*PATTERN 4*

[Moxy]

There's no mathematical basis/advantage of breaking it down in sessions broken apart versus one long continuous session?

Word of warning if you play it straight through you will break even minus the house edge because you do the same exact thing over and over.  It's like playing Red or Black straight through, you will come out even minus the times when you hit zero. 

If you can't win playing long term than explain how you can win playing short term intervals??  Everything must have a sound explanation to it and can't just be.  J Legend, are you going to post your testing records on the forum. 

I don't know if it's inevitable that P4 will come crashing down and the only way to find out is long extensive testing.  And as disapointing as it might be I hope everyone on will be honest enough to concede if it really works or not.  There seems to be a little bit of blind faith going on here that can cloud one's judgment.  Just trying to be voice of reason, that's all.

[marivo]

Sure, let's test

[Moxy]

THIS IS THE ONE   :LoL: !


thanks JL, we owe you  


Day One I am +500 Units

I do ONLY play at BV NZ RNG

I do play ALL THREE EC's

RB
OE
HL

I play a Grand Marti of 1-3-7

I don't do recovery, I take the loss.


Every time you finish a 12 Spin Session, log out and start over


Each Session of 12 Spins take around 60-90 Seconds


Rinse and Repeat  

Congrats, Twister!

This could very well be to the unnatural variances of RNG simulators because they are not truly random by nature only pseudo-random.   People complain about odd, crazy losing streaks and you also hear about amazing winning streaks as well that blows the variance in every direction more so than live wheels or dealers.

So good for you if you keep winning but let's see for the long haul though because that is key; crazy variance or not, every thing will average out in the end.

[Johnlegend]

There's no mathematical basis/advantage of breaking it down in sessions broken apart versus one long continuous session?

Word of warning if you play it straight through you will break even minus the house edge because you do the same exact thing over and over.  It's like playing Red or Black straight through, you will come out even minus the times when you hit zero. 

If you can't win playing long term than explain how you can win playing short term intervals??  Everything must have a sound explanation to it and can't just be.  J Legend, are you going to post your testing records on the forum. 

I don't know if it's inevitable that P4 will come crashing down and the only way to find out is long extensive testing.  And as disapointing as it might be I hope everyone on will be honest enough to concede if it really works or not.  There seems to be a little bit of blind faith going on here that can cloud one's judgment.  Just trying to be voice of reason, that's all.

That is why WE DONT PLAY IT STRAIGHT THROUGH. You win because your bet selection is asking random to do something in a precise place.

I have 2600 games recorded MOXY where random was only able to match the forth pattern with the first pattern 49 times. Thats a little better than breaking even mate.

[jon86]

That is why WE don't PLAY IT STRAIGHT THROUGH. You win because your bet selection is asking random to do something in a precise place.

I have 2600 games recorded MOXY where random was only able to match the forth pattern with the first pattern 49 times. that's a little better than breaking even mate.

Hi John.

Thats amazing.

Did you test with interuption between the sessions? wait 20 spin between for example or just strait play?

Jon

[Moxy]

That is why WE don't PLAY IT STRAIGHT THROUGH. You win because your bet selection is asking random to do something in a precise place.

I have 2600 games recorded MOXY where random was only able to match the forth pattern with the first pattern 49 times. that's a little better than breaking even mate.

You could be right or you could be very, very lucky; but you must have an explanation to that like every thing else in nature if you are right.  

If I roll the dice once every day for one year or straight through in one day and reach an equal amount of rolls, I will get close to a ratio of 1/6 of 7's that would come out for both events proving that it doesn't matter when or how long it takes you to complete each of your tests.

So how do you explain having a 1/7 W/L ratio playing straight through uninterrupted and then suddenly improving to a 1/10 or 1/13 by playing it in intervals in different sessions with gaps in between?  Reasonable enough question, I would think.

[Johnlegend]

Hi John.

that's amazing.

Did you test with interuption between the sessions? wait 20 spin between for example or just strait play?

Jon

No there MUST be AT LEAST 20 spins between games. EVERYONE READ THIS CAREFULLY. My discovery was made testing PATTERN BREAKER GAMES REMEMBER. And they were all SINGULAR. 5 games a day on average. So there is a POWER POINT in this. STICK TO THE PLAN.

Even out, no this is going up and up. My main interest is Twster vs BV RNG. If he breaks 3,000 units in profit. PATTERN 4 is the betting miracle weve been waiting 300 years for.

[ZigZag]

And as disapointing as it might be I hope everyone on will be honest enough to concede if it really works or not. 

Hmm well when i tried to bet this continuous i reported on this site a - 11 loss

Also for anyone on paddypower they can see me in play as i use the same name. I dont sit there looking at 1000s of random number spins and try to see if it works betting continuous. I test EVERYTHING using small chips on a REAL WHEEL for everybody to see.

Just my little 2p worth   

[jon86]

Hmm well when I tried to bet this continuous I reported on this site a - 11 loss

Also for anyone on paddypower they can see me in play as I use the same name. I don't sit there looking at 1000s of random number spins and try to see if it works betting continuous. I test EVERYTHING using small chips on a REAL WHEEL for everybody to see.

Just my little 2p worth   

I will look for you Zig I have same name to in PP 

[Moxy]

Ok, no response.  

For all we know John could be working for the casino just feeding you guys misinformation and fallacies just to round up more suckers to the casino door.  

Just saying...

[ZigZag]

I will look for you Zig I have same name to in PP 

lol i know. I see you leave the table today as i logged in 

[iamvaljean]

There's no mathematical basis/advantage of breaking it down in sessions broken apart versus one long continuous session?

Word of warning if you play it straight through you will break even minus the house edge because you do the same exact thing over and over.  It's like playing Red or Black straight through, you will come out even minus the times when you hit zero. 

If you can't win playing long term than explain how you can win playing short term intervals??  Everything must have a sound explanation to it and can't just be.  J Legend, are you going to post your testing records on the forum. 

I don't know if it's inevitable that P4 will come crashing down and the only way to find out is long extensive testing.  And as disapointing as it might be I hope everyone on will be honest enough to concede if it really works or not.  There seems to be a little bit of blind faith going on here that can cloud one's judgment.  Just trying to be voice of reason, that's all.

@Moxy: Congratulations on your post   Some common sense is always welcome!!!

The only way to get somewhere is through extensive testing. In this method, it is all the same wether the testing is made using continuos spins or making small breaks of 10,20 or 50 spins between 'attacks'. The result is going to be the same and, negative as I may sound, I am afraid the result is that you end up losing the house edge (actually more because of the small progression)

Sorry to sound negative in this case... If I am shown some real spins where the  advantage of this bet selection method is proved I will very gladly change my mind though  

As I said in another post of mine, using patterns to bet is a well known technique to Baccarat players. Lots of variations have been tested and not a single one (that I know of) has ended up as a long term winner. And Baccarat has a much lower house edge than Roulette!!!

[jon86]

LoL I know. I see you leave the table today as I logged in 

Cooooooool 

[Proofreaders2000]

I don't know if it's inevitable that P4 will come crashing down and the only way to find out is long extensive testing.  And as disapointing as it might be I hope everyone on will be honest enough to concede if it really works or not.  There seems to be a little bit of blind faith going on here that can cloud one's judgment.  Just trying to be voice of reason, that's all.--Moxy

All bets are subject to the house edge and unfair payouts.  JohnLegend gets his inspiration from the users in the forum.  He seems to need their energy to be creative.

[woods101]

@ Moxy.

@ moxy...

I've never spoken to john but I know his background. I can vouch that he's done more to help people here and elsewhere over the years to make a profit at roulette than most other people on this site. The same argument could be levelled at you with a lot more ground. Which casino do you work for? I'm sure you don't work for a casino but your debate is an age old one- hit and run vs. Mathematical probability. This is something you should debate elsewhere in a separate thread as it is applicable ( in your mind) to probably more than half the methods posted here. That's not to say that there isn't plenty of people here who will agree with you but I would suggest taking this up elsewhere as it's not actually a method and neither contributes to the testing of this method.
Thanks man.
Woods