Hi guys, I've attached the results of a simulation of PATTERN BREAKER. I used a kind of generic EC, labels 0 & 1, and there is no house edge of any kind but that doesn't detract from the results. Here are the first 4 games in the output file which I've attached :
*** GAME #1 ***
Waiting for 7 unique patterns...
111
001
011
001
000
110
111
001
100
010
Opposite of remaining pattern :010
1 Bank : -1
1 Bank : 1
Bank after game #1: 1 W
*** GAME #2 ***
Waiting for 7 unique patterns...
101
101
001
111
011
001
100
101
101
011
111
101
000
101
100
110
Opposite of remaining pattern :101
1 Bank : 2
Bank after game #2: 2 W
*** GAME #3 ***
Waiting for 7 unique patterns...
111
110
101
101
000
101
000
001
001
011
101
010
Opposite of remaining pattern :011
0 Bank : 3
Bank after game #3: 3 W
*** GAME #4 ***
Waiting for 7 unique patterns...
100
110
110
110
100
101
001
111
010
111
111
110
110
001
011
And here are the final results after 20,000 games:
------ SUMMARY ------
Final Balance : 104 units
Gain from Wins = 17513
No. Busts = 2487
Check : 17513 - 2487 x 7 = 104
Ratio of wins:busts : 7.04 to 1
The final balance of +104 is almost certainly due to there being no house advantage, and given that, it's not statistically significant anyway. The ratio of wins to busts is right about where it should be assuming no house edge.
To be honest I wasn't really expecting anything different, and further tests give the same kind of results. I'm not denying that the author of the system may have won with it, I'm only saying that those results are almost certainly due to luck.
Quote from: CoderJoe on Mar 03, 09:14 AM 2018
To be honest I wasn't really expecting anything different, and further tests give the same kind of results. I'm not denying that the author of the system may have won with it, I'm only saying that those results are almost certainly due to luck.
Right on the money :thumbsup:
People winning with it for years
Accept that.
No one is playing 20 thousand games.
Trust it isn't luck
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Mar 03, 04:38 PM 2018
People winning with it for years
Accept that.
No one is playing 20 thousand games.
Trust it isn't luck
I agree with you RG
I think the game is much more than only math.
There are other factors that make a winning player. And you know what those factors are.
"However, as an intelligent, knowledgeable, and disciplined player, things are not as forbidding as the mathematicians would lead one to believe.
First, the player will not be playing continuously 24 hours per day every day. He will limit his time and capital exposure, then use his methods to maximize his chance to capture a profitable trend in the ebb and flow of Baccarat decisions. Always, the player will employ smart money management to conserve and protect his bankroll against adverse trends in the game. Realistically, the player should experience many trips to the casino with profitable results.
Treat your play as a business and remember the more educated your guesses become the more profit is more likely to come."
Stuart quote
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Mar 03, 04:38 PM 2018No one is playing 20 thousand games.
Hi RouletteGhost,
So should I stop the simulation when the system shows a profit? ;-)
The idea behind a simulation is to show what happens over a longer test, when luck runs out. Besides, John Legend says he has played 14,000 games, which is not so far from 20,000. Any system can win over a few hundred or even a few thousand spins. The reason I knew the system wouldn't give any advantage is because it's based on the fallacy that the wheel has a memory. Using events as triggers in that way never makes any difference, I know because I've coded hundreds of systems. But still it's an interesting approach.
Quote from: CoderJoe on Mar 04, 03:19 AM 2018
Hi RouletteGhost,
So should I stop the simulation when the system shows a profit? ;-)
The idea behind a simulation is to show what happens over a longer test, when luck runs out. Besides, John Legend says he has played 14,000 games, which is not so far from 20,000. Any system can win over a few hundred or even a few thousand spins. The reason I knew the system wouldn't give any advantage is because it's based on the fallacy that the wheel has a memory. Using events as triggers in that way never makes any difference, I know because I've coded hundreds of systems. But still it's an interesting approach.
14,000 games from multiple roulette wheels at different roulette online casinos that won way above the 7:1 rate. The current rate is
50+ : 1 that only sentinel and Andre have claimed to achieve. Nobody else playing online live dealer casino has done this skipping over losers as they come according to math.
Yes the losers come at the rate of 1:7. The simple trick is to skip over them to play the other 7 winner games.
Be patient, stay disciplined stop play when losers come itlr. Play the winners only in a hit and run fashion, don't be greedy - secret sauce to 7 nice easy peasy winners. This gives 50:1 instead of 7:1 :thumbsup:
Quote from: cht on Mar 04, 03:52 AM 2018The simple trick is to skip over them to play the other 7 winner games.
How do you skip over losers? Do you mean wait for virtual losses?
Quote from: CoderJoe on Mar 04, 04:07 AM 2018
How do you skip over losers? Do you mean wait for virtual losses?
Nope. By being lucky. Some win and most lose. Your results are exactly what i expected. But of course some just dont get it......great job :thumbsup:
Quote from: CoderJoe on Mar 04, 04:07 AM 2018
How do you skip over losers? Do you mean wait for virtual losses?
Honest answer - I don't know. :(
Luck, blessed, midas touch, god of gamblers - CYF....
Thanks for being honest. All I can do is to simulate the system as described. Obviously if there are rules which I don't know about and which make the difference between winning and losing, then the simulation won't show the amazing results which are claimed by John Legend and some others. But hey, don't shoot the messenger. ;D
I go by real life results not simulations
If people are winning as they claim that’s all that matters
Another reason why your simulation is a waste of time is that we stop on a win
We do not continuously play. We take the loss when it happens. And the wins overcome the losses
People winning don’t care about a 20 thousand spin simulation. These people are doing one game a day in some cases
One last thing I’ll say
Winning 130 games and losing 4 with a minor three step progression may be more than luck ;)
@ RouletteGhost,
QuoteI go by real life results not simulations
Well I can't simulate you chatting to the dealer or scratching your arse, but does it matter?
John Legend is always going on about patience and discipline, as though it's the most important part of any system. But a computer never runs out of patience and never makes mistakes, so it can't be that aspect of playing which is the problem with the simulation, can it?
So what is it? What's the missing ingredient which I left out of the simulation which causes these win rates of 10:1 or more when according to the maths and simulations it's only 7:1?
QuoteAnother reason why your simulation is a waste of time is that we stop on a win. We do not continuously play.
It makes no difference whether you wait for more spins before starting a new game or play continuously. The simulation does actually get a random number of spins after each game which simulates a "stop".
QuotePeople winning don’t care about a 20 thousand spin simulation. These people are doing one game a day in some cases
Maybe you don't but I'm sure most people here are looking for a system which wins in the
long term. How do you know it's not just luck if you don't test over the long term? All systems win at times just by luck. If you don't test past when luck runs out you may well be deluding yourself that it's a winner.
I changed the code so now the file generated can be opened in a spreadsheet, it includes the lengths of the win/loss streaks. Take a look you'll see that long winning streaks are not uncommon, the highest I've seen is 73.
But the stats are no different from just betting on red with a 3 step martingale. You have an 87.5 % of a win, which is very close to the results of the sim. Waiting for the last pattern is a complete waste of time.
Coder Joe is right in saying it makes no difference in waiting or betting on a continuation.
There is no bet that can beat this game .
If you're looking at patterns (which I think is pointless)
why only look at the patterns of spins 1,2,3 and 4,5,6 etc.
What about the pattern of spins 2,3,4 and 3,4,5?
If betting 2,4,8 a win gives +2.
A loss gives - 14.
Therefore you have to win seven times out of eight
just to break even.
A 90% win rate in 100 games will only produce 40 units.
Not a very good risk/reward proposition.
Never was a maths expert but needing
7 wins out of eight means 87.5% wins
required to break even.
So 90% wins gives only +4 units.
Quote from: CoderJoe on Mar 05, 04:57 AM 2018ohn Legend is always going on about patience and discipline, as though it's the most important part of any system. But a computer never runs out of patience and never makes mistakes, so it can't be that aspect of playing which is the problem with the simulation, can it?
Hi CoderJoe,
I am not sure what rules you have built into your simulation but if your just running with a straight progression 1-2-4 and not using the recovery processes discussed in the forum and continue to be debated concerning MM then your missing the point of why this method is ONE of MANY methods that are successful in beating the game of roulette or indeed any other E/C game.
So, what JL has been reinforcing in his rules and his results is what is the performance of the system over a 100 game set. Also, you need to look at your bankroll and only bet a certain percentage of it. So the larger your bankroll the higher your base bets. The smaller your bankroll the lower your base bets. You also need to be practical and build in stop losses into your algorithm. Your simulation needs to be smart enough to know when to go to that third progression and when to avoid it. This all can be programmed.
But to really simulate what people like JL and others are doing by playing sparingly on a day to day basis, you need to take the same number of spins recorded from a live wheel over a year or more and only play those 10 sessions per day, skipping the other 1000+ spins that are spun each day. This will get you close to simulating what a successful disciplined play experiences. Just allowing the computer to generate random numbers without taking into account real life situation is like allowing a flight simulator to generate unnatural weather events that will never be experienced by a pilot. In this situation the plane would definitely crash more often. So just like a flight simulator takes naturally occurring weather events into consideration when programming the software to train the pilots in a "Realistic" environment so should you take actual LIVE spins into account. This will simulate a ball being spun from the last number at certain speed and landing in the next pocket. Also, it will simulate the clockwise/anticlockwise events that take place for each spin. At B&M casinos with live dealers I have recently taken into consideration the dealer signature where the ball continuously lands for 5 or more spins in the same area of the wheel. I see SMART players taking advantage of this and even tipping the dealer to indicate to continue this pattern so they can take advantage and bet heavily on that area of 5 or six numbers winning 35:1 with hundred or euros on those numbers. A computer simulator randomly picking numbers in no way can simulate this.
So if you can repeat your tests with the above criteria in mind I am sure you might come close to simulating what players like JL are experiencing. I am sure he is not living on 105 dollars or euro over the last 5 years since he has been playing this full time. It must be more than maths that is allowing him to sustain a lifestyle and pay the bills.
If you take a player like Phil Ivy who made his fortune bluffing his way playing Poker you will understand that it takes more than luck to beat these games of chance. The system deployed is just one1-2% of the winning formula. MM and what's between your ears is 98-99% of the WINNING formula. The system is just the information. How you use this information is the key.
Both of these can be programmed. What you have programmed is the method of play. What you have not programmed is what you do during those 20,000 events to make a losing situation into a profitable one. If your simulator is just blindly following rules without taking into consideration at least your bankroll then your simulator is just simulating the 98% of gamblers that do not know how to use the information in front of them and they should not be playing the game for profit.
Cheers,
Ricky
Hi Ricky,
Well as I mentioned in my last post, I am using actual spins, not RNG. I simulated the casino conditions by getting a random number of spins every 5 games (between 100-150 spins). Tests actually show this makes no difference but I included it for the sake of "realism". If anyone wants to provide their own actual spins they're welcome (just in case they think I'm trying to fix the outcome, which I have no reason to do anyway).
What you're talking about there is just progressions and money management, but this only affects the bottom line in terms of profits/losses, not the win rate. According to John his conservative estimate of the win rate is 10:1, but the simulation only shows the expected value of 7:1.
I haven't read the entire thread and I'm not sure where the complete rules of play are posted, but I got them from another forum -
QuoteThe revised system rules
(1)--You track ALL THREE even chances at the same time, instead of focusing on just one like I once did. The advantages of this are a slightly higher strikerate. And faster game qualification.
(2)--The first even chance to deliver the 8th pattern is your bet.
(3)--You proceed to bet against the 8th pattern using the classic 1-2-4 progression.
(4)--You stop at a win or of course a loss.
(5)--Optional and something I recommend is to cover Zero at least the last step of the progression. So if my progression was 5--10--20. I would bet 5--10--22--(2 on zero).
(6)--I play no more than 5 to 10 games in a calendar day. I know there's been this argument forever that hit and run makes no difference in the sea of variance. But its worked for me for years. Securing an average strikerate of 10--1 to 12--1. And by allowing random to now choose your bet for you. This has improved to an average of 13 to 15 to 1.
(7)--I always play my first game of the day as my banker bet. As it has an outstanding strikerate of over 20--1. I bet 3 times as much on this first game. As the ones that follow.
I didn't include all 3 ECs in the sim because that only increases the opportunities and shouldn't affect the win rate, and neither did I take into account the zero, which again isn't necessary for the purpose of the sim.
Quote from: Ross on Mar 05, 02:37 PM 2018A 90% win rate in 100 games will only produce 40 units.
Hi Ross, well if John's claimed win rate of 10:1 holds good in the long term and also takes into account the zero it would be a return of 3/11 chips per game or about 27 chips per 100 games on average. It might not sound much, but it represents about a 20% edge. Many sports bettors would be delighted with that.
Well...
(7)--I always play my first game of the day as my banker bet. As it has an outstanding strikerate of over 20--1. I bet 3 times as much on this first game. As the ones that follow.
So what's different about the first bet of the day?
My opinion - nothing. Just luck again.
Quote from: CoderJoe on Mar 05, 04:57 AM 2018Waiting for the last pattern is a complete waste of time.
Hi Coderjoe,
I disagree with your conclusion that waiting for that last pattern is a waste of time. This is the "special sauce" that is proving to avoid the losing bets and maximizing the winning bets. To try to explain to you the significance of PATTERN BREAKER strategy compared to just betting red on every spin as you claim shows the same results, let me ask you this proposition:
What is the likelihood that you will spin a coin 10 times and record the result and then immediately after spin another 10 times and get exactly the same result. ie say you spin HTHTHTHHHT then immediately after at that point in time you are asked by the casino to spin the EXACT same sequence. If you do you will win 1MILLION DOLLARS.
Now you may be EXTREMELY lucky and you achieve this result. BUT wouldn't you say that this EXACT sequence, assuming fair play and no funny business in the spins that you would FAIL many times out of 100 attempts. Each time you fail you lose your bets.
Well if you agree that the above proposition would cause you to have a negative expectation and you would most likely lose your bankroll and not get into profit let alone win the 1 MILLION DOLLARS PRIZE for getting the sequence correct twice in a row then you would agree that PATTERN BREAKER is actually a good method compared to just betting on red.
You see this is what PATTERN BREAKER is doing to the Casino. It is turning the above proposition on its head and getting the casino to do EXACTLY that. It is challenging the wheel to spin an exact sequence of 3 spins at EXACTLY at a point in time, IMMEDIATELY after spinning the 7th Pattern. And the smart thing about it is we are using the randomness of the wheel to choose when that 8th pattern must be spun. So the trigger occurs at a different time each time we play it. Sometimes the trigger may occur after 7 patterns of 3 have been spun, ie all 7 patterns are generated once without repeating sequences. Other times sequences are repeated so we have to wait longer for the 7th pattern to complete. And the sequence of the patterns is different all the time so we do not know in advance what that last pattern will be. So you start to realize the PATTERN BREAKER is not just a simple method that is no better than just betting red. But it is a very simple POWERFUL method that plays random against random.
This proposition of combinations and permutations is what man has invented to create locks for safes and the simple bike lock. It is widely known that if you use one of these locks or safes your precious items will be relatively safe from getting stolen. We all know about the extreme lengths thieves go through to crack safes. If it was that easy to pick a lock don't you think our precious items would be getting stolen on a regular basis. Sales of safes and locks would not be anywhere near as high as they are. The lock industry will die overnight.
So are you starting to understand that PATTERN BREAKER is not just another silly method. It has some logic to it and is the core reason why people like Sentinel and others are having success with this method. I plan on being another who will have long term success with this method where other methods I have used have failed long term.
Cheers,
Ricky
The problem with the test result is that they are false positiv.
For example you have more winnings then losing selections - so when you use hit and run you are more certain to hit a winning bet then a losing bet - let me illustrate this - assume you have 15 winning selections and one losing selection for the next eight hours - then you decide to jump on board with this particular live wheel online to play pattern breaker - then the probability is on your side that you will hit one of does 15 winning strikes with your first Banker bet - the true odds is 15 to 1 with this situation.
Another day you might have 25 winning selections and one losing selections - then the true odds is 25 to 1 using hit and run.
But other days the odds might be worse with 8 winning selections and 2 losing selections - but still pretty good chance hitting a winning strike among does results using hit and run.
So the probability and the true odds come in cycles and are not static as Coder Joes Test Results.
So when coder joe code the pattern breaker he make it continues flow where there is no beginning or end of the results.
Each day a gambler enter the table he does not know what the wheel has done or will do in the future.
But coder joes test show us that you get sometimes several winning strikes that increase the probability hitting one winning bet once using hit and run as does are more then the losing selections.
This might be the reason why the Banker Bet Works - where you bet higher units size with the first bet and lower you unit size into the second bet operating with casino money - for example 5 10 20 and after that 113 ...
Cheers
Quote from: Ricky on Mar 07, 02:18 AM 2018What is the likelihood that you will spin a coin 10 times and record the result and then immediately after spin another 10 times and get exactly the same result. ie say you spin HTHTHTHHHT then immediately after at that point in time you are asked by the casino to spin the EXACT same sequence. If you do you will win 1MILLION DOLLARS.
Now you may be EXTREMELY lucky and you achieve this result. BUT wouldn't you say that this EXACT sequence, assuming fair play and no funny business in the spins that you would FAIL many times out of 100 attempts. Each time you fail you lose your bets.
But each sequence has the same chance, so the odds don't change. It's the same with pattern breaker. The odds of 3 losses in a row haven't changed just because you waited for the final pattern. There is nothing special about that particular pattern at that moment in time. Ross is right to say it's pointless targeting one pattern over any other. All sequences of the same length have the same probability.
People aren’t worried about the odds or the fact PB isn’t special
The end game is profits in pockets, that’s what people care about
If they want to wait pointlessly let them, as long as they win, good on them
The 120-3 Win to loss ratio is far to common with this strategy for it to be a coincidence
I say let people play how they want, they know they aren’t changing the odds and they know they will lose at times
Being smart, stop loss, knowing when to walk away, will reduce losses. Take the loss don’t chase it.
Playing for a statistically insignificant number of spins is key. I think that’s why these guys are 120-2
Unlike your test results they stop on the first win in the theee step progression series, they don't keep going
To the guys winning with PB, good on you
Doesn’t matter what “strategy†you use. Being a smart bettor is what matters.
Does that mean when you lose with PB it´s not because of its flaws, but because "you´re not smart enough"?
Quote from: Ricky on Mar 07, 02:18 AM 2018
Hi Coderjoe,
I disagree with your conclusion that waiting for that last pattern is a waste of time. This is the "special sauce" that is proving to avoid the losing bets and maximizing the winning bets. To try to explain to you the significance of PATTERN BREAKER strategy compared to just betting red on every spin as you claim shows the same results, let me ask you this proposition:
What is the likelihood that you will spin a coin 10 times and record the result and then immediately after spin another 10 times and get exactly the same result. ie say you spin HTHTHTHHHT then immediately after at that point in time you are asked by the casino to spin the EXACT same sequence. If you do you will win 1MILLION DOLLARS.
Now you may be EXTREMELY lucky and you achieve this result. BUT wouldn't you say that this EXACT sequence, assuming fair play and no funny business in the spins that you would FAIL many times out of 100 attempts. Each time you fail you lose your bets.
Well if you agree that the above proposition would cause you to have a negative expectation and you would most likely lose your bankroll and not get into profit let alone win the 1 MILLION DOLLARS PRIZE for getting the sequence correct twice in a row then you would agree that PATTERN BREAKER is actually a good method compared to just betting on red.
You see this is what PATTERN BREAKER is doing to the Casino. It is turning the above proposition on its head and getting the casino to do EXACTLY that. It is challenging the wheel to spin an exact sequence of 3 spins at EXACTLY at a point in time, IMMEDIATELY after spinning the 7th Pattern. And the smart thing about it is we are using the randomness of the wheel to choose when that 8th pattern must be spun. So the trigger occurs at a different time each time we play it. Sometimes the trigger may occur after 7 patterns of 3 have been spun, ie all 7 patterns are generated once without repeating sequences. Other times sequences are repeated so we have to wait longer for the 7th pattern to complete. And the sequence of the patterns is different all the time so we do not know in advance what that last pattern will be. So you start to realize the PATTERN BREAKER is not just a simple method that is no better than just betting red. But it is a very simple POWERFUL method that plays random against random.
This proposition of combinations and permutations is what man has invented to create locks for safes and the simple bike lock. It is widely known that if you use one of these locks or safes your precious items will be relatively safe from getting stolen. We all know about the extreme lengths thieves go through to crack safes. If it was that easy to pick a lock don't you think our precious items would be getting stolen on a regular basis. Sales of safes and locks would not be anywhere near as high as they are. The lock industry will die overnight.
So are you starting to understand that PATTERN BREAKER is not just another silly method. It has some logic to it and is the core reason why people like Sentinel and others are having success with this method. I plan on being another who will have long term success with this method where other methods I have used have failed long term.
Cheers,
Ricky
Am I wrong to assume JL was Sentinel3 and is now Ricky? Same writing style!
What´s with all the sockpuppeting here?
Quote from: psimoes on Mar 07, 05:02 PM 2018
Does that mean when you lose with PB it´s not because of its flaws, but because "you´re not smart enough"?
any bet you place on the table is flawed because it is a negative expectation game.
no matter how the chips get on the mat its at the mercy of the house edge
so does not really matter how you play
i dont care if someones method is tapping their forehead, spinning around, and betting black
it takes smarts to be a winner
Quote from: CoderJoe on Mar 07, 12:41 PM 2018
But each sequence has the same chance, so the odds don't change. It's the same with pattern breaker. The odds of 3 losses in a row haven't changed just because you waited for the final pattern. There is nothing special about that particular pattern at that moment in time. Ross is right to say it's pointless targeting one pattern over any other. All sequences of the same length have the same probability.
Hi Coderjoe,
you are absolutely correct. I am not saying this is the holy grail infallable system that will NEVER lose. but as Clint Eastward phrased when shooting his magnum "Do you feel lucky punk? Well do you?" We are just turning the question back to the casino. If we lose that means the casino was lucky just as we are when we win. But it is not the player of PB that is guessing and feeling lucky. Its the casino. The point is that real life experience is showing that if you limit your bets to just these moments and ignore all the other spins that could be winners or losers then you are leaving luck to the casino not to yourself. It was not you that chose that moment to bet high or low or player or banker. It was the random event the took place in the previous spins.
I just came back from a local Casino here in Spain and played Andre's version of PB where he bets after a repeat of the same three hand sequence. I was only used a 1-2 betting progression and was playing it VERY patient. In the first shoe I only bet on one game and in fact it was an error so I should not really have bet. The next few shoes I was able to get some bets on and my result after about 3 hours was WLWWWWWLWWW. I did not use recovery and was playing with BR of 100 euro and made about 20 euro with now stress. My system told me when to bet and finished with 9 wins and 2 losses. Now if I continue this way I am sure I am going to grow my bankroll significantly. When I start losing as your simulation seems to predict I will let you know. But in the meantime I'm happy to employ this method until it starts losing on a long term basis. Somehow I do not think I am going to stop using this system. The only thing I will be doing is trying to maximize my staking levels to take advantage of the long winning streaks and minimize losses when the inevitable loss does occur. But a 9-2 after three hours with no Zero to cover and only slight 5c in the dollar disadvantage on the banker bet is giving me every confidence that this is a winning system.
You can continue running your simulations and let me know when you find a better system that is safer than PB with a 2 step progression risking less than or equal to 3 units and no recover mode to increase risks further.
cheers,
Ricky
PS. I am not Sentinel but wish I had his winning streak.
Quote from: psimoes on Mar 07, 05:02 PM 2018
Does that mean when you lose with PB it´s not because of its flaws, but because "you´re not smart enough"?
No it means the Casino got lucky. But its only getting lucky 1 in every 10+ spins. Calculate the win/loss ratio in terms of 100 spins. The PB player is taking advantage of a 10-20% edge over the Casino. If you play the same you will enjoy such advantage. What other method can you use that gives similar player advantage?
cheers,
Ricky
Quote from: Ricky on Mar 07, 07:27 PM 2018
The PB player is taking advantage of a 10-20% edge over the Casino. If you play the same you will enjoy such advantage. What other method can you use that gives similar player advantage?
Wait whuuuuut? Hell no !
Systems like this are just slowing the variance down (mostly). But without any doubt its coming to get you. If you think otherwise i suggest you stop playing this random game ::)
Quote from: Ross on Mar 06, 03:21 PM 2018
So what's different about the first bet of the day?
My opinion - nothing. Just luck again.
Bingooooo :thumbsup:
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Mar 07, 06:21 PM 2018it takes smarts to be a winner
Replace "smarts" with "luck" and all that will make sense.
Otherwise that only gives scammers, attention seekers and compulsive liars a good excuse for them to carry on with their agendas.
Quote from: Ricky on Mar 07, 07:27 PM 2018
No it means the Casino got lucky. But its only getting lucky 1 in every 10+ spins. Calculate the win/loss ratio in terms of 100 spins. The PB player is taking advantage of a 10-20% edge over the Casino. If you play the same you will enjoy such advantage. What other method can you use that gives similar player advantage?
cheers,
Ricky
PB has a major flaw right at its core. Why should we believe in that winloss ratio?
All roulette bets are flawed for the same reason: house edge and unfair payout
I have no reason not to believe PB results because I have duplicated them
Doesn’t matter how you play roulette. Same house edge.
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Mar 08, 07:38 AM 2018
All roulette bets are flawed for the same reason: house edge and unfair payout
I have no reason not to believe PB results because I have duplicated them
Doesn’t matter how you play roulette. Same house edge.
That doesn´t make sense. If all roulette bets are flawed, how can you not have a reason to doubt about PB?
Imho,
What the probability for a "matrix of three- EC" to hit=1/8...
The trillion dollar question, is what the probability of a last-matrix 3, of a particular 3 EC, that not yet hit,
To hit IMMEDIATELY, after SEVEN OF THEM HAD APPEARED?
What the % chance of the last, yet to hit, matrix3, hit after all seven had hit?
Mathboys shrieking itis 1/7,
But as .a group of pattern probability...
Say, there only eight kind of color, of cars in a city, after seven color has stop at the traffic light, will the last color stop at the traffic light? Imho, the probability is small...
It like having 8 color of marbles, in a box, take one out and replace it back, after 7 color taken out, will the next color be the eighth color?
This is a question of, after 7 color permutations appeared, will the next color be the 8th color?
Permutation of 7 are huge, and what the chance probability, of 7permutation turn to 8permutation, immediately after the last color of 7th permutation, turn to 8color permutation, any mathboys here?
Thus if we have , say color1, color2, color3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8...
Then the shortest permutation chances=12345678 permutation, and the longest is infinity of nowhere we see a permutation of 8 type of color, only 7color..
Thus what the chances of after "first permutation of 7colot hit", no mztter the length...
the eighth color hit?
Quote from: SWEET on Aug 30, 12:47 AM 2018
Imho,
What the probability for a "matrix of three- EC" to hit=1/8...
The trillion dollar question, is what the probability of a last-matrix 3, of a particular 3 EC, that not yet hit,
To hit IMMEDIATELY, after SEVEN OF THEM HAD APPEARED?
What the % chance of the last, yet to hit, matrix3, hit after all seven had hit?
Mathboys shrieking itis 1/7,
But as .a group of pattern probability...
Say, there only eight kind of color, of cars in a city, after seven color has stop at the traffic light, will the last color stop at the traffic light? Imho, the probability is small...
It like having 8 color of marbles, in a box, take one out and replace it back, after 7 color taken out, will the next color be the eighth color?
This is a question of, after 7 color permutations appeared, will the next color be the 8th color?
Permutation of 7 are huge, and what the chance probability, of 7permutation turn to 8permutation, immediately after the last color of 7th permutation, turn to 8color permutation, any mathboys here?
Thanks God and Good Morning All.
Thanks SWEET for this post.
It's like same as me and some senior members (RG etc) has discussed earlier for rare or rarest pattern chances/events of occurrences. specially what are the chances of these type of rare patterns to come at my local bm casino at the time when I am playing?
regards,
SugTips
Quote from: SWEET on Aug 30, 12:47 AM 2018
What the % chance of the last, yet to hit, matrix3, hit after all seven had hit?
Mathboys shrieking itis 1/7,
Mathboyz are correct....ur math is the usual wrong......if u learn that u might have learnt something
As this topic has resurfaced I thought I would look over the thread again at the responses. I stand by my test results, and I'm highly sceptical of JL's claims, given his track record. But if he is/was telling the truth, there must be something else he's taking account of which tells him when to start betting and when to quit, because taken in isolation, the probability of the last pattern coming up immediately after the second to last has hit is 1 in 8.
But I like ego's reply.
Quote from: ego on Mar 07, 02:40 AM 2018So the probability and the true odds come in cycles and are not static as Coder Joes Test Results. So when coder joe code the pattern breaker he make it continues flow where there is no beginning or end of the results. Each day a gambler enter the table he does not know what the wheel has done or will do in the future. But coder joes test show us that you get sometimes several winning strikes that increase the probability hitting one winning bet once using hit and run as does are more then the losing selections.
I think this is right, but how to identify what he calls the "true" odds? In my opinion, the reason most systems fail is that they are simple minded and don't take account of all the factors which produce the outcomes on a spin by spin basis. They just take one concept in isolation and run with it. How can this approach expect to succeed when outcomes are random, or at least largely random? The essence of randomness is change so you need to adapt to the changes otherwise you too often find yourself on the wrong track and losses mount up.
So I don't think the answer lies in somehow redefining probability, it lies in taking account of the probabilities of more factors. Using an analogy from sports betting/ horse racing, a simple minded racing system would be to bet on the horse which won its last race. As a long term strategy this is highly unlikely to succeed, it would be much better if you were to include other factors like the similarity of the current track to the track where it last won, the record of the jockey, the age of the horse, the weather conditions, etc etc.
In the language of statistics, this is multivariate analysis (taking account of multiple variables). A univariate (single variable) analysis is a poor strategy for the prediction of something as complex as random or near random outcomes, you need to include more variables. Even so, it's more of an art than a science in my opinion.
Its 1/8, try to edit, but too late, timeout ;D
After so many years since the idea of Pattern Breaker has surfaced for the first time, shouldn't there a handful of people who have played this system extensively and are willing to share their genuine experience and their win/loose ratio?
On one side you have the math, but on the other side we should have real-life experiences from players using this system.
Is there someone willing to share his statistics in regard of Pattern Breaker?
I am very curious to see some statistics derived from genuine play and not from some computer model.