*****FIVE*****

[Johnlegend]

example#1
this is correct?
D1---D2---D3
04---02---06
04---03---02 -> game trigger D1
02---04---05 -> bet trigger D2
02---04---02 -> lost
04---02---06 -> bet trigger D1
06---03---02 -> win
or this?
D1---D2---D3
04---02---06
04---03---02 -> game trigger D1
02---04---05 -> bet trigger D2
06---04---02 -> lost
04---02---06 -> bet trigger D1
06---03---02 -> win


example#2
this is correct?
D2
04
02
04 -> game trigger
03
04 -> bet trigger
04 -> lost
02
02
04 -> bet trigger
06 -> win
or this?
D2
04
02
04 -> game trigger
06
04 -> bet trigger
04 -> lost
02
07
04 -> bet trigger
06 -> win
or this?
D2
04
02
04 -> game trigger
06
04 -> bet trigger
04 -> lost
02
02
04 -> bet trigger
06 -> win


example#3 is correct?
numbers from BV NZ: 4,17,33,33,15,34,23,31,20,34,22,23,13,17,19,36,21,34,3,22,9,5,16,35,15,2,7,36,2,33,27,17,9,10,32,17,5,16,24,33,22,10,6,2,22,36,21,10,9,34,25,19,9,22,31

5,16,35,15,2
2,33,27,17,9 -> game trigger

35,15,2,7,36 -> bet trigger 1
27,17,9,10,32 -> bet trigger 1 LOST

17,9,10,32,17 -> bet trigger 2
22,10,6,2,22 -> bet trigger 2 LOST

2,22,36,21,10 -> bet trigger 3
9,34,25,19,9 -> bet trigger 3 LOST

36,21,10,9,34 -> bet trigger 4
25,19,9,22,31 -> bet trigger 4 LOST

GAME OVER - LOST 80 units

XEO if you are saying you played one game on BVNZ and got that. I won't argue because I personally wouldnt play BVNZ. I don't trust it. And secondly as I have mentioned before. The absence of the ZERO could make a difference to pattern formation. So methods like FIVE and 8 ON 1 might not perform as well. That's my fascination with Twisters quest on BVNZ. You play a game of FIVE and get that. He is pushing 200 games of 8 ON 1 and not even being challenged.
All I know XEO is played on a single ZERO wheel. I have 1,310/1 in real play. And considerably more documented from my days with THE ZONE. So you play a single game on a different format and find an instant loss. What does that mean? Not much to me personally. Find it on the single zero version of BV???

Play the method in the field IT WAS BORN. That's why I have no time for things like random.org. To me they in no way relate to real roulette and real random.

[kevint3]

JL--

So if playing five for instance..you are tracking 4 gaps and get this 1-35-22-ZERO-14-10  .....do you consider that a four gap by discarding the zero? or do you tract the zero's in your game and that would not be a four gap?..like this...1-35-22-ZERO-10-33....four gap on last dozen?

I, personally have been ignoring the Zeros when tracking. If they get me while betting I take the loss but bet on the very next spin...

[Johnlegend]

JL--

So if playing five for instance..you are tracking 4 gaps and get this 1-35-22-ZERO-14-10  .....do you consider that a four gap by discarding the zero? or do you tract the zero's in your game and that would not be a four gap?..like this...1-35-22-ZERO-10-33....four gap on last dozen?

I, personally have been ignoring the Zeros when tracking. If they get me while betting I take the loss but bet on the very next spin...

Very good question Kevin. Up until now I have always counted the zero as part of a 4 GAP. My only loss to date was caused by a Zero hitting on one of the steps. Not saying it wouldnt have lost anyway. But the Zero is an empty number. Unless you are covering it. On the other hand. I believe one of the reasons methods like FIVE and 8 ON 1 work so well on a single Zero wheel is because the zero changes the course of history literally. It pushes things forward everytime it hits. And what may have been a progression destroying pattern is now broken.

Without a zero in the mix. I believe its possible for random to lock into perfect patterns for longer.
Hence why I am amazed Twisters even made 180/0 for 8 ON 1 on BVNZ. The zero is actually a good thing in these methods. And the reason why montrous winning streaks now become realistic at relatively reasonable risks.

[Robeenhuut]

Well here's how I read it Matt. Most people will only consider a method a grail if it never loses. I consider a method a grail if longterm it doesn't show negative numbers. And pound for pound. I don't believe there's anything with 80 units max on the line that can give you a better return.

You have to also keep in mind the one loss I've suffered wasn't a true one. As ZERO was responsible for one of the losing steps. So I've yet to have random present me with a true FIVE.

I think you are making too much of these 70+ holds on step 4. I didn't push this method for nothing. I know how good it is. If ten people play it like me you'll get another 1000 plus winner. So on this forum you have Kevint3 and Samnl and myself playing FIVE.

I love arguing with you John.  Let me explain what i really mean by 70+ wins in a row on double dozen bet. On which step or spin it happened it really does not matter. It was just another double dozen bet. Do you remember how many times you won more than 30 consecutive bets on any step betting on double dozens?  Its like  seeing 1 dozen sleep more than 30 spins. Imagine starting every day in casino with one double dozen bet and continue winning this bet for one month.  Once in 1  Million chance. To do it 70 times you would need 1Mx1M=1 Trillion tries. What happened here is that in a sample of 70 independent spins you beat this astronomical odds in your first try. 
You always claimed that random had a limit and suddenly on the last  step of your progression RNG refused to act randomly.

[xeo]

Johnlegend please reply is this example#1 is correct?
D1---D2---D3
04---02---06
04---03---02 -> game trigger D1
02---04---05 -> bet trigger D2
02---04---02 -> lost
04---02---06 -> bet trigger D1
06---03---02 -> win
or this?
D1---D2---D3
04---02---06
04---03---02 -> game trigger D1
02---04---05 -> bet trigger D2
06---04---02 -> lost
04---02---06 -> bet trigger D1
06---03---02 -> win


example#2
this is correct?
D2
04
02
04 -> game trigger
03
04 -> bet trigger
04 -> lost
02
02
04 -> bet trigger
06 -> win
or this?
D2
04
02
04 -> game trigger
06
04 -> bet trigger
04 -> lost
02
07
04 -> bet trigger
06 -> win
or this?
D2
04
02
04 -> game trigger
06
04 -> bet trigger
04 -> lost
02
02
04 -> bet trigger
06 -> win

Thank you

[Johnlegend]

I love arguing with you John.  Let me explain what i really mean by 70+ wins in a row on double dozen bet. On which step or spin it happened it really does not matter. It was just another double dozen bet. Do you remember how many times you won more than 30 consecutive bets on any step betting on double dozens?  Its like  seeing 1 dozen sleep more than 30 spins. Imagine starting every day in casino with one double dozen bet and continue winning this bet for one month.  Once in 1  Million chance. To do it 70 times you would need 1Mx1M=1 Trillion tries. What happened here is that in a sample of 70 independent spins you beat this astronomical odds in your first try. 
You always claimed that random had a limit and suddenly on the last  step of your progression RNG refused to act randomly.

Matt firstly you need to understand I don't THINK random has a limit. Theres always a time when that pesky upstart will decide it wants to be the party pooper. What I claim/believe is RANDOM has VIRTUAL LIMITS. Points which it rarely crosses. Identifying such virtual limits and forging methods that work with them, enables us to garner profit. that's all there is to it.Now this 70 topic. I don't get what you are saying here. I don't see the link/comparison you are making with going to the casino and winning your first bet of the day everyday for a month.

Number 1 and most importantly Matt. Those 4th step wins werent consecutive. They were sporadic, separated by wins from steps 1---3. All that was happening there was, when I was taken to the fourth step it held. Now you might think some miracle was performed there. I wasn't surprised at all. WHY? Because I have several thousand documented results where it only lost TWICE playing Hit and run. And there were over 90 4th step winners there. So why so surprised??. Five hasnt gone past step 3 of the progression for 60 games now Matt. Is that another MIRACLE? 8 ON 1 hasnt shown me a SINGLE 8 in over 3,500 possible games. That surely must be the finding of the ages then Matt. Like ive said before, and no doubt will say again and again. Knowing something CAN LOSE, and meeting THAT LOSS in play H.A.R fashion are two different things Matt. The fun is the journey seeing how far you can stretch that winning streak again and again.

Will you be surprised if Twister wins 500 plus games of 8 ON 1 on BVNZ TOO? You don't believe in what I do Matt as most can't/don't. But that doesn't mean its not possible. That's what you have to understand. Everyone has their own ways, beliefs in how to best tackle random. All I do is present my ways. If 200 people read it. And a few take it onboard and benefit from it. that's good with me. As I always say regardless of whether 1 or 100 people play my methods. I will be profitting from them until my dying day.

[Johnlegend]

Johnlegend please reply is this example#1 is correct?
D1---D2---D3
04---02---06
04---03---02 -> game trigger D1
02---04---05 -> bet trigger D2
02---04---02 -> lost
04---02---06 -> bet trigger D1
06---03---02 -> win
or this?
D1---D2---D3
04---02---06
04---03---02 -> game trigger D1
02---04---05 -> bet trigger D2
06---04---02 -> lost
04---02---06 -> bet trigger D1
06---03---02 -> win


example#2
this is correct?
D2
04
02
04 -> game trigger
03
04 -> bet trigger
04 -> lost
02
02
04 -> bet trigger
06 -> win
or this?
D2
04
02
04 -> game trigger
06
04 -> bet trigger
04 -> lost
02
07
04 -> bet trigger
06 -> win
or this?
D2
04
02
04 -> game trigger
06
04 -> bet trigger
04 -> lost
02
02
04 -> bet trigger
06 -> win

Thank you

A game TRIGGER and bet TRIGGER must be separated by a gap of at least 5 XEO. So all your example where they arent are VOID.

[Robeenhuut]

RESULTS UPDATE FOR *****FIVE***** FOR  THE 14/10/2012

TOTAL GAMES PLAYED 1,120

TOTAL GAMES WON 1,119

TOTAL GAMES LOST 1

STRIKERATE 1,119/1

BALANCE 1,040 POINTS PLUS

STEP 1 WINS=442
STEP 2 WINS=412
STEP 3 WINS=191
STEP 4 WINS=74----LOSSES=1

Twister in  recent post in 8 thread suggested that i assume that you and/or him are lying about your results to get a closure. I feel i need to respond to that.  I posted before some doubts about your stats and i know that i probably will get no direct response or "im not a math guy" comment again. Let me use a plain English here. You bet here on double dozens using 4 step progression. Each bet usually has between 60% and 70% strike rate. In step 4 you went at some point 70/0 before your first loss as you reported before. You managed to do something that from a statistical point of view happens once in 1 Trillion tries. The odds of winning 70 double dozen bets in a row at ANY time are 1 in 1 Trillion. And 1 Trillion is 1 Million times 1 Million. I challenge anybody to prove me otherwise. Just get any statistical calculator online and calculate the chance of single event of 1/3 chance (2 dozens  hitting) not happening in 70 tries.  The odds of 40 Reds in a row.  That this happened on 4th step is irrelevant. 70 wins in a row at some point in 1st step would be also statistically impossible. Lets get this clear. We are talking about winning 70 bets in a row either playing HAR or continuously. These stats were taken out of the hat. Step 1 produced about 40% winning bets, steps 2 and 3 look ok.  Current challenge lost its way. Original challenge on Bayes RNG was proved to be potentially flawed and it probably was. Now we dont see much more on BV except some swings in balance where there are also other bets placed except FIVE and 8.
Just use a common sense and draw your own conclusions as to whats really happening here.

[spartacus]

 Hi

A small question why a difference of 3 and not play a gap of 4 or 5. Example of differing gap dozen
D1
05 1st
04
05 2nd go
pert 05
03
02
06 gain

D2
06 1st
05
06 2nd go
07 gain

(For info I away from u 6 3 of smarte live casino 4 days ago, column (2) 03.03.02.02.03.03.02.03.03 well I stopped playing, I lost all â,¬ 50).

Thank you for your answers.

[Johnlegend]

Twister in  recent post in 8 thread suggested that i assume that you and/or him are lying about your results to get a closure. I feel i need to respond to that.  I posted before some doubts about your stats and i know that i probably will get no direct response or "I'm not a math guy" comment again. Let me use a plain English here. You bet here on double dozens using 4 step progression. Each bet usually has between 60% and 70% strike rate. In step 4 you went at some point 70/0 before your first loss as you reported before. You managed to do something that from a statistical point of view happens once in 1 Trillion tries. The odds of winning 70 double dozen bets in a row at ANY time are 1 in 1 Trillion. And 1 Trillion is 1 Million times 1 Million. I challenge anybody to prove me otherwise. Just get any statistical calculator online and calculate the chance of single event of 1/3 chance (2 dozens  hitting) not happening in 70 tries.  The odds of 40 Reds in a row.  That this happened on 4th step is irrelevant. 70 wins in a row at some point in 1st step would be also statistically impossible. Lets get this clear. We are talking about winning 70 bets in a row either playing HAR or continuously. These stats were taken out of the hat. Step 1 produced about 40% winning bets, steps 2 and 3 look ok.  Current challenge lost its way. Original challenge on Bayes RNG was proved to be potentially flawed and it probably was. Now we don't see much more on BV except some swings in balance where there are also other bets placed except FIVE and 8.
Just use a common sense and draw your own conclusions as to what's really happening here.

Matt I'm not going to try to convince you of anything. I am going to step away from this forum today. The only thing you need to be concerned about are three dates, December 31st 2012---December 31st 2013 and December 31st 2014, By the latter date. Nobody will doubt that the way I think and play can beat this game. No sane reasonable person whatsoever. Superman will keep you updated. And my only question to you is what will you say/think if Twister goes into the thousands with 8 ON 1 without loss?? I am waiting for that, I know already how good that method is but Twister and what I will do on BV over the next 2---3 years will say a thousand times more than any words I can ever write.

Pilot genuine/fake??? Who knows. But there will be no questioning what I will do on BV. I'm out of here for a long time now. If anyone wants to reach me you can PM me or email me. I'm done talking. The results will talk for me from this day on.

[Robeenhuut]

Matt I'm not going to try to convince you of anything. I am going to step away from this forum today. The only thing you need to be concerned about are three dates, December 31st 2012---December 31st 2013 and December 31st 2014, By the latter date. Nobody will doubt that the way I think and play can beat this game. No sane reasonable person whatsoever. Superman will keep you updated. And my only question to you is what will you say/think if Twister goes into the thousands with 8 ON 1 without loss?? I am waiting for that, I know already how good that method is but Twister and what I will do on BV over the next 2---3 years will say a thousand times more than any words I can ever write.

Pilot genuine/fake??? Who knows. But there will be no questioning what I will do on BV. I'm out of here for a long time now. If anyone wants to reach me you can PM me or email me. I'm done talking. The results will talk for me from this day on.

John

Are you serious? Who is going to wait or care until the end of 2014?  You avoided answering my question again.  What Pilot says its irrelevant. Your numbers just dont make sense. By the way with Code4 you had at some point strike rate 1120/1 (post 563 in Code4 thread) - with FIVE 1119/1. Nice coincidence.  Twister can produce a long winning run - its possible with 5 step 1,3.9.27.81 progression. I can see that. 1000+ more probable than your winning but improbable run with FIVE. Its longer progression. But we saw what can happen in Superman testing and on RNG generator.
And John dont say good bye yet  You will be back soon for sure.

[ugly bob]

one of the few people on here who I can trust is twocatsam who shows videos of real play and not just playing for a few pennies on computer roulette. You can see a real player who makes mistakes like we all do at the tables and has nothing to hide.


bob.

[TwoCatSam]

Thank you for that, bob.  I'll bet I'm as ugly as you are!

I do lose.  (SURPRISE!!!)  Seriously, why should I make movies that show me clawing my way back out the hole?  I just wait until I'm back even and start over. 

Right now I'm fighting the devil.  He got hold of me again the other night!

Sam

[iggiv]

Rob, he answered your question, u just did not want to get the answer. What to do if someone would not listen?

There is a difference of opinions here, that's it. No more than that. It is not "70 bets in a row". It is 70 bets played from time to time. For u it is the same. But sorry, You can't say that John is lying.
If he is lying then You can blame for the same lies John Patrick, Lee Tutor, Brett Morton. Those are people well known in gambling world, and they do just what John L. does. They just use their methods which are well known unlike JL' methods. But they play the same way he does. Would they be surprised with JL results? no way, because their results are similar overall.

Tell them they are liers.

Even wizard of Ods, math genious,  did not call Brett Morton a lier, when they met.
And i think he knows math way better than u.

There is no point to argue. U just push your agenda  with no goal to find the truth.

[iggiv]

i can see a big problem here. People are taken by "tunnel vision" syndrome here. they think that their knowledge covers all the subject they are talking about. No doubts. Now when someone comes and argues with them, they start blaming him for lying and so on.

Now about lying. Lying does not come by itself. Person lying should have some motives to do so.
So far nobody could catch JL on pure lying. Yes, he could make mistakes as anybody else, but
sorry, there was no lying involved. He can't answer some questions. What can u answer if u already did your best to answer, then someone demands more answers, and if there is no more answer, then "he does not want to answer, because he is a liar" label is stuck onto him.

What can u do in this situation? How to answer? I saw John answering, but then it is just goin on and on and on....

I understand why he wants to leave. I don't feel great about all this, but i understand. I think it would happen sooner or later.

i don't wanna blame anyone here. I blame "tunnel vision" syndrome