They don't call you legend for nothing.

So here is where hit and run really works. In this place and these conditions, any person depending on luck or magical beliefs gets killed as a reward for their miscalculations. The place is Mt. Everest. You screw around with promises and you die. I prefer the real world.

If I didn't know better, and I can't prove anything, I would say that this is an elaborate hoax, JL is some kind of new type of troll craft, and that in reality he is some under paid and frustrated junior high school math teacher. This is the same person that was Fender1000 and promised that the future would prove his preaching was true. Now we are asked to wait once again. What I'm waiting for is someone that got burned by this to walk up and hit him and don't run.  There should be a consequence for trashing a forum by posters publishing outright fabrication designed specifically to deceive.

WARNING: Gizmo, you're treading a fine line here. No personal attacks please.

Quote from: JohnLegend on December 22, 2012, 01:04:36 PM

You have to have iron self belief. Some people arent made to beat this game period. Trebor and Shogun both simmered around 7/1 after two or three hundred games. For them failure. But NOT FOR ME that's the difference. I know how to make this method pay EVEN when it drops below its break even point 7/1.

When its flying as it is at the moment for me. You don't need any smart MM you just let it GO. So NO, not everyone will get stellar results with PB. Most will fold before they ever see what is really possible.

They want INSTANT GRATIFICATION. And when it doesn't come they will bend and drop out. STAYING POWER. its lacking in most people Superman. 7/1 doesn't buy you a miracle. You have to work at it.
242/1 that's another story. Bayes has a surprise coming his way next year with that one.

If that's not saying it's my fault for having no staying power then I'm a chinaman (no offence).

Quote from: Gizmotron on December 22, 2012, 03:34:31 PM
They don't call you legend for nothing.

So here is where hit and run really works. In this place and these conditions, any person depending on luck or magical beliefs gets killed as a reward for their miscalculations. The place is Mt. Everest. You screw around with promises and you die. I prefer the real world.

If I didn't know better, and I can't prove anything, I would say that this is an elaborate hoax, JL is some kind of new type of troll craft, and that in reality he is some under paid and frustrated junior high school math teacher. This is the same person that was Fender1000 and promised that the future would prove his preaching was true. Now we are asked to wait once again. What I'm waiting for is someone that got burned by this to walk up and hit him and don't run.  There should be a consequence for trashing a forum by posters publishing outright fabrication designed specifically to deceive.

Exactly what im in the process of doing now Giz. And where is your method and proof that you are right? Deceive who? You are overexaggerating everything here Giz.

You should know that if you tell a 1,000 people you can beat this game. Not even 10 will take you seriously. Please tell me you know this already. But then show a 1,000 people success. And then maybe 11 will take you seriously out of that 1,000. But at least those 11 will know I am not what you are implying.

Quote from: JohnLegend on December 22, 2012, 03:32:03 PM
Bayes I know this isn't a personal attack on me. But im giving my side of the story. All I say is this. If I sat there and played 40 games of Pattern Breaker in a row. You can be certain I would lose at least once. So now tell me why I can win 40 or more playing H.A.R if it has NO ADVANTAGE?

John,

You admit yourself that it works FOR YOU. To my mind, something that "works for me" is a method that just doesn't work, period. The natural conclusion to draw if some have won with it and some haven't is that it's just a matter of luck.
I wish you luck with the challenge, but even if you "destroy" PaddyPower it won't mean that you've proved that HAR works. To show that HAR is effective we need a control group. If HAR is as effective as you claim then it shouldn't take long to show beyond reasonable doubt whether it works or not.

Quote from: Trebor on December 22, 2012, 03:36:08 PM
If that's not saying it's my fault for having no staying power then I'm a chinaman (no offence).

Trebor I simply name checked you and Shogun. As you both had similar breakdowns. Im not saying anything is your fault.

So what we have is a little boy with a cardboard spaceship in his backyard. He's telling us that next July he will be in orbit. And if we don't believe him he's going to hold his breath.

Quote from: JohnLegend on December 22, 2012, 03:40:45 PM
Exactly what im in the process of doing now Giz. And where is your method and proof that you are right? Deceive who? You are overexaggerating everything here Giz.

You should know that if you tell a 1,000 people you can beat this game. Not even 10 will take you seriously. Please tell me you know this already. But then show a 1,000 people success. And then maybe 11 will take you seriously out of that 1,000. But at least those 11 will know I am not what you are implying.

Quote from: Bayes on December 22, 2012, 03:44:21 PM
John,

You admit yourself that it works FOR YOU. To my mind, something that "works for me" is a method that just doesn't work, period. The natural conclusion to draw if some have won with it and some haven't is that it's just a matter of luck.
I wish you luck with the challenge, but even if you "destroy" PaddyPower it won't mean that you've proved that HAR works. To show that HAR is effective we need a control group. If HAR is as effective as you claim then it shouldn't take long to show beyond reasonable doubt whether it works or not.

Okay Bayes we will leave it at that then. Its just all luck if I go from 200 units to 2 million.

Quote from: JohnLegend on December 22, 2012, 03:50:44 PM
Okay Bayes we will leave it at that then. Its just all luck if I go from 200 units to 2 million.

That's not what I meant. If you do that then it could be HAR at work or it could be the system. The point is, you won't have shown that it's specifically HAR which has given you the results.

Hey MISTER LEGENDARY MAN, show me one person that can tell me when the mathematical probability for the next quality trend will start and how long it will continue to be effective. If you are handed the real method that works and you can't see it then you of all people have experienced the greatest lesson in irony. What's more, Your 7.4/1 magic pill is known.

Quote from: Bayes on December 22, 2012, 03:55:37 PM
That's not what I meant. If you do that then it could be HAR at work or it could be the system. The point is, you won't have shown that it's specifically HAR which has given you the results.

Its always a three prong attack Bayes. Bet Selection, Money Management and H.A.R (LUCK) If one of them is missing I am not going to make it. All working in conjunction with eachother. Executed by a disciplined steadfast player. Great things are possible.

That's all I will show.

Quote from: Gizmotron on December 22, 2012, 03:58:33 PM
Hey MISTER LEGENDARY MAN, show me one person that can tell me when the mathematical probability for the next quality trend will start and how long it will continue to be effective. If you are handed the real method that works and you can't see it then you of all people have experienced the greatest lesson in irony. What's more, Your 7.4/1 magic pill is known.

Its time you stopped playing Mr superior Giz and throw down. POST A METHOD and PROVE IT WORKS. I DARE YOU?

Quote from: JohnLegend on December 22, 2012, 04:02:44 PM
Its time you stopped playing Mr superior Giz and throw down. POST A METHOD and PROVE IT WORKS. I DARE YOU?

Let's see if I have this right. I've been discussing my methods and theories with people that I know have long ago given up on inadequate systems that never have proven to be useful. And in this past year openly shared every secret and attempted to successfully communicate every answer to every question asked of me. Including the answer that the only proof that anyone will accept is proof one gets for himself. I worked on this method for more than fifteen years. It takes years of playing experience to master it. And most important of all. I know human nature. The majority of people here hope that you are right. Nobody wants to work hard for a method that fulfills their dreams or plans. Having you demand that proof is like listening to a baby demand that his diapers be changed or to feed him. All I have for you is wait until July.

I  personally feel that Bayes scientific explanations regarding Hit and Run is basically perfect but if the way PB is being played is wrong, what is the right way?
              Isn't every method basically merely a Hit and Run? We enter casinos at random times, start playing at random tables and with random sessions. Does this save us from getting bad runs even if we play random methods as well. There is always a fight with random versus random, whatever you play.
           Every method has same fate. Can anybody disprove this?

Every method or system has the same mathematical fate. At least from spin to spin. I'm an advocate that proposes that to win you must play the current conditions. Now there must be a syntax of communication with these conditions in order for there to be this communication. With regards to my technique that requires my charts. Without my charts very little of what I have shared can make sense. I have known this for years and had deliberately kept this secret. But you have it. Only at this forum I might add.

Quote from: KingsRoulette on December 22, 2012, 04:18:17 PM
I  personally feel that Bayes scientific explanations regarding Hit and Run is basically perfect but if the way PB is being played is wrong, what is the right way?
              Isn't every method basically merely a Hit and Run? We enter casinos at random times, start playing at random tables and with random sessions. Does this save us from getting bad runs even if we play random methods as well. There is always a fight with random versus random, whatever you play.
           Every method has same fate. Can anybody disprove this?

Same fate KR?