Hi to all who remember me and hi to those who don't know me yet.

Well its been 5 years since I was on this forum. I still play PATTERN BREAKER. But with some tweaks which made it even stronger and more profitable.

The revised system rules

(1)--You track ALL THREE even chances at the same time, instead of focusing on just one like I once did. The advantages of this are a slightly higher strikerate. And faster game qualification.

(2)--The first even chance to deliver the 8th pattern is your bet.

(3)--You proceed to bet against the 8th pattern using the classic 1-2-4 progression.

(4)--You stop at a win or of course a loss.

(5)--Optional and something I recommend is to cover Zero at least the last step of the progression. So if my progression was 5--10--20. I would bet 5--10--22--(2 on zero).

(6)--I play no more than 5 to 10 games in a calendar day. I know there's been this argument forever that hit and run makes no difference in the sea of variance. But its worked for me for years. Securing an average strikerate of 10--1 to 12--1. And by allowing random to now choose your bet for you. This has improved to an average of 13 to 15 to 1.

(7)--I always play my first game of the day as my banker bet. As it has an outstanding strikerate of over 20--1. I bet 3 times as much on this first game. As the ones that follow.

(--To give you some idea how good this first game is. So far this year I've only lost 1 game. So im running at a strikerate of 34--1 so far. Last year in 2017 it lost only 17 times out of 365 days. that's a strikerate of over 20--1 for the year.

Once I get to 400 games played of the revised system later this week I will give an update on results. If anyone has any questions, please feel free to ask...

if you are the same john legend we remember welcome back.  do you consider it a winning system? what is MK2? thank you.

Yes wannawin I am he, I consider it the greatest roulette concept and strategy of alltime wannawin. Its never failed me in 11 years. I have just come off a 54 game winning streak. Allowing random to select your bet for you made the system much stronger. And faster.

Random steers you away from the losing game more often. Than if you just stay on the same even chance. There is also the phenomena of what I call the perfect storm.

That is when you get 7 patterns of an even chance form in the minimum number of spins 21. You then  go all in against the 8th pattern. A perfect storm is probably the safest three step marty bet in existence. In 430 games..I have only lost 8 times. You must cover the Zero if you get one of these gems. Its the only thing that can upset the party most of the time. And I have had a winning streak of 67 games with them.

Welcome back John Legend - it make me really happy to read about your succés ...

Cheers

Quote from: Sputnik on February 26, 2018, 04:57:21 PM
Welcome back John Legend - it make me really happy to read about your succés ...

Cheers

Sputnik nice to hear from you..Its been a while.

Just for clarification purposes, after 7 different permutations you are betting against the 8th possible permutation/pattern?


If that's the betting principle then Albalaha would argue about the validity of the reasoning.


I don't consider myself as an expert on EC's betting, that's why I've mentioned user Albalaha who, according his mentality, considers every bet selection to be the same and only a money management could make the difference.


I'm somewhat neutral regarding EC betting but I would like to be further explained the reasoning about WHY it IS better or NOT.


Thank you

Quote from: JOHN LEGEND MK2 on February 26, 2018, 03:52:50 PM
Yes wannawin I am he, I consider it the greatest roulette concept and strategy of alltime wannawin. Its never failed me in 11 years. I have just come off a 54 game winning streak. Allowing random to select your bet for you made the system much stronger. And faster.

thanks for answering. an indiscreet question: if the system is good enough then why publish it? Is it not better to keep it a secret?? you are the exception to the norm . If you ask anyone who has a solid method for 11 years of continued use I do not think he will let it go so easily for the casinos to know.

Hi guys, I've attached the results of a simulation of PATTERN BREAKER. I used a kind of generic EC, labels 0 & 1, and there is no house edge of any kind but that doesn't detract from the results. Here are the first 3 games in the output file which I've attached :

*** GAME #1 ***
Waiting for 7 unique patterns...
111
001
011
001
000
110
111
001
100
010

Opposite of remaining pattern :010
1 Bank :  -1
1 Bank :   1
Bank after game #1:   1   W

*** GAME #2 ***
Waiting for 7 unique patterns...
101
101
001
111
011
001
100
101
101
011
111
101
000
101
100
110

Opposite of remaining pattern :101
1 Bank :   2
Bank after game #2:   2   W

*** GAME #3 ***
Waiting for 7 unique patterns...
111
110
101
101
000
101
000
001
001
011
101
010

Opposite of remaining pattern :011
0 Bank :   3
Bank after game #3:   3   W

And here are the final results after 20,000 games:

------ SUMMARY ------

Final Balance : 104 units
Gain from Wins = 17513
No. Busts = 2487
Check : 17513 - 2487 x 7 = 104
Ratio of wins:busts : 7.04 to 1

The final balance of +104 is almost certainly due to there being no house advantage, and given that, it's not statistically significant anyway. The ratio of wins to busts is right about where it should be assuming no house edge.

To be honest I wasn't expecting anything different. I'm not denying that John Legend may have had a lot of success with his system, only that it's probably due to sheer luck. If I knew exactly how many games he has played I could figure out just how lucky he has been.

Thanks for taking the time to code and publish the results.

Quote from: wannawin on February 27, 2018, 05:45:37 PM
thanks for answering. an indiscreet question: if the system is good enough then why publish it? Is it not better to keep it a secret?? you are the exception to the norm . If you ask anyone who has a solid method for 11 years of continued use I do not think he will let it go so easily for the casinos to know.

Because wannawin Human beings wouldn't play a system in great numbers no matter how long it turned a profit.

PB is a PERCENTAGE GRINDER. It works over the longterm. There is no rocket science or great drawdowns. Huge bankroll required.

It asks of the player one thing. DO YOU HAVE THE PATIENCE TO WAIT FOR SUCCESS. And the answer to that wannawin. Is the vast majority of human beings DO NOT. Over 90%

As soon as they lose a game or three. Or have a poor 100 game set. Where they only make 12 UNITS of profit. The enthusiasm wanes. And the MIND asks what's NEXT.

That's why I can publish this and have zero worries. Not even 5 people on this forum will STAY with this.

When I began playing PB 11 years ago. I lost 4 of my first 20 games. Now you tell me. How many people would even carry on if that happened to them? VERY FEW.

Then after that poor start. I won 38 games in a row. And finished my 100 game set 92--8. Or in other words 36 units of profit.

Quote from: Blue_Angel on February 26, 2018, 08:16:53 PM
Just for clarification purposes, after 7 different permutations you are betting against the 8th possible permutation/pattern?


If that's the betting principle then Albalaha would argue about the validity of the reasoning.


I don't consider myself as an expert on EC's betting, that's why I've mentioned user Albalaha who, according his mentality, considers every bet selection to be the same and only a money management could make the difference.


I'm somewhat neutral regarding EC betting but I would like to be further explained the reasoning about WHY it IS better or NOT.


Thank you

I don't get too philosophical about the reason it works. All I know is putting random on the spot to show you that 8th pattern IMMEDIATELY after that 7th pattern is SUPERIOR. To say waiting on 6 reds and hoping they don't become 16 reds.

Its got alot more certainty to it. It can be molded to suit your pocket and nerve. On another forum for example. One of the members there has been playing PB with great success for several years. Just betting the FIRST 2 STEPS of the prog. 1--2. They average 12--1 doing that. In other words for every 12 units they win. They lose 3. Giving a net of 9 units on average every 13 games.

Quote from: CoderJoe on March 03, 2018, 01:49:12 PM
Hi guys, I've attached the results of a simulation of PATTERN BREAKER. I used a kind of generic EC, labels 0 & 1, and there is no house edge of any kind but that doesn't detract from the results. Here are the first 3 games in the output file which I've attached :

*** GAME #1 ***
Waiting for 7 unique patterns...
111
001
011
001
000
110
111
001
100
010

Opposite of remaining pattern :010
1 Bank :  -1
1 Bank :   1
Bank after game #1:   1   W

*** GAME #2 ***
Waiting for 7 unique patterns...
101
101
001
111
011
001
100
101
101
011
111
101
000
101
100
110

Opposite of remaining pattern :101
1 Bank :   2
Bank after game #2:   2   W

*** GAME #3 ***
Waiting for 7 unique patterns...
111
110
101
101
000
101
000
001
001
011
101
010

Opposite of remaining pattern :011
0 Bank :   3
Bank after game #3:   3   W

And here are the final results after 20,000 games:

------ SUMMARY ------

Final Balance : 104 units
Gain from Wins = 17513
No. Busts = 2487
Check : 17513 - 2487 x 7 = 104
Ratio of wins:busts : 7.04 to 1

The final balance of +104 is almost certainly due to there being no house advantage, and given that, it's not statistically significant anyway. The ratio of wins to busts is right about where it should be assuming no house edge.

To be honest I wasn't expecting anything different. I'm not denying that John Legend may have had a lot of success with his system, only that it's probably due to sheer luck. If I knew exactly how many games he has played I could figure out just how lucky he has been.

Over the last 11 years Mr coder I have played over 14,000 games. There may be an element of luck involved. But I know of three others who make their living from this system. So it cannot be ALL LUCK.

You must understand that no system that can be played for as little as 3 units is bullet proof. No realisitic playable system ever has been or everwill be.

ROULETTE IS A PERCENTAGE GAME. Nothing more nothing less.

Once you have a system that can show a profit over the ultimate denomination of percentage. 🛑100🛑 You have the game beaten. At least in a mans lifetime.

And that is where the pattern breaker concept wins. In its revised format it is capable of winning over 20 times in a row at LEAST ONCE in every hundred games. And never fails to do so.

NOW! You all know what a parlay is. Imagine YOU KNOW. That in every frame of 100 games you at some point are going to have AT LEAST one winning streak of AT LEAST 20 games in a row.

Do I have to spell out the potential here?

You parlay

1-2-4
2-4-8

Etc for 20 in a row. You get 50 units of profit at win 20. 14 wins in a row is break even point. PBR has no trouble stringing together 4 to 5 streaks of 14 plus in a 100 games including at least ONE set of 20 plus.

I just came off a 54 game streak. You have to think about these things. And stop worrying about bot simulations. They in no way represent real roulette.

Just as an RNG doesn't. Playing 5 to 10 games a day. With random entry into variances cycle. Cannot ever be faithfully replicated in an artificial simulator. Im sorry but it can't. I wouldn't have been successful. And others I know on other forums wouldn't have either. Playing continuously. In a robotic fashion.

There's a distinct difference playing a limited set of games. On a real wheel with a real dealer. There truly is.

But the lazy who want all the anwsers yesterday. The jaded impatient system hoppers will never know this.

So spend years jumping from one system to another. And achieving no real profit building.

That takes them to a level they only have to play 3 or 4 games a day to be and living money level. Add in a nice parlay or two each month. And you are good to go.

John Legend i understand you and i agree with you.

Cheers

Hello John,

I didn't use an RNG for the simulation, but actual spins, I just ignored the zeros and coded red/black as 1/0. You say that your system is mechanical so I don't understand what difference there is between actual play and my simulation. A simulation, if coded correctly, has no issues with patience or discipline, which I agree are very important. A simulation is no different than real play as long as you are following the system's rules perfectly. If there are other rules which you follow then let me know and I can code them, but if that's the case why didn't you tell us about them in your opening post?

Well i have seen several members report succés with Pattern Breaker and have a hard time to understand why all this members would lie.
Patern Breaker has the same issue as Ching A Ling method - members start to report winning 5K and 30K and some vanish from the forum boards and start to play full time.
Guess what - still there was some members who say that the method does not work and you can not win.
Can you see what's wrong with this picture.

Cheers