Well, gary, nothing you say is going to change the fact that you're a malicious manipulator . As mentioned, you started this whole thread with the agenda of trashing my method and that's it. But, undoubtedly, you bit off more than you could chew. Anyway, let's look at some of the statements made by gary.
Gary states...
"He starts his own thread claiming if you wait until the first double and play 3 consecutive times after that, you win." - So, gary, adds his own words in there.
My response...
"There was NO claim ,in my original post, that you will win" - So, this is meant to say that there's no guarantee you'll win ,at the time, you play. Btw, gary, there was NEVER any claim that you will lose either.
"NOW YOU SAY......
I NEVER CLAIMED IT WORKED?" - So, gary quotes me and adds in the question mark. But, gary, are you asking me or are you making a statement.
"you have the gumption to say....
I NEVER CLAIMED IT WORKED?" - Again, gary quotes me and ,once again, adds the question mark.
"I NEVER MADE ANY CLAIM THAT THIS SYSTEM WOULD WIN." - So, here gary is quoting me and twisting my words. Notice, that the question mark disappeared.
"I NEVER CLAIMED IT WOULD WIN?" - So, again, gary is twisting my words.
As we can see, gary has a pattern of twisting words and repeating himself with the same nonsense. As mentioned, gary is always trying to pull something out of nothing.
Anyway, let's try and get back on track. The following ,updated, chart for New York ,basically, shows a fair comparison between Win D's doubles trap and the Hot Doubles trap with emphasis on the number of doubles.
New York (1/01/14 - now)
consecutive singles/skips |
draw |
total doubles |
Trap |
0 |
1st |
28 |
Hot Doubles |
1 |
2nd |
22 |
Hot Doubles |
2 |
3rd |
16 |
Hot Doubles |
3 |
4th |
18 |
Hot Doubles |
4 |
5th |
7 |
5 |
6th |
7 |
6 |
7th |
7 |
7 |
8th |
4 |
Win D's |
8 |
9th |
2 |
Win D's |
9 |
10th |
2 |
Win D's |
10 |
11th |
2 |
So, the 1st draw(i.e. 0 skips) ,following the first appearance of either a double or triple, had 28 doubles. Likewise, the 2nd draw(i.e. 1 skip) ,following the first appearance of either a double or triple, had 22 doubles. Next, the 3rd draw(i.e. 2 skips) had 16 total doubles after the first appearance of either a double or triple. Once more, the 4th draw(i.e. 2 skips) had 18 total doubles after the first appearance of either a double or triple. Basically, the rest is the same.
Now, as we can see, most doubles fell ,within the first 4 draws, after the first appearance of either a double or triple. Also, take notice of the downward trend of doubles as we continue outward. Lastly, take notice of the steep drop(i.e. from 18 to 7 total doubles) as we go from the 4th draw to the 5th one.
In comparison, Win D's doubles trap doesn't target doubles where they mostly occur, whereas the Hot Doubles trap does. Although, in fairness, the number of doubles being caught ,by the Hot Doubles trap, would be lower than shown since step #1 is not being accounted for. Nevertheless, the number of doubles would still be ,significantly, higher than that of Win D's doubles trap.
FACTS IGNORED BY GARY...
- The Hot Doubles Trap is meant to be played up to 4 draws.
- The Hot Doubles Trap has nothing to do with trying to get 3 or 4 doubles in a row.
- The Hot Doubles trap is NOT the "important discovery" spoken about.
- That most doubles ,according to Win D, fall "way before" the 8th, 9th, and 10th draws.
- That Win D's doubles trap fails to target these doubles.
- That lengthy losing streaks can ,and do, occur ,when using Win D's doubles trap, for multiple states.
- Win D's doubles trap is NOT even a trap for doubles.
- Contrary to his chart, it's plausible that ,at times, more than 50% of doubles can occur from the 11th draw up.