**VERTICAL 8*

[soggett]

But what if we took just 1/3/9?
that's 26 units for a lot of wins
Do you think that we can tak a loss with that and still be up?

Edit:

then we would have about 95,6% chance of a win, in the long run It looks like it wouldnt work, right?

[superman]

yep that's right but trouble is the other 1.6% of results at 80 or 243 unit losses void any gains ;(

Correct, but they'll "try" to avoid that with hit n run as usual which is a fallacy as it just equates to "luck"

[Bettor 27]

But what if we took just 1/3/9?
that's 26 units for a lot of wins
Do you think that we can tak a loss with that?

Based on this particular data set (recorded in a 4 X 4 matrix and dozens only) the results would look like this:

Vertical 03 = 289 times
Vertical 04 = 095 times
Vertical 05 = 036 times
Wins          = 420 Wins of 1 unit

Vertical 06 = 012 times
Vertical 07 = 002 times
Vertical 08 = 001 times
Vertical 09 = 002 times
Vertical 10 = 002 times
Losses       = 019 Losses of 26 = 494 units

Result        = -74 units

[soggett]

Yes, thats what I got too
too bad 

[Jeromin]

Five losses from vertical 8,9 and 10 in under 500 spins is a far cry from 1 loss every 3000 spins. Doesn't seem like random is reaching it's limit.

Jeromin

[MadMax]

I have to apologize for my first test result. I can´t  reproduce the mistake that I made, cause my calc crashes down every time, I want to open the file again (seems to much datas), but I suppose, I calculated 9 in a row dozens instead of 8.
I did a new sheet with 20000 spins, and the result is also disillusioning:
941 wins step 1
288         step 2
94           step 3
33            step 4
14           step 5 (as we can see, the typical *3 ratio for double dozens shows)
units won: 1370
5 losses
units lost: 1210
Result: +160 units
So I come to the conclusion, that this method is also not fit for continous play, as I thought first. What a pity!

Once again, sorry for my mistake. I feel really ashamed of posting wrong results!

[MightyMark]

John legend, Using a 5 wide matrix I have seen 8 verticals on VC Airball (my usual haunt) The FIRST session I played, I Played this by complete accident at failing to understand one of the other systems properly at first, the matrix 5 I think...  I saw something like this:

12133
31323
11213
22213
12133
33233
12313
22223

All was not lost as I won the next line but I was sweating like a dyslexic on countdown when I saw 8, lets just say it was the first and last time I used that system, how you've escaped losing so long is a marvel..

[Johnlegend]

I have to apologize for my first test result. I can´t  reproduce the mistake that I made, cause my calc crashes down every time, I want to open the file again (seems to much datas), but I suppose, I calculated 9 in a row dozens instead of 8.
I did a new sheet with 20000 spins, and the result is also disillusioning:
941 wins step 1
288         step 2
94           step 3
33            step 4
14           step 5 (as we can see, the typical *3 ratio for double dozens shows)
units won: 1370
5 losses
units lost: 1210
Result: +160 units
So I come to the conclusion, that this method is also not fit for continous play, as I thought first. What a pity!

Once again, sorry for my mistake. I feel really ashamed of posting wrong results!

I suggest 4 by 4 for a reason. The chances of you running into an 8 or more in that short span are very small. I have said this before and I will say it again and again. Even if it annoys the likes of Superman. The bigger the paper odds. The greater the potential for the SHORT SESSION APPLICATION.

Now lets get something straight here. The name of the game is PROFIT. Nobody said you have to get it in a rigid mathematical way. For people who can only think on one level you will always be at the bottom looking up.

I have no doubt this method works applied in short bursts. For those who are not willing/able to risk 80---242 units AFTER THOROUGH TESTING. The magic number is ****3**** look at it. And study it. And if you can't see a way to profit from its evergreen consistency you should give up this game altogether. I get disappointed with the lack of staying power brought forth on a forum dedicated to this great game.

The majority of people jump from method to method never actually doing the necessary graft to see FOR THEMSELVES. If a method will stand up on LIVE spins. I assure you, you will get nowhere in the process. twenty years from now you will still wrongly assume nothing beats random. I study and play this game 8---12 hours a day most days. I doubt many others do the same. I can impart what I have experienced and learnt to the forum. But YOU have to find the strength of mind to stay with a method long enough to see its worth.

When you have negative minds jumping on any morsel of doom and gloom they can find I know minds become jaded. But the only person who must prove a method works is the PLAYER THEMSELVES. don't take my word for it PROVE IT TO YOURSELVES. All I am doing is offering an idea and the results I have gained from it. The rest is up to you. And it always will be UP TO YOU...

[amk]

Based on this particular data set (recorded in a 4 X 4 matrix and dozens only) the results would look like this:

Vertical 03 = 289 times
Vertical 04 = 095 times
Vertical 05 = 036 times
Wins          = 420 Wins of 1 unit

Vertical 06 = 012 times
Vertical 07 = 002 times
Vertical 08 = 001 times
Vertical 09 = 002 times
Vertical 10 = 002 times
Losses       = 019 Losses of 26 = 494 units

Result        = -74 units

Bettor27??

You have to be seeing the same thing I am, do you?............

[Bettor 27]

Bettor27??

You have to be seeing the same thing I am, do you?............

I am thinking vertical 8 should be changed to vertical 11? Wait for vertical 7 to show then use 4 step progression...is that what you are seeing?

[Robeenhuut]

Five losses from vertical 8,9 and 10 in under 500 spins is a far cry from 1 loss every 3000 spins. Doesn't seem like random is reaching it's limit.

Jeromin

Hello


Random does not have a limit.  Actually it does but before you will be able to capitalize on it you will reach a table limit.....  
Extending your progression to make it seemingly a sure bet makes it in a best case scenario not a viable bet because you wait a very long time to win very little.  If the random lets you.


If all the matrix systems that were posted here had really worked why people keep posting new variations.
Ask yourselves this simple question. 


Regards

[superman]

If all the matrix systems that were posted here had really worked why people keep posting new variations.
Ask yourselves this simple question.

Good question.

I am thinking vertical 8 should be changed to vertical 11? Wait for vertical 7 to show then use 4 step progression...is that what you are seeing?

There would be no difference in the outcome

[Jeromin]

Hello


Random does not have a limit.  Actually it does but before you will be able to capitalize on it you will reach a table limit.....  
Extending your progression to make it seemingly a sure bet makes it in a best case scenario not a viable bet because you wait a very long time to win very little.  If the random lets you.


If all the matrix systems that were posted here had really worked why people keep posting new variations.
Ask yourselves this simple question. 


Regards

If random has a limit, it would be good to know what that limit is for all those matrix type bets discussed here. For example, in another thread EC were being tested with RXtreme and the limit seems to be 23 same EC in a row.  But a test of a million, or a few milion results with all the different matrix bets should yield a limit at some point ( or maybe not, I don't know ). Then one can play some other system while running a tracker instructed to warn when the limit is close enough that a long progresion  is feasible withing table limits. Which may only happen once every several long sessions. It would be a sure win side bet.
My problem is that if we talk about "random's limits" we cannot then, on a failed progression, turn around and say "hit and run". It's either one or the other.

Jeromin

[Jeromin]

In fact, a 5 million spin limit for a large number of bets, with a multi tracker, might yield a winner every session.

Jeromin

[Robeenhuut]

In fact, a 5 million spin limit for a large number of bets, with a multi tracker, might yield a winner every session.

Jeromin

Ok you can do it  but what would be the point here?  Some people reported seeing 10 vertical repeats already so i bet you can get 12 in a row. You can wait then for 6 repeats and use 6 step progression to be safe or wait for 3 repeats and use colossal 9 step progression.....
For me and im a very patient guy  completely waste of time.

Regards