CODE 4

[Johnlegend]

Wouldnt like to argue just to say opinion.


I thought to myself ok am i crazy when i can't see why all this JL stuff and approach would work??
And then decided to ask over 20 professionals and very very knowledable people of this game about this . It is very interesting that NOT EVEN ONE didn't confirmed that such approach can work longterm. Not even close to that. And also martingale for the name of all gods?


But JL will say put asside their knowledge they don't have mental set to see what am i about.. Hm.. Realy?



It is strange (not to say hillarious) to see how one can avoid bigger draftdowns only by playing very very short bursts of play in bigger  time frames. Hm... realy?


All this code bombarding stuff realy are gettin anoying more and more. Is it possible to block some threads not to see them at all? NEVER AGAIN.


Regards


Drazen

Drazen what do you actually do on this forum??? You should count yourself lucky AMK doesnt block you from this thread. He is too nice a guy. You have a CHOICE you dont like me or the methods stay away or go and work on your own simple really.

[Johnlegend]

John the Bloviator

Your disregard for logic and reason totally amaze me.  What you are--in effect--saying is this:  I'll take two unknowns and prove my theory.
If I want to measure a cucumber, I place a ruler beside it not an ear of corn.

What you propose to do is a conduct a test in which you cannot lose.  You assume and preach--incorrectly--that the system, Code 40, is infallible.
So--by that convoluted/tortured logic--if you lose the RNG must have cheated you.  Your system is great; the RNG is crooked.  If you should happen to
win--and how we'd know that, I don't know--then you could pronounce the RNG fair and your system flawless.

It is a win/win for John the Bloviator.

You sure bring life to the forum!!  I strongly suspect you'd set yourself afire if you had a large enough audience.

Sam

Sam maybe your years are catching up with you or something. Because while you are fond of quoting everything but the kitchen sink. Your understanding of the written English is slipping. I said I can beat an RNG IN PRACTICE/FUN MODE DAY AND NIGHT. And by Joe I can. Its when you start playing with that thing they call MONEY ever heard of that? that's when the monkey business begins. Now read that over and over until you take it in PROPERLY. Before you start your ridiculous, slanderous attacks.

And by the way I could care less whether you or anyone on this forum believes me or not. I never came here to prove anything to anyone. I came here to share what I have personaly learnt from  real experiences with certain methods and play applications. The response I am getting from certain charactors was expected.

The likes of you Drazen Cro, Bayes and Superman. Will take your negative beliefs to the grave. I tagged that one a while back. I am interested in the very few made of the right stuff. And they are of course the very few. As a good friend said to me sometime back about people in general. "YOU WOULD HAVE MORE CHANCE MAKING AN ATHEIST BELIEVE IN God. THAN YOU WILL A MATHS DEVOTEE THAT ROULETTE CAN BE TAKEN LONGTERM". Was he right??Absolutely.

I don't care what you think of me be sure of that. As I just said to Drazen Cro. You have a choice if you don't like me or my methods. Simply ignore me and do your own thing. Its that simple really.

[Johnlegend]

John Legend is like a scientist. 

What i hear him saying is he's going to run a comparative test of CODE 40 on both LIVE and RNG wheels.  He's too good to run all CODE 40 testing on an RNG.  And the reason he's even considering RNG is, in my opinion, there have been reports indicating that either some RNG's may actually be fair, or some may be suitable for this type of system. It would be good to know which RNGs are fair in live play.  It would save a lot of effort down the road to making money.   But to be scientific, he needs to maintain what's called a control group.  He's saying CODE 40 performs so well, he'd be willing to test both side by side...in hopes of getting the same kinds of statistics his live play normally yields.   

Scientists sometimes get excited about their new findings.  Sometimes they publish their findings too soon, or with too much fan fare.  I find this less frustrating than secrecy and hoarding.  After all, none of this is costing anyone anything except the time to test it with a reasonable base unit.  Code 4 Reverse Attack "failed" with an 18/1 strike rate (some might debate that) over a break-even rate of 7/1 (did i get that right?),  and a less-than-controlled control group (some might debate that).  Yes, it was an alpha or beta and we looked like rats in a lab.  But it was free, and might lead to some better ideas down the road.

There are indeed symbolic comparisons to be made between this type of approach and some kind of prophet who preaches power (empowerment) and freedom.  There again, it could be worse.  This is less frustrating than the preachers of dis-empowering doctrines, or those who keep their magical powers under lock and key, shared only with an inner circle, or sold only to the highest bidder.

If i were to stand up and preach the truth, i would run into the same states of mind; those curious enough to follow along for a few miles (before falling by the wayside), those who utterly disbelieve from the get-go (unbelievers), and those who are willing to get up, get going, and get (sooner than later) to the end of the journey home (through perseverance).   

We can only be disappointed when we misplace our expectations.  The Twilight Zone we've been calling "the world"  has disappointment built in and everyone is some kind of gambler, hoping to gain something from it.  We have a little bit of random longevity...but not really a life.  The inevitable draw-down is always around the corner.  We postpone it as long as we can before starting over with a BR of pretty much zero.   Extracting anything constant out of chaos, confusion and random circumstances...is the closest this Twilight Zone will ever allow us to experience anything comparable to REALITY.

I say we believe in John Legend and his miracles.   Accept them as the symbols they are. It's a miracle anybody shares anything of value around here or any forum where there's money to be made from what most perceive as a limited source.  Seeking and finding the truth, believe me, is much more challenging, and requiring equal or more dedication.  So this is good practice.   

~Still   

Still no dis-respect. But CODE 4 REVERSE ATTACK hasn't failed. Its hovering between 18/1 and 20/1 at present. that's far from a failure as it requires around 10/1 to break even. Its not as lucrative as I had at first hoped for. But my testing error is to blame for that. But anytime you even make a few percent over breakeven with a method you are doing what nearly everyone alive thinks impossible. You are beating the game of roulette.

And to anyone who thinks no one would publish a method if it really worked. You could publish them  day and night. Have billboards all over the place advertising them. Have them on the radio, TV the Internet. But you know what you could never do? Give the MASSES the mindset to play them faithfuly and stay with them LONG ENOUGH to do real damage. And that will be the same always.

I don't know how many members there are on this forum for example. But very few of them have what it takes. They have roulette killers sitting all over this forum. But they are not of the mind to ever use them to do what they were intended to do. That's where you can't help them.

They will skirt around them make excuses about logic and reasoning. Say ole JL never told me what to do if a Zero shows up. Ever heard of PM Bayes? If you were really that interested you could have PMed me I don't spend all my time wading through every post on this forum. There is a possibility I can miss some. Has that ever crossed your mind? And you talk of selective. You know my stand on testing. Of course I will favour those who do it the RIGHT WAY. That's obvious. Your indifference and lazyness is your shortcoming Bayes. You are fond of sneering at people and passing your silly one liners.

But when it comes down to the real meat and potatoes of the issue. You will back out everytime. You had no intention of testing CODE 4 REVERSE. From the getgo. Be honest about that.

[Johnlegend]

This thing is getting out of hand! I've never seen any forum shoot down someone like this, specially someone who's been around on this forum for a while, and as far as I know has always been constructive.


John puts down a method, and the first thing that happens is people start shooting it down.
Take some numbers, play the method, come back and post your results. (good old pen and paper)
If you don't have the time to test it, who the hell are you to criticize it?


Methods come and go, but what I don't understand is why does John have to prove anything?Then every single member here should start posting vids and screen shots WITH proof of their methods (ridiculous)

Play the method the way he does, (fun money) if you like it try it on a real money account.
If you make a couple of bucks, great....if you don't, so be it.


Who am I that anyone should listen to, no one, no one special or with fantastic methods or anything.
I'm just a regular guy, like everyone on here, that enjoys breaking away from my everyday life, reading some good topics of what people believe might work on a roulette table.


The beauty of it all is, I HAVE THE POWER to choose whether I want to believe it or not. I have the power to test if I want, but no one has given me the right to publicly break or humiliate someone.
I am very sad to see what's happening here.


... and people say Roulette is a gentleman's game!


Ever heard of "contrsuctive critism" ?
Let me Wiki it for those who haven't...


"Constructive criticism aims to show that the intent or purpose of something is better served by an alternative approach"


Now please explain where the better served alternative approaches are in some of these posts?


I end this with what I said previously... YOU have the power to choose and your choice is your right,but you don't have the right to change someone else's choice!


Regards,
M

Maui 13 You summed it up perfectly. But its okay I expected this from many. It comes with the territory. I don't need to come here. I only do so to show those who are not yet closed books. That this game is very beatable when applied in certain ways. 99.9 percent cannot be reached. Their mind is already made up you have to accept that. The tiny, tiny minority that has the right mindset. Might say lets hear this upstart out. And theyll test the methods the right way.

And they will of course make a profit. It might not always be stellar but a profit nevertheless.
So let them do their worst. I am thick skinned. It only shows what I know already. So desperate is this Sam charactor, he is now slyly trying to imply that Chauncy47 Is actually me. As if no one else could have a mind of their own. And not be a mathematicians lapdog. Wonders never cease.

[Johnlegend]

This 80/1 odds thing seems to have lost its way here ?

It should be the amount of money at risk to win 1 unit of betting upon reaching level 4 on twin
2 : 1 betting ?  So in that circumstance  80 : 1 is correct when expressed as a risk ratio not the betting odds. There are 2 separate main factors to consider here.

2 : 1 betting, people, in this CODE 4 case is, in approx.terms, 2 chances to win covering 24 numbers against 1 chance to lose with 12 numbers not covered. So that makes it 66.7% chance to win on any spin & 33.3% chance to lose. To be more exact, on a single zero wheel it's 24/37 = 64.9% chance of winning vs 13/37 = 35.1% chance to lose.
On the twin zero wheel we get 24/38 = 63.2% & 14/38 = 36.8%.

Accordingly the odds of winning or losing remain constant for any spin level.

Is it not such as                    L1  1 + 1 = 2 : 1
this for the risk
outlay ratio?                         L2  3 + 3 = 6
                                                         = 8  : 1
                                            L3   9+9 = 18
                                                          = 26 : 1
                                           L4  27+27= 54
                                                           = 80 : 1


The 3 : 1 odds thingo mentioned does not fit into any bet odds by my assessment?
Losing 3 times (L3) and winning at L4 is a statistic not odds?

Totally agree that the L4 loss risk to potential recovery is high and would take a number of hours of winning bets just to recover. Higher unit amounts may improve that recovery time ?

The whole point of hit & run is surf the higher probability of a win at L1 or L2 and leave the table on any win.

JL & others are indicating that in the majority of bet sessions this is the case. Thus their mantra that they are winning more than losing.

Constant longer term bet success is yet to be revealed. Apart from a persons time it costs nothing to virtual test these ideas.
I'll be doing just that next week, hit run, on multiple live dealer tables at our local casino here in Sydney OZ.

Note - Live tables as suggested, not RNG ?

Results to be published on this thread soon after.

Exactly. The excuses will never stop Ausguy. Theyre too plain lazy to do it the right way.

[Johnlegend]

Hey, John.
I hope i"m one of the deserving !!!!
Please keep on IMPROVING the MATRIX systems, as i BELIEVE betting the VERTICAL spins is the way forward to PROFIT whether HIT + RUN or not.
Cheers,
Dino.

Thanks DINO (You are) actually with CODE 40 it doesn't matter. Mr percentage shows you randoms lifestyle so beautifully you will never have any fears of laying a bet ever again. You know balance and rebalance is always on its way no matter how badly your session might start. Its a work of art. Because it needs no special anything to work. It just does. And the fact that this hasn't been spotted before has me more than amazed. I'm angry I didn't see it years ago. But its down to the Author of this thread AMK. Without that beautiful alternation between dozens and columns.

It couldnt work so consistently.

[jarabo002]

That sounds very nice.

I understand first of all the roulette game as fun and not as a business and there are systems that is very enjoyable because they are very entertaining and very exciting. Each game is a challenge, a competition.

[Chauncy47]

Maui 13 You summed it up perfectly. But its okay I expected this from many. It comes with the territory. I don't need to come here. I only do so to show those who are not yet closed books. That this game is very beatable when applied in certain ways. 99.9 percent cannot be reached. Their mind is already made up you have to accept that. The tiny, tiny minority that has the right mindset. Might say lets hear this upstart out. And theyll test the methods the right way.

And they will of course make a profit. It might not always be stellar but a profit nevertheless.
So let them do their worst. I am thick skinned. It only shows what I know already. So desperate is this Sam charactor, he is now slyly trying to imply that Chauncy47 Is actually me. As if no one else could have a mind of their own. And not be a mathematicians lapdog. Wonders never cease.

Hi JL,  I gladly look forward to anything you have to share whether it be here in the forum or in a PM.  There will always be those individuals that question methods, styles, approach, math, mindset or whatever it is, but the simply fact remains that you have been kind enough to offer up methods publically.  I am very thankful that you decided to do that because my BR has continued to grow.  I will have to touch base with AMK in a PM much like I did you.  As you mentioned, the game is very beatable.       

[Johnlegend]

Hi JL,  I gladly look forward to anything you have to share whether it be here in the forum or in a PM.  There will always be those individuals that question methods, styles, approach, math, mindset or whatever it is, but the simply fact remains that you have been kind enough to offer up methods publically.  I am very thankful that you decided to do that because my BR has continued to grow.  I will have to touch base with AMK in a PM much like I did you.  As you mentioned, the game is very beatable.     

Yes Chauncy AMK is a very nice person humble and appreciative. Without him. CODE 4, CODE 4 REVERSE AND CODE 40 would not exist. I will never forget that. Not to mention the other gem im starting to test Warriors HYBRID DC4. That looks a bit special too. Its all here on this forum in abundance. Sadly what isnt here are enough of the right people. But we cant have it all.

[Chauncy47]

Yes Chauncy AMK is a very nice person humble and appreciative. Without him. CODE 4, CODE 4 REVERSE AND CODE 40 would not exist. I will never forget that. Not to mention the other gem I'm starting to test Warriors HYBRID DC4. That looks a bit special too. Its all here on this forum in abundance. Sadly what isnt here are enough of the right people. But we can't have it all.

I have been testing the HYBRID DC and have done very well and can send you my results.  I agree, its a nice little gold nugget to add.  I thanked him for offering it up.  I will drop AMK a quick PM ....

[jarabo002]

Hi Jarabo.
Roulette to ME is not fun, but it is a BUSINESS.
I view each bet as an INVESTMENT - DECISION.
I must make PROFIT not woopee !! ( as the song goes ).

All the best,
Dino.

Well, what I mean is that like most of the time just losing, always stay with a good thing that consoles me, a bit of good fun.

Regards

[dino246]

John, i agree.
Often the "right" people are there.......watching.................AND..............silent.
Aperthy RULES OK !!!!!!!!!
Dino.

[Johnlegend]

Hi Jarabo.
Roulette to ME is not fun, but it is a BUSINESS.
I view each bet as an INVESTMENT - DECISION.
I must make PROFIT not woopee !! ( as the song goes ).

All the best,
Dino.

That should be our slogan Dino Lol!!!

[amk]

Hello everybody,

I will be editing the CODE 4 thread and a lot of posts might be lost. I am am sorry if this upsets anybody. I have nothing against anybody. I feel it is important for people just starting to play roulette to get a clear impression of CODE 4 and JohnLegends perspective of it as he has the expertise. With this I mean he as actually been playing CODE 4 for a year now. Until you have played CODE 4 for a year I feel you cannot criticize and say it is no good or that JL is the only one to get these results etc. At least play it for a month first and lose x amount of units before passing judgment. 

From now on I will be only keeping posts on the CODE 4 thread which highlight peoples progress, interesting questions, possible advancements etc. Discussion about if hit and run or CODE 4 is effective etc will be deleted, we have more than enough of those.

I will start a thread in the General Discussion Zone called "CODE 4 Discussions" where people can discuss anything they like.

The CODE 4 thread must remain "user friendly" for people searching for the answer as I once did.

I wish everyone the best and success in roulette.

Hopefully no hard feelings out there

[Johnlegend]

Hello everybody,

I will be editing the CODE 4 thread and a lot of posts might be lost. I am am sorry if this upsets anybody. I have nothing against anybody. I feel it is important for people just starting to play roulette to get a clear impression of CODE 4 and JohnLegends perspective of it as he has the expertise. With this I mean he as actually been playing CODE 4 for a year now. Until you have played CODE 4 for a year I feel you cannot criticize and say it is no good or that JL is the only one to get these results etc. At least play it for a month first and lose x amount of units before passing judgment. 

From now on I will be only keeping posts on the CODE 4 thread which highlight peoples progress, interesting questions, possible advancements etc. Discussion about if hit and run or CODE 4 is effective etc will be deleted, we have more than enough of those.

I will start a thread in the General Discussion Zone called "CODE 4 Discussions" where people can discuss anything they like.

The CODE 4 thread must remain "user friendly" for people searching for the answer as I once did.

I wish everyone the best and success in roulette.

Hopefully no hard feelings out there

Thats sensible the thread is about the great method CODE 4 Good decision AMK.