Here are the 4 events of this figure:  N N N N N

évent 1 :  R R R R

évent 2 : R R R R

évent 3: R R R R

évent 4 : R R R R

I do not think I'm wrong

Apparently we need a C.

It seems that the copy/paste is doing nothing .

Quote from: moglizu on March 06, 2017, 05:18:24 AM
It seems that the copy/paste is doing nothing .

He's from this site.  We have trusted and admired members who are able to understand your whole method in the first three sentences, and able to write a tracker before you can finish explaining.   

But of course.
You re all waiting for the easy and ready solution ... without the need of know the mechanics behind the method.

But even if some of you have the need of understanding , they don t have the brains to understand ...

so all cases are lost cases 

What I posted is strictly accurate.

Yes sure.
Make a tracked based on this one and you will all lose
LoL

Exact .

It will be the same on any figure.

Quote from: moglizu on March 06, 2017, 05:27:39 AM
But of course.
You re all waiting for the easy and ready solution ... without the need of know the mechanics behind the method.

But even if some of you have the need of understanding , they don t have the brains to understand ...

so all cases are lost cases

We don't have any of those kinds of members.   Here's a performance chart of one of our average members...and this is just on EC's! 

so if you already have a winning way , why are you bothering with mine?

Quote from: moglizu on March 06, 2017, 06:21:56 AM
so if you already have a winning way , why are you bothering with mine?

I was just sent to interview you for possible membership.   Mainly, they want to know if you would get into an IQ contest for no good reason.   

We had to let the other guy go, who performed below average on EC's.  Here is a chart of a member still in good standing. Notice now long, how straight, and how far it goes:

so use it and make money. and don t bother with my method

Quote from: plolp on March 06, 2017, 05:12:21 AM
Apparently we need a C.

That's what she said?

Quote from: 3Nine on March 06, 2017, 06:39:20 AM
That's what she said?

   

Guys


Anyone can say whatever they want about the method of Moglizu but I'm concerned about the following:

A)  There is no evidence whatsoever that the method is really a winnning method

B) There is no evidence of testing results that demonstrates that the method is a winning method.....

C) It has been claimed that 4 people makes chips with the method.....but up to now we have not seen any evidence from
     any of these people.

Naturally anyone can claim anthing; anyone is entitled to draw their own conclusion regarding the method. However, until I see evidence of matters mentioned
at points A,B,C above I do not believe that the method is a winning method as alleged.




Cheers

R.

Quote from: Rouletta on March 06, 2017, 12:10:22 PM
Guys


Anyone can say whatever they want about the method of Moglizu but I'm concerned about the following:

A)  There is no evidence whatsoever that the method is really a winnning method

B) There is no evidence of testing results that demonstrates that the method is a winning method.....

C) It has been claimed that 4 people makes chips with the method.....but up to now we have not seen any evidence from
     any of these people.

Naturally anyone can claim anthing; anyone is entitled to draw their own conclusion regarding the method. However, until I see evidence of matters mentioned
at points A,B,C above I do not believe that the method is a winning method as alleged.




Cheers

He claims that he has been winning for 2 years and I tend to  side with his claim. Reason being is that his method has certain trigger call for the bet to be placed,  and his bankroll needed to play  is very small. And flat betting to say the least.
I know we tend to first look for the evidence from the testing and whatnot.  I also read his characterized statements over and over. Moglizu has something worthy, I can tell because he does not give a sh---t about anyone..