*PATTERN BREAKER*

[Ricky]

Unbelievable! Something very, very, very rare!!!

I was very confident and I ended up losing only $120 because I did not want to continue with the progression.

I need to be more cautious, otherwise I will lose all my self-confidenceand and my bankroll

Hey Andre,
the Casino got lucky. That the 1 in 1000 shoes. Keep it up. Between the two of us if we put our win rates together we can smash the all time record for Winning Streaks using PB

Cheers,
Ricky

[Apolloo]

Hi Apoollo,
that's what my bot is doing with this 100 game run. Its playing 4 days straight and about 25 games a day. Almost finished but is ending with just under break even based on the bets I am placing. But I will do analysis in terms of units and recovery as I was not playing same units over that time.

So my next step will be to get your feedback on how I should run the next 100 games. I am hearing I should increase the unit size and play less often. So I will get forum members to look at the results and advise based on a 600 euro bankroll what my next test should be. Over time we will get an ideal mix of bet size and daily profit goal over 100 games to see if we can automate what a lot of you are painfully doing manually.

Cheers,
Ricky

yeah i would suggest in doing what you said in playing higher units and alot less games than 25 a day espessially if at the same wheel.

[Andre Chass]

Hey Andre,
the Casino got lucky. That the 1 in 1000 shoes. Keep it up. Between the two of us if we put our win rates together we can smash the all time record for Winning Streaks using PB

Cheers,
Ricky

You're right Ricky, my bankroll keeps growing every day.

But starting today I will change using the 1, 2, 2 progression.

[sentinel3]

I've already coded the system - link:s://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=20064.0

But some people believe that because they've won with it, it must be a winning system. What they don't seem to realize is that any random selection will work just as well. They are in denial. 

With all due respect. I must disagree with that thinking.

For EXAMPLE WHY NOT JUST. Speed things up Right. And instead of waiting

For 7 patterns out of 8 to form as the trigger. Or 3 of the same pattern.

We just bet against a 2 wide 4 deep matrix like.

HL
LH
HH
LL

Wait until three of those form and bet against the 4th one forming. Sure you could do that coderjoe. And then one day you lose 3 or 4 of those games IN A ROW.

Ive been there done that. PB as I play it..And I mean EXACTLY AS I PLAY IT CODERJOE. Will be winning when you me the owner of this forum are all long gone.

What there will NEVER be too many of. Is the RIGHT PEOPLE to play it EXACTLY LIKE I DO.

I will be a millionaire from PB by 2020. I will invite all Sceptics to las Vegas to watch me play for two weeks. All expenses paid. You can make of it what you want.

Played properly PB is an alltime winner. It will ALWAYS BE TWO STEPS FORWARD FOR EVERY STEP BACKWARDS. ALWAYS....

[DoctorSudoku]

I posted on this forum earlier that roulette has longer persistent trends, baccarat trends are shorter mostly stay in whipsaw range.

Strange though, majority of baccarat players are trend players betting on repeats.

I am not sure I can agree with you on that. In the US, baccarat is very popular with immigrants from East Asia and South-East Asia.

And many of them conspicuously play for the chops -- regardless of whether the results are showing a choppy shoe or a streaky shoe or an in-between type shoe.

Some of them believe in playing for the chops so strongly and consistently, they almost resemble "bots" -- albeit of the human variety.

To make matters worse, many of them do so with the usual negative progressions.

And, naturally, these players frequently pay a big price for playing that way (especially, when it is a streaky shoe).

[DoctorSudoku]

Hi Apoollo,
that's what my bot is doing with this 100 game run.

Its playing 4 days straight and about 25 games a day.

Almost finished but is ending with just under break even based on the bets I am placing.

But I will do analysis in terms of units and recovery as I was not playing same units over that time.

So my next step will be to get your feedback on how I should run the next 100 games. I am hearing I should increase the unit size and play less often. So I will get forum members to look at the results and advise based on a 600 euro bankroll what my next test should be. Over time we will get an ideal mix of bet size and daily profit goal over 100 games to see if we can automate what a lot of you are painfully doing manually.

Cheers,
Ricky

Ricky,
I am NOT surprised one bit by your results.

Forget bots -- if you play that many games (20-30) per day MANUALLY, you will also struggle to break even.

In fact, you will probably end up in negative territory.

I am convinced that the principal reasons I am having a fair degree of success with PB and several other rare pattern-based games are because I play them on a hit-and-run basis -- and I play them sparingly.

I know, theoretically, it should not lead to any advantage.

But, I have to go by my actual results -- and I have been in solidly positive territory since I started playing these rare pattern-based methods on a regular basis since the second half of 2015.

And, of course, I also don't use crazy negative progressions -- and that has also played a role in my getting those positive results on such a consistent basis so far.    

[Andre Chass]

I will make 100k profit by the end of the year and no one will say that I can't. It has already been proven that PB "Andre version" wins much more than it loses. I've been playing using this method for 3 months and I think it's the best strategy I've ever found.

Nothing more to say...

[cht]

I am not sure I can agree with you on that. In the US, baccarat is very popular with immigrants from East Asia and South-East Asia.

And many of them conspicuously play for the chops -- regardless of whether the results are showing a choppy shoe or a streaky shoe or an in-between type shoe.

Some of them believe in playing for the chops so strongly and consistently, they almost resemble "bots" -- albeit of the human variety.

To make matters worse, many of them do so with the usual negative progressions.

And, naturally, these players frequently pay a big price for playing that way (especially, when it is a streaky shoe).

In Macau & Singapore, players there are trend fanatics. If you play chops against the crowd they frown at you. If you lose that hand you will be laughed off as stupid.
If the crowd lose you will receive their curse.

Off topic - Citeh and Pep is a media fake hype that sells papers to the gullible.

CL favourites remain -
1. Real Madrid
2. Bayern Munich
3. Barcelona

[Ricky]

And you have the spins so I can do independant tests rather than take your word for it?

Coderjoe,
I am still waiting for the 20,000 spins you used so I can perform my own independent tests on the way I play PB using a programmed method. As per any program, the only way to improve it or confirm a result is to test it properly.
By you coming on this forum making unsubstantiated claims you only discredit yourself. I am at least sharing my results as I see them for the benefit of members to make their own informed decisions.

Cheers,
Ricky

[DoctorSudoku]

In Macau & Singapore, players there are trend fanatics. If you play chops against the crowd they frown at you. If you lose that hand you will be laughed off as stupid.
If the crowd lose you will receive their curse.

Off topic - Citeh and Pep is a media fake hype that sells papers to the gullible.

CL favourites remain -
1. Real Madrid
2. Bayern Munich
3. Barcelona

Yeah, yeah,  we will see how City and Pep are fake hypes promoted by the media come this weekend.

Get ready to see your gang get effortlessly and mercilessly bitch-slapped by them -- and then to add insult to injury, your gang will then have to bow down to the NEWEST CHAMPIONS of the land.

     

[Ricky]

Here is an interesting scenario. It meets the criteria of a back to back WIN assuming you had the courage to go to the 4th STEP

[Joe]

Coderjoe,
I am still waiting for the 20,000 spins you used so I can perform my own independent tests on the way I play PB using a programmed method. As per any program, the only way to improve it or confirm a result is to test it properly.
By you coming on this forum making unsubstantiated claims you only discredit yourself. I am at least sharing my results as I see them for the benefit of members to make their own informed decisions.

Ricky, I'm not the one making unsubstantiated claims, you are (and everyone else who claims they're winning with PB).
Anyone can come on a gambling forum and claim anything they like, but at least I've backed up my claim with a file showing the results of every single one of 20,000 games. How many others do that? Which has more credibility to you, someone who just makes claims without showing detailed data or someone who makes claims and does provide it?

To object to this, as rouletteghost does by saying that "nobody plays 20,000 games" is laughable. And he accuses me of just coming on this forum to try to prove that the system doesn't work. In fact I wrote the simulation because there was, and still is a lot of hype about the system, so I thought "well maybe there is something to it", even though I was sceptical. So I wrote the simulation but apparently the results mean nothing to some people, who not only ignored them but attacked me. I don't want the system to be a loser, but to ignore the results is just burying your head in the sand. Some people want systems to win so much that they ignore reality. Claims of winning are believed (because people want to believe them) and claims of losing are ignored (because people don't want to believe them), and those who make negative claims are attacked as naysayers.

For your information, I play roulette regularly and am pretty successful, but experience has taught me that you can't win consistently by exclusively using a simple minded system like PB (or in fact, ANY system exclusively). But I am certainly not a "naysayer" who makes blanket statements like "no system can win".

You can download the test results from this thread : link:s://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=20064.0

Or feel free to provide your own spins or baccarat hands and I'll run the simulation again.

[blueman]

Tell us then your system? 

[Ricky]

Claims of winning are believed (because people want to believe them) and claims of losing are ignored (because people don't want to believe them), and those who make negative claims are attacked as naysayers.

For your information, I play roulette regularly and am pretty successful, but experience has taught me that you can't win consistently by exclusively using a simple minded system like PB (or in fact, ANY system exclusively). But I am certainly not a "naysayer" who makes blanket statements like "no system can win".

You can download the test results from this thread : link:s://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=20064.0

Or feel free to provide your own spins or baccarat hands and I'll run the simulation again.

Hi Coderjoe,
I respect that you have done some research into this PB method with your own testing but on reviewing the results you have provided I am not sure what you are trying to test. You seem to have generated randomely some generic spins calling them 1s and 0s to be generic. But this whole approach seems to miss the mark on testing a live situations. I am currently doing this so by the end of my testing of 100 games played I will have actual spins recorded in my RX software which I will share in a file for others to scrutinize. I will also share my results of my BOT in making betting decisions based on the PB rules. I grant you I am not getting results that show the system makes you a multimillionaire within a month of playing it. But that was never the claim. It is the claim that used sparingly in a hit & run mode maybe even using different online casinos to distribute the risk would enable you to GRIND a small profit that over time played with DISCIPLINE and PATIENCE will reward the beholder over a LONG period of time. It was also mentioned that this system is NOT suitable for everyone. You may not like these non system related requirements because you cannot program it in a simulation or because you don't see it as relevent but these things are important. A SMART gambler will above all things protect his bankroll from ruin. He will incorporate stop losses and limits on how much he will risk in any particular session. He will treat his gambling like a BUSINESS. As in any business, some days you will make money, other days there will be unexpected expenses or losses. But a smart businessman will manage these situations and adjust his approach based on the conditions.

These ideas probably don't mean anything to you in terms of whether PB is any better than randomly picking red or black but in my opinion treating any gambling venture like a business is the key to success of any method deployed. If you do not approach any system with discipline and patience you cannot expect to profit from it.

Having said the above, I am going to agree with you that PB DOES lose but from my experience, taking all other aspects into account, it WINS more than it loses. And taking this knowledge into account you can organize your progression strategies and recovery strategies to turn a LOSING situation into a WINNING situation. As Sentinel(JL) recently mentioned, if you use the right recovery session you can recover from a losing game in the next two games and over a 100 game set you can generate a profit where normally you would have shown a loss.

So your simulations need to more reflect these components of the system and not just focus on whether overall you see a negative outcome in terms of units won vs lost.

Having said that, I came to this forum with an open mind and believe there is merit in PB and should be explored to ensure the method is used as it was intended and not just blindly followed without taking into consideration that sometimes it will win and other times you will have many losses. I have experienced this myself in my 100 game test. You will see when I share my results there were two or three times when playing too often I came across 4 losses in a row which had a detrimental impact on the profit made. But there were times when I had long winning streaks. So the key now is to use this information to see how this situation can be improved for the next 100 game test I will be doing. I will not blindly say because it did not show a huge profit it is no good. I will find the reasons and try to avoid these in the future.

Coderjoe, this is the sort of testing you need to do. If you do not have the time to do this level of testing then that's fine and noone is forcing you to do it. But to do some limited testing and then claim to others that it does not work because you tested it in the simulation you have shared is not a convincing argument against using PB.

I do not have my head in the sand and blindly believe what others are saying. As you can see from my posts I take my testing seriously and respect the contributions and experiences that others have brought to the forum. At the end of the day everyone has to make up there own mind whether PB is the method to use for them. Some have done well over it. Other have found that when they used it they came across losing situations so moved on. Not everyone has the time to stick to a system that maybe has not been profitable to them at the start. I have been there myself. My previous method I thought was the one (called permutations which is similar to PB) I won a heap of money in the first few weeks until I encountered a big loss. I did not have the patience to stick to it and the discipline to ensure any one loss did not ruin my bankroll so I immediately abandoned it.

In my opinion, and you may agree, you should not constantly use the same system to profit from the game of roulette. Roulette has the habit of killing any system played too often. Some people have resigned to use the one system for their own reasons. That's fine for them. But I believe you should spread your risk over multiple systems and play each system sparingly. Once you make a certain profit with PB you could switch to say the "footprint" method which follows dealer "footprints" of number repeats or neighbours.

Now to a potential HOLY GRAIL. I encourage you to do some testing on playing baccarat using the PB Andre version because I am yet to have a substantial loss that has wiped out my bankroll. Currently 35-1 over 29 days. Winning streaks are 22 and 13 with one loss in between. Using 10-20 euro base bets I am in profit to the tune of 296 euro (without the loss it would have been 436 euro.

If you have the capability to code a similar simulation playing baccarat I think it will be really helpful to test that our experience is correlated in a 20,000 hand simulation. For this excercise I think you can use RNG to shuffle 6 decks of 52 cards before dealing them in the order in which they were shuffled. But you need to code in the Baccarat rules of dealing player hand and banker hand. You can get this online. If you need more information on the PB method we use we can share but there are many pages in recent posts describing the method. We would like to know what the optimal progression is for this method. How many wins come in 1st, 2nd and 3rd step etc

Again Coderjoe, I'm not here it call you a naysayer but see everyone's contribution as valuable including yours. I look forward to your further testing if you so choose but as mentioned we need to keep an open mind and test in real conditions or, if simulating , try to reproduce real conditions as close as possible including using real spins not rng generatede. I know you have attempted this with the hit and run simulation. But in my view that type of testing does not come to good conclusions. 
Cheers,
Ricky

[atlantis]

Ricky wrote:

Now to a potential HOLY GRAIL. I encourage you to do some testing on playing baccarat using the PB Andre version because I am yet to have a substantial loss that has wiped out my bankroll. Currently 35-1 over 29 days. Winning streaks are 22 and 13 with one loss in between. Using 10-20 euro base bets I am in profit to the tune of 296 euro (without the loss it would have been 436 euro.

Just wondered what the breakdown on the strikerate on each bet - 1st, 2nd or 3rd - that resulted in those impressive 35/1 stats, Ricky?

The reason I'm interested is because It could be that the 3-step cycle progression I posted before might be all that was required or necessary (less riskier progression) but would still deliver the goods with an acceptable profit level; if these sorts of patterns of results are occurring in a regular fashion, that is.

A.