*THE MATRIX SLIDE*

[ophis]

Superman step back, you have it in for me I realize that. I'm not going to labour over this with you. If you don't get it, you don't get it.

As Warrior says you and Bayes are the negatives against our positives. You already believe nothing works so theres nothing to add.

In My Humble Opinion you have provoked it by your Grail claims... This is where it all started. And now you won't admit that those claim were simply not true.

Only thing they trying to say is that your method isint any better/worst than any other method.

And if IT IS working for YOU then <bravo>. But there are only couple of other people with results which inditate that this method is worth risking money.

---
And regarding your statistics of Win/Lose ratio... well any results that can't be reproduced by anyone else are simply False and shoudnt be taken as indicator of "How good is the method"

---
About "hit and run"... any method is good if your "timing" is good... this is nothing new.
You can simply go and bet red for 10 spins... if your "timing" is good then you will win.
Any method will win this way.

And if your method is winning ONLY when TIME is right.... then... oh well... its as "good" as betting red for 10 spins.


###
I'm sorry if I have offended anyone with this post.

[superman]

In My Humble Opinion you have provoked it by your Grail claims... This is where it all started. And now you won't admit that those claim were simply not true

Exactly, I don't 'have it in' for anyone! the fact is, YOUR so called grail methods only work in your timezone which is something you wont share, even with your followers.

[trebor]

I'm not looking for an argument but I want to state my experience with JL's methods as part of a balanced view.

I've played them all, at first the zone with real money and got stung. Then I tested the current methods and could not replicate the success of others and I did test exactly as the methods require.

My conclusion is that luck plays a big part. If you get off to a flying start and build up winnings that survive the downturns I can see that would give the confidence to continue. Not my experience I'm afraid.

Maybe I'm one of those unlucky* people. Maybe if I carried on I would come to the good times. I've no idea. There must be others with similar results that just don't post.

*On a more positive note I do have my share of luck playing other methods.

I wish good luck to everyone whatever your chosen route.

Robert

[vundarosa]

Not in any hurry Atlantis. I am thinking of waiting for A slide to form. Then betting against it producing the reverse. I have a staggering 213 unplayed winners in my results. And for a 26 unit risk. This is some discovery Youve made here Atlantis. It really is.

--------------
"This is some discovery Youve made here Atlantis. It really is."

wow, just played consecutively 200 lines, code 4 style. Not against any quad formation but just against the corresponding doz/col...

*1 loss and due to zero.
*+96u profit

vundarosa

[vundarosa]

@atlantis & JL

this is how i'm testing it
I did not play a slide if a zero was involved.
Betting both right and left slides

                     right                left             
3 A 2 C
1 0 1 B   
3 C 2 A   
1 B 2 B                   first 12 spins
2 C 3 A            l1 col2                       w col3 
3 B 3 C            w col3 
3 C 2 B   
1 C 3 A             w col2              l1 col3 
3 A 2 B                                   w col2 
1 C 1 B   
3 B 1 C              w                                  w 
3 A 1 C   
2 A 2 B   
3 C 1 A              w                     l1 
0 A 3 A                                      w 
2 C 1 C   
1 B 3 A              w                    l1 
1 B 2 C                                    w 
3 C 1 C 


vundarosa

[Bayes]

Bayes are you playing a system at the moment?and are you making money at it? I think you said you had a method that won on something like a million spins and it beat it ,so what is the problem?

As I said in that post, I never play what you'd call a 'system' for very long, if at all. My bet selection is based on standard deviations and the MM is variable.
I said I have coded and tested methods which have won over  large numbers of spins (1M+) , but they would be impractical to play because the profits are too small and the drawdowns too large. I was replying to FLAT who said no system will win over a million spins.

The thing is John, you are touting these systems as impregnable, and imply that they can be played indefinitely (albeit in a 'hit and run' way) with virtually no risk.  Tone down the hype, that's all we ask.

[Bayes]

Theres no such thing as luck Superman. ITS TIMING and nothing else.

Wow! this is new, so it's TIMING?

Why did you never mention this before? you have always said your entry into the game is RANDOM. What gives?

[Bayes]

I'm not looking for an argument but I want to state my experience with JL's methods as part of a balanced view.

I've played them all, at first the zone with real money and got stung. Then I tested the current methods and could not replicate the success of others and I did test exactly as the methods require.

My conclusion is that luck plays a big part. If you get off to a flying start and build up winnings that survive the downturns I can see that would give the confidence to continue. Not my experience I'm afraid.

Maybe I'm one of those unlucky* people. Maybe if I carried on I would come to the good times. I've no idea. There must be others with similar results that just don't post.

*On a more positive note I do have my share of luck playing other methods.

I wish good luck to everyone whatever your chosen route.

Robert

Thanks for the feedback Robert.

By the way, not criticising, but there's no need to justify your post by appealing to a balanced view. Forget political correctness or worrying about causing arguments - the TRUTH is more important.

[vundarosa]

Thanks for the feedback Robert.

By the way, not criticising, but there's no need to justify your post by appealing to a balanced view. Forget political correctness or worrying about causing arguments - the TRUTH is more important.

-----------------

As I said in your poll thread, what's enticing about JL's methods is the BR required. Other systems that perform to the same standard require much bigger wallets...ok, so they are not "holy grails", but they aren't garbage either! And the small BR requirement is not something to be taken that lightly...small BR means bigger unit value...and even if you'd have but 1u profit in 10 sections played, a big enough unit value would make the whole enterprise quite worthwhile.

and this is also TRUE

vundarosa

[Bayes]

vundarosa,

I didn't say that John's systems were garbage, only that there doesn't seem to be much evidence for the claims he makes of them. trebor has told us his results and it contributes to the overall picture.

[Johnlegend]

Exactly, I don't 'have it in' for anyone! the fact is, YOUR so called grail methods only work in your timezone which is something you won't share, even with your followers.

What are you talking about follower? What am I the messiah?

Number one I never said any method is a definate grail. I said The matrix slide is looking grail like. As for the time zone. There is no such thing. And am I the only person on here who is winning. Please anwser that.

I have told you a few times now HIT AND RUN works. Simply because you will fall BETWEEN LOSSES MORE THAN CONTINUOS PLAY. Read that over and over Superman and it might sink in

We just dont know how good a method is until weve tested it thoroughly on real spins. You dont have to be a genius to figure out that if something has paper odds of 80/1. And you can attain several hundred wins to every loss you have a WINNING METHOD.

[Johnlegend]

And I will state this with absolute assurance. PLAYING AGAINTS THE LAYOUT, will never match or outperform, PATTERN BREAKER, CODE 4 or anyother good method on here.

You are doing your best to nonsense all the methods I endorse. It would be BETTER if you actually played them properly. And see for yourself. Know why they succeed. The way you jump over any good idea is deplorable. How do you know for example Atlantis's Reverse slide isnt going to be another achilles heel for our friend Random?

You don't, CODE 4 gave me 642 straight wins. Two other members broke the 1,000 barrier. But I am making this all up. A few weeks ago I made a 63 unit progression yield four times that strikerate for a six step E/C code. But I must be lying again. Because it would croak on your bot precisely after 63 wins.

Manmade simulators have you mixed up Superman. They are no more reliable than an RNG. The guy who lost his very first game on CODE 4 Robeenhutt. Then went on to win over 200 games last count. I dont claim you WILL NEVER LOSE.

I claim if you play as I do you will PROFIT over the long Haul. And you WILL.

[Johnlegend]

@atlantis & JL

this is how i'm testing it
I did not play a slide if a zero was involved.
Betting both right and left slides

                     right                left             
3 A 2 C
1 0 1 B   
3 C 2 A   
1 B 2 B                   first 12 spins
2 C 3 A            l1 col2                       w col3 
3 B 3 C            w col3 
3 C 2 B   
1 C 3 A             w col2              l1 col3 
3 A 2 B                                   w col2 
1 C 1 B   
3 B 1 C              w                                  w 
3 A 1 C   
2 A 2 B   
3 C 1 A              w                     l1 
0 A 3 A                                      w 
2 C 1 C   
1 B 3 A              w                    l1 
1 B 2 C                                    w 
3 C 1 C 


vundarosa

Nice work Vundarosa, but you better start losing before they acuse you of being a big liar too.

[donik7777]

 96 units
 

[amk]

Bayes..........

Surely a great mind such as yours realizes when there is merit to a method.........