*THE MATRIX SLIDE*

[atlantis]

Hi JohnLegend,

I've implemented the excellent SLIDE idea into a CODE 4 revision and I think you'll find it interesting food for thought over at the code 4 thread. Anyhow, I would welcome your thoughts as seems working quite well. You would need to try it yourself probably... May the good fortune continue to roll on...

A.

[Bayes]

any time your money is on the line be it casino playing ,or buisness or stocks to me its all gambling ,you can can lose your money if you don't play the right way ,even millionares have gone bankrupt.

Isn't that the point? what is the "RIGHT way"?

[Bayes]

Warrior speaks the truth. No informed serious gambler will touch and RNG. Whether its BV NO ZERO or the seriously rigged machines at your local betting shop.

Anyone who tries to convince you theres no difference between an RNG or Live wheel is the real shill. I have seen things on an RNG you won't see on a live wheel if you lived forever.

John, this is a dead issue as far as I'm concerned. I've no interest any more in trying to convince those with prejudice.

Please can you try to answer the questions I asked?

What is your objection to computer simulation/bot testing?

We have established that SOME are having success, and others (such as myself and superman) are seeing failure. At the very least, it puts your claim in doubt, unless you are saying that we're both lying?

You have to admit that the jury is still out. Some say it loses, some say it wins. Agreed?

[Johnlegend]

@ John,

What exactly is your objection to testing using a bot or simulation?

What is the difference between using a computer and manual testing, in your opinion?

Sorry, but this is just plain wrong. The % is calculated in the same way as on a real wheel. If it's just GAMBLING, then why bother to create systems at all? why not just scatter your chips over the table at random?

A computer isnt true random in any shape or form. The physics of a live wheel are unique. The croupiers mild influence also.

Even an AIRBALL MACHINE isnt as trustworthy as a live wheel. But certainly better than the manmade scams we call RANDOM NUMBER GENERATORS.

You see I know someone on the inside. RNGS are PERCENTAGE MACHINES. They work on the basis of 3 for me, 1 for you. Like a Slot machine. If you are the fool who enters play after the payout has been made. You will lose absolutely.

[superman]

Arguing anyones point is futile, you requested me or ophis, I didn't have much to do last night so wasted the time botting the slide, you have known for a while that I test against the dreaded RNG as running it on a live wheel would take days to fail, and fail it will.

Joiner29 failed on a live wheel,

I don't know of Betfair. Are they a RUSSIAN LIVE FEED?

A live wheel is a live wheel is a live wheel or maybe the ball jockey has the initials of RNG

I use Betfreds and Ladbrokes for the most part

Yes, you've stated that numerous times, wonder why?

From here on as you know I only test against RNG so wont be botting anymore mirages and posting the results, fun doing it though but nobody likes the results it gets, I'll keep my nose out in future.

[Johnlegend]

Arguing anyones point is futile, you requested me or ophis, I didn't have much to do last night so wasted the time botting the slide, you have known for a while that I test against the dreaded RNG as running it on a live wheel would take days to fail, and fail it will.

Joiner29 failed on a live wheel,
 
A live wheel is a live wheel is a live wheel or maybe the ball jockey has the initials of RNG
 
Yes, you've stated that numerous times, wonder why?

From here on as you know I only test against RNG so won't be botting anymore mirages and posting the results, fun doing it though but nobody likes the results it gets, I'll keep my nose out in future.

Yeah my mistake for printing that post in the first place. It might lose, so once again the only thing I need to find out is its win loss percentage PLAYED AS I ADVOCATE. TWO GAMES SHUT IT DOWN. I managed 642 consecutive wins playing as such for CODE 4. Had I been playing FIVE GAME sessions I would have lost *8 TIMES*. Theres the value of HIT AND RUN RIGHT THERE BAYES.

You will ABSOLUTELY cheat the law of averages and attain a bigger slice of the win/loss pie than continual play. THERE IS NO QUESTION ABOUT THIS. My success is built on this foundation for more than seven years now. I couldnt win to save my life before I employed this strategy.

[Johnlegend]

Hi JohnLegend,

I've implemented the excellent SLIDE idea into a CODE 4 revision and I think you'll find it interesting food for thought over at the code 4 thread. Anyhow, I would welcome your thoughts as seems working quite well. You would need to try it yourself probably... May the good fortune continue to roll on...

A.

I dont know Atlantis, Ill have Bayes and Superman calling me an even bigger shill and liar. If we are winning we are liars Atlantis.

[Bayes]

You will ABSOLUTLELY cheat the law of averages and attain a bigger slice of the win/loss pie than continual play. THERE IS NO QUESTION ABOUT THIS. My success is built on this foundation for more than seven years now. I couldnt win to save my life before I employed this strategy.

Ok John. Rather than continual arguments, which are pointless, I would like to simulate what you consider to be your strongest system. I will:

   
• Use REAL spins from a wheel.
• Simulate "Hit and Run" by skipping a random number of spins before each attack (or according to what you think is best)
• Provide a detailed print-out of results so that no-one has to take my word for the outcome.

Does this seem acceptable to you? if so, let me know which system to test.

[amk]

Hello all..........

The debate keeps rolling along........

JohnLegend.... you won 642 games played two by two ie two sets........

Viewed from a different angle you won 1284 sets.......

All anybody can say is amazing...........

Have a song for everybody, hope you all like it.......... 

Bill Frisell - What Do We Do (Live At Montreal Jazz Festival 2002).wmv   copy past into youtube

[Johnlegend]

Ok John. Rather than continual arguments, which are pointless, I would like to simulate what you consider to be your strongest system. I will:

   
• Use REAL spins from a wheel.
• Simulate "Hit and Run" by skipping a random number of spins before each attack (or according to what you think is best)
• Provide a detailed print-out of results so that no-one has to take my word for the outcome.

Does this seem acceptable to you? if so, let me know which system to test.

Forget me Bayes, I'm not the only person on here with good methods. So I say go with AMKS CODE 4. I attained 642 consecutive wins playing TWO BY TWO.

Another member has won over 1,300 and STILL NOT LOST. So we must be both liars. So as far as I'm concerned CODE 4 is proven the best method on the forum at present. So go with CODE 4 since its not my baby.

I have nothing to gain from creditting its credentials. We owe great thanks to AMK. CODE 4...

[amk]

Please keep in mind that CODE 4 is simple PATTERN 4 played with alternating dozens and columns.....

JohnLegends method just tweaked a little.......

[Johnlegend]

Please keep in mind that CODE 4 is simple PATTERN 4 played with alternating dozens and columns.....

JohnLegends method just tweaked a little.......

Yes AMK, but what a tweak. Thats the greatest tweak of ALLTIME.

[atlantis]

Yeah! Hope my idea for amk's code 4 also hits good and is found worthy...

Nice sound, amk.
Here's my cool track, amk. Type in:

roy budd main theme diamonds

into Youtube. (AHHH... always makes me think of roulette that one)

A

[amk]

Thanks JohnLegend...........

Bayes........for your test I would say "what will be will be"...........

With this I mean you can possibly win tremendously with a method such as waiting for 3 blacks or red in a row then using a 6 step progression played HIT AND RUN......

There are great methods and not so good methods however what will be will be...........

[monaco]

not sure i really want to get involved in this, but for what it's worth..

Pattern 4 - looks like i had the last post on that thread, it didn't really deliver anything unexpected in my results, but if it can be said to have been used as a springboard, fair enough.

code 4 - i tested it earlier on closer to when it first appeared, but that was only about a 150 games (as far as i remember it lost twice in the first 130 or so). it wasnt a big enough sample to print or go against some of the other claims, i didnt really fancy carrying on with it so i left it for others to continue.

i started again last week though after having read reply #392 on Code 4 clarifying how it was now being played (its quite easy to track at the beginning of sessions whilst doing other stuff) -

this is 1 weeks results:
5 sessions of 2 games a day, smartlive casino & willhill live dealers
50 games,
49 wins (lost on the 45th game)
total -36

step 1 wins-35
step 2 wins-10
step 3 wins-3
step 4 wins-1

..will carry on testing & can share weekly updates if requested..

the claim of 1300 wins for Code 4 could do with being expanded upon i think - they were made at the end of July, only about 7 weeks after Code 4 was first presented - thats about 27 or 28 games a day if it had been played right from the off - not consistent surely with hit and run..

thats my experience anyway, maybe others who have not previously posted could show their results (if any)..
if i had to say my basic feeling though, it's that no bet selection can turn basically a 4-step grand martingale into a long-term winner, hit and run or otherwise.

but good luck to all anyway!