Flipovers aren't the only myth

[New2vp]

There are so many things here to refute and challenge.  First of all, my example is not "my interpretation" of this strategy but a simulated "application" of the rules set forth plainly in the strategy.  It is not "tedious".  You are trying to make it look that way because you have been cornered on this subject and you want people to see your long posts (talk about tedious) and give up trying to follow.
 
My example to you is absolutely acheivable.  It follows the rules of the strategy immaculately.  You are not able to refute it; I don't care how many twists, turns, and hoops you try to jump through.
 
Contradictory, Inconsistent, Tedious, and my favorite from you...It's lack of optimality...
 
Here are more accurate adjectives...
 
Simple, Smart, Consistent, Profitable, Rewarding, Goal-Oriented, Perfect for any size starting bankroll, Fun...etc.
 
If youunderstand the strategy as written (not what you think is implied) you will see the err of your analysis.Again you missed the explanation in the 2nd post and the question at the end.  Refer to the 2nd post and answer the question.

[New2vp]

Again, you are now employing the debating technique of someone who is defeated..."Change the Subject and ramble on and on about nothing to do with the original subject.
 
You claimed that it couldn't be done.  You claimed that the loss ALWAYS had to be more than $14k.  Not me!!
 
You WILL NOT admit that your unsolicited attack on this strategy is baseless.  Your figures are wrong and Sir, You are wrong.  I question your motives.
 
Maybe it's because of your pissy little feud with RS.
 
This is certainly no way to gain credibility against what he says.  It makes you look even more foolish.I didn't change the subject.  I continued it because you seemed not to understand the entire message.  Sorry, never took debate class.  I only like to argue on one side of an issue; the correct one.  It wouldn't surprise me to discover that you and/or your hero like debating whether or not you believe your argument.You claimed that losses are NEVER in the ballpark of $14k, not me.  I continue to stand by the conclusions (1) that an average loss of $7k with this system and either interpretation is not believable, and (2) with a reasonable interpretation of a non-contradictory strategy that a loss of $7k is impossible.My motives are pointing out the truth whether or not I have to withstand an onslaught of reflections or insults.I appreciate your counsel to help me not look foolish, but I'm going to decline your offer because you may not be expert enough in averting the mantle of foolishness to give others advice.
Again you missed the explanation in the 2nd post and the question at the end.  Refer to the 2nd post and answer the question. Hey, the following is to anyone else out there but seagreen and r-dude.  I've got to be gone for a while.  But it looks like responding to r-dude is going to be pretty easy.  So, please feel free to respond for me.  It looks like he will never address the ramifications of his interpretation that are pointed out in the second post, so when he makes the same or similar statement repeatedly, could someone post on my behalf while I'm gone:Again you missed the explanation in the 2nd post and the question at the end.  Refer to the 2nd post and answer the question.Thanks a bunch.

[cddenver]

Hi Bozo pianoboy
Its me aka Oej signed in under another members id. Just to show you that you and rs are full of horse poop.
rs must have many ways of explaning his strategy to suit the situation because he always told me soft profits  at each level were never risked again. Example : at $1 you have $40 soft profit but go in to lose the 400 credits.
You then go to $2. At $2 you have $80 soft profit but go on to lose your 400 credits.
You then go to $5. At $5 you have $200 soft profit but go on to lose your 400 credits.   etc etc.
You made it  a very clear point those will never be at risk.  That $320 is put in another pocket to take home.
You said each level stands on there on. We wnet over that many times.
Maybe you were to wasted to remember.
Maybe you don't remember telling me finally it was a scam. You were just trying to make a living the only way you knew how.
p.s. tell scorpio, alr, seaweed, harpo and all the others I am their Daddy.

[/QUOTE] "The probability of a $7,000 average is zero. Cant Happen!"


 
Your Wrrrong!!
 
You wanted someone to challenge you.  I proved you wrong.  My example is of a "losing session".  It doesn't happen often but when it does it is NOWHERE in your ballpark of $14k+.  Your claims are false and your understanding of the system is flawed.  I PROVED  it in my example.
 
Your misunderstanding, New2vp, is when pocketed wins are never to be risked again.  It is only in the $1 level that the wins go into the "lock box".  Any amounts pocketed at the other levels that do not recoup enough to start over at $1 would be in what you have termed "temp".  These smaller wins are a counter-weight against total loss.  It takes a disciplined player to not risk those credits when on a losing trend. 
 
As for advancing to higher levels when your losses are not in proportion to the progression, (i.e. going to $5 when your true loss is only $400 +/-...As you have now conceded possible although you claim it would be illogical to do...not impossible!) it is much easier to recoup your progression losses by increasing your bet at designated stops.  Remember the strategy as laid out is only going for a 14.53488372% gain on the starting bankroll of $17,200.  A goal that is much easier than you are asserting.  Everyone can equate that to stopping when you are ahead $15 when you start with $100.  Happens all the time (reaching that amount that is...few here have the discipline to stop).
 
Hate to make someone that is so educated eat his own words...but, you were the one that said it "Can't Happen" !!! 
 
 

[cddenver]

Checkmate.   YOU LOSE.  Time for your spanking.

[faygo]

If I have a starting Bankroll of $17,200, why in the Blue Blazes would I be playing .25 or $1? After all, it is stated, I will hit Quads at the $25 level for a big payday vs $40 at the lesser machines. Just wondering!

[cddenver]

Hi Bozo pianoboy
Its me aka Oej signed in under another members id. Just to show you that you and rs are full of horse poop.
 
Now, oej, you shouldn't come in here and post your personal views using someone else's name.  It might set a precedent. 
 
I find myself with a sudden craving for fried chicken with gravy, biscuits, and collards. 

[cddenver]

If I have a starting Bankroll of $17,200, why in the Blue Blazes would I be playing .25 or $1? After all, it is stated, I will hit Quads at the $25 level for a big payday vs $40 at the lesser machines. Just wondering!


 
Everyone knows that you have to do SOME losing during a session, so why not get that in at low denoms and save the nice hits for the high denoms? 

[faygo]

[QUOTE=faygo]If I have a starting Bankroll of $17,200, why in the Blue Blazes would I be playing .25 or $1? After all, it is stated, I will hit Quads at the $25 level for a big payday vs $40 at the lesser machines. Just wondering!


 
Everyone knows that you have to do SOME losing during a session, so why not get that in at low denoms and save the nice hits for the high denoms?  [/QUOTE]
 
Who is losing?  I'm reading this method is a sure fire winner.

[faygo]

[QUOTE=cddenver]
Hi Bozo pianoboy
Its me aka Oej signed in under another members id. Just to show you that you and rs are full of horse poop.
 
It's a terrible thing when people come in here and write posts as someone else, isn't it? 
 
I find myself with a sudden craving for fried chicken with gravy, biscuits, and collards.  [/QUOTE]
 
Now you have gone too far. I'm straving. Where is that phone number for KFC?  We don't have a Church's here, so have to settle for the Colonel.

[rolanddude]

  
With the interpretation that the cash outs are the same as "pocketed never to be risked again," this progression scheme makes no sense...   Is that always doing what he says?

 ...but do you really expect people to believe that he would continue to use a method which depletes his bankroll (by moving it to another pocket) and forces him to leave more often without actually reaching the minimum win goal of $2500?

OK, which is it?  Do you use the logical method that increases your chances of attaining your win goal and admit that the $7000 average was made up?  Or do you take your interpretation that reduces your chances of walking out with a minimum win? ...
 
...As a style sidenote, is it just my observation or is it impossible for either your hero or you to write an opinion without hurling insults?

And why the different colors in my post? 
 
OK New2vp and your called upon delegation of cronies...
 
Above are all the questions I could find in your lengthy factually misleading second post.  (Folks, you have to remember my story about the apples in the bucket in my first post to understand what New2vp is trying to do)
 
As to the first question above...Cash-outs DO NOT equal pocketed never to be risked again wins if they do not in their totality recoup your lost credits and bring you back to the $1 level.  (As explained fully in the strategy if you read it)  So to answer the first question as to always doing what he says.  I have found this to be true, both in his strategies and in real life to this point.
 
2nd Question...Again, a leading question to try to persuade one who isn't presented all the facts.  (apples in the bucket...again)  I do actually expect him to continue playing his strategies.  The strategy here is a game-plan for profiting from a machine.  As in all game-plans you must execute everything according to plan.  You however have misconstrued this game-plan, claimed that you have accurately represented it, and made conclusions based upon your seriously flawed facts about how to execute this strategy/game-plan.
 
3rd Question...(sigh!) OK which is it?  The logical answer of 2 + 2 = 4 apples in the bucket...or... the correct answer of 10 apples in the bucket due to facts either intentionally omitted or not given about the 6 apples in there to start with.   New, you are asking everyone to choose between things that don't exist as you state them.
 
4th Question...I always fight fire with fire.  You, OEJ, and others attempt to discredit me by claiming that I am RS.  And there are also the many names that I have been called that Webman has edited out and warned against.  A few of the less diabolical ones are... whore, 3 dollar bill, pianoboy...etc.  I have been told to do things with fingers and olive branches...etc.   I have been told that I am being watched...on and on and on it goes.  So fighting fire with fire is what you have to do here .  You guys have taught me well!
 
5th Question...I guess the colors in your post is where you mark your place after typing 2 hours at a time...I don't know!  But it was a question in your second detailed post.  I didn't want to be accused of dodging anything.
 
 
 
There are your answers New2vp.  I can now say that I have answered   all your questions in your second detailed post albeit flawed from the start.