Quote from: MarignyGrilleau on January 23, 2013, 11:16:02 PM

wiki
"The Gambler's fallacy, also known as the Monte Carlo fallacy (because its most famous example happened in a Monte Carlo Casino in 1913),[1][2] and also referred to as the fallacy of the maturity of chances, is the belief that if deviations from expected behaviour are observed in repeated independent trials of some random process, future deviations in the opposite direction are then more likely."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler's_fallacy

This may not apply or affect some methods (eg: matrix methods) when played H.A.R.

A.

Quote from: Ralph on January 25, 2013, 09:05:10 AM

Something to back up the claims should be mandatory.
As this over some time so it will also show the red figures , and not only selected sessions.

That's what the challenge is all about Ralph, Matt. Started with 200 units on PP. And you will see what im able to do with that before they stop me. Superman is my verifier. And recieves 50% of everything for his part in this. April will be the first update. July the first milestone.

From there im certain ill have your attention.

Ralph

Referring to your chart........

You won over 1,400 Euro in just over 46 minutes.  Is that correct?

Sam

Quote from: Atlantis on January 25, 2013, 09:28:20 AM
This may not apply or affect some methods (eg: matrix methods) when played H.A.R.

A.

It might effect them Atlantis, but it can't stop them being successful. Random has to do certain things within a certain spin frame. The layout was designed to throw the masses into chaos. And off the scent.


Its when you put random into another playground, and scrutinize its behaviour away from the wheel and layout. You begin to see patterns. And common limitations that give you a way to beat random.

The matrix concept is one such way. Then smart thinkers like you and AMK take it to an even higher level with the alternating format.

Now random becomes as easy to read as todays newspaper. It has to do certain things in a certain spin frame. It can't get around it.

Some people already know this. The masses can't and won't ever take it in.

Theyll always be falling into Einsteins lap. And what all mathematicians say is a mathematical certainty. I.E its simply impossible to overcome the house edge in the longterm.

I haven't believed that for years. The question is, how much would someone have to win before it starts to register in the minds of more than a few people?

If casinos are so sure that no mechanical method can overcome the house edge. Why do they limit or ban people who win consistently?. You only have to think about that to realize.

They are far from sure. The arrogance of a mathematician or someone who believes math is the law when it comes to this game. Is if someone proves they can beat the house edge at will. Longterm and consistently, then hundreds of years of teachings. Arent sound.

And this is huge. Because unlike religion, we arent talkng about personal faith here. We are talking about people who believe math is absolute truth and reality.

So how do you convince someone like that there's something missing from the story? The only way it can be done, is through longterm consistent winning. In a systematic fashion. That's what I and others will do on this forum.

Love it Sam!

Quote from: JohnLegend on January 25, 2013, 10:58:58 AM
That's what the challenge is all about Ralph, Matt. Started with 200 units on PP. And you will see what im able to do with that before they stop me. Superman is my verifier. And recieves 50% of everything for his part in this. April will be the first update. July the first milestone.

From there im certain ill have your attention.

So what's your current balance on PP?

Quote from: TwoCatSam on January 25, 2013, 03:16:56 PM
Ralph

Referring to your chart........

You won over 1,400 Euro in just over 46 minutes.  Is that correct?

Sam

Yes, but is not anything else than 1 Euro play. I use to make more UNITS at the same time in other sessions, but then using 0.01 or 0.1.

Quote from: Robeenhuut on January 26, 2013, 07:27:17 AM
So what's your current balance on PP?

The first update will be in April Matt. The second update and first milestone in July. The third update in September. And 4th update and second milestone in December.

I run this like a business. Its not about getting rich fast. Its about steady overall bankroll growrh that proves what im doing can't be down to just luck. it's a test of your patience to wait for these updates Matt.

But after the second one in July you will know I mean business. And more than a few people will begin to realize. I know what im doing. Especially the owner of anothet forum. The lies he spread about me im just biding my time.

Quote from: JohnLegend on January 26, 2013, 10:16:36 AM
The first update will be in April Matt. The second update and first milestone in July. The third update in September. And 4th update and second milestone in December.

I run this like a business. Its not about getting rich fast. Its about steady overall bankroll growrh that proves what im doing can't be down to just luck. it's a test of your patience to wait for these updates Matt.

But after the second one in July you will know I mean business. And more than a few people will begin to realize. I know what im doing. Especially the owner of anothet forum. The lies he spread about me im just biding my time.

Im just curious John. You can prove all doubters that you are right by just posting transaction history from an online casino you play at. Ladbrokes if memory serves me right ?  Now you are on PP.

Quote from: Robeenhuut on January 28, 2013, 07:47:10 AM
Im just curious John. You can prove all doubters that you are right by just posting transaction history from an online casino you play at. Ladbrokes if memory serves me right ?  Now you are on PP.

Im everywhere Matt, lets let Superman earn some of that money this year. He will be my public relations man.

Nobody will give a hoot until about september. Then I will never have to prove another thing. You just watch this year. Its the year that changes more than a few minds.

JL, I just wonder about the possible  flaw in your method. You claim it will never lose. In such a case I should divide the table max with the progressions needed and use  higher value chips. If your method does not work with other than lower chips, you have not told us why. Or may it be so you need the lower chips value due to the table max divided with the ground chip becomes the progression needed?


Some of my methods frankly is so, and have a risk to lose, if minor.

Quote from: Ralph on January 28, 2013, 08:53:53 PM
JL, I just wonder about the possible  flaw in your method. You claim it will never lose. In such a case I should divide the table max with the progressions needed and use  higher value chips. If your method does not work with other than lower chips, you have not told us why. Or may it be so you need the lower chips value due to the table max divided with the ground chip becomes the progression needed?


Some of my methods frankly is so, and have a risk to lose, if minor.

Ralph, I don't claim it will never lose. Bayes already showed it will lose in his simulation. What I said was I've yet to see a loss in nearly 4000 potential losses. And today I have hit the 1000 mark in wins.


RESULTS UPDATE FOR 7 ON 1 FOR 28/01/2013


TOTAL GAMES PLAYED 1000


TOTAL GAMES WON 1000


TOTAL GAMES LOST ZERO


STRIKERATE 1000/0


Well 7 ON 1 has hit the magical 1000 barrier in consecutive wins today. I don't know how to feel about this method. It didn't stand up to Bayes tests. But I have yet to lose a game. I've had one challenge on the progression in 1000 games.

So it stands that I've never seen more than six consecutive 4 GAPS on a live wheel. In almost 4,000 potential games. One thousand now played.

I know how everyone feels about that heavy high risk progression. I don't like the risk on the 5th step myself. 81---81 is alot to put on a single bet for a 1 unit return.

I only take this risk because I can well afford to do so. If I have the patience to wait for a treble trigger as I was doing on 8 ON 1. I will get less games, have to wait longer. But only have 80 units on the line.

Everything has its price with this game, and the two things we never have enough of in this life are in the balance here. TIME AND MONEY.

FIVE my other method that deals with 4 GAPS. Also has broken the 1000 winning game barrier. And only has 80 units on the line. But I have 3 losses on record. One suffered in real play. But all things considered its overall still the most successful method I've played.

I have to decide whether to continue pursuing 7 ON 1 at 242 units risk. Or to play both 8 ON 1 and FIVE in tandem with eactother. Both only risking 80 units a piece.

I would like to warn all the newbies, that the above results claimed as facts, are in fact fiction. Any resemblance with reality is pure coincidence.


note: Anyone who shows results without any backing up to support it, is merely making an empty claim without anything of substance to show. Despite all the promises placed on the future...

Quote from: MarignyGrilleau on January 28, 2013, 10:55:44 PM
I would like to warn all the newbies, that the above results claimed as facts, are in fact fiction. Any resemblance with reality is pure coincidence.


note: Anyone who shows results without any backing up to support it, is merely making an empty claim without anything of substance to show. Despite all the promises placed on the future...

Any resemblance with reality is pure coincidence. What on earth are you talking about? You may choose not to believe my results Marigny. But don't be making statements like that.

You will be one of the first to shy away from admitting you were wrong 5 months from now.

It would be very easy to prove me wrong immediately if you had verifiable sessions. But you don't. So what i say above stands as the present truth. Please realize that i do not hold any grudge against you, but i recon people wanting to improve their game @roulette will look into this forum. Just for consideration of those, i take the liberty of assuming the sceptic side.
I would be very happy if in fact your systems could beat the game. Me and hundreds of others. No doubt about that.
Just keeping expectations honest here.
Cheers