***TRILOGY***

[superman]

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.

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.

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.

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!

I 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

They 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.

[Bayes]

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?    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. 
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.

[Bayes]

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.  But that's the nature of forums I guess.

[Johnlegend]

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??

[Bayes]

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.

[Johnlegend]

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.

[Robeenhuut]

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.  But its irrelevant. U can still beat roulette defying basic mathematics rules.

Regards

[Johnlegend]

Hello John

U r wrong. If u cover 3 different sets of numbers your odds all still around  1/50000.  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.

[Robeenhuut]

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?

[Johnlegend]

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.

[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

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

[TwoCatSam]

this covers the argument about hit n run, if your timing is out your f****d

[Johnlegend]

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,

[ronkoh77]

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!!

[justanothergambler]

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.