I have a new method to introduce to the forum. It isnt entirely new in concept. But its potential looks huge. Wading through all past results for all matrix methods. I have found one loss in nearly 3,000 potential games. It is played on the dozens only so far. Whether it would be as effective on columns remains to be seen. The rules...
1, We record spins for the DOZENS in a 4 wide matrix until we get a VERTICAL COLUMN of 3 of the same dozen. I.E
2322
3312
0232--TRIGGER DOZEN 2 COLUMN 4
2, We now bet against this trip becoming an 8 timer. using the classic 1,3,9,27,81 x 2 progression. Total risk 242 units
3, I am playing for 4 games per session. Now depending on your pocket, patience you can wait longer for a quad before commencing. Or bet from a trip against a 7 timer. Using 1,3,9,27 x 2 for an 80 unit risk. I have 300 played games now. With only two 6 timers in the results. The extra risk of 242 units to increase turnover appears well worth the risk.
4, As always I advise you test Vertical 8 thoroughly before risking real funds. Its looking incredible in the 4 by 4 format.
RESULTS UPDATE FOR VERTICAL 8 FOR 02/10/2011
TOTAL GAMES PLAYED 300
TOTAL GAMES WON 300
TOTAL GAMES LOST ZERO
STRIKERATE 100%
BALANCE 600 UNITS PLUS
STEP 1 WINS 187
STEP 2 WINS 68
STEP 3 WINS 43
STEP 4 WINS 2
STEP 5 CURRENTLY UNCHALLENGED...
Quote from: JL
RESULTS UPDATE FOR VERTICAL 8 FOR 02/10/2011
TOTAL GAMES PLAYED 300
TOTAL GAMES WON 300
TOTAL GAMES LOST ZERO
STRIKERATE 100%
BALANCE 600 UNITS PLUS
STEP 1 WINS 187
STEP 2 WINS 68
STEP 3 WINS 43
STEP 4 WINS 2
STEP 5 CURRENTLY UNCHALLENGED...
Quote from: chrisbis
Total of actual spins posted in Forum, from actual game= Zero
Great to see new ideas here, all the Time, but..................................... :o
Sorry John, but some of us, Need PROOF this time.
I have a lot of players on the forum who say they can not replicate your results on many of the Matix ideas.
So, will U show us some actual numbers please?
Or there is a tendency to think, U just make these results "FIT" into your past data, in rather a Unique way!
Some examples would be fantastic to see/examine/study, and then we can
ALL go off, to our respective Casino's, and give a Jolly Good Go!
Urs sincerely, Chris
QuoteOr there is a tendency to think, U just make these results "FIT" into your past data, in rather a Unique way!
:o
Excellent point Chris, everybody who was supposedly supporting these matrix methods has never reported these types of result sets, ever.
Question to other members, have any of you had the same excellent, un troubled results as claimed by the creator?
Quote from: superman on Oct 03, 05:14 AM 2011
:o
Excellent point Chris, everybody who was supposedly supporting these matrix methods has never reported these types of result sets, ever.
Question to other members, have any of you had the same excellent, un troubled results as claimed by the creator?
To Chris/Superman READ rule 4 of the method. And ask yourself how many people on this forum TRULY follow a method for several months. As you should/must. To realize its potential or lack of.
The weak link in the chain is the HUMAN MIND. Never forget that. I am not going to labour with anyone over any method. You can chose to test it on paper or ignore it. Thats your choice.
Glad you're back JohnLegend and congratulations :thumbsup:
Would this method also work in an even-chance format?
Quote from: Proofreaders2000 on Oct 03, 08:49 AM 2011
Glad you're back JohnLegend and congratulations :thumbsup:
Would this method also work in an even-chance format?
Hi Proof thankyou, no even chances are too unstable. For 8, double that and youd have something. But once again you would require the patience to wait for say 8 evens before commencing your campaign. That is why I have introduced it on the dozens. They are the area on the layout I have the greatest experience with.
And 8 is a very solid barrier. Random has only shown me it once in around 3000 potential games. Most verticals don't even see 5. Remember how hard it was just to get a quad to play the ORIGINAL MATRIX VERTICAL 5. That is where this idea first entered my thoughts. Twister was the first person to let it be known that random could show you double figures for a vertical column on an even chance. But when it comes to a 2/1 chance, its another story. Random is running out of steam by the time it hits 4 the majority of the time. This is another of randoms achilles heels.
Test it thoroughly on real spins, and you will come to the same conclusion...
Another masterpiece JohnLegend...........
One loss in 3000 potential games says it all...........
I tested on my CODE4 live wheel spin data of 3500 spins and only found one 9 pointer......
Ofcourse not as VERTCAL8 should be played but shows its strength.........
I think it would be interesting to see where the equilibrium lies. Perhaps 80% of the time only 5 pointers are formed. Giving us the opportunity to start placing bets after a 3 pointer for a 26 unit bet.......
Thanks for taking the time to share VERTCAL8 with us, very exciting........
hi Johnlegend ! thanks for ur all excellent ideas and systems specially in matrix way in this forum. I like this forum for all of u genuises' contribution.
For ur this sytem VERTICAL 8, could u please explain more about my following confusion -
1. After getting VERTICAL COLUMN of 3 of the same dozen, should we continue for next 5 times for 8 ?
2. Or we will stop on win and wait for another quad ?
Thanks
Munir
Quote from: amk on Oct 03, 11:08 AM 2011
Another masterpiece JohnLegend...........
One loss in 3000 potential games says it all...........
I tested on my CODE4 live wheel spin data of 3500 spins and only found one 9 pointer......
Ofcourse not as VERTCAL8 should be played but shows its strength.........
I think it would be interesting to see where the equilibrium lies. Perhaps 80% of the time only 5 pointers are formed. Giving us the opportunity to start placing bets after a 3 pointer for a 26 unit bet.......
Thanks for taking the time to share VERTCAL8 with us, very exciting........
Thankyou AMK, yes there could be enough mileage in the fact that the majority of streaks don't go beyond 5. And its funny you should mention the number 9. Someone emailed me the other day. With a very interesting twist on CODE 4. Using 9 rows to layout all the possible permutations possible. Its called 9 by 9. I am currently testing it.
If it holds up I will ask him if he wants it on the forum. It looks impregnable because it marries the PATTERN BREAKER concept to CODE 4 imagine that. I will wade through my results AMK and give you the breakdown on percentage for strikes inside 5. I have only had 2 6 timers in 320 played games. Using the 4 by 4 approach. So I think you have a very good chain of thought here AMK. For players not able/willing to risk 80 or 242 units.
Well done...
QuoteRandom has only shown me it once in around 3000 potential games
My test I did with the first 3 files of iggiv´s german live casino spins (270000) confirms this result. In this 270000 spins, I got around 18000 betting signals and was faced with 6 losses (0 in the 1st file, 4 in the second and 2 in the 3rd). This means on average a betting signal in every 15 spins and a loosing chance of the progression of 0,033%! :o :o
I have to restrict these result, because I have ignored the zeros, which can lead to some more loosings.
I almost didn´t make these post, cause I hardly can believe the result of these test, but it´s a very simple Excel sheet only based on comparing the dozens.
Thanks a lot for sharing your system and good luck furthermore! :thumbsup:
Quote from: MadMax on Oct 04, 03:47 AM 2011
My test I did with the first 3 files of iggiv´s german live casino spins (270000) confirms this result. In this 270000 spins, I got around 18000 betting signals and was faced with 6 losses (0 in the 1st file, 4 in the second and 2 in the 3rd). This means on average a betting signal in every 15 spins and a losing chance of the progression of 0,033%! :o :o
I have to restrict these result, because I have ignored the zeros, which can lead to some more losings.
I almost didn´t make these post, cause I hardly can believe the result of these test, but it´s a very simple Excel sheet only based on comparing the dozens.
Thanks a lot for sharing your system and good luck furthermore! :thumbsup:
Thanks for your input Mad Max. Very interesting. It tallies pretty close to my research. with one loss in 3000 potential games.
If the test on 2700000 spins is continuous, I'm guessing there is no need for hit and run, right? MadMax, is there any chance you could break down the wins into step 1, step 2, etc? A 1 3 9 progression with higher unit value might be viable.
Jeromin
Here is a test on the entire month of January 2010 from
link:://permanenzen.westspiel.de/Default.aspx?tag=29&monat=9&jahr=2011&tisch=0107&casino=13 (link:://permanenzen.westspiel.de/Default.aspx?tag=29&monat=9&jahr=2011&tisch=0107&casino=13)
Breakdown of results for continuous play:
Vertical 03 = 289 times
Vertical 04 = 095 times
Vertical 05 = 036 times
Vertical 06 = 012 times
Vertical 07 = 002 times
Vertical 08 = 001 times
Vertical 09 = 002 times
Vertical 10 = 002 times
Quote from: Bettor 27 on Oct 04, 07:43 AM 2011
Here is a test on the entire month of January 2010 from
link:://permanenzen.westspiel.de/Default.aspx?tag=29&monat=9&jahr=2011&tisch=0107&casino=13 (link:://permanenzen.westspiel.de/Default.aspx?tag=29&monat=9&jahr=2011&tisch=0107&casino=13)
Breakdown of results for continuous play:
Vertical 03 = 289 times
Vertical 04 = 095 times
Vertical 05 = 036 times
Vertical 06 = 012 times
Vertical 07 = 002 times
Vertical 08 = 001 times
Vertical 09 = 002 times
Vertical 10 = 002 times
Wow, that's some nice numbers there
that's amazing, really amazing
Vertical 03 = 289 times - that means that 289 times it didn't go to vertical 4 or that you had 289 times a signal to bet?
Quote from: soggett on Oct 04, 07:54 AM 2011
Wow, that's some nice numbers there
Does that mean that we have a approximately 98,4% of a run ending at vertical 6?
that's amazing, really amazing
yep thats right but trouble is the other 1.6% of results at 80 or 243 unit losses void any gains ;(
But what if we took just 1/3/9?
that's 26 units for a lot of wins
Do you think that we can tak a loss with that and still be up?
Edit:
then we would have about 95,6% chance of a win, in the long run It looks like it wouldnt work, right?
Quoteyep that's right but trouble is the other 1.6% of results at 80 or 243 unit losses void any gains ;(
Correct, but they'll "try" to avoid that with hit n run as usual which is a fallacy as it just equates to "luck"
Quote from: soggett on Oct 04, 08:05 AM 2011
But what if we took just 1/3/9?
that's 26 units for a lot of wins
Do you think that we can tak a loss with that?
Based on this particular data set (recorded in a 4 X 4 matrix and dozens only) the results would look like this:
Vertical 03 = 289 times
Vertical 04 = 095 times
Vertical 05 = 036 times
Wins = 420 Wins of 1 unit
Vertical 06 = 012 times
Vertical 07 = 002 times
Vertical 08 = 001 times
Vertical 09 = 002 times
Vertical 10 = 002 times
Losses = 019 Losses of 26 = 494 units
Result = -74 units
Yes, thats what I got too
too bad :'(
Five losses from vertical 8,9 and 10 in under 500 spins is a far cry from 1 loss every 3000 spins. Doesn't seem like random is reaching it's limit.
Jeromin
I have to apologize for my first test result. I can´t reproduce the mistake that I made, cause my calc crashes down every time, I want to open the file again (seems to much datas), but I suppose, I calculated 9 in a row dozens instead of 8.
I did a new sheet with 20000 spins, and the result is also disillusioning:
941 wins step 1
288 step 2
94 step 3
33 step 4
14 step 5 (as we can see, the typical *3 ratio for double dozens shows)
units won: 1370
5 losses
units lost: 1210
Result: +160 units
So I come to the conclusion, that this method is also not fit for continous play, as I thought first. What a pity!
Once again, sorry for my mistake. I feel really ashamed of posting wrong results!
John legend, Using a 5 wide matrix I have seen 8 verticals on VC Airball (my usual haunt) The FIRST session I played, I Played this by complete accident at failing to understand one of the other systems properly at first, the matrix 5 I think... I saw something like this:
12133
31323
11213
22213
12133
33233
12313
22223
All was not lost as I won the next line but I was sweating like a dyslexic on countdown when I saw 8, lets just say it was the first and last time I used that system, how you've escaped losing so long is a marvel..
Quote from: MadMax on Oct 04, 09:55 AM 2011
I have to apologize for my first test result. I can´t reproduce the mistake that I made, cause my calc crashes down every time, I want to open the file again (seems to much datas), but I suppose, I calculated 9 in a row dozens instead of 8.
I did a new sheet with 20000 spins, and the result is also disillusioning:
941 wins step 1
288 step 2
94 step 3
33 step 4
14 step 5 (as we can see, the typical *3 ratio for double dozens shows)
units won: 1370
5 losses
units lost: 1210
Result: +160 units
So I come to the conclusion, that this method is also not fit for continous play, as I thought first. What a pity!
Once again, sorry for my mistake. I feel really ashamed of posting wrong results!
I suggest 4 by 4 for a reason. The chances of you running into an 8 or more in that short span are very small. I have said this before and I will say it again and again. Even if it annoys the likes of Superman. The bigger the paper odds. The greater the potential for the SHORT SESSION APPLICATION.
Now lets get something straight here. The name of the game is PROFIT. Nobody said you have to get it in a rigid mathematical way. For people who can only think on one level you will always be at the bottom looking up.
I have no doubt this method works applied in short bursts. For those who are not willing/able to risk 80---242 units AFTER THOROUGH TESTING. The magic number is ****3**** look at it. And study it. And if you can't see a way to profit from its evergreen consistency you should give up this game altogether. I get disappointed with the lack of staying power brought forth on a forum dedicated to this great game.
The majority of people jump from method to method never actually doing the necessary graft to see FOR THEMSELVES. If a method will stand up on LIVE spins. I assure you, you will get nowhere in the process. twenty years from now you will still wrongly assume nothing beats random. I study and play this game 8---12 hours a day most days. I doubt many others do the same. I can impart what I have experienced and learnt to the forum. But YOU have to find the strength of mind to stay with a method long enough to see its worth.
When you have negative minds jumping on any morsel of doom and gloom they can find I know minds become jaded. But the only person who must prove a method works is the PLAYER THEMSELVES. don't take my word for it PROVE IT TO YOURSELVES. All I am doing is offering an idea and the results I have gained from it. The rest is up to you. And it always will be UP TO YOU...
Quote from: Bettor 27 on Oct 04, 08:16 AM 2011
Based on this particular data set (recorded in a 4 X 4 matrix and dozens only) the results would look like this:
Vertical 03 = 289 times
Vertical 04 = 095 times
Vertical 05 = 036 times
Wins = 420 Wins of 1 unit
Vertical 06 = 012 times
Vertical 07 = 002 times
Vertical 08 = 001 times
Vertical 09 = 002 times
Vertical 10 = 002 times
Losses = 019 Losses of 26 = 494 units
Result = -74 units
Bettor27??
You have to be seeing the same thing I am, do you?............
Quote from: amk on Oct 08, 03:07 PM 2011
Bettor27??
You have to be seeing the same thing I am, do you?............
I am thinking vertical 8 should be changed to vertical 11? Wait for vertical 7 to show then use 4 step progression...is that what you are seeing?
Quote from: Jeromin on Oct 04, 09:36 AM 2011
Five losses from vertical 8,9 and 10 in under 500 spins is a far cry from 1 loss every 3000 spins. Doesn't seem like random is reaching it's limit.
Jeromin
Hello
Random does not have a limit. Actually it does but before you will be able to capitalize on it you will reach a table limit..... :)
Extending your progression to make it seemingly a sure bet makes it in a best case scenario not a viable bet because you wait a very long time to win very little. If the random lets you.
If all the matrix systems that were posted here had really worked why people keep posting new variations.
Ask yourselves this simple question. ;D
Regards
QuoteIf all the matrix systems that were posted here had really worked why people keep posting new variations.
Ask yourselves this simple question.
Good question.
QuoteI am thinking vertical 8 should be changed to vertical 11? Wait for vertical 7 to show then use 4 step progression...is that what you are seeing?
There would be no difference in the outcome
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Oct 09, 06:05 AM 2011
Hello
Random does not have a limit. Actually it does but before you will be able to capitalize on it you will reach a table limit..... :)
Extending your progression to make it seemingly a sure bet makes it in a best case scenario not a viable bet because you wait a very long time to win very little. If the random lets you.
If all the matrix systems that were posted here had really worked why people keep posting new variations.
Ask yourselves this simple question. ;D
Regards
If random has a limit, it would be good to know what that limit is for all those matrix type bets discussed here. For example, in another thread EC were being tested with RXtreme and the limit seems to be 23 same EC in a row. But a test of a million, or a few milion results with all the different matrix bets should yield a limit at some point ( or maybe not, I don't know ). Then one can play some other system while running a tracker instructed to warn when the limit is close enough that a long progresion is feasible withing table limits. Which may only happen once every several long sessions. It would be a sure win side bet.
My problem is that if we talk about "random's limits" we cannot then, on a failed progression, turn around and say "hit and run". It's either one or the other.
Jeromin
In fact, a 5 million spin limit for a large number of bets, with a multi tracker, might yield a winner every session.
Jeromin
Quote from: Jeromin on Oct 09, 08:04 AM 2011
In fact, a 5 million spin limit for a large number of bets, with a multi tracker, might yield a winner every session.
Jeromin
Ok you can do it but what would be the point here? Some people reported seeing 10 vertical repeats already so i bet you can get 12 in a row. You can wait then for 6 repeats and use 6 step progression to be safe or wait for 3 repeats and use colossal 9 step progression.....
For me and im a very patient guy completely waste of time.
Regards
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Oct 09, 08:59 AM 2011
Ok you can do it but what would be the point here? Some people reported seeing 10 vertical repeats already so i bet you can get 12 in a row. You can wait then for 6 repeats and use 6 step progression to be safe or wait for 3 repeats and use colossal 9 step progression.....
For me and I'm a very patient guy completely waste of time.
Regards
Firstly, I don't know if there is a point because I don't know if there is a consistent limit. But let's say that someone patiently programs RX to test, no just this bet but 50 or 100 diferent bets: all the matrix bets, streaks, chops, terrible two's, on every layout bet: EC, street, line, dozen, etc. And let's assume that one does reach consistent limits after miltiple million sample trials, both real spin and random. With a large number of bets being monitored at the same time, one or more might reach the expected limit inside a session, close enough that a long progression within table limits guarantees ( or nearly guarantees ) a win.
your example has two problems: firstly, we don' know how far this particular system goes in very large, multiple tests ( 12 in a row? 15? 18? ); secondly, it is only one system. It might take 50 hours of continuous play, or maybe a hundred to reach that point. Maybe more. Hence the need for a large number of systems being tracked at the same time.
Still, I don't like the idea of going against random. Imagine going against Red after 16 consecutive reds, with some crazy martigale, to end up making one unit, rather than follow red and make a fortune letting it ride. This is just thinkig aloud.
Jeromin
Quote from: Jeromin on Oct 09, 09:20 AM 2011
Firstly, I don't know if there is a point because I don't know if there is a consistent limit. But let's say that someone patiently programs RX to test, no just this bet but 50 or 100 diferent bets: all the matrix bets, streaks, chops, terrible two's, on every layout bet: EC, street, line, dozen, etc. And let's assume that one does reach consistent limits after miltiple million sample trials, both real spin and random. With a large number of bets being monitored at the same time, one or more might reach the expected limit inside a session, close enough that a long progression within table limits guarantees ( or nearly guarantees ) a win.
your example has two problems: firstly, we don' know how far this particular system goes in very large, multiple tests ( 12 in a row? 15? 18? ); secondly, it is only one system. It might take 50 hours of continuous play, or maybe a hundred to reach that point. Maybe more. Hence the need for a large number of systems being tracked at the same time.
Still, I don't like the idea of going against random. Imagine going against Red after 16 consecutive reds, with some crazy martigale, to end up making one unit, rather than follow red and make a fortune letting it ride. This is just thinkig aloud.
Jeromin
Hello Jeronim
I think we are both veering of the subject here which is the feasibility of this system.
For me a final conclusion based on the test results of other members and my observation of other similar systems is that this system in its current form is not viable and is not worth tweaking.
Regards
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Oct 09, 08:59 AM 2011
Ok you can do it but what would be the point here? Some people reported seeing 10 vertical repeats already so i bet you can get 12 in a row. You can wait then for 6 repeats and use 6 step progression to be safe or wait for 3 repeats and use colossal 9 step progression.....
For me and I'm a very patient guy completely waste of time.
Regards
Once again you all miss the POINT. Knowing something CAN LOSE, and running into THAT LOSS are two different things. The likes of Superman will be on forums like this until the end of time warning us if it loses AVOID, AVOID. That is not the point. What we have to do is gauge the best way to exploit the strong points of a method while negating the weak point as best as possible.
It may well be true that random has no limit in realistic PLAYABLE TERMS. But that doesn't mean it cannot be exploited with the right application. So nobody saw an 11 pointer, so the call goes out we should therefore wait longer to be assured of NEVER LOSING. Wrong, then someone will report an 11 or longer pointer. This isnt how we beat random...
If I were shrewd with limited funds. The number no-one has latched onto yet is THREE. There are so many strikes on THREE that a PLAYABLE/WORKABLE method should be staring someone in the face on here. I can see it, but I don't want to have to always be the one to spell it out.
It would be nice to see someone else see the OBVIOUS for a change. Aside from a few like AMK and ATLANTIS. Who have really contributed and added to my methods. I don't see enough creative input from others. Instead of waiting around for a miracle. You should get your thinking caps on and contribute more to things.
I am now 420/0 for VERTICAL 8. Do I know its a winner hit and run?? Hell yes, but then I have the knowledge and strength not to be deterred by negative feedback. What I said to all was paper test this and any method THOROUGHLY. Because I will repeat, knowing something can lose, and running into those losses are two different things.
If I played CODE 4 unlimted it wouldnt work. TWO BY TWO. It works like a dream. APPLICATION, APPLICATION, APPLICATION. When it comes to you that its not just the method but how you USE IT.
You will be on your way, HIT AND RUN and CLEVER MONEY MANAGEMENT. Cannot, and must not be underestimated. The idea is to GET AHEAD. Once you have turned your progression even half a dozen times. You should never taste negative figures....
Quote from: Johnlegend on Oct 09, 01:04 PM 2011
Once again you all miss the POINT. Knowing something CAN LOSE, and running into THAT LOSS are two different things. The likes of Superman will be on forums like this until the end of time warning us if it loses AVOID, AVOID. That is not the point. What we have to so is gauge the best way to exploit the strong points of a method while negating the weak point as best as possible.
It may well be true that random has no limit in realistic PLAYABLE TERMS. But that doesn't mean its cannot be exploited with the right application. So nobody saw an 11 pointer, so the call goes out we should therefore wait longer to be assured of NEVER LOSING. Wrong, then someone will report an 11 or longer pointer. This isnt how we beat random...
If I were shrewd with limited funds. The number no-one has latched onto yet is THREE. There are so many strikes on THREE that a PLAYABLE/WORKABLE method should be staring someone in the face on here. I can see it, but I don't want to have to always be the one to spell it out.
It would be nice to see someone else see the OBVIOUS for a change. Aside from a few like AMK and ATLANTIS. Who have really contributed and added to my methods. I don't see enough creative input from others. Instead of waiting around for a miracle. You should get your thinking caps on and contribute more to things.
I am now 420/0 for VERTICAL 8. Do I know its a winner hit and run?? Hell yes, but then I have the knowledge and strength not to be deterred by negative feedback. What I said to all was paper test this and any method THOROUGHLY. Because I will repeat, knowing something can lose, and running into those losses are two different things.
If I played CODE 4 unlimted it wouldnt work. TWO BY TWO. It works like a dream. APPLICATION, APPLICATION, APPLICATION. When it comes to you that its not just the method but how you USE IT.
You will be on your way, HIT AND RUN and CLEVER MONEY MANAGEMENT. Cannot, and must not be underestimated. The idea is to GET AHEAD. Once you have turned your progression even half a dozen times. You should never taste negative figures....
Hello John
Speaking of Code 4 i lost FIRST EVER game played as i reported in one of my previous posts. How is it for hit n run ;D No time for a hit....
I admit i recovered a lot but i dont see that you can have winning streaks in hundreds playing and you need them to be in the profit. But maybe im extremely unlucky.
For me extending the progression by waiting few extra steps is nothing special - you can apply it to virtually any method. As for testing a limit of random as far as i remember the longest streak of one dozen hitting consecutively is 13 so i would say here 13 would be a good number ;D But that would be extremely rare so you would probably be safe with 11. But to either wait so long for the trigger or still risk so many units to win just one for me does not make sense. But maybe its something that would appeal to others. I would rather wait for 6 consecutive dozens to hit and use 5 step progression. Simpler and easier to track and the same risk. ;D
As for merits of HIT and RUN no point in arguing - no way to come up with reliable data to support any of the point of view. Personally for me its pointless discussion.
You have to calculate win to loss ratio and if you are really comfortable with that just do it.
One example... i play something similar to what you are really familiar with - Phase3.
Im ahead playing it for quite long time. But yesterday i saw something that really changed my perception of a limit of random. 3 sets of DS hit consecutively 17 times.
Previous longest recorded streak by me was 14 which seemed already quite long ;D
The system had provision for 12 consecutive hits and was winning in the long run.
Do you understand what im saying? I dont question your numbers but maybe tomorrow you are due for a rude awakening.
Im trying to be far from personal here, just stated my point so maybe others will benefit from a different point of view.
Regards
QuoteI admit i recovered a lot but i don't see that you can have winning streaks in hundreds playing and you need them to be in the profit. But maybe I'm extremely unlucky
You and everyone else mate, except of course ... the chap at 420/0, it's been questioned before, I think its getting long in the tooth all these excellent results only ONE person seems to be having. C.E.H maybe?
Quote from: superman on Oct 09, 03:16 PM 2011
You and everyone else mate, except of course ... the chap at 420/0, it's been questioned before, I think its getting long in the tooth all these excellent results only ONE person seems to be having. C.E.H maybe?
A typical response from Superman. First of all is there anyone playing the method EXACTLY as I do Superman? I doubt it, I don't consider 440/1 excellent Superman. I expect 600 plus. But its winning.
If you had TRULY, 10 members on this forum, playing EXACTLY as I do, and not one of them had results to mirror those of mine. Youd be right to think I'm making this all up. But that's just it, the human mind is the weak link in the chain of this game. Always has been and always will be. Everyone wants a miracle handed to them on a plate. But virtually nobody wants to put the time and effort into running a winning method.
As soon as they hear of a loss or two. They jump ship onto the next method to hit the forum. Theyll be doing this for the rest of their days fuelling your pessimistic forecasts in the process. When I thought like they do, I lost like they do. For several years. Until you get your mind right. You cannot beat this game. Its that simple. 99.9% of players don't and never will have the right mindset to do it. That means even on a forum like this dedicated to the game. Not even 1 in a 100 can ever be successful.
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Oct 09, 02:07 PM 2011
Hello John
Speaking of Code 4 i lost FIRST EVER game played as i reported in one of my previous posts. How is it for hit n run ;D No time for a hit....
I admit i recovered a lot but i don't see that you can have winning streaks in hundreds playing and you need them to be in the profit. But maybe I'm extremely unlucky.
For me extending the progression by waiting few extra steps is nothing special - you can apply it to virtually any method. As for testing a limit of random as far as i remember the longest streak of one dozen hitting consecutively is 13 so i would say here 13 would be a good number ;D But that would be extremely rare so you would probably be safe with 11. But to either wait so long for the trigger or still risk so many units to win just one for me does not make sense. But maybe its something that would appeal to others. I would rather wait for 6 consecutive dozens to hit and use 5 step progression. Simpler and easier to track and the same risk. ;D
As for merits of HIT and RUN no point in arguing - no way to come up with reliable data to support any of the point of view. Personally for me its pointless discussion.
You have to calculate win to loss ratio and if you are really comfortable with that just do it.
One example... I play something similar to what you are really familiar with - Phase3.
I'm ahead playing it for quite long time. But yesterday i saw something that really changed my perception of a limit of random. 3 sets of DS hit consecutively 17 times.
Previous longest recorded streak by me was 14 which seemed already quite long ;D
The system had provision for 12 consecutive hits and was winning in the long run.
Do you understand what I'm saying? I don't question your numbers but maybe tomorrow you are due for a rude awakening.
I'm trying to be far from personal here, just stated my point so maybe others will benefit from a different point of view.
Regards
Robeenhutt, I have been fully aware for several years that random can go into serious downturn at the drop of a hat. That is EXACTLY why I play HIT AND RUN. Here is why I came up with the VERTICAL 8 Method. The original Matrix method MATRIX VERTICAL 5. Concentrated on waiting for a vertical column of three of the same dozen after a QUAD TRIGGER
.
We then proceeded to bet that there wouldnt be 5 QUADS in a row. This method was good. The problem it carried was the patience testing WAIT for a QUAD. It could take hundreds of spins just to get THE TRIGGER. In the wait for that trigger, there would often be several TRIPS formed. And therein lies a gift to this forum. And it looks like I have to be the one to bring this gift to the forum once again.
VERTICAL 8 isnt for everyone (seems no-one) I appreciate this. It is an advanced method. You need several 1000 units in your BR to run it with confidence. The majority of members on this forum don't really have a minumum BR to start with. Which is a problem. Everyone playing this game should bring at least 200 units to the table to start with.
I am waiting to see if anyone can read between the lines here. Because the laymans method is waiting for you all. The NUMBER IS 3. Now I already know its a great one. But I am not going to spell it out just yet. While all are busy looking for the holy grail. Which doesn't exist. At least not in an acceptable format to the masses. You have THE GIFT right under your noses. Roulette isnt about finding a method that never tanks. Its about finding a way of playing the game that ultimately leads to POSITIVE NUMBERS.
When you realize this, you have your starting point. Random will always produce freak runs that upset any set mechancal method. Everyone SHOULD KNOW THIS. And its surprising how many don't. But again, those freak runs are the exception. Its how we capitalize on the standard flow of results that matters. There are no surprises for me Robeenhut. I have seen it all with this game. I had a friend who won several thousand times. PLAYING AGAINST THE LAYOUT. He swore he had the grail, no way could it lose. Then he lost three times in a row in one session. And we are talking 242 units a loss. That deflated him bigtime.
But remember this, HE WAS THERE TO LOSE THREE TIMES IN A ROW. This is the crucial factor all the doom merchants like Superman can't digest. He played the fatal long drawn out sessions, that invite random to take you apart everytime it hits that nasty downturn morphing phase. I play as I play for a simple reason. It garners more profit than straight play. There is absolutely no question about this. It also strengthens your confidence to raise stakes post losses. Because unlike the fatal continuos play. Back to back losses are EXTREMELY UNLIKELY.
This is the most crucial factor to a method like PATTERN BREAKERS success. Yes it can lose and it loses a plenty. But back to back losses are so infrequent profit isnt a maybe its a CERTAINTY. But again this will be lost on virtually all because they heard it loses. Everyone wants a method that makes them rich overnight never loses. And requires a tiny BANKROLL to run. The word DREAMER. Comes to mind whenever I think of this equation. Its simply not going to happen. BUT, making steady profits over time is no pipe dream. IF, (isnt that a helluva two letter word) You go about it in the right way.
And very few can go about it in the right way. Which of course perpetuates the myth that the game of roulette is a mugs pursuit. It is if you are a MUG.
RESULTS UPDATE FOR VERTICAL 8 FOR 10/10/2011
TOTAL GAMES PLAYED 440
TOTAL GAMES WON 440
TOTAL GAMES LOST ZERO
STRIKERATE 100%
BALANCE 880 UNITS PLUS
STEP 1 WINS 285
STEP 2 WINS 88
STEP 3 WINS 62
STEP 4 WINS 5
STEP 5 CURRENTLY UNCHALLENGED
The method is performing very well in the 4 by 4 format, most games dont even go beyond the first step of the progression. I end my session directly after I have played my 4 games. So I have yet to even see a vertical 8 loss, the last step of the progression is currently not even being tested. My next update will be at 600 games played.
John,
What do you do if there are two triggers within the matirx..? for example 2 sets of VERTICAL COLUMN's of 3, like this:
2322
3312
0332
What then, which one do you choose..? (obviously not both triggers as you would then be betting all three dozens)
Cheers
Quote from: topcat888 on Oct 10, 05:26 PM 2011
John,
What do you do if there are two triggers within the matirx..? for example 2 sets of VERTICAL COLUMN's of 3, like this:
2322
3312
0332
What then, which one do you choose..? (obviously not both triggers as you would then be betting all three dozens)
Cheers
Good question Topcat. It seldom happens to me with the 4 by 4 format. Another reason to keep your sessions this short. On the occasions I have had two qualifying dozens in the same row. (Never had 3 to date) Remember you have to play ONE BEFORE THE OTHER. Obviously if the first one makes up my FOURTH GAME in a session. I will not play the next one.
If on the other hand they are both required as part, or to complete my session. I will play them both. I tell you Top cat. There are so many TRIPS in this method. That you are seldom taken to the second step of the progression twice in a row. So keep this in mind. Short SESSIONS RULE. They really do. They will more than not rinse the method of all that can and will go wrong longterm.
One day this will sink into a few minds. Until then people will have to continue to learn the hard way, just as I did from 1995---2003.
Great info, thanks John...
What exactly means the 4 by 4 format?
Quote from: nightwolf4 on Oct 15, 12:15 PM 2011
What exactly means the 4 by 4 format?
Hello Nightwolf, it means you play no more than 4 games per session. Its this discipline of short play. That will LONGTERM, generate a greater overall strikerate than fatal continuos play. You can go for much longer periods without loss. Even on methods with a fast turnover like DIVIDE AND CONQUER. It will give you superior results.
1, We record spins for the DOZENS in a 4 wide matrix until we get a VERTICAL COLUMN of 3 of the same dozen. I.E
2322
3312
0232--TRIGGER DOZEN 2 COLUMN 4
2, We now bet against this trip becoming an 8 timer. using the classic 1,3,9,27,81 x 2 progression. Total risk 242 units
So your betting the same dozen won't hit every 4 spins five times ??? after it has hit 3 in a row every 4 spins?
why not bet after one four wide maxtrix ie 1322 then bet that one line of your choice doesn't repeat 5 times in a row?
Quote from: moles40 on Oct 16, 11:35 AM 2011
1, We record spins for the DOZENS in a 4 wide matrix until we get a VERTICAL COLUMN of 3 of the same dozen. I.E
2322
3312
0232--TRIGGER DOZEN 2 COLUMN 4
2, We now bet against this trip becoming an 8 timer. using the classic 1,3,9,27,81 x 2 progression. Total risk 242 units
So your betting the same dozen won't hit every 4 spins five times ??? after it has hit 3 in a row every 4 spins?
why not bet after one four wide maxtrix ie 1322 then bet that one line of your choice doesn't repeat 5 times in a row?
You could Moles40. The question is do you have the staying power to find out if this would work over the longterm??.
That's what is lacking overall amongst players, STAYING POWER. Until you can stick with something against REAL LIVE SPINS. For several thousand games you just won't know. Idle speculation or hanging on the results of a man-made number cruncher or RNG. Will never give you the true story. That's why the vast majority of players will be going round in circles their whole lives. And losing plenty in the process.
Eh,have not posted on the forum for a long time.
Doubt someone mentioned it,but how ever.
Came after the pause.
Well,I love JohnLegend's ideas,basicly most of them are based on the same thing - verical calculations and matrix,but however,if you have enough bir BR and right progression - you would appear as a winnger after the session.
Going to try this system at BV,no zero roulette table should work. I have something like 10 euros or so left deposited on my account,will play with those funds using 1 cent chips. Eh,God bless BV for giving me the opportunity to play with such a low bank roll :)
Will write back later about the results.
RESULTS UPDATE FOR VERTICAL 8 FOR 9/11/2011
TOTAL GAMES PLAYED 1000
TOTAL GAMES WON 999
TOTAL GAMES LOST 1
STRIKERATE 999/1
BALANCE 1516 UNITS PLUS
STEP1 WINS 567
STEP2 WINS 274
STEP3 WINS 140
STEP4 WINS 16
STEP5 WINS 3----LOSSES 1
Tremendous consistency after 1000 completed games. This is a high risk method. But theres still a diamond in the rough here regarding the strikrate of hits on step 1 of the progression. I will forge a more accessable method in the future.
:)
:)
:)
:)
:)
:)
:)
:)
A Totem Pole of Smileys!
Nice.
Hello, gentlemens!
Doesn't work on [ Auto-wheels (Slingshot-machines)!
Four loses (on fifth leg) in 15 games for real. But fifth leg was never challenged with "fun money" for much more than 50 games (I didn't have ability to record them all) in testing period.
I just wanted to warn you all...
I'm having a hard time believing your results Subreptivus. Reasons being, you only have 3 posts, you have a link to a casino and your forum name refers to being false......
Quote from: amk on Jan 29, 05:29 PM 2012
I'm having a hard time believing your results Subreptivus. Reasons being, you only have 3 posts, you have a link to a casino and your forum name refers to being false......
Hello
Number of posts does not reflect much. If someone follows clear posted rules of a system and reports negative results we should discuss them not discard them.
Regards
QuoteI'm having a hard time believing your results Subreptivus. Reasons being, you only have 3 posts, you have a link to a casino and your forum name refers to being false......
Hello, amk!
It's your right indeed, but I could send you, or attach to this thread, my papers with actual and "fun money" results.
I'm RO person 99,99% of the time. So it just wasn't needed to post something useless for other members. I apologize to all for posting actual link it was copy-paste, so I didn't notice... I saw a lot of links across the forum, but never mind it's already removed (I thought it checked by moderator before appearing in thread).
Regarding my nickname, I just used to it, so using it here also, it shouldn't bother members what does it mean cause I'm able to prove every of my message...
And as was mentioned earlier, I just wanted to warn you all, nothing less, nothing more.
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Jan 29, 10:06 PM 2012
Hello
Number of posts does not reflect much. If someone follows clear posted rules of a system and reports negative results we should discuss them not discard them.
Regards
I agree with this. If a he had said he had won(instead of saying he lost) a million euros would you have said the same thing?
Hey Robeenhuut and Juiced, how've you been.
Well, I said I had a hard time believing his results. If he had won a million I would have a hard time believing that as well. JohnLehend did actually do a lot of testing for this, some where around 30,000 spins or something to this effect. He never saw anything like this, not to say it can't happen. 26 R/B is also possible and happens but for that to happen in his first few games is really unlucky. Sub posts that he had 4 losses in 15 games, wierd. He had a link directly to a casino and his forum name refers to being "false". These things just made me go hmmmmmm. JohnLegend posted a 999/1 strikerate this should be scary for any casino. It would not surprise me if a casino posted negative results for a good method. People lose interest etc. Might be that Sub did actually lose those games I just have a hard time believing that.......
Quote from: amk on Jan 30, 01:56 PM 2012
Hey Robeenhuut and Juiced, how've you been.
Well, I said I had a hard time believing his results. If he had won a million I would have a hard time believing that as well. JohnLehend did actually do a lot of testing for this, some where around 30,000 spins or something to this effect. He never saw anything like this, not to say it can't happen. 26 R/B is also possible and happens but for that to happen in his first few games is really unlucky. Sub posts that he had 4 losses in 15 games, wierd. He had a link directly to a casino and his forum name refers to being "false". These things just made me go hmmmmmm. JohnLegend posted a 999/1 strikerate this should be scary for any casino. It would not surprise me if a casino posted negative results for a good method. People lose interest etc. Might be that Sub did actually lose those games I just have a hard time believing that.......
Hello Amk
I just posted for the sake of arguing ::) . I agree with you about doubting Subreptivus results. But for a different and simple reason. Nobody in the world would continue to be playing this after losing 2 times only in 15 games and having been down almost 500 units so quickly O0
And you know from my older posts that i am not exactly a big fan of this system.
It is just a common sense.
Regards
"Nobody in the world would continue to be playing this after losing 2 times only in 15 games and having been down almost 500 units so quickly"
That's a great observation Robeenhuut. I looked completely over that one. Feels like a Sherlock Holmes episode :)
2Robeenhuut & amk
Hello, gentlemens!
I've described everything in previous post, but it's still on moderators hold...
Regarding 4 loses in 15 games and your brilliant Sherlock-like minds, I didn't really loses 4 of them cause I covered 0 on high bets. So (as Robeenhuut wrote) it were actually 2 loses. BUT it wasn't in original rules, and if I'd stick to original system described in 1st post there will be 4 loses.
And besides, I were playing with low limit table (to be completely sure in this system) so there were -500 units, but it wasn't to much in equivalent...
Well Sub, I think what you saw was as rare as your house being in the path of a total solar eclipse. I think you can now play the method with confidence. I am sure JL has good results at the moment. You can to.
Sub, I missed one of your post some how. Welcome to the forum :)
I think with any method you can walk into weird cases. However if someone reports that they have a 999/1 strikerate the method is good. Regardless of the luck factor. JL also had this strikerate when he started CODE4. Now it is still very good. We also have to remember that even if a method wins 99% of the time 1% will not..........
Thanks, amk!
For sure. And what I didn't mentioned in previous posts, that this "lack of luck" was started after this casino changed design. Don't know how it's tied, but that is what I've noticed.
As F_LAT_INO wrote in some topic, auto-wheel could be rigged less noticeable than unfair dealer.
And what about VERTICAL 8 it is very risky method (regardless of strike-rate) and it eats a lot-lot of time to play 4 by 4. 120 spins for me in average for the last sessions...
Conclusion: auto-wheels in this casino isn't suitable for V8.