****CODE 4 REVERSE ATTACK****

[Still]

Absolutely. And this is why JL's hit & run methods make no sense, because the inbetween states aren't monitored.  You just enter the game at random intervals, HOPING that the random flow at that point won't be the one which generates a loss.

On the other hand, he says that "timing is everything" but gives no clue as to when you should enter the game.

Go figure. 

This isn't just being "negative", it's a reasonable criticism.

I'd like to be more accurate about what this really is/does.  What i'm seeing here is what i'll call a "look-back" period of about 25 spins on average...before any real bets are placed.  While not all in-betweens are monitored between sessions, they are at least monitored between games and a session is started with a 25 spin look-back (on average).  So this is not a completely random hit because of the look-back. The run from the game is planned relative to a max loss of basic units and the run from the session is capped at 20 games. 

I don't understand the look-back period enough to say anything about it, whether or not the triggers do signal a better betting environment.   I don't understand the instructions to track "dozens and columns" in a four column wide matrix where three of the spins are x'd out. That could be cause of my unfamiliarity with roulette (and/or Code 4).  It looks like keeping track of every fourth spin for signals.  Ok, if it works. 

Rolletti posted some results alleged to be off of a pre-recorded history from a trusted B & M casino (Wiesbaden).  I'm wondering why that's not getting more attention, at least to verify that the games were rightly processed by his code.  Because if there are no mistake in his tests, this does not look good. 

What i can do is compare this system to some forex trading systems that have a short take-profit target and a long stop-loss.  This way, you can manufacture a win-rate of  90% if you want.  But without an "edge" of some sort (the triggers have to be valid), the system will be eaten up by commissions and/or spreads (the vig). 

[albertojonas]

No matter how you try to "rationalize" this in the end it will eat all profit. MY OPINION!


But this is just an opinion and i don't pretend to hurt anyone.


Hit & Run Does not make a mathematical sense, so i show this playing continuously.
Also i use every Column not only the first.


Attachment has pdf with 2000 spins BV no zero.


I like Gamblers Fallacy, =) so i decide to attack after a Fictive total Loss: -It means a string of 8 consecutive Losses.
LLLLLLLL
this is the "safe" trigger
========================


Progression

1 Bank 4 each Row

Step 1
1) Bet: $ 2 on 1 spots. Profit on a Win: $ 4 Bankroll Needed: $2
2) Bet: $ 3 on 1 spots. Profit on a Win: $ 4 Bankroll Needed: $5
3) Bet: $ 4 on 1 spots. Profit on a Win: $ 3 Bankroll Needed: $9
4) Bet: $ 6 on 1 spots. Profit on a Win: $ 3 Bankroll Needed: $15


Step 2
1) Bet: $ 4 on 1 spots. Profit on a Win: $ 8 Bankroll Needed: $4
2) Bet: $ 5 on 1 spots. Profit on a Win: $ 6 Bankroll Needed: $9
3) Bet: $ 8 on 1 spots. Profit on a Win: $ 7 Bankroll Needed: $17
4) Bet: $ 12 on 1 spots. Profit on a Win: $ 7 Bankroll Needed: $29


=========================================


Results (vertical Rows)


[reveal]


ROW 1


L
L
L
w +3


w +4   +7


L
w +4   +11


L
W +4   +15


L
W +4   +19


W +4   +23


L
L
W +3   +26


w +4   +30


L
W +4   +34


L
L
W +3   +37




ROW 2
L
L
L
L -15 (2nd step recovery)


L
L
W +7   -8


W +8   0 (back to 1st step)


L
W +4   +4


L
L
W +3   +7


W +4   +11


W +4   +15


W +4   +19




ROW 3


W +4   


W +4   +8


L
L
L
L -15   -7 (2step recovery)


L
W +6   -1 (back to step 1)


L
W +4   +3


W +4   +7


W +4   +11


W +4   +15


L
W +4   +19


W +4   +23


L
L
L
W +3   +26




Row 4


L
W +4


L
L
W +3   +7


L
L
W +3   +10   


L
L
L
L -15   -5 (step2)


L
W +6   +1


Total = +83



[/reveal]


What i think is that it takes a lot of patience and time to grind such a small profit...


Anyway in 2000 spins it increased almost 50 % initial bankroll.
Profit should be used to increase unit value or to buy extra steps on the progression.
I prefer first.
I would like to add that it could be played horizontally also...
And it doesn't matter the spread or the steps in the progression. It is all a matter of time and value.

Cheers


Isn't everyone fed up matrix type bets?
let's move on...

[TwoCatSam]

ausguy

I'm barely familiar with the movie.  I thought the Vietnamese were forcing him to pull the trigger.  Maybe I'll watch it, but those kinds of movies bother me for days on end.

Alberto

You know, I am a wee bit tired of matrices.

I feel the need to shut up for a while.

Sam

[Robeenhuut]

ausguy

I'm barely familiar with the movie.  I thought the Vietnamese were forcing him to pull the trigger.  Maybe I'll watch it, but those kinds of movies bother me for days on end.

Alberto

You know, I am a wee bit tired of matrices.

I feel the need to shut up for a while.

Sam

Ausguy is on 2 something. How about Russian Roulette All In Matrix Attack 

[Robeenhuut]

No matter how you try to "rationalize" this in the end it will eat all profit. MY OPINION!


But this is just an opinion and i don't pretend to hurt anyone.


Hit & Run Does not make a mathematical sense, so i show this playing continuously.
Also i use every Column not only the first.


Attachment has pdf with 2000 spins BV no zero.


I like Gamblers Fallacy, =) so i decide to attack after a Fictive total Loss: -It means a string of 8 consecutive Losses.
LLLLLLLL
this is the "safe" trigger
========================


Progression

1 Bank 4 each Row

Step 1
1) Bet: $ 2 on 1 spots. Profit on a Win: $ 4 Bankroll Needed: $2
2) Bet: $ 3 on 1 spots. Profit on a Win: $ 4 Bankroll Needed: $5
3) Bet: $ 4 on 1 spots. Profit on a Win: $ 3 Bankroll Needed: $9
4) Bet: $ 6 on 1 spots. Profit on a Win: $ 3 Bankroll Needed: $15


Step 2
1) Bet: $ 4 on 1 spots. Profit on a Win: $ 8 Bankroll Needed: $4
2) Bet: $ 5 on 1 spots. Profit on a Win: $ 6 Bankroll Needed: $9
3) Bet: $ 8 on 1 spots. Profit on a Win: $ 7 Bankroll Needed: $17
4) Bet: $ 12 on 1 spots. Profit on a Win: $ 7 Bankroll Needed: $29


=========================================


Results (vertical Rows)


[reveal]


ROW 1


L
L
L
w +3


w +4   +7


L
w +4   +11


L
W +4   +15


L
W +4   +19


W +4   +23


L
L
W +3   +26


w +4   +30


L
W +4   +34


L
L
W +3   +37




ROW 2
L
L
L
L -15 (2nd step recovery)


L
L
W +7   -8


W +8   0 (back to 1st step)


L
W +4   +4


L
L
W +3   +7


W +4   +11


W +4   +15


W +4   +19




ROW 3


W +4   


W +4   +8


L
L
L
L -15   -7 (2step recovery)


L
W +6   -1 (back to step 1)


L
W +4   +3


W +4   +7


W +4   +11


W +4   +15


L
W +4   +19


W +4   +23


L
L
L
W +3   +26




Row 4


L
W +4


L
L
W +3   +7


L
L
W +3   +10   


L
L
L
L -15   -5 (step2)


L
W +6   +1


Total = +83



[/reveal]


What i think is that it takes a lot of patience and time to grind such a small profit...


Anyway in 2000 spins it increased almost 50 % initial bankroll.
Profit should be used to increase unit value or to buy extra steps on the progression.
I prefer first.
I would like to add that it could be played horizontally also...
And it doesn't matter the spread or the steps in the progression. It is all a matter of time and value.

Cheers


Isn't everyone fed up matrix type bets?
let's move on...

Hola Alberto

Kudos 4 your testing. I always tracked all 4 columns as well. But you have 2 be careful here.
I have done some testing and in around 200 games already saw at least 16 spins without hit - i ran out of data 2 verify actual number. Playing such a high number of games you expose yourself to it happening and it happens on average 1 in 700 events I like your recovery procedure. After double loss i would immediately play few games just with regular 2 virtual loses trigger with double stakes.

Regards

[Johnlegend]

Hello Iggiv

We try to do some constructive and fair criticism of everything what's posted here. I posted some stuff that did not work due to mostly  not adequate testing and being overzealous. I never personally attacked anybody here. What bugs me about JL attitude is his  "I know the best" line and flat dismissal of other people posts that don't agree with his results by ignoring them or endlessly pushing his hit and run philosophy. Bettor 27 reported strike rate around 110/1 in around 900 games of CODE 4 and there was no reply, Intriseco put out a chart testing CODE 4 and got just average results. But it was not true hit and run testing in JL opinion. To me testing it on Rx playing in some intervals and using verified live spins would constitute true test.
Look what happens now with CODE 4 Reverse Attack testing. It produces just average results but they will be dismissed by JL because the tests were not done in proper fashion. He reported in 7500 games that he saw only 11 loses - game went 9 or more steps without hit.  I just scratch my head when i see his numbers.

Regards

Robeenhuut before you fly off the handle something you have overlooked. And I myself overlooked in testing REVERSE ATTACK using CODE 4s results. Is the SAMPLE BREAKDOWN. With CODE 4 unless the zero negates a line we never play more than 20 spins a session. With REVERSE ATTACK it can take over 40 to get the triggers. This I believe is why the results are quite extreme. Even my last 100 games has delivered 5 losses. So I have made an error I believe in my testing. When I am wrong I will say it.
That said the numbers are STILL positive at the moment. Just not as stellar as the flawed testing showed.

[TwoCatSam]

John

I have been told by a member I trust that your methods are sound and your "Hit and Run" does work.  My proverbial hat is off to you, sir!  Apologies if I offended!

TwoCatSam

[Johnlegend]

RESULTS UPDATE FOR CODE 4 REVERSE ATTACK FOR 26/05/2012

TOTAL GAMES PLAYED 200

TOTAL GAMES WON 192

TOTAL GAMES LOST 8

STRIKERATE APPROX 24/1

BALANCE =342 UNITS PLUS

WIN LOSS BREAKDOWN OVER LAST 100 GAMES PLAYED
6 WON----1 LOST /18 WON----1 LOST /26 WON----1 LOST/13 WON----1 LOST/16 WON----1 LOST/16 WON------

I believe I have made an error with my innitial testing source. Using CODE 4 results doesn't give an accurate picture of what is likely with this method. As you are nearly always using a set 20 spin sample and tagged together. They do not represent the same results as REVERSE ATTACK games which can take many more spins to complete with two triggers. So my appologies for that error. Nevertheless, the numbers I am getting thus far are positive and with a 28 unit risk I will take them. Theres a long way to go. Before I can say this method is even close to the big three. But everything is relative to risk and time.

[Johnlegend]

John

I have been told by a member I trust that your methods are sound and your "Hit and Run" does work.  My proverbial hat is off to you, sir!  Apologies if I offended!

TwoCatSam

No worries Sam. Its each to their own. I appreciate its application is not for everyone. I just show what its done for me. Its up to you/others then whether they want to adopt it.

[vundarosa]

RESULTS UPDATE FOR CODE 4 REVERSE ATTACK FOR 26/05/2012

TOTAL GAMES PLAYED 200

TOTAL GAMES WON 192

TOTAL GAMES LOST 8

STRIKERATE APPROX 24/1

BALANCE =342 UNITS PLUS

WIN LOSS BREAKDOWN OVER LAST 100 GAMES PLAYED
6 WON----1 LOST /18 WON----1 LOST /26 WON----1 LOST/13 WON----1 LOST/16 WON----1 LOST/16 WON------

I believe I have made an error with my innitial testing source. Using CODE 4 results doesn't give an accurate picture of what is likely with this method. As you are nearly always using a set 20 spin sample and tagged together. They do not represent the same results as REVERSE ATTACK games which can take many more spins to complete with two triggers. So my appologies for that error. Nevertheless, the numbers I am getting thus far are positive and with a 28 unit risk I will take them. Theres a long way to go. Before I can say this method is even close to the big three. But everything is relative to risk and time.

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

I believe you're lucky JL. I know I’m not favored by luck so it’s no mystery that in all “your” systems, i test and test and never attain the results you get, even as i believe i'm following your guidelines closely while testing.....

so to me, its tough to get around the idea that your luck not is playing a big part in your results….or maybe it’s a gut feeling that you might not even be aware of…I mean, do you hesitate sometimes to bet because of something you’ve seen on the last few spinsor do you lay your bet the very first spin you come to the table….

vundarosa

[Johnlegend]

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

I believe you're lucky JL. I know I’m not favored by luck so it’s no mystery that in all “your” systems, i test and test and never attain the results you get, even as i believe i'm following your guidelines closely while testing.....

so to me, its tough to get around the idea that your luck not is playing a big part in your results….or maybe it’s a gut feeling that you might not even be aware of…I mean, do you hesitate sometimes to bet because of something you’ve seen on the last few spinsor do you lay your bet the very first spin you come to the table….

vundarosa

Hello Vundarosa. Can I ask you a question. When/if you play CODE 4 do you play no more than 2 games a session?  Luck I don't believe in personaly. I believe something either works or it doesn't. When AMK first presented CODE 4 for example I took one look at it and my gut feeling was this is one of the greatest concepts I've ever seen even before I played a single game. Its PURE GENIUS. And should be heralded as an absolute roulette smasher.

I would like you to honestly tell me how you apply yourself to CODE 4, PATTERN BREAKER and DIVIDE AND CONQUER. If you suggest you play very close to my guidlelines lets REALLY see if you do. Hesitate no. The only thing I do that some might not. Is I backtrack the marker board to get a lot of my virtual spins quickly. I never start a game from virgin spins. That might be something others should take note of. Obviously if a ZERO made up the first spin of a line in CODE 4 for instance I don't play that line.

KEEP SAYING THIS TO YOURSELF. JL only plays TWO GAMES OF CODE 4 And the session is OVER, OVER, OVER. Because I really don't believe many are playing just two games.

[vundarosa]

"When/if you play CODE 4 do you play no more than 2 games a session?  Luck I don't believe in personaly. I believe something either works or it doesn't. When AMK first presented CODE 4 for example I took one look at it and my gut feeling was this is one of the greatest concepts I've ever seen even before I played a single game. Its PURE GENIUS. And should be heralded as an absolute roulette smasher."

--------------------------
@JL, as Sam pointed out, about being pure genius i don't know.....but i suspect that, by your logic, almost any decent method played 2 games a session should be a roulette smasher...

vundarosa

[Johnlegend]

"When/if you play CODE 4 do you play no more than 2 games a session?  Luck I don't believe in personaly. I believe something either works or it doesn't. When AMK first presented CODE 4 for example I took one look at it and my gut feeling was this is one of the greatest concepts I've ever seen even before I played a single game. Its PURE GENIUS. And should be heralded as an absolute roulette smasher."

--------------------------
@JL, as Sam pointed out, about being pure genius i don't know.....but i suspect that, by your logic, almost any decent method played 2 games a session should be a roulette smasher...

vundarosa

Vundarosa I asked you a specific question, And you come back with a second notion on Sams comment. How does that get you anywhere??

[Skakus]

I'm still playing and I've been stopping for a break or switching tables after only one game.

[Johnlegend]

JL

You wrote:  "When AMK first presented CODE 4 for example I took one look at it and my gut feeling was this is one of the greatest concepts I've ever seen even before I played a single game. Its PURE GENIUS. And should be heralded as an absolute roulette smasher."

If you are going to continue to talk in the above manner I, for one, think you should explain to this forum why CODE 4 is pure genius.  Is there anyone who will join in asking him this?

Please just use plain English.  You may, if you wish, assume I am the stupidest person on the planet.  Then explain it so I will understand it.

Understand, I am not saying it doesn't work; I merely want an explanation as to why it is PURE GENIUS.

Tell me with specificity why the first bet you make has a greater chance of winning than my just betting against the dozen that came coming again.

Thank you.

TwoCatSam

The method is pure genius in its simplicity yet effectiveness in producing winners in .the HIT AND RUN application. Its betting frequency is fixed yet can produce extraordinary winning streaks. Now Sam what did you tell me this morning? Now you are back on the train of doubt again. That's fine. I don't know if you can grasp the advantage of Hit and Run Sam. It might be that you think youre being cheated if you don't stay at the table for an extended period of time and win a bundle. Old ways and habits die hard, very hard.

Betting ultimately for one pure game is indeed superior to staying at the table. My 7,640 real games have proven this. If you play one game at a time SAM with odds of 80/1 its very hard for random to take your bet on the very first attempt. Of course you will lose at some point. But in the meantime you could rack up several hundred singular wins before you finaly run into that losing game. If you however leave the gate open too long. YOU WILL DEFINATELY LOSE.

True no one knows randoms ebb and flow. But also remember this. You speak of the run from hell. Well if you said I am going to the casino and playing 60 consecutive games of CODE 4 today and you are hit with a run from hell you may lose 3 or 4 times in that 60 games. Wiping out several hundred units. I will be dead and gone before I will ever lose 3 or 4 times playing 60 single games Sam. Its never going to happen.

Random simply cannot deliver that many losses to a game here and a game there. Sure I have lost two games closely 22 apart to be precise but one of them was the second game of my two game session. Then I won 300 plus after that. You could never play that many consecutive games and not lose several times.

Random cannot land on that single first game very often its just a fact. Mathheads don't like it when everything can't be laid out in facts and figures for them. It makes them uneasy. And look a little silly. Because to start with I've said this before. The only area of math that really has anything to do with roulette is PERCENTAGE. Its randoms keeper. True you cannot predict where and when random will do something. But eventually it gets pulled back into line by Mr percentage. By playing HIT AND RUN you defy the laws of probability. What applies to continous play is thrown out the window. If I play 6 games on 6 different tables it has no relation to playing 6 consecutive games on one table.

That's why simulations are worthless. They can never replicate all these factors. The only playground you can truly validate anything regarding your method in. Is the playground you intend to use it in. That this  fundamental essential  cannot be understood by many on this forum and in the roulette world in general, is another reason few get anywhere with this game.