John. Admit it. If you were in the ring, the ref would stop it. Throw in the towel. Know when to quit.
Sam
I'm on the line.
You're not on the line. You're too big a coward to even get close to the line.
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jun 15, 02:37 PM 2012
And we will take a look at what you propose
You will never take a look at what I propose as it is a fair test and you would run from a fair test like it was a pit bull.
Did this thought ever cross your jaded mind: Sam could win big money with my system and he'd have tell everyone!
No it did not as you know the system will fail.
You're beat, John. Admit it. If you were in the ring, the ref would stop it. Throw in the towel. Know when to quit.
Sam
Sam you are getting ahead of yourself. I cannot be beat when I haven't even started yet. When I take a 200 units BR up into the thousands maybe, just maybe even if youll never admit it oppenly to me. You say to yourself. "Darn it that crazy upstart really can do it, darn it"
Hello John!
You should not lose time, proving to someone
Can you give more results for trilogy or hybrid 4 just without hit-run? I have some idea.
Thanks so much.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jun 15, 02:41 PM 2012
When I take a 200 units BR up into the thousands maybe
Dear Mr. John Legend
You don't have to take anything into thousands. It is very hard work. Your BEST so admired FRIEND Martingale will do that for you. You two seems dont go one without other... Just don't ruin good friendship between you two before that match. I know he can be bad when gets angry or turns against you.
Regards
Drazen
Quote from: drazen_cro on Jun 15, 03:00 PM 2012
Dear Mr. John Legend
You don't have to take anything into thousands. It is very hard work. Your BEST so admired FRIEND Martingale will do that for you. You two seems don't go one without other... Just don't ruin good friendship between you two before that match. I know he can be bad when gets angry or turns against you.
Regards
Drazen
Yes Drazen 7 units out of 200 is a helluva risk im shaking in my boots as to what Mr progressions gonna do to me. If I dont get that 12/1 strikerate.
Quote from: donik7777 on Jun 15, 02:55 PM 2012
Hello John!
You should not lose time, proving to someone
Can you give more results for trilogy or hybrid 4 just without hit-run? I have some idea.
Thanks so much.
I can't Donik because I never play more than two at a time for either. I will be able to do that with DOUBLE MATCH. But that comes after the showdown. This time the results will speak for themselves first with that gem. Then it will be revealed. Every great method on this forum is under appreciated seriously under appreciated. This time you will see what a great method can do before you learn how it works.
Its the only chance to wake the jaded up.
DOUBLE MATCH
Oh, boy, another name!!
For some reason John can never "get down to brass tacks" as it goes. He's always impeded by something to keep him from really showing us what he can do.
Anyone but me notice that??
Sam
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jun 15, 03:20 PM 2012
DOUBLE MATCH
Oh, boy, another name!!
For some reason John can never "get down to brass tacks" as it goes. He's always impeded by something to keep him from really showing us what he can do.
Anyone but me notice that??
Sam
You talk of avoiding things Sam. You didn't like being put on the spot yourself did you? When I do it I don't play games. So how about it Sam 1000 that says I won't show.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jun 15, 03:12 PM 2012
If I don't get that 12/1 strikerate.
Ah yes here we are. I was hoping for this, to tell the truth ;)
I am not here to fight or argue monsieur, just to speak humble in how big fallacy or ignorance you are.
mr. john legend do you know that this 12/1 as you expect is very wrong caclucated? Mathematicaly you can get such odds but not with the way you play or bet.
This is BIG slap in face to your friend Marty so i am afraid he will slap you back. And he has bigger palm :sad2:
Regards
Drazen
Quote from: drazen_cro on Jun 15, 04:01 PM 2012
Ah yes here we are. I was hoping for this, to tell the truth ;)
I am not here to fight or argue monsieur, just to speak humble in how big fallacy or ignorance you are.
mr. john legend do you know that this 12/1 as you expect is very wrong caclucated? Mathematicaly you can get such odds but not with the way you play or bet.
This is BIG slap in face to your friend Marty so i am afraid he will slap you back. And he has bigger palm :sad2:
Regards
Drazen
I'm afraid youre wrong Drazen youre giving marty far too much respect. I have 3,800 played games where marty couldnt break 12/1. But your missing the even more crucial point. Say marty broke that 12/1 in half over my next 500 games. I WOULD STILL MAKE A PROFIT. And in case you are not aware. That is the name of the game. Don't worry you are going to see how awesome the PATTERN BREAKER is as it beats Bayes RNG.
So how about it Sam 1000 that says I won't show.
John
Everyone knows you'd show up for 1,000 somethings. You have nothing to lose. Any person who'd take that bet is a fool of the higher order.
What we want is to test your system. There are two of us now!! And it's not my wife or either dog!! LOL
So how about it, John? Some rules please?
TO ANY MATRIX SUPPORTER:
Some rules please! I'm willing to loose 100Euro just to see if your system works. If it does, I'll be the first to laud you properly.
If you have a system that works, why not take me up on it? Makes no sense to me.
TCS
(Yes, I have dogs, too!)
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jun 15, 04:40 PM 2012
So how about it Sam 1000 that says I won't show.
John
Everyone knows you'd show up for 1,000 somethings. You have nothing to lose. Any person who'd take that bet is a fool of the higher order.
What we want is to test your system. There are two of us now!! And it's not my wife or either dog!! LoL
So how about it, John? Some rules please?
TO ANY MATRIX SUPPORTER:
Some rules please! I'm willing to lose 100Euro just to see if your system works. If it does, I'll be the first to laud you properly.
If you have a system that works, why not take me up on it? Makes no sense to me.
TCS
(Yes, I have dogs, too!)
Sam I indeed have a system close to a grail. But you dont get it till I say so. GOT THAT. I am the one who had to put the work in. But I am also the one who is going to show it working and winning. And no-one not you or even my Mrs gets it till I say so. How hard os that for you to take onboard???
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jun 15, 03:15 PM 2012
I can't Donik because I never play more than two at a time for either. I will be able to do that with DOUBLE MATCH. But that comes after the showdown. This time the results will speak for themselves first with that gem. Then it will be revealed. Every great method on this forum is under appreciated seriously under appreciated. This time you will see what a great method can do before you learn how it works.
Its the only chance to wake the jaded up.
JL you just can't stop to amaze me! the names you give to your systems are an art in itself!
I have 3,800 played games where marty couldnt break 12/1.
John, John, John........there you go again.
I quote Jim Jones who led 900+ to suicide in Jonestown. "People will lie to you, Brother."
You offer no evidence. What if you were in court. Could you offer proof? Do you have witnesses?
How do you test so fast, John? Someone comes up with an idea and---BANG---you've tested 8.000 games. You the fastest mother on Earth. The THUNDER could use you in Miami!!
You're like the guy who can do 1,000 push ups when no one is looking.
I decline your bet and concede that for 1,000 somethings you'd show up.
I'd sure like some rules, however.
TCS
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jun 15, 04:40 PM 2012
So how about it Sam 1000 that says I won't show.
John
Everyone knows you'd show up for 1,000 somethings. You have nothing to lose. Any person who'd take that bet is a fool of the higher order.
What we want is to test your system. There are two of us now!! And it's not my wife or either dog!! LoL
So how about it, John? Some rules please?
TO ANY MATRIX SUPPORTER:
Some rules please! I'm willing to lose 100Euro just to see if your system works. If it does, I'll be the first to laud you properly.
If you have a system that works, why not take me up on it? Makes no sense to me.
TCS
(Yes, I have dogs, too!)
Sam! I will take your bet, we can play it live. I stop playing until you say enough winning !
or you can play it and I tell you what to bet.
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jun 15, 04:47 PM 2012
I have 3,800 played games where marty couldnt break 12/1.
John, John, John........there you go again.
I quote Jim Jones who led 900+ to suicide in Jonestown. "People will lie to you, Brother."
You offer no evidence. What if you were in court. Could you offer proof? Do you have witnesses?
How do you test so fast, John? Someone comes up with an idea and---BANG---you've tested 8.000 games. You the fastest mother on Earth. The THUNDER could use you in Miami!!
You're like the guy who can do 1,000 push ups when no one is looking.
I decline your bet and concede that for 1,000 somethings you'd show up.
I'd sure like some rules, however.
TCS
Sam are you on meds??? 8000 games. Where. Divide and Conquer?? Yeah thats over a years worth bub. Wakey wakey.
Sam I indeed have a system close to a grail.
John,
I have a dog that's close to a horse. Four legs, two ears, two eyes, one mouth full of teeth, poops on green grass, eats green grass, runs like the wind--darn near a horse!!! But not a horse!!
Close is not good enough!!
Keep diggin'. I should calculate where you are!! You might pop up in my back yard.
Sam
Sam are you on meds???
Yes, I am and I can name them.
Care for a list?
Does rheumatoid arthritis and asthma count against me?
Sam
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jun 15, 04:50 PM 2012
Sam I indeed have a system close to a grail.
John,
I have a dog that's close to a horse. Four legs, two ears, two eyes, one mouth full of teeth, poops on green grass, eats green grass, runs like the wind--darn near a horse!!! But not a horse!!
Close is not good enough!!
Keep diggin'. I should calculate where you are!! You might pop up in my back yard.
Sam
You just cant leave it alone can you. First I accepted Bayes offer then you sheepishly say GAME ON. Then you try to throw out baits hoping ole SAM will get this here grail before anyone else. By offering some kind of Paypal bribe. Shame on you a man of your years an all.
I have one goal. To let this awesome method speak for itself. Like I keep saying once enough people see this thing in action I wont have to convince anyone of anything ever again. I dont need anyone to fawn over me Sam this is where youve got it all wrong. I just need a few people to TRULY BELIEVE. THIS GAMES CAN BE METHODICALY BEATEN. No luck no math no Einstein babble. No VB. No Voodoo. Just a pure and honest method that has random cornered into submission. Thats where DOUBLE MATCH enters the fray.
JL, Sam, this is getting a bit boring now, Sam we've had the fisty cuffs midweek, JL has now agreed to show us IF he can beat the RNG which will be kindly provided by Bayes, let's just get along for a while, there's too many threads getting over polpulated with the 2 of you.
IF JL loses or fails to do the test, then we can expect either an apology OR he will vanish, although I don't think he is the type of member to vanish after all the posts/activity he has.
IF JL manages to do as it says he can then he can expect OUR applause/apologies as there will be no way he can BS the RNG Bayes is going to provide.
IF however he says Bayes has fixed the RNG to eat him alive and he comes back saying the software was fixed/cheating/not random or whatever he can come up with, well, that will speak for itself.
So please fellas, in the meantime let's relax it a bit, it really is turning the forum into a bickering match, VLS went that way and still is that way, is this how all gambling/roulette forums end up? do we want that?
Here here superman
Quote from: superman on Jun 15, 05:08 PM 2012
JL, Sam, this is getting a bit boring now, Sam we've had the fisty cuffs midweek, JL has now agreed to show us IF he can beat the RNG which will be kindly provided by Bayes, let's just get along for a while, there's too many threads getting over polpulated with the 2 of you.
IF JL loses or fails to do the test, then we can expect either an apology OR he will vanish, although I don't think he is the type of member to vanish after all the posts/activity he has.
IF JL manages to do as it says he can then he can expect OUR applause/apologies as there will be no way he can BS the RNG Bayes is going to provide.
IF however he says Bayes has fixed the RNG to eat him alive and he comes back saying the software was fixed/cheating/not random or whatever he can come up with, well, that will speak for itself.
So please fellas, in the meantime let's relax it a bit, it really is turning the forum into a bickering match, VLS went that way and still is that way, is this how all gambling/roulette forums end up? do we want that?
I've gotta say that's the best thing I've ever read from you Superman. You are right. I won't say Bayes has fixed anything if he hasn't Superman. that's how good two of my methods are. They will actually tell me when somethings not right. With live spns and Playmode RNGS I get like clockwork the breakdowns I expect. On Real money RNG something else alltogether is going on.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jun 15, 04:14 PM 2012
Say marty broke that 12/1 in half over my next 500 games.
Dear mr. John, as you maybe know or don't know, this beautifull game we are discussing about, is mathematical game of randomness with unfair payout to the player (unless you are Advantage-play player)
So Its beautifull characteristics can be observed through mathematics so as its discipline statistics.
As you know if you studied it enough, that everything in the longterm has to show itself and has to balanced in the end.
So it is not problem to create such odds as you say 12/1 and that these odds show in longterm to us.
Main problem is that you don't have them with way you play and bet.
So i realy don't understand what your dear friend Marty has with bothering these odds in this case?
How did on Earth these odds get here? I think odds got drunk and lost here, or you drunk them LoL
Problem is that i can prove that you don't have such odds, but you can't prove who are you and that these results are real.
And if you don't have such odds you just can't have such results as you claim.
So i don't belive you a single word about results, and don't have anything against you or think something bad.
Nor i am expecting this your famous beating RNG, because it is not possible. But on other hand i ll be first from whom you ll get deepest apology and bowe to the ground if you succed, although i won't play like that even then, becasue that can't work like that :thumbsup:
Cheers mister
Drazen
Sup and Buff
OK, guys. You're right. I've even bored myself!!
I am going to say one more thing and then leave it be for a while. Did anyone catch the insult to Bayes? You know......I better copy this.....
Hang on.............
Quote from: drazen_cro on Jun 15, 05:19 PM 2012
Dear mr. John, as you maybe know or don't know, this beautifull game we are discussing about, is mathematical game of randomness with unfair payout to the player (unless you are Advantage-play player)
So Its beautifull characteristics can be observed through mathematics so as its discipline statistics.
As you know if you studied it enough, that everything in the longterm has to show itself and has to balanced in the end.
So it is not problem to create such odds as you say 12/1 and that these odds show in longterm to us.
Main problem is that you don't have them with way you play and bet.
So i realy don't understand what your dear friend Marty has with bothering these odds in this case?
How did on Earth these odds get here? I think odds got drunk and lost here, or you drunk them LoL
Problem is that i can prove that you don't have such odds, but you can't prove who are you and that these results are real.
And if you don't have such odds you just can't have such results as you claim.
So i don't belive you a single word about results, and don't have anything against you or think something bad.
Nor i am expecting this your famous beating RNG, because it is not possible. But on other hand i ll be first from whom you ll get deepest apology and bowe to the ground if you succed, although i won't play like that even then, becasue that can't work like that :thumbsup:
Cheers mister
Drazen
Drazen I don't think I will ever understand how you think. All this talk of this and that. Theres only one thing I look for. PROFIT. How I get it makes no difference to me. Its doing what isnt supposed to be possible. Trust me the RNGs going to be beaten if its fair. I've beaten over 10 different RNGS in play mode. The breakdowns they give are very similar to real live wheels. that's how I know they are fair. When however you play a real RNG. You get ridiculous breakdowns that simply aren't possible with true random. You will die of old age before youd seen them on a real wheel.
And that's because the wheel is reading your play then opposing your play. Whatever it takes to beat you.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jun 15, 05:15 PM 2012
I've gotta say that's the best thing I've ever read from you Superman. You are right. I won't say Bayes has fixed anything if he hasn't Superman. that's how good two of my methods are. They will actually tell me when somethings not right. With live spns and Playmode RNGS I get like clockwork the breakdowns I expect. On Real money RNG something else alltogether is going on.
For any of you with any knowledge of psychology, you will know what that sentence means. Especially the "if he hasn't" phrase.
How do we know Bayes has or hasn't? He possibly will, hence the statement. If John steps up and takes the test and loses, he has already planted the seeds for his excuse right here in this thread. Bayes cheated him. We don't know how, but Bayes did it!
Am I the only frickin' person on this forum who can see any of this???
I'll try to stay away.
Someone sent me a system to test. Complete with rules!!
Sam
FOR THE SAKE OF TRUTH AND HONESTY, PLEASE DO NOT DELETE MY LAST POST!!!!
I screen-shot the post. I will NOT let this go away.
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jun 15, 05:34 PM 2012
For any of you with any knowledge of psychology, you will know what that sentence means. Especially the "if he hasn't" phrase.
How do we know Bayes has or hasn't? He possibly will, hence the statement. If John steps up and takes the test and loses, he has already planted the seeds for his excuse right here in this thread. Bayes cheated him. We don't know how, but Bayes did it!
Am I the only frickin' person on this forum who can see any of this???
I'll try to stay away.
Someone sent me a system to test. Complete with rules!!
Sam
[/quoteSam I will know trust me. And I will then show you how I know. But I want to believe Bayes is being fair about this. And If he is full respect and power to him. I would still find a way to prove I can beat random believe that. I am in this phase of showing instead of posting a method. Theres to many jaded fickle people in this game. Even if you land a holy grail in their laps they wont hit the ground running with it. A Warrior or Chauncy47 only come along once in a very long while.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jun 15, 05:39 PM 2012
I am in this phase of showing instead of posting a method
Last year you said in this phase you should be i quote "conquering casinos all over Europe", with your SO POWERFULL methods.
But as i see you wont be going to travel soon because you have very hard (easy) competition to beat.
It is not something that fitts to man who can and has intention to "conquer" casinos. Go play, earn money and buy yourself a bentley and chateu on south of the France. That suits to your "power".
Regards
Drazen
Quote from: drazen_cro on Jun 15, 05:50 PM 2012
Last year you said in this phase you should be i quote "conquering casinos all over Europe", with your SO POWERFULL methods.
But as i see you won't be going to travel soon because you have very hard (easy) competition to beat.
It is not something that fitts to man who can and has intention to "conquer" casinos. Go play, earn money and buy yourself a bentley and chateu on south of the France. That suits to your "power".
Regards
Drazen
Drazen I have no interest in material things. Only spreading the word that this game is not unbeatable. I will be going to Europe later this year. My personal life didn't allow for it when I wanted. But the first thing I have to do is get minds thinking on what is supposed to be the best forum on the planet for roulette. Am I wrong? Then Once I've done that. I will show Sam how to pay his grand kids through College without even breaking a sweat. Then I'm out of here. Sam will blow my trumpet for me after that. My work on this forum will be done.
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jun 15, 04:50 PM 2012
Sam I indeed have a system close to a grail.
John,
I have a dog that's close to a horse. Four legs, two ears, two eyes, one mouth full of teeth, poops on green grass, eats green grass, runs like the wind--darn near a horse!!! But not a horse!!
That was so fu*in funny....LMAO
Quote from: turnerfeck on Jun 15, 06:03 PM 2012
That was so fu*in funny....LMAO
At the moment its hilarious Turnerfeck. But watch this space. We wait for Bayes. Then the serious stuff begins.
What a hoot! ;D
John, the only foolproof way I can think of to prove that the RNG is legit is to use the system of randomness control like BV uses. Do you understand how it works? Just wondered, 'cos you said you're not a technical guy.
It's not hard to understand, but I get the feeling some people don't, and in fact you've dismissed it yourself in the past.
The last thing I want IF you lose is to be accused of rigging the RNG.
Quote from: Bayes on Jun 15, 06:11 PM 2012
What a hoot! ;D
John, the only foolproof way I can think of to prove that the RNG is legit is to use the system of randomness control like BV uses. Do you understand how it works? Just wondered, 'cos you said you're not a technical guy.
It's not hard to understand, but I get the feeling some people don't, and in fact you've dismissed it yourself in the past.
The last thing I want IF you lose is to be accused of rigging the RNG.
Bayes just get it done asap. Im pretty certain you are a fair guy. As youve said yourself, you really want to see if true random can be beaten. You will see it without a shadow of a doubt. I would prefer the zero stays in there though. I really dont want any excuses from anyone. After I do this test. Then show Sam I am for real Im done with this forum. So you can all bust out the champagne. But at the same time you will know I never lied about what I said.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jun 15, 06:06 PM 2012
At the moment its hilarious Turnerfeck. But watch this space. We wait for Bayes. Then the serious stuff begins.
Sorry John....I wasnt having a go at you....i just thought Sams comedy was good comedy.
Seriously....i enjoy reading your posts. You seem to be very confident in your abilities which is good.
My stance on the world is that I "think" I know I am right. Self medication doesnt work....fact.
You have to listen listen listen. Thats how you got to where you are. You invented nothing. You just listened.
In my view....you seem to have stopped listening. I personally think thats a mistake.
Allways listen to someone elses view before you take your egos view as fact.
Just my view John...take it or leave it :thumbsup:
Actually, I've just realised that even using a hash function won't be foolproof. The randomness control only guarantees that the spins are generated before you place the bet, so although it's guaranteed that I can't generate a spin after you've placed bets, if I know you're using a particular system (say PATTERN BREAKER), then I *could* just generate the spins accordingly. I won't be doing that, but (perish the thought) if you DO lose, and accuse me of rigging the RNG, it'll just be your word against mine.
It's going to take me a while because I'm learning a new programming language from scratch. Not just for this software, I was going to do it anyway, although I need the extra features to make the program work the way I want it to.
What will happen is that when you've played a session, the program will send me the results by email, then it will save a copy of them for you (so you can check against your own record). That should rule out any disputes which might arise.
It should be good to go by the end of June at the latest.
hopefully... ^-^
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jun 15, 06:14 PM 2012
I would prefer the zero stays in there though.
That can be arranged. :)
Full zero or la partage?
This program is a great idea, I think that soon there will be no more self-proclaimed winners, at least not on this forum .. :thumbsup:
Quote from: Bayes on Jun 15, 06:36 PM 2012
Actually, I've just realised that even using a hash function won't be foolproof. The randomness control only guarantees that the spins are generated before you place the bet, so although it's guaranteed that I can't generate a spin after you've placed bets, if I know you're using a particular system (say PATTERN BREAKER), then I *could* just generate the spins accordingly. I won't be doing that, but (perish the thought) if you DO lose, and accuse me of rigging the RNG, it'll just be your word against mine.
It's going to take me a while because I'm learning a new programming language from scratch. Not just for this software, I was going to do it anyway, although I need the extra features to make the program work the way I want it to.
What will happen is that when you've played a session, the program will send me the results by email, then it will save a copy of them for you (so you can check against your own record). That should rule out any disputes which might arise.
It should be good to go by the end of June at the latest.
hopefully... ^-^
Bayes I'm impressed you can even do this at all. You have great skills in that area. Like I keep saying there is a certain flow of patterns I expect for say PATTERN BREAKER. Random just naturally does them. If all of a sudden I'm gettiing the total reverse. Then somethings not right.
The same with my new kid on the block DOUBLE MATCH. Its so readable that I should never lose more than 100/1. I haven't lost at all yet in testing/playing over 340 games. So if I went on a real money RNG all of a sudden it would be losing like theres no tomorrow. On a live wheel it will win like theres no tomorrow. This is how I smell foul play on certain RNGS. And its because they are predatory. They know what you bet and are simply programmed to oppose you.
I once saw someone lose three times in a row on a real money RNG. Nothing special in that. Until you understand he had 35 numbers covered each time.
Quote from: speed on Jun 15, 07:31 PM 2012
This program is a great idea, I think that soon there will be no more self-proclaimed winners, at least not on this forum .. :thumbsup:
You think wrong Speed. Very WRONG.
Quote from: Bayes on Jun 15, 06:42 PM 2012
That can be arranged. :)
Full zero or la partage?
Just a regular full zero Bayes. I dont like being in prison. Thats randoms role.
Quote from: turnerfeck on Jun 15, 06:29 PM 2012
Sorry John....I wasn't having a go at you....i just thought Sams comedy was good comedy.
Seriously....i enjoy reading your posts. You seem to be very confident in your abilities which is good.
My stance on the world is that I "think" I know I am right. Self medication doesn't work....fact.
You have to listen listen listen. that's how you got to where you are. You invented nothing. You just listened.
In my view....you seem to have stopped listening. I personally think that's a mistake.
Allways listen to someone elses view before you take your egos view as fact.
Just my view John...take it or leave it :thumbsup:
Good View. Im just eager to start visually rewriting the thinking on this game. I dont think anyones ready for what im about to do. How will people view Einsteins statement about roulette after im done. Very differently I think.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jun 15, 09:30 PM 2012
Good View. I'm just eager to start visually rewriting the thinking on this game. I don't think anyones ready for what I'm about to do. How will people view Einsteins statement about roulette after I'm done. Very differently I think.
Does anyone here actually know something, other than an unverified/garbled/popularist quote, about a famous physicist's life and work? Here is a bit about Einstein, the man... link:://:.neatorama.com/2007/03/26/10-strange-facts-about-einstein/ (link:://:.neatorama.com/2007/03/26/10-strange-facts-about-einstein/) .
Anyway, here we go yet again with the proposed "testing" of the completely-baseless stuff. I think that Bayes needs JL, as much as versa?
Did Einstein make even such-simple grammatical errors? Egs, the mixed metaphor of "visually rewriting the thinking"; and the bad sytax of "very differently" rather than "as something different". Does Bayes know the difference?
Sorry, Mr. Legend, but you sound like "a Wendel". Remember him? Except that Wendal came with also some kooky theories. At least he tried, lol, to "walk that sort of talk".
Anyone remember this?
Quote from: John Gold on Jan 26, 09:13 AM 2012
Hello little bread gobblers.
Well time for me to say adios,
Just let me say, I would even pi$$ on my own mother’s shoes before telling her the H-G.
So you sad sorry sacks of sh*t had no hope of getting it either through relay or whatever. ROFLMAO.
But me and a ‘few’ others had a good laugh at your expense the last week. Especially all the threads opening up on different forums about Parrondo’s Paradox. Guys! You are too clueless to work any of it out and like SPIKE used to say: Never, and I repeat NEVER wise up a chump.
So long.
:o
Hi Guys,
I'm trying to understand this method of betting but cant get my head around it
Has anyone got the time to explain it to me in newbie terms ?
Thanks
I once saw someone lose three times in a row on a real money RNG. Nothing special in that. Until you understand he had 35 numbers covered each time.
Hello John
So do u think that this is not possible on a real live wheel? ;D Odds of that happening about more or less 1/50000 or 2 put things in perspective any EC's hitting 16 or 17 times . Please correct me Bayes f i am wrong. ;D
And it still amazes me that some people play this bet.
Regards
QuoteI won't be doing that, but (perish the thought) if you DO lose, and accuse me of rigging the RNG, it'll just be your word against mine.
I think we know whos word we will be taking, I have met Bayes and I know he is after the same as the rest of us, he has no reason whatsoever to rig the RNG.
QuoteI once saw someone lose three times in a row on a real money RNG. Nothing special in that. Until you understand he had 35 numbers covered each time.
That happens more than you think, if that's the substance of what you think is rigged then you still have much to learn about random. I have real spin data with many numbers repeating 3 times in a row and once 4 times in a row, it happens!
QuoteI am going to say one more thing and then leave it be for a while. Did anyone catch the insult to Bayes?
Yes Sam, I did note it, also noted
QuoteThey will actually tell me when somethings not right.
So if they/your methods lose, you then blame the RNG? that's what every one does when they lose, when they can accept that their method isn't working and understand its the method not the platform then they can get further with their experiments, if they just sat back and blamed everything but, well, that would be a shame.
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Jun 15, 11:37 PM 2012
I once saw someone lose three times in a row on a real money RNG. Nothing special in that. Until you understand he had 35 numbers covered each time.
Hello John
So do u think that this is not possible on a real live wheel? ;D Odds of that happening about more or less 1/50000 or 2 put things in perspective any ECs hitting 16 or 17 times . Please correct me Bayes f i am wrong. ;D
And it still amazes me that some people play this bet.
Regards
RBH, that sounds about right. In this case you can work it out by pure logic, without any calculation, by referencing it to a single number bet. If a single number can hit 3 times in a row (I've seen 4), then 2 numbers hitting 3 times in a row (equivalent to losing when you cover 35 numbers) MUST be possible, because in general the length of streaks is proportional to the amount of numbers you're betting.
Quote from: superman on Jun 16, 02:57 AM 2012
I think we know whos word we will be taking, I have met Bayes and I know he is after the same as the rest of us, he has no reason whatsoever to rig the RNG.
Thanks, superman. Let's hope it won't come to that. But I can almost guarantee that if John comes up smelling of roses, SOMEONE will accuse me of rigging it in HIS favour. ;D But that's the nature of forums I guess.
Quote from: superman on Jun 16, 02:57 AM 2012
I think we know whos word we will be taking, I have met Bayes and I know he is after the same as the rest of us, he has no reason whatsoever to rig the RNG.
That happens more than you think, if that's the substance of what you think is rigged then you still have much to learn about random. I have real spin data with many numbers repeating 3 times in a row and once 4 times in a row, it happens!
Yes Sam, I did note it, also noted
So if they/your methods lose, you then blame the RNG? that's what every one does when they lose, when they can accept that their method isn't working and understand its the method not the platform then they can get further with their experiments, if they just sat back and blamed everything but, well, that would be a shame.
I am putting my faith in Bayes, Superman. No I think you misunderstood about the covering 35 numbers. He did it on three different numbers. And each time the rng showed him the one he hadnt covered.
The thing is Superman if you always are able to make a profit on any play mode RNG, Just like you do on a live wheel. And then you play a real money RNG and you cant win ever. Wouldnt you be just a little bit suspicious??
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jun 16, 03:55 AM 2012
The thing is Superman if you always are able to make a profit on any play mode RNG, Just like you do on a live wheel. And then you play a real money RNG and you can't win ever. Wouldnt you be just a little bit suspicious??
John, which casino are you talking about here? Have you seriously tested this? it could be that you just had a bad run in real money mode and then gave up, having ASSUMED they were cheating. What I'm saying is, you really need to do proper tests to come to a firm conclusion.
Quote from: Bayes on Jun 16, 04:01 AM 2012
John, which casino are you talking about here? Have you seriously tested this? it could be that you just had a bad run in real money mode and then gave up, having ASSUMED they were cheating. What I'm saying is, you really need to do proper tests to come to a firm conclusion.
You might be right Bayes. I've tried a real money RNG about a dozen times. On Ladbrokes, Bet365. Blue Square and Paddy Power. I definately saw something happen. And everytime I play them in practice mode I win with uncannily similar results to a live wheel Bayes. That's where my suspicions arose from.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jun 16, 03:55 AM 2012
I am putting my faith in Bayes, Superman. No I think you misunderstood about the covering 35 numbers. He did it on three different numbers. And each time the rng showed him the one he hadnt covered.
The thing is Superman if you always are able to make a profit on any play mode RNG, Just like you do on a live wheel. And then you play a real money RNG and you can't win ever. Wouldnt you be just a little bit suspicious??
Hello John
U r wrong. If u cover 3 different sets of numbers your odds all still around 1/50000. ;D But its irrelevant. U can still beat roulette defying basic mathematics rules.
Regards
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Jun 16, 04:08 AM 2012
Hello John
U r wrong. If u cover 3 different sets of numbers your odds all still around 1/50000. ;D But its irrelevant. You can still beat roulette defying basic mathematics rules.
Regards
One day I might be right with you Robeenhuut. I am just saying it was one of those awful machines they have in the UK betting shops like William Hill and Ladbrokes. But if you had personally witnessed this. I think youd have been a little surprised yourself.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jun 16, 04:12 AM 2012
One day I might be right with you Robeenhuut. I am just saying it was one of those awful machines they have in the UK betting shops like William Hill and Ladbrokes. But if you had personally witnessed this. I think youd have been a little surprised yourself.
Nothing surprises me in roulette John. As 2 this 35 numbers bet it took me 5 minutes 2 find 3 times a single number hit 3 times in a row. I have about 4k worth of 185 live spins sets from live wheel at SML and i only checked about 10 sets so 2k spins. All this data was taken from this forum.
Actually its pretty unusual i would say but can we really say that its something fishy about SML live wheel?
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Jun 16, 04:29 AM 2012
Nothing surprises me in roulette John. As 2 this 35 numbers bet it took me 5 minutes 2 find 3 times a single number hit 3 times in a row. I have about 4k worth of 185 live spins sets from live wheel at SML and i only checked about 10 sets so 2k spins. All this data was taken from this forum.
Actually its pretty unusual i would say but can we really say that its something fishy about SML live wheel?
No Robeenhuut you have misunderstood me. Of course I know a number can trend. I have seen several multi hits on the same number. Countless triples quite a few quads and one quintet in my time. I am talking about walking into a betting shop loading an RNG up with 200 units. And bam, bam, bam,. The guy covers 35 DIFFERENT numbers three times in a row. And loses all three. He was eastern European and man was he pissed. He cursed everyone but Mother Teresa.
QuoteNo I think you misunderstood about the covering 35 numbers. He did it on three different numbers. And each time the rng showed him the one he hadnt covered
Ah ok, it can still happen as Robeenhut says, the odds are still the same, now imagine he did that for a few weeks hit n run style, then as you say, bam bam bam, so he was out of sync at that stage and random caught up with him, this covers the argument about hit n run, if your timing is out your f****d
this covers the argument about hit n run, if your timing is out your f****d
^-^
Hit and Run doesnt work like that with say pattern breaker, I playing two even chances together, In 3830 games only twice have I Lost them both, Sam thinks I am dodging his offer, IM NOT, Im simply delaying it, I want to prove first I can win before I hand it to him, So if he cant make it win no one can say it fails, Because ive already done it, Thats why im waiting for Bayes,
hi all ,
i am from singapore and just wanted to thank
john legend for the strategies.
A combination of trilogy and reverse code 20 has let me win
3000hkd in macau conrad today within 2 hrs, with conbined
strategy and 3 step progression .
i would mention it did not cross 3 bets to win any single frame.
it works, just be flexible and alert.
thanks john again!!
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jun 16, 11:01 AM 2012
Hit and Run doesn't work like that with say pattern breaker, I playing two even chances together, In 3830 games only twice have I Lost them both, Sam thinks I am dodging his offer, I'm NOT, I'm simply delaying it, I want to prove first I can win before I hand it to him, So if he can't make it win no one can say it fails, Because I've already done it, that's why I'm waiting for Bayes,
personally I dnt believe in hit&run thingy. its just the length of the session which you refer to. you play short session of 3 games that what you call h&r.
in roulette that just non-sense. what count is money management, when you go to play you have your bankroll AND a target win, so either you loose it all or you reach your target PLAYING continuously, thats it. that how I play anyways.
JAG Targets our often unrealistic, I rarely hav a day where I finish with less than I started, I will show you all this soon,
John, I assume you're going to be only betting on the outside (ECs and Doz/Col) in this test? if so, I can make a cut-down version of the program which will be much quicker to write. Later I'll extend it but for now I'm keen to get this show on the road.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jun 16, 11:01 AM 2012
Hit and Run doesn't work like that with say pattern breaker, I playing two even chances together, In 3830 games only twice have I Lost them both, Sam thinks I am dodging his offer, I'm NOT, I'm simply delaying it, I want to prove first I can win before I hand it to him, So if he can't make it win no one can say it fails, Because I've already done it, that's why I'm waiting for Bayes,
Hi JL, I am back after a week on the road....I will also share my results from Hit & Run style... along with the methods used. Results remain solid.... another observation after watching so many people lose their BR ....greed is a killer....play hit and run, stick to the rules and then leave the casino .... Ok, I'll pop in later.
that's why I'm waiting for Bayes
While John is waiting for Bayes, perhaps we should coolly discuss something.
I feel we need to establish the definition of a win or loss concerning this test. It needs to be fair to John and within reason.
Would someone hazard a guess?
TwoCat
Hi Chauncy47 absolutely greed indeed, Another reason to do this test is to show short play will over the long run improve the strikerate,
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jun 17, 10:26 AM 2012
Hi Chauncy47 absolutely greed indeed, Another reason to do this test is to show short play will over the long run improve the strikerate,
I would agree. Last night was the first night where I have ever seen all the tables at the casino set with a $10 min. Regardless, results still the same but a first time for me at that level so enjoyed the moment. It was a quick night and played D&C, Code 4, P4, D&C Hybrid and Code 4....and then making a quick exit. Quite frankly, I feel a bit lonely when playing as I am the only person ever playing on the outside...LOL
Being a smart player is a lonely business Chauncy47, 99% of playerr will uphold the usual thinking on the game through pure greed and stupidity, I was once one of them, You are playing hit and run exactly as its meant to be played, So your results are no surprise, Now imagine there was 10,000 players in North America playing EXACTLY like you, A message would be sent through the industrx,
RESULTS UPDATE FOR TRILOGY FOR 07/07/2012
TOTAL GAMES PLAYED 500
TOTAL GAMES WON 493
TOTAL GAMES LOST 7
STRIKERATE APPROX 70/1
BALANCE 318 UNITS PLUS
STEP 1 WINS 255
STEP 2 WINS 221
STEP 3 WINS 17----LOSSES 7
The virtual trigger has proved its value over the last 500 game sample. Without it I would have suffered 17x26 in losses resulting in 500-442 giving me only 58 units profit. With it I have now secured 318 units profit. Its certainly worth the wait.
Quote from: GARNabby on Jun 15, 10:53 PM 2012
Does anyone here actually know something, other than an unverified/garbled/popularist quote, about a famous physicist's life and work? Here is a bit about Einstein, the man... link:://:.neatorama.com/2007/03/26/10-strange-facts-about-einstein/ (link:://:.neatorama.com/2007/03/26/10-strange-facts-about-einstein/) .
Anyway, here we go yet again with the proposed "testing" of the completely-baseless stuff. I think that Bayes needs JL, as much as versa?
Did Einstein make even such-simple grammatical errors? Egs, the mixed metaphor of "visually rewriting the thinking"; and the bad sytax of "very differently" rather than "as something different". Does Bayes know the difference?
Sorry, Mr. Legend, but you sound like "a Wendel". Remember him? Except that Wendal came with also some kooky theories. At least he tried, LoL, to "walk that sort of talk".
Sorry man but I can't resist- was liquor involved in the proceedings at all?
If ya gonna pull someone for grammatical error (when I assume you mean mis-quotation)
then ya can't pepper your statement with grammatical error and hope to get away with it.. surely?
We assume by 'versa' you mean vice versa.
We assume by 'Egs' you mean e.g., as an example?
We assume by 'sytax' you might mean...er...syntax. (I refuse to use the word ironic in this post, no matter what).
We assume that 'Wendal' and 'Wendel' who you refer to are actually the same person.
We assume that sh1t is at least 40% proof.
We assume you pull ya neck in a bit next time.
Obviously sometimes when we assume, we are wrong.
Woods.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jul 07, 02:11 AM 2012
RESULTS UPDATE FOR TRILOGY FOR 07/07/2012
TOTAL GAMES PLAYED 500
TOTAL GAMES WON 493
TOTAL GAMES LOST 7
STRIKERATE APPROX 70/1
BALANCE 318 UNITS PLUS
STEP 1 WINS 255
STEP 2 WINS 221
STEP 3 WINS 17----LOSSES 7
The virtual trigger has proved its value over the last 500 game sample. Without it I would have suffered 17x26 in losses resulting in 500-442 giving me only 58 units profit. With it I have now secured 318 units profit. Its certainly worth the wait.
Hola John
Do u still play 1 game in 20 spins frame? Anyway 1 game probably takes sometimes more than 20 spins. And virtual trigger is a 1stvirtual loss? So u start betting after u lose 1st bet meaning that after 2 consecutive non matches there is a match? Then u play 3 step 1,3,9 prog?
Regards
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Jul 08, 11:18 PM 2012
Hola John
Do u still play 1 game in 20 spins frame? Anyway 1 game probably takes sometimes more than 20 spins. And virtual trigger is a 1stvirtual loss? So u start betting after u lose 1st bet meaning that after 2 consecutive non matches there is a match? Then u play 3 step 1,3,9 prog?
Regards
Yes hutt that's. Correct.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jul 10, 10:33 AM 2012
Yes hutt that's. Correct.
Thanks for clarification John. ;D