This is where I'll post John's results when he starts the test. I'm away hiking in the mountains for the next few days, back on Sunday. The software should be ready next week, by 1st July at the latest.
Here's what it's going to look like, the GUI is 90% done.
[attachimg=1]
John suggested starting with a 200u bank and trebling it, and that will be a good start. Let's see if he makes it that far.
Quote from: Bayes on Jun 20, 06:04 PM 2012
This is where I'll post John's results when he starts the test. I'm away hiking in the mountains for the next few days, back on Sunday. The software should be ready next week, by 1st July at the latest.
Here's what it's going to look like, the GUI is 90% done.
[attachimg=1]
John suggested starting with a 200u bank and trebling it, and that will be a good start. Let's see if he makes it that far.
Nice work Bayes. I will do a few virtual tests on your marvel before I start for real to get a feel for it and see if it behaves as I have come to expect. Then I shall begin what I hope will be the start of an historic bench mark in all of roulette forum history.
cant wait--this should be fun
Where will the numbers be generated from? Will they be from an RNG built directly into the software?
If so, how good is the rng? Can it be relied upon?
The rng could be the weak link in this test, make it a good one Bayes. :)
Will JL only be able to get 1 spin at a time?
Skakus,
Yep, the numbers will be generated from an internal RNG. I thought this best as then there won't be any question of the spins being corrupted, plus if I were to use actuals from a file, there's a risk that they could be known. I don't have enough personal actuals for the test, and getting them from a public source is probably not a good idea.
Don't know about the quality of the RNG, I'm make some enquiries. I'm pretty sure it's the 'rand()' function from the C programming language, if so it should be high quality. Anyway, I've generated a couple of thousand so that JL or anyone else can check them out.
It crossed my mind to enable multiple spins, say an option to get 1, 10, 50, 100? what do you think, John?
p.s. gotta run now, so you won't get a reply from me until Sunday.
Hello bayes one spin at a time is fine, Im in no hurry, All I preach about patiemce and discipline, will be demonstrated over the next year,
Quotewill be demonstrated over the next year
Surely it's not going to take that long mate, what is your plan of attack? as you know the RNG doesn't understand waiting periods it just spits out numbers how many times are you going to play on it each day and for how long at a time?
Quote from: superman on Jun 21, 09:13 AM 2012
Surely it's not going to take that long mate, what is your plan of attack? as you know the RNG doesn't understand waiting periods it just spits out numbers how many times are you going to play on it each day and for how long at a time?
Im going to play on it when I have time Superman. My real money games come first. And my part time job and family life take up a fair amount of time. What I will show is exactly how I bet but on a smaller scale. Bringing the Bankroll up at a steady pace. When losses occur they will be setbacks. But I am always confident that overall I will progress as I do on a live wheel. And other Rngs I play in test mode. I will aim for a 5 to 10% increase of my Base BR per session.
Bayes suggests I reach at least 1000 units to show there is not really any way I could be wiped out from that point. The point is Superman. A year from now maybe sooner. There wont be a single right minded person who doubts me again. You run it like a business. You always give random respect, but not too much respect. I will try to double the 200 unit start with even money methods. Then I will bring in Dozen Column methods. Once I have a solid Br.
John, I've sent you a PM.
you could fetch numbers from random.org....
shoudnt be hard to generate them remotely with some query.
Good idea Ophis. Anyway, the prog is done so we're ready to roll. :)
Ok, popcorns are popping in microwave, juice is ice cold in fridge, so i am ready!
I am already sure this movie will be main favorite nominated for Oscar . No matter in which category LoL LoL
Cheers
Drazen
Will this be covered by ESPN? or any info on live blogs or tweets? Heres to John and I hope he proves that matrixes etc have validity
I pulling for a win myself.
I'd hate to give the bloke a public hug, but I'd do it if he found a winning system.
But......just a hug.......I have my pride!! And limits!!
Sam
Quote from: drazen_cro on Jun 27, 06:56 AM 2012
Ok, popcorns are popping in microwave, juice is ice cold in fridge, so i am ready!
Juice?? You're kidding me, right .... :twisted:
Quote from: Wally Gator on Jun 27, 07:45 PM 2012
Juice?? You're kidding me, right .... :twisted:
No my friend, i don't drink alcohol. But i ll definitely have to drink something "sharply" if JL raises his bank to several thousand of units with his Martingale. ;D
Cheers
Drazen
I believe JL is in the black today---go get em
Quote from: drazen_cro on Jun 28, 03:04 AM 2012
No my friend, i don't drink alcohol. But i ll definitely have to drink something "sharply" if JL raises his bank to several thousand of units with his Martingale. ;D
Cheers
Drazen
If that happens, the JUICE is on me .....
Where's Jl?
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jun 28, 10:29 PM 2012
Where's Jl?
He posted in Profit Trickler thread in Testing Zone
Testing zone (link:://rouletteforum.cc/testing-zone/13/) / Re: Profit Trickler (link:://rouletteforum.cc/testing-zone/13/profit-trickler/4661/msg83977#msg83977)Apparently he started playing Pattern 7 n Breaker. ;D
UPDATE:
Temporary delay due to software problems. ::)
Stay tuned...
i would say: why do u need RNG or random.org if u have roughly 30 wheel data in real time or archives at spielbank casinos online?
The goal is to defeat RNG or a wheel? i think defeating RNG is harder. Also there could be special requests fulfilled from spielbank data, like each set of spins can be from another wheel and/or
done such and such number of spins away from the previous one.
I'm looking forward to the restart of the challenge!
A.
The results will now be uploaded to a web site, I'll post the link here when I get some confirmation from JL that the software is working ok (I sent him the download link earlier). Just bookmark the site and you can keep track of JL's progress. :)
@ iggiv, I did look into getting spins from spielbank some time ago. Unfortunately it's not so easy to get them in real time, and the problem with using the archive is that they could be known to John. I did offer to provide actuals, but seems happy enough to use RNG.
Bayes, u don't have to give him last results. it could be one year ago results. they are just as valid as any. i don't think John will look for where he can find spins to use to fake his game. I think he is an honest guy u can trust.
or u can provide him with both sets of results. Let's say if he loses RNG and wins roulette then we will know that there could be some difference with results.
Iggiv,
Bayes is right in that is too risky to provide old Spielbank spins. doesn't matter when they are from. Computers can search a ton of stuff of matching strings of numbers... very easy to find with the right setup.
MM
John does not sell anything, he has no interest to lie. But if u say so i don't mind. It's not me taking up the challenge :))
Quote from: Bayes on Jun 29, 03:59 AM 2012
UPDATE:
Temporary delay due to software problems. ::)
Stay tuned...
I just wanted to point out this thread just in case. But since it probably won't be calling random numbers at high speed, it probably won't matter.
link:://rouletteforum.cc/coding-for-roulette/26/dont-make-this-programming-mistake-with-random/9602/ (link:://rouletteforum.cc/coding-for-roulette/26/dont-make-this-programming-mistake-with-random/9602/)
I think this is an excellent method to prove something. Wishing JL the best of skill and announce that i was a believer before he had to prove anything. In fact i still believe in Code 20.
Quote from: iggiv on Jul 01, 03:19 PM 2012
or You can provide him with both sets of results. Let's say if he loses RNG and wins roulette then we will know that there could be some difference with results.
I like this idea, but not sure how it could be done in practice. I don't think that JL is selling anything either, but the test has to be as foolproof as possible. I'm not saying that JL would try to cheat, only that a good test should minimize the possibility that anyone COULD cheat if they had a mind to.
mattymattz is right, it's so easy for anyone with the right software (or ability to write it) to scan millions of spins and match a pattern, so any spins in the public domain shouldn't be used. As for live wheels, apart from the technical issues, I don't think JL would agree because it would take too long; with the RNG he can get a spin instantly at the click of a button.
real casino spins can be taken from anywhere. for example from smartlive casino or casino vittoriosa. And they are not in archives there, but rather in real time. To scan spins from there
our bud John will have to sit there and watch those casinos 24/7.
That's OK. if u wanna find something really unbiased and foolproof better don't rely on your RNGs, they may be wrong as well.
take spins from random.org, that's gonna most unbiased RNG u can find.
Thanks for all the well wishes guys, Iggiv is right I honestly want to prove its possible to profit from this game, This is only the start, I want to try and beat the RNG Then I dont mind doing another test with ACTUALS, Ive only played one session on Bayes RNG but I praise him for delivering a fair easy to play set up, It behaves as I expect an RNG to behave, Trust me winning at roulette is not easy but its possible, I will take it slow over the first twenty sessions and attempt to double the BR, Speak soon and thanks again for ur support,
Great news Bayes and I have finally got lift off with this challenge. I had quite a tough first session. But managed to still increase the BR by 3% to 206 units. I will let Bayes give you guys the link so any interested can chart my progress.
Ok guys, here's the link to the site where you can follow John's progress (note: the format of the results is SELECTION STAKE WIN/LOSS BANK) -
link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/jltest.html (link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/jlchallenge.html)
6 units down, 394 to go. ;D
JL
I think it's safe to say we are all interested.
I wish you the best!
TCS
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jul 02, 04:04 PM 2012
JL
I think it's safe to say we are all interested.
I wish you the best!
TCS
Thankyou Sam.
I want John to prove his point. He is a good guy and not a liar, i am sure about it. Though our views on roulette are different, i trust him. He got no reasons and no interest to lie. I think he has some gut feeling for roulette, that's reason why not so many people are capable to follow him.
Though with RNG it could be totally different. That's not a roulette. Roulette is a mechanical device.
Quote from: iggiv on Jul 02, 05:13 PM 2012
I want John to prove his point. He is a good guy and not a liar, i am sure about it. Though our views on roulette are different, i trust him. He got no reasons and no interest to lie. I think he has some gut feeling for roulette, that's reason why not so many people are capable to follow him.
Though with RNG it could be totally different. That's not a roulette. Roulette is a mechanical device.
Thanks Iggiv. Both can be beaten. But theres no question an RNG is a little harder. That said Pattern Breaker is 16/0 so far on Bayes RNG. I would be hard pressed to have won 16 games in two sessions on a live wheel.
John,
I was keen to get the program up and running, but the results are a bit sparse. It would be better if I added a few more columns for the number of bets, ratio of wins to losses, a running z-score... You know - all that math boyz nonsense. 8)
I don't know what systems you're using, but it will be interesting to see whether over time any true advantage emerges from your bet selections, or whether it all comes down to money-management.
I'll leave it a couple of days to make sure there are no problems, then I'll add the extra columns. I'll send you a new version of the program with the updated starting bank.
Quote from: Bayes on Jul 02, 05:26 PM 2012
John,
I was keen to get the program up and running, but the results are a bit sparse. It would be better if I added a few more columns for the number of bets, ratio of wins to losses, a running z-score... You know - all that math boyz nonsense. 8)
I don't know what systems you're using, but it will be interesting to see whether over time any true advantage emerges from your bet selections, or whether it all comes down to money-management.
I'll leave it a couple of days to make sure there are no problems, then I'll add the extra columns. I'll send you a new version of the program with the updated starting bank.
Okay Bayes so long as I dont have to start over. RNGs are tough to beat period. The thing that will make the difference overtime Bayes is the human Factor. Iggiv seems to sense this about me. And I know its fact. I have a feeling when its time to shut up shop. I wanted to get to 210---212 tonight. But It wasnt going my way. I entered the cycle at the worst possible time tonight. And got a field of hard games to play and beat.
The first session I played on your RNG was the opposite. I entered at the perfect time. And won 5 units like it was nothing. But because of the software problems had to forfeit that gain. So technically I would be at 211 right now. But thats my next goal. Cheers.
Quote from: iggiv on Jul 02, 05:13 PM 2012
Though with RNG it could be totally different. That's not a roulette. Roulette is a mechanical device.
I think there will always be a debate about this, but as far as I'm concerned there is no reason to believe, and no evidence whatsoever that RNG and wheel produce different results. The wheel is, after all, just a physical RNG. You can argue that a real wheel isn't "random" in the same way that an RNG is, because you can measure things like wheel and ball speed etc on a wheel, but in terms of the distribution of numbers and groups, there is no difference.
Some of you might be aware of the test I did on VLS with bombus and others. I posted 100 sets of 300 spins, some of the sets were RNG, some were actuals. No-one who did the test was able to determine which was which by any significant margin.
I am aware of that test......
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jul 02, 05:35 PM 2012
Okay Bayes so long as I don't have to start over.
No, the new version's starting bank will be whatever your current bank is. Apart from that, everything will be the same apart from the additional columns. :thumbsup:
Quote from: Bayes on Jul 02, 05:38 PM 2012
I think there will always be a debate about this, but as far as I'm concerned there is no reason to believe, and no evidence whatsoever that RNG and wheel produce different results. In terms of the distribution of numbers and groups, there is no difference.
I agree 100% with that.
Good luck with the challenge John.
Quote from: flukey luke on Jul 02, 05:46 PM 2012
I agree 100% with that.
Good luck with the challenge John.
Thanks Flukey. Early stages will be slow and cautious. If I make my goal of 400 units then the real business begins. And I can accelerate my gains nicely.
You're a good man, Charlie Brown .... er, John Legend. Best of luck to you, although I'm not so sure you'll be needing it.
I have just completed my second session. An easier affair than yesterday where I had a real battle with the RNG. I attained my 6 units profit relatively easy today. So after two sessions my balance stands at 212 units.
Quote from: Wally Gator on Jul 02, 09:16 PM 2012
You're a good man, Charlie Brown .... er, John Legend. Best of luck to you, although I'm not so sure you'll be needing it.
Thankyou Wally Gator appreciate it.
Go Go Go !!!!! Big time rooting for you! Hey 6% uptick already
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jul 03, 01:07 PM 2012
Thankyou Wally Gator appreciate it.
You are a good man JL! I will share that I have played RNG and battled many a nights only to end up on the losing side eventually. It is not even close to live play...that I do know for sure. I will be be very anxious to hear more about your results and perhaps you can inspire some of us to try RNG again. For now, I will stick to live play! Can't wait to hear more :)
Quote from: Tomla021 on Jul 03, 01:23 PM 2012
Go Go Go !!!!! Big time rooting for you! Hey 6% uptick already
Thanks Tomla021
Quote from: Chauncy47 on Jul 03, 01:24 PM 2012
You are a good man JL! I will share that I have played RNG and battled many a nights only to end up on the losing side eventually. It is not even close to live play...that I do know for sure. I will be be very anxious to hear more about your results and perhaps you can inspire some of us to try RNG again. For now, I will stick to live play! Can't wait to hear more :)
Good to hear from you Chauncy47. Hows your play going? RNGs are tough but can be beaten. Thats why I took the challenge to inspire people to think more positively.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jul 03, 01:43 PM 2012
RNGs are tough but can be beaten
Beating real RNG-s is not tougher than any modern maintaned wheel. It is perfectly the same.
At least in your case 8)
Regards
Drazen
JL, the live play has been awesome to say the least. The results continue to be amazing or maybe not so amazing anymore :) Perhaps the right word is expected :) Thank you again for all your contributions to the forum! As you know, I am getting ready to head to Europe for 2 weeks and really looking forward to playing the single 0 wheel .... although it won't change my betting strategy, it will just be a different fun experience. I have been giving RNG a lot of thought lately and will say that you are way ahead of the curve if you have focused in a way to beat it. I have found that even through Hit & Run, its very stubborn.
Quote from: drazen_cro on Jul 03, 01:49 PM 2012
Beating real RNG-s is not tougher than any modern maintaned wheel. It is perfectly the same.
At least in your case 8)
Regards
Drazen
I'm not sure about that Drazen. Yesterday was the hardest I've had to work for just 6 units in a long time. That said I am being very conservative with my staking at the moment. If I am able to double the BR. My staking will be more adventurous. Especially for recovery. Plus I will be able to finance the 2/1 methods. That's when it really gets going. And I will push for bigger session percentages. To reach my first benchmark of 600 units. One step at a time. I have been preaching about patience and self discipline ever since I landed on a roulette forum. Now you will all see how JL puts that talk into practice.
Quote from: Chauncy47 on Jul 03, 02:20 PM 2012
JL, the live play has been awesome to say the least. The results continue to be amazing or maybe not so amazing anymore :) Perhaps the right word is expected :) Thank you again for all your contributions to the forum! As you know, I am getting ready to head to Europe for 2 weeks and really looking forward to playing the single 0 wheel .... although it won't change my betting strategy, it will just be a different fun experience. I have been giving RNG a lot of thought lately and will say that you are way ahead of the curve if you have focused in a way to beat it. I have found that even through Hit & Run, its very stubborn.
It can be done Chauncy47. There is no question Bayes RNG is as fair as a live wheel. I know of certain online RNGs that are predatory. They simply oppose whatever you bet on. Its so obvious that they should be closed down and fined some serious loot. But there are some that are fair. Its finding them and also being able to play them.
Bayes says BV is a fair RNG. Now I'm not going to argue with him. Because to be honest I've never really taken a close look at it. Plus I've never been comfortable with a no zero wheel as amazing as that may sound. What I do know is no RNG has ever beaten me in practice mode. Yet in real money mode I've never been able to come out on top. Maybe I haven't played them long enough to come to that absolute conclusion. But the few I have played just don't appear to behave anywhere close to a live wheel or even as they do when they have nothing to gain (practice mode) That's all I'm saying. After this challenge is over. And hopefully I am successful. I would like Bayes to direct me to RNGS he believes are fair. Then I will see if I can beat them.
The reason I want to do this is for our American friends more than anything. They have it real tough with their ridiculous online betting laws. So its really tough for them to make any money online.
JL, and to add to your comment from above. I am not sure RNG and Live Wheel Play are the same either. I will share that the results are much different or appear to be much different at this time. I have read enough to know about RNG that the parameters can be altered and what that means is still unclear but the simple fact is that if something can be altered, so its not exactly the same as Live Wheel Play. I am only offering an opinion before I get barraged challenging the validity of RNG. Its only an opinion.
Hm.. well mr. John saying this you are implying that there are could be differences beetween randoms of leveled wheel and real independant RNG as you are playing on?
And that you are sensitive so much on randoms behaviour and could spot the difference?
With playing so small example? No, no mr. John
This can look lets say like a preparing for a possible fail in the eyes of your followers and advocates.
Dont you affraid of that?
Cheers
Drazen
Quote from: Chauncy47 on Jul 03, 02:39 PM 2012
JL, and to add to your comment from above. I am not sure RNG and Live Wheel Play are the same either. I will share that the results are much different or appear to be much different at this time. I have read enough to know about RNG that the parameters can be altered and what that means is still unclear but the simple fact is that if something can be altered, so its not exactly the same as Live Wheel Play. I am only offering an opinion before I get barraged challenging the validity of RNG. Its only an opinion.
Dont bother my friend with that BS. Every at least little serious player here knows the difference when playing on gambling RNG for real.
On independent true RNG is no difference. Be sure about that.
Spare your energy for something better, and never use any kind of RNG in gambling purposes, especialy for playing with your hard earned money my friend.
Cheers
Drazen
Quote from: drazen_cro on Jul 03, 02:39 PM 2012
Hm.. well mr. John saying this you are implying that there are could be differences beetween randoms of leveled wheel and real independant RNG as you are playing on?
And that you are sensitive so much on randoms behaviour and could spot the difference?
With playing so small example? No, no mr. John
This can look lets say like a preparing for a possible fail in the eyes of your followers and advocates.
don't you affraid of that?
Cheers
Drazen
NO Drazen. I am not affraid. Or I wouldnt have taken the challenge. I'm saying there are certain online RNGs that are breaking the law. You yourself have slated RNGs in the past. So you should know. Remember the one about your friend being banned by William Hill. But very welcome to use their RNGs. Now why would that be???
I know that very well John. Yes i my first lost money was on RNG, but some can say it was a system of course it will loose :)
But anyway, yes that on WH was ultimate prove to me, and no one can convince me opposite >:D
I wish you all the best in your challenge, just dont use martingale and miracles maybe could happen =)
Cheers
Drazen
--You have my support Johny boy
Quote from: drazen_cro on Jul 03, 02:55 PM 2012
I know that very well John. Yes i my first lost money was on RNG, but some can say it was a system of course it will lose :)
But anyway, yes that on WH was ultimate prove to me, and no one can convince me opposite >:D
I wish you all the best in your challenge, just don't use martingale and miracles maybe could happen =)
Cheers
Drazen
Drazen I am against suicidal Martingales. But there is nothing wrong with mild progressions. I only risk in relation to my BR. Thats why you wont see me touch a 26 unit or more progression until I have at least 400 units. And thats what everyone should be doing. You always bet in relation to the size of you BR. Never ever risking more than 10% of it on any one game. Never ever.
Quote from: vile on Jul 03, 03:03 PM 2012
--You have my support Johny boy
Thanks Vile. If I make 400 units. I will be using your line Method from time to time.
Gonna use any Voodoo?
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jul 03, 03:25 PM 2012
Gonna use any Voodoo?
What on earth is that Sam. You on the Rum and Coke tonight?? ^-^
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jul 03, 03:06 PM 2012
Drazen I am against suicidal Martingales. But there is nothing wrong with mild progressions.
The second session played had 10 losses in a row. Nuff said.
Quote from: Bayes on Jul 04, 04:26 AM 2012
The second session played had 10 losses in a row. Nuff said.
What method was played n what represented a loss?
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jul 03, 03:25 PM 2012
Gonna use any Voodoo?
link:://:.doktorsnake.com/voodoo-spells/voodoo-gambling-spells/ (link:://:.doktorsnake.com/voodoo-spells/voodoo-gambling-spells/)
You could try sticking pins in an effigy of the pit-boss. :D
RH, no idea what systems JL is using, PATTERN BREAKER maybe? He seems to be staking very conservatively at the moment, which is a bit surprising because most of his systems involve doubling-up.
Quote from: Bayes on Jul 04, 04:47 AM 2012
RH, no idea what systems JL is using, PATTERN BREAKER maybe? He seems to be staking very conservatively at the moment, which is a bit surprising because most of his systems involve doubling-up.
So u can not see his actual bets but only results?
I can "see" the bets in the sense that each placed bet is recorded by the software and is uploaded to the web site. I didn't bother to record the no-bets (or virtual bets), I didn't think there was any point, and it's only the actual placed bets which count, of course. You can't quit the program and start again, so it's not possible to "cherry pick" the best results.
I suppose if I'd included all the spins that were generated then it would be possible to work out what system JL is using, but why bother? it's not as if his systems are a secret.
Quote from: Bayes on Jul 04, 05:16 AM 2012
I can "see" the bets in the sense that each placed bet is recorded by the software and is uploaded to the web site. I didn't bother to record the no-bets (or virtual bets), I didn't think there was any point, and it's only the actual placed bets which count, of course. You can't quit the program and start again, so it's not possible to "cherry pick" the best results.
I suppose if I'd included all the spins that were generated then it would be possible to work out what system JL is using, but why bother? it's not as if his systems are a secret.
Bayes Im playing PB Pattern 8 and ec matrix at the moment.
What seemed like 10 losses was 3 methods making me wait for a win. I'm playing no more than 2 now and being tight with staking until I reach 300 units.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jul 04, 08:10 AM 2012
What seemed like 10 losses was 3 methods making me wait for a win. I'm playing no more than 2 now and being tight with staking until I reach 300 units.
Why r u tight with staking John? How long is it going 2 take u 2 increase yr BR to 50%?
What is going 2 change if u reach 300u? R u going 2 increase yr bet size or play different method?
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Jul 04, 10:49 AM 2012
Why r u tight with staking John? How long is it going 2 take u 2 increase yr BR to 50%?
What is going 2 change if u reach 300u? R u going 2 increase yr bet size or play different method?
Its going to take a bit longer now. Had a nightmare session. My fault tried a new method and it didnt work. Still pulled myself back from -25 loss in BR. And finished the session 14.5% down on my starting BR. I will be sticking with PB and PATTERN 8. Im in no hurry Hutt. Never right me off. I have been down as low as 90 units on a 200 unit start. And eventually got the right side of 500 units. When I eventully get to 300 you will see how things change.
So I will not be trying anything new. Only tried and tested methods from now until I get to 300 units. I will recover at around 10 units a session.
Quote from: drazen_cro on Jul 03, 01:49 PM 2012
Beating real RNG-s is not tougher than any modern maintaned wheel. It is perfectly the same.
At least in your case 8)
Regards
Drazen
Yah, but nooobody has eeever beaten Bayes RNG!!
Wishing JL all the best!
P.S. ~
Quote from: drazen_cro on Jul 03, 02:39 PM 2012
This can look lets say like a preparing for a possible fail in the eyes of your followers and advocates.
don't you affraid of that?
Cheers
Drazen
No i'm not afraid of that at all! Code 20 forever!
Quote from: Still on Jul 04, 09:24 PM 2012
Yah, but nooobody has eeever beaten Bayes RNG!!
I can beat it. :P
Well JL really messed up his last session. If you end a session -32 units flat betting the EC's then there is little hope of recovery. This is certainly no way to beat an RNG "every time". Perhaps an overall profit in the end is still achievable?
Better luck next session JL.
Gentlemen
Let's not etch his tombstone just yet.
Sam
@Skakus
I seem to have missed where Bayes posted a link to the results site. Anybody want to PM me or something?
Here's the link, Still.
link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/jltest.html (link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/jlchallenge.html)
Quote from: Skakus on Jul 04, 09:55 PM 2012
I can beat it. :P
Skakus,
I can easily set up another web page if you want to have a crack at it, just let me know and I'll send you a link to download the software.
@ John,
Never mind mate, it happens. I'm sure you'll claw your way back.
Come on then, put up your dukes>>> hahahahha!
Ah, you know I can't back down from a challenge. Send me the software link and I will attempt to KICK YOUR SORRY ARSE RNG BACK TO MARS!
;D ;D ;D :o :o :xd: :xd: :twisted: :twisted: :wink: :wink: :girl_to:
But serioulsy, I would be honoured to try and overcome your RNG. Let's not take the attention off JL's excellent challenge though.
I do say I can beat your RNG over time, but I don't say I can beat it every time as JL claims.
I hope people understand that this type of test is open ended and could take years to complete. Unless you or I lay down our king at some point, Bayes. 8)
Thanks for the offer - PM the program!
Oh Goody :xd: :xd: :xd:
Give me a little while to set up the page and make a couple of minor changes to the program. You do know this is outside bets only? just thought I'd mention it because I know you like to bet the inside. I'm planning to write another version which includes the full layout, but that will be a while coming.
Quote from: Bayes on Jul 05, 03:53 AM 2012
Oh Goody :xd: :xd: :xd:
>>> You do know this is outside bets only?<<<
Oh cr_ap! Can I get cheese to put the bets on for me? >:D
The full layout version would be awsome, but I'll still whoop it.
Oh yeah maybe start a new thread like, The Skankass Challenge, or something. ;D
@Bayes
I read about a old challange at GG.
They test different systems for two weeks.
The system below come at secound place with out tanking.
Maybe that would be something to test run with your RNG.
link:://starthere.mysteria.cz/VIPsystems/winalert_January18_2005.htm (link:://starthere.mysteria.cz/VIPsystems/winalert_January18_2005.htm)
Quote from: Skakus on Jul 05, 04:01 AM 2012
Oh cr_ap! Can I get cheese to put the bets on for me? >:D
Good luck with that. :xd:
Ready to go, I've sent you a pm.
Ego, thanks for the link. Looks interesting. :thumbsup:
S
Quote from: Skakus on Jul 04, 09:55 PM 2012
I can beat it. :P
Well JL really messed up his last session. If you end a session -32 units flat betting the ECs then there is little hope of recovery. This is certainly no way to beat an RNG "every time". Perhaps an overall profit in the end is still achievable? Skakus relax order will.be restored by the weekend I've got work to do no more long sessions Hit and run time. BEGINS
Better luck next session JL.
JL you told me before in another topic that i should wait until Bayes had the RNG finished.
You speak about showing me incredible results that would change my opinions.
Now i am here - can you show me the incredible results.
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jul 04, 10:14 PM 2012
Gentlemen
Let's not etch his tombstone just yet.
Sam
wise words Sam, I'm. 29 units down not 129. Ive been from 141 to 214 so far always been ahead at some point in a session but broke my own rules. Been trying to rush myself, now I'm going play as I should pure hit and run.
Quote from: Bayes on Jul 04, 04:42 AM 2012
link:://:.doktorsnake.com/voodoo-spells/voodoo-gambling-spells/ (link:://:.doktorsnake.com/voodoo-spells/voodoo-gambling-spells/)
I just saw this. C mon don't tell me this is for real?! :thumbsup:
Not some sort of joke or play?
Pure voodo sh*t and we can pay to practice it to beat roulette?
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha i fall off my chair!!!
Wheels, croupiers and pitt bosses be aware that if i don't win you will be affected by magic of voooooooddddooooooo >:D >:D >:D >:D >:D >:D >:D >:D >:D >:D >:D >:D >:D >:D >:D
Good to have this, i know many people who should schedule seance then! :D
Cheers
Quote from: Bayes on Jul 05, 03:16 AM 2012
Skakus,
I can easily set up another web page if you want to have a crack at it, just let me know and I'll send you a link to download the software.
@ John,
Never mind mate, it happens. I'm sure you'll claw your way back.
Yes Bayes count on it. I've been as low as 90 units on ladbrokes Rng and made a recovery and ended up over 500 units. Can't. Play today have to drive. Familly long distance. But Friday, Saturday. And Sunday will play at least 10 sessions
Quotenow I'm going play as I should pure hit and run
Aww c'mon fella, you did say your method would play continually without problems against RNG day and night, are the rules changing mate?
Quote from: ego on Jul 05, 08:08 AM 2012
JL you told me before in another topic that i should wait until Bayes had the RNG finished.
You speak about showing me incredible results that would change my opinions.
Now i am here - can you show me the incredible results.
Early days Ego, come.back round September /October.
Quote from: superman on Jul 05, 08:55 AM 2012
Aww c'mon fella, you did say your method would play continually without problems against RNG day and night, are the rules changing mate?
Hola Superman
They r his rules. Let him play with d stuff he is comfortable with. Bayes supplies d spins n JL plays.
Regards
Quote from: superman on Jul 05, 08:55 AM 2012
Aww c'mon fella, you did say your method would play continually without problems against RNG day and night, are the rules changing mate?
That's Double match Superman need 400 units minumum to play it. Maybe shouldve asked. Bayes to. Start me at 400. Patience. Superman its. Very early days.
Quote from: Bayes on Jul 05, 03:53 AM 2012
Oh Goody :xd: :xd: :xd:
Give me a little while to set up the page and make a couple of minor changes to the program. You do know this is outside bets only? just thought I'd mention it because I know you like to bet the inside. I'm planning to write another version which includes the full layout, but that will be a while coming.
thats great bayes! I can test mine on your RNG too when finished.
thanx mate.
-JL: good luck mate, no pressure and take your time!
Guys, I don't really believe in voodoo.
-
JL=voodoo
When he waste time with RNG so do i teach others how to play the game for real ...
JL does not know so much about roulette.
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jul 05, 11:23 AM 2012
Guys, I don't really believe in voodoo.
we know Sam! but thats your trademark word in the forum. I like it actually. thats the right word to describe those systems
Quote from: ego on Jul 05, 11:28 AM 2012
-
JL=voodoo
When he waste time with RNG so do i teach others how to play the game for real ...
JL does not know so much about roulette.
Hi ego,
Would you be willing to play your best method(s) on Bayes RNG so we could compare progress?
Re: Do you like even money bets - then your search ends here.
link:://rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=9585.15 (link:://rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=9585.15)
Myself and several others were a little unclear. I offered to help clarify/translate by starting a Questions & Answers dialogue until i understood your method. I wanted to learn it. carpanta offered a point of view, and wrote well, but it was left uncertain whether that was also what you were trying to say. We never heard back from you. Instead of my search ending there, i began to look at all your threads and found that your methods are explained more or less here there and everywhere in several threads over two or three forums. I was hoping you would follow through with the "search ends here" thread to tie all your best methods, and latest research into one thread that would end all threads on the subject. I would make the effort to learn it thoroughly if you would make the effort to teach it. It would be especially motivating if those methods also showed a rising equity curve on Bayes RNG.
Thanks for your consideration.
~Still
@ still
My friend, i should say that you shouldnt diverge so much from theme of thread like you did with this.
Open new thread for that discussion or speak directly to thread maker in that thread or through PM-s. Those are forum rules.
Further, if you read it right, which i see you didn't, you should read that is not a method, and that you would have to do your own testing and observations to get method.
What mr. ego does there is just showing how to place less bets to get same probability. In other words how to apply same dozen probability on EC-s.
You can apply it on any dozen strategy. I ll give you best shot by my opinion. And you should do testing and see will it work or can you make something better.
First you need to understand that concept what mr.ego explains. It is written very clear and you have examples also, so if you can't understand it from there i am afraid i don't know who could explain it more clear.
So this could be the method:
On dozzens you would play like this. Whenever you have two different dozens in a row you bet them to repeat. So you are playing that all 3 won't whow up in a row, and that i like to call perfect state.
Why play like this?
Because number of combinations is in our favour.
Okay we would have 6 perfect states:
123
132
213
231
312
321
And twelve other states
122
121
232
233
311
313
211
212
322
323
131
133
So you are winning on 12 patterns and losing on 6 + green round number.
Apply this on EC-s through states of series and singels as ego is explaining because you will need to place less bets then on dozens to get excat same probability, spice it with good MM of course, test it thouroghly and see what am i about here.
But this is system, and we know with systems nothing is due to happen :)
Sory mr. Bayes for interuption of your thread with this, move it if you want.
Cheers
Drazen
QuoteQuoteWould you be willing to play your best method(s) on Bayes RNG so we could compare progress?
Why would i - waste of time and Bayes knows that.
All systems fail - i apologies saying that - but that is the truth.
Quote from: ego on Jul 05, 04:09 PM 2012
Why would i - waste of time and Bayes knows that.
All systems fail - i apologies saying that - but that is the truth.
--TRUE ON ZILLION SPINS...UNTRUE ON SEPARATE PLAYING SESSIONS.
Many thanks Drazen!
Keep the faith here JL!
Remember his motivation is to help us, whether right or wrong it is very noble to do so considering his busy playing schedule.......
Quote from: ego on Jul 05, 04:09 PM 2012
JL=voodoo
When he waste time with RNG so do i teach others how to play the game for real ...
JL does not know so much about roulette.
Quote from: ego on Jul 05, 04:09 PM 2012
Why would i - waste of time and Bayes knows that.
All systems fail - i apologies saying that - but that is the truth.
@Drazen
Thanks very much. I mentioned it here because it is here in this thread that ego has mentioned he was teaching how to play the game for real. Yes, i could search all his threads, but in the one thread where i showed interest in learning, and where an end to searching seemed promised, it felt to me like he had abandoned the thread before it was made clear. By comparison, I don't think JL would have done that.
Now i am confused by the two statements made above that seem to me to be incongruous. Teaching how to play "for real" seems to imply the game can be beat...or at least that his method could beat JL's "voodoo" methods. "For real" and "all systems fail" seem contradictory to me...so i am just wondering if ego would show us what his methods look like when he plays them on Bayes RNG.
Meanwhile, i appreciate the fact that you are following ego's contributions and have a good grasp of them. I will look closely at what you and albertjonas and carpanta have to say about them. But since i saw ego make these statements, i was asking a little more from him. That could be as little as a list of links that would constitute the body of his work, the most salient descriptions of his work, or his latest greatest discoveries.
Sorry if this is out of place.
~Still
Quote from: Still on Jul 05, 05:26 PM 2012
@Drazen
Now i am confused by the two statements made above that seem to me to be incongruous. Teaching how to play "for real" seems to imply the game can be beat...or at least that his method could be JL's "voodoo" methods. "For real" and "all systems fail" seem contradictory to me...so i am just wondering if ego would show us what his methods look like when he plays them on Bayes RNG.
"For real" and "all systems fail" are not same things mr. ego was reffering to. You see, he is true visual balistic expert, and if you don't know i ll explain. Visual balistic is part of so called advantage play methods- methods that use physics parameters of this game to exclude negative mathematical expectation and actualy create postive expectation with positive edge on your side :)
All systems will fail if tested on millions of spins, and all Advantage-play experts and math guys says that is impossible to succed with systems no matter how you play, but on other hand i know few real system professionals, so that is contrary in theory in a way. LoL
Mr. ego never uses any systems as he doesn't have to. But he has incredible level of phanatism and obsession for this game, so he studies some other things except Advantage play, as his hoby. I have to admit i know many professionals and roulette lovers, but so knowledable in so many areas of roulette as him i assure you, you won't find so easy. Hatt off!
don't take mr. ego as harsh and weird man if he doesn't reply, because he is totaly opposite actualy, but you have to understand that he doesn't have time and can't explain basic things to all total newbies who pull him for sleeve. He explained it clear (most of the time LoL), it is up to you to figure it out, test it and see it.
If you are interested on his elaborations with systems i can reccomend threads about Marigny and Markov chain. Actualy as i know for now Marigny is the only thing except Advantage-play that can create an edge but only with La Partage rule and with proper MM and ego showed that on one other forum, but it is quite hard to play it in practice (although not impossible).
But enough of ego here, glory here should go to JL and his way of playing . At least some are hoping to that :)
Cheers
Drazen
@drazen
Thanks. Yes, i'm aware ego is more visual balistic and advantage play. But i had not seen him teaching anything but systems, even if only as hobby. So i assumed when he said "for real" he may have been implying one of his systems, perhaps based on Marigny, might actually work. I've got the link(s) on thread(s) you pointed to because i have a folder dedicated to ego and your contributions. I'll be sure to pay more attention to them if you really think one can get an edge that way. That is what i understood...that even though it is a system, and they are suggestions, and it is a hobby for ego, that there's something he is suggesting that can get an edge.
Hats off to you and your contributions and i will be looking closely.
Ive been busy working, so I missed that the JL challange had started.
Firstly, I wanted to say to JL that I really admire him putting his money where his mouth is.
Totally impressed.
secondly, Im glad to see an old soldier like Ego admitting no system works. I dont think that matters really. Im still very enthusiastic.
Finally...
Im looking at JL's results and trying to fathom out what "beating roulette" actually means.
JL should have 2500000U and he can beat roulette. marty 16 times to 1million and win 1 unit.
Thats how you beat roulette. its the casino you cant beat. They evolve.
If JL gets to 500U, and looking at it, its going to be 7000 spins, thats about 10 days in a casino 10 hours a day. Is this beating roulette?
Quote from: ego on Jul 05, 04:09 PM 2012
Why would i - waste of time and Bayes knows that.
All systems fail - i apologies saying that - but that is the truth.
Lets wait and see. When I was in the black negatives were quite. Now you think I'm over already you all come out of the woodwork. Watch this space. From tomorrow I will demonstrate the art of Hit and Run. I rarely play a session where I am not at least 1 unit up at some point. Even yesterday I was 2 units up. Now watch how those units add up. Thanks for all the positive support people.
Quote from: turnerfeck on Jul 05, 07:08 PM 2012
I've been busy working, so I missed that the JL challange had started.
Firstly, I wanted to say to JL that I really admire him putting his money where his mouth is.
Totally impressed.
secondly, I'm glad to see an old soldier like Ego admitting no system works. I don't think that matters really. I'm still very enthusiastic.
Finally...
I'm looking at JL's results and trying to fathom out what "beating roulette" actually means.
JL should have 2500000U and he can beat roulette. marty 16 times to 1million and win 1 unit.
that's how you beat roulette. its the casino you can't beat. They evolve.
If JL gets to 500U, and looking at it, its going to be 7000 spins, that's about 10 days in a casino 10 hours a day. Is this beating roulette?
Wrong evaluation Turnerfeck. I was playing long sessions. Not my usual style. Now watch how it pans out from tomorrow. The bottom line is anytime you are even 1 unit up. You are beating a game of negative expectancy. Something the experts say is a no,no. I will get to 500 units. I will get as far as it takes. Dont put time on success. The objective is to show this games beatable over the LONG HAUL. And I will show just that. By september/october alot of people will be taking me seriously. Mark those words.
Stay firm John! Show us hit-n-run tactics in action!
Quote from: amk on Jul 05, 05:01 PM 2012
Many thanks Drazen!
Keep the faith here JL!
Remember his motivation is to help us, whether right or wrong it is very noble to do so considering his busy playing schedule.......
AMK you know that one already. Its time to show why Hit and Run is the superior way to play and beat this game.
Quote from: iggiv on Jul 05, 07:23 PM 2012
Stay firm John! Show us hit-n-run tactics in action!
Watch this space Iggiv.
Yes show us why hit and run is different than playing continuously
LOL no need to defend me - but thanks :twisted:
@Still PM me and i might help you - but first you have to check my list ...
1. You don't play to become wealthy and live independent life style.
2. You don't play to pay dept or bills as you are working for a living.
If no then you are good in my book so far - now next level of my list ...
3. You play because you enjoy the game and like to learn more and win some is never wrong.
4. You feel that you could have roulette as life time hobby and get involved with hard core physics.
5. You are not compulsive and greedy.
Now if you done well of my list feel free to PM me.
I can not promise you anything - but i know i can give you some tools and pin point out the correct directions for you.
Cheers
@ John,
I've sent you a PM.
Ok guys, Skakus drew my attention to a couple of issues with the software which I've now fixed. I gave JL the opportunity to start afresh with a new bank of 300 units. Pretty generous of me I thought. ;D
So we're off again and the new URL is link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/jltest.html (link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/jltest.html)
Over to you John. :thumbsup:
Quote from: Bayes on Jul 06, 09:54 AM 2012
Ok guys, Skakus drew my attention to a couple of issues with the software which I've now fixed. I gave JL the opportunity to start afresh with a new bank of 300 units. Pretty generous of me I thought. ;D
So we're off again and the new URL is link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/jltest.html (link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/jltest.html)
Over to you John. :thumbsup:
Yes.Bayes being a technophobe id have been None the wiser, but thanks anyway. Gotta give your Rng respect its tough. I'm all.business from now. Will stay focused, first session ltr.
Quote from: Bayes on Jul 06, 09:54 AM 2012
Ok guys, Skakus drew my attention to a couple of issues with the software...
I knew it!!
I have never seen my mast...i mean John Legend down 32 units before!
Quote from: Still on Jul 06, 03:15 PM 2012
I knew it!!
I have never seen my mast...i mean John Legend down 32 units before!
Still
What does "I knew it" mean? Sounds like you're saying Bayes has given him a second chance for no good reason. I hope that's not what you meant.
TwoCat
Quote from: Still on Jul 06, 03:15 PM 2012
I knew it!!
I have never seen my mast...i mean John Legend down 32 units before!
Still I was down alright. No the problem was Skakus figured out that the software could be tampered with. and reset to the starting bankroll. So Bayes has fixed that. And dont get carried away. Im nobodies master. I have alot of work to do. By september. I think I can inspire the forum into a more positive frame of mind. Lets see.
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jul 06, 04:05 PM 2012
Still
What does "I knew it" mean? Sounds like you're saying Bayes has given him a second chance for no good reason. I hope that's not what you meant.
TwoCat
I knew there was some sort of flaw that allowed Bayes to keep resetting JL's balance to -32 units!
What do you mean Still? are you suggesting foul play? >:D
BTW John, I haven't set a house limit, but let's call it 100 units. There's nothing to stop you going over that, but if you do, we'll all know about it. :D
Looks like hit & run is working ok. So far...
Quote from: Bayes on Jul 06, 04:45 PM 2012
What do you mean Still? are you suggesting foul play? >:D
by the way John, I haven't set a house limit, but let's call it 100 units. There's nothing to stop you going over that, but if you do, we'll all know about it. :D
Looks like hit & run is working ok. So far...
Thanks Bayes. Had to work for my last unit of profit. I entered at the wrong time. Still longest losing streak playing in short bursts so far is 5 compared to the 10 I had a few times playing long, long sessions. That's an improvement. 100 on a bet. Never Bayes LoL. That is Skakus style. I am very conservative. The most I will probably ever lay on a single bet is 20 units. And then I would have to have at least 500 BR.
Quote from: Bayes on Jul 02, 03:25 PM 2012
Ok guys, here's the link to the site where you can follow John's progress
link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/jlchallenge.html (link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/jlchallenge.html)
Is there an issue with this link?
Not FoundThe requested URL /jlchallenge.html was not found on this server.
Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.
Quote from: Wally Gator on Jul 06, 06:29 PM 2012
Is there an issue with this link?
Not FoundThe requested URL /jlchallenge.html was not found on this server.
Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.
There's a new link Wally G. That one's dead.
link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/jltest.html (link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/jltest.html)
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jul 06, 12:09 PM 2012
>>> Gotta give your Rng respect its tough. <<<
Tough?
Its a bloody apex predator! :twisted:
Guys, I'm curious. I really can't tell the difference between RNG and actuals. Can you say what it is about this RNG which makes it tough?
Try to be specific, if you can, don't just say it's more unpredictable. Unpredictable in what way? too many/not enough streaks, chops, repeaters, too many "weird" patterns?
To be honest, I think it's all in your minds. If you didn't know it was RNG you wouldn't be complaining. >:D
Can you tell me does it grab one result at a time/per click, or a whole lot of results at the start of the session, when you open the program?
Skakus, not sure what you mean? 1 click = 1 spin grabbed, right from the start. Is the program doing anything else? it shouldn't be!
Quote from: Skakus on Jul 07, 01:43 AM 2012
Tough?
Its a bloody apex predator! :twisted:
Toughs not the word Skakus. I'm down to 200 units from a 309 start today. I had to unleash DOUBLE MATCH to pull me out of the fire. Its the only method I have that can beat this RNG. I was saving it for later. But I need to recover. So I had to bring it in now. Bayes must be loving this. But, I will come back over the next 5 or 6 sessions. And let DOUBLE MATCH do the work.
Go Johny go am drucking for you.
Good luck with the "DOUBLE MATCH", Johnlegend.
I was surprised you had such bad result today...!?
I hope your new creation of Double Match will recoup these losses and put you firmly into the profit zone.
A.
Quote from: atlantis on Jul 07, 02:40 PM 2012
Good luck with the "DOUBLE MATCH", Johnlegend.
I was surprised you had such bad result today...!?
I hope your new creation of Double Match will recoup these losses and put you firmly into the profit zone.
A.
Thanks Atlantis. Im down but certainly not out.
?is this rng
Quote from: drazen_cro on Jul 07, 02:22 PM 2012
To me as i see how many spins you played, when we summarize first try and this is sinking ship... And it is not hit and run. I see too many played spins...
Now making up some methods with which obviously you are sinking... You don't need more time.
You are fake and you will fail.
Don't bother John, your days are outnumbered.
Nothing personal.
Cheers
Drazen
Wait and see Drazen too quick to judge. Watch the come back. I played too many spins no question. Now I am playing only one method unitl I am well and truly back up there. Watch DOUBLE MATCH and then come back and insult me some more. Nothing personal indeed.
OMFG
THIS GUY LOST 100 UNITS IN THIS MANY SPINS?
Must be the worst session ever.
:girl_to:
good luck JL!
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jul 07, 02:14 PM 2012
Bayes must be loving this.
Not really John. I'm a little disappointed, to be honest. :(
For one thing, I thought your money management would be a lot better on the ECs - it's terrible!
BTW, don't worry about going bust because the bankroll CAN go negative, in fact there is no limit. You could go to -1000 or more if you like, but the stakes must be no more than 100 units.
I'd like JL to give this test a fair trial, even if it means him losing face. After all, he can always come back and say it's the tough RNG that caused the losses. BUT, if he's going admit defeat on those grounds, I think he should do the same test using actuals. I did offer to use them before the test started, but JL wanted RNG.
So if the results are poor using the RNG, and JL insists that the RNG is the reason for the poor results, then we should expect him to do a LOT better using actuals, right?
But, it's still early days, so we shouldn't write him off yet.
Regardless of anything, the fact remains that JohnLegend made a lot of units last year with very low BR systems and I am sure things are going nicely this year as well. Any updates yet JL?
Will JLs playing style work for everyone, maybe not but 8 or so people out of 10 sounds good :)
by the way actuals don't have to be just from Spielbank and not all of them can be "scanned".
Some of them are even in form of pdf files , not text files. Some of them u can capture as jpg file.
I can show Bayes where to get them.
Quote from: Bayes on Jul 07, 05:12 PM 2012
Not really John. I'm a little disappointed, to be honest. :(
For one thing, I thought your money management would be a lot better on the ECs - it's terrible!
by the way, don't worry about going bust because the bankroll CAN go negative, in fact there is no limit. You could go to -1000 or more if you like, but the stakes must be no more than 100 units.
I'd like JL to give this test a fair trial, even if it means him losing face. After all, he can always come back and say it's the tough RNG that caused the losses. BUT, if he's going admit defeat on those grounds, I think he should do the same test using actuals. I did offer to use them before the test started, but JL wanted RNG.
So if the results are poor using the RNG, and JL insists that the RNG is the reason for the poor results, then we should expect him to do a LOT better using actuals, right?
But, it's still early days, so we shouldn't write him off yet.
Don't write me off anyone. I've been down a lot worse. I will come back don't worry about that. And yes next up will be actuals Bayes. I'm doing it all over the next 6 months to a year.
When I see people like Drazen attack me as soon as the results are negative. It shows them for who they are. I know the nature of the game. I tried to play too much and got chewed up. Lost in the day. I went down to 163 at one point and now I'm back to 203. And I've brought out the big gun. DOUBLE MATCH. I shouldve employed it from the get go. Its the only method I've ever used that can beat a real RNG. So it should have no trouble pulling me back. On Bayes creation.
Iggiv relax. I'm in lockdown mode now. Recovery back into profitville is underway. You know its a different feel that's all. Theres no physical wheel. You just press a button and a number appears. Its called the JL challenge for a reason. All I ask is you give me time. Rome wasn't built in a day. I will recover. Move firmly into profit. And next up I will take on the actuals test. GAME ON...
Quote from: Bayes on Jul 07, 03:17 AM 2012
Guys, I'm curious. I really can't tell the difference between RNG and actuals. Can you say what it is about this RNG which makes it tough?
Try to be specific, if you can, don't just say it's more unpredictable. Unpredictable in what way? too many/not enough streaks, chops, repeaters, too many "weird" patterns?
To be honest, I think it's all in your minds. If you didn't know it was RNG you wouldn't be complaining. >:D
I relish the challenge Bayes. Your RNG appears harder to beat than say the one I practice on and test methods on at Ladbrokes. As you say it could be in the mind. I know I am playing more tentatively on your RNG than I would when I'm testing on the Ladbrokes one because. Obviously theres more at stake. I would have recovered a lot more quickly on the ladbrokes. Because I would let rip with the stakes when I know I'm almost certain to win. I'm being over cautious here and trying to do too much too soon. And getting my arse kicked in the process.
Now I've taken stock. Employed a great method for RNGs and will at my own pace pull it back. And do what I came to do. Nobody need fear for me. Today was as bad as it will ever get. Now I do it at my pace. If that's 5 units a day its 5 units. When its 15 or 20 a day so shall it be. Anyone who wants to attack me save it. If you don't like me just stay off the thread. And do your own thing. Therell come a time when I won't need to say a word. That's all I've got to say. I won't pass comment on this thread again. Until I'm in a situation where some positive exchange can take place. Bayes can PM me at anytime as can anyone if you have any questions. You just check in from time to time if you are interested. And youll see why I'm not even conccerned about the setback. Its done now I move forward.
why people do not leave the person to prove and do what he has to do ,why are you acting like first time gambler like never seen bankroll to go down 100 units...its called gambling..oh this is bad rng will be better on life wheel and so on...just get it this are numbers being spat from either rng or wheel does not make difference...and question @Bayes can i have some spin data from your rng i just want to check something for myself...thank you :thumbsup:
calm down guys! its just opinions why you have to argue?
what I see people defending JL and others saying their opinions about the facts they see .. bankroll going down etc.. its also mistake from JL as he makes strong claims so these people expected lot more from him! not letting his bankroll going free fall twice. he still has 200 he can come back from that hole if he stick to his saying like determination and hit run etc. lets not judge him now, its gambling after all.
Bayes: can we have a copy of that program to test your spins (you dnt have to include the sending to web method) thanx.
Ok, since a couple of members have asked, I've attached a cut-down version of the software. It doesn't upload or save any results, and the bank resets to 300 units on startup.
Quote from: iggiv on Jul 07, 05:26 PM 2012
by the way actuals don't have to be just from Spielbank and not all of them can be "scanned".
Some of them are even in form of pdf files , not text files. Some of them You can capture as jpg file.
I can show Bayes where to get them.
iggiv, the problem with spins on jpg files is that it's hard to read them into a program. 1000s of spins will be needed, and I'm certainly not going to enter them manually! If they're on a pdf it will be easier, because you can convert pdf to text files. Anyway, plenty of time for thinking about that later, let's get past this challenge first. :)
-
So how does it goes with the challenge - any update?
I’ve tried a few ‘practice sessions’ to get a feel for this challenge format and I’ll probably try some more before I rip in.
I’ll only ever really be able to roughly explain my bet selections because even though I’m using a systematic approach, I’m still deciding whether or not to bet etc on a spin by spin basis. Also the selection method could evolve somewhat as we go.
The main point of my attempt to beat Bayes RNG is,
A) To test out my EC Money Management strategy.
B) To win, and to show it can be done.
Now I’m no Johnlegend, and this challenge is a long term deal, but at the end I’m hoping to start a new thread called, ‘RIP Bayes RNG’ or ‘Skakus Is A Douchbag’. ^-^
Oh yeah,
I'm also playing hit and run for now. :thumbsup:
LOL...Skakus...finally...u were against it before.
Quote from: Skakus on Jul 08, 07:58 AM 2012
Oh yeah,
I'm also playing hit and run for now. :thumbsup:
Who really cares? Spread it over few months n d only people involved will be u,JL n Bayes as a facilitator. This was not a workable idea from d beginning. Get d paper n pen n it would take few people little bit of time 2 test anything here. And I'm sorry Skakus that You can not understand my post. And John? Double Match is yr new baby? Just one question. Lets say u have few strategies that work 4 u. Why would u not play with Double Match from d beginning? Or u just came up with that as a your recovery weapon? Its getting ridiculous here ;D
give it some time Rob.
by the way JL lost so much when he stopped hit-n-run approach and started playing long sessions.
Before (when he was using hit-run) he was OK.
i think if u analyze his results with some attention, u may realize something...In reality this is a good lesson how to bet and how not to bet. I am glad he did not try this stuff for real money. That's probably why he was carried away by this tricky game.
Now he is up 10 units (from his falldown) again after starting hit-n-run again.
Don't get me wrong, i am not trying to say that anything will work with hit-n-run...
Hola Iggiv
Sorry i modified my post. So JL got down with his best stuff n now he tries 2 recover with his a new best stuff. Its like playoffs n i like it. Hope he has more tricks in his bag. And of course im rooting 4 him like everybody else. I want 2 get my holy grail.
Regards
Quote from: iggiv on Jul 08, 08:18 AM 2012
give it some time Rob.
by the way JL lost so much when he stopped hit-n-run approach and started playing long sessions.
Before (when he was using hit-run) he was OK.
i think if u analyze his results with some attention, u may realize something...In reality this is a good lesson how to bet and how not to bet. I am glad he did not try this stuff for real money. That's probably why he was carried away by this tricky game.
Now he is up 10 units (from his falldown) again after starting hit-n-run again.
Don't get me wrong, i am not trying to say that anything will work with hit-n-run...
Exacty Iggiv short and sweet is the ONLY way I know how to win at roulette. Get into a war with random, and you will LOSE. I let my discipline slip, because this isnt for real money. And I was slightly pandering to the forum members. As if I am in some race to prove I can do it. I can do it alright. But its got to be at my pace. And Hutt DOUBLE MATCH is in my bag of tricks for a while now. I didn't want to launch it yet because its a DOUBLE/DOZEN---COLUMN method utilizing AMKS superb alternating concept. But I already know its a roulette killer. So from 163 down I brought it in. I'm back to 211. And will only move up from this point.
I'm playing it my way from now on. No rush, just winning my 5---10 units a day for a method as I have done for several years. Iggiv (THE BALKAN SQUAD) I love that expression. Yes, they can be very aggressive and judgemental. Lets see what they have to say around September.
Keep it up John. Yes, long war against randomness is a way to lose. Don't worry about the squad :)
Remember we are talking long term solution here, not a couple of bad days. Even if he lost all his bankroll he still could try it again. It is not the tale about a Golden Fish and only three wishes You can ask for.
Quote from: iggiv on Jul 08, 08:01 AM 2012
LoL...Skakus...finally...u were against it before.
Hehe. I'm still a nonbeliever in hit and run.
I'm playing hit and run for a while until I get a good feel for this rng, also I'm too busy at the moment to play long sessions.
Cheers, iggiv.
iggiv some people never understand gambling in first place...do not worry about them because they learn it hard way and will continue to learn it hard way...say you have worst possible system to play roulette and everyone tested it and they know is a loser but one night you win money with it you say to them you won and they will call you names...human nature never changes...people seems to not understand that gambling is as any other trade,takes time to learn you get better by experience and yes you have bad days... :thumbsup: ...great software Bayes thank you for uploading it
Quote from: ego on Jul 08, 06:30 AM 2012
-
So how does it goes with the challenge - any update?
link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/jltest.html (link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/jltest.html)
iggiv
My problem with any and all people who make grandiose claims is that they simply aren't willing to back up those claims with provable data. I can say I win $X at Riverwind. Who knows?
We all know we can be anything we want on-line. Right?
This man John has blown like an Oklahoma tornado about what he can do. Now he has the chance to show us, so let him show us.
Why do you delete my posts? How many others who disagree or offer a different viewpoint do you delete?
I will ask one simple question: If John has a winning method or methods he's been using for years, why doesn't he just apply it/them? Why all the excuse-making? OK, that was two.
TCS
sam i remember you testing and testing winkels theory GUT you were going back and up right and left trying to catch good streak of numbers to give you positive bankroll...you remember...say this guy just doing the same trying to prove and make it work..give him a chance ..maybe you can see what mistakes he does maybe you can learn something you never know...give a chance,we are all equal clever and equal stupid as someone once said... :thumbsup:
Thank you, ddarko. We have a city in Oklahoma named Anadarko!! But I digress.......
Has anyone taken the time to look at the results chart? It tells a lot.
If you look at the "hit and run" sessions, most of them are losers. In fact, I found only a couple that were winners. What do you think will happen to make this turn around?
Second point: John (and others) have raved about how H&R will win, but he does not practice H&R. Why the long, long sessions? This is a gambler trying to recover. Been there; know that!
iggiv, you can delete all the posts you want. Go back and delete everything to do with the Jl challenge and Bayes and the software---might as well delete the whole darn forum. But you know what? Many of us will remember because you can't delete our memories!
Still, I hope the man pulls out and wins but let's stop the stupid excuses for why he's losing.
Sam
maestro
I totally know about runs of good numbers and runs of bad numbers. I still have dozens of graphs to prove it.
NOT MY POINT.....................
1. The guy says he can show me how to put my grandson through college with his methods.
2. Do it.
I'd freakin' love to eat crow. Raw!!
Sam
iggiv
Well, just keep on deleting! In the final analysis, you can't make John win. And your "Hit and Run" won't win and that sticks in your crop. You'[ve touted his methods so if he's a failure, you're a failure!
Funny how the people who say really good things about John don't have their posts deleted.
Sam
Now back to roulette stuff.
Sam u claim that most of John's hit-run sessions are losers.
i will show u how your bad emotions manipulate the real truth.
I copied to jpg files his hit-run quick sessions (not his long sessions!),
and i posted my comments where he really lost. I marked the start and end of bankroll as well.
so here u go.
now tell me that u say only truth about John's game
Quote from: Skakus on Jul 06, 09:31 PM 2012
There's a new link Wally G. That one's dead.
link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/jltest.html (link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/jltest.html)
The above link is the last one I found on this thread. There are countless short sessions, each with far more L than w. It has today's date, July 8, 2012, on it so it seems to be up to date.
iggiv, would you please direct me to where you got these figures?
Sam
that's funny Sam, because what u call more L than W are really more winning sessions than losing.
these are figures from the same link u posted here. Just your emotions prevented it from analyzing properly.
U ASSUMED that John's game failed, and that was enough for u.
but in reality his game failed only where he broke his own rules about hit-run. Where he let himself to be involved in long sessions. That's where he lost. But on hit-run he won more than he lost.
i calculated that if he were not involved in the long sessions he would be 29 units up by now --
10% of his bankroll. By this pace if he kept winning he would double his bankroll roughly in one month or so.
in a year or so he would make 4000 of his bankrolls, if he kept winning this way only by short sessions and kept doubling his bankroll and his units each month.
i am not telling this will necessarily happen, i am just telling how he would have been doing if he was not involved in "war against randomness" as he called it.
People are drawn by emotions, quarrels etc, and can't just sit and analyze his results carefully...
Here's today's result.
We'll see, won't we?
Quote from: iggiv on Jul 08, 06:58 PM 2012
that's funny Sam, because what u call more L than W are really more winning sessions than losing.
these are figures from the same link u posted here. Just your emotions prevented it from analyzing properly.
U ASSUMED that John's game failed, and that was enough for u.
but in reality his game failed only where he broke his own rules about hit-run. Where he let himself to be involved in long sessions. That's where he lost. But on hit-run he won more than he lost.
i calculated that if he were not involved in the long sessions he would be 29 units up by now --
10% of his bankroll. By this pace if he kept winning he would double his bankroll roughly in one month or so.
in a year or so he would make 4000 of his bankrolls, if he kept winning this way only by short sessions and kept doubling his bankroll and his units each month.
i am not telling this will necessarily happen, i am just telling how he would have been doing if he was not involved in "war against randomness" as he called it.
People are drawn by emotions, quarrels etc, and can't just sit and analyze his results carefully...
Anyone can explain the concept of
Personal Permanence ??
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jul 08, 07:02 PM 2012
Here's today's result.
We'll see, won't we?
today result was 8 units from 203 to 211. Yes, we will see. No reason to bash John and claim his failure. Just wait and see.
Personal permanence...........
If memory serves me right, VLS described it this way:
Only the numbers that come while you are actively involved in the game are of importance to you. If you put them all together over the years, you have your personal spins or numbers that came.
This is why "hit and run" won't work. If it did, in your permanence you would find a meaningful imbalance. Like no zeros. You just won't find it. What you will find it that the permanence will reflect the true math of the game.
Where is KonFuSed when you need him?
Sam
Very good explanation. :thumbsup:
probability to be deleted :(
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jul 08, 08:03 PM 2012
Personal permanence...........
If memory serves me right, VLS described it this way:
Only the numbers that come while you are actively involved in the game are of importance to you. If you put them all together over the years, you have your personal spins or numbers that came.
This is why "hit and run" won't work. If it did, in your permanence you would find a meaningful imbalance. Like no zeros. You just won't find it. What you will find it that the permanence will reflect the true math of the game.
Where is KonFuSed when you need him?
Sam
that's a most weird conclusion. if personal permanence is that and this, then hit-n-run won't work.
it's like saying " if a motorcycle engine is called internal combustion engine then jet plane engine won't work".
that definition (pers.perm) has nothing to do with hit-run.
Most if not all legitimate pro gamblers (John Patrick, Bret Morton and others -- well known) advocate hit-n-run. No one will tell u -- "sit in casino and play till u have power to...
If u r OK with it, then play 3 days in a row, that's ok".
they know very well, everyone who knows about gambling know that u should stop as soon as possible at the right moment...and not to play for too long...
that's what hit-n-run is about...
Then just answer me one question:
What do you do when you sit down and lose? All these folks talk about sitting down and winning and then leaving. iggiv, that is a pipe dream! Then we have the loss limit. What do you do if the next time you sit down, you lose? You're trying to overcome the losses by dodging them. Can't be done! You must deal with them as they come!
Do you sit three days? No. You get tired, you leave!
And as I said, that's what I remember from Victor.
I'm outta here!!
Sam
Have a good nite and sweet dreams Steve. Take it easy. I wanted to say "my friend", but i guess u don't wanna be my friend anymore. :)
So much i have heard about myself today from u.
:(
Anyway feel free to say what u want.
Quote from: iggiv on Jul 08, 08:29 PM 2012
Have a good nite and sweet dreams Steve. Take it easy. I wanted to say "my friend", but i guess u don't wanna be my friend anymore. :) Quote
Looks like an ultimatum and pressure from the mod iggiv
good. lets Steve see how u r trolling in this forum. Nice.
LOL here we go again, another fisty cuffs, Sam does have a very good point that nobody seems to remember.
When JL was priming for this challenge he said he would beat the RNG without hit n run he would attack it for as long as he wanted, his secret weapon (method) that he would only divulge via PM after the challenge proved he could do it, day and night, so what Sam and others are seeing is the goal posts have been moved a bit.
Personally I couldn't care less now if he wins or loses the challenge because from what we have already seen it didn't look good, now he's reverted to hit n run, so what, it may look good for a long time, but at some point it's not going to look good, time will tell.
Iggiv i will just my opinion.
Through all time i am here whenever was some situation that required mod to interfier, you were the one that annoyed me a bit. Why? Because you were to good to say so. You were always giving too many chances to accused ones and to those who were told to stand up, because they werent behaving properly. And had too much patience.. Like mother Teresa. Always tried to patch up situation and going in explanations again and again.. If member didn't obey on no more no less 100th time being warned, finaly then he got banned.
But now, like you have gone mad. My opinion is you took all this too serious and behave too sharp. Deleting posts that are not inapropriate or rude. In my case, i was talking to JL and his challenge and there wasn't nothing out of topic there, so i feel offended by that manner of yours. Straight questions to the challenge about wheels and RNG-s and JL-s inconsistencies...
It is so obviously you defend JL no matter what you said... I didn't waited first possible situation to attack JL, i just warned and it so true, as TCS said little earlier here soooooooooo many inconsistensies in what JL was talking he will do and what he is doing. It is BS!!!!
Regards
Drazen
Maybe it would be better if this thread were locked and JL started his own thread to update the results, then he can delete any posts that HE feels are inappropriate.
My view on this is that it's better to hold off criticism of JL's results until we have more of them. Come on guys, it's only been a few days!
On the other hand, it seems to me that iggiv is being a little too biased in favour of John. He says that JL has no reason to lie. Well, maybe not, but how does he KNOW that? and what about all those who haven't gotten good results with JL's systems? I did a poll a few months ago and something like 90% of those who responded said his systems were no better (or worse) than any others.
So what reason is there for THOSE people to lie?
I'm not suggesting that JL has any ulterior motives for his claims (such as he is leading up to a scam), but it seems to me that if you're just looking for reasons to lie, then there are more to be found for those who claim success than for those who claim failure.
The point of this challenge is to enable John to put his money where his mouth is. And let's not forget that he didn't have to do it. Let's give him the credit he deserves and the time to see it through, at least until he trebles his bank (which was the orginal goal).
If JL has won with his systems its because he is lucky with the hit run, i belive he
is not a liar just lucky.
We never know what is next in the next hit run session, could be the W or the L.
This is why i agree with simulate some graphs to see how system will perform
in the long run, but even like this ( if win after 1.000.000 spins) in the next(s)
1. 000.000 spins will get different results. My opinion is if one system can beat
sometimes ( but various times) 50 000 or more spins, flat bet , it s playable.
But at the end don't we all play hit run ? No matter if play 10 spins or 300 spins sessions
this is anyway hit run, admit or not ...to win we all need good strategies,MM and also
some luck.
wish you luck JL ....you will need a lot to beat RNG
Quote from: Kattila on Jul 09, 04:17 AM 2012
If JL has won with his systems its because he is lucky with the hit run, i belive he
is not a liar just lucky.
Kattila,
Sorry, but that won't do. JL has regularly updated results from playing his various systems, and they are FAR outside the bounds of luck. Luck is just standard deviation. That is, standard deviation is the quantification of "luck", so using statistical techniques, you can determine the probability of getting a particular set of results.
For JL to be consistently getting the results he is posting, it has to be more than luck.
Mr. Bayes didn't you simulated hit and run once.. And we know how did it ended...
I have never heard some expert said playing very short bursts of play can help you and i think that is provable with simulations, right? >:D
So in this chain must be some weak link, i just wonder which will break first? :)
Cheers
Drazen
I ll take a break from all this and forum... I don't want to be considered as bashing or arguing guy.
And you are good guy iggiv as mod also doing good job, just in last situation things run amuck a bit seems to me for few of us...
This is last thing i will say about John and his play, and leave him in peace forever, wheter he will fail or succed i don't give a darn. Please don't delete this as i will say some facts what should be thought about when getting conclusions.
Main thing with that he was proclaiming was use of martingale in all his methods. And in some of our past debate he clearly said he will have enough high hit ratio to justify use of it.
Now he doesn't even using it and says he is against such things... No. 1 FAIL in consistency
This some questions about RNG you could also try to answre mr. iggiv
He says it is tough to beat Bayses RNG although he can't give any fact or reasonable explanation why this should be/is so.
Can he explain why there is a difference between independant Bayses RNG and live wheels he is playing on?
( we know story about gambling RNGs for real money, but this is not the case, RNG is any other honest and independant)
If RNG is independant (as Bayses is) and wheel unbiased there is no differnce, and i am sure if you will gave him spins from both he can't tell the difference...
He said he has special weapon for RNG. Again, why and what excatly is difference in randomnes of fair RNG and live unbiased wheel, and how and why excatly that method uses differnce in them to make profit?
And why all methods he was using till now were working on RNG worse then they should in live?
The only thing that was actualy giving him advantage was „hit and run“, right? And first time he played a lot of spins, failed into hole because of lot of spins played continously ( even without use martingale), then after reseting contest, again.
So how is possible for a person to do that who has one the strongest minds for playing roulette by its opinion and knows that breaking this rule will lead directly to fail by its opinion/experince?
I could witte more questions like if he now knows that some methods are behaving different then he expected and he knows how in which ratio, why can't he do it opposite and win?
But enough is enough...
Don't delete this post, or that will be definite end for me here!!!!
Ok if he can give understandable and reasonable fact answeres without just watch, i can't explaint it to you, ill raise his hand as a winner immedietaly as long as i am concerned.
I am not guided by feelings or emotions, just by pure logic and knowledge.
And questions are not off topic, insultive or meaningless.
Cheers
Drazen
Hola Iggiv
This is what a good forum should be about.... Sharing of ideas and unregulated criticism. Once you intervene in a flow then all burden is upon you. You are the one who will be always accused of taking sides. Are you ready for that? If not you'd better shut it down. But what do i know? and i would not want to be in your shoes. So let it be.... These things usually boil down pretty quickly.
If not we have some extra entertainment value like in cheese vs crackers exchanges @ vlsroulette ;D
Regards
Quote from: Bayes on Jul 09, 04:39 AM 2012
Luck is just standard deviation. That is, standard deviation is the quantification of "luck", so using statistical techniques, you can determine the probability of getting a particular set of results.
For JL to be consistently getting the results he is posting, it has to be more than luck.
Hi Bayes, i don't agree that luck is standard deviation in all cases. What if we are play some positive progression in that cases we need deviation because its our weapon.
Hi Kattila, i agree wit you. 10 000 spins with a hit and run is the
same as 10 000 spins a constant play. Who does not believe let test.
Quote from: speed on Jul 09, 10:25 AM 2012
Hi Bayes, i don't agree that luck is standard deviation in all cases. What if we are play some positive progression in that cases we need deviation because its our weapon.
Hi speed,
My point was that luck can be thought of as natural variance. If a blind man were to scatter chips on the table and he won a few hundred chips, then that's luck: the variance was swinging his way. But the luck won't continue for 1000s of spins.
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Jul 09, 09:52 AM 2012
Hola Iggiv
This is what a good forum should be about.... Sharing of ideas and unregulated criticism. Once you intervene in a flow then all burden is upon you. You are the one who will be always accused of taking sides. Are you ready for that? If not you'd better shut it down. But what do i know? and i would not want to be in your shoes. So let it be.... These things usually boil down pretty quickly.
If not we have some extra entertainment value like in cheese vs crackers exchanges @ vlsroulette ;D
Regards
I agree. It's tough sometimes to find the line when you're a mod, especially if you happen to dislike a poster. Too much heavy moderation isn't good for the forum, we should try to remain impartial but it's not always easy.
There's some really weird censorship of certain words on this forum. For example a.b.s.u.r.d comes out as "illogical", and d.a.m.n. becomes "darn".
What gives? :-\ >:( :o
Quote from: drazen_cro on Jul 09, 04:48 AM 2012
Mr. Bayes didn't you simulated hit and run once.. And we know how did it ended...
I have never heard some expert said playing very short bursts of play can help you and i think that is provable with simulations, right? >:D
Hi drazen,
It's definitely provable with simulations. The only requirement is that the player stick rigidly and completely to the system, just as the computer does. Winkel used to talk about "gambler's intelligence" which involves NOT sticking rigidly to the system, but being flexible and dynamic in response to the flow of the game. That's fine, but as a set of rules it's far too vague to be programmed.
Bayes, I tested your RNG and I admit its very fair and accurate with reel wheel. good job
I wish it has numbers bet :)
I believe when someone mentions Hit & Run, it means Win-Target & Stop-Loss. >:D
Quote from: albertojonas on Jul 09, 01:16 PM 2012
I believe when someone mentions Hit & Run, it means Win-Target & Stop-Loss. >:D
thats how it should be actually.
when gambling we are playing against the unknown and under pity of randomness. I dnt believe of someones definition of H&R, like one member said HIT what ? and RUN where!!?
I believe in one thing , you have your gambling amount of money , when you go to play is either loose it all or stop when you want or tired.. otherwise I just have fun with friends there.
iggiv which part of the "the spins are adding up , no matter if u play continiusly or with long breaks" You can not digest?
If a system can win in every visit because it makes high peaks and we are quiting as winners , then this also means that those hight peaks will let us win also in the long run by playing consistently....
And remember that when WE say long run , we don't only mean playing consistently 1M spins , but also play 1M spins with long breaks....
Breaks or not breaks in 1 M spins we will hit the down(oposite of a peak) and this is why 1M spins is needed as a test.
So the real question that will unlock ur brain and u will understand that hit and run can t work is :
WHO can guaranty you that after leaving as a winner in 1 visit(hit and run) that in the next visit u will also play the frame of the spins that will favour ur system (high peak) and u will also leave as a winner???????????????????????
If with the above question , you aren t able to understand why hit and run is a fallacy , then there is no hope in u....
So there is no hope in ur after all..........
And tell me something....IF you will increase your prediction , then why do u need hit and run? ;D
2 wise men said the folowings:
"""There's no difference between a session where you try for just one unit and leave, verses just playing nonstop.""""
""""So playing 1 spin per day for 2 minutes - for a week
isn't the same as playing 7 spins for 14 minutes back to back
because the exposure isn't the same ?
What planet is this ? LoL""""
"""" these hit and run guys think something magical happens when they leave that enables them to come back and win that one unit again."""""
iggiv if You can t understand that by hitting and running You aren t minimizing the chances on falling in a spins frame that will destroy your system then .....God help you.
I don't speak anymore about it........i did the best i could to explain it to you.
bye
good , then live in ur fantasy Hit and run world...its fine by me because i m not the one that is losing money
There members here are complaining to me about each other. Can you guys please just leave each other alone. You don't have to agree with each other about whatever, but it is not hard to take it easy.
If anyone has a problem with anyone, I cannot do anything if you just tell me "this person is being a *#%@#$" or whatever. I need precise examples to know yes that is wrong, or no I can't see anything being done that's wrong. I need actual examples.
But from this point there shouldnt be any examples because everyone is going to be nice to each other, I'm sure.
The way things go sometimes, an asteroid could be headed to earth and arguing will still be going on in forums. Either way as long as everyone accepts mine is biggest, we'll all get along fine.
Quote from: Steve on Jul 10, 12:01 AM 2012
Either way as long as everyone accepts mine is biggest, we'll all get along fine.
Years ago I once found a Genie bottle washed up on a deserted beach. I gave it a rub and out popped a Genie who thanked me ever so much for freeing him after 1000 years trapped in the bottle.
He offered me one wish with conditions, I must choose one of two wishes on offer.
He said I could have the biggest penis in the world, or the best memory in the world.
At the time I was so exited about this, but do you know for the life of me, to this day I can't remember which of those wishes I chose! >:D
QuoteAt the time I was so exited about this, but do you know for the life of me, to this day I can't remember which of those wishes I chose!
The penis you big pr1ck, looool skakus
Quote from: superman on Jul 10, 02:58 AM 2012
The penis you big pr1ck, looool skakus
Who you callin' a pr1ck,..
pri1ck! :xd:
Bayes or others,
Are these 2000 spins attached on replay 4,numbers involved for testing.
Thanks.
Quote from: F_LAT_INO on Jul 11, 02:23 PM 2012
Bayes or others,
Are these 2000 spins attached on replay 4,numbers involved for testing.
Thanks.
Hello F_LAT_INO good to see you back in here. I am not really sure what you are asking. Bayes is the expert on the software as its creator. The software is supposed to emulate an RNG thats all I can tell you.
I see no fresh results since 7/7/12.
I hope it's going well for you JL.
Trebor
V
Quote from: trebor on Jul 15, 07:01 AM 2012
I see no fresh results since 7/7/12.
I hope it's going well for you JL.
Trebor
Its going steady thanks Trebor, there should be results up to today current balance 253 units. Click the link on Skakus post page 9. I'm working my way slowly but surely to 350 units. If I make it I'm on holy ground literally. And I will be in my zone.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jul 15, 07:49 AM 2012
VIts going steady thanks Trebor, there should be results up to today current balance 253 units. Click the link on Skakus post page 9. I'm working my way slowly but surely to 350 units. If I make it I'm on holy ground literally. And I will be in my zone.
Hola John
I checked your results. You got another chance after you went down more than 100u in a few days. Now after you started at 300u again after lets say 600 placed bets you are at 250u level. What about growing your bankroll at steady level as promised? Why dont you revert again to hit and run?
We are not in a hurry ;D
Regards
Y
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Jul 15, 08:44 AM 2012
Hola John
I checked your results. You got another chance after you went down more than 100u in a few days. Now after you started at 300u again after lets say 600 placed bets you are at 250u level. What about growing your bankroll at steady level as promised? Why don't you revert again to hit and run?
We are not in a hurry ;D
Regards
Incorrect Hutt started At 200 went to 178. Then Bayes restarted the program when skakus found eras. Then I fell to 200 after since then have come back to 253 and playimg pure hit and run from here. Did a lot of real money testing to get a feel for Bayes Rng..Now I have it.
i am really surprised that someone can't see his hit-run has been working since he started really usin it. It's been a few days, something like a week since he got carried away by the game and lost 100 units in a couple of long sessions. Since then i can see that almost daily he gets a few units. If he keeps winning that way further then he will achieve his goals with some time.
Quote from: iggiv on Jul 15, 11:01 AM 2012
i am really surprised that someone can't see his hit-run has been working since he started really using it. It's been a few days, something like a week since he got carried away by the game and lost 100 units in a couple of long sessions. Since then i can see that almost daily he gets a few units. If he keeps winning that way further then he will achieve his goals with some time.
Hi iggiv,
Yes - I had noticed but preferred to keep silent until JL had recouped original bank. Hit and run certainly seems working for him now and he seems confident that he will soon be back in the profit zone.
A.
Oooh! That was my #1000 post!!
I been following JL's results and he has indeed been making daily units. ^-^
Skakus is doin good again by hit-run as well now as much as i can see.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jul 15, 07:49 AM 2012
VIts going steady thanks Trebor, there should be results up to today current balance 253 units. Click the link on Skakus post page 9. I'm working my way slowly but surely to 350 units. If I make it I'm on holy ground literally. And I will be in my zone.
Silly me. That's where I looked. Didn't notice the date is American format. Don't know how I thought it could be month 14. What would that be called.
Trebor
Got to cheer John on.....
He's creeping up like cheap underwear........
Sam
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jul 16, 01:16 AM 2012
Got to cheer John on.....
He's creeping up like cheap underwear........
Sam
Lol good one Sam, I'm enjoying a good run at the moment. Therell be losses and setbacks ahead. But overall Hit and run will get me there.
hows the test coming along? good luck to the contestants
link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/jltest.html (link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/jltest.html)
He's at 262 at my last view.
Sam
I wish him well. He seems to be climbing out of the hole.
Quote from: Tomla021 on Jul 18, 08:48 AM 2012
hows the test coming along? good luck to the contestants
There is only one contestant Tomla unless im in a different forum. And he is on a comeback trail...
Yes, there is one contestant.
If he wins, he will be insufferable!! ::)
Sam
Well, he's at 115 now so the only thing I can say now is: Go for it John!
Dang!! He was at 262!
I thought you meant he was up 115.
TCS
Oh dear... :-[
John, it's going to be a tough climb back up from this. Are you ready to concede defeat? >:D
Quote from: Bayes on Jul 19, 02:42 AM 2012
Oh dear... :-[
John, it's going to be a tough climb back up from this. Are you ready to concede defeat? >:D
It was basically very bizarre betting. It only made sense in the beginning but after string of 14L and drop down of 60u John i guess started improvising. It looked like he wanted to recoup the losses very quickly. He for sure had some runs from hell like at once string of 25L with just 1W inside of it. But losing 16 times in a row 1 Dozen bet happens. He then came close to wipe out after he lost 120u in this sequence and dropped to 57u with bets of 20u. What happened to hit and run?
yeah, looked a bit like panic betting there. Playing to get back to even never works.
QuoteWhat happened to hit and run?
What happened to patience also, well climbing back from that is going to be tough, real tough.
What say you JL?
JL looks panicking! we told him many times to watch what he says but he never listens!
Bayes, next test is me ! I can beat your RNG :) make me a page to post the results. my way : one day bet, double or loose it all.
Quote from: justanothergambler on Jul 19, 07:01 AM 2012
one day bet, double or lose it all.
What would that prove?
Quote from: Skakus on Jul 19, 08:34 AM 2012
What would that prove?
Not much Skakus. But you were the first one who stopped after a bad run in your challenge. But you were ahead.
John went for broke ( sort of ) and lost it. But the question is why he did that. I think that he tried to impress some people here. I do not know if hit n run works but apparently it was his element. And he chose a different approach.
But in real life you just do your own thing playing roulette. You just have one opponent either live wheel or air ball not like many opponents in some competition. And this is a completely different ball game. ;D
Quote from: Bayes on Jul 19, 02:42 AM 2012
Oh dear... :-[
John, it's going to be a tough climb back up from this. Are you ready to concede defeat? >:D
Bayes, can you reset it back to -32 now? >:D
I think he mentioned that he was allowing -1000 units to mark defeat. I would like him to stay in and use a positive progression instead of a negative progression. Got to admit, though, 24 losses with only one win sandwiched in between sounds possible, but utterly unlucky.
Quote from: Still on Jul 19, 09:38 AM 2012
Bayes, can you reset it back to -32 now? >:D
I think he mentioned that he was allowing -1000 units to mark defeat. I would like him to stay in and use a positive progression instead of a negative progression. Got to admit, though, 24 losses with only one win sandwiched in between sounds possible, but utterly unlucky.
Still
Did you bet on single dozens recently? If you did you would know ;D
There is no such a thing as being unlucky in roulette unless you get a sleeping
dozen in 30 spins.
Quote from: superman on Jul 19, 05:15 AM 2012
What happened to patience also, well climbing back from that is going to be tough, real tough.
What say you JL?
-------------
hummm, it seems that all this time the pot has just been laughing at how black the pan is........
vundarosa
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Jul 19, 09:21 AM 2012
Not much Skakus. But you were the first one who stopped after a bad run in your challenge. But you were ahead.
I'm just treading water, not stopped. Doing slightly better than JL at this point. :)
link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/s_test.html (link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/s_test.html)
Quote from: justanothergambler on Jul 19, 07:01 AM 2012
JL looks panicking! we told him many times to watch what he says but he never listens!
Bayes, next test is me ! I can beat your RNG :) make me a page to post the results. my way : one day bet, double or lose it all.
Sorry JAG, but Skakus is right. You have to prove something more than that you can get lucky. ;D
JL must be thinking that the RNG is rigged. Here's the killer sequence:
DOZ1 2 L 235
DOZ2 2 L 233
DOZ1 2 L 231
DOZ2 2 L 229
DOZ2 4 L 225
DOZ3 4 W 233
DOZ2 1 L 232
DOZ3 1 W 234
DOZ1 3 L 231
DOZ2 3 L 228
DOZ1 3 L 225
DOZ2 3 L 222
DOZ2 4 L 218
DOZ3 4 W 226
DOZ2 2 L 224
DOZ3 2 L 222
DOZ1 5 L 217
DOZ2 5 L 212
DOZ1 5 L 207
DOZ2 5 L 202
DOZ1 12 W 226
DOZ2 12 L 214
DOZ1 2 L 212
DOZ2 2 W 216
DOZ2 2 L 214
DOZ3 2 W 218
DOZ2 1 L 217
DOZ3 1 L 216
DOZ1 5 L 211
DOZ2 5 L 206
DOZ1 5 L 201
DOZ2 5 W 211
DOZ1 5 L 206
DOZ2 5 W 216
DOZ1 1 L 215
DOZ2 1 L 214
DOZ2 3 W 220
DOZ3 3 L 217
DOZ1 3 L 214
DOZ2 3 L 211
DOZ1 3 L 208
DOZ2 3 L 205
DOZ1 5 W 215
DOZ2 5 L 210
DOZ2 2 L 208
DOZ3 2 L 206
DOZ2 2 L 204
DOZ3 2 L 202
DOZ1 5 L 197
DOZ2 5 L 192
DOZ1 5 L 187
DOZ2 5 L 182
DOZ1 12 L 170
DOZ2 12 L 158
DOZ1 12 L 146
DOZ2 12 L 134
DOZ2 20 W 174
DOZ3 20 L 154
DOZ1 3 L 151
DOZ2 3 W 157
DOZ1 3 W 163
DOZ2 3 L 160
DOZ2 3 L 157
DOZ3 3 L 154
DOZ2 3 L 151
DOZ3 3 L 148
DOZ1 3 L 145
DOZ2 3 L 142
DOZ1 3 L 139
DOZ2 3 L 136
DOZ1 5 W 146
DOZ2 5 L 141
DOZ2 2 L 139
DOZ3 2 L 137
DOZ1 3 L 134
DOZ2 3 L 131
DOZ1 3 L 128
DOZ2 3 L 125
DOZ1 6 L 119
DOZ2 6 L 113
DOZ1 6 L 107
DOZ2 6 L 101
DOZ2 6 L 95
DOZ3 6 L 89
DOZ2 6 L 83
DOZ3 6 L 77
DOZ1 20 L 57
Only 14 wins in 87 bets. :'(
But actually, that's only -3.2 STDs.
Quote from: Skakus on Jul 19, 10:02 AM 2012
I'm just treading water, not stopped. Doing slightly better than JL at this point. :)
link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/s_test.html (link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/s_test.html)
Hehe Skakus
You are so modest. You doubled your Br before you went a bit down ;D You know im not BS guy here.
Quote from: Skakus on Jul 19, 10:02 AM 2012
I'm just treading water, not stopped. Doing slightly better than JL at this point. :)
link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/s_test.html (link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/s_test.html)
Bit of a bumpy ride though! ;D
[attachimg=1]
Quote from: Bayes on Jul 19, 10:12 AM 2012
Bit of a bumpy ride though! ;D
LoL.
Bayes, you suck! Hahaha!
Quote from: Bayes on Jul 19, 10:12 AM 2012
Bit of a bumpy ride though! ;D
[attachimg=1]
Dont be so mean Bayes....plz
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Jul 19, 09:44 AM 2012
Did you bet on single dozens recently? If you did you would know ;D
There is no such a thing as being unlucky in roulette unless you get a sleeping
dozen in 30 spins.
I guess these are all double dozen bets? Most of JL's systems seem to use them - ie.
DOZ1 2 L 235
DOZ2 2 L 233 this was a double dozen bet on 1&2
DOZ1 2 L 231
DOZ2 2 L 229 double dozen bet on 1&2
DOZ2 4 L 225
DOZ3 4 W 233 double dozen bet on 2&3
DOZ2 1 L 232
DOZ3 1 W 234 double dozen bet on 2&3 etc..
so the 14 losses in a row is actually 7 double dozen losses in a row, & then won the 8th attempt with 20u on each dozen?
Quote from: monaco on Jul 19, 10:58 AM 2012
I guess these are all double dozen bets? Most of JL's systems seem to use them - ie.
DOZ1 2 L 235
DOZ2 2 L 233 this was a double dozen bet on 1&2
DOZ1 2 L 231
DOZ2 2 L 229 double dozen bet on 1&2
DOZ2 4 L 225
DOZ3 4 W 233 double dozen bet on 2&3
DOZ2 1 L 232
DOZ3 1 W 234 double dozen bet on 2&3 etc..
so the 14 losses in a row is actually 7 double dozen losses in a row, & then won the 8th attempt with 20u on each dozen?
You are wrong. Study betting history from 18/7. Single dozens only.
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Jul 19, 11:12 AM 2012
You are wrong. Study betting history from 18/7. Single dozens only.
How does that prove I'm wrong? Proves I'm right if anything.
{It's why you'll never see 3 continuous W's when he's betting the dozens.}
Quote
Quote from: Bayes on Jul 19, 02:42 AM 2012
Oh dear... :-[
John, it's going to be a tough climb back up from this. Are you ready to concede defeat? >:D
No Bayes if we are playing -500 to +5000? As the parameters of failure and success. I'm not done yet. Played foolishly had a few jars for my birthday. Should have left it alone. But 7 zeros in 9 bets didn't help either. This is where an Rng differs from a live wheel. Now I have to call on PB and P4 to bring me back 10---15 units a day.
Quote from: monaco on Jul 19, 11:16 AM 2012
How does that prove I'm wrong? Proves I'm right if anything.
{It's why you'll never see 3 continuous W's when he's betting the dozens.}
DOZ1 2 L 235 DOZ2 2 L 233 DOZ1 2 L 231 DOZ2 2 L 229 DOZ2 4 L 225 DOZ3 4 W 233
I think that you need 2 go back to roulette 101 classes if this is
double dozen betting. :D
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Jul 19, 11:34 AM 2012
DOZ1 2 L 235 DOZ2 2 L 233 DOZ1 2 L 231 DOZ2 2 L 229 DOZ2 4 L 225 DOZ3 4 W 233
I think that you need 2 go back to roulette 101 classes if this is
double dozen betting. :D
Let me break it down for you..
07/18/2012
DOZ1 2 L 235
DOZ2 2 L 233 was a double dozen bet on 1&2, 2units on each, lost.
DOZ1 2 L 231
DOZ2 2 L 229 double dozen bet on 1&2, 2u on each lost
DOZ2 4 L 225
DOZ3 4 W 233 double dozen bet on 2&3, 4u on each, won on dozen3 etc...
DOZ2 1 L 232
DOZ3 1 W 234
DOZ1 3 L 231
DOZ2 3 L 228
DOZ1 3 L 225
DOZ2 3 L 222
DOZ2 4 L 218
DOZ3 4 W 226
DOZ2 2 L 224
DOZ3 2 L 222
DOZ1 5 L 217
DOZ2 5 L 212
get it now?
I dnt know how JL made that fall ! I have tested Bayes RNG and always end up positive.
JL has to admit his approach is wrong from the beginning .. he just doesnt want to listen to MATH guys.
Quote from: monaco on Jul 19, 11:40 AM 2012
Let me break it down for you..
07/18/2012
DOZ1 2 L 235
DOZ2 2 L 233 was a double dozen bet on 1&2, 2units on each, lost.
DOZ1 2 L 231
DOZ2 2 L 229 double dozen bet on 1&2, 2u on each lost
DOZ2 4 L 225
DOZ3 4 W 233 double dozen bet on 2&3, 4u on each, won on dozen3 etc...
DOZ2 1 L 232
DOZ3 1 W 234
DOZ1 3 L 231
DOZ2 3 L 228
DOZ1 3 L 225
DOZ2 3 L 222
DOZ2 4 L 218
DOZ3 4 W 226
DOZ2 2 L 224
DOZ3 2 L 222
DOZ1 5 L 217
DOZ2 5 L 212
get it now?
You are right. When i looked at betting history i found one instance that 2 consecutive pairs of bets were different so it pointed out to single dozens betting. But the pattern points to double dozens betting but its not really the point here ;D
Bayes
Would you sort this out?
DOZ1 2 L 235
DOZ1........does that mean he bet on the first dozen?
2......does that mean he bet two units?
L...........he lost.
235.......his bankroll after the loss.
Is he betting single dozens or double dozens?
Sam
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Jul 19, 12:18 PM 2012
You are right. When i looked at betting history i found one instance that 2 consecutive pairs of bets were different so it pointed out to single dozens betting. But the pattern points to double dozens betting but its not really the point here ;D
I know, it was just an observation :thumbsup:
I get it...
DOZ1
DOZ2............is a single spin. But what is the 2 that follows both bets. Not bet amount.
Right, Monaco?
Sam
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jul 19, 12:22 PM 2012
I get it...
DOZ1
DOZ2............is a single spin. But what is the 2 that follows both bets. Not bet amount.
Right, Monaco?
Sam
thats right - thats one spin, the 2 that follows is the amount bet on that particular dozen.
DOZ2 1 L 232
DOZ3 1 W 234
OK, if he's betting on double dozens, how can we have this?
Sam
.
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jul 19, 12:25 PM 2012
EDIT
Sam if you bet on 2 dozs , they cant WIN both :)
did you try Bayes program to get familiar?
Sorry guys.......another dense moment.
I'll leave this alone.
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jul 19, 12:25 PM 2012
DOZ2 1 L 232
DOZ3 1 W 234
OK, if he's betting on double dozens, how can we have this?
Sam
the 'ball' lands in doz 3 - doz 3 wins 2, doz 2 loses 1.. total at spin before must've been 233, so a 1 unit win takes him to 234.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jul 19, 11:22 AM 2012
No Bayes if we are playing -500 to +5000? As the parameters of failure and success. I'm not done yet. Played foolishly had a few jars for my birthday. Should have left it alone. But 7 zeros in 9 bets didn't help either. This is where an Rng differs from a live wheel. Now I have to call on PB and P4 to bring me back 10---15 units a day.
Sorry John
Nothing but excuses from you. Either too many or too many zeros. If you feel that you dont have enough BR why would not say so before? Everybody can have a bad run once a while but looking at your betting history i dont see any cohesive tactic. Now you are back to PB or P4 and recently you promised to use your secret weapon to climb back. And you always preached virtues of patience and discipline. So why dont stick with your best stuff bit longer?
Just one more................ ;D
When John was just blowin' in the wind, I called him a bloviator. When he puts himself on the line, he has my respect.
He's got to be nervous as walrus.
John, take a deep breath and do what you do.
TwoCat
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jul 19, 12:36 PM 2012
Just one more................ ;D
When John was just blowin' in the wind, I called him a bloviator. When he puts himself on the line, he has my respect.
He's got to be nervous as walrus.
John, take a deep breath and do what you do.
TwoCat
Yeah
It takes balls to take on this challenge. We all will have to give him that.
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jul 19, 12:36 PM 2012
Just one more................ ;D
When John was just blowin' in the wind, I called him a bloviator. When he puts himself on the line, he has my respect.
He's got to be nervous as walrus.
John, take a deep breath and do what you do.
TwoCat
Thanks for that Sam, I played like an arse and got ripped a new one by Bayes Rng. I have a stop-loss rule in place now. And no more booze when playing. I should have stopped when I hit 230 units. Its going to be a hard grind from here. I'm going to have to earn it.
But it can be done, I hope to show that over the comimg weeks. I'm no quitter.
JL, did you have 7 zeros in 9 spins?
Or were there 7 zeros in a frame of 20 etc?
p.s.
Hello TwisterUk! Just saw you were online as well.
What are your thoughts about the current methods on the forum? Which ones do you like? There have been many good ones released over the last few months. Warrior, F_LAT_INO, Ego, JohnLegend, marivo, GLC to name a few (bufallowizard, ScoobyDoo, Gizomtron, atlantis) have many great contributions.
Quote from: amk on Jul 19, 03:59 PM 2012
JL, did you have 7 zeros in 9 spins?
Or were there 7 zeros in a frame of 20 etc?
p.s.
Hello TwisterUk! Just saw you were online as well.
What are your thoughts about the current methods on the forum? Which ones do you like? There have been many good ones released over the last few months. Warrior, F_LAT_INO, Ego, JohnLegend, marivo, GLC to name a few (bufallowizard, ScoobyDoo, Gizomtron, atlantis) have many great contributions.
7 zeros In 9. Bets Amk spaced about 50 spins apart. But that's not important. Now, my lack of discipline after an afternoon drinking to celebrate my birthday is what cost me. You can't let it slip for a moment with this game. When I play right ill win, when I don't you can see what will happen. Double dozen betting is costly if you don't have a powerful BR. Now I've got to grind my way back, with my trusty PB and P4.
And I'm using. A stop-loss rule to limit damage on days where the rng turns and bites. I have to remember most days are winning ones. Its how we handle the losing ones that are Crucial. I play on Jls no quitter. I will fight my way back.
Happy Birthday........
.........and how old is JL?
TwoCat
HAPPY B, ITS MINE TOO.
Warrior
Happy Birthday to you!
How old might you be?
Sam
Happy , Happy then!!!
Quote from: warrior on Jul 19, 07:07 PM 2012
HAPPY B, ITS MINE TOO.
------------------
@jl & Warrior, hey i didn't know you u guys were twins :-P
happy belated to you both
vundarosa
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jul 19, 06:37 PM 2012
Happy Birthday........
.........and how old is JL?
TwoCat
Thanks guys, 48 yesterday Sam.
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jul 19, 07:15 PM 2012
Warrior
Happy Birthday to you!
How old might you be?
Sam
43 0r maybe 34 just kidding.
John hit a low of 57 and then pulled back to 115 or so.
Could say he doubled his bankroll. One 20u bet pulled his fat out of the fire. Would rather see many small winners than one large one. One large can be luck; many small cannot.
Wesa pullin' fer ya, JohnBoy!!
Sam
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jul 20, 11:30 AM 2012
John hit a low of 57 and then pulled back to 115 or so.
Could say he doubled his bankroll. One 20u bet pulled his fat out of the fire. Would rather see many small winners than one large one. One large can be luck; many small cannot.
Wesa pullin' fer ya, JohnBoy!!
Sam
Thanks Sam. You're right I'm looking for about five points a day until I get back to 200. No risky stuff and have a stop-loss of 30 points. So I can't destroy 10 days work in one session ever again.
Only tested first 2000 numbers,two uncles different way,and it beats flat bet these 2000 rng numbers
Minus starting 24 tracking numbers.
What happened to website with the numbers?
Quote from: F_LAT_INO on Jul 21, 07:24 AM 2012
Only tested first 2000 numbers,two uncles different way,and it beats flat bet these 2000 rng numbers
Minus starting 24 tracking numbers.
Dear F_LAT_INO,
This is the purest way to play your unique concept of jumping back and fourth from recent to furthest after a loss to catch a winning run.
It will keep someone busy placing bets and keeping track of the numbers, but if it works playing the sectors, how can it not work playing the individual numbers?
I think there are a lot of bet progression methods that can enhance the units won per spin. Flat bet for a predetermined number of spins as long as you're staying ahead during those 10 spins, stay at 1 unit. If down after 10 spins increase by 1 unit per number. Play the next 10 spins at the increase amount per number unless you reach a new high bank.
We could even be a little more conservative and if we're betting 2 units per number, we could drop back down to 1 unit per number if we win back to where we were at the end of our 10 spins with 1 unit on each number. This will help keep our bets from escalating out of control if we enter a really long section of very bad choppiness.
Increasing each number by a unit makes our progression: 18-36-54-72-90-108-126 etc... Maybe the leveller idea should be employed. Use our progression until we get to like 54 units and stay at that level until we reach a new high bank amount.
Just thinking out loud my friend. I know you've also been thinking how to improve this over just a flat bet, that is unless a flat bet wins enough to make it worth the time invested.
G
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Jul 21, 11:44 AM 2012
What happened to website with the numbers?
Gadzooks!! It's gone!!
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jul 21, 11:52 AM 2012
Gadzooks!! It's gone!!
Sabotaged? Any suspects?
Hope it comes back, was great to watch the drama unfold :lol:
Quote from: Twisteruk on Jul 21, 01:16 PM 2012
Hope it comes back, was great to watch the drama unfold :LoL:
Yeah, i guess it was just a temporary malfunction :D We should ask Bayes...
"Round up the usual suspects."
Quote from: GLC on Jul 21, 11:46 AM 2012
Dear F_LAT_INO,
This is the purest way to play your unique concept of jumping back and fourth from recent to furthest after a loss to catch a winning run.
It will keep someone busy placing bets and keeping track of the numbers, but if it works playing the sectors, how can it not work playing the individual numbers?
I think there are a lot of bet progression methods that can enhance the units won per spin. Flat bet for a predetermined number of spins as long as you're staying ahead during those 10 spins, stay at 1 unit. If down after 10 spins increase by 1 unit per number. Play the next 10 spins at the increase amount per number unless you reach a new high bank.
We could even be a little more conservative and if we're betting 2 units per number, we could drop back down to 1 unit per number if we win back to where we were at the end of our 10 spins with 1 unit on each number. This will help keep our bets from escalating out of control if we enter a really long section of very bad choppiness.
Increasing each number by a unit makes our progression: 18-36-54-72-90-108-126 etc... Maybe the leveller idea should be employed. Use our progression until we get to like 54 units and stay at that level until we reach a new high bank amount.
Just thinking out loud my friend. I know you've also been thinking how to improve this over just a flat bet, that is unless a flat bet wins enough to make it worth the time invested.
G
--This afternoon had a few hours session on airball machine/as don't think will be going playing
night sessions in casino until don't get fit--lol/---and played as Wally suggested progress on each losing spin by 1 and min.1 on a win.......most of the session was on starting 2 ch.per sector,on chops reached 5 most.Your suggestion is very near how I really imagine it to play.
Quote from: Bayes on Jul 02, 03:25 PM 2012
Ok guys, here's the link to the site where you can follow John's progress (note: the format of the results is SELECTION STAKE WIN/LOSS BANK) -
link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/jltest.html (link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/jlchallenge.html)
6 units down, 394 to go. ;D
Hi Bayes...or anyone?
I find this link dead.....any ideas?
Quoteany ideas?
Maybe JL has asked for it's removal :twisted: , JL, what's happening chap?
Quote from: GLC on Jul 21, 11:46 AM 2012
Dear F_LAT_INO,
This is the purest way to play your unique concept of jumping back and fourth from recent to furthest after a loss to catch a winning run.
It will keep someone busy placing bets and keeping track of the numbers, but if it works playing the sectors, how can it not work playing the individual numbers?
I think there are a lot of bet progression methods that can enhance the units won per spin. Flat bet for a predetermined number of spins as long as you're staying ahead during those 10 spins, stay at 1 unit. If down after 10 spins increase by 1 unit per number. Play the next 10 spins at the increase amount per number unless you reach a new high bank.
We could even be a little more conservative and if we're betting 2 units per number, we could drop back down to 1 unit per number if we win back to where we were at the end of our 10 spins with 1 unit on each number. This will help keep our bets from escalating out of control if we enter a really long section of very bad choppiness.
Increasing each number by a unit makes our progression: 18-36-54-72-90-108-126 etc... Maybe the leveller idea should be employed. Use our progression until we get to like 54 units and stay at that level until we reach a new high bank amount.
Just thinking out loud my friend. I know you've also been thinking how to improve this over just a flat bet, that is unless a flat bet wins enough to make it worth the time invested.
G
George, I'm not sure this would be the best progression. The reason is because the amount of time spent on this method of play can be long and tiring. I am more of the opinion to simply add 1 or more to each session until you hit your target and leave. I also believe that there are multiple ways to get the most out of this strategy: (1) play as it is currently written, (2) play to +1 or -1 and go up either way on the next session. This means you are playing the remainder of the session virtually, (3) play Winkel's progression strategy within each session. So, you are now increasing within each session. That sequence would continue into the next session if you're not in plus. (4) play as (3) but follow the progression at the beginning of each session, as opposed to within the session.
I've not had a change to do any extensive testing on this, I'm just going by what I see happening during my real play. Often times when my play is going up and down and I look down at my recordings I think "had I just played +1 -1 during the sessions, I'd be out of here by now". Anyway, just a few thoughts ....
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Jul 21, 12:51 PM 2012
Sabotaged? Any suspects?
I told Bayes a lot of my results had been deleted apart from most of the first days play 6/7/12 and my most recent games. He is working on fixing the problem Hutt. My current balance is 129 points. He advised me not to play until he has fixed the problem.
Quote from: Twisteruk on Jul 21, 01:16 PM 2012
Hope it comes back, was great to watch the drama unfold :LoL:
Great to see you back Twister how are you? Yes I'm down but don't Count me out I'm a fighter. And I'm coming back. With tight sensible play. And a stop-loss to make sure I never undo over a weeks work in one session ever again. Its one step backwards and two steps forward from here on.
Quote from: superman on Jul 21, 05:46 PM 2012
Maybe JL has asked for it's removal :twisted: , JL, what's happening chap?
No Superman, never mark me down as a quitter. What happened as I said to Hutt was on Friday night when I saved my current win and went to check the site. All that was there was most of my first days play on 06/07/2012. And the last result I uploaded 126 points. I played and won three more games of Pattern Breaker after that. And it recorded them to give me a current total of 129 points. But I thought I had better report this strange occurance to Bayes.
His comeback was he too had noticed this. But he didn't have time to really look at it. He advised me not to play until he does. And I am awaiting comeback from him on the issue. In the meantime I think he closed the link while he investigates the problem.
QuoteNo Superman, never mark me down as a quitter
It was tongue in cheek, I haven't written you off ...... yet, Bayes should be able to get it fixed.
Hi guys,
I've spent some time trying to solve this problem, what's happening is that the html doc. seems to be corrupted when it gets to a certain size. Unfortunately I haven't been able to figure out why (Skakus' results seem fine at the moment, presumably because he hasn't made as many bets as JL).
So anyway the alternative I propose is to do away with the web site and instead use a database (which will be on JL's pc). The results will be saved to the database, which won't be accessible to JL (but he will be able to print out each session's results), and every couple of weeks or so I'll ask him to send me the database from which I'll extract the results and upload them to the forum. This won't be as much fun for members to follow the progress, but at least the test will be free from any long-term problems.
Hopefully I'll be able to make the necessary changes in the next couple of days.
Unfortunately most of the previous data was lost, but I can confirm that JL's bank stands at 129 units (the current bank is held in a separate text file on the server). So 129 units will be the new starting bank.
why not keep things as they are, website and all, and just keep reseting after some x number of bets or of days?
vundarosa
Quote from: Bayes on Jul 22, 02:51 AM 2012
Hi guys,
I've spent some time trying to solve this problem, what's happening is that the html doc. seems to be corrupted when it gets to a certain size. Unfortunately I haven't been able to figure out why (Skakus' results seem fine at the moment, presumably because he hasn't made as many bets as JL).
So anyway the alternative I propose is to do away with the web site and instead use a database (which will be on JL's pc). The results will be saved to the database, which won't be accessible to JL (but he will be able to print out each session's results), and every couple of weeks or so I'll ask him to send me the database from which I'll extract the results and upload them to the forum. This won't be as much fun for members to follow the progress, but at least the test will be free from any long-term problems.
Hopefully I'll be able to make the necessary changes in the next couple of days.
Unfortunately most of the previous data was lost, but I can confirm that JL's bank stands at 129 units (the current bank is held in a separate text file on the server). So 129 units will be the new starting bank.
Okay thanks Bayes, so that means play is off limits to me until you send me this database?? I was looking forward to continuing my saga with the RNG today but nevermind. I will wait for the database.
Quote from: vundarosa on Jul 22, 03:09 AM 2012
why not keep things as they are, website and all, and just keep reseting after some x number of bets or of days?
vundarosa
That is an idea Bayes. I dont think members really care about seeing every result. Just the bottom line at the end of the day. Can I eventually beat this RNG or not? I think thats a good suggestion by Vundarosa.
Quote from: vundarosa on Jul 22, 03:09 AM 2012
why not keep things as they are, website and all, and just keep reseting after some x number of bets or of days?
vundarosa
Good suggestion, and that will save me the extra work. :thumbsup:
ok. I'll just clear the site every week or so. I'll do that now, you should be ready to go in a few minutes John - actually, give it half an hour.
Bayes, Can't you just overwrite/replace the existing file every time he finishes a session? instead of adding to it, that would keep the size down.
Quote from: Bayes on Jul 22, 03:24 AM 2012
Good suggestion, and that will save me the extra work. :thumbsup:
ok. I'll just clear the site every week or so. I'll do that now, you should be ready to go in a few minutes John - actually, give it half an hour.
Great Bayes, and anyone who wants to keep track of every session I play can simply save my sessions on a folder on their P.C I've saved most of my previous play and Bayes could do the same for detailed study to find out if say Pattern breaker does achieve the 10/1-----12/1 I say is possible played Hit and Run.
superman, so you mean only the last session is shown? yeah I could do that. It would save me having to clear the file every so often, but that only takes a couple of minutes. If I make that change I'll have to change the code in the program and send JL the updated version, plus it might be nice to see a few sessions at a time on the site. I'll leave it up to JL to decide.
You should be ok to carry on now John. :thumbsup:
Quote from: Bayes on Jul 22, 03:38 AM 2012
superman, so you mean only the last session is shown? yeah I could do that. It would save me having to clear the file every so often, but that only takes a couple of minutes. If I make that change I'll have to change the code in the program and send JL the updated version, plus it might be nice to see a few sessions at a time on the site. I'll leave it up to JL to decide.
You should be ok to carry on now John. :thumbsup:
I think the last 100 plays should always be there for members to see. And those that want to simply save them every few days, if they want the whole story.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jul 22, 03:46 AM 2012
I think the last 100 plays should always be there for members to see. And those that want to simply save them every few days, if they want the whole story.
John, Is there any chance of a quick precis of whats happened so far. I was following it, then i went on holiday...and Im confused. If its too much trouble I understand.
Turner
All
You gots to say one thing for John--his draw downs are tiny compared to most. Three or four units at most.
Very impressive!
Sam
Methinks Bayes is right: This can't be luck.
Keep yer kool, JL.
Sam
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jul 25, 05:36 PM 2012
Methinks Bayes is right: This can't be luck.
Keep yer kool, JL.
Sam
Will do Sam, its taken me a long time to get a feel for Bayes Rng. I've tried a lot of methods on it. Some worked. Better than others. Now I'm trying the very first method I really got moving with. THE ZONE. Concentrating on dozen 1 and 3. I think its going to do very well. All the playing I've done simce 6/7/12 was written as numbers so I. Could run several methods across them. The Zone has out performed everything else so far. Rngs set Into trends just like live wheels. By early August I have faith I'll Be the right side off 300 points and will never look back. Watch this space.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jul 25, 06:00 PM 2012
Will do Sam, its taken me a long time to get a feel for Bayes Rng. I've tried a lot of methods on it. Some worked. Better than others. Now I'm trying the very first merhod I really got moving with. THE ZONE. Concentrating pn dozen 1 and 3. I think its going to do very well. All the playing I've done simce 6/7/12 was written as numbers so I. Could run several methods across them. The Zone has out performed everything else so far. Rngs set Into trends just like live wheels. By early August I have faith I'll Be the right side off 300 points and will never look back. Watch this space.
So have you started playing again?
Quote from: Blood Angel on Jul 25, 06:02 PM 2012
So have you started playing again
I never stopped Blood Angel. Its taken me three weeks to learn how best to approach this RNG. Stiff methods can't take it. All the time I've been trying this and that. One method on paper has been shining. THE ZONE. Its the only one that truly seems to be the answer. After two nasty drawdowns. That had nearly everyone and the kitchen sink thinking I was a goner.
I have made my pledge to come back. Sam is one of the few who has supported and encouraged me all the way. And I am grateful for that. When Bayes suggested it might be best to call it quits when I hit 115 last week.Sams comment about taking a deep breath and doing my thing was all I needed to realize I'm not done here. I am on the rise. And will restore faith in all who are routing for me. Once I taste the right side of 300 points. Anything is possible. I had tougher times on live wheels over the last 15 years. If I was a quitter. Id never have gotten anywhere.
With this RNG it was a question of finding the right tool for the job. I really think I have it now. And I hope my numbers over the coming weeks will show that to the forum. Thanks for the support people.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jul 25, 06:38 PM 2012
I never stopped Blood Angel. Its taken me three weeks to learn how best to approach this RNG. Stiff methods can't take it. All the time I've been trying this and that. One method on paper has been shining. THE ZONE. Its the only one that truly seems to be the answer. After two nasty drawdowns. That had nearly everyone and the kitchen sink thinking I was a goner.
I have made my pledge to come back. Sam is one of the few who has supported and encouraged me all the way. And I am grateful for that. When Bayes suggested it might be best to call it quits when I hit 115 last week.Sams comment about taking a deep breath and doing my thing was all I needed to realize I'm not done here. I am on the rise. And will restore faith in all who are routing for me. Once I taste the right side of 300 points. Anything is possible. I had tougher times on live wheels over the last 15 years. If I was a quitter. Id never have gotten anywhere.
With this RNG it was a question of finding the right tool for the job. I really think I have it now. And I hope my numbers over the coming weeks will show that to the forum. Thanks for the support people.
I wish you well.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jul 25, 06:38 PM 2012
Sam is one of the few who has supported and encouraged me all the way.
That's not true! I have been supporting you MORE than Sam all along!
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jul 25, 06:38 PM 2012
And I am grateful for that. When Bayes suggested it might be best to call it quits when I hit 115 last week.Sams comment about taking a deep breath and doing my thing was all I needed to realize I'm not done here. I am on the rise. And will restore faith in all who are routing for me.
I suggested Bayes reset the count to -32! >:D
I still believe in CODE 20, but if the ZONE has life, i believe in that too!
300+ = Resurrection from the dead. I never wrote you off! Best wishes!
Quote from: Still on Jul 25, 11:20 PM 2012
That's not true! I have been supporting you MORE than Sam all along!
I suggested Bayes reset the count to -32! >:D
I still believe in CODE 20, but if the ZONE has life, i believe in that too!
300+ = Resurrection from the dead. I never wrote you off! Best wishes!
Thanks Still yes I know you have been supporting me. I appreciate it and look to justify your support over the coming mpnths. Watch this space.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jul 25, 06:38 PM 2012
One method on paper has been shining. THE ZONE. Its the only one that truly seems to be the answer.
Wow, now there's a blast from the past. ^-^
Just a quick observation. You seem to jump from one method to another John. Recently you pledged to use P4 or Pattern breaker and now you shifted to ZONE. Its bit confusing ;D But i guess the results will tell.
Good luck.
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Jul 26, 09:24 AM 2012
Just a quick observation. You seem to jump from one method to another John. Recently you pledged to use P4 or Pattern breaker and now you shifted to ZONE. Its bit confusing ;D But i guess the results will tell.
Good luck.
Its hard to beat this RNG Hutt. I can't be precious about the method I use. Only the ones that give me a chance. I test live in play which is risky. As my session tonight shows. But I believe in the longrun. The Zone always brings it home. The beauty of Bayes RNG is its the fastest thing on earth. You can play a weeks worth in a few hours. What my session tonight will show is the ups and downs of the ZONE. I purposely played a long drawn out session. I started at 148 units. Had a drawdown as low as 78 at one point after 4 lost games in a row. Then started a comeback. Which eventually led to me going from 78 points to 155. An increase of seven points for the day.
I ended the days play as I will play in more normal circumstances with three Hit and Run style games which amazingly all won on bet 1. That's a dream result. And its not to be expected often. I don't fear Bayes RNG. But getting the better of it is no easy thing. Pattern 4 can't do it. The trends that form on Bayes RNG can be a nightmare. Even for Pattern Breaker. I saw a double loss yesterday for both High and Low and Odd and Even. Something I've only seen 4 times in over 4000 games on a live wheel.
I think the Zone is the best approach because its moving and constantly switching between dozens. The Zone is far less affected by repeating trends than other methods. I have now thoroughly tested it. And have full faith in it as the one to take Bayes RNG. It will be extremely rare for me to take a backward step from here on. The profit may only be 2 or 3 points on some days. On others it will be as high as 25 or more especially once I am over 250 points again. But a profit and step in the right direction it will be.
Quote from: Bayes on Jul 26, 09:05 AM 2012
Wow, now there's a blast from the past. ^-^
Yes Bayes, I think its the best method to take on your RNG.
yeeha--go for it Mr John.....best wishes
How can we not root for someone with your optimism?
Maybe some would like to see you fail, but more of us by far are hoping that you succeed.
All of us with any experience know that RNG's a nightmare in the long run.
Thanks for not giving up.
I hope you're original system turns out to be the one.
GLC
Quote from: Bayes on Jul 26, 09:05 AM 2012
Wow, now there's a blast from the past. ^-^
LoL!
(link:://i499.photobucket.com/albums/rr351/skakus/thezonesquirrel.jpg)
JL, You are already successful, just simply by trying!! The icing on the cake is that you are willing to share it in the forum. There's no doubt that you will be successful at this as well. All your other methods continue to offer solid results, at least for me ... Thank you again! Always look forward to hearing your thoughts!
Quote from: Chauncy47 on Jul 27, 07:59 AM 2012
JL, You are already successful, just simply by trying!! The icing on the cake is that you are willing to share it in the forum. There's no doubt that you will be successful at this as well. All your other methods continue to offer solid results, at least for me ... Thank you again! Always look forward to hearing your thoughts!
Hi Chauncy read your email. Glad you enjoyed Switzerland and the single zero wheel. I've been battling and testing on Bayes Rng. Its been tough but I feel I have the anwser now. And its not a matrix method.
Ironically my Neo looks like being the very first method I introduced to a roulette forum The ZONE.
Quote from: GLC on Jul 26, 08:51 PM 2012
How can we not root for someone with your optimism?
Maybe some would like to see you fail, but more of us by far are hoping that you succeed.
All of us with any experience know that RNG's a nightmare in the long run.
Thanks for not giving up.
I hope you're original system turns out to be the one.
GLC
Me too GLC thanks for your post.
Quote from: GLC on Jul 26, 08:51 PM 2012
Maybe some would like to see you fail, but more of us by far are hoping that you succeed.
Too bad one can't beat roulette just from hoping to beat it... Or persuading other people that some illusion can help (like hit and run) It needs a bit more than that... don't you think dear George?
Cheers
Drazen
Quote from: drazen_cro on Jul 27, 12:14 PM 2012
Too bad one can't beat roulette just from hoping to beat it... Or persuading other people that some illusion can help (like hit and run) It needs a bit more than that... don't you think dear George?
Cheers
Drazen
Hit and Run Illusion? Come back in the middle of August and see if you can say that again Drazen.
Quote from: drazen_cro on Jul 27, 12:14 PM 2012
Too bad one can't beat roulette just from hoping to beat it... Or persuading other people that some illusion can help (like hit and run) It needs a bit more than that... don't you think dear George?
Cheers
Drazen
If I did, I'd quit trolling around on this forum!
G
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jul 27, 01:30 PM 2012
Hit and Run Illusion? Come back in the middle of August and see if you can say that again Drazen.
In my casino they have mini-roulette in the bathrooms for hit & run strategies. :lol:
It is "Hit and Run" the question is the session time, which can be long, but not too loooong.
As my wife use to say come fast, but no too fast. Its a thrilling thing the game!
Quote from: GLC on Jul 27, 02:10 PM 2012
If I did, I'd quit trolling around on this forum!
G
Dear G if some is not trolling that is you. You are minister of progressions and MM on this forum if you ask me and i have stated that many times... If someone here deserved to see the light in the end of a this long dark tunel you would be defintely one of the first ones...
What i can say (and i never lie) that i have seen and actualy know a way to create real edge...
I am leaving this place for some time because there is not much more for me here i am afraid...
I will never forget place and people from whom i "originated" actualy and i ll drop here from time to time to check you all up...
But now my dear, actualy REAL and not so fast fight for me begins. It will still need so much darn efforts and struggle but i am so ready to work long and hard to achieve it and i ll have every right to demand that i succed. Failure is not an option, it never was, i was telling that to myslelf every time i saw this beautifull game of wheel...
JL i wish you all the best, please dont resent me anything, never had any hard or personal feelings.
Every one has to find his own way in the end i would say... The time will discern winners from losers...
Cheers and keep up good work, whatever that could mean for one :)
Best regards and be blessed all
Good luck for the ones who needs it also..
Over and out
Drazen
Quote from: monaco on Jul 19, 11:16 AM 2012
How does that prove I'm wrong? Proves I'm right if anything.
{It's why you'll never see 3 continuous W's when he's betting the dozens.}
That's not true Monaco I've had three in a row many times. And between Thursday and Friday had 5 wins in a row against Bayes formiddable Rng.
Quote from: drazen_cro on Jul 27, 07:58 PM 2012
Dear G if some is not trolling that is you. You are minister of progressions and MM on this forum if you ask me and i have stated that many times... If someone here deserved to see the light in the end of a this long dark tunel you would be defintely one of the first ones...
What i can say (and i never lie) that i have seen and actualy know a way to create real edge...
I am leaving this place for some time because there is not much more for me here i am afraid...
I will never forget place and people from whom i "originated" actualy and i ll drop here from time to time to check you all up...
But now my dear, actualy REAL and not so fast fight for me begins. It will still need so much darn efforts and struggle but i am so ready to work long and hard to achieve it and i ll have every right to demand that i succed. Failure is not an option, it never was, i was telling that to myslelf every time i saw this beautifull game of wheel...
JL i wish you all the best, please don't resent me anything, never had any hard or personal feelings.
Every one has to find his own way in the end i would say... The time will discern winners from losers...
Cheers and keep up good work, whatever that could mean for one :)
Best regards and be blessed all
Good luck for the ones who needs it also..
Over and out
Drazen
Okay Drazen all the best, TIME will tell the story. This is at least a year long journey for me I've stumbled and struggled in my first 3 weeks. But at the same time I've learnt. What you have to realize is what you've seen is me testing a lot of the time In real play. Its not my normal way. I've been trying to learn how to beat this rng. It took me a month to learn how to beat Ladbrokes Rng. I wiped out the 200 points start many times. But once I learnt I never lost the BR again. That's how it is with me.
The differnece here is you all get to see me. And some will make snap judgements and think its over for me because I tasted double digits. That's fine, the journey has only begun. I now feel I have what it takes to beat this RNG longterm. To Bayes and others who ask what is the difference between an RNG and a live wheel. Its pattern formation.
Both are random and theres no question Bayes RNG is fair. But what RNGs do differently in my experience (and the Ladbrokes and Bet365 ones are just the same) Is throw up more unusual seemingly impossible continuos clustered trends. True a real wheel could do this too. But not with the same regularity. This is what I've had to adjust to with this RNG, and its taken me 3 weeks to understand how it flows. Zeros are the other thing. An RNG will often hit you with a flow of zeros that would rarely be seen in live play. This happened to me last week when I came close to tasting negative numbers.
2,1,3,0,0,0,3,2,0,0,1,2,0,3,0,1,0,
Now that could happen on a real wheel. But that kind of clustered hit of Zeros tends to happen more often on an RNG. Obviously if your bets on any of them its lost. This is why as the weeks rolled by I noticed the only method that could really survive this RNG is the Zone. And even there I've tweaked it to switch between dozens on every bet. So as to slip trends. And it appears to be working. Its prospured over the last three weeks on paper. And has got off to a nice start in real play. Lets see how it does over the coming weeks.
Best to you Drazen.
I still remember your 1st post on this forum. It stirred up a lot of excitement.
I hope you finish school if you haven't already. Just in case.
Your friend always,
George
I know how it feels to try and beat this rng. I too have been experimenting with different strategies while trying to figure this thing out.
At this point I'm doing better than JL with a bankroll approaching 900 units, but it has taken what seems like forever to reach this level, and I feel I could lose most of it in a flash.
I must admit, even though I'm winning, and have almost tripled the starting bankroll, I had a dream start and since then I've struggled to make any headway at all. If you remove what could have just been a lucky start, then I have been struggling to barely break even over many spins, many bets, and huge expense.
I am seriously thinking about conceding defeat at this point, and I'm well in front. But I'll keep going for now, as is JL.
Good luck JL, I know first hand how tough this is.
link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/s_test.html (link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/s_test.html)
[attachimg=1][attachimg=2]
Quote from: Skakus on Jul 28, 12:11 AM 2012
I know how it feels to try and beat this rng. I too have been experimenting with different strategies while trying to figure this thing out.
At this point I'm doing better than JL with a bankroll approaching 900 units, but it has taken what seems like forever to reach this level, and I feel I could lose most of it in a flash.
I must admit, even though I'm winning, and have almost tripled the starting bankroll, I had a dream start and since then I've struggled to make any headway at all. If you remove what could have just been a lucky start, then I have been struggling to barely break even over many spins, many bets, and huge expense.
I am seriously thinking about conceding defeat at this point, and I'm well in front. But I'll keep going for now, as is JL.
Good luck JL, I know first hand how tough this is.
link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/s_test.html (link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/s_test.html)
Thanks Skakus you have done really well don't give it up. I said to Bayes although I got no confirmation from him, that the parameters of failure and success with this test should be -500 to +5000. I think that's a fair trade. So if you are at 900 points. You are not in a position to even consider conceding defeat.
I think you were expecting too much of yourself in a short period of time that's all. Theres no rushing this thing. I know for example most of my winners will come in a maximum of 5 bets now for example. At a 2/1 payback. Do you know how tempting it is to really go for it and smash my way back over 300 points in one day?? But no, I could run into that 5 plus losing streak at anytime and wipe myself out. So you have to bide your time and accept the small daily profits until you are in a position to really make some decent sized wins.
Take your time Skakus, I aim to reach 5,000 points or more in a year that's my timeline. You should set yourself a similar longterm goal. Well done and stay optimistic.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Jul 27, 08:03 PM 2012
That's not true Monaco I've had three in a row many times. And between Thursday and Friday had 5 wins in a row against Bayes formiddable Rng.
hi JL
no, i dont mean you wont have 3 winners in a row, i mean in the test results, when you're betting double dozens, it wont show as WWW
for example you'll never see -
W
L
W
L
L
W
W
W..
when you're betting double dozens, because you are making 2 bets with every double dozen bet, ie. dozen 1 & dozen 2, so even if you win the bet on dozen 1, dozen 2 loses, this will show as
W
L
so therefore impossible to see
W
W
W when you're making double dozen bets - that's all.
It was just me trying to figure out how the results display.
When you had those 5 W's in a row on Thu/Fri - were they single dozen bets?
If not, then I'm confused...
Quote from: monaco on Jul 28, 04:01 AM 2012
hi JL
no, i don't mean you won't have 3 winners in a row, i mean in the test results, when you're betting double dozens, it won't show as WWW
for example you'll never see -
W
L
W
L
L
W
W
W..
when you're betting double dozens, because you are making 2 bets with every double dozen bet, ie. dozen 1 & dozen 2, so even if you win the bet on dozen 1, dozen 2 loses, this will show as
W
L
so therefore impossible to see
W
W
W when you're making double dozen bets - that's all.
It was just me trying to figure out how the results display.
When you had those 5 W's in a row on Thu/Fri - were they single dozen bets?
If not, then I'm confused...
Okay Monaco, I understand what you are saying. Yes the 5 in a row were single dozen bets. As I am playing a tweaked version of the ZONE. Most of my bets will be single dozen from here on. I may come back to double dozen bets once I have a healthy BR.
Im impressed JL, keep goin :thumbsup:
Quote from: Twisteruk on Jul 28, 05:21 AM 2012
I'm impressed JL, keep goin :thumbsup:
I will Twister good to hear from you again. I hope you are doing well.
Gents
Something is wrong--either my brain or the website.
I logged on just before church this morning and there were several sessions for 7/29 and the total was +172. Now there is only one session and the total is much lower---142 or something.
Did I dream this? Did anyone else see it?
Sam
i see +146 now
Stephan
OK 146
But it was very different!
Sam
And now the 146 is gone!!
That's very strange.
He's at 170 now.
And the website has been changed. Far less days.
Where's the 146??
Sam
a yes,
day 29 is gone.
but isnt the last day the most important one, so we can see how far JL is right now
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jul 30, 08:30 PM 2012
And now the 146 is gone!!
That's very strange.
He's at 170 now.
And the website has been changed. Far less days.
Where's the 146??
Sam
Hi Sam every time I play 20-30 games when the results are uploaded it deletes a lot of the previous results. And keeps the most recent plays. This happened first time last week. And Bayes reset the page to my current balance, which was 129 points at the time. So long as I get my most recent balance I don't mind. So you are not seeing things. I was at 172 Sunday, lost 26 points in a bad session. Now have pulled it back to 170. I'm going to try and break the 200 barrier today. Cheers...
Quote from: Stepkevh on Jul 31, 12:20 AM 2012
but isnt the last day the most important one, so we can see how far JL is right now
To me, it's important to have the entire set of data so that the stats can be analyzed and charted. I could make a spreadsheet to make this easier; doable in one click. But i'm still concerned about so much loss of data, and so frequently, that i would challenge Bayes to look into it a little more. With a full set of data, it would be possible to look at periods where JL or Skakus applied a different method, or changed money management style. For example, JL tells us he switched to the ZONE. If he could tell us exactly when he made the switch, the spreadsheet could analyze how well the ZONE is doing compared to other methods he has tried. Last but not least, without a full set of data, it's not possible to test alternative money management styles against the WinLoss patterns. So i'll see if i can get this spreadsheet together to easily gather and preserve data, but i also wish Bayes could look into a better performing web page schema.
I think you write the result to disk, if for any reason the file must have limited length, the script can change the filename every time it save the maxlength, so to keep all records.
Quote from: Still on Jul 31, 02:38 AM 2012
To me, it's important to have the entire set of data so that the stats can be analyzed and charted. I could make a spreadsheet to make this easier; doable in one click. But i'm still concerned about so much loss of data, and so frequently, that i would challenge Bayes to look into it a little more. With a full set of data, it would be possible to look at periods where JL or Skakus applied a different method, or changed money management style. For example, JL tells us he switched to the ZONE. If he could tell us exactly when he made the switch, the spreadsheet could analyze how well the ZONE is doing compared to other methods he has tried. Last but not least, without a full set of data, it's not possible to test alternative money management styles against the WinLoss patterns. So i'll see if i can get this spreadsheet together to easily gather and preserve data, but i also wish Bayes could look into a better performing web page schema.
Still Pm me your email and from now on I will save all my play to a file and email it to you each week. That's what we can do.
Listen, folks....Bombus is conducting a test on VLS forum and it runs pages and pages with not one piece of data left out. (MattyMattz is ahead.)
Why--if you must cut out something--why not the oldest? Why the day before?
Mr. Still, if it's not on the official website, how do you trust it? Surely Bayes can step in here and correct this. As it is the test if flawed, John's work will be for naught and we will all be non the wiser. There is no reason for this. Who is in such a hurry they can't scroll down?
Sorry...........that's just how it shakes out.
TwoCat
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jul 31, 09:04 AM 2012
Listen, folks....Bombus is conducting a test on VLS forum and it runs pages and pages with not one piece of data left out. (MattyMattz is ahead.)
Why--if you must cut out something--why not the oldest? Why the day before?
Mr. Still, if it's not on the official website, how do you trust it? Surely Bayes can step in here and correct this. As it is the test if flawed, John's work will be for naught and we will all be non the wiser. There is no reason for this. Who is in such a hurry they can't scroll down?
Sorry...........that's just how it shakes out.
TwoCat
Sam my latest balance will always be on the official website. Anyome interested can simply see how I arrived there. Strikerate, staking wins losses etc. I still have to beat this tough Rng to get a bigger balance.
John
Maybe I've been watching too many cops and robbers and lawyers shows but the evidence is tainted!
If what you say is true, we only need to see one entry: Doz1 2 199. That tells us where you are; we want to know how you go there.
Inquiring minds want to know what happened between 146 and 172. Did you go broke and so Bayes kicked you up to 172 'cause he's a good ol' boy? In the real world in real testing, that is a viable question.
I had so hoped for an unimpeachable test; this is not it.
Sam
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jul 31, 10:10 AM 2012
John
Maybe I've been watching too many cops and robbers and lawyers shows but the evidence is tainted!
If what you say is true, we only need to see one entry: Doz1 2 199. That tells us where you are; we want to know how you go there.
Inquiring minds want to know what happened between 146 and 172. Did you go broke and so Bayes kicked you up to 172 'cause he's a good ol' boy? In the real world in real testing, that is a viable question.
I had so hoped for an unimpeachable test; this is not it.
Sam
Sam there is no way Bayes is going to do that. Don't you remember him asking me to. Consider conceding defeat when I hit 115 on the 18th? Where is Bayes anyway he has been off the site for a while. Like I said until Bayes can improve this. I will save all my results. So anyone can see them. The bottom line is you either beat this Rng or you don't Just ask skakus.
JL
Bro, I'm not going to get into it with you any more over this stuff.
Frankly, I don't think Bayes would toss you a bone!! That was an example of what could be thought in this case.
I don't want the results from you. Bayes was supposed to set up a test which could not be altered. It has been altered. I wanted the results from a program which spits out the truth good or bad.
Let me sing THE MOODY BLUES........
"....just what the truth is; I can't say any more..."
Won't sing you the next line!! LOL
Samster
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jul 31, 10:49 AM 2012
JL
Bro, I'm not going to get into it with you any more over this stuff.
Frankly, I don't think Bayes would toss you a bone!! That was an example of what could be thought in this case.
I don't want the results from you. Bayes was supposed to set up a test which could not be altered. It has been altered. I wanted the results from a program which spits out the truth good or bad.
Let me sing THE MOODY BLUES........
"....just what the truth is; I can't say any more..."
Won't sing you the next line!! LoL
Samster
Sam you are being a little silly. Ill just say this. Even if you had every result. There is no gaurantee that Bayes couldnt have given me or Skakus a helping hand. Think that over. I will beat this RNG eventually but I will do it fair and square. After 3 weeks of battling it I stand at only 173 points. Nothing to write home about. But I have learnt a lot. Now I have a method that can beat it. And I don't want no one implying my impending success is piggybacked off Bayes goodwill.
Everything I've ever gotten in my life has been hard earned this will be no different. End of...
You have a flawed test...........
I'm not the only one who thinks it.....
Your results are already invalid in my mind no matter what happens.......
If the testing fails, the tested fails. This testing has failed. You failed, plain and simple. I've failed. We've all failed.
Accept it; move on.
Sam
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Jul 31, 12:40 PM 2012
You have a flawed test...........
I'm not the only one who thinks it.....
Your results are already invalid in my mind no matter what happens.......
If the testing fails, the tested fails. This testing has failed. You failed, plain and simple. I've failed. We've all failed.
Accept it; move on.
Sam
What you are basically saying then is Bayes is a cheat. As he has the power alone to alter things. I play on because. Bayes will know whatever happens I failed or succeeded fair and square. And only one person needs to know that as far as I am concerned.
QuoteWhat you are basically saying then is Bayes is a cheat
Forget that, there is no way he will help JL that's for sure, 100%
QuoteWhere is Bayes anyway he has been off the site for a while
Good question, I sent him an email on Monday and have not had a reply yet, he will be back at some point, the man does have a life outside roulette.
QuoteIf the testing fails, the tested fails. This testing has failed. You failed, plain and simple. I've failed. We've all failed
I sort of agree with Sam, JL was supposed to have a secret weapon that would be proved to beat RNG day and night, JL tried this secret weapon but it failed miserably so now JL has tried all his different methods and, if I'm right, it using the zone, the very first method he brought to the forums, so the test has failed in one sence as the secret method isn't being used anymore, but the overall test hasn't failed yet as he still has chips left, as far as I am concerned the zone is a doomsday tool, I tested it extensively when it first appeared, maybe with hit n scarper it may last longer, I was hoping the secret method was the one to beat RNG as first stated, sadly it is not looking like it was, so now, I don't care if JL beats it or not because the method being used, UNLESS JL is using something different again, is flawed and will fail.
Good luck JL but interest if dropping off a bit.
Quote from: superman on Jul 31, 01:28 PM 2012
Forget that, there is no way he will help JL that's for sure, 100%
Good question, I sent him an email on Monday and have not had a reply yet, he will be back at some point, the man does have a life outside roulette.
I sort of agree with Sam, JL was supposed to have a secret weapon that would be proved to beat RNG day and night, JL tried this secret weapon but it failed miserably so now JL has tried all his different methods and, if I'm right, it using the zone, the very first method he brought to the forums, so the test has failed in one sence as the secret method isn't being used anymore, but the overall test hasn't failed yet as he still has chips left, as far as I am concerned the zone is a doomsday tool, I tested it extensively when it first appeared, maybe with hit n scarper it may last longer, I was hoping the secret method was the one to beat RNG as first stated, sadly it is not looking like it was, so now, I don't care if JL beats it or not because the method being used, UNLESS JL is using something different again, is flawed and will fail.
Good luck JL but interest if dropping off a bit.
Superman, I am not using the ZONE. I am using a method inspired by a wonderful realization while playing rhe ZONE. Coming back to the ZONE was the best thing I have done since I posted it on here. Combined with Hit and Run style play. What I have here now is a world beater. As good as any method ever conceived on any forum. Now on the eve of this wonderful discovery. We have Sam crying foul play. Let it be. Bayes will know as sure as night follows day. 5 ON 5 is as close to a holy grail as you all will ever get. Now watch it in action. It needs no help from anyone. Just watch it over the coming weeks.
All my struggling and stumbling has paid off. I told you all long ago you get nowhere without hard work and perserverance. I had the courage to expose myself on here. I stumbled and struggled. But my self belief is tougher than titanium. I will be up there with Skakus by the weekend. And let you all decide is this is a secret weapon or not. Game ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!
good luck JL I hope you acheive your goals as we will all benefit, some people here do not realize this
tom
The test needs to be whiter than white to satisfy people. There have been so many claims, so many new almost holy grails.
It seems always to be jam tomorrow.
Trebor
PS I hope he does it!
Quote from: joiner29 on Jul 31, 01:46 PM 2012
good luck JL I hope you acheive your goals as we will all benefit, some people here do not realize this
tom
Thanks Tom. This is a long term thing. I get annoyed when people lack the patience to wait and see. Skakus took off like a nuclear warhead. I struggled and went down. Ever morphing and trying to figure this beast out. Skakus has done amazing, now its time I joined him up there. With a method that can beat anything. Just watch this thing go.
@JohnLegend, i believe my email is listed in my personal information if you click on my name. Sure, if you have a way of saving to disk, i would be interested in having an update weekly, especially while there is a problem on the web page where results are stored. If you have a complete set of data so much the better. I don't doubt the latest results i just feel it's important to be able to easily visualize the chart of progress and analyze stats. This is also in the interest of keeping peoples interest high.
Quote from: Still on Jul 31, 02:09 PM 2012
@JohnLegend, i believe my email is listed in my personal information if you click on my name. Sure, if you have a way of saving to disk, i would be interested in having an update weekly, especially while there is a problem on the web page where results are stored. If you have a complete set of data so much the better. I don't doubt the latest results i just feel it's important to be able to easily visualize the chart of progress and analyze stats. This is also in the interest of keeping peoples interest high.
Cool Still, I will email you all my results this Friday. At the moment this webpage is behaving itself. Im refreshing it and saving after every single game I play. That may help.
People
I am not accusing John or Bayes of anything untoward. What I'm plainly saying is that if the test is flawed, the tested is flawed. If the test is to jump seven feet high, but you dig a huge ditch just before the bar----what kind of test is that? Think about it. Put a 200lb jockey on a horse. Is that a test of the animal?
Once again John is trying to obfuscate by making me out the bad guy. I'm the guy who wants an honest test.
Ask yourselves this: If someone had to take out a portion of the test, why wouldn't they take out the oldest portion rather than the newest?
Why would they skip from 146 to 172 or whatever? Makes no sense!
Hopefully the program itself has a bug and it's to blame and the people are all cleared of wrongdoing.
Sam
Ok i'll be glad to get a set of data on Friday's. Ideally it will be a complete set. I already have most of the data stored and am missing a day or two or some sessions here and there. I'd like to get those filled in. I don't think this is going to be a problem. I seriously doubt JL went suddenly broke, and just as suddenly, Bayes bailed him out by doctoring the data and/or resetting the software. That's only something i would joke about. >:D
Quote from: trebor on Jul 31, 02:07 PM 2012
The test needs to be whiter than white to satisfy people. There have been so many claims, so many new almost holy grails.
It seems always to be jam tomorrow.
Trebor
PS I hope he does it!
Thanks Trevor, I learn on the job I always have. Every format presents a new challenge. At first I will stumble I always do. Once I gauge what it takes to beat something you will see something else. Lets say I have reached that point now. Don't get me wrong. Bayes RNG is formiddable. Skakus will tell you that in a hurry. But he is still beating it. And now its my turn to join him up there. By the weekend. Some of you will start to realize. I don't play around.
Quote from: Still on Jul 31, 02:22 PM 2012
Ok i'll be glad to get a set of data on Friday's. Ideally it will be a complete set. I already have most of the data stored and am missing a day or two or some sessions here and there. I'd like to get those filled in. I don't think this is going to be a problem. I seriously doubt JL went suddenly broke, and just as suddenly, Bayes bailed him out by doctoring the data and/or resetting the software. That's only something i would joke about. >:D
Correct observation Still. Bayes is not about to help me beat his RNG. And Sam is off the money on that assumption. The way I was saving results may be to blame. I dont know how skakus saves his. Now I am saving after every single play instead of leaving it for hours like I was before. I am also refreshing the results page every play. Something I never did before. And of course saving all results to disk now.
This is for real people. I battled my behind off with this thing. In my mind I should already be at 4 figures. I have high expectations. Now watch the next few weeks. Its time to throw down...
What is so special with Bayes numbers...beats me...numbers as any other numbers,and I beat em
all regulary as any other set of numbers......Who know how to do it, is so easy and there shouldn't
be much fuss about it.Some can and some can't or too lazy to become a winners...My 2 chips
JL is now up to 270
That's a gain of about 100 points just today. JL's been very busy. That's the good news. On the other hand, it appears the web page is just not able to keep up pace. My last datapoint was 7/30/2012 @ 170. Then, today, 7/31/2012 there are several sessions starting @ 258 and ending up @ 270.
@ JL, you might consider emailing me the data before Friday considering how the updating on the web page is still inexplicably sketchy. Who knows when Bayes will be back! I'll post a chart .png of the data as soon as i can.
are the results still here: link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/jlchallenge.html (link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/jlchallenge.html) Im not getting to it? Hey JL nice move up
No the results have been here for a while:
link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/jltest.html (link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/jltest.html)
ahhh thanks still
Aw, c'mon guys........
We have missing days of play and the total jumps one hundred plus points. None of you are the slightest concerned?
This is like Richard Nixon and the missing eighteen minutes of tape!
No one even wants an explanation for this?
OK......
Sam
Quote from: Still on Jul 31, 07:38 PM 2012
JL is now up to 270
That's a gain of about 100 points just today. JL's been very busy. That's the good news. On the other hand, it appears the web page is just not able to keep up pace. My last datapoint was 7/30/2012 @ 170. Then, today, 7/31/2012 there are several sessions starting @ 258 and ending up @ 270.
@ JL, you might consider emailing me the data before Friday considering how the updating on the web page is still inexplicably sketchy. Who knows when Bayes will be back! I'll post a chart .png of the data as soon as i can.
Still I've got results saved from 203 to 270 overwrote 170---203 by mistake as you have to put each one on its own file. So we go from there. I will email you from 203 to whatever total I have today. I will be winning 50--100 points most days. Now that I have the method to challenge anything. It will soon become obvious to most 5 on 5 is the reason for my success and turnaround. And not Bayes sitting there saying geez let's help Jl beat my RNG. I too want bayes to sort this webpage out for me. Because I want it clear to all. I have a truly great method now to win at this or any version of roulette.
Nice going John. ;D From last entries i see that you possibly play 1,3,9... progression for double dozens? Meaning 100 sessions won in a row without a loss?
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Aug 01, 03:01 AM 2012
Nice going John. ;D From last entries i see that you possibly play 1,3,9... progression for double dozens? Meaning 100 sessions won in a row without a loss?
Yes Hutt its actually a four step prog.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Aug 01, 12:25 AM 2012
Still I've got results saved from 203 to 270 overwrote 170---203 by mistake as you have to put each one on its own file. So we go from there. I will email you from 203 to whatever total I have today. I will be winning 50--100 points most days. Now that I have the method to challenge anything. It will soon become obvious to most 5 on 5 is the reason for my success and turnaround. And not Bayes sitting there saying geez let's help Jl beat my RNG. I too want bayes to sort this webpage out for me. Because I want it clear to all. I have a truly great method now to win at this or any version of roulette.
Very well done JL !
What is this 5 on 5 you refer to ?
Hi guys, I've been away for a few days and come back to find chaos! ;D
Ok, I've fixed the problem (hopefully). I will have to send JL a corrected version of the program so I'll remove the current file (web page) until I get the ok from him that he has the new version installed. The current balance is 270 units - nice recovery John. :)
Quote from: Bayes on Aug 01, 04:50 AM 2012
Hi guys, I've been away for a few days and come back to find chaos! ;D
Ok, I've fixed the problem (hopefully). I will have to send JL a corrected version of the program so I'll remove the current file (web page) until I get the ok from him that he has the new version installed. The current balance is 270 units - nice recovery John. :)
Thankyou Bayes I'm glad you are back.
Quote from: Twisteruk on Aug 01, 04:42 AM 2012
Very well done JL !
What is this 5 on 5 you refer to ?
Its like Matrix vertical 5 got married to the Zone and had a baby Twister. When I hit the 2000 points mark all will be revealed.
Just remember that i supported JL 50% more than other leading brands of JL supporters!
The chart below is missing some data, but you get the idea.
Bayes still needs to check how the program updates to the web page.
We just lost some more data.
Notice where the number is "28". That should be 283.
Then we lost 37 records between then and where we are now @ 308
Quote from: Still on Aug 01, 02:58 PM 2012
Just remember that i supported JL 50% more than other leading brands of JL supporters!
The chart below is missing some data, but you get the idea.
Don't get carried away Still Bayes RNG nearly got me tonight. I was taken to step 4 of the prog. I have saved all my play tonight Still. don't know why its still deleting games. But I have them all up from 271---306.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Aug 01, 03:50 PM 2012
Don't get carried away Still Bayes RNG nearly got me tonight. I was taken to step 4 of the prog. I have saved all my play tonight Still. don't know why its still deleting games. But I have them all up from 271---306.
Looks like you are now using a 1-1-3-3-9-9-27-27 progression...or something.
Quote from: Still on Aug 01, 03:55 PM 2012
Looks like you are now using a 1-1-3-3-9-9-27-27 progression...or something.
Yes I am using the classic four step progression. Its been tested a handful of times by Bayes formiddable RNG. But its held so far. I am finally getting somewhere with this RNG. The balance stands at 350 points. Still have a long, long way to go.
holly molly, what a roller coaster!
i hope no more drunk sessions, John?
congratulations!
where are the links to watch u and Skakus?
this is for JL's challenge
link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/jltest.html (link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/jltest.html)
and this is Skakus challenge
link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/s_test.html (link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/s_test.html)
Quote from: iggiv on Aug 01, 09:29 PM 2012
holy molly, what a roller coaster!
i hope no more drunk sessions, John?
congratulations!
where are the links to watch u and Skakus?
Thanks Iggiv, No way its a clear head from now on.
Quote from: Stepkevh on Aug 02, 12:09 AM 2012
and this is Skakus challenge
link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/s_test.html (link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/s_test.html)
Thanks for the links Stepkevh, how do you do that?
just go to the challenge webpage and copy the link, then paste it here in a message, piece of cake :)
Finally in the black! :)
Well done John. I don't like the look of that progression though, I think you might come unstuck eventually... :-\
I notice the spacing between sessions has increased to 2 lines instead of 1, I hope this doesn't mean that there's going to be more problems. There shouldn't be because the code is exactly the same as Skakus' version of the program apart from the different file names, strange.
And well done, Skakus, nearly 3,000 bets and your z-score has been consistently high. Currently at 2.00.
Way to go JL !
Is the score on the web page correct ? It says 350
JL
i suppose your new method is still hit&run style ?
Quote from: Bayes on Aug 02, 02:49 AM 2012
Finally in the black! :)
Well done John. I don't like the look of that progression though, I think you might come unstuck eventually... :-\
I notice the spacing between sessions has increased to 2 lines instead of 1, I hope this doesn't mean that there's going to be more problems. There shouldn't be because the code is exactly the same as Skakus' version of the program apart from the different file names, strange.
And well done, Skakus, nearly 3,000 bets and your z-score has been consistently high. Currently at 2.00.
Yes Bayes, its risky but I think the strikerate will show its worth it. I'm 208/0 at the moment. My confidence in risking 80 units a game is strong. Because what I'm bettimg against, I saw once In all the years I played the ZONE. I've no doubt your Rng will beat my progression at some point. I'm just hoping the strikerate stays strong.
Quote from: Twisteruk on Aug 02, 04:04 AM 2012
Way to go JL !
Is the score on the web page correct ? It says 350
Yes Twister for the first time in 25 days I'm In the black again. Hope I can stay there.
Quote from: Stepkevh on Aug 02, 04:08 AM 2012
JL
i suppose your new method is still hit&run style ?
Well as much as it can be on an Rng Stepkevh. I play singular games, but I'm not sure if Bayes rng carries on from where it left off or starts fresh each time you open the program.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Aug 02, 08:34 AM 2012
Yes Bayes, its risky but I think the strikerate will show its worth it. I'm 208/0 at the moment. My confidence in risking 80 units a game is strong. Because what I'm betting against, I saw once In all the years I played the ZONE. I've no doubt your Rng will beat my progression at some point. I'm just hoping the strikerate stays strong.
Quote from: Bayes on Aug 02, 02:49 AM 2012
Finally in the black! :)
Ya, that's how the casino-games are set up. Likely a 99% chance that a persistent gambler will find himself ahead, and on several occasions. And a 100% chance that eventually, without a well-documented mathematical method, that he will find himself completely-broke. (The luckiest of them learn that lesson very early-on.)
Quote from: Bayes on Aug 02, 02:49 AM 2012
Well done John.And well done, Skakus, nearly 3,000 bets and your z-score has been consistently high. Currently at 2.00.
What else would you expect from someone who has one of those "plain 5% bank accounts", and has to rely on something called a "z-score (to make sense of probability at a casino)".
P.S. Great entertainment, will drop in again in a month, or two. Lol.
***but I'm not sure if Bayes rng carries on from where it left off or starts fresh each time you open the program.***
If it carried on, would it be an RNG?
I second F's statement: What is different about "Bayes RNG" and any other. If RNGs are truly random, how can they be different?
You all think about this:
If you had a cement mixer with a thousand red balls and a thousand black balls in it and you ran it for ten minutes, would the mix be random? Now if you poured it into a sack and thoroughly shook the sack, would it be more random?
The question is: How random can random get? Is there randomer and randomest?
JL keeps insinuating the test is him against "Bayes RNG". The test should be can JL profit from a stream of random numbers. Where they came from is of little matter.
Sam
Quote from: GARNabby on Aug 02, 11:06 AM 2012
What else would you expect from someone who has one of those "plain 5% bank accounts", and has to rely on something called a "z-score (to make sense of probability at a casino)".
:yawn:
He's not "relying" on the z-score, I just calculated it because it gives an objective measurement of the success or otherwise of a bet selection.
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Aug 02, 11:08 AM 2012
***but I'm not sure if Bayes rng carries on from where it left off or starts fresh each time you open the program.***
I'm not sure what this means, to be honest. The RNG is obviously a pseudo RNG unlike the RNG from random.org which uses hardware (radioactive decay, I think). Pseudo RNG means that the numbers will EVENTUALLY repeat (but only after billions of spins), so for all intents and purposes it doesn't matter that the outcomes are deterministic. Usually what happens is that a "seed" is taken from the system clock and determines the start of the cycle, so in that sense it will start afresh each time you run the program, but it shouldn't make any difference to the randomness of the numbers.
@ Sam,
There are lots of ways you can test for randomness, all RNG's have to pass a suite of statistical tests to be deemed "truly" random. But then, what is "true" random, no-one knows!
barcode posted a link recently to a site where you can enter numbers and run tests on them for randomness, but I forget which thread it was in.
Bayes
I saw that test and took it for a few tries. I am very random!!
I have heard it said that if a mosquito farts near an RNG it will change the out come. Chaos!
But who pays attention to mosquito farts? Mrs. Mosquito, that's who!!
I gotta go.....
Sam
Looks like there are problems again on the web page. >:( :'(
Complete gibberish being uploaded there now. I'll look into it tomorrow. I think the best solution is to have a database like I suggested before.
Quote from: Bayes on Aug 02, 04:07 PM 2012
Looks like there are problems again on the web page. >:( :'(
Complete gibberish being uploaded there now. I'll look into it tomorrow. I think the best solution is to have a database like I suggested before.
There's a big difference between Skakus updates and JL updates. Skakus is doing fine. It can't be true that they are both the same software. When i try to load JL updates into Excel, there are gaps between the sessions. Each session has one additional blank between the last session. After 15 sessions, for example, there might be 15 blank lines in between sessions. Skakus is fine. Has not lost any data, even though he has as many or more bets than JL had when his software first started messing with the already uploaded data. It just doesn't make sense to me why already uploaded data should be deleted, and in the latest case, it truncated "283" to "28".
So my suggestion is to copy Skakus version over to JL and of course reset where he is currently at.
Quote from: Still on Aug 02, 05:17 PM 2012
There's a big difference between Skakus updates and JL updates. Skakus is doing fine. It can't be true that they are both the same software. When i try to load JL updates into Excel, there are gaps between the sessions. Each session has one additional blank between the last session. After 15 sessions, for example, there might be 15 blank lines in between sessions. Skakus is fine. Has not lost any data, even though he has as many or more bets than JL had when his software first started messing with the already uploaded data. It just doesn't make sense to me why already uploaded data should be deleted, and in the latest case, it truncated "283" to "28".
So my suggestion is to copy Skakus version over to JL and of course reset where he is currently at.
Yes that's been the cutoff pattern since it first occurred. Still. After about 50 uploads it will cut back to the first 15--20 plays first entered and only have your most recent upload under that. But I have all results from 203 to my new balance 430 saved anyway. If you still want me to send you them for analysis purposes Still??
Quote from: Bayes on Aug 02, 04:07 PM 2012
Looks like there are problems again on the web page. >:( :'(
Complete gibberish being uploaded there now. I'll look into it tomorrow. I think the best solution is to have a database like I suggested before.
Whatever solves the problem Bayes I dont mind.
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Aug 02, 11:08 AM 2012
***but I'm not sure if Bayes rng carries on from where it left off or starts fresh each time you open the program.***
If it carried on, would it be an RNG?
I second F's statement: What is different about "Bayes RNG" and any other. If RNGs are truly random, how can they be different?
You all think about this:
If you had a cement mixer with a thousand red balls and a thousand black balls in it and you ran it for ten minutes, would the mix be random? Now if you poured it into a sack and thoroughly shook the sack, would it be more random?
The question is: How random can random get? Is there randomer and randomest?
JL keeps insinuating the test is him against "Bayes RNG". The test should be can JL profit from a stream of random numbers. Where they came from is of little matter.
Sam
That's true Sam. I only refer to it as Bayes RNG because well... it is. I know there shouldnt be any difference regardless of where your source comes from.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Aug 02, 05:35 PM 2012
Yes that's been the cutoff pattern since it first occurred. Still. After abut 50 uploads it will cut back to the first 15--20 plays first entered and only have your most recent upload under that. But I have all results from 203 to my new balance 430 saved anyway. If you still want me to send you them for analysis purposes Still??
Yes, i'd like to have the data from 203 thanks very much. And i hope whatever system you are using keeps going up to 2000.
Quote from: Still on Aug 02, 05:41 PM 2012
Yes, i'd like to have the data from 203 thanks very much. And i hope whatever system you are using keeps going up to 2000.
Still PM me your email please. Well I am using FIVE. All the way. Its been tested once tonight in 80 games. I dont want to say its holy just yet. But its done alot better than anything else I could throw at this RNG. And to use one of Twisters expressions. If it even gives me 400/1 Its supernova proof in my book. I am currently 288 and 0.
Keep it going JL!!
Sorry to have been out of touch, working on some things as usual.
Quote from: GARNabby on Aug 02, 11:06 AM 2012
Ya, that's how the casino-games are set up. Likely a 99% chance that a persistent gambler will find himself ahead, and on several occasions. And a 100% chance that eventually, without a well-documented mathematical method, that he will find himself completely-broke. (The luckiest of them learn that lesson very early-on.)
What else would you expect from someone who has one of those "plain 5% bank accounts", and has to rely on something called a "z-score (to make sense of probability at a casino)".
P.S. Great entertainment, will drop in again in a month, or two. LoL.
We cant wait geez. Whered they get this guy from? ??? .
Quote from: amk on Aug 02, 06:04 PM 2012
Keep it going JL!!
Sorry to have been out of touch, working on some things as usual.
Good to hear from you again AMK. Its all good. Had a tough ride. But I think I've hit calmer waters now. I don't give up easily. From a dangerous low of 57 points. I've pulled it back to a decent figure. Still a mountain to climb to reach 5000 points. But lets hope FIVE is as good as I think it is. :question: :question: :question: :question: :question:
those links are not working anymore for me
Quote from: Bayes on Aug 02, 12:18 PM 2012
The z-score gives an objective measurement of the success or otherwise of a bet selection.
Like hell, that's like holding onto the ass-end of something. Don't require a z-score to know if what you're doing is working; or to know that "where there's smoke, there's fire".
Anyway, if you're really a thick-head AP, or "doubing Thomas"... just simulate it.
@ GARNabbey,
You’re a bac player, do you think there’s any advantage to the multiple streams of EC bets within roulette over the single stream of a bac shoe or not?
Do you as a player sit down to 1 table, or do you move between several tables, thereby playing multiple streams of data?
@JL,
As they say in poker >>> Read 'em and weep. link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/s_test.html (link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/s_test.html)
>:D
Iggiv, it should work, the link works for me
This is JL's
link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/jltest.html (link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/jltest.html)
And Skakus link is above me :)
Just looking at the two links--and I'm too tired to copy them---JL has reports for Aug 2 and they are dozens. Skakus has reports for Aug 3 and they are reds at the end.
Different time zones? Gremlins in the machine?
Why dozens on one test and reds on another?
Sam
i dont think that i understand what you mean but the most obvious answer would be
"thats what they played last" :)
Quote from: Skakus on Aug 03, 12:11 AM 2012
@JL,
As they say in poker >>> Read 'em and weep. link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/s_test.html (link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/s_test.html)
>:D
Fantastic work Skakus, I hope to join you at four figures within the next week. I can't see you ever losing, so long as you keep the staking sensible.
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Aug 03, 01:15 AM 2012
Just looking at the two links--and I'm too tired to copy them---JL has reports for Aug 2 and they are dozens. Skakus has reports for Aug 3 and they are reds at the end.
Different time zones? Gremlins in the machine?
Why dozens on one test and reds on another?
Sam
That's just our choices Sam, Skakus is going to prove roulette can be beaten longterm using a smart filtering even chance method. I'm attempting to prove it can be beaten longterm using a double dozen method, and even more crucially a progression that just about everyone thinks won't survive longterm.
5000 points is the goal. I Think that will show my method is a longterm winner if I can achieve that goal.
Quote from: GARNabby on Aug 02, 11:26 PM 2012
Like hell, that's like holding onto the ar*e-end of something. Don't require a z-score to know if what you're doing is working; or to know that "where there's smoke, there's fire".
You're missing the point, the z-score doesn't just tell if you if something is working, it allows you to compare where you are in relation to a standard (the normal distribution). For example, which is better: 27 wins after 48 bets, or 52 wins after 93 bets?
z-score is analogous to putting fractions over a common denominator, it allows you to compare more easily where you are in relation to where you've been. Looking at profit only can be misleading, especially if you're using a progression or betting different amounts of numbers each spin.
Quote from: Still on Aug 02, 05:17 PM 2012
There's a big difference between Skakus updates and JL updates. Skakus is doing fine. It can't be true that they are both the same software. When i try to load JL updates into Excel, there are gaps between the sessions. Each session has one additional blank between the last session. After 15 sessions, for example, there might be 15 blank lines in between sessions. Skakus is fine. Has not lost any data, even though he has as many or more bets than JL had when his software first started messing with the already uploaded data. It just doesn't make sense to me why already uploaded data should be deleted, and in the latest case, it truncated "283" to "28".
So my suggestion is to copy Skakus version over to JL and of course reset where he is currently at.
That's not a bad idea, Still. :thumbsup:
The code is exactly the same (apart from the different file names), but the format of the html file might have been slightly different in Skakus' case. The problem is I can't write results directly to the file but have to download it first, then remove the last html tag, write to the file, then upload it again. I'll try using Skakus' file and if that doesn't work, I'll change to a database format. You'll still see all the results, just not every day. The important thing is the bank (final result) isn't being affected.
Quote from: iggiv on Aug 02, 08:36 PM 2012
those links are not working anymore for me
It's a crappy web host, sometimes I have to hit enter 20 or more times before I get a connection. Anyone else having the same problems?
sometimes 3 or 4 times before connection
Quote from: Skakus on Aug 03, 09:59 AM 2012
Well there you go guys.
Ask a man a straight question while he's actively viewing and posting on a thread and what do you get?... Squat, that's what you get.
Make of it what you will, but I say GARNabbey can not be relied upon for much. Might be a good team mate in a game of scrabble, or good for rolling the joints at a pot party, but not much else.
:wink:
Garnabbey is negative. I have no time for such people. If I thought like him id have never played this game at all. You Skakus are showing this games beatable. I am starting to take it up with a method. That is looking impregnable. I have always believed theres a barrier that random simply isnt interested in crossing too often. In fact there are several. What we have to do is identify them. Then the games for the taking.
A thought ran through my mind about a week ago. While playing the zone. It was to do not with what I had seen during my time playing that method. But what I hadnt seen. Now I am exploiting that observation that's all. The times I have been taken to step 4 of the progression haven't worried me. Because I am only using one trigger a lot of the time for speeded turnover. In its purest form there will be two triggers. And If there were a five step progression 242 points. I seriously doubt you would ever lose. I cannot opperate a five step progression because Bayes has instigated a 100 point betting limit. The 5th step would require a 162 point limit.
But like I said. I can never see that losing. Random is simply exhausted by the time it gets to 5 most of the time let alone 7. I have moved into a nice position now with a bank of 520 points. FIVE is now 378 and 0. Lets see how far it can go before I surrender my progression.
Quote from: Skakus on Aug 03, 12:09 AM 2012
@ GARNabbey,
You’re a bac player, do you think there’s any advantage to the multiple streams of EC bets within roulette over the single stream of a bac shoe or not?
Do you as a player sit down to 1 table, or do you move between several tables, thereby playing multiple streams of data?
Thanks for your good questions, Skakus. Gives me the opportunity to write out this stuff in some sort of context.
There're likely as many such independent "streams" (of information) in either of the casino-games. And, some of the best bits of information to the harder problems are those few which aren't obviously, directly laid out, but as-related. You just have to train yourself to look out for those while go along.
The problem with the non-independent "streams" is that given all of any such (information) of a type, there could be no usable conclusion, not even by any form of Chaos Theory... it remains random. For example, track all of the "random walks", of varying lengths, within a very-long sequence of random outcomes. Even thought it's mathematically-known that each such "walk, and sub-walk at each level", shall, with certainty, return to an "even state" over enough trials, those shall cancel each other out at each point in terms of an overall, predictable direction to an "even state". Better to try to match up the basic exponentially-recursive fractal form of the "random walk" to the situation at-hand... a specific, parametric path instead of a general one.
This is not an evening out in the real, direct sense. For example, even though Einstein realized that physics follows math, to an extent at least, he contradicted that by going on to note that Space-Time, ie, our universe, "Just is". Well, if everything just is, then it wouldn't require a bunch of mathematical equations to "knit it together".... we could move separate of the gravitational and electrical fields. So, by evening out, if at all under a particular application, it's meant to occur by complex means (which aren't about such per se, on the surface.) It's not even a matter of knowing, or not, an infinite history of random results before guessing at the one at-hand. Though with baccarat, for a number of reasons, i prefer to limit the length of the appropriate finite "streams" to that of each shoe.
The two basic "streams" have to do with the regular outcomes as additive, or exponential, in nature. Additive means how many outcomes the one side is ahead of the other; exponential means that in terms of those side's streaks, over the course of many outcomes. (The multiplicative denotes the ratio, or quotient, of the number of one side's outcomes to the other's. But that's merely the first two types of basic "streams" taken over-and-over-again to infinity.) In baccarat, those basic "streams" can be taken in the carding and betting senses, P/B and L/W. For example, one might try waiting for 4 P's to come off before putting some martingale on up to 4 B's. Though i might try that, but in some more-elaborate form, after seeing the 4 P's come off several times in quick succession, as it's unlikely to ever see a bunch more in the absolute sense, it's the waiting for the 4 P's that means the waiting for the even-longer runs of P's, which then will naturally occur by probability. Even when we wait for the one side to get ahead by, say, five outcomes, and then bet for it to return to its "even state", we're waiting for those even-longer runs of the one side, which then will naturally occur by probability. Nor does it help us to try to average things out by running a bunch of "random walks" at once, as, at some point, there will be a lot of the runs which don't return to an "even state". So, some other bit of the overall puzzle is required to make these basic, and other advanced, "streams" work for us. (The "random walks" over sequences of outcomes does equate to a bunch of individual outcomes... can as much eventually get up one unit over nine tries, but lose all nine on the tenth try before you get up one again. Those must return to an "even state" before you go broke to work.)
At the board which i admin, (i don't own or operate it,) backed up to review a lot of the conventional mathematics of the casino-games, thrown out some fundamentally-new re-thinking on that, and left it to the reader to re-think and re-arrange it all into working systems. I believe that i can well defend everything there, but, as of yet, haven't been afforded the opportunity to begin doing so. (I like to throw out stuff which leads to something but only after a bit of further thought. Like the bumper sticker, "I like attention, but not yours.")
Again there is a piece out JL's website
08/03/2012
DOZ1 1 W 445
DOZ2
its al gone :-\
08/03/2012
DOZ2 1 W 509
DOZ3 1 L 508
Okay, its the end result that counts but wanted to see the bets in between ;D
i can't open this website...but do i see what i see? it's just incredible...
Both Skakus and JL are doing remarkable things...
iggiv,
sometimes i need to reclick the link 3 or 4 times before it realy opens
but indeed, their both doing great
Quote from: GARNabby on Aug 03, 10:20 PM 2012
>>>I was working all day today, just had a chance to respond to the question at-hand, the one just posted yesterday. Think an apology is in order.<<<
Thanks for your comprehensive answer GARNabbey, I will mull it over for a while.
I apologise for hastily giving up on you posting an answer, I blame the 50% proof Smirnoff triple distilled Vodka that I opened yesterday. You not only answered but went beyond the basics. Thanks again.
Quote from: Stepkevh on Aug 04, 12:04 AM 2012
Again there is a piece out JL's website
08/03/2012
DOZ1 1 W 445
DOZ2
its al gone :-\
08/03/2012
DOZ2 1 W 509
DOZ3 1 L 508
Okay, its the end result that counts but wanted to see the bets in between ;D
yeah, the results are still being messed up. :'(
This won't do, and I've run out of ideas as to how to fix the problem, so I'm going to code the database option. In the meantime, the current version of the software won't be usable. Sorry to do this John when you're doing so well - have a break for a couple of days and watch the Olympics. ;)
Skakus' file will remain, so he can continue on.
Actually, the more I think about the database idea, the more I like it. When the challenge is finished, it will mean you can run queries on the data. There are free programs which make this easy, you don't necessarily need to know any SQL. A database will be even more useful for looking at the data when I've written the full version (full table layout with drag n drop chips).
Quote from: Bayes on Aug 04, 02:46 AM 2012
yeah, the results are still being messed up. :'(
This won't do, and I've run out of ideas as to how to fix the problem, so I'm going to code the database option. In the meantime, the current version of the software won't be usable. Sorry to do this John when you're doing so well - have a break for a couple of days and watch the Olympics. ;)
Skakus' file will remain, so he can continue on.
Actually, the more I think about the database idea, the more I like it. When the challenge is finished, it will mean you can run queries on the data. There are free programs which make this easy, you don't necessarily need to know any SQL. A database will be even more useful for looking at the data when I've written the full version (full table layout with drag n drop chips).
Okay Bayes. I am on a good run at the moment, and was hoping to double my BR today. But I will wait for the database. Cheers.
Running a bit behind with this as I got caught up with the Olympics over the weekend (go team GB! ;D ). Also, it seems there's no easy way to stop the database from being opened, so I've decided to use an encrypted text file instead. You should get it today or tomorrow at the latest. Hopefully your good run will continue. :D
*** Also, it seems there's no easy way to stop the database from being opened***
So.......what does the above mean? "Opened" as in opened and modified/changed? And if there is no way to prevent this, the other side of the pancake is...someone is/has been doing it. Otherwise, how would you know there is no way to prevent it?
Who is opening the database. Inquiring minds want to know.
TwoCatSam
Sam,
Since I'm no longer uploading results directly to the web page, I was planning on using a database (SQLite, an industry standard) which JL would keep on his pc and in which the results would be stored. So the idea was that every week or two, JL would send me a copy of the database which I would then access and extract the saved results. Unfortunately, for this DB, there is no way to protect it - anyone can use freely available software to access and modify the contents. Other databases such as MySQL can be password protected, but they're harder to use and over the top for this application, it would be like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.
So plan B is to save the results to an ordinary text file instead of a DB, then encrypt the file. JL COULD modify the contents, but since he wouldn't know what he was modifying, the decrypted results would be garbled, and I would know the file was tampered with. Not that I'm suggesting he would do that, of course. ^-^
@ GARNabby,
The reason I deleted some of your posts (not all of them) was because some of them were off-topic and/or personal attacks. I don't have the time or inclination to get involved in a p1ssing contest with you or anyone else. By the way, any thread starter can delete any posts he/she feels are inappropriate, they are the moderators of their own threads.
Quote from: Bayes on Aug 06, 10:54 AM 2012
Sam,
Since I'm no longer uploading results directly to the web page, I was planning on using a database (SQLite, an industry standard) which JL would keep on his pc and in which the results would be stored. So the idea was that every week or two, JL would send me a copy of the database which I would then access and extract the saved results. Unfortunately, for this DB, there is no way to protect it - anyone can use freely available software to access and modify the contents. Other databases such as MySQL can be password protected, but they're harder to use and over the top for this application, it would be like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.
So plan B is to save the results to an ordinary text file instead of a DB, then encrypt the file. JL COULD modify the contents, but since he wouldn't know what he was modifying, the decrypted results would be garbled, and I would know the file was tampered with. Not that I'm suggesting he would do that, of course. ^-^
Hello Bayes no I don't need to ever cheat I have a method that has this game in the bag. But please make sure I couldn't cheat. I don't want people like Sam implying there's any foul play. I like your idea about having everything online so I play and the results are right there for all to see. But if you insist you would know if there was any foul play with this one we will go with that.
***people like Sam***
Exactly who are "people like Sam"? Spell it out!
Skeptics? Guilty as charged!
Now is your chance, JL. Your friend AMK has accused me of thinking I'm perfect in spite of the many times I've publicly announced that I hosed up! Many times!! Jump on and get your two-cents worth in.
I had hoped we would get an impeachable test of your abilities. Despite the excellent and dedicated work of Bayes, we have not.
The absolute truth is, John, what you're trying to do is impossible. Any more than you can add 2+2 and get 4.00000000000001. Just ain't gonna happen. Even with a million zeros.
You are, as I have suspected from the start, all talk and no action. If you were sincere, you would just open an account at any reputable casino and show us how you make money. No person who can make money at roulette would waste their time taking a test.
"The proof is in the pudding." All you serve is wind pudding!
Sam
(I'll bet my arse there are others like me!)
Quote from: Stepkevh on Aug 04, 12:04 AM 2012
Again there is a piece out JL's website
08/03/2012
DOZ1 1 W 445
DOZ2
its al gone :-\
08/03/2012
DOZ2 1 W 509
DOZ3 1 L 508
Okay, its the end result that counts but wanted to see the bets in between ;D
I totally disagree.
What we need is to know that certain numbers were furnished and bets were made on some of those certain numbers and that there is a winning result. We need to know those numbers were as pure as if they were just spun off the Dublin wheel. No human intervention.
We need to be able, at the end of the test, to check those numbers for accuracy. That is--if we want an honest test.
Sam
Sam,
What you're asking for in this test would be a very difficult and impractical task. I don't know why you're not also questioning the validity of Skakus' results? The problems with JL's results on the web page was unfortunate (I suspect it may have something to do with the constant closing and restarting of the program, but that's not JL's fault), but how do you know Skakus isn't hacking into the server and changing the results? It's POSSIBLE (just very very unlikely).
The only way we can know that certain numbers were furnished and that JL made a certain bet etc is to see him making the bets in real time in a way that's completely transparent, but I don't know how that could be done, not to mention the time it would take.
I'm satisfied that JL's results are genuine, because the bank file (which records the final bank after each session) hasn't been affected by this bug, we're just in the dark about some of the bets made.
The new approach I propose will be as foolproof, if not more so, than uploading the results to a web page. If there's any tampering going on, I assure you I'll know about it.
Unless you think I'm in cahoots with JL to engineer some kind of scam? well that's also possible I suppose, but also not very likely, given that I've been one of his detractors for so long.
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Aug 06, 12:28 PM 2012
***people like Sam***
Exactly who are "people like Sam"? Spell it out!
Skeptics? Guilty as charged!
Now is your chance, JL. Your friend AMK has accused me of thinking I'm perfect in spite of the many times I've publicly announced that I hosed up! Many times!! Jump on and get your two-cents worth in.
I had hoped we would get an impeachable test of your abilities. Despite the excellent and dedicated work of Bayes, we have not.
The absolute truth is, John, what you're trying to do is impossible. Any more than you can add 2+2 and get 4.00000000000001. Just ain't gonna happen. Even with a million zeros.
You are, as I have suspected from the start, all talk and no action. If you were sincere, you would just open an account at any reputable casino and show us how you make money. No person who can make money at roulette would waste their time taking a test.
"The proof is in the pudding." All you serve is wind pudding!
Sam
(I'll bet my arse there are others like me!)
Sam you blow hot and cold. One minute you say I have your respect for doing this test. Then you cry foul play because results were deleted. Bayes knows I've done this fair and square. He is now working om a better version so what's your problem? My objective is to show I can beat an Rng, then actuals. Then Live wheels. And that's the order I'm going in. You have a bias towards doing things your way I get that.
But please let me do this the way I plan. Bayes has put a lot of work into this. And without question he is being fair and unbiased about this test. You will get your test when I'm ready.
Bayes
I don't think you're in cahoots with anyone. I have the utmost respect for you and your efforts. As to Skakus, his test is just not on my radar as I have a full full plate.
When someone tells me they have a perpetual motion machine in their garage--pardon me if I want to see it. Can you make water run uphill. Let's see it.
Can you do what John claims to do. Let's see it.
You know, Dublin can been seen by anyone. He could arrange a time to log on and anyone interested could follow the numbers. He could post a video of his betting and no swingin' dick on the planet could dispute the results.
But such a test would reveal the truth.....
Sam
John......I'm all for you winning. I hope you do.
BUT
I want to know you really won. Sorry, but I'll not take your word for it and I'd not expect you to take mine.
If Bayes verifies the results as being accurate, that's good enough for me.
But how does Bayes know what he's seeing? Is he seeing what you edit it for him to see?
Sam
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Aug 06, 01:35 PM 2012
John......I'm all for you winning. I hope you do.
BUT
I want to know you really won. Sorry, but I'll not take your word for it and I'd not expect you to take mine.
If Bayes verifies the results as being accurate, that's good enough for me.
But how does Bayes know what he's seeing? Is he seeing what you edit it for him to see?
Sam
Don't take my word for it, but do take Bayes. Both me and Skakus should play his new proposed version its as close to your proposal as you can get. AND you'll get your wish in 3 or 4 months. The problem I have with doing your idea is SPEED. I could win 100,200,300 games. What will that prove? Here I have to make it to 5000 against an Rng that's a decent sample in anyones book.
Wow,
Just came from posting on BV Fun Mode: Max BR.
When JohnLegend began this thread I new it would be something else.
2Cat is just trying to help. This test is serious and it must be done in the best way possible. We have Bayes and JL working together, only good things can come from this.
Do I trust the results at the moment, yes. Can they be tampered with probably.
Bayes, I can only suggest that we have more monitors in some fashion.
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Aug 06, 01:35 PM 2012
But how does Bayes know what he's seeing? Is he seeing what you edit it for him to see?
Sam, I'll be using the SHA-1 Cryptographic hash function (link:://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SHA-1) to make sure that none of the saved sessions have been altered. If it's good enough for the U.S. Government, it should be good enough for you. ;D
By the way, Betvoyager also use this in their "randomness control".
@ John,
Would you mind posting the last line of your results, and also the date of the last session you played? I know the final bank is 520 units but I need the other data too (just the last line will be enough). Thanks.
Anybody able to crack the SHA-1 Cryptographic hash function will not test at all, he will know before the numbers at BV, and be playing all the games in real mode! ;D
QuoteBy the way, Betvoyager also use this in their "randomness control".
SHA-256 is used by them :thumbsup:
QuoteAnybody able to crack the SHA-1 Cryptographic hash function will not test at all, he will know before the numbers at BV, and be playing all the games in real mode!
Forget it, mission impossible
Quote from: superman on Aug 06, 04:24 PM 2012
SHA-256 is used by them :thumbsup:
Forget it, mission impossible
My statement were for they who may think the method is not good for the challenge here!
Quote from: Bayes on Aug 06, 03:55 PM 2012
@ John,
Would you mind posting the last line of your results, and also the date of the last session you played? I know the final bank is 520 units but I need the other data too (just the last line will be enough). Thanks.
Yes Bayes its
08/03/2012
DOZ1. 1. W. 521
DOZ3. 1. L. 520
Quote from: superman on Aug 06, 04:24 PM 2012
SHA-256 is used by them :thumbsup:
My mistake. I knew it was some species of SHA.
Thanks John. You'll get the updated software tomorrow.
Thinking about it, this is actually more foolproof than uploading the results to a web site. For suppose JL hacked into the server and changed the data; if he did, I might never know about it, and he might get away with it. But using the hash function, I will definitely know if any tampering has occurred. It doesn't actually matter if JL succeeds in altering the results, because he'll only be able to do it once, then he'll be disqualified. >:D
Quote from: Bayes on Aug 06, 05:14 PM 2012
My mistake. I knew it was some species of SHA.
Thanks John. You'll get the updated software tomorrow.
Thinking about it, this is actually more foolproof than uploading the results to a web site. For suppose JL hacked into the server and changed the data; if he did, I might never know about it, and he might get away with it. But using the hash function, I will definitely know if any tampering has occurred. It doesn't actually matter if JL succeeds in altering the results, because he'll only be able to do it once, then he'll be disqualified. >:D
I have trouble getting Into my email Bayes so forget that. No with what I have on my hands now its the casinos who will need help. Not myself, I'm going to see how far I can take this winning streak. Both Double Match and FIVE are flourishing on rngs and live. Look forward to continuing my campaign.
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Aug 06, 01:32 PM 2012
>>> As to Skakus, his test is just not on my radar as I have a full full plate.<<<
Perfect! ^-^
JL challenge is like olympic games and Skakus like world championship ;D
Quote from: Bayes on Aug 07, 04:34 AM 2012
Skakus the hacker? ;D
And a damn good one at that!
I'm done with roulette, I'm going off to join a hacker's forum where my talents might be more appreciated! :twisted:
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Aug 07, 04:40 AM 2012
JL challenge is like olympic games and Skakus like world championship ;D
So do you think Im in with a chance for gold Hutt? ::)
I've been thinking about the +5000 or -500 challenge limits put forward by JL, and I'm not sure if it's the best option, especially because we are playing different probabilities/progressions?
What about a placed bet amount total instead?
What would be an acceptable number of bets for EC or DOZ/COL bets using progressions?
For example 10,000 placed EC bets with a bankroll still intact? What about 20,000 placed EC bets with a bankroll still intact?
Any opinions?
03/08/2012
DOZ3 1 L 520
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 519
DOZ3 1 W 521
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 523
DOZ2 1 L 522
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 524
DOZ3 1 L 523
DOZ1 1 W 525
DOZ2 1 L 524
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 523
DOZ3 1 L 522
DOZ1 2 L 520
DOZ3 2 L 518
DOZ1 8 L 510
DOZ2 8 W 526
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 525
DOZ3 1 W 527
DOZ2 1 W 529
DOZ3 1 L 528
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 527
DOZ2 1 W 529
DOZ2 1 L 528
DOZ3 1 L 527
DOZ1 1 L 526
DOZ3 1 L 525
DOZ1 3 L 522
DOZ2 3 W 528
DOZ1 1 L 527
DOZ2 1 W 529
DOZ2 1 W 531
DOZ3 1 L 530
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 529
DOZ3 1 W 531
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 530
DOZ2 1 W 532
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 W 534
DOZ3 1 L 533
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 535
DOZ2 1 L 534
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 533
DOZ3 1 L 532
DOZ1 2 W 536
DOZ2 2 L 534
DOZ1 1 W 536
DOZ3 1 L 535
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 534
DOZ3 1 L 533
DOZ1 2 W 537
DOZ2 2 L 535
DOZ1 1 L 534
DOZ3 1 W 536
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 535
DOZ3 1 W 537
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 536
DOZ3 1 L 535
DOZ1 2 L 533
DOZ3 2 W 537
DOZ2 1 L 536
DOZ3 1 W 538
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 537
DOZ2 1 L 536
DOZ2 2 W 540
DOZ3 2 L 538
DOZ1 1 W 540
DOZ2 1 L 539
DOZ1 1 W 541
DOZ2 1 L 540
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 542
DOZ3 1 L 541
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 540
DOZ3 1 L 539
DOZ1 2 L 537
DOZ2 2 L 535
DOZ1 3 L 532
DOZ3 3 L 529
DOZ2 6 L 523
DOZ3 6 W 535
DOZ1 2 L 533
DOZ3 2 W 537
DOZ1 1 L 536
DOZ2 1 L 535
DOZ1 3 L 532
DOZ3 3 L 529
DOZ2 6 W 541
DOZ3 6 L 535
DOZ1 3 L 532
DOZ2 3 W 538
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 537
DOZ3 1 L 536
DOZ2 3 L 533
DOZ3 3 W 539
07/08/2012
DOZ1 2 L 537
DOZ3 2 W 541
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 540
DOZ3 1 L 539
DOZ1 2 L 537
DOZ3 2 L 535
DOZ2 4 W 543
DOZ3 4 L 539
DOZ1 3 L 536
DOZ2 3 L 533
DOZ2 6 W 545
DOZ3 6 L 539
DOZ1 3 W 545
DOZ2 3 L 542
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 544
DOZ3 1 L 543
DOZ1 1 L 542
DOZ3 1 L 541
DOZ2 3 W 547
DOZ3 3 L 544
DOZ3 1 L 543
DOZ3 1 L 542
DOZ1 2 L 540
DOZ2 2 L 538
DOZ2 2 L 536
DOZ2 4 W 544
DOZ3 1 L 543
DOZ1 1 L 542
DOZ1 2 L 540
DOZ2 2 W 544
DOZ2 1 L 543
DOZ1 2 W 547
DOZ1 1 L 546
DOZ3 1 W 548
DOZ2 1 L 547
DOZ1 2 L 545
DOZ3 2 L 543
DOZ2 3 W 549
DOZ1 1 L 548
DOZ3 1 L 547
DOZ1 2 W 551
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 553
DOZ1 1 L 552
DOZ1 1 L 551
DOZ1 1 L 550
DOZ3 2 L 548
DOZ1 2 L 546
DOZ3 2 L 544
DOZ2 4 L 540
DOZ1 4 L 536
DOZ2 6 W 548
DOZ3 2 W 552
DOZ1 1 W 554
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 553
DOZ3 2 L 551
DOZ1 2 L 549
DOZ2 3 L 546
DOZ1 4 W 554
DOZ3 1 L 553
DOZ2 2 L 551
DOZ1 2 L 549
DOZ3 3 W 555
DOZ1 1 L 554
DOZ3 1 W 556
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 W 558
DOZ3 1 W 560
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 559
DOZ1 1 L 558
DOZ1 2 W 562
DOZ2 1 L 561
DOZ1 1 W 563
DOZ3 1 L 562
DOZ1 1 W 564
07/08/2012
DOZ1 2 W 568
DOZ2 2 L 566
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 565
DOZ2 1 L 564
DOZ1 3 L 561
DOZ3 3 L 558
07/08/2012
DOZ2 3 L 555
DOZ3 3 L 552
DOZ1 6 L 546
DOZ3 6 W 558
DOZ2 6 W 570
DOZ3 6 L 564
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 563
DOZ3 1 L 562
DOZ2 3 W 568
DOZ3 3 L 565
07/08/2012
DOZ1 2 W 569
DOZ2 2 L 567
07/08/2012
DOZ2 2 L 565
DOZ3 2 L 563
DOZ2 2 L 561
DOZ3 2 W 565
DOZ2 3 W 571
DOZ3 3 L 568
07/08/2012
DOZ2 2 L 566
DOZ3 2 L 564
DOZ2 4 L 560
DOZ3 4 L 556
DOZ1 8 L 548
DOZ2 8 L 540
DOZ1 12 L 528
DOZ3 12 L 516
DOZ2 30 L 486
DOZ3 30 W 546
DOZ1 10 L 536
DOZ3 10 W 556
DOZ1 4 W 564
DOZ2 4 L 560
07/08/2012
DOZ1 3 W 566
DOZ3 3 L 563
DOZ2 2 W 567
DOZ3 2 L 565
DOZ2 3 W 571
DOZ3 3 L 568
DOZ1 2 L 566
DOZ3 2 W 570
07/08/2012
DOZ1 2 L 568
DOZ3 2 W 572
07/08/2012
DOZ1 2 W 576
DOZ3 2 L 574
07/08/2012
DOZ1 2 L 572
DOZ3 2 W 576
07/08/2012
DOZ2 2 L 574
DOZ3 2 W 578
07/08/2012
DOZ1 2 W 582
DOZ2 2 L 580
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 582
DOZ2 1 L 581
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 W 583
DOZ3 1 L 582
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 W 584
DOZ3 1 L 583
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 582
DOZ3 1 L 581
07/08/2012
DOZ2 3 W 587
DOZ3 3 L 584
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 583
DOZ2 1 L 582
07/08/2012
DOZ1 3 L 579
DOZ3 3 L 576
07/08/2012
DOZ2 9 W 594
DOZ3 9 L 585
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 584
DOZ3 1 W 586
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 588
DOZ2 1 L 587
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 586
DOZ2 1 L 585
07/08/2012
DOZ1 3 L 582
DOZ2 3 W 588
07/08/2012
DOZ1 2 L 586
DOZ3 2 W 590
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 592
DOZ3 1 L 591
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 593
DOZ3 1 L 592
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 591
DOZ2 1 W 593
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 592
DOZ3 1 L 591
07/08/2012
DOZ2 3 L 588
DOZ3 3 W 594
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 593
DOZ3 1 L 592
07/08/2012
DOZ1 3 L 589
DOZ2 3 W 595
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 594
DOZ3 1 L 593
07/08/2012
DOZ1 3 L 590
DOZ3 3 L 587
07/08/2012
DOZ1 11 L 576
DOZ2 11 W 598
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 597
DOZ3 1 L 596
07/08/2012
DOZ1 4 L 592
DOZ3 4 W 600
07/08/2012
DOZ2 2 L 598
DOZ3 2 W 602
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 601
DOZ2 1 L 600
07/08/2012
DOZ1 3 L 597
DOZ2 3 W 603
07/08/2012
DOZ1 2 L 601
DOZ3 2 L 599
07/08/2012
DOZ2 5 W 609
DOZ3 5 L 604
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 606
DOZ2 1 L 605
After one month of hard persistent play. I have finally doubled my Bankroll. I continue on from here hopelfully all the way to 5000 points.
Quote from: Skakus on Aug 07, 06:11 AM 2012
I've been thinking about the +5000 or -500 challenge limits put forward by JL, and I'm not sure if it's the best option, especially because we are playing different probabilities/progressions?
What about a placed bet amount total instead?
What would be an acceptable number of bets for EC or DOZ/COL bets using progressions?
For example 10,000 placed EC bets with a bankroll still intact? What about 20,000 placed EC bets with a bankroll still intact?
Any opinions?
That sounds interesting Skakus. I think ultimately we should let Bayes decide. Because it has to be a big enough sample to convince most people that we couldnt ever lose our Bankrolls. I dont care if the target is 5,000---10,000 even 20,000.
Hi JL,
I'm very impressed with your latest results. Good to see you back on track and in the profit zone. From now on the sky's the limit?
A.
Quote from: atlantis on Aug 07, 12:21 PM 2012
Hi JL,
I'm very impressed with your latest results. Good to see you back on track and in the profit zone. From now on the sky's the limit?
A.
Hi Atlantis, yes I slipped I stumbled and I fell. But I never gave up. Now I will work my way up to 4 figures by the weekend hopefully. And maybe even catch Skakus and be in front for once. :question: :question: :question: :question: :question:
03/08/2012
DOZ3 1 L 520
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 519
DOZ3 1 W 521
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 523
DOZ2 1 L 522
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 524
DOZ3 1 L 523
DOZ1 1 W 525
DOZ2 1 L 524
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 523
DOZ3 1 L 522
DOZ1 2 L 520
DOZ3 2 L 518
DOZ1 8 L 510
DOZ2 8 W 526
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 525
DOZ3 1 W 527
DOZ2 1 W 529
DOZ3 1 L 528
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 527
DOZ2 1 W 529
DOZ2 1 L 528
DOZ3 1 L 527
DOZ1 1 L 526
DOZ3 1 L 525
DOZ1 3 L 522
DOZ2 3 W 528
DOZ1 1 L 527
DOZ2 1 W 529
DOZ2 1 W 531
DOZ3 1 L 530
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 529
DOZ3 1 W 531
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 530
DOZ2 1 W 532
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 W 534
DOZ3 1 L 533
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 535
DOZ2 1 L 534
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 533
DOZ3 1 L 532
DOZ1 2 W 536
DOZ2 2 L 534
DOZ1 1 W 536
DOZ3 1 L 535
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 534
DOZ3 1 L 533
DOZ1 2 W 537
DOZ2 2 L 535
DOZ1 1 L 534
DOZ3 1 W 536
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 535
DOZ3 1 W 537
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 536
DOZ3 1 L 535
DOZ1 2 L 533
DOZ3 2 W 537
DOZ2 1 L 536
DOZ3 1 W 538
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 537
DOZ2 1 L 536
DOZ2 2 W 540
DOZ3 2 L 538
DOZ1 1 W 540
DOZ2 1 L 539
DOZ1 1 W 541
DOZ2 1 L 540
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 542
DOZ3 1 L 541
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 540
DOZ3 1 L 539
DOZ1 2 L 537
DOZ2 2 L 535
DOZ1 3 L 532
DOZ3 3 L 529
DOZ2 6 L 523
DOZ3 6 W 535
DOZ1 2 L 533
DOZ3 2 W 537
DOZ1 1 L 536
DOZ2 1 L 535
DOZ1 3 L 532
DOZ3 3 L 529
DOZ2 6 W 541
DOZ3 6 L 535
DOZ1 3 L 532
DOZ2 3 W 538
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 537
DOZ3 1 L 536
DOZ2 3 L 533
DOZ3 3 W 539
07/08/2012
DOZ1 2 L 537
DOZ3 2 W 541
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 540
DOZ3 1 L 539
DOZ1 2 L 537
DOZ3 2 L 535
DOZ2 4 W 543
DOZ3 4 L 539
DOZ1 3 L 536
DOZ2 3 L 533
DOZ2 6 W 545
DOZ3 6 L 539
DOZ1 3 W 545
DOZ2 3 L 542
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 544
DOZ3 1 L 543
DOZ1 1 L 542
DOZ3 1 L 541
DOZ2 3 W 547
DOZ3 3 L 544
DOZ3 1 L 543
DOZ3 1 L 542
DOZ1 2 L 540
DOZ2 2 L 538
DOZ2 2 L 536
DOZ2 4 W 544
DOZ3 1 L 543
DOZ1 1 L 542
DOZ1 2 L 540
DOZ2 2 W 544
DOZ2 1 L 543
DOZ1 2 W 547
DOZ1 1 L 546
DOZ3 1 W 548
DOZ2 1 L 547
DOZ1 2 L 545
DOZ3 2 L 543
DOZ2 3 W 549
DOZ1 1 L 548
DOZ3 1 L 547
DOZ1 2 W 551
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 553
DOZ1 1 L 552
DOZ1 1 L 551
DOZ1 1 L 550
DOZ3 2 L 548
DOZ1 2 L 546
DOZ3 2 L 544
DOZ2 4 L 540
DOZ1 4 L 536
DOZ2 6 W 548
DOZ3 2 W 552
DOZ1 1 W 554
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 553
DOZ3 2 L 551
DOZ1 2 L 549
DOZ2 3 L 546
DOZ1 4 W 554
DOZ3 1 L 553
DOZ2 2 L 551
DOZ1 2 L 549
DOZ3 3 W 555
DOZ1 1 L 554
DOZ3 1 W 556
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 W 558
DOZ3 1 W 560
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 559
DOZ1 1 L 558
DOZ1 2 W 562
DOZ2 1 L 561
DOZ1 1 W 563
DOZ3 1 L 562
DOZ1 1 W 564
07/08/2012
DOZ1 2 W 568
DOZ2 2 L 566
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 565
DOZ2 1 L 564
DOZ1 3 L 561
DOZ3 3 L 558
07/08/2012
DOZ2 3 L 555
DOZ3 3 L 552
DOZ1 6 L 546
DOZ3 6 W 558
DOZ2 6 W 570
DOZ3 6 L 564
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 563
DOZ3 1 L 562
DOZ2 3 W 568
DOZ3 3 L 565
07/08/2012
DOZ1 2 W 569
DOZ2 2 L 567
07/08/2012
DOZ2 2 L 565
DOZ3 2 L 563
DOZ2 2 L 561
DOZ3 2 W 565
DOZ2 3 W 571
DOZ3 3 L 568
07/08/2012
DOZ2 2 L 566
DOZ3 2 L 564
DOZ2 4 L 560
DOZ3 4 L 556
DOZ1 8 L 548
DOZ2 8 L 540
DOZ1 12 L 528
DOZ3 12 L 516
DOZ2 30 L 486
DOZ3 30 W 546
DOZ1 10 L 536
DOZ3 10 W 556
DOZ1 4 W 564
DOZ2 4 L 560
07/08/2012
DOZ1 3 W 566
DOZ3 3 L 563
DOZ2 2 W 567
DOZ3 2 L 565
DOZ2 3 W 571
DOZ3 3 L 568
DOZ1 2 L 566
DOZ3 2 W 570
07/08/2012
DOZ1 2 L 568
DOZ3 2 W 572
07/08/2012
DOZ1 2 W 576
DOZ3 2 L 574
07/08/2012
DOZ1 2 L 572
DOZ3 2 W 576
07/08/2012
DOZ2 2 L 574
DOZ3 2 W 578
07/08/2012
DOZ1 2 W 582
DOZ2 2 L 580
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 582
DOZ2 1 L 581
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 W 583
DOZ3 1 L 582
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 W 584
DOZ3 1 L 583
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 582
DOZ3 1 L 581
07/08/2012
DOZ2 3 W 587
DOZ3 3 L 584
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 583
DOZ2 1 L 582
07/08/2012
DOZ1 3 L 579
DOZ3 3 L 576
07/08/2012
DOZ2 9 W 594
DOZ3 9 L 585
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 584
DOZ3 1 W 586
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 588
DOZ2 1 L 587
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 586
DOZ2 1 L 585
07/08/2012
DOZ1 3 L 582
DOZ2 3 W 588
07/08/2012
DOZ1 2 L 586
DOZ3 2 W 590
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 592
DOZ3 1 L 591
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 593
DOZ3 1 L 592
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 591
DOZ2 1 W 593
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 592
DOZ3 1 L 591
07/08/2012
DOZ2 3 L 588
DOZ3 3 W 594
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 593
DOZ3 1 L 592
07/08/2012
DOZ1 3 L 589
DOZ2 3 W 595
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 594
DOZ3 1 L 593
07/08/2012
DOZ1 3 L 590
DOZ3 3 L 587
07/08/2012
DOZ1 11 L 576
DOZ2 11 W 598
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 597
DOZ3 1 L 596
07/08/2012
DOZ1 4 L 592
DOZ3 4 W 600
07/08/2012
DOZ2 2 L 598
DOZ3 2 W 602
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 601
DOZ2 1 L 600
07/08/2012
DOZ1 3 L 597
DOZ2 3 W 603
07/08/2012
DOZ1 2 L 601
DOZ3 2 L 599
07/08/2012
DOZ2 5 W 609
DOZ3 5 L 604
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 606
DOZ2 1 L 605
07/08/2012
LOW 2 W 607
HIGH 2 W 609
HIGH 1 L 608
HIGH 2 W 610
HIGH 2 W 612
LOW 1 L 611
LOW 2 L 609
LOW 4 W 613
HIGH 1 W 614
HIGH 1 W 615
HIGH 1 W 616
HIGH 1 L 615
HIGH 2 L 613
LOW 4 L 609
HIGH 7 L 602
HIGH 14 W 616
LOW 4 L 612
LOW 8 W 620
I have finished the days play with some games of PATTERN BREAKER. To give me a total of 620 POINTS.
Quote from: Bayes on Aug 06, 11:03 AM 2012
@ GARNabby,
The reason I deleted some of your posts (not all of them) was because some of them were off-topic and/or personal attacks. I don't have the time or inclination to get involved in a p1ssing contest with you or anyone else. By the way, any thread starter can delete any posts he/she feels are inappropriate, they are the moderators of their own threads.
Hey Steve, just ban me from also this board of yours. Big waste of time!
Quote from: GARNabby on Aug 07, 01:34 PM 2012
Big waste of time!
This topic is really a big waste of time (for me)...
thanks bayes for software who showed a lot, who wants to understand
I really do wish that people would stick with the thread topic - IF YOU DO NOT LIKE IT - GO ELSEWHERE - do not criticise the people that are trying to help all of us achieve our goal - to beat this game, let play continue in peace, please.
My humble opinion,
Alf
So is this the latest deal...........
John posts his play and Bayes verifies it?
Sam
This has probably been explained somewhere but I can't find it.
How are the numbers presented to JL? Presumably one at a time.
Trebor
Here is a chart of the data i already collected, plus what was posted above...
[attach=1]
Here's a chart with data supplied by John Legend from 202 + via email and posted above...
[attach=2]
Here is the spreadsheet i'm using for now...
[attachurl=3]
That is a very impressive final section on those charts!
Hey JL, can you PM me your new MO?
I want to change from mine to yours so you can't catch me >> ;D ;D ;D
Hello John
It seems that you changed your progression from 1,3,9,27 to other staking plans for double dozens.
How many games in a row did you win using 1,3,9,27 ? Congrats on your progress.
Regards
John,
There are couple of changes I want to make to the program, sorry to be a pain but it will actually make life a bit easier for you. Firstly, I need to change the "house limit" to 100 units. I thought I'd made it 100 u when I coded it, but for some reason it ended up at 50. Also, although it's a bit slow incrementing the stakes one u at time, I'll leave this the way it is - it's probably not a good idea to make it too easy to bet large stakes. ;)
Second, at the moment the results are saved to just one file which records all bets since you started, but it will be easier for you to post the ongoing results if I create a second file which only saves the results of the last session by date. By that I mean it will reset the file every time the date changes (rather than by session, which will mean you have to save the file every time you close and restart the program).
Also, another reason why I'm doing this is because at the moment you might accidentally change the main file when copying parts of it to post here, so it's probably better if you either don't open it at all or just open it for looking at the overall results.
Carry on as you are for the moment, I'll send you a pm when I've coded the changes.
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Aug 07, 04:50 PM 2012
So is this the latest deal...........
John posts his play and Bayes verifies it?
Sam
Sam, yep, that's the deal.
I've put quite a bit of effort into making sure that they can't cheat, or rather, not that they CAN'T cheat (I can't stop that) but that if they do, then I'll know about it.
I mentioned the hash function in a previous post, which ensures that if any data is changed, a completely different hash number will be generated. The hash numbers are saved to a file, so when JL and Skakus send me the files (the results file and the hash file) I will run through the results and check that they do generate the same hash numbers. The hash numbers are generated at random times when the program is running and are saved immediately to a file.
Now suppose that JL's had a few beers and has a really bad session - he's lost half his bank. Since the results are written to the file only when the program quits, what's to stop him from opening the results file and deleting the last session? Nothing, but as the hash numbers have already been written, it means that I'll know something's missing when I run the verification. Note that it won't help JL to force the program to quit (maybe by switching off his computer or using the task manager), because in that case, the file may not have been updated, but the hash numbers will still be there.
But what about the hash file itself? can't that be modified? Yes, but you won't know which hash number corresponds to which part of the results file, and if you change anything here then the verification will also fail.
The only way they could cheat and I wouldn't know about it is at the start. So suppose the very first session is a big loss. You could then completely erase BOTH files and start over. Rinse and repeat until you get the results you want. ;D
But in a long term test like this one, it won't count for much.
Quote from: Skakus on Aug 07, 06:11 AM 2012
I've been thinking about the +5000 or -500 challenge limits put forward by JL, and I'm not sure if it's the best option, especially because we are playing different probabilities/progressions?
What about a placed bet amount total instead?
What would be an acceptable number of bets for EC or DOZ/COL bets using progressions?
For example 10,000 placed EC bets with a bankroll still intact? What about 20,000 placed EC bets with a bankroll still intact?
Any opinions?
I've been thinking about this. It would be nice to a have good reason for setting a number of bets. More is better of course, but we have to be practical. I remember Kelly saying that you need at least 50,000 placed bets to "prove" that a EC system is a winner. I think it was based on 3 STD but can't remember the details of how he came to that number.
On thing I could do is to write a simulation to find out how many bets are necessary for the house edge to "catch up" and eliminate every player. i.e. - The program will simulate say 1000 sessions flat betting. Each session will last for 1000, 2000, 3000 etc spins. When I've found a number such that EVERY session ends in a loss, then using that number of spins should eliminate winning purely by chance.
Quote from: Skakus on Aug 08, 02:48 AM 2012
That is a very impressive final section on those charts!
Hey JL, can you PM me your new MO?
I want to change from mine to yours so you can't catch me >> ;D ;D ;D
Skaks whats MO? Cheeky. Let me do a Usain bolt on you first then youll get it. DOUBLE MATCH is finally showing its power. I now have a fairly powerful BR. So I can play it with pure confidence. About to upload todays play.
03/08/2012
DOZ3 1 L 520
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 519
DOZ3 1 W 521
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 523
DOZ2 1 L 522
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 524
DOZ3 1 L 523
DOZ1 1 W 525
DOZ2 1 L 524
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 523
DOZ3 1 L 522
DOZ1 2 L 520
DOZ3 2 L 518
DOZ1 8 L 510
DOZ2 8 W 526
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 525
DOZ3 1 W 527
DOZ2 1 W 529
DOZ3 1 L 528
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 527
DOZ2 1 W 529
DOZ2 1 L 528
DOZ3 1 L 527
DOZ1 1 L 526
DOZ3 1 L 525
DOZ1 3 L 522
DOZ2 3 W 528
DOZ1 1 L 527
DOZ2 1 W 529
DOZ2 1 W 531
DOZ3 1 L 530
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 529
DOZ3 1 W 531
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 530
DOZ2 1 W 532
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 W 534
DOZ3 1 L 533
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 535
DOZ2 1 L 534
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 533
DOZ3 1 L 532
DOZ1 2 W 536
DOZ2 2 L 534
DOZ1 1 W 536
DOZ3 1 L 535
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 534
DOZ3 1 L 533
DOZ1 2 W 537
DOZ2 2 L 535
DOZ1 1 L 534
DOZ3 1 W 536
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 535
DOZ3 1 W 537
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 536
DOZ3 1 L 535
DOZ1 2 L 533
DOZ3 2 W 537
DOZ2 1 L 536
DOZ3 1 W 538
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 537
DOZ2 1 L 536
DOZ2 2 W 540
DOZ3 2 L 538
DOZ1 1 W 540
DOZ2 1 L 539
DOZ1 1 W 541
DOZ2 1 L 540
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 542
DOZ3 1 L 541
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 540
DOZ3 1 L 539
DOZ1 2 L 537
DOZ2 2 L 535
DOZ1 3 L 532
DOZ3 3 L 529
DOZ2 6 L 523
DOZ3 6 W 535
DOZ1 2 L 533
DOZ3 2 W 537
DOZ1 1 L 536
DOZ2 1 L 535
DOZ1 3 L 532
DOZ3 3 L 529
DOZ2 6 W 541
DOZ3 6 L 535
DOZ1 3 L 532
DOZ2 3 W 538
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 537
DOZ3 1 L 536
DOZ2 3 L 533
DOZ3 3 W 539
07/08/2012
DOZ1 2 L 537
DOZ3 2 W 541
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 540
DOZ3 1 L 539
DOZ1 2 L 537
DOZ3 2 L 535
DOZ2 4 W 543
DOZ3 4 L 539
DOZ1 3 L 536
DOZ2 3 L 533
DOZ2 6 W 545
DOZ3 6 L 539
DOZ1 3 W 545
DOZ2 3 L 542
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 544
DOZ3 1 L 543
DOZ1 1 L 542
DOZ3 1 L 541
DOZ2 3 W 547
DOZ3 3 L 544
DOZ3 1 L 543
DOZ3 1 L 542
DOZ1 2 L 540
DOZ2 2 L 538
DOZ2 2 L 536
DOZ2 4 W 544
DOZ3 1 L 543
DOZ1 1 L 542
DOZ1 2 L 540
DOZ2 2 W 544
DOZ2 1 L 543
DOZ1 2 W 547
DOZ1 1 L 546
DOZ3 1 W 548
DOZ2 1 L 547
DOZ1 2 L 545
DOZ3 2 L 543
DOZ2 3 W 549
DOZ1 1 L 548
DOZ3 1 L 547
DOZ1 2 W 551
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 553
DOZ1 1 L 552
DOZ1 1 L 551
DOZ1 1 L 550
DOZ3 2 L 548
DOZ1 2 L 546
DOZ3 2 L 544
DOZ2 4 L 540
DOZ1 4 L 536
DOZ2 6 W 548
DOZ3 2 W 552
DOZ1 1 W 554
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 553
DOZ3 2 L 551
DOZ1 2 L 549
DOZ2 3 L 546
DOZ1 4 W 554
DOZ3 1 L 553
DOZ2 2 L 551
DOZ1 2 L 549
DOZ3 3 W 555
DOZ1 1 L 554
DOZ3 1 W 556
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 W 558
DOZ3 1 W 560
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 559
DOZ1 1 L 558
DOZ1 2 W 562
DOZ2 1 L 561
DOZ1 1 W 563
DOZ3 1 L 562
DOZ1 1 W 564
07/08/2012
DOZ1 2 W 568
DOZ2 2 L 566
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 565
DOZ2 1 L 564
DOZ1 3 L 561
DOZ3 3 L 558
07/08/2012
DOZ2 3 L 555
DOZ3 3 L 552
DOZ1 6 L 546
DOZ3 6 W 558
DOZ2 6 W 570
DOZ3 6 L 564
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 563
DOZ3 1 L 562
DOZ2 3 W 568
DOZ3 3 L 565
07/08/2012
DOZ1 2 W 569
DOZ2 2 L 567
07/08/2012
DOZ2 2 L 565
DOZ3 2 L 563
DOZ2 2 L 561
DOZ3 2 W 565
DOZ2 3 W 571
DOZ3 3 L 568
07/08/2012
DOZ2 2 L 566
DOZ3 2 L 564
DOZ2 4 L 560
DOZ3 4 L 556
DOZ1 8 L 548
DOZ2 8 L 540
DOZ1 12 L 528
DOZ3 12 L 516
DOZ2 30 L 486
DOZ3 30 W 546
DOZ1 10 L 536
DOZ3 10 W 556
DOZ1 4 W 564
DOZ2 4 L 560
07/08/2012
DOZ1 3 W 566
DOZ3 3 L 563
DOZ2 2 W 567
DOZ3 2 L 565
DOZ2 3 W 571
DOZ3 3 L 568
DOZ1 2 L 566
DOZ3 2 W 570
07/08/2012
DOZ1 2 L 568
DOZ3 2 W 572
07/08/2012
DOZ1 2 W 576
DOZ3 2 L 574
07/08/2012
DOZ1 2 L 572
DOZ3 2 W 576
07/08/2012
DOZ2 2 L 574
DOZ3 2 W 578
07/08/2012
DOZ1 2 W 582
DOZ2 2 L 580
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 582
DOZ2 1 L 581
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 W 583
DOZ3 1 L 582
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 W 584
DOZ3 1 L 583
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 582
DOZ3 1 L 581
07/08/2012
DOZ2 3 W 587
DOZ3 3 L 584
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 583
DOZ2 1 L 582
07/08/2012
DOZ1 3 L 579
DOZ3 3 L 576
07/08/2012
DOZ2 9 W 594
DOZ3 9 L 585
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 584
DOZ3 1 W 586
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 588
DOZ2 1 L 587
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 586
DOZ2 1 L 585
07/08/2012
DOZ1 3 L 582
DOZ2 3 W 588
07/08/2012
DOZ1 2 L 586
DOZ3 2 W 590
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 592
DOZ3 1 L 591
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 593
DOZ3 1 L 592
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 591
DOZ2 1 W 593
07/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 592
DOZ3 1 L 591
07/08/2012
DOZ2 3 L 588
DOZ3 3 W 594
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 593
DOZ3 1 L 592
07/08/2012
DOZ1 3 L 589
DOZ2 3 W 595
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 594
DOZ3 1 L 593
07/08/2012
DOZ1 3 L 590
DOZ3 3 L 587
07/08/2012
DOZ1 11 L 576
DOZ2 11 W 598
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 597
DOZ3 1 L 596
07/08/2012
DOZ1 4 L 592
DOZ3 4 W 600
07/08/2012
DOZ2 2 L 598
DOZ3 2 W 602
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 601
DOZ2 1 L 600
07/08/2012
DOZ1 3 L 597
DOZ2 3 W 603
07/08/2012
DOZ1 2 L 601
DOZ3 2 L 599
07/08/2012
DOZ2 5 W 609
DOZ3 5 L 604
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 606
DOZ2 1 L 605
07/08/2012
LOW 2 W 607
HIGH 2 W 609
HIGH 1 L 608
HIGH 2 W 610
HIGH 2 W 612
LOW 1 L 611
LOW 2 L 609
LOW 4 W 613
HIGH 1 W 614
HIGH 1 W 615
HIGH 1 W 616
HIGH 1 L 615
HIGH 2 L 613
LOW 4 L 609
HIGH 7 L 602
HIGH 14 W 616
LOW 4 L 612
LOW 8 W 620
08/08/2012
DOZ2 2 L 618
DOZ3 2 W 622
DOZ1 2 W 626
DOZ2 2 L 624
DOZ1 1 L 623
DOZ3 1 W 625
DOZ1 1 L 624
DOZ2 1 L 623
DOZ1 3 W 629
DOZ3 3 L 626
DOZ1 1 W 628
DOZ2 1 L 627
08/08/2012
DOZ2 2 L 625
DOZ3 2 W 629
DOZ1 1 L 628
DOZ3 1 L 627
DOZ2 2 L 625
DOZ3 2 L 623
DOZ1 4 L 619
DOZ3 4 W 627
DOZ2 3 L 624
DOZ3 3 L 621
DOZ1 5 L 616
DOZ2 5 L 611
DOZ2 10 W 631
DOZ3 10 L 621
DOZ1 5 W 631
DOZ2 5 L 626
DOZ2 4 L 622
DOZ3 4 W 630
DOZ1 1 W 632
DOZ3 1 L 631
DOZ1 2 W 635
DOZ2 2 L 633
DOZ1 1 L 632
DOZ3 1 W 634
08/08/2012
DOZ2 2 L 632
DOZ3 2 L 630
DOZ1 5 W 640
DOZ2 5 L 635
DOZ2 2 L 633
DOZ3 2 W 637
DOZ1 1 L 636
DOZ3 1 L 635
DOZ1 3 L 632
DOZ3 3 W 638
DOZ2 2 L 636
DOZ3 2 W 640
DOZ2 2 L 638
DOZ3 2 L 636
DOZ2 2 L 634
DOZ3 2 L 632
DOZ1 6 L 626
DOZ2 6 W 638
DOZ2 2 L 636
DOZ3 2 L 634
DOZ1 6 L 628
DOZ3 6 W 640
DOZ2 1 L 639
DOZ3 1 L 638
DOZ2 3 L 635
DOZ3 3 W 641
08/08/2012
DOZ1 2 L 639
DOZ3 2 L 637
DOZ2 4 L 633
DOZ3 4 L 629
DOZ1 8 L 621
DOZ2 8 L 613
DOZ1 12 L 601
DOZ3 12 L 589
DOZ2 16 L 573
DOZ3 16 L 557
DOZ1 40 W 637
DOZ2 40 L 597
DOZ2 12 W 621
DOZ3 12 L 609
DOZ1 12 L 597
DOZ3 12 L 585
DOZ1 40 L 545
DOZ2 40 L 505
DOZ2 50 L 455
DOZ3 50 W 555
DOZ1 50 W 655
DOZ3 50 L 605
DOZ1 40 W 685
DOZ2 40 L 645
DOZ1 5 L 640
DOZ3 5 L 635
DOZ2 15 L 620
DOZ3 15 L 605
DOZ1 45 L 560
DOZ2 45 L 515
DOZ1 50 L 465
DOZ3 50 W 565
DOZ2 50 W 665
DOZ3 50 L 615
DOZ1 30 L 585
DOZ2 30 W 645
DOZ1 5 W 655
DOZ2 5 L 650
DOZ1 2 W 654
DOZ3 2 L 652
08/08/2012
DOZ1 3 W 658
DOZ2 3 L 655
DOZ1 1 L 654
DOZ3 1 W 656
DOZ1 2 W 660
DOZ2 2 L 658
DOZ1 2 W 662
DOZ2 2 L 660
08/08/2012
DOZ1 3 W 666
DOZ3 3 L 663
DOZ2 1 L 662
DOZ3 1 L 661
DOZ1 4 L 657
DOZ2 4 L 653
DOZ1 6 L 647
DOZ3 6 L 641
DOZ2 12 L 629
DOZ3 12 L 617
DOZ1 27 L 590
DOZ2 27 W 644
DOZ2 6 L 638
DOZ3 6 L 632
DOZ2 16 L 616
DOZ3 16 L 600
DOZ1 40 W 680
DOZ3 40 L 640
DOZ1 30 L 610
DOZ2 30 W 670
DOZ2 5 L 665
DOZ3 5 L 660
DOZ1 12 L 648
DOZ3 12 L 636
DOZ1 30 L 606
DOZ2 30 W 666
DOZ1 10 L 656
DOZ3 10 W 676
DOZ1 4 W 684
DOZ2 4 L 680
08/08/2012
DOZ1 5 L 675
DOZ3 5 L 670
DOZ1 10 W 690
DOZ2 10 L 680
DOZ1 5 W 690
DOZ3 5 L 685
DOZ1 2 L 683
DOZ2 2 W 687
DOZ2 3 L 684
DOZ3 3 L 681
DOZ1 10 W 701
DOZ3 10 L 691
DOZ1 2 L 689
DOZ3 2 W 693
DOZ1 2 W 697
DOZ2 2 L 695
DOZ1 2 L 693
DOZ3 2 W 697
DOZ2 3 L 694
DOZ3 3 W 700
DOZ1 2 L 698
DOZ2 2 L 696
DOZ1 5 L 691
DOZ2 5 W 701
08/08/2012
DOZ1 5 W 711
DOZ3 5 L 706
DOZ1 2 L 704
DOZ2 2 L 702
DOZ2 8 L 694
DOZ3 8 W 710
DOZ1 4 L 706
DOZ2 4 W 714
DOZ2 2 L 712
DOZ3 2 L 710
DOZ1 5 L 705
DOZ2 5 L 700
DOZ1 10 L 690
DOZ3 10 L 680
DOZ2 15 L 665
DOZ3 15 W 695
DOZ1 15 W 725
DOZ2 15 L 710
DOZ1 3 W 716
DOZ3 3 L 713
DOZ1 3 W 719
DOZ2 3 L 716
DOZ1 4 W 724
DOZ3 4 L 720
08/08/2012
DOZ1 3 L 717
DOZ3 3 L 714
DOZ1 6 L 708
DOZ2 6 W 720
DOZ1 4 W 728
DOZ3 4 L 724
DOZ2 2 W 728
DOZ3 2 L 726
DOZ1 4 L 722
DOZ3 4 L 718
DOZ2 8 L 710
DOZ3 8 L 702
DOZ1 20 L 682
DOZ2 20 W 722
DOZ1 8 W 738
DOZ3 8 L 730
DOZ2 3 L 727
DOZ3 3 W 733
DOZ1 7 L 726
DOZ2 7 W 740
08/08/2012
DOZ1 4 W 748
DOZ2 4 L 744
DOZ2 2 L 742
DOZ3 2 L 740
DOZ1 6 L 734
DOZ2 6 L 728
DOZ2 12 L 716
DOZ3 12 W 740
DOZ1 6 L 734
DOZ3 6 W 746
DOZ1 4 W 754
DOZ2 4 L 750
DOZ1 2 L 748
DOZ3 2 L 746
DOZ1 6 W 758
DOZ3 6 L 752
DOZ1 3 W 758
DOZ2 3 L 755
DOZ2 5 L 750
DOZ3 5 L 745
DOZ1 10 W 765
DOZ3 10 L 755
DOZ1 5 L 750
DOZ2 5 W 760
08/08/2012
DOZ1 4 L 756
DOZ3 4 L 752
DOZ2 8 L 744
DOZ3 8 W 760
DOZ1 5 L 755
DOZ3 5 L 750
DOZ1 10 L 740
DOZ2 10 L 730
DOZ2 15 L 715
DOZ3 15 W 745
DOZ1 20 L 725
DOZ3 20 L 705
DOZ1 40 L 665
DOZ3 40 W 745
DOZ2 20 L 725
DOZ3 20 W 765
DOZ1 5 L 760
DOZ3 5 W 770
DOZ1 3 L 767
DOZ2 3 W 773
DOZ2 2 L 771
DOZ3 2 W 775
DOZ1 5 L 770
DOZ2 5 W 780
08/08/2012
DOZ2 5 L 775
DOZ3 5 L 770
DOZ1 10 L 760
DOZ3 10 W 780
DOZ2 5 L 775
DOZ3 5 W 785
DOZ1 3 W 791
DOZ3 3 L 788
DOZ1 2 L 786
DOZ2 2 L 784
DOZ2 6 W 796
DOZ3 6 L 790
DOZ1 3 L 787
DOZ2 3 L 784
DOZ1 6 W 796
DOZ3 6 L 790
DOZ2 3 L 787
DOZ3 3 L 784
DOZ1 8 W 800
DOZ3 8 L 792
DOZ1 4 L 788
DOZ3 4 W 796
DOZ2 4 L 792
DOZ3 4 L 788
DOZ1 8 L 780
DOZ2 8 W 796
DOZ1 4 L 792
DOZ3 4 W 800
Good seesion today. DOUBLE MATCH is finally doing what I expect of it. I have the power base now to push it properly and not play tentatively at the wrong times. Its given me a nice increase of 180 points for the day. I got my play in early today. As I have a lot to do. Cheers.
:ooh: :ooh: :ooh:
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Aug 08, 02:50 AM 2012
Hello John
It seems that you changed your progression from 1,3,9,27 to other staking plans for double dozens.
How many games in a row did you win using 1,3,9,27 ? Congrats on your progress.
Regards
Hi Hutt. I won about 380 games with that progression. I am playing more loosely now. More instinctively because. A, I am playing DOUBLE MATCH which is a double dozen perecentage method. And B, I have a fairly strong BR. So I can stake big at the right times and not Have to be too careful. The bigger the bankroll the more confidence you have. So I will be aiming for bigger wins each session now. I will aim to break 4 figures by the close of play this friday.
Quote from: Bayes on Aug 08, 03:38 AM 2012
John,
There are couple of changes I want to make to the program, sorry to be a pain but it will actually make life a bit easier for you. Firstly, I need to change the "house limit" to 100 units. I thought I'd made it 100 u when I coded it, but for some reason it ended up at 50. Also, although it's a bit slow incrementing the stakes one u at time, I'll leave this the way it is - it's probably not a good idea to make it too easy to bet large stakes. ;)
Second, at the moment the results are saved to just one file which records all bets since you started, but it will be easier for you to post the ongoing results if I create a second file which only saves the results of the last session by date. By that I mean it will reset the file every time the date changes (rather than by session, which will mean you have to save the file every time you close and restart the program).
Also, another reason why I'm doing this is because at the moment you might accidentally change the main file when copying parts of it to post here, so it's probably better if you either don't open it at all or just open it for looking at the overall results.
Carry on as you are for the moment, I'll send you a pm when I've coded the changes.
Okay Bayes I will look out for it.
Bayes said:
"I've put quite a bit of effort into making sure that they can't cheat, or rather, not that they CAN'T cheat (I can't stop that) but that if they do, then I'll know about it."
I know you have, Bayes. And I totally appreciate it. I guess I'm being a bug.
But here's the deal...............
If JL is totally on the level, he will have done something truly noteworthy. He may deserve a place in history. We would not want him to achieve this lofty goal with a spot on his shirt, would we?
In fact, I suggest a urine test at the finish line to see if he's doping!!
Again, thanks to both of you.
Silly Sam (As John calls me.)
I use to think a 2 doz system is hard to run for long. I have today start test a method using two cols, which of course can be run on dozens. Got 200 unit plus today, so there may be system which can work. I will test it more and come back if it holds to 1000.
(I will not post it here!)
QuoteI will test it more and come back if it holds to 1000
If it does Ralph, start a new thread for it so this thread can remain on the JL Challenge
I've just realized that this method I'm using with the hash isn't such a good idea. ::)
You can easily generate a SHA-1 online, so if you wanted to cheat you could do this:
1. Find a line in the results file you want to change.
2. Generate the hash for it using the online generator
3. Search the hash file for the number generated in (2)
4. Go back to the results file and make the changes
5. Generate the hash for this new text using the online generator
6. replace the hash found in (3) for the new one generated in (5)
Job done. So now you have successfully modified the file and all the hash numbers will match the corresponding text!
Will then the salt be the same for both encrypted files?
Quote from: Bayes on Aug 09, 07:55 AM 2012
I've just realized that this method I'm using with the hash isn't such a good idea. ::)
You can easily generate a SHA-1 online, so if you wanted to cheat you could do this:
1. Find a line in the results file you want to change.
2. Generate the hash for it using the online generator
3. Search the hash file for the number generated in (2)
4. Go back to the results file and make the changes
5. Generate the hash for this new text using the online generator
6. replace the hash found in (3) for the new one generated in (5)
Job done. So now you have successfully modified the file and all the hash numbers will match the corresponding text!
Bayes
Your post begs the question: Is John very good at roulette or very good at doing the above? If I read your post correctly, the whole test
could be flawed. The verb is
could be, not
is, John.
Seriously, how will we ever know?
Sam
John,
you said you are betting with Double match on 2 doz's.
I ran over your results to find some clues of your betting system and i saw this
07/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 553 <-
DOZ1 1 L 552 <-
DOZ1 1 L 551 <-
DOZ1 1 L 550 <-
DOZ3 2 L 548
DOZ1 2 L 546
DOZ3 2 L 544
DOZ2 4 L 540
DOZ1 4 L 536
DOZ2 6 W 548
DOZ3 2 W 552
DOZ1 1 W 554
were you betting 4 times doz 1 seperatly here at the start ?
Sam,
The answer to both questions is "I don't know". When I get the security issues fixed, hopefully we'll find out if he's any good at roulette. ;)
I mentioned encrypting the file in an earlier post, but didn't actually do it because although the language has the facility, it's a little complicated. I thought I could use a hash function because the coding is easier, but obviously that's not secure enough. It's a learning curve for me, but interesting. I'll have to encrypt the file, that's the only way to be sure. BTW this isn't some toy algorithm I made up but an international standard (link:://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Encryption_Standard).
@ Ralph, not sure what you mean?
It is a random noise you can add, and it is common, which ensure the file can not be edited changed ,
rehashing whithout you will know about it.
I'm not saying John is unintelligent but I seriously doubt he has the knowledge to go tweaking hash flags. His BR is looking strong now and the 5k bankroll target....I think he will do it too :)
To everyone watching my progress. Bayes has just sent me the cheat proof software. And reset me back to 520 points. As I had a problem with my laptop and was unable to save a session. So now everyone can rest assured that the results will be honest and trustworthy. I will upload my current balance every couple of days to keep the interested informed. And once a week Bayes will verify my results.
CURRENT BALANCE 522 POINTS.
Well, Johnathon, you're harsh and quite insulting, but I'm pullin' for ya!
Sam
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Aug 10, 12:42 PM 2012
Well, Johnathon, you're harsh and quite insulting, but I'm pullin' for ya!
Sam
Thanks Sam
10/08/2012
DOZ2 2 L 518
DOZ3 2 W 522
10/08/2012
DOZ1 2 L 520
DOZ3 2 W 524
10/08/2012
DOZ1 2 W 528
DOZ2 2 L 526
10/08/2012
DOZ1 2 L 524
DOZ2 2 L 522
DOZ2 3 W 528
DOZ3 3 L 525
DOZ2 2 L 523
DOZ3 2 L 521
DOZ1 6 L 515
DOZ2 6 W 527
10/08/2012
DOZ1 3 W 533
DOZ2 3 L 530
10/08/2012
DOZ2 2 L 528
DOZ3 2 W 532
10/08/2012
DOZ1 2 L 530
DOZ3 2 W 534
10/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 533
DOZ2 1 W 535
DOZ2 1 L 534
DOZ3 1 L 533
DOZ1 3 W 539
DOZ3 3 L 536
10/08/2012
DOZ1 2 L 534
DOZ3 2 W 538
DOZ2 1 W 540
DOZ3 1 L 539
10/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 538
DOZ3 1 L 537
DOZ1 3 L 534
DOZ3 3 L 531
DOZ1 9 W 549
DOZ2 9 L 540
10/08/2012
DOZ2 3 W 546
DOZ3 3 L 543
10/08/2012
DOZ1 2 L 541
DOZ2 2 W 545
10/08/2012
DOZ1 2 W 549
DOZ2 2 L 547
10/08/2012
DOZ1 3 L 544
DOZ2 3 L 541
DOZ2 6 L 535
DOZ3 6 W 547
10/08/2012
DOZ1 3 W 553
DOZ2 3 L 550
10/08/2012
DOZ2 3 L 547
DOZ3 3 L 544
DOZ1 6 L 538
DOZ3 6 L 532
DOZ1 6 L 526
DOZ3 6 W 538
DOZ2 4 L 534
DOZ3 4 W 542
10/08/2012
DOZ1 3 L 539
DOZ3 3 L 536
DOZ1 6 W 548
DOZ2 6 L 542
DOZ1 3 L 539
DOZ2 3 W 545
10/08/2012
DOZ2 3 L 542
DOZ3 3 W 548
10/08/2012
DOZ2 3 L 545
DOZ3 3 W 551
10/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 550
DOZ3 1 W 552
10/08/2012
DOZ1 1 W 554
DOZ2 1 L 553
10/08/2012
DOZ2 1 L 552
DOZ3 1 W 554
10/08/2012
DOZ1 1 L 553
DOZ3 1 L 552
DOZ2 3 L 549
DOZ3 3 L 546
DOZ2 9 L 537
DOZ3 9 L 528
DOZ1 15 L 513
DOZ2 15 W 543
10/08/2012
DOZ2 5 W 553
DOZ3 5 L 548
10/08/2012
DOZ1 5 L 543
DOZ2 5 W 553
10/08/2012
DOZ1 2 W 557
DOZ2 2 L 555
Okay this is my first session playung the new superior software. Next update will be Sunday thanks.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Aug 10, 12:31 PM 2012
To everyone watching my progress. Bayes has just sent me the cheat proof software. And reset me back to 520 points. As I had a problem with my laptop and was unable to save a session. So now everyone can rest assured that the results will be honest and trustworthy. I will upload my current balance every couple of days to keep the interested informed. And once a week Bayes will verify my results.
CURRENT BALANCE 522 POINTS.
Has the date been updated? Today is the 10th but the results are from the 8th. Imo, if your trajectory over the next 300 units gain is about the same as the last run to 800+, then i am going to add these results to those.
JL's last results are from the 10th -> 10/08/2012
Can someone tell me what a z-score is? How is it worked out and what use is it?
In this chart i've added the latest results to the previous results because i don't think any of the previous results were tampered with.
Jesus...is this still going! LOL
What is this post actually trying to prove?
John is a liar
John isnt a liar
I think its lost its way
I really cant be arsed reading through all this again, so this may of been suggested but wouldnt this be good if it was a place we could go to and run our idea as an approved idea...like john is doing.like mabe a star rating.... 1 Bayes test Star may be " +20U in 50 spins, 10 Bayes stars may be " go order your Island in the Carribian"
So......
Turners Holy Grail F#ckin best system ever.....3 Bayes test stars.
Turners Street Gold Best Ever System......4 Bayes stars.
(They dont exist before you start getting all exiting)
@turnerfeck
Would you be willing to submit your best system(s) to the same test that JohnLegend and Skakus are taking? If not, why not? Let me guess;
1.) too busy making real money to bother with proving anything to anybody.
2.) don't believe any system can win long-term so not worth trying/proving.
3.) all of the above.
4.) none of the above.
5.) Other ___________________________________.
I consider Bayes RNG to be a valid test and a valuable contribution to this forum. If you don't let us know why.
Quote from: Still on Aug 11, 05:32 PM 2012
@turnerfeck
Would you be willing to submit your best system(s) to the same test that JohnLegend and Skakus are taking? If not, why not? Let me guess;
1.) too busy making real money to bother with proving anything to anybody.
2.) don't believe any system can win long-term so not worth trying/proving.
3.) all of the above.
4.) none of the above.
5.) Other ___________________________________.
I consider Bayes RNG to be a valid test and a valuable contribution to this forum. If you don't let us know why.
There you go...you havnt read anything I ever posted....
Listen...Ive platituded myself to death in this forum...and no one cares what I say. Im a 250+ poster so Im gonna just speak my mind from now on, just like everyone else does. I just did...read up.
Now you completly missed the point of my post by getting all jiggy cos I dared to say I thought this wasnt working. I dont care.
My point was this....(this is where you can switch off and miss my point again)
I think the Casinos arnt quaking in their boots over JLs attempt to show the world how he can conquer roulette.
What I do like is Bayes idea to have a test site to play against that people can see the results of.
Mabe bayes could automatically score the attempt...we could use it to get a score. A score people could see before they read.
wow.....look...turners "F*ckin Ace Holy Grail system" scored a 4 star in Bayes test.
Get it Still...or shall I type it all again?
Still
I'll go with number 1 and 5 both. Maybe I'm beating a dead horse, but why would a player who can win money want to prove it to a group by fun-betting?
I seem to be the only person who believes in screen-capture wmvs. While I would not reveal the placement of my bets, I can surely capture the E window and people can watch the total increase.
And decrease.......
Sam
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Aug 11, 11:07 PM 2012
Still
I'll go with number 1 and 5 both. Maybe I'm beating a dead horse, but why would a player who can win money want to prove it to a group by fun-betting?
If you recall, some people were calling John Legend out, saying things, doubting everything he is saying/doing. He likes to share what he finds and was getting flak. So Bayes made a proposal and JL stood up to back up what he was saying. Most of us agreed this is a valid method of proving something, even more than posting videos of some online play. Proving something here will give JL the right to speak with confidence (bragging rights) about things he is saying/doing...and hopefully silence critics who bog down the threads he starts. Why anybody else would do it is another question, but i give respect to Skakus for taking the challenge. If he does well, then he too ought to get some respect, especially if he decides to publish his method(s). Proving something here also benefits JL to the degree that he has more ways to make money than with just live wheels. He ought to be able to bet against RNGs in the future.
As for fun-betting, this test is probably not fun for either JL or Skakus. And in my opinion, any betting under a base unit of 1 euro is *for fun* anyway.
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Aug 11, 11:07 PM 2012I seem to be the only person who believes in screen-capture wmvs. While I would not reveal the placement of my bets, I can surely capture the E window and people can watch the total increase.
And decrease.......
Sam
Sam, JL is the epitome of positive forum contributors because he shares what he finds to be profitable. He might be mistaken, but his approach is as, or more scientific than most here on the forum. Obviously, i can't exactly say how much he holds back and does not share. But for a long time, he has been sharing things that he believes beat the casino and has posted some pretty impressive stats that even Bayes agrees can't be random. And now you are saying here that if you had a system you thought could win, you would not publish how you select your bets. Since Bayes RNG publishes your bet selections, you would not take this test, even though you normally use a base unit of a dime? I don't see the difference between a private dime and a publicly placed bet. For one thing, even though we see what Skakus is selecting, we still don't know exactly what his method is. Likewise with JL, if/when he uses a method we don't yet know about. So there's no reason for YOU to not use Bayes RNG to prove something if that's what you want to do. You don't want to because there's no money at stake? Again, base units of a dime are not money. As for the validity of screen capture wmvs, it is not a more valid way of logging results than what Bayes has set up. And your way would take us a lot of unnecessary time to look at the results, especially if it is a video. Watching a balance grow, whether by video or screen-capture tells us less, not more, than what Bayes RNG data tells us in the time it takes to load it into Excel and run stats/charts on it.
Now, as for me, i am tempted to take Bayes test. It would not be a waste of time for me because i am not betting any sized unit yet at all, largely because of the problems the gubmint has created for U.S. citizens. For another thing, i would not bet a single dime unless i thought i had reason to beat the wheel in the long-term. However, i need to believe in a system before i will spend precious time learning it and manually betting on it in any venue. I want to be clear, unless something offers the opportunity to win long-term, i do not consider it fun. Apparently there are people here who are happy to lose less. I just don't get that mentality.
What i am mainly asking of posters here is to be contributors, not concealers, nor complainers. Complainers and concealers slow down people like me from finding a system - if there is a system - that can beat the wheel long-term. I have come here with an open mind. I don't KNOW whether a system can beat the wheel or not. I come from a trading background with some reason to believe that a random walk can be beaten, despite books written to the contrary. Too many people consistently make money out of the randomness we call 'the market', either despite it's randomness, and/or because it is not not purely random like a roulette wheel.
I have spent far too much time in this forum with too little to show and my patience is running thin with certain kinds of posters. My attitude is get out of the way of people who are proving the impossible is not impossible. I am here because i would prefer to make money this way than the other ways i have in mind. Before i learn and test every system that is proposed, i want to see at least one system work long-term. One system, working long-term, suggests that there may be similar systems that could work. I have to sift through a lot of NOISE to get to this system, and still, it has not been proven to my complete satisfaction. I give respect first to those here who are working to prove something, like JL. I especially give respect to those who are actually sharing what they believe works, long-term, and not just things they are happy to lose less with. I am nearly ready to step out, and check back in but once a month or every quarter. Were it not for contributors like JL and Flat_Ino i would not be here at all.
So, bottom line, Sam, it's time for you to step up. You've been here many years. You've been the beneficiary of a lot of generosity. If you don't want to reveal (if you want to continue to conceal) what you think works long-term, then i encourage you to step up to Bayes RNG, because, in fact, it does NOT reveal your entire method of bet selection. It does reveal money management but so what?
You can continue to play for private dimes, or you can play for public credibility. I would rather see the latter.
Quote from: turnerfeck on Aug 11, 04:04 PM 2012
Jesus...is this still going! LoL
Yah that's the idea...to keep going until something is proved.
Quote from: turnerfeck on Aug 11, 04:04 PM 2012What is this post actually trying to prove?
John is a liar
John isnt a liar
My last chart proved that John's bottom line has been heading straight up since he apparently figured out how to handle Bayes RNG. It may not have been heading straight up long enough to prove to doubters whether or not he has been lying (or lucky) about past performances.
Quote from: turnerfeck on Aug 11, 04:04 PM 2012I think its lost its way
Let me get this straight. John Legend's chart is headed straight up, and you think this thread has lost it's way?
Quote from: turnerfeck on Aug 11, 04:04 PM 2012I really can't be arsed reading through all this again, so this may of been suggested but wouldnt this be good if it was a place we could go to and run our idea as an approved idea...like john is doing.like mabe a star rating.... 1 Bayes test Star may be " +20U in 50 spins, 10 Bayes stars may be " go order your Island in the Carribian"
A few pages back, a discussion began about what would be considered a win in the shortest amount of spins...now that valid statistics are rolling in. Maybe you didn't read it, but its somewhere in the range of 5000 to 10000 spins. Even then, the resulting statistics have to be well beyond standard deviation for random. It would not necessarily be related to units gained, or even units gained per spin because it might be possible to get away with bad money management for a while, but not for 5000-10000 spins.
If the ability to participate in this challenge depends on Bayes accommodations, then Bayes has his own sense of the number of brownie points needed to justify his time. He has already turned someone down because what he proposed would not prove anything. Likewise, if you can make 20U in 50 spins, it is up to Bayes if he wants to work to see more, but a sample that narrow is, imo, silly.
Quote from: turnerfeck on Aug 11, 04:04 PM 2012So......
Turners Holy Grail F#ckin best system ever.....3 Bayes test stars.
Turners Street Gold Best Ever System......4 Bayes stars.
(They don't exist before you start getting all exiting)
Do you want to participate or not? Then just ask Bayes! He will let you know if any of your systems have merit enough to be considered, and whether the amount of effort you are willing to spend testing them has any merit (hint: more than 50 spins). Once data starts rolling in, we will be able to determine, with Bayes help, what is beyond the bounds of random deviation, thus proving you have a valid, long-term winner. Till then, you've got nothing on JohnLegend and shouldn't be judging, publicly, whether or not he or this thread has lost his/its way. I might ask Steve to make a whole new section : Systems That Don't Actually Work, But Will Help You Lose Less. You could post your systems there, and let us decide for ourselves whether JohnLegend, Skakus, or anyone else is posting stats beyond extreme deviations from random.
Quote from: turnerfeck on Aug 11, 07:02 PM 2012
What I do like is Bayes idea to have a test site to play against that people can see the results of.
Mabe bayes could automatically score the attempt...we could use it to get a score. A score people could see before they read.
wow.....look...turners "F*ckin Ace Holy Grail system" scored a 4 star in Bayes test.
TF, I agree with you and this is what I have planned, but it's a lot of work. Not only that, this kind of thing has to be paid for by someone, and why should I be out of pocket? Maybe I could come to some arrangement with Steve to host it on the forum, or charge a nominal amount to pay for the hosting service.
@ Still, thanks for the support. This was intended to be a one-off for JL, and although I'm happy that Skakus has also taken up the challenge, I don't want more than that. With the current scheme I have in place, it would be too time-consuming for me to keep track of all the players. What's needed is something totally automated and online.
Hello Still
I think that you won't be able to find what you are looking for in this forum. There are some good systems posted here that could give you some profit but nothing is guaranteed to work long term. As to JL challenge even if he wins it it won't prove much to some people. It will prove that he could go from 300 to 5000 level. But the question will always linger if he could repeat that feat.
There were some systems posted on forums that were able to generate 5k or 10k units profit but nobody seems to be playing them. And Sam posted few systems here and tested a lot but never made any long term guarantees.
But i still appreciate the effort of all parties involved. ;D
Regards
Quote from: Bayes on Aug 12, 04:08 AM 2012
TF, I agree with you and this is what I have planned, but it's a lot of work. Not only that, this kind of thing has to be paid for by someone, and why should I be out of pocket? Maybe I could come to some arrangement with Steve to host it on the forum, or charge a nominal amount to pay for the hosting service.
Bayes,
Sorry....you know the ideas guys allways fall out with the budget guys. I totally appreciate what effort you have put in with this test program
There are automatic devices on the net already, called casinos, if you have confident in your play, why not use a casino. The stat pages should be good enough as reference.
I do not know exactly how it is played, but probably not 1,3,9,27,81....
A large bankroll of thousends will be needed.
Whats happen here is not impossible at all.
STILL....
what are you.?..JL's agent lol
Calm down for feck sake
I appreciate JL's input into this forum.
Quote from: Still on Aug 12, 04:01 AM 2012
Do you want to participate or not? Then just ask Bayes! He will let you know if any of your systems have merit enough to be considered, and whether the amount of effort you are willing to spend testing them has any merit (hint: more than 50 spins). Once data starts rolling in, we will be able to determine, with Bayes help, what is beyond the bounds of random deviation, thus proving you have a valid, long-term winner. Till then, you've got nothing on JohnLegend and shouldn't be judging, publicly, whether or not he or this thread has lost his/its way. I might ask Steve to make a whole new section : Systems That Don't Actually Work, But Will Help You Lose Less. You could post your systems there, and let us decide for ourselves whether JohnLegend, Skakus, or anyone else is posting stats beyond extreme deviations from random.
There is already software on the forum which can help you to decide whether your system has any merit, that wasn't really the main purpose of this challenge, but simply to allow JL to show us that all the bragging and amazing results he's been posting here isn't just hot air.
When (if) the online thing ever gets done, I can see a number of uses:
1. A simple online roulette game much like any online casino in fun mode.
2. A platform for roulette competitions.
3. An opportunity for "braggers" to show us how great they really are.
4. A chance for systems sellers to prove to us that their systems really do work as advertised.
Point (4) might be controversial. There isn't any section for sellers on this forum, unlike at VLS, but it might be worth thinking about if there was a way for them to demonstrate their claims.
A rare deviation is by definition rare, but happens anyhow more often than we think.
Every day on this planet, in all casinos land and online, its a hugde number of spins.
Most of them are in normal range of deviation, but still there are room for many rare outcomes.
We speak not often of the common outcomes, rather then it is something special.
Special for the eys, many rare events goes passed, as we do not look for them.
Any thousend spins are very unique.
I've got nothing to prove to anybody other than myself by doing this challenge. All I stand to benefit from it is to increase my knowledge base, and improve my game through focus and sustained effort.
Thanks Bayes for accommodating my challenge of your rng.
Thanks JL for stepping up and having a go.
Thanks Still and others for your contributions, efforts, and support.
Thanks to all the critics, skeptics, detractors, and naysayers for being true to your convictions.
:thumbsup:
Still
"You can continue to play for private dimes, or you can play for public credibility. I would rather see the latter."
I have no need for public credibility.
I once called myself the "Master Testicator", (the latter word being a pun on George W. Bush) because I feel I test fairly and completely and post failures as well as any "successes", if there are any! Because of that, I get things in my email that are marked "for your eyes only" so to speak. Many of them are worthless. You should have seen the email I got from a fellow once after I told him that!
So, yes, I have software, robots, systems and ideas in my files that I have been privileged to receive. And I don't publish them. One such is a bacarrat system a fellow wanted me to test on Dublin and Bet Voyager, as he feels no-zero roulette is the same as baccarat. This is a very good system. It took a dive two days ago and I dropped about 175 Euro, not dimes, and am in recovery.
AGAIN, THAT'S THE THING PEOPLE!! IT IS NOT WHEN OR IF THE RFH WILL COME, IT'S HOW YOU OVERCOME IT.
I have published four systems that I actually made money with and still can. I did last night. Again, I didn't say I'd run them through RX or some program to see if they worked--I said I cashed checks from casinos. I've walked out of casinos after using them with a profit in my pocket.
Believe it or don't. I couldn't muster up the energy to care less.
By the way, you don't have to watch an entire video. You can just fast forward and drop in from time to time. And are you so busy you would not spend a few minutes to learn a winning system.
Mores the pity!
Sam
Quote from: Bayes on Aug 12, 04:29 AM 2012
There is already software on the forum which can help you to decide whether your system has any merit, that wasn't really the main purpose of this challenge, but simply to allow JL to show us that all the bragging and amazing results he's been posting here isn't just hot air.
When (if) the online thing ever gets done, I can see a number of uses:
1. A simple online roulette game much like any online casino in fun mode. useful!
2. A platform for roulette competitions. I ran a chess club...the buggers always get bored halfway thro the comp.
3. An opportunity for "braggers" to show us how great they really are. Beautiful...will cut bragging down by 99% lol
4. A chance for systems sellers to prove to us that their systems really do work as advertised. Thats the coolest of the lot :-)
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Aug 12, 04:17 AM 2012
Hello Still
I think that you won't be able to find what you are looking for in this forum. There are some good systems posted here that could give you some profit but nothing is guaranteed to work long term. As to JL challenge even if he wins it it won't prove much to some people. It will prove that he could go from 300 to 5000 level. But the question will always linger if he could repeat that feat.
There were some systems posted on forums that were able to generate 5k or 10k units profit but nobody seems to be playing them. And Sam posted few systems here and tested a lot but never made any long term guarantees.
But i still appreciate the effort of all parties involved. ;D
Regards
Hutt once I can win I can do it over and over. How many times would I have to do it to satisfy you? Also to Sam I will do the live deal In the future. Its. Very. Very slow. That's the problem, dublin spin the ball 20 times an hour. It would take 2 years to show what I can show on here in 1 month.
Quote from: Still on Aug 11, 05:32 PM 2012
@turnerfeck
Would you be willing to submit your best system(s) to the same test that JohnLegend and Skakus are taking? If not, why not? Let me guess;
No.....Let ME guess....you are JohnLegend !!!
You need to phrase...type and syntax differently if you are going to Dopple.
I spent 10 years in chat rooms. I'm a text style expert.
Turnefeck, what is your goal? To defeat roulette or find out who is who? If John wins then better ask him how he does it. If he loses -- then what? This topic loses its way when it is not about roulette anymore. And who cares if someone uses a second nick as long as he does not use it for insulting people or scamming-spamming under different nicks.
Quote from: turnerfeck on Aug 12, 06:21 PM 2012
No.....Let ME guess....you are JohnLegend !!!
Negative.
Quote from: iggiv on Aug 12, 08:06 PM 2012
Turnefeck, what is your goal? To defeat roulette or find out who is who? If John wins then better ask him how he does it. If he loses -- then what? This topic loses its way when it is not about roulette anymore. And who cares if someone uses a second nick as long as he does not use it for insulting people or scamming-spamming under different nicks.
Iggiv, my goal in my post about sectors was to find out what people thought. Why didnt you comment on that. Whats your goal? In fact where are your systems?
If some one is pretending to be some one else its a con. You are allways quick to have a go at me. Why is that?
Quote from: turnerfeck on Aug 13, 02:42 AM 2012
Iggiv, my goal in my post about sectors was to find out what people thought. Why didn't you comment on that. what's your goal? In fact where are your systems?
If some one is pretending to be some one else its a con. You are allways quick to have a go at me. Why is that?
Turnerfeck I can assure you, Still and myself are two different people. I don't know why you think otherwise. This isnt a popularity contest, you sound a bit fed up and bitter why?
Quote from: Johnlegend on Aug 13, 08:42 AM 2012
Turnerfeck I can assure you, Still and myself are two different people. I don't know why you think otherwise. This isnt a popularity contest, you sound a bit fed up and bitter why?
Fair enough....please continue. (I think Still is in love with you...between you and me)
Quote from: turnerfeck on Aug 13, 09:10 AM 2012
Fair enough....please continue. (I think Still is in love with you...between you and me)
Come on that's a bit OTT. He is simply passionate about roulette and stats. Sharing ideas. He has enthused over Skakus work just as much. He is positive and upbeat that's all, besides I'm happily married. Lol...
Quote from: Johnlegend on Aug 13, 09:23 AM 2012
Come on that's a bit OTT. He is simply passionate about roulette and stats. Sharing ideas. He has enthused over Skakus work just as much. He is positive and upbeat that's all, besides I'm happily married. LoL...
me too..28 years.....anyhow...its a new dawn its a new day....
Continue!
Back on topic!! :sad2:
John how'd you fair on Sunday nights spins? 8)
Turfeck, i don't have "a go" on u. U just complained that this topic lost itself, then u start looking for "cons" and things like this. I just don't understand it. This topic was about JL game, not personal stuff. Why would he be a con? Did he offer something for sale? He plays without keeping secrets or asking for money. That's kinda weird to suspect him.
What are my systems? I don't have ones. I am trying to play with no exact systems, because patterns don't live for long. It is too complicated to be explained.
What is my goal here? To read about roulette and find some interesting ideas which i mostly find myself now, with no forum. But i am a mod here and sometimes i give here my opinion too. If u don't mind.
Quote from: iggiv on Aug 13, 08:19 PM 2012
Turfeck, i don't have "a go" on u. U just complained that this topic lost itself, then u start looking for "cons" and things like this. I just don't understand it. This topic was about JL game, not personal stuff. Why would he be a con? Did he offer something for sale? He plays without keeping secrets or asking for money. That's kinda weird to suspect him.
What are my systems? I don't have ones. I am trying to play with no exact systems, because patterns don't live for long. It is too complicated to be explained.
What is my goal here? To read about roulette and find some interesting ideas which i mostly find myself now, with no forum. But i am a mod here and sometimes i give here my opinion too. If u don't mind.
Well thats sorted then
thank u very much. I was afraid u were gonna tell me that i am JL and con too.
Quote from: iggiv on Aug 14, 06:04 AM 2012
thank u very much. I was afraid u were gonna tell me that i am JL and con too.
You Type totally different Iggiv......you cant be them.
Update
Skakus has found another way to cheat! ;D
It seems that if you run the program from inside the zip file, you're prompted to save the results, and if you choose "no", you can simply run the program over and over until you get the results you want and only then choose to save them. Obviously, this won't do, so the test has to be abandoned (there's no way I can fix the problem).
The only cheat-proof way is to have the results saved to a remote server, but as you know, we were getting errors with JL's web page. One thing that's worth trying is to wait until Skakus has finished his test, then give JL a copy of the software, since we know Skakus' results have been uploading faultlessly (unfortunately I don't have the original source code of Skakus' program). All I need to do is reset the bank and web page for JL.
Alternatively, wait until I've done the online game/testing platform, but it will take a while.
Quote from: Bayes on Aug 15, 04:33 AM 2012
Update
Skakus has found another way to cheat! ;D
Sorry JL/everyone.
I think far and away most interest is in JL's challenge so I don’t mind stepping down from the challenge and handing the original software over to JL if he agrees to revert back to uploading the results.
I’m rapidly closing in on a 3+ z-score so I consider myself victorious anyway. Besides, I can continue with the new software, you just won’t be able to trust my future results, pity.
So now I stop.
I have won 1000 units. my bankroll is a healthy 1300 units.
Bets 4269
W 2170
L 2099
+71
z-score 2.92
link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/s_test.html (link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/s_test.html)
Laid it on the line and done better than anyone I've ever seen do in one of these challenges. I'm happy with that result.
See you in the casino! :D
Thanks Skakus for being such a good sport, and an excellent result. :)
By the way, for the naysayers who say that Skakus' result is meaningless because there weren't enough bets made, or it could be a fluke etc, are wrong. True, a result of almost 3 standard deviations could occur by chance, but it's one thing to make thousands of bets and eventually hit a sequence where you get 3 STD; that would happen for ANYONE if they play long enough, but this was a ONE-OFF test, and as such the results are highly significant, statistically speaking.
Quote from: Skakus on Aug 15, 07:04 AM 2012
So now I stop.
I have won 1000 units. my bankroll is a healthy 1300 units.
Bets 4269
W 2170
L 2099
+71
z-score 2.92
link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/s_test.html (link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/s_test.html)
Laid it on the line and done better than anyone I've ever seen do in one of these challenges. I'm happy with that result.
See you in the casino! :D
Skakus thankyou. There's no way you would have lost that lead, so I consider you a success also. Now I have to match you and go the right side of 5000 points by years end hopefully. Also I like Bayes idea for an online play centre. And I've already told him I will front half the cost if and when he is ready to go for it. Thanks again Skakus for your goodwill. And very well done.
Quote from: turnerfeck on Aug 14, 06:08 AM 2012
You Type totally different Iggiv......you can't be them.
@turncoatfeck
I not JL. Me not typing same same JL. What thinking you this thing? Jesus!...on other hand, he be one with me and i wid him. What saying you at most even da tiniest my roulette brothers, saying you dat @ me. Put dat text in em sin-tax pipe and dat be smoke ya!
@Skakus
Way to go! Up +71 flat-betting after 4269+ bets is saying something. Should be down -100 or more. Did you ever repeat the kind of system+mm you used in your first run-up?
@JohnLegend
Looking forward to +5000. The count-up on Skakus' old page restarted at 520 and is up to 584 today. Is that you?
Quote from: Still on Aug 15, 02:49 PM 2012
@turncoatfeck
I not JL. Me not typing same same JL. What thinking you this thing? Jesus!...on other hand, he be one with me and i wid him. What saying you at most even da tiniest my roulette brothers, saying you dat @ me. Put dat text in em sin-tax pipe and dat be smoke ya!
@Skakus
Way to go! Up +71 flat-betting after 4269+ bets is saying something. Should be down -100 or more. Did you ever repeat the kind of system+mm you used in your first run-up?
@JohnLegend
Looking forward to +5000. The count-up on Skakus' old page restarted at 520 and is up to 584 today. Is that you?
Yes Still its me. Im using Skakus old sofware as hopefully there wont be any bugs in it for me either.
This chart is accumulative. JL has been set back a couple of times due to software issues. If you believe that there has been no hanky-panky, as i do, then this is where it stands. This does not accurately reflect the number of bets because the spreadsheet is counting the date lines where a new session starts as well as a few blank lines. Link here:
link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/s_test.html (link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/s_test.html)
JL data starts at 520. Earlier data is Skakus'.
QuotePut dat text in em sin-tax pipe and dat be smoke ya!
:LoL:
Quote from: Still on Aug 15, 03:40 PM 2012
This chart is accumulative. JL has been set back a couple of times due to software issues. If you believe that there has been no hanky-panky, as i do, then this is where it stands. This does not accurately reflect the number of bets because the spreadsheet is counting the date lines where a new session starts as well as a few blank lines. Link here:
link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/s_test.html (link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/s_test.html)
JL data starts at 520. Earlier data is Skakus'.
I will try to keep reaching for the stars Still. Had a great session today. After all the setbacks. I was actually at 1005 points. But had to sacrifice it and drop back to 520 with all the software changes. I am now at 700 points after a 180 point rise tonight. I was taken to the limit with FIVE once tonight. Its holding superbly. My experience with the ZONE. May have landed a grail like method in my lap. I am only using one trigger. With two triggers and a five step progression. I think its impregnable.
Because random (even more so than with matrix vertical 5) runs out of steam by the time it gets to 3 fives most of the time. I saw one 5 in all the years I've tested and played the ZONE. And even when I am stretched to the 4th step of the progression. Its usually not pure. By that I mean a zero was responsible for at least one of the losses.
Fingers crossed it looks like I will get the same reliability that Skakus had with this program.
Quote from: Still on Aug 15, 02:49 PM 2012
@turncoatfeck
I not JL. Me not typing same same JL. What thinking you this thing? Jesus!...on other hand, he be one with me and i wid him. What saying you at most even da tiniest my roulette brothers, saying you dat @ me. Put dat text in em sin-tax pipe and dat be smoke ya!
LoL....the old "type like a chinese shop keeper" routine to diguise your typing.
Its the oldest trick in the book.
Quote from: turnerfeck on Aug 15, 05:19 PM 2012
LoL....the old "type like a chinese shop keeper" routine to diguise your typing.
Its the oldest trick in the book.
Turnerfeck I cant believe you still think I am STILL. Come on its a new day its a new dawn lets live and work together in harmony on the forum.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Aug 15, 05:29 PM 2012
Turnerfeck I can't believe you still think I am STILL. Come on its a new day its a new dawn lets live and work together in harmony on the forum.
John...I'm joking for petes sake.....I don't think you are still LoL
as you can see in my recent post, I am capable of at least thinking outside the box if nothing else. I'm still trying to see roulette from a different angle. Its hard to break the old ways.
Your comments help thanks....
That was harmonious wasnt it :thumbsup:
Quote from: Still on Aug 15, 02:49 PM 2012
@Skakus
Way to go! Up +71 flat-betting after 4269+ bets is saying something. Should be down -100 or more. Did you ever repeat the kind of system+mm you used in your first run-up?
I used the same system(s) all the way through. The MM was basically the same right through too, except that I removed the stages and just maintained the one level of betting, I also settled on the stop-loss of -108 units at some point. Towards the end I was starting sessions with any extra chips won or saved from the previous session. I was and still am tweaking both the selection method and the MM but it's close to water tight now I think.
Quote from: turnerfeck on Aug 15, 05:39 PM 2012
John...I'm joking for petes sake.....I don't think you are still LoL
as you can see in my recent post, I am capable of at least thinking outside the box if nothing else. I'm still trying to see roulette from a different angle. Its hard to break the old ways.
Your comments help thanks....
That was harmonious wasn't it :thumbsup:
that's a paradox here. JL is still JL, but Still is still not JL.
Or should i say JL is still not Still but Still is still Still
I am really confused.
08/15/2012 DOZ1 2 L 590 DOZ2 2 L 588 DOZ1 4 L 584 DOZ3 4 L 580 DOZ2 12 L 568 DOZ3 12 L 556 DOZ1 36 L 520 DOZ2 36 L 484 DOZ1 36 L 448 DOZ2 36 W 520 DOZ2 50 W 620 DOZ3 50 L 570 DOZ1 10 L 560 DOZ2 10 W 580
08/15/2012 DOZ1 8 L 572 DOZ3 8 W 588
08/15/2012 DOZ1 4 L 584 DOZ2 4 W 592
Hello John
Very gutsy betting to get back to level. ;D Betting 100u.
I'm curious what your next bet would be if you lost that 100u bet.
I'm becoming a believer.
Regards
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Aug 15, 11:43 PM 2012
08/15/2012 DOZ1 2 L 590 DOZ2 2 L 588 DOZ1 4 L 584 DOZ3 4 L 580 DOZ2 12 L 568 DOZ3 12 L 556 DOZ1 36 L 520 DOZ2 36 L 484 DOZ1 36 L 448 DOZ2 36 W 520 DOZ2 50 W 620 DOZ3 50 L 570 DOZ1 10 L 560 DOZ2 10 W 580
08/15/2012 DOZ1 8 L 572 DOZ3 8 W 588
08/15/2012 DOZ1 4 L 584 DOZ2 4 W 592
Hello John
Very gutsy betting to get back to level. ;D Betting 100u.
I'm curious what your next bet would be if you lost that 100u bet.
I'm becoming a believer.
Regards
Hello Hutt the next step would be a cup of tea and lick my wounds. You won't see me betting like that for some time again. I was cutting. Corners to try and get back up there. Relying on the solid strikerate of 5. I'm on the standard 80 unit four step progression now until I lose it.
I think 5 as I play it could have a strikerate somewhere in the region of 400/1 longterm. The way id like to play it with a 242 unit five step progression. It might be a grail. Ive only seen one 5. I've never seen a 6. But I'm limited to 100 units max so I can't play the 5th step.
Anyhow let's see what the longterm will give me for 80 units and four steps.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Aug 16, 01:36 AM 2012
Hello Hutt the next step would be a cup of tea and lick my wounds. You won't see me betting like that for some time again. I was cutting. Corners to try and get back up there. Relying on the solid strikerate of 5. I'm on the standard 80 unit four step progression now until I lose it.
I think 5 as I play it could have a strikerate somewhere in the region of 400/1 longterm. The way id like to play it with a 242 unit five step progression. It might be a grail. I've only seen one 5. I've never seen a 6. But I'm limited to 100 units max so I can't play the 5th step.
Anyhow let's see what the longterm will give me for 80 units and four steps.
Hehe John
I did not think you would continue this way :D But if you are so confident of your strike rate then maybe adjust your progression so you would win in first 3 steps and break even on 4th step and lose a bit on the last one. Straight Marty for DZ is a bit scary ;D
But its your challenge so good luck.
Regards
Quote from: Bayes on Aug 15, 07:32 AM 2012
Thanks Skakus for being such a good sport, and an excellent result. :)
Thanks Bayes.
I'll keep playing with the encrypted version for some time to come. I want 4 standard deviations at least! :P
Quote from: iggiv on Aug 15, 10:13 PM 2012
that's a paradox here. JL is still JL, but Still is still not JL.
Or should i say JL is still not Still but Still is still Still
I am really confused.
It cant be a paradox because it isnt wholly provable if what i said was true or false.due to the lack of proof it isnt self reference, infinite regress or a circular definition ;-)
QuoteThanks Skakus for being such a good sport, and an excellent result.
Yes well done Danny, very good run, good luck at hitting the 4 SD
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Aug 16, 02:23 AM 2012
Hehe John
I did not think you would continue this way :D But if you are so confident of your strike rate then maybe adjust your progression so you would win in first 3 steps and break even on 4th step and lose a bit on the last one. Straight Marty for DZ is a bit scary ;D
But its your challenge so good luck.
Regards
Hello Hutt yes, I have a few staking ideas in mind. Im trying to find out how good it is first. I havent lost yet. Overall I'm 490/0. If I get up to say 1500 points. I may start waiting for TWO triggers then enter play using 5--15--45. So it makes the wait worthwhile. And I will track both. COLUMNS and DOZENS for faster turnover. Let's see how it goes over the first 1200 games.
**** in the region of 400/1 longterm.****
John
Some clarification is in order here. Are you saying you're betting an even chance, be it red/black---whatever---and you have a strike rate somewhere in the neighborhood of 400 to 1?
You're saying--for example--that when certain circumstances present themselves--you will win your EC bet at a rate near 400 to 1?
A simple, straight answer would be most appreciated.
Sam
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Aug 16, 09:34 AM 2012
**** in the region of 400/1 longterm.****
John
Some clarification is in order here. Are you saying you're betting an even chance, be it red/black---whatever---and you have a strike rate somewhere in the neighborhood of 400 to 1?
You're saying--for example--that when certain circumstances present themselves--you will win your EC bet at a rate near 400 to 1?
A simple, straight answer would be most appreciated.
Sam
Hello Sam, I'm playing. Columns and dozens. What I'm saying is my 80 unit four step progression could survive 400 times to every loss. At present I'm 490/0. Obviously the win loss gaps can vary. I might win 600 times then lose twice in the next 200 games. Hope that anwsers your queerie.
****** your queerie.********
I'll have you know, I'm straight as an arrow!!
But thanks for the answer. That clears it up.
Sam
Quote from: Skakus on Aug 15, 05:39 AM 2012
Sorry JL/everyone.
I think far and away most interest is in JL's challenge so I don’t mind stepping down from the challenge and handing the original software over to JL if he agrees to revert back to uploading the results.
I’m rapidly closing in on a 3+ z-score so I consider myself victorious anyway. Besides, I can continue with the new software, you just won’t be able to trust my future results, pity.
can someone please tell me what a z-score is? :-\
Quote from: subby on Aug 16, 06:08 PM 2012
can someone please tell me what a z-score is? :-\
link:://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_score (link:://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_score)
thanks but what sort of real life info does it show? That link was really technical for me to understand lol :sad2:
subby,
This link explains it better for roulette.
link:://vlsroulette.com/index.php?topic=13193.0 (link:://vlsroulette.com/index.php?topic=13193.0)
Cheers.
thanks man,,,,any explanation on your funky d'alembert?
Progress update. I have now trebled the starting BR of 300 units. And my balance stands at 921 points. For those interested. I am swapping between three methods at the moment. As I have now reached what I call the comfort zone. It should be academic from here on to reach 5000 points. The only question is how long it will take.
I am using the ZONE. FIVE and DIVIDE and CONQUER. At the moment. From time to time I will bring in other methods like TRILOGY and PATTERN BREAKER. To add a bit of variety. You can see my results at the link STILL has provided on page 36. Many thanks.
Update.
Gives new meaning to the term "up"-date.
[attachimg=1]
Quite impressive.
Does anyone see the big "IF" in the last couple of posts?
Sam
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Aug 18, 10:55 PM 2012
Quite impressive.
Does anyone see the big "IF" in the last couple of posts?
Sam
Hi Sam. How do you mean?
John
You're using four systems. If a person tried to duplicate your results, they would not know when to use what system.
If you wanted to be crass, you could say, "Oh, well, in that case you should have used PATTERN BREAKER."
To truly test a system, one must have exact rules (or it's not a "system") and follow the exact progression with the exact amount of spins. Can't do ten spins and call it a winner.
Sam
Progress update. I have had a great session today and have quadruppled the starting BR OF 300 POINTS. Now standing at 1225 points. When you have a strong BR under you, it gives you more confidence to stake higher to speed recovery. Which is what I had to do today. Going to the max a few times. I mixed it up today playing some E/C methods like PATTERN 4 and PATTERN BREAKER.
I wanted to get to a nice level as I will be travelling around a lot next week so won't be able to play as much. Its nice to finally be in Skakus territory after struggling down the bottom for the first 3 weeks.
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Aug 19, 09:58 AM 2012
John
You're using four systems. If a person tried to duplicate your results, they would not know when to use what system.
If you wanted to be crass, you could say, "Oh, well, in that case you should have used PATTERN BREAKER."
To truly test a system, one must have exact rules (or it's not a "system") and follow the exact progression with the exact amount of spins. Can't do ten spins and call it a winner.
Sam
Sam I play Hit and Run so never stay on one method too long. Money management is flexible for me. This is the human factor I have always talked about. This is where it comes in. You are betting money to make money. If its always too rigid it will never work. I will tell you that clear. Unless I am using a method like 5, which has a powerful strikerate. I can then use the classic 4 step progression with confidence.
With Pattern breaker, Pattern 4 and Divide and Conquer. They are fast turnover methods with low buy ins. Where you trade a lower strike rate. You must have something that makes them worthwhile. That something is the rarity of DOUBLE LOSSES. that's where you know you can take up the staking to recover a lost game quickly. In essence. PATTERN BREAKER and DIVIDE AND CONQUER. are money management methods. They have a consistency on the second attack.
Whereas a method like 5, can win several 100 times in a row. I am now over 600 without loss. I can systematically bet a fixed progression on that all day. I can play one method at a time. But I usually play 2 or three.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Aug 19, 10:09 AM 2012
Sam I play Hit and Run so never stay on one method too long. Money management is flexible for me. This is the human factor I have always talked about. This is where it comes in. You are betting money to make money. If its always too rigid it will never work. I will tell you that clear. Unless I am using a method like 5, which has a powerful strikerate. I can then use the classic 4 step progression with confidence.
With Pattern breaker, Pattern 4 and Divide and Conquer. They are fast turnover methods with low buy ins. Where you trade a lower strike rate. You must have something that makes them worthwhile. That something is the rarity of DOUBLE LOSSES. that's where you know you can take up the staking to recover a lost game quickly. In essence. PATTERN BREAKER and DIVIDE AND CONQUER. are money management methods. They have a consistency on the second attack.
Whereas a method like 5, can win several 100 times in a row. I am now over 600 without loss. I can systematically bet a fixed progression on that all day. I can play one method at a time. But I usually play 2 or three.
JL, You knew I would have to add to your post...lol... as I am a huge fan of your appraoch to the game. Its not just your methods that I support, but its really your mental appraoch and discipline that sets you apart from many others and aslo your understanding of randomness. Like you, I coninue to play P4, Divide & Conquer, Code 4 and a few others. All those methods are extremely solid! Additionaly, you are absolutely correct about money management as it relates to the rarity of double losses. I recently had 2 first round losses while playing P4 but had no double loss to follow and made a full recovery. Remember, I have 5 unit minimums and can only play live and so my point is that those losses could have really rattled my appraoch/confidence. Its so important to stay disciplined and unfazed by little blips like this and if you can stay disciplined mentally and true to your game plan, success is the only possible outcome.
You mentioned Method 5? Is that what you are working on now? As always, look forward to hearing more from you and all the others! Thank you from your contributions!!
Quote from: Chauncy47 on Aug 19, 11:49 AM 2012
JL, You knew I would have to add to your post...LoL... as I am a huge fan of your appraoch to the game. Its not just your methods that I support, but its really your mental appraoch and discipline that sets you apart from many others and aslo your understanding of randomness. Like you, I coninue to play P4, Divide & Conquer, Code 4 and a few others. All those methods are extremely solid! Additionaly, you are absolutely correct about money management as it relates to the rarity of double losses. I recently had 2 first round losses while playing P4 but had no double loss to follow and made a full recovery. Remember, I have 5 unit minimums and can only play live and so my point is that those losses could have really rattled my appraoch/confidence. Its so important to stay disciplined and unfazed by little blips like this and if you can stay disciplined mentally and true to your game plan, success is the only possible outcome.
You mentioned Method 5? Is that what you are working on now? As always, look forward to hearing more from you and all the others! Thank you from your contributions!!
Hello Chauncy good to hear from you. Yes the right state of mind is important. Yes five is the method I've been using a lot lately. It works well and has helped me get to four figures. I will share it soon. All the best.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Aug 19, 10:09 AM 2012
.....
Money management is flexible for me. This is the human factor I have always talked about. This is where it comes in.
.........
------------------
oh, it seems i've been tuned in to the wrong channel all this time....i thought it was patience and discipline...humm ok....great job nevertheless JL if anything it’s at least encouraging that it can be done on the long run vundarosa
John, John, John..................
You're a smart fellow. You know the "human factor" is not part of a system. That's intuition or a G.U.T. feeling or Voodoo or whatever.
Just when I have hope in you, I am tossed a curve ball.
Look at that little "Surround" system MOP posted. Hard and fast rules!! Could be programed into a bot. Human factor cannot be.
Sam
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Aug 20, 10:51 PM 2012
John, John, John..................
You're a smart fellow. You know the "human factor" is not part of a system. That's intuition or a G.U.T. feeling or Voodoo or whatever.
Just when I have hope in you, I am tossed a curve ball.
Look at that little "Surround" system MOP posted. Hard and fast rules!! Could be programed into a bot. Human factor cannot be.
Sam
Sam Now you know. Its not about following rules all the time. The only criteria set in stone is how I arrive at my bet selection. How I stake it for a low turnover merhod has to be flexible.
I can play rigidly all the way up to 5000 Poimts and beyond. That's no problem. But if the method had no strong points. No amount of MM can help it anyway. You know that already.
John
When this test started, I assumed--maybe incorrectly--that any person who followed the "rules" would be able to duplicate the results. Now, with the "human factor" figure in, that is not so.
Too bad; so sad!
Sam
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Aug 21, 11:45 AM 2012
John
When this test started, I assumed--maybe incorrectly--that any person who followed the "rules" would be pable to duplicate the results. Now, with the "human factor" figure in, that is not so.
Too bad; so sad!
Sam
Sam you have a way of over dramatizing things. Anyone could win doing what I do.
The only difference as I already mentioned is for methods like Pattern Breaker and Divide and conquer. You attack the game after a loss more heavily.
With Five you can stake 1-3-9-27 for ever and still turn a handsome profit because the strikerate is strong.
This is nothing earth shattering its the way I've always played. And always made profit. I'm showing you how I do it. Whether you want to learn from my example or not is entirely up to you. The bottom line is you know now how and why I succeed.
Johnathon
I'd love to learn if you would....ever say anything!! ^-^
Samster
EDIT: Take a break, John. Get a brew and watch my movies posted today. I spell out in exact detail what I'm doing. Nothing left to the imagination.
I have to side with JL on the "Human Factor" I have observed how the "human factor" plays a role in the game from both from sides of the table. I support his Hit & Run style and they are extremely solid methods. It is true that those methods aren't for everyone and not everyone is wired mentally to play it the same way JL plays it. My observations come from watching people play night after night as I can only play live at casinos here in the USA. So I have the opportunity to observe how the human factor/emotion effects the outcome of a players success or failure for that game or night. From time to time(very rare), I encounter what is called a bad streak, but look at it this way when it occurs: Every Friday I get a paycheck ....but in order to get it, I have to drive to work everyday and at some point I have to put gas in my car. My point is that I have to spend a little money in gas but the reward at the end of the week is so worth it. I look at "bad streaks" the same way. Every once in a while I have to give back a little to randomness, but its worth it at the end of the month. Using JL's methods, style, mental approach and discipline, works very well for him and I am grateful it works for me and for some others I know. However, I will share that its not for everyone and that doesn't make it right or wrong ... it just means that it works for him and possibly some players too. There are winning methods all over this forum and others ... but until someone comes up with a winning method that wins 100% of the time, the human factor will play a role in the outcome. I have played his method(s) for over 6 months now and the results are extremely solid. I will continue to play this way and will always look for ways to improve. I am much more of an observer in this forum than I am a participant and just wanted to offer a different opinion. I have an offer for JL but will have to come back tomorrow as I need to run. JL, keep up the good work and I appreciate your contribution to the forum as I do everyone elses contribution.
To Anyone.........
Other than "Know when to hold 'em; Know when to fold 'em." what is the human factor?
1. Nerves of steel?
2. Ability to stick to a plan?
3. Avoiding distractions?
Or is it just a G.U.T. feeling?
Sam
Hello John!
Can you explain about your method FIVE, so will be better if we start testing too?
Thanks for your effort.
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Aug 21, 10:16 PM 2012
To Anyone.........
Other than "Know when to hold 'em; Know when to fold 'em." what is the human factor?
1. Nerves of steel?
2. Ability to stick to a plan?
3. Avoiding distractions?
Or is it just a G.U.T. feeling?
Sam
--------------
wat it is i dunno....?! but as far as i'm concerned i thought the challange began because no one could replicate the results JL had playing stricktly by the rules he posted...he stressed about patience and discipline.....now he comes in talking about the human factor.....to me this test has lost merit on the grounds it started.......however the results are encouraging as one thing it shows is that its possible to keep that BR growing even after a bad start.....if you're lucky enough <cough cough>, err, i mean, if you are well tuned in to the *human factor*......
vundarosa
Quote from: vundarosa on Aug 22, 12:30 AM 2012
--------------
wat it is i dunno....?! but as far as i'm concerned i thought the challange began because no one could replicate the results JL had playing stricktly by the rules he posted...he stressed about patience and discipline.....now he comes in talking about the human factor.....to me this test has lost merit on the grounds it started.......however the results are encouraging as one thing it shows is that its possible to keep that BR growing even after a bad start.....if you're lucky enough <cough cough>, err, i mean, if you are well tuned in to the *human factor*......
vundarosa
Its always human factor unless you use a bot and go to sleep. ;D Real life betting is a completely different thing. You think twice before you put 200 euros on 2 dozens but sometimes you need to take chances. They are few tools that evaluate your system like Van Keelen test, Kelly criterion or z score. But if your system or betting strategy gets excellent score (like z score of 5) in large number of spins it does not mean that it will perform as well in a next set of spins. If you do 1000 bets on Ec's flat betting and make 100u your z score will be massive but in the next 1000 bets you might end up with -5. ;D So you can read between the lines about my opinion about any challenge here.
Quote from: vundarosa on Aug 22, 12:30 AM 2012
--------------
wat it is i dunno....?! but as far as i'm concerned i thought the challange began because no one could replicate the results JL had playing stricktly by the rules he posted...he stressed about patience and discipline.....now he comes in talking about the human factor.....to me this test has lost merit on the grounds it started.......however the results are encouraging as one thing it shows is that its possible to keep that BR growing even after a bad start.....if you're lucky enough <cough cough>, err, i mean, if you are well tuned in to the *human factor*......
vundarosa
Stop over complicating things. The human factor simply means you respond to your results. And it only applies to low buy in methods. Like I keep saying, a method like FIVE can succeed at one staking level. Sam has a bias towards his screenshot testing. My question is how long would it take to test a method properly on there? When you consider they spin 20 times an hour.
People expect to be presented method on a platter here but if somebody delivers here using few methods at once which in my opinion is a smart thing to do i dont see any problem.
And number of spins is also of course the factor.
Quote from: donik7777 on Aug 21, 10:28 PM 2012
Hello John!
Can you explain about your method FIVE, so will be better if we start testing too?
Thanks for your effort.
I will explain it once I hit 2000 points.
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Aug 22, 12:56 AM 2012
If you do 1000 bets on ECs flat betting and make 100u your z score will be massive but in the next 1000 bets you might end up with -5.
What about a steadily rising z-score after 5000 spins? What about 10,000? What about 50,000?
How many spins would you need before you can take it to the bank? :question:
Quote from: Skakus on Aug 22, 01:26 AM 2012
What about a steadily rising z-score after 5000 spins? What about 10,000? What about 50,000?
How many spins would you need before you can take it to the bank? :question:
Skakus its irrelevant how many spins. Some suggest 50000 spins if you flat bet and 0.5M if you use progression. If you have excellent score and profit after 5k just play it. Some people will always tell you that they saw a system tank after 5k after it performed flawlessly before but what's a point. ;D
There is never enough testing to be done. What i do if possible is to look at the graph if its coded and analyze it by breaking down into real life sessions. Otherwise some paper and pen and few sessions to get an idea. But I'm not an expert here. :girl_to:
You just hope to be dealt good set of number that fits your betting strategy if it shows some promise. And you wont see a steady rise in your score over large number of spins hehe...
Regards
-
Is there any update how many won units and lost units with this challenge.
Is JL now playing with the casinos money and not hes own money.
That should be every ones goal stop risking there own money and let the casinos money win money for us.
link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/s_test.html (link:://:.gigabean.co.uk/s_test.html)
he's at 1200 + now, so as far that i know he already plays with casino money
-
That sound cool - nice ...
Quote from: Johnlegend on Aug 22, 01:15 AM 2012
Stop over complicating things. The human factor simply means you respond to your results. And it only applies to low buy in methods. Like I keep saying, a method like FIVE can succeed at one staking level. Sam has a bias towards his screenshot testing. My question is how long would it take to test a method properly on there? When you consider they spin 20 times an hour.
--------------
JL i think you sidestep the real issue i pointed out....but no worries....its all clear now to me at least....better to be lucky than to be smart......ciao
vundarosa
Quote from: vundarosa on Aug 22, 04:37 AM 2012
--------------
JL i think you sidestep the real issue i pointed out....but no worries....its all clear now to me at least....better to be lucky than to be smart......ciao
vundarosa
Better to win than to lose. I havent been able to play this week as I'm out of town. I will be back
tomorrow evening and will resume.my play.
Maybe we should define a "system". Anyone?
QuoteMaybe we should define a "system". Anyone?
A system is something that will eventually be caught up by random which = the player feeling cheated, robbed, mugged, raped, violated etc etc
A method on the otherhand is a style of play that relies on what's happening currently from the RNG (not real wheels as they are random) RNG's have a good tendency of producing the same happenings at the same intervals over time, understanding these happenings is key, but even then the gaps between these happenings can vary, a lot.
A system is a laid-out set of rules by which we play. There is no wiggle room; no place for "human intervention". A bot could play it as well as a human. It can have a stop-loss and a profit goal. It can have a trailing loss.
The most simple system:
When you see five of anything in a row, bet for the opposite. Double you bet and keep betting until 1, you go broke or 2, you hit the table limit. This was invented by a guy named Martin Gayle. Yes, there is a chance it will lose!
Now that was TwoCat humor, but it's true. That is a system.
I had hoped Johnlegend would post a set of hard-and-fast rules as he said he would. And with those rules, we would all make a few skins.
"Human intervention", no matter how valuable, is not part of a system.
DISCLAIMER: The above is only my opinion; I have not been up the mountain!
TwoCat
Quote from: superman on Aug 22, 09:22 AM 2012
A system is something that will eventually be caught up by random which = the player feeling cheated, robbed, mugged, raped, violated etc etc
A method on the otherhand is a style of play that relies on what's happening currently from the RNG (not real wheels as they are random) RNG's have a good tendency of producing the same happenings at the same intervals over time, understanding these happenings is key, but even then the gaps between these happenings can vary, a lot.
I think Superman has summed it up pretty well. That said, if you find a system that is so strong. It can beat random several hundred to one. You can go Into auto pilot and just watch it collect profit. That's what I have with FIVE. Ive only identified one loss. In 3500 betting oppurtunities. And it took a zero to do that.
Overall it cannot lose. It came to mind while playing the Zone. You have to wait for random. But its turnover is faster than MV5. The only thing I can compare to it.
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Aug 22, 10:28 AM 2012
This was invented by a guy named Martin Gayle.
With all due respect to that man of yours Martin Gayle whoever he is...
Martingale is English for
martegal (French dialiect word meaning
inhabitant of Martigues;
Martigues is - or was - a village in France). The oldest meaning of martingale seems to be is a piece of tack used on horses to control head carriage. This meaning is, at least, the best known one, but another meaning is more important for us: martingale is a betting strategy. The gambler doubles his bet after every loss, so that the first win would recover all previous losses plus win a profit equal to the original stake. Traders give this name to all related strategies, as well. Mathematicians, besides, use the term of martingale to name a stochastic process in which the conditional expectation of the next value, given the current and preceding values, is the current value. It is a kind of "fair game" where nobody wins and nobody loses. As to that French village, Martigues, its inhabitants were considered to be eccentric and probably venturesome. Anyway, this multitude of meanings is sometimes the reason why some people use it in a wrong way.
Cheers mr. TCS
Drazen
QuoteI had hoped Johnlegend would post a set of hard-and-fast rules as he said he would
Me too Sam, this whole test/challenge was started as JL said he had the ONE system that would kill RNG day and night, so in a real world he has failed the challenge. The fact that the challenge has now morphed into the use of multiple systems is irrelevent to the initial reasoning behind the challenge, it's now simply to see if he, the person, can beat the RNG using whatever system for whatever duration he wants, as hit n run is now also in the mix.
Quote from: superman on Aug 22, 10:40 AM 2012
Me too Sam, this whole test/challenge was started as JL said he had the ONE system that would kill RNG day and night, so in a real world he has failed the challenge. The fact that the challenge has now morphed into the use of multiple systems is irrelevent to the initial reasoning behind the challenge, it's now simply to see if he, the person, can beat the RNG using whatever system for whatever duration he wants, as hit n run is now also in the mix.
Well this is what i meant when i said that the thread has lost its way....but i got my head chewed off for it :yawn:
" That's what I have with FIVE. I've only identified one loss. In 3500 betting opportunities. And it took a zero to do that."
So, John, the FIVE is pretty salty!!
Can I get an unequivocal promise from you that you will post this system when you have reached 5,000--as you have said?
Sam
Hit and run? He still seems to hit, lets wait for the run.
Sam,
In Reply 574 on previous page John says he will tell it at 2000 instead of 5000
You're right! I don't know 2000 from 5000!!
But that's good news. We should be getting the system in nothing flat!
Sam
I think what JohnLegend is doing is great. He does not have to do this at all, could just spend this time playing. Instead he feels confident enough to play his style of roulette on a RNG and be successful in a friendly challenge. Not only that but he will show us the way if he is indeed successful. In my book that is a nice person. Remember nobody is perfect and we all slip up at times with things we say and do.
I don't care how JL wins on the RNG, its all good :)
Thanks JL and only wish everyone the best.
I AGREE with the above !!!!
All the VERY best of LUCK to EVERYONE who has a POSITIVE attitude of mind within this forum.
Dino.
AMK
I'll give John one kudo! If I could make money like he does, I'd be out making it. He must have a gregarious heart.
Sam
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Aug 22, 03:39 PM 2012
AMK
I'll give John one kudo! If I could make money like he does, I'd be out making it. He must have a gregarious heart.
Sam
Sam I make money, when I'm through with this challenge I will take a look at Dublinet. I don't know it well, but I know its a real casino. And slow like a real Casino.
I've got used to faster turnover play. What you guys have to keep In mind, is neither Skakus or myself would be at our current levels if we had done this on a live wheel. Bayes Rng is the fastest thing you can get.
You can condense two weeks play into two hours.
Quote from: superman on Aug 22, 10:40 AM 2012
Me too Sam, this whole test/challenge was started as JL said he had the ONE system that would kill RNG day and night, so in a real world he has failed the challenge. The fact that the challenge has now morphed into the use of multiple systems is irrelevent to the initial reasoning behind the challenge, it's now simply to see if he, the person, can beat the RNG using whatever system for whatever duration he wants, as hit n run is now also in the mix.
Superman I've got the one system that can beat anything day and night. I got it through sheer determination not to be defeated. I had another method that can beat Ladbrokes, but it wasn't as good on here. Now I have Thee method. The Zone which you think the world of, has layed the golden goose. Be happy, losing days are over for any who stick with FIVE. Hutt thinks fluke. Ill go how ever far any of you want.
Until even the most ardent pessimist will know, this games over if enough ever played Five.
I found "The Bone", but I can't find "The Zone". Could anyone link me or post the rules?
.
Can't find The Zone at the moment. I must admit that it has been a longtime since I saw it last or its origins.
Its out there :)
Thanks for looking!
Sam . . . try this, it may be the Zone you are looking for. don't forget to bookmark it (he he)
Nick
link:://vlsroulette.com/index.php?topic=16103.0 (link:://vlsroulette.com/index.php?topic=16103.0)
Nick
That was it. I'm all over that thread!
Sam
Quote from: superman on Aug 22, 10:40 AM 2012
Me too Sam, this whole test/challenge was started as JL said he had the ONE system that would kill RNG day and night, so in a real world he has failed the challenge. The fact that the challenge has now morphed into the use of multiple systems is irrelevent to the initial reasoning behind the challenge, it's now simply to see if he, the person, can beat the RNG using whatever system for whatever duration he wants, as hit n run is now also in the mix.
------------------------
here \0/ here \0/ here \0/ fully in agreement
vundarosa
Hello John!
Many thanks for job and effort!
We waiting your method and that very fast for testing than testing you alone.
Best regards.
Quote from: amk on Aug 22, 02:48 PM 2012
Not only that but he will show us the way if he is indeed successful. In my book that is a nice person.
----------------
forget it amk....the way is the human factor..... how can we be shown that?
vundarosa
Quote from: vundarosa on Aug 22, 10:16 PM 2012
----------------
forget it amk....the way is the human factor..... how can we be shown that?
vundarosa
If the method is posted you will get all the rules. Challenge is just to show how it works - you have to change your staking plan sometimes to adjust to your winning goal or stop loss but the core of the method stays the same.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Aug 22, 05:02 PM 2012
Superman I've got the one system that can beat anything day and night. I got it through sheer determination not to be defeated. I had another method that can beat Ladbrokes, but it wasn't as good on here. Now I have Thee method. The Zone which you think the world of, has layed the golden goose. Be happy, losing days are over for any who stick with FIVE. Hutt thinks fluke. Ill go how ever far any of you want.
Until even the most ardent pessimist will know, this games over if enough ever played Five.
Even if i thought it was a fluke i would still play it. John you dont need to say that you guarantee that it would work over and over again. If the results are stellar in large number of spins then everybody should start playing this. ;D
Quote from: vundarosa on Aug 22, 10:16 PM 2012
----------------
forget it amk....the way is the human factor..... how can we be shown that?
vundarosa
Of course you can be shown that. The thing Is Vundarosa are you ready to learn anything? Some people are too set in their ways. Also you don't read my posts properly. What did I say about FIVE?
And patience and discipline are still very important. When you are playing live. As Chauncy said the way I play is not for everyone. Even if I won a Million points on this challenge. Not even 20% of members on this forum would take notice. The human mind is not for changing with most people.
For many to accept I've succeeded. They must also question their own intelligence, for having believed what so-called experts said for so long. That is a bitter pill to swallow for many. Better for them to turn away and pretend nothings happening. Or come up with some excuse, that exact rules weren't followed.
Winning is winning. I had to learn on the job to beat this Rng. When I was down at 115 everybody had me written off. Except me. I've been there before. Now I'm up there. There's still plenty who don't like it. Some people can never be pleased.
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Aug 22, 11:26 PM 2012
If the method is posted you will get all the rules. Challenge is just to show how it works - you have to change your staking plan sometimes to adjust to your winning goal or stop-loss but the core of the method stays the same.
-----------------
Robeenhuut, what is being said is not about adjusting the staking plan....what i get from JL now is that there's a human factor in selecting what system to play....given that, how can you guarantee the same results from person to person it beats me......this is what has been said before, that JL might inadvertently be doing something that leads him to have the results that are so different than if you'd just step to the table and robotically play the system...i say that the system selection criteria should also be discussed if we are to have nearly the same results as JL posts.vundarosa
Quote from: Johnlegend on Aug 23, 12:42 AM 2012
Of course you cam be shown that. The thing. Is Vundarosa are you ready to learn anythilng? Some people are too set in their ways. Also you don't read my posts properly. What did I say about FIVE?
And patience and discipline are still very important. When you are playing live.
---------------------
i don't are so much about FIVE at this point.....your claims about it are just the same as about every system you promote when you first release them....when time goes out you mellow out on your claims....so i'd rather wait till you're more sober on your assessment of FIVE to even consider it vundarosa
Quote from: vundarosa on Aug 23, 12:52 AM 2012
---------------------
i don't are so much about FIVE at this point.....your claims about it are just the same as about every system you promote when you first release them....when time goes out you mellow out on your claims....so i'd rather wait till you're more sober on your assessment of FIVE to even consider it
vundarosa
That isn't what I'm referring to. You and Sam have jumped on this HUMAN FACTOR issue. What I'm sayiing to you is FIVE can be played as you put it robotically. Its going to win. The only thing you need is the patience. That's your price for success. Its by far the best method I've ever seen. And I've enthused over any method that I could win with.
This is the best of them all. I had to revisit the ZONE to find it. Now its up to each individual once its out there.
Quote from: vundarosa on Aug 23, 12:47 AM 2012
-----------------
Robeenhuut, what is being said is not about adjusting the staking plan....what i get from JL now is that there's a human factor in selecting what system to play....given that, how can you guarantee the same results from person to person it beats me......this is what has been said before, that JL might inadvertently be doing something that leads him to have the results that are so different than if you'd just step to the table and robotically play the system...i say that the system selection criteria should also be discussed if we are to have nearly the same results as JL posts.
vundarosa
Vundarosa I can go all the way to 5000 points with one method, and one staking plan robotically. In fact that's what ill do. You are making too much of the Human factor issue. If you want winning on auto pilot. I can do that too. When you have the one. You have it all.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Aug 23, 01:49 AM 2012
Vundarosa I can go all the way to 5000 points with one method, and one staking plan robotically. In fact that's what ill do. You are making too much of the Human factor issue. If you want winning on auto pilot. I can do that too. When you have the one. You have it all.
------------------
then post the method, the rules and stick to it.....lets see
vundarosa
"This is the best of them all. I had to revisit the ZONE to find it. Now its up to each individual once its out there." Gawd, it's coming!!!
John
I haven't "jumped on" anything.
I've been around "touters" for a long time listening to them tout their wares. I can almost always find the "wiggle room" in their spiel. No, I can always find it! They said of Bill Clinton that he couldn't complete a sentence without having wiggle room in it. And he wiggled........
My wiggle word is "seems". I freely admit it.
Your wiggle words are now "human factor". Why not just admit it?
You've blown this thing up to be greater than----well, just about anything short of the Second Coming! I will patiently wait for the system. Trust me, if you're spot on, you will have more praise and respect than you can handle.
Sam
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Aug 23, 05:30 AM 2012
"This is the best of them all. I had to revisit the ZONE to find it. Now its up to each individual once its out there." Gawd, it's coming!!!
John
I haven't "jumped on" anything.
I've been around "touters" for a long time listening to them tout their wares. I can almost always find the "wiggle room" in their spiel. No, I can always find it! They said of Bill Clinton that he couldn't complete a sentence without having wiggle room in it. And he wiggled........
My wiggle word is "seems". I freely admit it.
Your wiggle words are now "human factor". Why not just admit it?
You've blown this thing up to be greater than----well, just about anything short of the Second Coming! I will patiently wait for the system. Trust me, if you're spot on, you will have more praise and respect than you can handle.
Sam
Okay Sam, yes I use the term human factor. But it depends on what you are playing. So my appologies if I read you wrong. Let's hope I can make it to 2000 points. Then I will drop it on the forum.
You will make it John, I'm sure of that!
Quote from: SamNL on Aug 23, 01:21 PM 2012
You will make it John, I'm sure of that!
Thankyou SamNL, its going very well at the moment. Have played a session this evening. And got the total up to 1330 points. Had a few close calls. I have no doubt I will have to lose at some point. But the strikrate is pushing 650/0 at the moment and I am very pleased with that.
650 to 0
If this holds you're a genius. Grouchy one, but a genius none the less!
Sam
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Aug 23, 01:44 PM 2012
650 to 0
If this holds you're a genius. Grouchy one, but a genius none the less!
Sam
I absolutely agree with this except for the grouchy part :wink:
Well, he hasn't accused you of felonious intent!!
But, all is forgiven!!
Sam
Hello John!
Very slow going because 19 avgust was 1250 after 4 days only 1330 are you playing 20 games on day if 650/0 you can play 200-300 games day. You stiil not sure about method?
For many members dont need 2000 points, we believe you, 50 members make test your system in 50 times faster. Best regards.
Quote from: donik7777 on Aug 23, 05:59 PM 2012
Hello John!
Very slow going because 19 avgust was 1250 after 4 days only 1330 are you playing 20 games on day if 650/0 you can play 200-300 games day. You stiil not sure about method?
For many members don't need 2000 points, we believe you, 50 members make test your system in 50 times faster. Best regards.
Slow going. I was at 1225 and now I'm at 1330. I have been out of town so no play for 4 days. I set my target at 2000. To satisfy myself, if I cant make it to 2000 points its not worth passing onto anyone
Even if it were to not pass 2000 RNG I would still value the method greatly.
Live wheel has to be doing nicely, correct :)
Hope you will post some updates on various threads.
Has Scooby Doo disappeared again???
Hello???
He had some work to do....
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Aug 23, 11:28 PM 2012
He had some work to do....
Ha!
Only TwoCatSam would punish us with that! ^-^
Quote from: amk on Aug 23, 08:49 PM 2012
Even if it were to not pass 2000 RNG I would still value the method greatly.
Live wheel has to be doing nicely, correct :)
Hope you will post some updates on various threads.
Has Scooby Doo disappeared again???
Hello???
Hello Amk yes a lot of updating to do.
Skakus
Someone has to do it!
Sam
pretty amazing skakus and john legend both heading towards the 2000 unit goal----amazing grace baby
1460 now for JL. Keep going JL! You can do it!
+1560, keep it up. ;)
I suppose I could calculate the z-score, but it's not obvious which bets are on 2 doz/col or 1 doz/col. I should have thought about that when I wrote the code. But given the house limits, if you get to 5000 units that will be an impressive result.
QuoteWhat I'm sayiing to you is FIVE can be played as you put it robotically. Its going to win. The only thing you need is the patience. That's your price for success. Its by far the best method I've ever seen. And I've enthused over any method that I could win with.
This is the best of them all.
Ah, John, you can't resist hyping it up, but then a few posts later you say "let's hope I can make it to 2000". :xd:
How can it be "the best of them all" when you obviously can't have done enough testing to know that?
Not having a go at you, it's just that you make me chuckle sometimes with the "bloviating" as Sam would say.
Quote from: Bayes on Aug 26, 05:25 AM 2012
+1560, keep it up. ;)
I suppose I could calculate the z-score, but it's not obvious which bets are on 2 doz/col or 1 doz/col. I should have thought about that when I wrote the code. But given the house limits, if you get to 5000 units that will be an impressive result.
Ah, John, you can't resist hyping it up, but then a few posts later you say "let's hope I can make it to 2000". :xd:
How can it be "the best of them all" when you obviously can't have done enough testing to know that?
Not having a go at you, it's just that you make me chuckle sometimes with the "bloviating" as Sam would say.
Hello Bayes you know I have a penchant for over excitement. I have a good feeling about this one mainly because of my years playing the Zone. That's a lot of pre-testing right there. When you only see something lose once in over 3500 potential games albeit hit and run style. It does tend to get the bloviator engine running.
I have had a good couple of days. And have now reached 1612 points. I used a combination of PATTERN 4 and FIVE today to go from 1460 to 1612 points. I am being taken to the border more often than I like though. And I know its only a question of time before I surrender a 156 point progression. At present I stand at 701/0 for 5. The longest winning streak I've ever known. I would be happy with 300/1 So its doing pretty well.
John is not a math boy as he proclaimed before so z-score would not interest him but judging from the fact that lots of wins betting on DZ came in an early stage of progression i would guess 4 territory ;D Everybody familiar with z-score should be impressed.
Just wondering about why you bet 50 in a last bet instead of 54 to have a 2u gain.
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Aug 26, 06:02 AM 2012
John is not a math boy as he proclaimed before so z-score would not interest him but judging from the fact that lots of wins betting on DZ came in an early stage of progression i would guess 4 territory ;D Everybody familiar with z-score should be impressed.
Just wondering about why you bet 50 in a last bet instead of 54 to have a 2u gain.
Hello Hutt, the reason is simple. my limit is 50 units on the RNG. So because I am playing for 2 points A game, the fourth bet should be 54---54 but I can only do 50---50. So in effect when I am taken to the border I have to forfeit a 4 point loss. Or two winning games. Its only a matter of time now before I lose a progression. I cant believe im at 701/0 its the best streak Ive ever had.
RH, if he bets 50 he's break even, so if he wants 2u+ he needs to bet 52 not 54
and John, 156 point progr ??? 2+2+8+8+16+16+50+50 = 152
or is it 156 because you decided to use 52 instead of 50 as 4th bet ?
Quote from: Johnlegend on Aug 26, 06:13 AM 2012
Hello Hutt, the reason is simple. my limit is 50 units on the RNG. So because I am playing for 2 points A game, the fourth bet should be 54---54 but I can only do 50---50. So in effect when I am taken to the border I have to forfeit a 4 point loss. Or two winning games. Its only a matter of time now before I lose a progression. I can't believe I'm at 701/0 its the best streak I've ever had.
Of course. I overlooked the max bet limit. ;D And John nothing is due in roulette. You can make it 4 digits streak.
i take my words back, i was wrong :D
Quote from: Stepkevh on Aug 26, 06:15 AM 2012
RH, if he bets 50 he's break even, so if he wants 2u+ he needs to bet 52 not 54
and John, 156 point progr ??? 2+2+8+8+16+16+50+50 = 152
or is it 156 because you decided to use 52 instead of 50 as 4th bet ?
Hello Stepkevh as I posted above I want to do this 2-2--6-6--18-18--54-54 but because the limit on the RNG is 50 points. Can only do this 2-2--6-6--18-18--50-50.
So each time I am taken to step 4 of the progression I have to forfeit 4 points.
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Aug 26, 06:17 AM 2012
Of course. I overlooked the max bet limit. ;D And John nothing is due in roulette. You can make it 4 digits streak.
That's true Hutt, but I am being pushed to the border more often in shorter betting cycles. It will probably happen as a result of a zero at some point. We will see.
But which method do you think is better JL, Pattern Breaker or your new method FIVE?
I think he said FIVE
Quote from: SamNL on Aug 26, 03:48 PM 2012
But which method do you think is better JL, Pattern Breaker or your new method FIVE?
I think Five because it hasn't lost yet, so its potential is unknown. Whereas Pattern breaker averages 11/1 hit and run. That said PB is 7 points to buy in. FIVE 80.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Aug 26, 04:53 PM 2012
I think Five because it hasn't lost yet, so its potential is unknown. Whereas Pattern breaker averages 11/1 hit and run. That said PB is 7 points to buy in. FIVE 80.
This post caught my eye because I know from all the systems I have tested that an 80 point buy-in gives me a lot more wins before a loss than a 7 point buy-in.
On the other hand, I leave open the possibility that the 80 point buy-in system might win more than the 90% over the 7 unit buy-in that it should.
The main question I have is, "How would the 7 unit buy-in perform if you had 80 units backing it up instead of 7?"
Since we don't know the FIVE system yet, we'll just have to wait and see.
i know i am a little late, but this is nice to see. Good job JL
Quote from: GLC on Aug 26, 11:30 PM 2012
This post caught my eye because I know from all the systems I have tested that an 80 point buy-in gives me a lot more wins before a loss than a 7 point buy-in.
On the other hand, I leave open the possibility that the 80 point buy-in system might win more than the 90% over the 7 unit buy-in that it should.
The main question I have is, "How would the 7 unit buy-in perform if you had 80 units backing it up instead of 7?"
Since we don't know the FIVE system yet, we'll just have to wait and see.
If you had 77u BR and played PB 11,22,44 the strike rate of just 8/1 would give you a better profit in any number of games than 1,3,9,27 prog. You would constantly beat 1.3.9.27 prog with the same buy- in. You would average 11/9=1.2u a game with PB and if you had 11/1 rate then it would be 3.7u ;D But its just a math...
WOW, John is almost at 1700!
The following chart looks at all of John Legend's column and dozens bets. It does not look at any even chance bets; so not comparing apples to oranges. This chart looks at units only. The line that goes steadily down is the rate at which a gambler should be losing units. Thus, after 5702 bets, he should be down about 76 units at the rate of 1.35 units per hundred. Am i right?
Another way of looking at this is if there was no zero on the wheel, then the number of units won/lost should hover around the zero line (break even). With one zero (European wheel), the chart should hover around the straight line heading down. At first, he was losing units at a faster rate than expected. As you can see, at some point, JL started bucking the trend and is picking up units faster than expected, either way you look at it. And its starting to look like a non-random trend to me.
[attachimg=1]
One final observation, when JL had lost 70 units, he was down about -200 bank. But while gaining almost 70 units back from the bottom, he has added some 1500 or 1600 to his bank. To me that's significant.
Quote from: SamNL on Aug 27, 04:25 AM 2012
WOW, John is almost at 1700!
A good session today have finished at 1770 points. I am varying the play between Dozens and Columns a but more trying to keep the winning streak going.
Well, almost 2000 John. You'll make it
This is a chart of all bets i have logged in my database. To keep perspective, i've started the chart at zero instead of +300 bank roll. This way we can see PROFIT. Keep in mind that my chart has more bets and more profit over all because i've collected data pretty regular, including about +300 or so units that were officially subtracted during a time where Bayes RNG may have been considered compromised. Since i don't think JL fooled with it, i've included those points.
[attachimg=1]
Hello John!
I thinking already 2000 units?
Best regards.
Quote from: donik7777 on Aug 28, 12:48 PM 2012
Hello John!
I thinking already 2000 units?
Best regards.
John is at 1770 units now.
Almost there.. I can imagine how hard to reach +2000 with BR 300 and maxbet 50, in the middle of business & personal activities.
Go get 'em, Tiger John! :thumbsup:
Cheers,
-bd
Let's not forget he dropped to 57 units!! And from there.........
Well, I hope I got egg on my face!
Go! Go! Go Johnny Go! (Singin' like Chuck Berry!)
Sam
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Aug 28, 05:18 PM 2012
Let's not forget he dropped to 57 units!! And from there.........
Well, I hope I got egg on my face!
Go! Go! Go Johnny Go! (Singin' like Chuck Berry!)
Sam
Love Chuck Berry into all the old vintage Rock n Roll. Well I am at 1820 now. I feel a loss is in the pipeline. So I am going to make myself less available to it by only playing 25 odd hit and run games a day until I am well over 2000 points or experience my first loss. I know it can happen because I saw one today for the columns. BUT, luckily I decided to stay with dozens today so avoided it. My winning streak is now 796/0 This is incredible for me. Its asking alot to go to 1000/ no loss. But its possible as Henry Fonda said to his 11 fellow jurors in the great film 12 angry men.
John, good for ya man. I hope u will teach and inspire some. And i am glad your harsh critics are silent now, nothing for them to say.
Quote from: iggiv on Aug 28, 07:45 PM 2012
John, good for ya man. I hope u will teach and inspire some. And i am glad your harsh critics are silent now, nothing for them to say.
Hi Iggiv well I could still hit a field of losses and lose 500 plus points. I won't feel I've achieved anything unless I reach 5000 points minumum. Id like to actuall
y get up to 10,000 points. I think 300 to 10,000 should satisfy most. That I would never move back to negative numbers. Then id like to do the same challenge with ACTUALS. Then move to live performance. Which is Sams area of expertise. So he would have to help me out if he is willing? Let's see if I can make the first milestone of 5000 points. I to have seen methods win several thousand then collapse. I want to. Convince myself as well as the forum.
Hello John!
Thanks for job.
Very nice results. I believe you. Can you explain your new method?
Thanks.
Best regards.
John, will you still show your method FIVE to the people here when you're at 2000 points or is it 5000 now?
He promise us when he got 2000 points. I hope.
Anyway thanks so much John! You giving us hopefulness.
Best regards.
Quote from: donik7777 on Aug 30, 08:23 AM 2012
He promise us when he got 2000 points. I hope.
Anyway thanks so much John! You giving us hopefulness.
Best regards.
I know donik but I'm not sure anymore after the last post from John. So that's why I asked John about this.
I hope. If he promised he allways gave us very nice idea and inspiration.
Best regards.
Quote from: SamNL on Aug 30, 03:12 AM 2012
John, will you still show your method FIVE to the people here when you're at 2000 points or is it 5000 now?
Yes when I break into 2000 points I will show it to you.
Thanks for the answer John, you're doing great!
for he's a 'johnny' good felloooooww..
which nobody can deny :thumbsup:
Quote from: bossdarling on Aug 31, 04:26 AM 2012
for he's a 'johnny' good felloooooww..
which nobody can deny :thumbsup:
;D
09/01/2012 DOZ1 2 W 1874 DOZ2 2 L 1872
09/01/2012 DOZ1 2 W 1874 DOZ3 2 L 1872
09/01/2012 DOZ2 2 L 1868 DOZ3 2 W 1872
That's the sequence that was posted on the website. The new balance its
not correct. Results are nice.
almost there John :thumbsup:
well... at the first milestone :smile:
1978 now, WOW! Incredible. 22 points to go for method FIVE ;D
Quote from: Stepkevh on Sep 01, 04:59 AM 2012
almost there John :thumbsup:
well... at the first milestone :smile:
Hello Stepkevh well Im there. But pushed to the limit 3 times in last dozen bets. Like random knew what I was trying to achieve. So the balance stands at 2012 to cheekily match our year. I will start to write the rules for 5. And post the method tomorrow.
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Sep 01, 04:52 AM 2012
09/01/2012 DOZ1 2 W 1874 DOZ2 2 L 1872
09/01/2012 DOZ1 2 W 1874 DOZ3 2 L 1872
09/01/2012 DOZ2 2 L 1868 DOZ3 2 W 1872
That's the sequence that was posted on the website. The new balance its
not correct. Results are nice.
Hi Hutt I dont know what happened there. When I went to close the rng after a game. I noticed there were two open. One had what should have been my new total 1874. The other the total before the game 1872. But it stuck with the previous total twice. So in reality I should be at 2016 right now. But I am happy to get to the first milestone without loss. I was incredibly pushed to the border 3 times in the last 20 games. I was sure I was going to lose but its held.
Quote from: bossdarling on Aug 31, 04:26 AM 2012
for he's a 'johnny' good felloooooww..
which nobody can deny :thumbsup:
That's brilliant Bossdarling. How did you get a clip from one of my alltime favourite movies on here?? Amazing.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Sep 01, 06:17 AM 2012
Hi Hutt I don't know what happened there. When I went to close the rng after a game. I noticed there were two open. One had what should have been my new total 1874. The other the total before the game 1872. But it stuck with the previous total twice. So in reality I should be at 2016 right now. But I am happy to get to the first milestone without loss. I was incredibly pushed to the border 3 times in the last 20 games. I was sure I was going to lose but its held.
Yeah John and about 80 u should be added to your balance because you were taken to the limit around 20 times and you were forced to take 2 u loss instead of 2 u win. I think you lost 4 step prog once but you were using a different prog then. Anyway that does not a change the fact that you had a very impressive run. ;D Congrats.
Hurray for John!
now now , that is really cool. Congrats JL !!!!!
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Sep 01, 07:06 AM 2012
Yeah John and about 80 u should be added to your balance because you were taken to the limit around 20 times and you were forced to take 2 u loss instead of 2 u win. I think you lost 4 step prog once but you were using a different prog then. Anyway that does not a change the fact that you had a very impressive run. ;D Congrats.
Thanks Hutt still have a long way to go, but have a pretty strong BR now.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Sep 01, 06:17 AM 2012
Hi Hutt I don't know what happened there. When I went to close the rng after a game. I noticed there were two open. One had what should have been my new total 1874. The other the total before the game 1872. But it stuck with the previous total twice. So in reality I should be at 2016 right now.
D'oh!
Another thing I didn't think of. ::)
John,
This test is flawed in several respects, so rather than continue using the software up to the 5,000 unit target, would you consider using an online casino?
We could open an account at BV and put in a few euros. You then continue the test using that account and betting in cents - with a maximum stake decided beforehand. Then we can login to check your progress every so often. It won't be quite as fast as using my software, but you get a spin every few seconds on BV, so not too bad. What do you think?
The only snag is that you no longer get free spins. Not sure if there's any fast online casino where you can bet in pennies and get free spins.
But if you'd prefer to carry on using the software, that's ok.
Bayes!
Yes test with 0.01 if it works it already works. If not it is a small cost. Winning a grand on paper??
Better in IRL. All sensible tests we do in real using pennies.
You do get free spins on BV.
QuoteThis test is flawed in several respects
Yes, we know that closing the laptop can prevent the software uploading as the internet connection is disconnected so that session is flawed, as this "could" be used to cover up a bad run!! or am I wrong Bayes?
QuoteWe could open an account at BV and put in a few euros
The only way forward with this challenge. Then Bayes could login to the same account and get the history, un cheatable totally.
QuoteYou do get free spins on BV.
4 units on low, 2 units on 3rd dozen, 1 unit on line 19-24
test is flawed! i Wonder. :question:
Quote from: Bayes on Sep 01, 09:59 AM 2012
This test is flawed in several respects,
After all this drama ... you gotta be kidding me !!!!!!
Here's an offer.... send me the strategy, I'll play it exactly as written in a real casino on a certified RNG machine on Saturday's with my own money. If it wins the $2K or $5K (whatever you decide) I'll donate the money to whatever charity you'd like. If I lose, I'm out the $300 bucks for a bankroll. I can tell everyone what casino I'll be in and at what machine if anyone wants to come by and check on it. It can be a single or double zero wheel, I have access to both.
Let me know if there is any interest....
From the Hills of Branson, Missouri, USA...............
While the test itself may be flawed, let's not discount the possibility that Jl could actually be winning.
Sam
JL like a crazy buffalo now, nothing is gonna stop him. Over 2k...Hope he will show us sky as a limit.
Charts don't cheat!
[attachimg=1]
Am i mistaken or this 2k mark was reached, not by using a single strategy but with multiple ones, with *five* being the last one on the ranks?!....
vundarosa
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Sep 01, 09:30 PM 2012
While the test itself may be flawed, let's not discount the possibility that Jl could actually be winning.
Sam
Exactly, Sam!
A real money account test is the best way to go, though.
If JL agrees to move the test over to real account betting he should be afforded the same bankroll he has now.
2012 units is at least 20 euros for penny play.
JL should decide how it's funded and who gets the winnings. So if JL Funds it himself then JL gets the winnings. If I fund it then JL and I split the winnings down the middle. ;D
Quote from: superman on Sep 01, 04:39 PM 2012
Yes, we know that closing the laptop can prevent the software uploading as the internet connection is disconnected so that session is flawed, as this "could" be used to cover up a bad run!! or am I wrong Bayes?
The only way forward with this challenge. Then Bayes could login to the same account and get the history, un cheatable totally.
4 units on low, 2 units on 3rd dozen, 1 unit on line 19-24
I'm not an expert on software but a common sense approach to find out if the test is flawed would be to let other person have the same setup as John and try to void any bad session. Lets say you place a bet and it loses then try to prevent it from uploading. If its so easy as just disconnecting then the results could be manipulated.
In the meantime lets John post his method as he promised after reaching 2000u.
QuoteLets say you place a bet and it loses then try to prevent it from uploading. If its so easy as just disconnecting then the results could be manipulated
From what I understand, JL opens the software, it connects to the server and gets his balance in a file, by downloading and reading it, the only time it updates that file is when the software is told to stop, if you disconnect from the web in any manner, close laptop or pull plug on pc, instant blackout then the software cannot upload the results, Bayes will have to confirm this but thats how I see it.
QuoteIn the meantime lets John post his method as he promised after reaching 2000u./quote]
Yup I agree, then if everyone else isn't getting the same results or duplicate his play, he can then show it to everyone on BV, heck even I would chip in to fund it. As it stands now, I don't think we can rely 100% on the results, only Bayes knows if the above is possible.
Quote from: vundarosa on Sep 02, 12:07 AM 2012
Am i mistaken or this 2k mark was reached, not by using a single strategy but with multiple ones, with *five* being the last one on the ranks?!....
vundarosa
Thats how understand it too.
Quote from: superman on Sep 02, 03:40 AM 2012
From what I understand, JL opens the software, it connects to the server and gets his balance in a file, by downloading and reading it, the only time it updates that file is when the software is told to stop, if you disconnect from the web in any manner, close laptop or pull plug on pc, instant blackout then the software cannot upload the results, Bayes will have to confirm this but that's how I see it.
Yeah that's how it works. Unfortunately there's no way around this, except to have the whole shebang on a remote server, which is what I should have set up from the start. Also we've seen that there are other ways in which the results can be corrupted, with the possibility of having more than one instance of the program running, in that case it could work against John, as he's pointed out.
I don't think that any of this necessarily invalidates the results so far, but it would be better in my opinion if the remainder of the test was entirely online.
Anyway thanks to Skakus for kindly offering to provide the bankroll. ;) We'll let John decided how he wants to continue.
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Sep 02, 12:27 AM 2012
In the meantime lets John post his method as he promised after reaching 2000u.
Agreed!
Quote from: Bayes on Sep 02, 04:30 AM 2012
Yeah that's how it works. Unfortunately there's no way around this, except to have the whole shebang on a remote server, which is what I should have set up from the start. Also we've seen that there are other ways in which the results can be corrupted, with the possibility of having more than one instance of the program running, in that case it could work against John, as he's pointed out.
I don't think that any of this necessarily invalidates the results so far, but it would be better in my opinion if the remainder of the test was entirely online.
Anyway thanks to Skakus for kindly offering to provide the bankroll. ;) We'll let John decided how he wants to continue.
I don't mind either way Bayes. I know I've reached my total honestly. I am fed up to be honest with all the changes. I too wish you had made it online to start with. I dont really trust BV. But I will do it. I also hope you will set the online game up in the near future.
Quote from: Skakus on Sep 02, 12:26 AM 2012
Exactly, Sam!
A real money account test is the best way to go, though.
If JL agrees to move the test over to real account betting he should be afforded the same bankroll he has now.
2012 units is at least 20 euros for penny play.
JL should decide how it's funded and who gets the winnings. So if JL Funds it himself then JL gets the winnings. If I fund it then JL and I split the winnings down the middle. ;D
Okay even though I dont really trust BV. I like Skakus suggestion. He can set the account up and we will split the money down the middle if he is up for that.
I think that unless there is a proof that there was a strong probability of any cheating in this challenge than we should continue the way it was done before. Anyway feel sorry that i pointed this out :D
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Sep 02, 10:06 AM 2012
I think that unless there is a proof that there was a strong probability of any cheating in this challenge than we should continue the way it was done before. Anyway feel sorry that i pointed this out :D
Hutt. Its fine I dont want anyone saying I got to 5000 unfairly. I will finish it on BV. And by then I hope Bayes will have an online game so I can do the next test ACTUALS on there. Then I will go live. Its an ongoing process. That could last years. I dont care. By the end all will know what I say I can do. I do.
When can we expect your method FIVE today John?
Remote server?
What about Amazon Web Services. They offer a free computer in the cloud for a year. If the issue is about shutting down one's computer, that would no longer be an issue. An administrator could delete an image and replace it with a saved image but if the player is not the administrator then...
I have an AWS account that i have not been using lately. It has a few months to go of free service. I ran software on it 24/7 for a few months installed on Windows Server 8 with a familiar desktop. Something to consider. Imo its better than BV because its easier and we will always wonder if BV is fair on players, and, how would we be able to collect data and make charts?
Quote from: SamNL on Sep 02, 10:22 AM 2012
When can we expect your method FIVE today John?
Probably at five o'clock !
Buffet and Jackson: It's five o'clock somewhere!
Hello John!
I look forward with great anticipation your method. I hope its ready.
Best regards.
Well, I've sent John a Private Message asking when we can all expect FIVE on the forum. When I hear something I'll let you all know
Quote from: Still on Sep 02, 12:55 PM 2012
Remote server?
What about Amazon Web Services. They offer a free computer in the cloud for a year. If the issue is about shutting down one's computer, that would no longer be an issue. An administrator could delete an image and replace it with a saved image but if the player is not the administrator then...
I have an AWS account that i have not been using lately. It has a few months to go of free service. I ran software on it 24/7 for a few months installed on Windows Server 8 with a familiar desktop. Something to consider. in my opinion its better than BV because its easier and we will always wonder if BV is fair on players, and, how would we be able to collect data and make charts?
Hi Still,
This sounds interesting, I've sent you a pm.
another 5pm passed and no info on 5? But still very nice that JL could run it up so nicely!
Quote from: Johnlegend on Sep 02, 09:59 AM 2012
Okay even though I don't really trust BV. I like Skakus suggestion. He can set the account up and we will split the money down the middle if he is up for that.
Just saw this, sorry.
I'm happy to put up the 20 euros but as I'm in Australia it's too difficult for me to set up the account.
Perhaps someone like superman could set it up and I'll send him the money. If JL wins then he can split it with superman, and he can hold the funds towards some future coding, or something?
Cheers.
QuotePerhaps someone like superman
OK account setup, just waiting for my card to clear with moneybookers as I've never needed to add funds to moneybookers, all done just need to verify when my bank statement updates, should be this evening, will PM JL the BV login details when I put the 20 euros in it.
Hello guys!
For us need someone to prove that the result reached or we want to find the method that gives us a profit?
JL was ready two days ago to publish its. After several posts about what the results may be unreliable, he said he is fed up. And again he will be test it several months. Then someone else say that these results are also not significant.
I do not understand why JL reacts so strongly to the posts of some members and change his decisions.
Let's ask him published a method and we will test it for yourself.
Best regards.
John
I know you read this thread. C'mon, man, post the system.
If it's good, many will cheer you. If it's bad--well, who among us can cast the first stone?
Sam
I believe John Legend was not playing by the rules. I mean, my belief is that he was cheating. :ooh:
Just a clear insight of that!
Lets see what he does with BV. Probably will make up some excuse.
If it was so easy to beat the game with progressions and mechanical selections why would there be roulette still?
:sad2:
Quote from: albertojonas on Sep 04, 09:01 PM 2012
I believe John Legend was not playing by the rules. I mean, my belief is that he was cheating. :ooh:
Just a clear insight of that!
Lets see what he does with BV. Probably will make up some excuse.
If it was so easy to beat the game with progressions and mechanical selections why would there be roulette still?
:sad2:
There's nothing easy about what JL has achieved. I know first hand.
Most would crash and burn well before now, including yourself most probably. ;)
Hey guys!
you again for any evidence, we are here to prove that someone's got it and THEN WHAT?
Let's take a look at his new method as it was with his other methods, as well as all other members.
Best regards.
Quote from: Skakus on Sep 04, 09:17 PM 2012
There's nothing easy about what JL has achieved. I know first hand.
Most would crash and burn well before now, including yourself most probably. ;)
OK
I came home drunk with wife,,, and Im still pissed at JL ,,,when I figure out why I will complain!--where is the complain box?
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Sep 04, 08:24 PM 2012
John
I know you read this thread. C'mon, man, post the system.
If it's good, many will cheer you. If it's bad--well, who among us can cast the first stone?
Sam
Sam I'm not posting the method until I'm at least 1000 up on BV. I don't want members lile Albertojonas calling me a cheat. I had to work damn hard to get the better of that rng. Now ill do the same on BV and put. This argument to bed forever. I will find out once and for all if BV is fair or not.
If it is Superman will like what he sees over the next year plus. And will do nicely out of his investment. I promise him that.
And you all have to remember this is all early days, I have a long way to go. And also a new revised version of the ZONE. That is cleanng up on live wheels. So step back and look out for the the target of 3000 points.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Sep 05, 01:19 AM 2012
Sam I'm not posting the method until I'm at least 1000 up on BV. I don't want members lile Albertojonas calling me a cheat. I had to work darn hard to get the better of that rng. Now ill do the same on BV and put. This argument to bed forever. I will find out once and for all if BV is fair or not.
If it is Superman will like what he sees over the next year plus. And will do nicely out of his investment. I promise him that.
And you all have to remember this is all early days, I have a long way to go. And also a new revised version of the ZONE. That is cleanng up on live wheels. So step back and look out for the the target of 3000 points.
My point is that changing your target to 3000u wont convince people especially considering your remark about a fairness of BV. I was the one that first pointed out a possible problem with your results but never called you a cheat. You dont have much to gain making extra 1000u if you want to prove that you have a constant winning system. If you think that you have all the rules ready you should post them now. Even if you hit 5000u some still wont consider it a roulette beater. ;D
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Sep 05, 02:09 AM 2012
My point is that changing your target to 3000u won't convince people especially considering your remark about a fairness of BV. I was the one that first pointed out a possible problem with your results but never called you a cheat. You don't have much to gain making extra 1000u if you want to prove that you have a constant winning system. If you think that you have all the rules ready you should post them now. Even if you hit 5000u some still won't consider it a roulette beater. ;D
What if I beat BV for 40,000 points over the next two years Hutt/Matt?? Will that be enough? Some people will never accept it I know that already. Their own ego won't allow it.
Ok, so I take it that the BV phase of this challenge is under way?
A couple of questions: Are you playing the zero wheel? I don't think it should be the no-zero game. Also, what are the house limits (not BV's but yours assuming a base chip of 1 cent)?
Quote from: Johnlegend on Sep 05, 02:39 AM 2012
What if I beat BV for 40,000 points over the next two years Hutt/Matt?? Will that be enough? Some people will never accept it I know that already. Their own ego won't allow it.
You may even reach 200000 points! 8)
The spreed on zWheel is 1 to 10000 on straiht up and 1 to 100000 on EC.
QuoteOk, so I take it that the BV phase of this challenge is under way?
Account is setup, but I can't put any money in as my card forst needs verifying with moneybookers, all my gambling money is in paypal, moneybookers sent me the test amount which I must enter as soon as it shows on my bank statement, they say 2 - 3 days.
OR someone with money in moneybookers can send me £20 so we can get it underway and I will send it back to them as soon as my card is verified.
Personally I don't care which game JL plays, european or no zero, as most of the BV players here play no zero I don't see why JL can't do his challenge there, atleast the odds will help him a little bit, thoughts anyone.
I'm not sure why the spread is all that important, maybe someone can explain that to me. Ok, maybe we want to know that a win is due to good money management as much as good bet selection. We want to know if high numbers can be gained by grinding it out over a longer term, rather than risking 100% on one bet. I don't think anyone wants to see that. But the spread should be a matter of % of BR...what is considered safe and sane. In the trading world, most would say that 1% of BR is max to risk on any one trade/bet/idea. I'm sure pro gamblers would agree. But it seems to me that if JL wanted to go to 10% that ought to be his prerogative. I would like to see spread relative to BR because i want to eventually see a chart with exponential growth. Could not do that with a max cap on bet size. If the casino allows it why not? I would like to see JL beat the casino according to the rules of most casinos. So if BV is more liberal with spread, maybe adjust to something more normal-typical of a land-based casino.
Also, as for disclosure of the system, i think those of us who believe should be able to receive 'five' or anything else via PM so that we are not bogged down by the delays invoked by doubters always seeking more proof. :twisted:
Quote from: superman on Sep 05, 03:40 AM 2012
Personally I don't care which game JL plays, european or no zero, as most of the BV players here play no zero I don't see why JL can't do his challenge there, atleast the odds will help him a little bit, thoughts anyone.
I would like to see JL beat the casino on the same terms that most casinos offer, or at least most European casinos. Would like to see how his systems handle one zero. Two zeros is ridiculous anyway. That way, when he wins, we can all feel that we can all win anywhere, anytime there is a one zero game offered that is fair.
Bv ZWheel will do, the spreed is high, but some casinos in Europe has spreed from 1Euro to 10000 euro.
If they did not benefit from that, its should not just be such a spreed.
Low stakes 1cent at BV make people from low salary contries play as well, an Euro is some money there.
The 1000 Euro bet will come from other kind of players, or at a desperate way of catch a loss.
Many ways playing online will not be practical on landbased casinos.
Quote from: superman on Sep 05, 03:40 AM 2012
Personally I don't care which game JL plays, european or no zero, as most of the BV players here play no zero I don't see why JL can't do his challenge there, atleast the odds will help him a little bit, thoughts anyone.
My opinion is that JL should play the zero wheel. I think the test should as far as possible be a continuation of what he's been playing up until now, and he's done well so far, so why not? After all, a no-zero game is only available in BV (and Betfair) and surely the test should reflect the average "real world" conditions as far as possible? Also, using NZ means you have to pay a commission of 10% after every session, which makes things more complicated than they need to be when trying to assess his advantage, if any.
I also think the spread should be 1-100 units, which means a max stake of 1 euro. Again, he's been doing ok with a max of 50u, so this would be an improvement. The higher the spread, the more spins JL will have to play to demonstrate an advantage (because high stakes mean high variance); most people can win for a long time given a big enough bank and house limit, but isn't this challenge more to do with JL showing us that his methods and systems can win as claimed? in that case he shouldn't need to use stakes which are larger than in any of the systems he's posted.
QuoteAlso, as for disclosure of the system, i think those of us who believe should be able to receive 'five' or anything else via PM so that we are not bogged down by the delays invoked by doubters always seeking more proof
Yes we would all like to see it BUT as the current test is now clouded in doubt AND the test could have been cheated it would be better to wait and see if JL can perform again at an actual casino, be patient it will start very soon. The test was done ON the forum pages not via PM's so the method should also be posted rather than passed privately.
I totally agree with Bayes about the fact that John should be playing on the
single zero wheel.
Afterall, Bayes RNG was also single zero.
The limit should also be 100 units instead of 50 because as far as i followed the thread John said he needed a limit of 54 for his "five" method, its the 4th step of his progr, so 100 sounds fair enough :)
And i agree with Superman too for the fact that the Bayes test was shown on the forum, so teh method should also be posted on te forum instead privatly.
Stephan
Yes, in the end a victory on single zero could help more people.
Limit should probaly be % based as Still suggests. JL should be able to up the ante as he goes, as long as he doesn't go over factors of 54 per dozen for any current progression.
JL has promised to post his method eventually, give him time guys.
At least he's not a douchebag like me, who has not promised to share his Bayes' RNG smasher system! :xd:
I did give out the EC Money Management strategy though, and that's got to be worth something.
mind u guys if we bet single straight numbers instead of table layout--- 2 zeros instead of 1 won't make as much difference as betting on table layout. All u gotta do is just bet 12 numbers instead of dozens or columns or 18 numbers instead of EC.
and u can bet other number or numbers, it won't make that much difference. 11 or 14 is still good enough isn't it
Quote from: Johnlegend on Sep 05, 01:19 AM 2012
Sam I'm not posting the method until I'm at least 1000 up on BV. I don't want members lile Albertojonas calling me a cheat. I had to work darn hard to get the better of that rng. Now ill do the same on BV and put. This argument to bed forever. I will find out once and for all if BV is fair or not.
If it is Superman will like what he sees over the next year plus. And will do nicely out of his investment. I promise him that.
And you all have to remember this is all early days, I have a long way to go. And also a new revised version of the ZONE. That is cleanng up on live wheels. So step back and look out for the the target of 3000 points.
The conditions of the test were flawed.
I wish you luck. It is very possible to win for a certain number of bets. It happens all the time.
In this forum, there are threads of systems winning 2 months, flat betting, playing all spins from all tables, from a B&M Casino. Everyone that tested "stuff" in this forum came across with streaks of wins. And the other half will say that it will crash sometime.
I just do not believe in the logic behind your systems. We just agree to disagree.
Hello John! What would happen if you placed your method and be tested for other members of the forum at least 100,000 units? I think nothing will not change. Perhaps for many will not have to prove anything.
All the best.
Quote from: Bayes on Sep 05, 04:14 AM 2012
My opinion is that JL should play the zero wheel. I think the test should as far as possible be a continuation of what he's been playing up until now, and he's done well so far, so why not? After all, a no-zero game is only available in BV (and Betfair) and surely the test should reflect the average "real world" conditions as far as possible? Also, using NZ means you have to pay a commission of 10% after every session, which makes things more complicated than they need to be when trying to assess his advantage, if any.
I also think the spread should be 1-100 units, which means a max stake of 1 euro. Again, he's been doing ok with a max of 50u, so this would be an improvement. The higher the spread, the more spins JL will have to play to demonstrate an advantage (because high stakes mean high variance); most people can win for a long time given a big enough bank and house limit, but isn't this challenge more to do with JL showing us that his methods and systems can win as claimed? in that case he shouldn't need to use stakes which are larger than in any of the systems he's posted.
I'm 100% in agreement with Bayes here. I want to show winning is posible on the European based single zero wheel. I don't need to go higher than 2x81 If I grow my bank to 5000 points 50 dollars or poumds. I would want to use a base point of 3 units. So the progression would be 3-3---9-9---27-27---81-81 and that's the limit.
Quote from: albertojonas on Sep 05, 06:57 AM 2012
The conditions of the test were flawed.
I wish you luck. It is very possible to win for a certain number of bets. It happens all the time.
In this forum, there are threads of systems winning 2 months, flat betting, playing all spins from all tables, from a B&M Casino. Everyone that tested "stuff" in this forum came across with streaks of wins. And the other half will say that it will crash sometime.
I just do not believe in the logic behind your systems. We just agree to disagree.
We shall see ALbert, Five. Came like all my methods do. From observing a consistency within certain parameters. There is no explainable logic. Just an observation. That says random doesn't go beyond certain points too often. Its then up to the observer, to try to forge a method to take advantage of their findings. That's all I do.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Sep 05, 09:25 AM 2012
We shall see ALbert, Five. Came like all my methods do. From observing a consistency within certain parameters. There is no explainable logic. Just an observation. That says random doesn't go beyond certain points too often. Its then up to the observer, to try to forge a method to take advantage of their findings. That's all I do.
There is no explainable logic? Everything has an explanation and behind it there is always maths and probability. The ways you built to try and take advantage of those phenomena with certain parameters is the other factor that lacks consistency. I wish you no harm, we had our discussions in the past. After all it's the clash that makes the world evolve.
Cheers
I got 5 on it :)
Hey JL....
In June, I typed this in VLS forum.......is this "5" ?
So what's the oposite of the classic wait 5 then bet on that Doz?.Well...... Wait 5 then don't bet on that dozen because it doesn't work (I've seen it go 15 spins etc)
So Doz 1 hasn't hit for 5 spins, we bet on 2 and 3.
In some fun tests of about 50 times, I have made (virtually) double that of betting on the expectant Doz/Col. Its not tested enough to nail it to the mast.
Just an idea.
I'm guessing "5" may be when doz 1 hasn't hit for 4, bet on 2 and 3. (or 1,3 when 2 hasnt hit etc)
TF,
JL also refers to his "zone" and a 25 spin frame.
So what you say must be happening withing these 25 spins ?
Stephan
Quote from: Stepkevh on Sep 07, 10:54 AM 2012
TF,
JL also refers to his "zone" and a 25 spin frame.
So what you say must be happening withing these 25 spins ?
Stephan
Not sure but he said my idea "line idea using dozens" reminded him of zone
I've had this trigger in my head for months. Wait 5 or 4 doz to sleep then "do somthing" in the other 2 dozens. Its the "do something" i am experimting with. I may do an "ego" and just keep posting in notepad
OK the funds are now in teh account for JL, he has been practicing in demo mode and has already had very good results, so it's game on .................. again.
I am going to start a new thread to post his results, I'll call it The JL BV challenge
Any chance we could collect data somehow?
Quote from: Stepkevh on Sep 07, 10:54 AM 2012
TF,
JL also refers to his "zone" and a 25 spin frame.
So what you say must be happening withing these 25 spins ?
Stephan
I think that John works on the idea that in some amount of spins something is due to happen.
Like in Trilogy or Code 20 it was 20 spins. It involves at least one trigger. Hope that he is right and his method is playable on live wheels. In Still chart it looks like he played 7k spins but how long does it take to wait for a trigger? I dont have a problem with waiting if something works. We just have to wait for it to be posted. Maybe we should start a challenge about guessing the rules of FIVE ;D
RH,
Turnerfeck already started guessing :D
link:://rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=10216.0 (link:://rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=10216.0)
And John mentioned that he's at the right track.
If he bet 2 doz and use a stiff progression, he must be sure he can hit at least every 5 trials.
So then the main clue is to find a bet selection which make it possible.
If i look at John's results it should be something like this.
Wait for the trigger of a dozen to be 4 back, then bet 2 opposite doz's.
If win, start new session or retrack for another doz to be 4 back.
If loss, rebet on same 2 doz's with the progr.
This can go upto 3 losses and a win on the 4th.
Stephan
Quote from: Stepkevh on Sep 08, 03:35 AM 2012
If i look at John's results it should be something like this.
Wait for the trigger of a dozen to be 4 back, then bet 2 opposite doz's.
If win, start new session or retrack for another doz to be 4 back.
If loss, rebet on same 2 doz's with the progr.
This can go upto 3 losses and a win on the 4th.
Stephan
I bet Stef that everybody hopes that Five rules are bit more complicated than that ;D
My GF tells me that its based on waiting for one sleeper to sleep for certain number of spins
and bet on the next one. Because not much has been posted recently in terms of new systems we can continue our guessing game.
It would indeed be too easy ;D
oh well, i could only take a guess huh :lol:
:wink: Start each new bet by playing against the most recent dozen.
Only bet if your 2 dozens hits 6 times before the other dozen hits 3 times.
As soon as your 2 dozens hits 6 times bet for 1 win, or progress until the other dozen has hit 3 times.
If you win start a new round betting against the most recent dozen.
If you lose start a new round betting against the most recent dozen, but increase the bet in line with the 4 step 1-3-9-27 progression.
If the other dozen hits 3 times before your 2 dozens hits 6 times start a new round betting against the most recent dozen.
So we play 2 dozens against 1 dozen if they hit 6 times before 3 times over a 4 step progression.
Only number missing in this system is FIVE! :wink:
Quote from: Skakus on Sep 08, 05:01 AM 2012
:wink: Start each new bet by playing against the most recent dozen.
Only bet if your 2 dozens hits 6 times before the other dozen hits 3 times.
As soon as your 2 dozens hits 6 times bet for 1 win, or progress until the other dozen has hit 3 times.
If you win start a new round betting against the most recent dozen.
If you lose start a new round betting against the most recent dozen, but increase the bet in line with the 4 step 1-3-9-27 progression.
If the other dozen hits 3 times before your 2 dozens hits 6 times start a new round betting against the most recent dozen.
So we play 2 dozens against 1 dozen if they hit 6 times before 3 times over a 4 step progression.
Only number missing in this system is FIVE! :wink:
Skakus...your actual description rules had 5 paragraphs :twisted:
lol.
In my opinion that progression is suicide, by the way.
Quote from: Stepkevh on Sep 08, 04:21 AM 2012
It would indeed be too easy ;D
oh well, i could only take a guess huh :LoL:
The rules are as simple as that. But not quite that. Revisiting the ZONE has been very fruitful. Its given me FIVE. Which in turn has inspired a superior version of THE ZONE which is better and more playable than FIVE. BV looks fair to me at the moment. Better than Ladbrokes for sure. If in fact Bayes and Superman were right about BV. Superman will be making a tidy sum from his investment, over the coming months and years. And I will do well too.
After two sessions the breakdowns are identical to fun mode. This is very, very good news.
:)
So John,
You're telling that i'm not far from the answer or are you misleading me :-)
Stephan
Quote from: Stepkevh on Sep 08, 11:45 PM 2012
So John,
You're telling that i'm not far from the answer or are you misleading me :-)
Stephan
No misleadimg Stephan. You know the difference between success and failure with this game, is a slight tweak here. And a slight tweak there. I've revised the Zone for example with a very simple change. And what I now have is a method that will never lose. Once you have an understanding of randoms breakdown.
That's why for example I will now be able to tell if an RNG is fair or predatory. If I don't get the expected average breakdown over several sessions.
Random has virtual limits, points it cannot go beyond very rarely. Any successful method works on this knowledge. I'm being cautious with BV real play at the moment until I reach 3000 points.
When I do, I will step it up and everyone who really came to this forum to learn how to win will take notice. And realize so long as the Rng is FAIR. Its as beatable as a live wheel. And for our American friends this has to be good news. The ultimate complement will be if I reach a point a year plus down the road, where the people that run BV actually fear me. And ban me.
It Could happen as pennies turn into pounds and so forth. Let's see.
As long you follow the terms of play, they will not fear you, they pay out larger sums every hour.
You can get restrictions of withdraw a day, and the limit use to be in 1000 s of Euro.
This is why I never use cancel bet tracking, it COULD violate the terms of use.
Quote from: Johnlegend on Sep 09, 02:28 AM 2012
No misleadimg Stephan. You know the difference between success and failure with this game, is a slight tweak here. And a slight tweak there. I've revised the Zone for example with a very simple change. And what I now have is a method that will never lose. Once you have an understanding of randoms breakdown.
That's why for example I will now be able to tell if an RNG is fair or predatory. If I don't get the expected average breakdown over several sessions.
Random has virtual limits, points it cannot go beyond very rarely. Any successful method works on this knowledge. I'm being cautious with BV real play at the moment until I reach 3000 points.
When I do, I will step it up and everyone who really came to this forum to learn how to win will take notice. And realize so long as the Rng is FAIR. Its as beatable as a live wheel. And for our American friends this has to be good news. The ultimate complement will be if I reach a point a year plus down the road, where the people that run BV actually fear me. And ban me.
It Could happen as pennies turn into pounds and so forth. Let's see.
So John which RNG that you played was not fair in your opinion? Or just you dont trust any RNG? Are you playing FIVE now at live wheel as well?
QuoteAfter two sessions the breakdowns are identical to fun mode. This is very, very good news
I've always said this, it's actually good for everyone to see that a person who ALWAYS only played live wheels is getting identical results on 3 different RNG produces, Bayes home brewed RNG, BV play mode and now BV real money mode, which is starting to prove, random numbers are just that, random numbers.
There are/must be predetory RNG's out there, myself, I wouldn't trust playtech as they give a number at a time so 'could' dish out what you don't want, BV's hash can't change during your play which is comforting to know, BUT you must remember IF and WHEN the killer run arrives that doesn't neccessarily mean the RNG is not fair, almost sounds childish, "it beat me aww that's not fair" anyway, keep going JL and good luck.
QuoteSuperman will be making a tidy sum from his investment
:thumbsup:
Quote from: Ralph on Sep 09, 02:35 AM 2012
As long you follow the terms of play, they will not fear you, they pay out larger sums every hour.
You can get restrictions of withdraw a day, and the limit use to be in 1000 s of Euro.
This is why I never use cancel bet tracking, it COULD violate the terms of use.
Well that's great news then Ralph.
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Sep 09, 03:31 AM 2012
So John which RNG that you played was not fair in your opinion? Or just you don't trust any RNG? Are you playing FIVE now at live wheel as well?
As Superman said Matt Playtech is inconsistent. I'm using FIVE live but obviously tracking is slower than RNGs which is why its exciting to have methods that can beat Rngs. The revised ZONE is more playable live than FIVE. And is beating RNGS too. Its going to become apparent to many by years end, And lucrative for those who adopt it. My only problem now is the occasional forfeit of 6 units when ZERO shows up.
And betting 0,01 on "odd" for a free spin.
I always do it that way and in the end it comes down to -0,03 or +0,03 or evens out.
Its better then risking 6c for a zero
Stephan
Quote from: Stepkevh on Sep 09, 04:48 AM 2012
And betting 0,01 on "odd" for a free spin.
I always do it that way and in the end it comes down to -0,03 or +0,03 or evens out.
Its better then risking 6c for a zero
Stephan
Thanks for the tip Stephan.
Hello John!
How many point you did?
Cheers.
I don't believe there is anyone on the forum not rooting for you JL. We hope you kill it. Good luck.
He is great gambler forever!
" And for our American friends this has to be good news. The ultimate complement will be if I reach a point a year plus down the road, where the people that run BV actually fear me. And ban me."
John,
Is that good news because it will beat a double zero wheel also?
Quote from: Wally Gator on Sep 10, 10:29 PM 2012
I don't believe there is anyone on the forum not rooting for you JL. We hope you kill it. Good luck.
So do I Gator.
Hello John!
What's new with your results?
Best regards.
My 7 year old daughter has a very kind heart - she always says:
"Sharing is Caring!"
:girl_to:
Thanks so much for answer John!
I look forward your FIVE. :thumbsup:
Best regards.
Quote from: Wally Gator on Sep 10, 10:29 PM 2012
I don't believe there is anyone on the forum not rooting for you JL. We hope you kill it. Good luck.
A bit of a mascot dance...for JL/Superman
I was looking for cheerleaders...
link:://:.youtube.com/watch?v=DaVCfVbucVM# (link:://:.youtube.com/watch?v=DaVCfVbucVM#)
:thumbsup:
QuoteA bit of a mascot dance...for JL/Superman
Nice one buddy, hy loop soos a suip gat, nice
Quote from: Maui13 on Sep 19, 02:55 AM 2012
A bit of a mascot dance...for JL/Superman
I was looking for cheerleaders...
link:://:.youtube.com/watch?v=DaVCfVbucVM# (link:://:.youtube.com/watch?v=DaVCfVbucVM#)
:thumbsup:
Brilliant Maui13 I wish I could learn how to bring clips like that on here.
Hello John!
We waiting your yesterday promise about 5.
Best regards. :)
John - very simple...
First - get your video clip ready - Youtube/Vimeo or whatever your choice...
Copy the link address of your clip (hold on to that thought)
Then go to the topic where you would like to post...
Click reply
Click the 3rd icon from the left that shows a little planet and a clipboard/paper thingy. "Insert Hyperlink"
***When you hover your mouse over the icon it should bring up the text "Insert Hyperlink" ***
This should bring up a box where you can now paste your hyperlink that you just copied.
And voila.... clip is in your post! :thumbsup:
Hope this helps!
Ciao
M
Quote from: Maui13 on Sep 19, 03:03 PM 2012
John - very simple...
First - get your video clip ready - Youtube/Vimeo or whatever your choice...
Copy the link address of your clip (hold on to that thought)
Then go to the topic where you would like to post...
Click reply
Click the 3rd icon from the left that shows a little planet and a clipboard/paper thingy. "Insert Hyperlink"
***When you hover your mouse over the icon it should bring up the text "Insert Hyperlink" ***
This should bring up a box where you can now paste your hyperlink that you just copied.
And voila.... clip is in your post! :thumbsup:
Hope this helps!
Ciao
M
Thanks mate.
Quote from: Wally Gator on Sep 10, 10:29 PM 2012
I don't believe there is anyone on the forum not rooting for you JL. We hope you kill it. Good luck.
I guess the idea is more about "not not rooting" for the nutty stuff.
You want to come back on to it every 25 pages, or so, to reaffirm for yourself that it's still going nowhere fast.
On a scale of a "sure $1000 from $100 each month" has turned into what, exactly?
@ GARN
Depends on your units size :wink:
Quote from: GARNabby on Sep 20, 10:23 AM 2012
I guess the idea is more about "not not rooting" for the nutty stuff.
You want to come back on to it every 25 pages, or so, to reaffirm for yourself that it's still going nowhere fast.
On a scale of a "sure $1000 from $100 each month" has turned into what, exactly?
Your thought process is going nowhere fast. I went from 300 to 2,012 in little over a month. Now I'm at 2,601 on a real money RNG. Where you have to sacrifice points in order to move the RNG. So keep out of it. You will believe what you believe until the end. And I will keep winning. Your mind is either in the right place or not. And your mind is not for this game, just pessimistic outbursts to upholster your loser attitude.