THE CROSSPLAY 5*****

[GLC]

that's a good idea Side B and welcome. I think we need to wait for 3 even 4 triggers with the crossplay to make it safer. When playing only dozens or columns I have never seen more than 7 games before it returns to 5 or 6 so I am thinking after what Trebor said that 7 losing games is the virtual limit. You know if you know there is a point that seldom gets crosessed you should still be as close to it as possible. I would say 2 triggers for THE ZONE and 4 FOR THE CROSSPLAY 5. TELL ME HOW OFTEN YOU SEE A 5LOSS FOR THE zone AND AN 8LOSS FOR THE CROSSPLAY 5.

THE NEED FOR PATIENCE IS THE PROBLEM HERE I HAVE IT BUT MANY DON'T. BUT THERE IS AN incredible solution to that coming soon. thanks to Scooby. I won't break it yet but he has discovered something VERY SPECIAL.

Scooby,

I know that you have enough years on us to be full of wisdom and we all need a word of advice re: patience.  As for me, I'm all ears. 

Help!

G.

[atlantis]

Another point is to ensure is that you are definately only betting after back to back losers.

After the first virtual loss; when you have lost 2 fictitious bets on a qualifier; you must not wait until that doz/col HITS before you record it down as a loser eg:
DOZEN2=14 before you start searching for the next virtual losing trigger.
Instead you must track immediately from the loss and search for qualifiers for your second virtual loss TRIGGER. In other words there must not be intervening winning qualifiers between the 2 virtual loss results. I think that is quite important  - to only commence betting on a qualifying doz/col if the preceding 2 triggers were back to back losers... Same if you're losing 3 or 4 triggers.

Thanks,
A.

[FENDER1000]

Another point is to ensure is that you are definately only betting after back to back losers.

After the first virtual loss; when you have lost 2 fictitious bets on a qualifier; you must not wait until that doz/col HITS before you record it down as a loser eg:
DOZEN2=14 before you start searching for the next virtual losing trigger.
Instead you must track immediately from the loss and search for qualifiers for your second virtual loss TRIGGER. In other words there must not be intervening winning qualifiers between the 2 virtual loss results. I think that is quite important  - to only commence betting on a qualifying doz/col if the preceding 2 triggers were back to back losers... Same if you're losing 3 or 4 triggers.

Thanks,
A.

Well spotted and said Atlantis. Yes often the next qualifier has already hit on spin 5 or 6 before the losing one has concluded its vacation. Atlantis I played the crossplay 5 today using 3 triggers instead of two. I feel more comfortable with that, now that Trebor has reported a 7loss to us. And I had 2 3losses in my sessions so I was happy with that. Another thing to note Atlantis, and READ when tracking dozens and columns. Is OFTEN after you have a cluster of hits on the 5th and 6th spins THEN COMES THAT 4LOSS PLUS.

This has always been the case when I played THE ZONE. You will see as in one of my real sessions below.

DOZEN 1=6
DOZEN 2=5
DOZEN 3=6
DOZEN 1=11
DOZEN 1=7
DOZEN 3=9
DOZEN 2=7
DOZEN 1=7
DOZEN 2=6
DOZEN 1=10
DOZEN 2=5
DOZEN 3=6----Do you see what I mean Atlantis often 3 or more 5/6 hits are followed by a 3loss or greater. This is something to learn to read when tracking.

[ScoobyDoo]

The way I see it is you need to find a happy medium between the number of triggers are you patient enough to gather and the length of your progression.

The term that Fender doesn't use when trying to describe his way of thinking about a winning system is "The Law Of Diminishing Probability". It just means that the longer you follow  something to happen, the less likely  it is to happen. For example, if you track even chances to repeat, the longer the string of repeats gets, the more likely that string will end.

Now I know this "Law" flies in the face of Math geeks but if you ever do any testing, you will find this to be true.

So, what you are looking for is, what is the most times a losing trigger will repeat in a row, 99.9% of the time. Sure, there will be times when that string of triggers will exceed that barrier but the occurance will be rare enough for you to make a nice profit before it happens.

[FENDER1000]

The way I see it is you need to find a happy medium between the number of triggers are you patient enough to gather and the length of your progression.

The term that Fender doesn't use when trying to describe his way of thinking about a winning system is "The Law Of Diminishing Probability". It just means that the longer you follow  something to happen, the less likely  it is to happen. For example, if you track even chances to repeat, the longer the string of repeats gets, the more likely that string will end.

Now I know this "Law" flies in the face of Math geeks but if you ever do any testing, you will find this to be true.

So, what you are looking for is, what is the most times a losing trigger will repeat in a row, 99.9% of the time. Sure, there will be times when that string of triggers will exceed that barrier but the occurance will be rare enough for you to make a nice profit before it happens.

Hi Scooby very well said. Listen MATCH 9 is unreal. I think its TIME. You know what I am saying Scooby. It is THE ONE. I have made too much already with it. Do you want to break it or me??

[Side B]

Atlantis, I'm not sure I understand, could you please clarify?

The way I've been playing is by the same rules as the Zone, ie I wait until the losing dozen hits before I start looking for a qualifier again.
ie.  in the sequence LHHMMHML (L hits on 7th spin= loss!) followed by MMHM I would bet on L here (as opposed to betting on H  2 spins ago).  That's the way we're all playing it, right?

Also, so far I'm finding there's around 50-50 winning to losing games, lots of progressions going up the 5th or 6th game, making for really long sessions (even worse than the Zone waiting for one or two virtual losses).  I liked the idea of Crossplay at first as I thought it would be a good way to get in and out quickly, but so far it's been long sessions and losing me money! My aim is to make 3-4 units a day and I'm very patient, I'd really like Crossplay to work but the Zone with its average 80% strike rate is better than Crossplay's 50% so far. . .

[FENDER1000]

Here are my results for the last two sessions I am now waiting for 3 triggers for a little extra safety. The wait is a bit longer BUT WORTH IT.

THURSDAY SESSION 1
DOZEN 1=11----COLUMN 2=7
DOZEN 3=8----THREE TRIGGERS COMPLETE
COLUMN 1=7-5PTS
COLUMN 2=6+4PTS----SESSION ENDED WITH 4 PTS PROFIT--LEVEL 2 STAKES
DOZEN 2=9
COLUMN 1=5
COLUMN 3=5
DOZEN 1=5
DOZEN 3=8----SESSION COMPLETE WITH 4 WINS--6 LOSSES

THURSDAY SESSION 2
COLUMN 1=8
DOZEN 2=11
COLUMN 2=9----THREE TRIGGERS COMPLETE
DOZEN 1=6+4PTS----SESSION ENDED WITH 4 POINTS PROFIT
COLUMN 3=5
DOZEN 3=5----COLUMN 1=6
COLUMN 2=6
DOZEN 1=7
DOZEN 2=13----SESSION COMPLETE WITH 5 WINS--5 LOSSES

RUNNING BALANCE SINCE 17/05/2010=121 POINTS PROFIT
WINNING STREAK =89 WINS AND ZERO LOSSES

Still going very well, now that we know a 7loss is possible I am waiting for 3 triggers instead of two. I am also reading the winning patterns. For example if there is a cluster of 3 or more hits on the 5th and 6th spin. I am expecting a potential 4loss or greater. In which case I will wait for anything up to 4 triggers before beginning.

[FENDER1000]

Atlantis, I'm not sure I understand, could you please clarify?

The way I've been playing is by the same rules as the Zone, ie I wait until the losing dozen hits before I start looking for a qualifier again.
ie.  in the sequence LHHMMHML (L hits on 7th spin= loss!) followed by MMHM I would bet on L here (as opposed to betting on H  2 spins ago).  That's the way we're all playing it, right?

Also, so far I'm finding there's around 50-50 winning to losing games, lots of progressions going up the 5th or 6th game, making for really long sessions (even worse than the Zone waiting for one or two virtual losses).  I liked the idea of Crossplay at first as I thought it would be a good way to get in and out quickly, but so far it's been long sessions and losing me money! My aim is to make 3-4 units a day and I'm very patient, I'd really like Crossplay to work but the Zone with its average 80% strike rate is better than Crossplay's 50% so far. . .

That's IT SIDE B. Amazing isn't it? In a random game where anything can happen. those 5th and 6th spins collect on average 50% of the action. that's what gives the CROSSPLAY 5 ITS POWER. We just have to learn to read it a bit better to tame that potential 7loss or greater. And we have an amazing strategy...

[Side B]

Fender, your optimism knows no bounds!! Can you please confirm that I'm playing it right, as in my example sequence in my previous post?

[ScoobyDoo]

Hi Fender,

I'm not 100% convinced that MATCH 9 is ready to bring to the forum. But since you say you are having good luck with it maybe you should be the one to introduce it, especially since you have a few things that you have added to it which I don't know much about.

If you are going to introduce it, I think you should start a new thread.

Scooby doo

[Gizmotron]

Here are my results for the last two sessions I am now waiting for 3 triggers for a little extra safety. The wait is a bit longer BUT WORTH IT.

... I am also reading the winning patterns. For example if there is a cluster of 3 or more hits on the 5th and 6th spin. I am expecting a potential 4loss or greater. In which case I will wait for anything up to 4 triggers before beginning.

I've illustrated that making a set of rules simple, complete, and disclosed that one or two refinements would follow soon, in which case they did. In a few posts I had shown that the system was easy to explain. It only took me one day to create that system. Now it has been programmed and tested. Why do these 11 year old systems continue to go through changes? Why is the Zone now morphed into THE CROSSPLAY 5*****, with the implication that the NINE(morphedZone) system is soon to make an appearance. I thought that the Zone was the money maker for the past 6 years and perfected for 11 years. It only took 150 forum pages to discover that it was a constantly changing system. Why do the Fender1000 system always evolve after disclosing them. Why are there people asking for the correct rules 100's of forum pages later? I see that pattern.

[superman]

Why do the Fender1000 system always evolve after disclosing them

Because random has no limits, except for the limts he hasn't yet seen, when he does the rules change to suit, this is what every roulette player goes through, 100% for optimism though, everyone started out like that. 

Funny thing is though, all the great names he brings in, it's funny how the mind works when you 'think' you've found the dogs bo||ocks, your chuffed with yourself, tell the world, they denounce when people don't agree, mainly because they haven't seen what happens yet, we've all been there, he'll catch up. 

[Gizmotron]

superman , well yeah, only I didn't expect the truth. Nice answer.

[Bayes]

it's funny how the mind works when you 'think' you've found the dogs bo||ocks, your chuffed with yourself, tell the world, they denounce when people don't agree, mainly because they haven't seen what happens yet, we've all been there, he'll catch up.   

Good post superman.  Why all the hype from Fender? sometimes I think he's trying to convince himself by singing the praises of the latest casino-crusher.  He certainly doesn't convince me.

[ScoobyDoo]

When fender introduced the ZONE, Fender had been using it successfully for a number of years. After it's introduction, several members suggested things that might improve it. If Fender thought they were better than what he had been using, he went with it. I don't see that as being so unusual....We all want whatever method we are using to function the best way it can.

In regards to the CROSSPLAY 5...It was created by someone other than Fender. Fender liked it so began testing it and added suggestions as he went along. It was never claimed to be a fully complete system so suggestions have been made by members to improve what has been shown so far. There are no set rules at this time.

When push comes to shove, I'm sure that Fender will always fall back on what worked for him over the years. If by chance one of these other off-shoot methods also work he will merely add them to his arsenal of methods.

It makes me laugh....These are all things that we all do.....but when Fender does them, for some reason it is marked as different.....Go figure