#1 Roulette Forum & Message Board | www.RouletteForum.cc

I'm interested in finding out what people think of John's systems, since they've attracted quite a bit of attention in the past.
Not to be taken too seriously, and of course, the results won't really "prove" anything one way or the other.

Personally what interest me on JL systems is the low BR required. They lose just as expected of any system but they're definitely a decent way to slowly build one's BR, and are easy to understand.

Of course a big challenge for someone with a low BR is time management. One has to invest a lot of time for a seemingly small reward...but when playing with a big enough BR, i actually think JL systems are worth the trouble.
 
my 2 cents

vundarosa

Quote from: vundarosa on Aug 05, 05:40 PM 2011
Personally what interest me on JL systems is the low BR required. They lose just as expected of any system but they're definitely a decent way to slowly build one's BR, and are easy to understand.

Of course a big challenge for someone with a low BR is time management. One has to invest a lot of time for a seemingly small reward...but when playing with a big enough BR, I actually think JL systems are worth the trouble.
 
my 2 cents

vundarosa

Fully agree vundarosa.......

Hello Bayes, after a lot of roulette research I just find JohnLegends methods to ring true and his results speak for themselves..............

The problem I have with John's systems, and all the currently fashionable "matrix methods", is that the bet selections are always touted as effective ways to somehow trick random - the implication is that "random" is unlikely to come up with the pattern in the matrix, and that's where you get your advantage. This is a bit like lottery players who would never choose the numbers 1,2,3,4,5,6 because that pattern is too "perfect", instead they use something like 3,7,16,23,28,34, which seems to be more "random", and thus more likely to hit. Like many roulette players, they forget that all sequences are equally likely. It's really not hard to come up with a new matrix system. Here's one -

RBBBR
BRBRR
BBRBB

The idea is to arrange the outcomes in lines and bet for the 'V' shape NOT to occur. It took me precisely 3 seconds to invent this system. There are literally millions of matrix methods you could dream up, but just because you arrange the outcomes in a particular way and then abstract patterns doesn't mean that those patterns are less likely to occur than any others you didn't happen to think of. A pattern isn't necessary at all in order for the chance of success to be exactly the same. For example, you would get the same results by betting on Red in each of the positions where you would normally bet against the V pattern forming.

I see Ur point Very precisely Jules.

Here's my take on it.

If U take the mentioned matrix, and strung it out in a 'Straight Line', like we would with normal play, the choice of when to bet, becomes a variant on a straight line rule. Forinstance.

Here's Ur "V" formation:-

RBBBR
BRBRR
BBRBB

But shown as a straight line load:-

RBBBRBRBRRBBRBB

and the "V" now shows as:-

RBBBRBRBRRBBRBB

which could be a written rule of:-

"Bet on the 1st spin, then the 5th spin, then the 7th spin, then  the 9th spin, then the 13th spin, in a series of 15 blocks of spins."

U see, when Unwrapping the 'Illuzion' bet, it can become a reasonably easy bet to wright a function formula for.

Having said all that, I like the cleverness of the Matrix bets, and  if "Clever" can put on over the Roulette Random, then so be it.
Where I think the Matrix needs to go, is in playing a variety of Matrices (Matri'i) all at the same time, and allowing a computer program to decide which one suit the conditions thrown out by the Spin results at that time.

Quoteallowing a computer program to decide which one suit the conditions thrown out by the Spin results at that time

Theres no decision to be made though, the odds are identical no matter what eye candy you look at, JL has been lucky to avoid losing attacks, others haven't had the same luck, that's all it boils down to, luck

I do see your point regarding the forming of patterns, for the V in your example to form once is of course possible, but using Johns thoughts on random, can random form that same V four times in a row. and how often. This is what we are betting against.

Quotecan random form that same V four times in a row. and how often

Often enough to take back whatever you won, random is forming whatever patterns they are visualising on a frequent enough basis, the only thing they have for them is this hit n run thingy ma bob, which equates to luck and nothing else.

Quote from: artattack on Aug 06, 06:49 AM 2011
I do see your point regarding the forming of patterns, for the V in your example to form once is of course possible, but using Johns thoughts on random, can random form that same V four times in a row. and how often. This is what we are betting against.

............and when it DOES form those patterns Four times in a row, all your left with (as a player) is to PROGRESS Urself out of trouble, exactly the same as you would (if you choose to do so), with any other System/Routine/Sequence.

Maybe the real question, is the comparison between a Progression of a Matrix Sequence, and its ability to recover; and, any other system play, that uses Progressions to recover.

QuoteMaybe the real question, is the comparison between a Progression of a Matrix Sequence, and its ability to recover; and, any other system play, that uses Progressions to recover

Exactly Chris, the results will be the same no matter what pattern you choose to follow

Quote from: artattack on Aug 06, 06:49 AM 2011
I do see your point regarding the forming of patterns, for the V in your example to form once is of course possible, but using Johns thoughts on random, can random form that same V four times in a row. and how often. This is what we are betting against.

YESTERDAY driveing to my workout im stopped at a red light see this nice looking girl on a bike, by the way this true ,one hour later i meet the same girl on here bike at the same red light what are the odds,this happens to alot of people,but if i go to my workout at the same time today at the same red light will i see the same girl on the bike at the same red light maybe ,maybe not but if it happens today i will be amazed.

So now its all down to:

Few facts then.

• Matrix appears to ONLY require 4-6 steps of progression to Win.
• Many other Systems, require 10-16-20 steps of progression to Win.
• No Matrix (till proven otherwise) can Win with Continuous Play.
• No System has shown to Win on a Continuous Play.

Would anyone like to Comment, or Add/Subtract this statements?

Here's my basic thought on matrices.  If we play any of the methods posted on this forum, we are usually just betting that the last result in a formation will either be something or not be something.  If it's a dozen then there's 1 in 3 chances it will be or 2 in 3 chances it won't be.  The 1 in 3 pays 2:1 and the 2:3 pays 1:2.  I don't see an advantage here.  If you have three opportunities to bet you should get 1 yes and 2 nos for single dozen bet or 2 yeses and 1 no for double dozen bet.


The really difficult way is to bet against the "slide" as an example, forming from the 2nd spin or even the 1st spin.  Example:  Let's say we're betting againts the following:


1223
2122
1211
3221


That's four 1's on a left top to bottom right diagonal.  If we wait till three have formed, we only have a 1 in 3 chance that it will form the 4th, or 2 in 3 that it won't form.


If we start betting on the 2nd row (2122) that the 1 won't show and then if it does, we bet on the 3rd row (1211) that the 1 won't show etc... Now it will be a rare event.  The problem is that we will have to have a very big progression in order to make money every time our bet is right.


I don't know all the math, but I know logically that we have the same odds of winning in the long run whether we wait to only bet against the 4th 1 showing, or we start betting against the 2nd, 3rd and 4th 1 showing.


Betting against the whole slide forming gives us a lot more wins than waiting until the 1st 3 numbers have formed and then betting the 4th won't.  The problem is an overall loss betting against all 4 forming, sets us back proportionately as much as a loss when only betting for the last number to not show.


Okay, it's early here.  But you get the point I'm trying  to make.  Right?


??? :-\ :'( :question:

i see we have yet another poll..just to put a little pointer here i,ve played continiously diaganoly like the slide version but with a small tweak ie if the results were this
a b c c    heres the 1st line
A b c a    here a comes under a so our next bet will on the next line sliding under b
b B C a    is a b again so lose but now we stay on this line and bet the last 2 dozens above
c b b a     which in this case is c and a it hits doz c first so we win...

               with this and using another doz system its very easy not to progress too much as one system helps the other out...john legend is on the right track....a quick question to you superman...one system is not like any other at all ...i,ll put this to you and other coders on here   if we were to play double streets ie n1  to n6   so there are of course 6 n6,s....in typical matrix mode  you write down the very 1st 6 n6 or to most double streets  ie the results are ds 6-4-1-4-3-5   the odds are astronomical of you hitting the very same numbers again(double streets)  i call it roulette codebreaker..chrisbis i think you need time out making silly polls...patience is the key and using two systems at least which is not very hard is the answer  ...i don,t think you have it ..wheres alibabha gone?

Quote from: 6th-sense on Aug 06, 11:47 AM 2011
I think you need time out making silly polls

Actually, this silly poll was my idea.  ;)

Quote..wheres alibabha gone?

Banned.

thanks Bayes...........was just about to say something similar, though without the 'Silly' attribution.
The Poll would be interesting, IF everyone who HAS tried the Matrix, (in what ever format, whether singularly, or in combination, (as say as part of the MST tracker device)), took part in the Poll.


@6th............as usual you make at lot of 'sense'.

though for my '6th pennith' worth, I actually think two or three systems/routines is the way forward.

Question now is what two, and as someone has just asked me- When, Which and Where?
Also, '6th'........
[reveal]I am now akin 2 U- I have two user names, though in my case not of my own doing![/reveal]

The losses tend to come in clumps (several losses in a row) and one may find a considerably larger bank is required than suggested. (Even with hit and run tactics).

so majority thinks that JL's systems are nothing special? So what systems are better? Maybe its because im new but his systems are the best things i have ever read on a roulette forum. Where is he now? Haven't seen his post in a while

forget them all learn something that has to happen like movements! kimo li = way forward you can earn so much ****** MONEY!


and if u cant be bothered to learn kimos way then just create a system off the top of your head play it to gain a few units and then create another system they all seem to win the first few times u play

Quote from: StackBundles on Mar 21, 01:31 PM 2012
forget them all learn something that has to happen like movements! kimo li = way forward you can earn so much ****** MONEY!


and if You can't be bothered to learn kimos way then just create a system off the top of your head play it to gain a few units and then create another system they all seem to win the first few times u play

O RLY??

You want to make money off roulette... become a dealer

He had a system that was quite good...anyone remember The Zone Dozens System?

my couple of cents. I think JL has no reasons to lie about winning with his methods. But not everybody is successful with them. Why? i think JL very well "feels the rhythm" of his systems. It is extremely important not "overabuse" any method. Winning method may become real loser easily.

So analysis must be made of the way u play and win or lose. How many spins u can play, what profit u can get, how many spins to skip after (could be thousands of spins to skip! which means u may play the same wheel once say in 5 or 10 days) and so on.

all this must be done with RX of course, not with your money. Until u r sure u r on a right track

Quote from: Proofreaders2000 on Mar 21, 07:50 PM 2012
He had a system that was quite good...anyone remember The Zone Dozens System?

he got more than one good system

I was thinking that if JL's systems work, then we could use his basic idea and play on the fly.


Here's what I mean.


1 3 2 1 3 3
2 1 1 3 2 3
1 2 2 2 3 1
2 2 1 2 1 1
3 3 2 2 3 3
1 2 1 3 2 2
1 2 X 1 1 1
2 3 2 1 3 1
1 1 3 1 2 1
2 2 1 3 3 X

As you can see, the 3 red 1's are forming a pattern and the red X is where we would bet against that pattern continuing.


The blue X is where we bet against the 2 pattern continuing.


I'm sure there are other patterns you can find to bet against besides the ones I pointed out.


You could continue to bet against these patterns for up to 3 or 4 chances.


You can create any size matrix you want.


You could even create a variety of matrices using the same spins such as a 3 wide, 5 wide and 7 wide matrices looking for patterns in each matrix and I think you would have many more bets than if you track for predetermined patterns to develop. 


Many of us who have tested some of the systems can attest that often you must track forever before getting to place a bet.  "The Slide" is a case in point.

Quote from: iggiv on Mar 21, 08:42 PM 2012
my couple of cents. I think JL has no reasons to lie about winning with his methods. But not everybody is successful with them. Why? i think JL very well "feels the rhythm" of his systems. It is extremely important not "overabuse" any method. Winning method may become real loser easily.

So analysis must be made of the way u play and win or lose. How many spins You can play, what profit You can get, how many spins to skip after (could be thousands of spins to skip! which means u may play the same wheel once say in 5 or 10 days) and so on.

all this must be done with RX of course, not with your money. Until u r sure u r on a right track

Hello

I disagree slightly here. I dont think you can improve your odds by waiting certain number of spins or play it hit and run. The loses will just simply catch up with you sooner or later.  Testing it manually i just could not verify strike rate reported by some people.  400/1 in Code 4 just seems impossible to me. I might be biased because i lost first game ever played of Code 4. But i might have got 400 wins after that :( I just did not take that chance.
Funny thing is that if you come up with some decent system you usually get few easy wins at the beginning and loses will come later. But it maybe my bad luck.
I just would not feel comfortable playing them.

Regards

The people who regularly profit from roulette mostly dont visit forums because there is only ever:

1. advantage play methods that are old and unsuitable for modern casinos
2. gamblers fallacy, ie RBRB etc.

And if they bother to take the time to explain to people the truth about things, people dont listen. And they may go their whole lives not learning a method that wins consistently. This might sound strange coming from someone that owns multiple forums, but its the truth. Will this change the course of discussions? Not likely. Never has for most people. Not until they understand what does and doesnt work and WHY. And that will never happen for most people because they're looking for something that is easy.

Quote from: Steve on Mar 22, 12:46 AM 2012
The people who regularly profit from roulette mostly don't visit forums because there is only ever:

1. advantage play methods that are old and unsuitable for modern casinos
2. gamblers fallacy, ie RBRB etc.

And if they bother to take the time to explain to people the truth about things, people don't listen. And they may go their whole lives not learning a method that wins consistently. This might sound strange coming from someone that owns multiple forums, but its the truth. Will this change the course of discussions? Not likely. Never has for most people. Not until they understand what does and doesn't work and WHY. And that will never happen for most people because they're looking for something that is easy.

You are never old enough to learn something stupid  8)

What would we do if there did not exist system players, i love them and keep up the good work.
Thanks to you all i am free to do what i do best.

In the back of my mind there is this nagging suspicion that the wheel doesn't know what kind of gymnastics we have gone through to decide how much or what number to bet on.  It doesn't know if we're betting against a rare formation or betting for a common one.  It's all random.  The patterns are random.  No matter how rare they are, they will come up some time, randomly. 

I keep hoping we can find a method of play that will stay ahead of the losses.  Unfortunately, we cannot be sure because random can favor our system while testing and then throw a bad series of spins that can last way longer than we have money when we start playing for real.

Maybe we are just wasting our time here.

Quote from: GLC on Mar 22, 11:12 AM 2012
In the back of my mind there is this nagging suspicion that the wheel doesn't know what kind of gymnastics we have gone through to decide how much or what number to bet on.  It doesn't know if we're betting against a rare formation or betting for a common one.  It's all random.  The patterns are random.  No matter how rare they are, they will come up some time, randomly. 

I keep hoping we can find a method of play that will stay ahead of the losses.  Unfortunately, we cannot be sure because random can favor our system while testing and then throw a bad series of spins that can last way longer than we have money when we start playing for real.

Maybe we are just wasting our time here.

Now that is a very good sign and make common sense to make a statment like that.
Nice.

So i might add this to your statment.
Now many does not know why we state the game has 37 degree of freedom witch make nothing due to happen.

The dealer release the ball with one particular fource.
The behavior change each time the dealer release the ball, so it can be similiar but not the same, even do it can occur a repeat of previos release behavior.

Then the ball make from the begining to end different amounts of turnarounds.
The spindevelopment can do 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 turnarounds to end.
During this each time, each spin with different spindevelopment the dealer puch the rotor to move.
The speed is slight different each time or for each spin.
That means the position of the numbers on the number ring or rotor will travel with certain speed.
So the timeframe for the spindevelompment and rotor is totaly random and all numbers has 37 degree of freedom or show up with not static rules as they all have the same chanse.

To this we should also add at the end there is 8 metal deflectors where the ball will hit and then randomly jump a distance and land on the number ring and start to randomly scatter on the number ring before the ball stop in one particular number or winning number.

The point is - even if the dealer try to puch the rotor with the same constant speed and spin the ball with the same fource it would still have 37 degree of freedom.
As if all spins was 16 turnarounds from begining to end there would exist duration witch would differ the time for the ball to complete and reach the end - witch would not be the same amount of time.
Also the rotor would drift 0.5 or 1.0 pocket over time into other direction and would not be in same position at end of the spin.
And also add ball jump with random scatter so are we again facing 37 degree of freedom.

"Maybe we are just wasting our time here."

That's a non-starter.  These boards should be more about the real entertainment of explaining what's really going on (than the pretend sort which covers it all up).

But only an honest message-board would allow for that.  Like the casinos don't hang around for the "entertainment" after it's no longer profitable for them.

"I keep hoping we can find a method of play that will stay ahead of the losses.  Unfortunately, we cannot be sure because random can favor our system while testing and then throw a bad series of spins that can last way longer than we have money when we start playing for real.

Maybe we are just wasting our time here."-GLC

I understand your sentiment which brings me to this.  No you can't avoid the losses, but if there is a way to minimize the losses, (less at stake) compared to wins, that would be the Grail (for any system).

food for thought for non-believers like buddy Robeenhut. This was a little experiment with German spins, playing hot EC trends roughly with 1000 spin gaps. Hot trend -- i mean playing just last EC result randomly for 1 spin only.

playing similar way different last choices like street, corner, EC, dozen, column. All flatbet. Playing street 12 times (or till win), corner 9 times (or till win) and so on. Gaps of roughly 1000 spins.

it is like u come to the same casino every few days and play once the same wheel.

Quote from: iggiv on Mar 23, 11:20 PM 2012
food for thought for non-believers like buddy Robeenhut. This was a little experiment with German spins, playing hot EC trends roughly with 1000 spin gaps. Hot trend -- i mean playing just last EC result randomly for 1 spin only.

Hello Buddy Iggiv

Yeah its possible. I play some methods like this trying to capitalize on some trends. Pick random 18 numbers and you will be surprised how many times you will get 6 or 7 wins in a row. If you down after 6 games use mild progression.
But we are talking about something little bit different here. Look up my post on Code 4.
It looks like some people have perfect timing ALL THE TIME entering the game and walking away after just few games. Stats show that  played continuously  its just a little better than average method. And suddenly it becomes Holy Grail with hit and run stats.
Its like you always pick the right games to play thousands times over.
Its just betting against 1 Dz or CL alternatively for 4 steps and at the last step your strike ratio
is 10 to 1?  And at some point you go 600/0?

So I'm extreme non-believer here  :xd:
You are absolutely right iggiv.
I'm just trying to use some common sense.
Hehe i want to play in this german casino. Maybe they have biased wheel toward clients.


Regards

Remember, roulette is unbeatable on a long run with any method. Longer u play -- easier u lose. Don't let yourself get stuck in "tunnel vision". No method will bring u anything but losses if u try to play it continously and want a lot of money. But many methods can bring u something if u use them smartly.
Yes, hit and run, but not just this. U should know how to use "hit-n-run". How much hit and for how long run. There was a good movie, "Analyze this". And then came a sequel "Analyze that".  These are 2 very good names not only for the movies

u don't have to believe me. Analyze this and analyze that :)
u got nothing to lose.

Qui habet aures audiendi, audiat.

do widzennie :)

i agree iggy ....i,ve just posted in code 4 i,m going to see if i can set up some video capture software program and play code 4 and d&c plus and my cyclonic bet all at the same time and start putting up a day by day or session by session video for all too see either too plus 10 units or 100 spin sessions...win or lose ..someone should have done it a long time ago....a bit of effort of support for john legend wouldn,t go amiss...william hill low stakes....leave it with me.

Quote from: 6th-sense on Mar 25, 02:14 AM 2012
i agree iggy ....I've just posted in code 4 I'm going to see if i can set up some video capture software program and play code 4 and d&c plus and my cyclonic bet all at the same time and start putting up a day by day or session by session video for all too see either too plus 10 units or 100 spin sessions...win or lose ..someone should have done it a long time ago....a bit of effort of support for john legend wouldn,t go amiss...william hill low stakes....leave it with me.

Hello

I would love to see that because we dont have other data than JL's.

 

Bayes, interesting you should say that about the lottery. I'm reading a book called taking chances and it discussed that very subject.

123456 does actually get bet on, but humans can't ever think 123456 is random. Infact, if they used random.org to select the lottery and it came up with 123456, they would most certainly not use it.

As for Matix bets, i don't get it. Its a very simple idea tarted up to look complex, fashioned to look like it will confuse random.

If we track nice blocks of 4 in a 4x4 matrix, then say the 4th row won't repeat what does that complex human shape mean? It means the next number out won't be the same as 13 ago??

Random doesn't work in blocks of 4. Its an independant number that has no memory. So the truth of the matrix is also a single comparison without memory,i.e. 13 numbers ago.

Seen like that, then Code 4 and all those matrix systems work because betting on 2 dozens gives you very good odds.

Just my view.

Everything should be broken down into its most simple ellement to see its truth.

Quote from: turnerfeck on Apr 29, 10:06 AM 2012
As for Matrix bets, i don't get it. Its a very simple idea tarted up to look complex, fashioned to look like it will confuse random.

If we track nice blocks of 4 in a 4x4 matrix, then say the 4th row won't repeat what does that complex human shape mean? It means the next number out won't be the same as 13 ago??

Random doesn't work in blocks of 4. Its an independant number that has no memory. So the truth of the matrix is also a single comparison without memory,i.e. 13 numbers ago.

Seen like that, then Code 4 and all those matrix systems work because betting on 2 dozens gives you very good odds.

Just my view.

Everything should be broken down into its most simple element to see its truth.

Gotta agree with Turnerfeck's logic here!

A.

I think the subject died down a long time ago.  To me they are not better than any pattern oriented method out here and with hit'n'run approach you  may make some money in a short run.
In a long run played straight with a progression they will gradually give back all your earnings like most of the methods out here.

Quote from: Robeenhuut on Apr 29, 12:47 PM 2012
I think the subject died down a long time ago.  To me they are not better than any pattern oriented method out here and with hit'n'run approach you  may make some money in a short run.
In a long run played straight with a progression they will gradually give back all your earnings like most of the methods out here.

the kind of progression used is the first flaw of that system. many things could be observed for triggers, but none did. Also another way of improvement was filtering the LW registry. The ultimate tuning would be interpret tendencies and switch from bet to anti-bet.
None of the above is applied on that system, so even if the hit & run works for some, in the long term, as their personal permanence grows, everything will tend to the odds of the game.


Anyway i am glad that someone hits a positive tram and profits from that.
As Iggiv says: Analyze this! -Analyze that!  :thumbsup:


Cheers

Quote from: 6th-sense on Mar 25, 02:14 AM 2012
i agree iggy ....I've just posted in code 4 I'm going to see if i can set up some video capture software program and play code 4 and d&c plus and my cyclonic bet all at the same time and start putting up a day by day or session by session video for all too see either too plus 10 units or 100 spin sessions...win or lose ..someone should have done it a long time ago....a bit of effort of support for john legend wouldn,t go amiss...william hill low stakes....leave it with me.

Any progress on that mate? I'd like to see what you have in mind :)