A,

In your results it looks like its better to bet FOR rather than against 

Those 6 pointers aren't as rare (on random.org anyway!)


I have been getting similar sequences.

What if we bet continously without waiting for the next trigger to show up. For example:

LHLL
LLLH
LHHH
LHLL
LLHH----so triger col 1
LLLH-----  Down 1 unit
HHLL----- If we bet on col using the 2nd stage of progression will be positive and Atlantis testing

will show a positive as well. I'm sure that i'm wrong the way i'm playing but just wanted to see what you guys think.

Atlantis,
You don't even have the zero factored in or did you qualify the zero has low?
CD

Quote from: buffalowizard on Jul 10, 05:12 PM 2011
Those 6 pointers aren't as rare (on random.org anyway!)
I have been getting similar sequences.

Hi BW,
I am quite willing to accept that JL is right and played correctly on a ZERO table and with real numbers it could be entirely different scenario - but I have to admit it was pretty scary to encounter a bust-out on my first tryout with randomly generated results  -and without a ZERO too! I have not faked those results - that was what it churned out much to my disappointment.
I don't mind telling you it shook me a bit and made me very wary about what can happen in Roulette. All I'm saying it could be a fluke result but - you never know...
Don't get me wrong - I want more than anything for this to work and I'm grateful to JL for posting this.

A.

Dear Fellow Hard Grafters,


Had we been betting with someone's progression posted here link:://rouletteforum.cc/money-management/even-chance-progression/ we would have actually won 12 units.


Granted, it's starts out about as bad as we can imagine, but then it settles down into a more normal, we hope, pattern that takes advantage of my progression.


I will post a play by play account of how my progression would have saved the day in my next post.


Thanks again JL for this system.  It's the one most to my liking of all that has been posted here.  Right up there with Divide and Conquer and Code 4.


GLC

Hi JL   Thanks for your new method...Looks great..

This method you have to use seperate banks for each Even chance....You can't jump from one EC to another EC tigger using same progression...3 seperate progressions for each EC...So if you only have 63 units to play with u can only choose 1 EC and stick to it.

Well this is how i read it anyway..Hopeful John can confirm

Cheers

My progression:
1
2
4
8
6 Let it ride once
8 Let it ride once
10       ''
13       ''
18       ''
11  Let it ride twice
12       ''
14       ''
16       ''
18       ''
21       ''
24       ''
27       ''
It continues, but we don't need the rest of it.  If you're interested, follow the link in my previous post for the entire progression.

Here's Atlantis' results bet against my progression.


L     1       -1
L     2       -3
L     4       -7
L     8       -15
L     6       -21  From here on we have to win 1st bet plus a parlay
L     8       -29
L     10     -39
W    13     -26  Next bet is parlay 13+13=26
L      26    -52
L      18    -70
W    11    -59  From here on we have to win 1st bet plus 2 parlays
W    22    -37  Won 1st parlay
L     44     -81  Lost 2nd parlay
W    12     -69  Next bet in progression is 12
W    24     -45  won 1st parlay
W    48      +3  won 2nd parlay
W     1       +1  reset to 1
W     1       +1
W     1       +1
L      1        -1
W    2        +1
W    1        +1
W    1        +1
W    1        +1
W    1        +1
L     1         -1
W    2        +1
                 ____
                 +12


Cheers,


GLC

Quote from: GLC on Jul 10, 05:50 PM 2011
My progression:

Am I wrong or is it +10?

Thanks JohnLegend for this amazing method, I can't say enough  .......   26000 spins, thats a lot of research..........

"Deep" that Atlantis's first test landed in such a fashion.....

I do feel however, that we can only really conclude that we have tested a method when it has been tested over past live wheel spin data....... Computer generated spins are not alive.....


JohnLegend Quote:

"1, We record spins for ALL three even chances in three separate FOUR WIDE MATRIXES until we have a vertical formation of FIVE of any of the even chances."

The method is perfect....  However, after Atlantis's test run I was inspired to think outside of the box again...  When we lose our first bet in one of the qualified EC's, we do not continue playing in it. We wait for the next 5 POINTER in the other two EC's then bet against it... If this were to lose we switch again....

Very happy that this thread has started, this is just the beginning..... for us at least JL

Quote from: ZigZag on Jul 10, 05:33 PM 2011
Hi JL   Thanks for your new method...Looks great..

This method you have to use separate banks for each Even chance....You can't jump from one EC to another EC tigger using same progression...3 separate progressions for each EC...So if you only have 63 units to play with You can only choose 1 EC and stick to it.

Well this is how I read it anyway..Hopeful John can confirm

Cheers

OMGAWD! Where have you been Zig I thought aliens had abducted you.

Quote from: atlantis on Jul 10, 04:50 PM 2011
Here is my first 1000 spin continuous test with results from random.org.

H   L   L   L
L   L   L   H
L   H   H   L
H   H   L   L
H   L   L   H
L   H   L   L
L   L   H   L
L   L   H   H
L   L   L   L
L   L   L   L - trig col1
L   H   H   L - L at col1     -1
L   L   H   H
H   L   L   H
L   L   H   L
H   H   L   H
H   L   L   H
H   L   H   H
L   H   H   H
L   H   H   L
L   L   L   L
H   L   L   L
L   H   L   H
L   L   L   H
L   H   L   L -trig col3
H   H   L   H -L at col3     -3
L   H   L   L
L   L   H   H
L   H   L   H
H   L   H   L
H   L   H   H
L   L   L   L
L   H   H   L
L   L   L   H
H   L   L   L
H   L   L   L
H   H   L   L
L   H   H   L
L   L   H   L - trig col4
H   L   L   L - L at col4    -7
L   H   H   H
L   H   L   H
H   L   H   L
L   H   H   L
L   L   L   H
H   H   L   H
L   L   L   H
L   H   H   H
L   H   H   H - trig col4
H   H   L   H - L at col4    -15
H   H   L   L
H   H   H   L - trig col2
L   H   H   L - L at col2     -31
H   L   L   L
H   L   H   L
H   H   L   L
L   L   H   L
L   L   H   L
L   L   H   H
H   H   H   H
L   H   L   H
L   H   H   H
L   L   L   L
H   H   H   L
L   L   H   H
L   H   L   L
H   H   H   L
L   H   H   L
H   L   H   H
H   L   H   H
H   H   L   L
H   L   L   L
H   L   H   H -trig col1
H   L   L   L - L at col1    -63****BUST
L   H   H   H
H   H   L   L
H   H   H   H
H   L   L   H
L   L   L   L
H   L   H   L
L   L   L   H
H   L   L   L - trig col2
L   L   L   L - L at col2    -1
L   H   H   H
L   H   L   H
H   H   H   L
H   H   L   L
H   L   H   L
L   H   L   H
L   H   H   L
L   H   L   H
L   L   L   L
L   L   L   L -trig col1
H   L   L   H -W at col1  +1
L   L   L   H - trig col3
L   H   L   H - L at col3   +0
L   H   L   L
L   L   H   H
H   L   L   L
L   H   L   L
L   L   H   L
L   H   L   L
H   L   H   L - trig col4
L   L   L   L - L at col4    -2
L   H   H   H
H   H   H   H
L   L   L   L
L   L   H   H
H   H   L   H
H   L   L   H
H   H   H   L
L   L   H   L
L   H   H   L
L   H   L   L
L   H   H   L - trig col4
L   L   H   H -trig col1 ; W at col4  +2
H   H   H   L - W at col1
H   L   L   L
H   L   H   L
H   L   H   L
H   H   L   L - trig col1 ; trig col4
H   L   L   H - L at col1 ; W at col4  +1   +3
L   L   L   L
H   L   H   L
L   H   H   L
H   L   L   L
L   H   H   L - trig at col4
L   H   L   H - W at col4     +4   
H   L   H   H
H   L   L   H
L   L   L   L
L   L   L   L
H   H   L   H
L   L   H   H
L   H   H   L
L   L   L   H
H   L   H   L
H   H   H   L
L   H   L   H
L   L   H   L
H   L   H   H
L   H   L   H
L   H   L   H
L   H   H   H
H   L   H   H -trig at col4
L   L   H   L -W at col4     +5
L   L   H   H
H   H   L   H
H   H   H   L
L   H   H   H
L   L   L   L
L   H   H   H
L   L   L   L
L   H   L   H -trig col1
H   L   H   H - W at col1   +6
H   L   H   H
L   L   L   L
L   L   H   L
L   H   L   L
H   H   H   H
L   L   H   L
H   L   L   L
H   L   H   H
H   H   L   H
L   L   L   H
L   L   L   L
L   H   H   L
L   L   H   L
L   L   L   H - trig col1
H   L   H   H - W at col1   +7
H   L   H   L
H   H   L   L
L   L   L   L
L   L   H   L
H   L   H   L - trig at col4
H   H   H   H - W at col4   +8
H   L   H   L
L   L   L   H
H   L   H   H
L   L   L   L
L   H   L   H
L   H   H   H
H   L   H   H
H   H   H   H
H   L   L   H - trig at col4
H   H   L   H -L at col4      +7
L   H   L   H
L   H   L   L
L   L   L   L -trig col3
H   L   H   L -W at col3     +9
H   L   H   H
H   H   H   L
H   L   L   H
H   H   H   L - trig col1
L   H   L   L -W at col1     +10
L   H   L   H
L   H   H   H
L   L   H   L
L   L   L   H - trig col1
H   H   L   H - W at col1   +11
H   L   L   H
L   L   L   H
H   L   L   L - trig col3
L   H   H   H - W at col3   +12
H   L   H   L
H   L   H   H
L   H   L   H
L   H   L   L
H   H   H   H
H   H   L   H
H   H   H   L - trig col2
L   L   H   H - W at col2   +13
L   L   H   H
H   L   L   L
H   H   L   L
L   L   H   L
H   L   L   H
H   L   H   L
H   H   L   H
L   H   H   H
H   H   L   H
H   H   H   L
H   L   H   L
H   L   L   H
L   H   H   H
L   L   H   L
L   L   H   H
L   H   H   H
H   L   H   L - trig col3
H   L   H   L - L at col3   +12
L   L   L   L
H   H   H   H
L   H   L   H
L   L   H   H
L   H   L   L
H   L   L   H
L   H   H   H
H   L   H   L
H   L   L   H
L   H   L   H
H   L   L   H
L   L   H   L
H   L   H   L
H   L   L   H
L   L   H   L - trig col2
L   H   L   H - W at col2  +14
H   L   L   H
L   L   L   L
H   H   H   L
H   L   L   H
L   H   L   L

OK. So not so great start for my test. Assuming I've done it right I get a complete loss of
progression in the first half, and a +14 in the second half. Just shows it CAN happen!!!
Amazing  - and it happens on my VERY FIRST TEST!!! 

Obviously this happened because I got a sequence or succession of losers occurring across all
four columns simultaneously which I imagine is pretty rare...?

Now  - only way I can see to counteract this sort of circumstance is to have separate progression
for EACH COLUMN....
Doing that turns this unwelcome result around, and the result is POSITIVE - Each separate column
WINS (or at the very least at the end of the spins is still well inside the progression)

WHY? Because there were not more than FIVE six-pointers in succession in each INDIVIDUAL
COLUMN of the matrix 4 columns.

What do you think John?

Check out the w/l registry for each of the four EC columns:

COL1:  LLWWLWWW = 5 wins
COL2:  LLWW = 2 wins
COL3:  LLWWL = 2 wins (so far)
COL4: LLLWWWWWL = 5 wins (so far)

Played that way the highest step of the progression reached in any one column is the 4th step (1-2-4-8) in col 4 -  and a win occurs on that step.

But as I say you would need 4x63u progression bank...

Regards and sorry to be the bearer of bad news - (but better now than later),
Atlantis.

Atlantis, all is not bad that is at  random.org no zero afterall. Out of interest Atlantis how does the forerunner MATRIX VERTICAL 5 perform over the same sample. As I can see QUADS splitting the SIX POINTERS in that losing first half. And in my real play Since I have never seen more than 6 FIVE POINTERS before a QUAD. I am going on results from live casinos with a Zero wheel. Maybe I tried to fix it when it wasnt broken in the first place. Post kept telling me MV5 was the one. Also Londonboys, most vertical columns don't go beyond 7. So with a stop-loss. That could be a go.

Quote from: ZigZag on Jul 10, 05:33 PM 2011
Hi JL   Thanks for your new method...Looks great..

This method you have to use separate banks for each Even chance....You can't jump from one EC to another EC tigger using same progression...3 separate progressions for each EC...So if you only have 63 units to play with You can only choose 1 EC and stick to it.

Well this is how I read it anyway..Hopeful John can confirm

Cheers

I think ZigZag's approach could be better then what I just mentioned.....

3 BR's for each EC....

Regardless.... I know that this method will only deliver good results.......

Quote from: marivo on Jul 10, 06:11 PM 2011

Am I wrong or is it +10?

Count all the +'s.  Ignore the -'s because they are resolved at the next +.

Quote from: GLC on Jul 10, 07:20 PM 2011

Count all the +'s.  Ignore the -'s because they are resolved at the next +.

Oh i see, thanks!