JL - " PATTERN BREAKER is capable of producing. Most of the time YES. you win 6 you lose 1 you win 4 you lose 1. You win 9 you lose 1.

THEN! Something special happens, that random entry into the cycle goes on a winning streak15,20,25 OR BEYOND. "

Quote from: Gizmotron on November 29, 2012, 08:37:02 PM
Sorry to break this to you but that is common of a straight uninterrupted 3 step Marti also. I just created a plain old 3 step Marti with no special waiting for the last of eight patterns and no "HAR" intervals. And guess what? You can't tell the difference between the win/loss sequences for this test and the w/L sequences for PB. They have the same long win streaks as the mumbo jumbo win streaks. Your balloon is popped. This is the definitive "cat's out of the bag" moment. There's no need to wait two years.

I dare any of you to compare PB win streak claims against those of a common 3 step Martingale. Be prepared to be amazed.

Quote from: JohnLegend on November 29, 2012, 08:58:13 PM
Now you know why I play PATTERN BREAKER. YES, YES YES a hundred marthingale methods could do some attractive win loss streaks. But when they go wrong my gawd they go WRONG.

I know what im talking about Giz. And time will show it ALL I promise you all that.

P.S Subby appologies feel free to delete all this back and forth with Giz.

Feel free to discuss the unique marvels of PB's 3 step Martingale. If it's the same thing then why is the Legend's version different? Perhaps he knows exactly when to return to the casino for a blast of the good stuff.

I would like to add to the randomness conversation again regarding any system or PB in this case.  I am stating this from a place of pure observation, nothing more, nothing less:

I don't think JL is here to compare systems as much as he is sharing his methods that simply work well for him.  When he finds something that works, he shares it ... nothing more, nothing less.  He is not selling it or pushing it in a book, he is simply sharing his data with the forum.

I am not sure "we" will ever be able to fully understand randomness within the roulette world.  We all are trying, that's for sure ...and good constructive conversation like this may finally get us some further understanding    It is my opinion that randomness struggles to repeat certain events, especially at very specific "moments in time.  If players like JL and myself simply believe that we will win (playing PB) by betting against the last pattern forming and it works for us and we are successful at it, then players like JL and I are catagorically 100% correct.  However, if there are players the don't believe that PB is any better than another system or produces the results claimed, then they are also catagorically 100% correct.  It simply doesn't matter what side of the fence you are on, it simply matters what you believe and what works for you.  Again, just sharing .... 

Quote from: Chauncy47 on November 30, 2012, 01:58:47 PM
I would like to add to the randomness conversation again regarding any system or PB in this case.  I am stating this from a place of pure observation, nothing more, nothing less:

I don't think JL is here to compare systems as much as he is sharing his methods that simply work well for him.  When he finds something that works, he shares it ... nothing more, nothing less.  He is not selling it or pushing it in a book, he is simply sharing his data with the forum.

I am not sure "we" will ever be able to fully understand randomness within the roulette world.  We all are trying, that's for sure ...and good constructive conversation like this may finally get us some further understanding    It is my opinion that randomness struggles to repeat certain events, especially at very specific "moments in time.  If players like JL and myself simply believe that we will win (playing PB) by betting against the last pattern forming and it works for us and we are successful at it, then players like JL and I are catagorically 100% correct.  However, if there are players the don't believe that PB is any better than another system or produces the results claimed, then they are also catagorically 100% correct.  It simply doesn't matter what side of the fence you are on, it simply matters what you believe and what works for you.  Again, just sharing ....

This debate will go on forever Chauncy, its about more than winning and losing.

Its about people questioning their own intelligence. Its not like faith where you believe in god while you can't prove god exists.

Its about an aspect of the game that maths probability have a weaker grip on. People like to feel they are in control. They know that after A you have B. H.A.R throws that out of the window.

Because you just don't know what it might show you. And at its best. At its VERY BEST. It will give you the edge required to win against this game.

I could never and will never beat this game playing like the masses. But I will always beat this game playing as I now do.

So this works because of H.A.R. How do you know when to run? How do you know when to hit? This question is to all that are doing well with PB.

Quote from: Gizmotron on November 30, 2012, 06:46:54 PM
So this works because of H.A.R. How do you know when to run? How do you know when to hit? This question is to all that are doing well with PB.

YOU don't. But like I keep saying, its HARDER TO LAND DEAD ON TOP OF A LOSS,(H.A.R) THAN IT IS TO TRAVEL TOWARDS A LOSS (CONTINUOS PLAY)

That is what I believe makes H.A.R  a superior way to approach the game. And the bigger the odds the more dramatic its effect can be. Playing one of my other methods FIVE I have a strikerate of 1,425/1 When probability says 80/1.

Playing another of my methods 8 ON 1. I currently have a strikerate of 605/0 When probability says 242/1 And 8 ON 1 hasnt even been challenged ONCE YET. Tests show neither method would make those numbers in continuos play.

Hey Gizmo,
        Do not overemphasize this topic. You have already said so many things about it. Has PB become a subject of research? Shouldn't we focus our attention towards other constructive things than keep on debating over PB.

Quote from: KingsRoulette on November 30, 2012, 07:32:41 PM
Hey Gizmo,
        Do not overemphasize this topic. You have already said so many things about it. Has PB become a subject of research? Shouldn't we focus our attention towards other constructive things than keep on debating over PB.

Kingsroulette, its only the beginning im afraid. Success attracts attention.

Quote from: JohnLegend on November 30, 2012, 04:17:42 PM
Its about an aspect of the game that maths probability have a weaker grip on.

Implying you have a strong grip on it. All right,
I'll bite. What is it about probability that's weak
in your 'aspect' of the game that lets you win
more than lose. Go into detail, show us why
this works.

Quote from: spike on November 30, 2012, 07:39:53 PM
Implying you have a strong grip on it. All right,
I'll bite. What is it about probability that's weak
in your 'aspect' of the game that lets you win
more than lose. Go into detail, show us why
this works.

Is that you in the Avatar Spike or Billy Idol lol? I don't have an exact answer. My theory is simple. ITS HARDER TO LAND DEAD ON TOP OF A LOSS, THAN TO TRAVEL TOWARDS A LOSS.

That's all there is to it. And the greater the odds the more awesome the winning streak can be. That's why even with a method like PATTERN breaker, which only has paper odds of 7/1. People are stringing together streaks in excess of 20. Subby is currently on a streak of 21.

Quote from: JohnLegend on November 30, 2012, 07:46:11 PM
I don't have an exact answer. My theory is simple. ITS HARDER TO LAND DEAD ON TOP OF A LOSS, THAN TO TRAVEL TOWARDS A LOSS.

Which is meaningless. You don't know how the math
for your own system works, you don't know how it
wins, you know nothing about probability or the nature
of random outcomes. You're the guy who strapped
on some balsam wings and jumped off the barn roof
and didn't die, so now you're an expert on winged
flight. Keep jumping, Lindbergh, the truth will eventually
catch up to you.

Quote from: spike on November 30, 2012, 07:56:27 PM
Which is meaningless. You don't know how the math
for your own system works, you don't know how it
wins, you know nothing about probability or the nature
of random outcomes. You're the guy who strapped
on some balsam wings and jumped off the barn roof
and didn't die, so now you're an expert on winged
flight. Keep jumping, Lindbergh, the truth will eventually
catch up to you.

Spike I only need to know it WORKS. I leave all the number crunching to maths boys like you. Its held for over 4 years. And its so far ahead. I would have to lose 200 times in a row just to half my profit.

You keep number crunching, the winning goes ON.

The reality of PB or any other system that produces more wins than losses, based on this discussion of randomness, is that "we" may not be able to explain why it works.  We believe we know why it works.  I believe I know why it works.   It's my opinion that the answer is simple:  This method is not for everyone.

I over hear this old saying time and time again while I am down at the casiono each night:  "The ball has no memory."  Really? No kidding!  The ball also doesn't understand math such as 7/1, ...and it doesn't understand probability and it doesn't understand black or red or even or odd or high or low.  Quite frankly, the ball doesn't care or understand Pattern Breaker either. 

Players like JL, me and some others, simply believe that randomness has limitations at very specific moments in time.  And so we believe that we can take advantage of those moments and win most of the time -regardless of the system.   And because we believe in that concept combined with believing in patience, good smart money management, discipline, creativity, open mindedness, etc.... It works very well for us.  Nothing more, nothing less.

I am not here to debate with anyone about PB, Code 4, P4 or any of the other great methods ... I am simply offering some insight to why we think the way we do and why we are comfortable playing these methods.   

Quote from: Chauncy47 on November 30, 2012, 09:11:51 PM
The reality of PB or any other system that produces more wins than losses, based on this discussion of randomness, is that "we" may not be able to explain why it works.  We believe we know why it works.  I believe I know why it works.   It's my opinion that the answer is simple:  This method is not for everyone.

I over hear this old saying time and time again while I am down at the casiono each night:  "The ball has no memory."  Really? No kidding!  The ball also doesn't understand math such as 7/1, ...and it doesn't understand probability and it doesn't understand black or red or even or odd or high or low.  Quite frankly, the ball doesn't care or understand Pattern Breaker either. 

Players like JL, me and some others, simply believe that randomness has limitations at very specific moments in time.  And so we believe that we can take advantage of those moments and win most of the time -regardless of the system.   And because we believe in that concept combined with believing in patience, good smart money management, discipline, creativity, open mindedness, etc.... It works very well for us.  Nothing more, nothing less.

I am not here to debate with anyone about PB, Code 4, P4 or any of the other great methods ... I am simply offering some insight to why we think the way we do and why we are comfortable playing these methods.

EXACTLY, you either open your mind to this or keep it stuck in a maths journal.

Exactly the point I've been making forever. Random doesn't care about any of it. It is and it does. All we do is find a method to play small frames and if its good we collect more profit than we lose over the longterm. That's what PB does today, tomorrow forever. Take it leave it.

It will still be working a thousand years from now.