So long, you keep barking upon me, I will keep kicking you and your master along.


Bark more.............


Captain,
           I won't regret leaving this place forever but I can't allow dogs barking at the behest of others. If you can't chain them, I won't let them bite me.


            Iggiv,
                      Victor is not selling cheating devices or "genuinefailure".

and I can imagine that Steve will double your salary and give incentive for your nice performance here. By the way, how much is your payroll with Steve?


Ad,
       You should better advise these igniters to behave and maintain dignity. If they are free to bark upon me, I can't be barred to retaliate.

and I don't have even slightest doubt in your credentials in barking upon me, in this specific occasion. Why don't you just use his cheating devices to beat casinos? You don't trust him or his credentials?

Quote from: iggiv on January 28, 2014, 07:15:09 PM
I will ask Mods kindly to stop this kind of personal attacks  because i don't wanna be involved in this kind of conversation. One good thing though.  It shows who is who. And how our desperate hero tries to kick me out of this forum because i said truth to him. Without any insults by the way.

Truth is the best defense against defamation. If your opinion regarding me can be close to be a truth, mine is an absolute reality. Do you get a commission too, from his sales? Why don't you use his techniques to beat the game?

Quote from: iggiv on January 28, 2014, 06:50:34 PM
Interesting what Mods are gonna do about it.

That's why everybody "loves" u, Al. But u know. Even after trying to insult me i still don't hate you  and wish you all the best. I just feel sorry for u.

Bud, your successes with roulette are and will be limited by loud forum claims and virtual noise you are creating, not more than this. Because you are on totally wrong way. And probably will be like this for years.
Keeping up with your claims and insults.

Before doing any sort of namecalling, just look up at your sleeves. You are  global moderator of a jailbird scammer forum.  Ask him to get you a cheating device for your job for promoting his scams and get a complimentary copy of "genuinefailure" from him too. You have no business to debate here and there as to how to win roulette.

QuoteIf a number hasn't shown for a long time, then the most foolish bet a person could make would be to chase the coldest number.

          Nothing is hottest or coldest number. This statement is a fallacy in itself.

Quote from: iggiv on January 28, 2014, 03:09:35 PM
"put up or shut up". Be decent enough. You are not obligated to reveal your private info, nobody is. But be at least a decent man and do not shout loudly, don't boast about your achievements, especially in ridiculous terms of "Holy Grail" and "i can win millions spins in the row". You achieved your goals, you wanna leave forums? Fine. Say "Good buy, ladies and gentlemen, i achieved what i was aiming for, i wish you all best of luck." That will be enough. And then -- don't come back to boast and tell how unique your achievements are.

And nobody will make fun of you then.

Ask your boss Steve to put up or shut up and stop going jail for scamming masses further. I know his dogs are sniffing around for potential threats and barking upon all of them too. Learn from him the "genuinefailure" and do not move around sniffing around every bone. Get his cheating devices and get  your legs broken soon.

To certain extent, I do agree with you, Xander. A good betselection is necessary to win too but even the best possible/logical betselection can get to its extreme bad runs. You should be able to sustain through that phase and win in less than average situation.

Dear AMK,
           JL was only working on martingale and grand martingale type stuff which are proven failures. I do not pity just him but his followers too. When I simulated his way with Ophis MST, it was clear like a glass that it is based upon a failure idea.
               I wonder that someone even did need to simulate to understand that a martingale is surest way to lose max and win least, in whatever trigger you play that.


               My HG is based upon clear target:
If I get only 45 or even 40 wins of a dozen in 185 spins, i.e. -3 SD
  can I win such session?
    wins may come in any scatter or cluster


I am not using any progression like martingale because I know that a dozen may drag me as long as 36 spins, for a win, once in a while.
             and I am not relying on a cluster of wins either, so regression or something like Oscar Grind won't help me either.
              Regarding proving my grail, I do not think I need to do that. Even if I prove this by playing in someone's account, will it fetch me a Nobel Prize?
                   I am not saying I am a genius who did this and there can be no match. I can teach all basics to all of you very clearly (apart from progression), if all those who are making fun, apologize here.
         In my last 5 years on various forums, I have yet to see/read any method which is even worth trying mathematically or logically. Everyone is showing a favorable session where it can win, be it a newbie forum member or known book authors. Everyone is saying play this and that. Nobody can answer why should we play that and how will it be beneficial. I asked from Johnlegend to Izak Matatya, Gizmotron to Kimo Li, Bayes to GLC. Everyone says, it should work but can't explain why.

Plain regression is as much a failure as plain progression. If we have a sizable bankroll, I will always go with progression. Regression basically goes similar to Oscar Grind. It needs clusters of wins. Opposite situation will frustrate.
              Sputnik seems to be too much obsessed with Regression but very few would agree with him.

QuoteAgain, you're not listening. I didn't say you had to post it here, and I even offered to code it for you. If you're so confident in it I would have thought you'd jump at the chance; think of the publicity it will give you when I post the amazing results. Sales will go through the roof, and you'll get the recognition you feel you deserve.

                Bayes, people are turning mad over this and why I am not revealing what I have and what I claim. If you can recall, a few days back, I asked you a mathematical question regarding probability of happening and non-happening of something. I plainly asked u as to how likely it is to get less than 45 wins of a dozen in a span of 185 spins? You described it in detail and if I am not incorrect, you said that 99.3% (only 7 in 1000 sessions can be an exception) I should get any number of hits from 40 to 80 of any single dozen in a span of 185 spins. That is roughly a range of -3 SD to +3 SD.
                          Now, I can beat this situation below a bet of 100 units (in whatever style 40 hits come). The worst drawdown, I can see is -200. My average winning per session is 100 units. I will surrender a session if it somehow reaches -300 or more and retry from there. Now, is it an HG? Anybody who can get things set in this odds have a grail of his own. There is no need of coding this, to test. It is a very simple progression that even a 10 years kid can count and apply.
                     You can see that Ophis has left public domain, after HG bot. He told me to do the same, that time. I was happy to see millions of spins going down drain against my mathematical approach but yet I wasn't fully satisfied. just two days later, I could beat both books of zumma baccarat, with altogether different approach.
                 As you pointed out, there are certain methods which can be proved but not played (manually at least). I believe that nobody till date has beaten more than 10 millions spins with any mathematical manner and without any kind of reverse engineering (cherry picking) apart from me and Ophis.
            So, my grails (which were displayed in testmystraegy and bot made by Ophis) were practically useless for me. I do not like to wait a few thousands spins or a few hundred hands of baccarat just to get a trigger to place my bet. I wanted to have something that can win 99% or even more sessions within 200 spins max (that anybody can play in any casino or online) and when it loses  1 session out of 100, it doesn't lose winning of 99 times.
               I started tracking as to what is most obvious expectation within 200 spins that I can target. Obviously, ECs and dozens/columns can do that best. I kept my researches on and kept putting various challenges around this. Whoever beaten any such cases merely tried to fit a suitable size plug in suitable size hole. You can go through them and if u have even a little sense of maths, if u will see they were illogical ways to do them. The challenge was not to beat a situation by seeing a particular "weak" side of that. A little shuffling of wins/losses would have made claimants look funny.
                                  Anyhow, it is not a rocket science what I did and u can't do. Pockets has openly claimed to beat #3 and all sessions alike with one strategy. He PMd me for zumma numbers w/l chart and I gladly passed that to him. Now, ball in his court. He may realize that whatever he did through #3 won't hold on other similar cases. May be I am wrong and he actually beat all numbers. Wait and watch.

Quote from: Blood Angel on January 27, 2014, 01:30:00 PM
Then go and play it. No one here is going to salute you. Can't you see that. If you really have done what you say you have then leave, make millions and live happy ever after.

          I am quite doing that but frustrated people are shouting too much of my name on forums. Stop this and debate something else that can fetch u some profit.

For records,
           I have given zumma w/l for all numbers to Pockets. Whether he simulates that or not and put it here or not, is his prerogative.

Quote from: Number Six on January 27, 2014, 10:30:55 AM
Albalaha,

What do you hope to achieve by trying to discredit people like Bayes and Victor in such trivial ways?

                    I am only answering the blatant attack on me. Who the hell has given even a single winner method here that has any statistical edge, if played in long run?


                     Why should I put my HG here? Whoever did that were proved to be either  wrong or confusing,so far. Mine is mathematical and logical. Not a subjective holy grail but a pure one.

I have no business to stay in such forums with double standards. Why can't you or Victor or MrJ or Bombus@MBB@billionloudspeaker@skakus ask Lord Steve to prove that his genuinefailure system which he is selling for $2500 works or not?


                          Go and write testimonials for him and get your commission. I have no need to stay here or in any forum. If you can not control the mob mentality here, delete my account. I know that you are only here to promote the agenda of Steve that only roulette computers win and my claim can harm his business(scamming).