*PATTERN BREAKER*

[iggiv]

Steve, u r AP i know. from your point of view they are wrong.

but they manage to win more than lose, they are not scammers.

[Steve]

No iggiv, mathematical and scientific certainty is NOT AN OPINION. IT IS NOT A POINT OF VIEW.

I don't believe any of them win more than they lose, and if they do, it would be short term results. There are winners and losers in short term play even with bad systems. It is a fact.

Iggiv we are on completely different wavelengths I'm sorry but respectfully you don't understand either.

And you are forgetting the fact that banning of JL had NOTHING to do with whether or not I agree with his strategy.

And you need to understand the casinos never bother with 'system' player because they are NO THREAT. Advantage play is just a way of saying "people that do what works". But ok, lets assume the casinos are still COMPLETELY dopey after all these years..... Truth is they laugh at most of the nonsense posted and love it. Gee, why would that be.

Nevermind I really don't have time for this anyway

[iggiv]

OK Steve.

just take it easy

[kingsroulette]

I believe that "Pattern Breaker" is a much hyped system which has no merits at all. It is simply 3 step martingale coupled with gamblers' fallacy that a particular even is more likely not to happen.
    Both martingale and gamblers' fallacy are responsible for the biggest losses in gambling. Steve banned him very correctly.

[Steve]

kings I'm glad you can see his system has no merit at all, but I did not ban him for having a bad system. My reasons were posted so everyone understood. If I banned people for a bad system, it would be a pretty quiet forum.

Reasons:

1. Banning of JL has NOTHING to do with me disagreeing with him. It is entirely because:

a. he is Fender who has been banned multiple times before for inappropriate conduct. PLUS I have good reason to believe he is also CEH. ie same IP range and from same ISP.

b. I believe he is degrading the integrity of the forum. Specifically I believe he is willfully misleading people for personal and selfish reasons (attention). There are many, many clues to this. For example, a whole year to test a system with a goal of +70 units.... because you know, you have to play for very small wins then run. I mean.....  wtf? that's not a system. that's just plain short term play and praying for luck. There is much more to it, but whether or not he asks for money, he is a fraud. CEH does this for attention. It is sad to see so many gullible people, including members who I though had half a brain.

Even if he wasn't CEH (doubtful), he has also been banned previously for similar justified reasons.

It is nothing personal. Members are either good or bad for the forum. He is past the line and clearly BAD for the forum.

The votes support him being banned, because there is clear enough proof that he is CEH.

anyway whatever, just more wasted time, just drives me batty how INCREDIBLY DUMB some people are. so backwards without a shred of a clue

[Robeenhuut]

I think that some people lost common sense here regarding John. Its clear to me that he manipulated his stats and challenge anybody to prove me wrong. The shifts and turns.... Now after a timely visit of Mr Pilot who endorsed his idea posting some fairytale run of 180 wins in a row with PB he shifted from FIVE and 8 on 1 to play only PB     And FIVE produced 1000+ win streak overall and 70+ on a last step of a progression. Its ridiculous to repeatedly see such claims and if some believe in them then they are seriously misguided. I think that cooking the books could be a legitimate reason for being banned here. But i would not do it personally.

[Steve]

More like total loss of reasoning, not just common sense

[kingsroulette]

kings I'm glad you can see his system has no merit at all, but I did not ban him for having a bad system. My reasons were posted so everyone understood. If I banned people for a bad system, it would be a pretty quiet forum.

very true. most systems are bad.

[Bayes]

I do sympathize with Steve's frustration regarding H.A.R. The way it's defined by JL, it simply makes no sense at all, and that's an objective fact, not an opinion. But some members think of it as just not playing long sessions to avoid a bad run or the house edge "catching up". It's true that in a negative expectation game, the longer you play, the more you will lose, but you can't make a "system" out of that fact. This is the kind of reasoning that underlies such a system, and it's faulty:

1. If I play too long, I'll hit a bad run or the house edge will start to bite.
2. If I don't play too long, I won't hit a bad run and the house edge won't bite.

(2) doesn't follow from (1). It's a fallacy called denying the antecedent.

But this isn't what JL means by H.A.R. He maintains that given the same number of actual bets placed, you're better off breaking the sessions into a number of short sessions rather than one long one. According to JL, this alone gives you an advantage because you "somehow" (and it's never explained just how) will avoid the bad runs. I find it mind-boggling that anyone can swallow that logic. Remember, you're entering the game at random times (meaning there is no "trigger" - whether valid or invalid) and playing the same number of spins in each case. Simple reasoning should tell you that there will be no difference in terms of outcomes in the long term, the only difference being that if you're playing short sessions, it will take longer to realize that there's no difference.

It's just as likely (given that you enter the game at random times) that each of your short sessions will contain as many losses as playing one long "continuous" session.

On the other hand, if you have a valid trigger, then of course it makes sense to only play a limited number of spins as and when the conditions are right, and leave the table when the conditions deteriorate. You could call that H.A.R if you like, and it's the logical way to play.

[Turner]

I believe that "Pattern Breaker" is a much hyped system which has no merits at all. It is simply 3 step martingale coupled with gamblers' fallacy that a particular even is more likely not to happen.
    Both martingale and gamblers' fallacy are responsible for the biggest losses in gambling. Steve banned him very correctly.

Then i should banned, some of the sh.it ive posted lol

[Turner]

Ok...i struggle to be serious but im approaching roulette from an imbalance point of view exactly as bayes just described. Imbalaces have a short life. I stop betting that short idea when the imbalace isnt there. Call it HAR ....call it what u want. I do ok out of roulette. My biggest limiter to making big bucks is playing with small stakes.
Turner

[vundarosa]

kings I'm glad you can see his system has no merit at all, but I did not ban him for having a bad system. My reasons were posted so everyone understood. If I banned people for a bad system, it would be a pretty quiet forum.

Reasons:

1. Banning of JL has NOTHING to do with me disagreeing with him. It is entirely because:

a. he is Fender who has been banned multiple times before for inappropriate conduct. PLUS I have good reason to believe he is also CEH. ie same IP range and from same ISP.

b. I believe he is degrading the integrity of the forum. Specifically I believe he is willfully misleading people for personal and selfish reasons (attention). There are many, many clues to this. For example, a whole year to test a system with a goal of +70 units.... because you know, you have to play for very small wins then run. I mean.....  wtf? that's not a system. that's just plain short term play and praying for luck. There is much more to it, but whether or not he asks for money, he is a fraud. CEH does this for attention. It is sad to see so many gullible people, including members who I though had half a brain.

Even if he wasn't CEH (doubtful), he has also been banned previously for similar justified reasons.

It is nothing personal. Members are either good or bad for the forum. He is past the line and clearly BAD for the forum.

The votes support him being banned, because there is clear enough proof that he is CEH.

anyway whatever, just more wasted time, just drives me batty how INCREDIBLY DUMB some people are. so backwards without a shred of a clue

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

Steve, i don't think it accomplishes much being rude to people. Does being a forum owner automatically gives you the right to label members? How would you react if I was the one making these comments about fellow members? Being right does not gives us the right to stop being cordial....something to think about.......

Vundarosa

[kevint3]

kings I'm glad you can see his system has no merit at all, but I did not ban him for having a bad system. My reasons were posted so everyone understood. If I banned people for a bad system, it would be a pretty quiet forum.

Reasons:

1. Banning of JL has NOTHING to do with me disagreeing with him. It is entirely because:

a. he is Fender who has been banned multiple times before for inappropriate conduct. PLUS I have good reason to believe he is also CEH. ie same IP range and from same ISP.

It says JL has been a member since Feb 2011...we are nearing 2013.

You are just NOW getting around to banning him..for these violations you speak of?
Some one seems butt hurt

[kevint3]

The honorable thing to do would be to "install" a block button. You don't like someone?? You block them..you won't even know they are here.

I think some people just love to p.iss and moan about anything.

You say so many people want him banned..yet these same people flock to a thread he starts with a new system he posts. If you didn't like his last 4 systems why would you even bother to look at a thread he posts a new system in??

Attention seekers of a different kind I suspect.

[Juiced91]

I agree with vundarosa. Was getting a bit annoyed myself being called "dumb" and "stupid" every post. If it wasn't for all us "dumb" and "stupid" people this forum wouldn't exist.