*PATTERN 4*

[soggett]

------------------
@John, this seems to be really incredible....best of both worlds.

vundarosa

Yes, I have to agree with you

This should have an even better strike rate

(Just tried it on Baccarat also, works like a charm  )

[Johnlegend]

------------------
@John, this seems to be really incredible....best of both worlds.

vundarosa

INCREDIBLE is an understatement Vundarosa. It is the ACCESSABLE HOLY GRAIL. I cannot see anything bettering this alround. Even XXVV cannot come back negative on this. I have had the easiest time of my 12 years playing real money on this game. I never once felt under threat. Especially since I know how the LAW OF AVERAGES WORKS. I scrutinize every 5x4 block of 20 spins. When you have a 20 spin block that only produced say 6 or 7 matches out of a possible 20. Look what will happen in the next 20. TRIPS, QUADS and beyond staring at you. You can read this like a book because the turnover is there so you don't become jaded and unfocused. You are seeing RANDOM tamed, brought to book in that 4 wide matrix by its keeper the LAW OF AVERAGES. Making profit just became MAINSTREAM reality FOR ALL.

[vundarosa]

INCREDIBLE is an understatement Vundarosa. It is the ACCESSABLE HOLY GRAIL. I cannot see anything bettering this alround. Even XXVV cannot come back negative on this. I have had the easiest time of my 12 years playing real money on this game. I never once felt under threat. Especially since I know how the LAW OF AVERAGES WORKS. I scrutinize every 5x4 block of 20 spins. When you have a 20 spin block that only produced say 6 or 7 matches out of a possible 20. Look what will happen in the next 20. TRIPS, QUADS and beyond staring at you. You can read this like a book because the turnover is there so you don't become jaded and unfocused. You are seeing RANDOM tamed, brought to book in that 4 wide matrix by its keeper the LAW OF AVERAGES. Making profit just became MAINSTREAM reality FOR ALL.

-------------

"I have had the easiest time of my 12 years playing real money on this game. I never once felt under threat. "

This is exactly how i felt, never under threat, so predictable. This has to be THE ONE!

vundarosa

[Johnlegend]

-------------

"I have had the easiest time of my 12 years playing real money on this game. I never once felt under threat. "

This is exactly how I felt, never under threat, so predictable. This has to be THE ONE!

vundarosa

It is. even  though I can hear XXVV, OPHIS AND SUPERMAN oiling up their BOTS, THIS IS THE ONE...

[moles40]

Hi Kenio,

That's also quite an interesting idea. Bet that the 4th line will not be a repeat of the 1st line

H   H   L   H
H   L   H   L
L   H   H   L
L   H   L   L ---won@1st bet (col1)

A.

This seems to be the ultimate grail.You can play continuously as well.

[joiner29]

Can you tell me if this has been seen before I'm playing betfair rng
HHHL
LHHL
LHHL
LHHL
LHHL
L
I can't BELIEVE THIS HAS HAPPENED

[Gordonline]

TOTAL GAMES: 36

                                     H/L                    B/R                  O/E
WIN                                32                     29                    31
LOST                                3                       7                      5
LOST 2 IN ROW                1                       0                      0

WIN ON 1 STEP                 19                     18                    23
WIN ON 2 STEP                 10                       6                     5
WIN ON 3 STEP                   3                       5                     3

TOTAL: + 71 units

108 bets - 92 wins - 16 loses - that's about 7/1


Hi All

I played last night on BV NZ that Pattern 1 would not be the same as Pattern 4 and recorded 56 spins straight, continuous betting from spin 13 onwards and my results were as follows,

I was betting on all 3 E/C's with a 1,2,4,8, but if I had a loss didn't use progression

It ended with a balance of +1 (Highest +9 Lowest -5) however if you take a look at the table below and Soggetts results above if I flat betted only on the 1st bet it would of ended with a better result +3 (obviously the risk is also lower) Soggetts result only betting on the 1st bet would of ended in +28

Just thought I would mention this as more often than not we win on 1st leg and if flat betting can still produce good results its worth trying.

Strange as it may seem if I had run seperate banks on all legs flat betting only it would of produced a net result of +9 units    

                         1st   2nd   3rd   4th      1st   2nd   3rd   4th      1st   2nd   3rd   4th
Number of Bets   11   5   1   0      11   4   2   11      11   7   3   1
Wins                            6   4   1   0      8   2   1   0      4   5   2   0
Losses                    5   1   0   0      3   2   1   1      7   2   1   1
Unit Balance            1   3   1   0      5   0   0   -1      -3   3   1   -1


Hope the above makes sense and feel free to comment  

Gordon

[jon86]

Can you tell me if this has been seen before I'm playing betfair rng
HHHL
LHHL
LHHL
LHHL
LHHL
L
I can't BELIEVE THIS HAS HAPPENED

RNG is not Roulette. Real wheel real result 

Cheers

Jon

[XXVV]

Looking forward to testing matrix and also re testing earlier P4 results on a different and extended progression which will account for the difference in results between myself and JL wrt final result and length of streaks.

Oiling up (lol)!!!

XXVV

[soggett]

TOTAL GAMES: 36

                                     H/L                    B/R                  O/E
WIN                                32                     29                    31
LOST                                3                       7                      5
LOST 2 IN ROW                1                       0                      0

WIN ON 1 STEP                 19                     18                    23
WIN ON 2 STEP                 10                       6                     5
WIN ON 3 STEP                   3                       5                     3

TOTAL: + 71 units

108 bets - 92 wins - 16 loses - that's about 7/1


Hi All

I played last night on BV NZ that Pattern 1 would not be the same as Pattern 4 and recorded 56 spins straight, continuous betting from spin 13 onwards and my results were as follows,

I was betting on all 3 E/C's with a 1,2,4,8, but if I had a loss didn't use progression

It ended with a balance of +1 (Highest +9 Lowest -5) however if you take a look at the table below and Soggetts results above if I flat betted only on the 1st bet it would of ended with a better result +3 (obviously the risk is also lower) Soggetts result only betting on the 1st bet would of ended in +28

Just thought I would mention this as more often than not we win on 1st leg and if flat betting can still produce good results its worth trying.

Strange as it may seem if I had run separate banks on all legs flat betting only it would of produced a net result of +9 units    

                         1st   2nd   3rd   4th      1st   2nd   3rd   4th      1st   2nd   3rd   4th
Number of Bets   11   5   1   0      11   4   2   11      11   7   3   1
Wins                            6   4   1   0      8   2   1   0      4   5   2   0
Losses                    5   1   0   0      3   2   1   1      7   2   1   1
Unit Balance            1   3   1   0      5   0   0   -1      -3   3   1   -1


Hope the above makes sense and feel free to comment  

Gordon

I see what you mean, nice  

Didn't thought of flat betting

And I would have been +12, you have to include the losts of sessions, not just wins on step 2 and 3 

But you're doing it wrong, we don't bet continuously, one PB4 and then exit. Rinse and Repeat. That way you reset the RNG pattern (or something like that, BV says so)

I'm now testing PB 4 on a 4 wide instead of 3 wide, and it seems its even better  

What do you think about that?

[Smee]

Guys. . . . . ive been dabbling in this system. . . . have only played 46 games and had 5 losses.  Seems to have a ratio of 9 wins to 1 loss for me, which is kinda similar to a few other guys results.

Ive been playing a mixture of RNG, Live and B&M casinos so I consider the results pretty real. . . . as opposed to JUST RNG.  But it is a very small sample.

What I dont get is that when playing 3 wide there are only 8 different patterns that can come out.  So isnt it just a 1 in 8 chance of losing?? Im unsure of how the 4th line affects the odds tho.  Dosn't really sound that great for a grail. . . . 1 in 8 chance of losing. . .

And if we change it to a 4 wide matrix there are still only 15 patterns and a 4th progression added. . . 1 in 15 chance of losing is better but STILL dosnt sound that flash to me either. . .

Am I missing something here? Cause I kinda hope so. . . .

Thanks guys. . . . . but great systems Johnlegend!

[Johnlegend]

Guys. . . . . I've been dabbling in this system. . . . have only played 46 games and had 5 losses.  Seems to have a ratio of 9 wins to 1 loss for me, which is kinda similar to a few other guys results.

I've been playing a mixture of RNG, Live and B&M casinos so I consider the results pretty real. . . . as opposed to JUST RNG.  But it is a very small sample.

What I don't get is that when playing 3 wide there are only 8 different patterns that can come out.  So isnt it just a 1 in 8 chance of losing?? I'm unsure of how the 4th line affects the odds tho.  Dosn't really sound that great for a grail. . . . 1 in 8 chance of losing. . .

And if we change it to a 4 wide matrix there are still only 15 patterns and a 4th progression added. . . 1 in 15 chance of losing is better but STILL dosnt sound that flash to me either. . .

Am I missing something here? Cause I kinda hope so. . . .

Thanks guys. . . . . but great systems Johnlegend!

Smee thankyou, here's how I see it on paper its true you should lose once every 8 games. But my sample of results simply didn't read like that. It is down to when you enter the cycle no question. Just as XXVV has observed a window of oppurtunity, to exploit the last pattern. On paper those EIGHT PATTERNS should form one after the other. The reality is I have games taking anything from 30 spins to 130 spins to come to a conclusion. So we can take advantage of these inconsistencies..

[amk]

Hello JohnLegend,

Once again thank you for all your work.

I have not been able to keep up with the developments and wanted to see if you could possible recap the strategy to date... how to play, like you did for your first entry explaining the Pattern 4.

This would be great as I am going to let it be tested over 50,000/100,000 spins, I will post the results as soon as possible.

[Proofreaders2000]

I love the speed of this particular system.  While you are waiting for MV5, MV5 Hi/Lo,  Pattern4 may have made enough to balance a 1st progression loss (when/if it happens).

[XXVV]

There are only 24 hours in the day, at least on this planet.

So I am prioritising for entirely selfish reasons and am conducting a very definitive test of the P/F ( variant of Pattern Breaker) with two or three levels of play annexed. Results will be on Pattern Breaker thread or also on the workshop thread on the Gambling Framework , ie "Experimental Ideas in Professional Play'.

Early results have been remarkably consistent and the effective current run of wins on the level one EC is +30 sessions.

Reason for this relatively consistent winning is the choice of playing the eighth pattern which means that you will have balancing/ restorative elastic forces working with you mainly and not against you. There are still some surprises of course but generally we can say by selection of this particular target bet we have the tide in our favour-for a short time.

Second reason for success is thus timing.

We await the trigger signal (appearance of pattern #7 and can then deduce pattern #8), play for a short time , usually appearing after 40 spins, sometimes much later, but we play only for a window of opportunity that will frequently permit about +5 units o/a three EC profit on level one, or about +20 units o/a on level two playing the three EC bets on a 1.3.7 progression ( risking 11 units), with a guide that we play about 4 cycles of bets on every EC, ie say 12 bets at this level usually. Sometimes its longer if we encounter a triple loss and we want to recover that loss. We can play on till say we recover part or all the loss or overall we are close to a +20 unit profit o/a which seems to be reasonable norm ( tipping point).

Please note those who question or test and just grind on without pause, not breaking spin outcomes into session groupings are wasting their time. They then wonder why the o/a result is a loss.

It is in the true nature of roulette to be cyclic and sub cyclic, ie cycles within cycles and the only way we can win against the house edge is to select very short passages of play where a trend, bias or skew materialises, like the eddy in a stream current, and take a modest profit, and leave.

There are many examples of short trend and bias behaviour, and that has nothing to do with the questioned mechanics of a wheel ( wheel bias) which in our culture is now unlikely. Our search is for examples of streaks where the extent of the streak ( in a short cycle) runs counter to the limits expected within probablity theory ( in a big cycle).

On the small scale this can be outrageous ( for example 15 or more reds in a row) but this pattern happens relatively frequently on live tables and its frequency has been measured and milked, or an individual number can repeat five times even with a dealer change midway ( I have seen this), or an imbalance of zero appearances where six can occur in ten spins. These trends take place in small sequences. At the time they are startling yet in the scheme of things, say a day's results, or a week's results, they are nothing that much out of the ordinary.

On another (small) scale there are random forces at work that would cause incredible repeats and chaotic behaviour and there can be forces at work in another direction that grow stronger with time that would seek to bring into more order the average appearance of a set of numbers so the proportion that repeat within 37 spins is consistent within a small range, being the 'phenomenon of the third'.

On a bigger scale, say 50-100 spins, there are forces that seek to balance out and re-distribute like an elastic force the small triad patterns of the eight possible outcomes within every EC, ie 24 in all.

After the seventh triad, as JL brilliantly discovered, the eighth triad pattern can be deduced and must still materialise before the cycle wraps and re-starts.

This restorative force can be harnessed by us and can help us take short term profit, before it might appear to degenerate and work against us. It is just that a new cycle is underway, thus a new session is needed.

However there can be an overlap, a grey area where the three EC's produce this completion at different times, thus the only way to continue in phase with this restorative energy is to stop and re-calibrate.

This is what the system testers might miss, and certainly edited long lists of spin outcomes totally miss.

A session exists while we watch. As soon as we leave, the session for us finishes, even though the wheel keeps spinning outcomes. Our reality is different from the infinite space of potential sessions ( for others).

It works on other levels too in a live casino where the energies of the dealer and the onlookers/ players have a unique edge, but this can change as key parties leave or arrive. However if we are there throughout it is our session, and ours only, and for the others they all have unique experiences.

So I wont be testing the P4 matrix variations, just yet anyway.