In response to my last post. Been thinking about this,,,,,, if you have a HG (cough) or a system that doesn't lose, shouldn't that *ONLY* be based on starting your bets immediately instead of WAITING (triggers) for something or virtual or a progression etc.? Using parameters as rules does NOT make what you have a HG.
>>> Anyone starting at any point would win, using something that doesn't lose <<<
I am quickly reaching your conclusion.
It's taken a lot of test results to get there, but after you do millions of actual spins from legitimate/un-biased wheels testing nearly everything under the sun, you find that triggers in nearly every instance don't affect the outcome any more than not waiting for the trigger.
I will put a caveat in my comment about palestis, who I have no doubt does as well as he says he does when he and his group play, using some extremely trigger-heavy methods.
But for me personally I haven't been able to replicate trigger-based positive results in my testing.
I always let the results determine my future path, simply because I'm a novice in the game. I don't have the right, or experience, or previous winnings, to say "you're wrong and I know better" to a block of data that shows something I'm attempting with triggers isn't working.
And so far, no trigger-based system has passed the controls I have in place for a testing environment. Not John Legend's Pattern Breaker routine, or Palestis' single dozen method, or any of 100+ of Ignatus' best work (love you Iggy, keep going!).
The longer I test, the smarter Ken looks...how scary is that.