Our members are dedicated to PASSION and PURPOSE without drama!

*******7 on 1*******

Started by JohnLegend, January 12, 2013, 01:43:23 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 13 Guests are viewing this topic.

JohnLegend

Quote from: Bayes on January 19, 2013, 12:31:55 PM
The breakdowns start from the trigger (step 2), so a win on step 3 means the first bet you make.
Okay Bayes thanks. It seems like 11 is the wall for this method. Ralph could boterize this. And win all day. Without any huge drawdowns.

Bayes

John, the distribution of wins and losses of 7-on-1 follow the same pattern as just betting randomly with a 5 step progression. The conclusion is that there's no need for waiting and tracking, just bet ANY 2 dozens at any time to get approximately the same results. I know that's probably not what you want to hear...  :annoy:

JohnLegend

Quote from: Bayes on January 19, 2013, 01:47:45 PM
John, the distribution of wins and losses of 7-on-1 follow the same pattern as just betting randomly with a 5 step progression. The conclusion is that there's no need for waiting and tracking, just bet ANY 2 dozens at any time to get approximately the same results. I know that's probably not what you want to hear...  :annoy:
Well no, but at present im getting what I want from it. At the end of the day profits what I want.

I never put all my eggs in one basket. PB could get me to where im going through sheer MM. Im still looking for that playable semi grail just as everyone else is.

Next in the grinder has got to be CODE 4 HORIZONTAL. Given the risk it holds alot more potential than 7 ON 1. CODE V5 looks like it will be the double dozen workhorse.

Superb turnover similar to CODE 4. But stronger. :thumbsup:

Bayes

Ok, I've found the CODE 4 HORIZONTAL thread. Have the rules been tweaked or are they still the same as in Atlantis' first post?

QuoteCODE 4 HORIZONTAL VARIATION
======================
Bet that the second 2 elements of a code 4 horizontal line MATCH the first 2 elements recorded in the line...

For instance:
B3 is first 2 results recorded on a line - bet for B3 to repeat

For instance:
2C is first 2 results recorded on line - bet for 2C to repeat

Rotate the 1-1-1-2 (total 5u) progression.

If lose the whole progression (1-1-1-2) then restart the progression.

Also, restart the progression after ANY WIN gained on a line.

Important: ONLY PLAY AFTER 2 L's in a row have occurred on a line then resume betting on the line immediately below at positions 3 and 4 for a match of the first 2 results on the line.  **STOP AT A WINNER ON A LINE**

EXAMPLE (using col-doz-col-doz matrix)

B3A3 - L w       (waiting for 2 horizontal non-matches in a row)
B1A2 - L L        trigger  (2 L's in a row on a line)

JohnLegend

Quote from: Bayes on January 19, 2013, 02:22:08 PM
Ok, I've found the CODE 4 HORIZONTAL thread. Have the rules been tweaked or are they still the same as in Atlantis' first post?
This is where we have now arrived at Bayes.

3C2A---LL
3C1B---LL
2A1C---LL----TRIGGER
1C1A---W---BET 1 STEP 1

We are betting against random showing us 16 of these losses in a row. Progression

1,1,2,3,5,7,11,16,24,36= 10 steps 106 units

Atlantis

Just confirming with JL in regard to CODE4-H...


Record sequences of 4 results in the format doz/col/doz/col
For example if the last 4 numbers were 16,19,3,28 then you record:

2a1a

Once you have recorded a line of 4 numbers like that you compare the first two elements (couplets) of the line with the last two pair of results on the line and if they match horizontally you record a "w". If they don't match you record an "L"

So you get:

2a1a  Lw   (the 2 and 1 do not match so it is a L; the column a's do match so that is classed as a w - win)

You build up your matrix with lines of 4 results eg:

2a1a Lw
3b1c LL
2b2b wW

When you get a situation where you have recorded 6 L's over 3 consecutive lines

LL
LL
LL

it is time to begin the progression:

2b3c LL
1a3b LL
2c3a LL - trigger to begin betting for a matching couplet on the next line eg:


2b3c LL
1a3b LL
2c3a LL -----six L's trigger
1a--------------------begin to bet now for match of doz1 then next spin bet for match on column a - BUT always stop at a winner on the line.

I use a 10-step progression: 1-1-1-2-3-5-7-11-16-25 = 72u

Example:

1a3c LL
1a2b LL
2b1c LL   TRIGGER
2c2c w+2; w            +2
3b1a LL
1c2b LL
3c2a LL    TRIGGER
1c1c w+2 w             +4
1a1b w L
3c2c L w
3c1b LL
2c3a LL
3a2b LL     TRIGGER
3b1a L-1 L-1
2c2c w+2 w             +4

Hey JL, Looking forward to codev5!   :)

Atlantis.

JohnLegend

Yep Atlantis, you got it. Yeah im proofing CODE V5 at the moment. Its got to win the first 500 games to make it on here. Im 245/0 at present.

TwoCatSam

John

I have an old Chinese proverb for you.  "The man who chases two rabbits catches neither."

Not ragging on you, but if one system works why look for more? 

Sam
If dogs don't go to heaven, when I die I want to go where dogs go.   ...Will Rogers

Ralph

Quote from: TwoCatSam on January 19, 2013, 05:27:21 PM
John

I have an old Chinese proverb for you.  "The man who chases two rabbits catches neither."

Not ragging on you, but if one system works why look for more? 

Sam


I do not need a bust to shift. I shift methods sometimes  to not going into a boring routine.


And maybe the casino use players signature! :))

TwoCatSam

Yes, Ralph, but all your methods work.  If I found a method that works, I'd stick with it.

Just my opinion.

John seems to run these things out like he had an assembly line!

Sam
If dogs don't go to heaven, when I die I want to go where dogs go.   ...Will Rogers

MarignyGrilleau

Thing is that they are poorly tested before any claim should be made.

JohnLegend

Quote from: TwoCatSam on January 19, 2013, 06:50:47 PM
Yes, Ralph, but all your methods work.  If I found a method that works, I'd stick with it.

Just my opinion.

John seems to run these things out like he had an assembly line!

Sam
You are right and wrong at the same time Sam, PATTERN BREAKER is 4.5 years old. And ill be playing it till I draw my last breath.

7 on 1 is new. And although Bayes tests are discouraging. Remember they are sims and not H.A.R. Im still doing very well with it.

I've always used at least two methods. Atlantis CODE 4 H. Is too good to be ignored. It really is. So im using it. CODE V5 is the one yet to break on here. If it holds up it will.

It will put in an appearance. FIVES on the backburner. As 7 On 1 took presedence over it. I even have methods for the streets that I use from time to time.

Variety is the spice of life. So long as they're winning. They are there for use.

Robeenhuut

Quote from: JohnLegend on January 19, 2013, 11:04:40 PM
You are right and wrong at the same time Sam, PATTERN BREAKER is 4.5 years old. And ill be playing it till I draw my last breath.

7 on 1 is new. And although Bayes tests are discouraging. Remember they are sims and not H.A.R. Im still doing very well with it.

I've always used at least two methods. Atlantis CODE 4 H. Is too good to be ignored. It really is. So im using it. CODE V5 is the one yet to break on here. If it holds up it will.

It will put in an appearance. FIVES on the backburner. As 7 On 1 took presedence over it. I even have methods for the streets that I use from time to time.

Variety is the spice of life. So long as they're winning. They are there for use.

What happened to FIVE?  You had 1000+ winning run with that. And it was with 1,3,9,27 progression.

Bayes

Quote from: JohnLegend on January 19, 2013, 11:04:40 PM
7 on 1 is new. And although Bayes tests are discouraging. Remember they are sims and not H.A.R. Im still doing very well with it.

John, to be honest, I find this a bit depressing. If I go to the trouble of writing a simulation and the response is "it means nothing", which is what you're basically saying, then why should I (or anyone else) be motivated to make the effort?

H.A.R. can easily be simulated (I've done it before, as has Gizmo), but I get the feeling you would dismiss that as invalid, too.

You have been testing 7-on-1 using THE VERY SAME file which I used for the sim, but suggest that only LIVE results matter, in which case, why bother to test at all?

Atlantis

Quote from: Robeenhuut on January 22, 2013, 06:10:49 AM
What happened to FIVE?  You had 1000+ winning run with that. And it was with 1,3,9,27 progression.

Hi Robeenhuut,
FIVE was superceded by 7on1 and was born out of it and is a lot easier to understand and track (and code). JL thought it superior as well, so that explains why FIVE was put on the back burner due to the testing and playing being switched to the 7on1 method.
A.