****8 on 1****

[kevint3]

JL...what is your definition of hit and run??

Are you saying one hit and done? Or 3...or 4?? What is your limit  at one sitting?

[Johnlegend]

JL...what is your definition of hit and run??

Are you saying one hit and done? Or 3...or 4?? What is your limit  at one sitting?

Never EVER more than 4 games Kevin. Most of the time I play two. But PURE HIT AND RUN. Is one game and DONE. And if you hit 3 or 4 tables for 1 game a piece in your session. You are going to do even better. Get off the track quickly. Remember that wheel is turning constantly. And the chances of you landing dead on top of a losing game are very, very small. If you keep it short.

You will literally defy random and the odds and come out overall with profit in the longterm. When I played long drawn out sessions I LOST. And I still will IF I play that way. But since I have adopted this approach overall I have made profit. And never had a losing year. You only have to think about it. Forget about all you have heard about the game. And think then think some more. To lose at 8 ON 1 playing HIT AND RUN. You have to land directly on top of an 8. It can happen YES. But it will happen a lot, lot less. Than if you just stay there betting for even 20 games in a row. Because you will be more likely to travel into a loss. Even if there was one loss every 100 games. It would be harder to find it playing Hit and Run, than playing straight through 100 games. That should be basic common sense to all.

[TwoCatSam]

Dang, John.  There's almost some logic in that!!

Keep on truckin'.

TCS

[kevint3]

John,

Just curious, but if you are playing **Five** and during that game you encounter a betting opportunity for 8 on 1 and win...do you finish out the game of Five? I am guessing you do. I would.

[Robeenhuut]

A while ago a forum member here Roletti tested some of the methods including Code 4 using hit and run approach versus a continuous play. He found not much difference in a strike rate in the long run.
It just experienced some fluctuations which are normal. Im sure if somebody repeated the tests the results would be the same. So if we play 100 games continuously one after another our odds of experiencing a loss are bigger if our games are separated by 100 spins?  And John when you started your challenge with FIVE on Bayes RNG you played a lot games every day...

[Johnlegend]

John,

Just curious, but if you are playing **Five** and during that game you encounter a betting opportunity for 8 on 1 and win...do you finish out the game of Five? I am guessing you do. I would.

No Kevin, I have total faith in both methods ability to stand alone. Remember ive only had the one loss on FIVE. On a live wheel with a zero involved. The method is going strong. Its a winner just like 8 ON 1. You stay with it and youll see. STAY WITH DOZENS though.

[Johnlegend]

A while ago a forum member here Roletti tested some of the methods including Code 4 using hit and run approach versus a continuous play. He found not much difference in a strike rate in the long run.
It just experienced some fluctuations which are normal. I'm sure if somebody repeated the tests the results would be the same. So if we play 100 games continuously one after another our odds of experiencing a loss are bigger if our games are separated by 100 spins?  And John when you started your challenge with FIVE on Bayes RNG you played a lot games every day...

Matt I've just realized you don't understand what I'm talking about regarding HIT AND RUN. I don't think many do. Its NOT about separating the games. Its about getting OFF THE TRACK. We all agree that random is constantly morphing, changing its flow RIGHT? that's why its so hard for a rigid mechanical method to get the better of it. Random is like water It can flow into any shape, form eventually.

But for it to beat 8 on 1, you have to land directly on top of that loss. CODE 4 is a different animal to 8 ON 1 Matt. With CODE 4 random has a code to figure out. Which it of course eventually will. With 8 ON 1 random has to stretch to a virtual limit its hard pressed to do. PLUS it has to do it EXACTLY at the same time I decide to play a game. Do you see the difference?. What I'm asking random to do to beat me. Is stretch itself way beyond its comfort zone (FOUR CONSECUTIVE 4 GAPS) Whenever I feel like it. And as time will show. That is asking too much. Of course it will eventually lose. I never doubt that. What I always say is in the meantime it could give me who knows how many wins.

Yes I played a lot of games on Bayes RNG, but they were separated not continuos. When I played long sessions, you saw what happenned to me. Theres only one way I DEFINATELY know how to win. I've been trying to get this across to you for nearly 2 years on this forum. Forget if I go up or down, or sideways. Come december 31st my first milestone of 50 euros will have been reached. Come december 31st 2013 my second milestone of 10k will have been reached. And only HIT AND RUN can do this for ME.....

[Robeenhuut]

Matt I've just realized you don't understand what I'm talking about regarding HIT AND RUN. I don't think many do. Its NOT about separating the games. Its about getting OFF THE TRACK. We all agree that random is constantly morphing, changing its flow RIGHT? that's why its so hard for a rigid mechanical method to get the better of it. Random is like water It can flow into any shape, form eventually.

But for it to beat 8 on 1, you have to land directly on top of that loss. CODE 4 is a different animal to 8 ON 1 Matt. With CODE 4 random has a code to figure out. Which it of course eventually will. With 8 ON 1 random has to stretch to a virtual limit its hard pressed to do. PLUS it has to do it EXACTLY at the same time I decide to play a game. Do you see the difference?. What I'm asking random to do to beat me. Is stretch itself way beyond its comfort zone (FOUR CONSECUTIVE 4 GAPS) Whenever I feel like it. And as time will show. That is asking too much. Of course it will eventually lose. I never doubt that. What I always say is in the meantime it could give me who knows how many wins.

Yes I played a lot of games on Bayes RNG, but they were separated not continuos. When I played long sessions, you saw what happenned to me. Theres only one way I DEFINATELY know how to win. I've been trying to get this across to you for nearly 2 years on this forum. Forget if I go up or down, or sideways. Come december 31st my first milestone of 50 euros will have been reached. Come december 31st 2013 my second milestone of 10k will have been reached. And only HIT AND RUN can do this for ME.....

John

My point was about playing just 4 games a day like you do and claiming a superiority of this approach. There were few simulations done already that did not show any difference in a strike rate. Which methods were tested is irrelevant. If your method works HAR it should work in larger number of games played continuously. There is always a set of numbers that defeats your method some time and if you put together randomly 100  random samples of 10 spins each do you think that you have a lesser chance to get it than in one continuous 1000 spin sample? Both samples represent just a equally random set of spins.  Its statistics 101  and you can not ignore this fact. Your winning runs are certainly not attributed to HAR factor. And getting off the track i would rather call a luck factor. Its the most under appreciated factor in beating roulette.

[Johnlegend]

John

My point was about playing just 4 games a day like you do and claiming a superiority of this approach. There were few simulations done already that did not show any difference in a strike rate. Which methods were tested is irrelevant. If your method works HAR it should work in larger number of games played continuously. There is always a set of numbers that defeats your method some time and if you put together randomly 100  random samples of 10 spins each do you think that you have a lesser chance to get it than in one continuous 1000 spin sample? Both samples represent just a equally random set of spins.  Its statistics 101  and you can not ignore this fact. Your winning runs are certainly not attributed to HAR factor. And getting off the track i would rather call a luck factor. Its the most under appreciated factor in beating roulette.

No Matt you have mis-understood me. I mean 4 games a SESSION not day. I might play 20--30 games a day but NEVER more than 4 at a time.

[Ralph]

Most fluctuations comes in shorter runs, that do not means hit and run allways are better.
But for example a streak never last, so reset or change methods or break is not at all bad.
Continue running the same will be hit by random at some point. Its a work of random if we get our methods winning numbers as well.
Breaking up the play can reduce misstakes, we get tired and lose focus after a while.
We all know we have days which are better, and if we feel it is not working now, why do not wait then?

[Johnlegend]

Most fluctuations comes in shorter runs, that do not means hit and run allways are better.
But for example a streak never last, so reset or change methods or break is not at all bad.
Continue running the same will be hit by random at some point. Its a work of random if we get our methods winning numbers as well.
Breaking up the play can reduce misstakes, we get tired and lose focus after a while.
We all know we have days which are better, and if we feel it is not working now, why do not wait then?

Breaking up the play is the ONLY WAY I am certain I will win. I cannot say that about sitting there waitng for the inevitable to happen. Many of you don't understand that when you leave a wheel its still spinning. While you are away the loss that was wating for any foolish enough to play for endless hours has likely come and gone. Now when I come back to play the MAJOR DIFFERENCE. Is for me to lose I have to land BANG ON TOP, of the losing game. Until you take this onboard you will never understand how I'm going to do what I'm going to do over the next three years.

[Skakus]

What you're doing is playing a 5 step progression on 2 dozens.

If you just did that continuously from the start you would land on a loser soon enough.

But you are breaking up the game with a convoluted trigger & selection process. The resulting broken up game is for all intents and purposes the same as playing hit and run.

So you are playing a 5 step progression on 2 dozens using hit and run to the power of 2.

Just my opinion.     

[Johnlegend]

What you're doing is playing a 5 step progression on 2 dozens.

If you just did that continuously from the start you would land on a loser soon enough.

But you are breaking up the game with a convoluted trigger & selection process. The resulting broken up game is for all intents and purposes the same as playing hit and run.

So you are playing a 5 step progression on 2 dozens using hit and run to the power of 2.

Just my opinion.     

Yes Skakus the purpose is to get off the track. Its like when you handed 32,000 spins to Superman and said right lets see how Jls 8 ON 1 stands up to this. I am actually surprised there werent at least 3 or 4 losses in there. Its a good job Superman didn't test it on Columns, because I got my arse kicked playing 8 ON 1 on COLUMNS Tuesday night. And it wasn't that the progression lost. I got two SEVENS in three hours. My problem was I went in after two triggers. And started too heavy. And because I am not allowed to bet more than 1 EURO 100 points. I ran out of steam before the losing run ended. And as a result found myself 6.5 Euros down for the day.

So 8 ON 1 is not stable on COLUMNS. On the Dozens however I still haven't had more than FIVE 4 GAPS. at BV.and 6 live. And FIVE is off on another wonder run. I know some people will never get or accept how I play. But its worked for me, because I have stayed with it and understood why it works. Theres no old thinking in my head. Only what transpires in front of me as that wheel spins. I am back on the up and up. And in November. I am going to spend an entire week playing nothing but BV. that's when I will make some serious progress.

[kevint3]

JL

What you see inside random is really a different and refreshing twist on an old game. You have a vision and passion.  I myself have questioned is the 4 gap method any different or better then just
playing 2 dozens on a four step progression. Maybe it is....maybe it isn't.

I don't believe random knows what a four gap or any gap is for that matter.

It is a pattern man (you) have witnessed over years of playing. It is a pattern that is easy to play within a relatively short amount of time for a hit and run.

If you like to play a new twist on a game then try it out...if you don't...then don't simple as that.

[Johnlegend]

JL

What you see inside random is really a different and refreshing twist on an old game. You have a vision and passion.  I myself have questioned is the 4 gap method any different or better then just
playing 2 dozens on a four step progression. Maybe it is....maybe it isn't.

I don't believe random knows what a four gap or any gap is for that matter.

It is a pattern man (you) have witnessed over years of playing. It is a pattern that is easy to play within a relatively short amount of time for a hit and run.

If you like to play a new twist on a game then try it out...if you don't...then don't simple as that.

That's it Kevin, I don't normally play methods that don't have my full confidence. When I try something that hasn't been thoroughly tested by myself I can and do get burned. As I did with the COLUMNS. But after years of playing the ZONE. I had a wealth of H,.A.R results that showed me something random wasn't doing WITHIN those H.A.R results. To most 80 units risk on a progression to win 1 unit seems madness, let alone 242. But then someone is willing to risk 2000 points on something they bought on the internet.

That to me is madness, and so we go on and on and on. Questioning will this work and how can I wait to win a meagre 1 point? When that bot test showed negative expectation. As I keep saying knowing something can lose and MEETING that loss are two different things. I haven't run into a losing game yet. And I am 390/0. Five isnt even being challenged at the moment. Since its single loss live. I've never been taken beyond step 3. This is where my confidence comes from Real play and results. Not endless theorizing about what IFS. They don't build bankrolls.