*MATRIX VERTICAL 5* (Randoms BLACKHOLE)

[joiner29]

hi, if a quad goes to a five do u wait until another quad forms or do you keep betting it wont become a six or a seven as i just had a vertical 10 dozens in a row on betfair live casino

[Johnlegend]

how many spins does 1 game consist of john thanks.

It varies warrior anything from 20 spins to 120. Most of my sessions are over in 200 spins.

[atlantis]

Hi, if a quad goes to a five do you wait until another quad forms or do you keep betting it wont become a six or a seven as I just had a vertical 10 dozens in a row on betfair live casino

Joiner29,
The rule is already stated lots of times: you only bet on a QUAD to not become a 5-POINTER (quintuplet)
If you do NOT win then you track for the next unique QUAD to occur and bet against a 5-POINTER at the next level of the progression...

A.

[joiner29]

thanks atlantis

[Johnlegend]

Hi, if a quad goes to a five do you wait until another quad forms or do you keep betting it wont become a six or a seven as I just had a vertical 10 dozens in a row on betfair live casino

Joiner you never try to outlive a single vertical. you bet ONCE against each quad  becoming a five pointer.

[joiner29]

cheers john cant wait for your new system

[atlantis]

I tried the 4 wide matrix in the program and it still loses. The numbers I used were real numbers from DB.

I'm not trying to be naysayer but I'm just looking for an explanation to this. Is there a problem with the program? Or will the system eventually fail in the long run?

If the program is correct and as I am using real numbers, then what else could explain the bad results?

Hi The Force,
Can you print or look back at ALL of the session quads with this program?
It would be useful if you could scrollback thru the history of the matrix4 and see the quads highlighted for checking/verification and to see whether or not it is identifying them correctly and also prompting correctly to bet. Also there is the ZERO factor - does the prog take account of that? You say IF the program is correct - it might not be...

A.

[superman]

Or will the system eventually fail in the long run?

Yes it will, your results were bad luck that you saw the problem initially in your tests, when I boted it, all matrix methods so far have failed eventually, I have said in other posts they can and do last a reasonable amount of time but eventually the losses are there.

what else could explain the bad results?

Random is my guess.

[Johnlegend]

Hi The Force,
Can you print or look back at ALL of the session quads with this program?
It would be useful if you could scrollback thru the history of the matrix4 and see the quads highlighted for checking/verification and to see whether or not it is identifying them correctly and also prompting correctly to bet. Also there is the ZERO factor - does the prog take account of that? You say IF the program is correct - it might not be...

A.

Force when you say lose what frequency are we talking about (losses per 1000 spins) And as Atlantis asked do you know a zero in the makeup of a quad voids it. This is the problem I have with rigid computer programs. They cant mimick human play and decision making accurately enough to draw a true comparison in results. A friend of mine already number crunched this method. There were 11 three 5 pointers, 5 four 5 pointers and 4 five 5 pointers in a 30,000 spin sample. Thats the bad news. The good news in between those bad boys, there were 479 Quads. But we are not playing 30,000 spin sessions. When you enter the cycle can greatly affect your P&L margin. Im now 205 games no loss. I have to suffer 8 3 five pointers to wipe that out. Its not going to happen especially when my sessions can be over in 140 spins. LESS IS MORE PEOPLE. Never get flustered about waiting to win, when you reach living level you wont be complaining it took you 5 hrs to win what your job used to pay plus all the grief, keep these things in mind...

[Maui13]

@ All the negative people towards this system...

NO ONE - in the history of gambling, sports, wars etc. has won every time they attempt whatever they attempt - NO ONE! So will this system fail, of course it will!!! Everything at some point fails.

Here are the questions:

1. Will it have 100% strike rate for ever and ever and ever and ever - NO it wont
2. Will you have more wins than losses - YES. So this system is exactly what is says it is... successful!!!

So in short...use it? don't use it?....but don't belittle it!!!

[joiner29]

well said indeed if you dont like it leave others may like it

[strato1985]

im in swindon, uk

Worked a  12hr shift plastering on a building site an hour an a half from home,

An i aint gonna sleep till the legend has posted!!

[Johnlegend]

@ All the negative people towards this system...

NO ONE - in the history of gambling, sports, wars etc. has won every time they attempt whatever they attempt - NO ONE! So will this system fail, of course it will!!! Everything at some point fails.

Here are the questions:

1. Will it have 100% strike rate for ever and ever and ever and ever - NO it wont
2. Will you have more wins than losses - YES. So this system is exactly what is says it is... successful!!!

So in short...use it? don't use it?....but don't belittle it!!!

You said it perfectly MAUI13 If you want a method THAT NEVER LOSES, I know a few but youll get few bets. The definition of a successful method for me is one that turns a weekly profit. Thats what its all about.

MATHS DEVOTEES, cant digest that thought. There mission is to uphold mathematicians laws, at all costs. They assume showing a method loses does that. they forget the only thing that matters is STRIKERATE. PROFIT TO LOSS.

MV5 has it as does THE PATTERN BREAKER. I cant wait to hear what the negs are going to try and tell me about PB. Maths is so REDUNDANT with this one.

[joiner29]

come on johnlegend put us out of our misery the suit must look good  just like your systems

[jon86]

You said it perfectly MAUI13 If you want a method THAT NEVER LOSES, I know a few but youll get few bets. The definition of a successful method for me is one that turns a weekly profit. that's what its all about.

MATHS DEVOTEES, can't digest that thought. There mission is to uphold mathematicians laws, at all costs. They assume showing a method loses does that. they forget the only thing that matters is STRIKERATE. PROFIT TO LOSS.

MV5 has it as does THE PATTERN BREAKER. I can't wait to hear what the negs are going to try and tell me about PB. Maths is so REDUNDANT with this one.

What means REDUNDANT ?