Thread: Izak Matatya the Liar

In the past few weeks I have received many simulations for Izak's systems. I have received the excel simulations for IBS2, IBS6, BB (results only), DB/RB and a few other ones.

With respect to BB (although it deserves no respect) I see he is up to his usual tricks doctoring the Zumma results to give the system a very good result. He claims on his website that with a max bet of 23 units you can beat every shoe of Zumma (or a carry over shoe if you were betting at the end of one and it did not resolve). This is quite peculiar because my programmer friend writes:

"I am having trouble getting over some of the drawdowns even with a stop and go on 23 units. On a no stop, there are 52 drawdowns greater than 23 units. If you stopped at 23 and restarted at 0, that is a loss of 1196 units, far more than the 600 or so the system is supposed to be up."

So not only is the 23 unit max bet surpassed, but if you stop at a max bet of 23 units, you end up at -1196 units.

IBS 6 was positive after Zumma. Of course when the simulator does not take commission into account, any system betting on banker would show a positive result. Same thing with IBS 2.

I am not surprised at any of this, dealing with him the last 7 years or so. He is by far the worst system seller on the net. To think of how many people he has roped in with his scams is enough to make you sick.

It truly disturbs me that a person not only can not trust the results of a system seller, but has to test it themselves against an accurate version of the tester that it was supposedly tested against! This is analogous to you buying a car and the snake oil salesman telling you there are air bags in it, but you find out he is lying when you smack into that 1963 Pontiac Tempest screeching out of the Sac-O-Suds convenience store.

Among all of the members at BTC every system available on the internet or in Baccarat books has been purchased and played by my students before becoming members at BTC. None worked and most would completely break you. Izak's name came up frequently.

From my own 30 years experience, testing, and design, I can tell you for a fact that any system that gets you into double unit bets will lose in the long run whether it be a 23 unit bet or a 89 unit bet or even a 12 unit bet. The problem is, when you get to that bet, and you will, your odds of winning it are still no better than 50/50. You will win half of them and lose half of them. And don't forget that the only way you can get to that bet is to lose a whole bunch of bets before it. You are in no position to make such a bet.

Which brings us right back to the same exact thing. The only way to win is to follow the shoe at hand and keep your highest bet single digit. I very seldom bet more that 5 units and my absolute max is 7 units only under the very best of conditions.

If your system cannot function within those betting parameters, its not going to function period. Believe me, I know. That much you can take to the bank.

Someone posted about this topic on Izak's empty forum and
Izak writes in his extinct forum:

No, of course it's not true. The systems test results are as I have posted in the marketing letters. I send those results to the purchasers together with the system document.

This post was made by TeO in Baccarat Forum. You should know that there are two guys in Gambler's Glen: TeoRulte and Johno, who are my sworn ennemies. They are there to destroy my reputation and everything I come up with. This has nothing to do with my systems. They do what they do as a revenge, because I had to kick them out of my forum once, due to their vulgar behaviour and insulting other members of the forum. They are truly sick people. The worst part is their perseverence in doing wrong.

It takes years to build a wonderful monument and it takes seconds to destroy it. Those guys specialize themselves in destruction. It does no good to anyone, but only to satisfy their ego.

The simulators do take Baccarat win commissions into account and they are shown to do so.

As far as "scamming" is concerned, I feel I'm the most honest and the fairest of all system developers, letting purchasers try my systems for 30 days with no obligation to keep the systems, and returning the systems totally unconditionally if it's not to their liking for any reason. Johno calls me a thief, where he is the one who has stolen all my systems and have distributed them for free any way he could. He also sends me hate emails from time to time. So you can tell who the real bad guys are.

----

The guy calls ME sick? The guy is a delusional, and sorry excuse for a human being.

NO, THE SIMULATIONS DO NOT TAKE COMMISSION INTO ACCOUNT.
Don't believe me, here is someone who initially TESTED IBS 2 with the excel simulation:

He writes:

> I have run 35 randomized versions of the Z600 shoes
> (can run infinite number of shoes) representing over
> 1.4M decisions using the same betting parameters as
> your original test on the Z600. I think we should be
> clear that the session bankroll is really 64 units not
> 32 as you mention and the max bet is 32.
>
> Anyway, my results were:
>
> -402
> 682
> 1149
> 1296
> 548
> 786
> 394
> 1193
> 887
> 176
> -239
> 1296
> 1412
> 305
> 284
> 1060
> 660
> -111
> 162
> -311
> 547
> -1521
> -846
> -25
> 172
> 1281
> -1373
> 682
> 2340
> 2765
> 310
> -1013
> -375
> 2513
> 573
>
> Grand total of 14768 or .703 units per shoe and 75%
> chance of being positive per 600 shoes. While
> positive, note that the overall drawdowns can be high
> suggesting a lifetime bank in the 3000 unit range.
>
> While still promising, what leaves me still leary of
> this approach is:
>
> - Significant bankroll required
> - Possibility of playing 600 shoes and ending with a
> negative result
> - Current program does not account for commish, which
> I know you are adding onto the bank bets and could be
> overcome but until it is programmed in, I won't
> believe it actually works long-term
> - Commish will add to bank requirements (not much but
> something)

LOL.

And then there is IBS 7. He claims he came out positive with little bankroll on the Zumma 600 tester book until people inputted THEIR version of Zumma into the simulator. Here is what they say:

I tested IBS7 with my own input 600 Zumma data and ended up at over -2000 units. My first feeling was that Izxx's 600 Zumma data may have typo mistakes. He should not be stupid enough to doctor the Zumma results. However, I tested IBS7 with the 600 Zumma data which was included in purchasing Izxx's Secret Flat Baccarat system, it also ended up at over -2000 units.

The shoe 3 were original
3 10 P
3 11 P
3 12 B

Why did he provided 2 different set 600 Zumma data in 2 systems? I am completely disappointed.

2.

In case any more proof is needed...

Teo sent me the zumma shoes packaged with IBS7 (thanks Teo), and I wrote a program to compare the differences from my (official) zumma shoes. The decisions from the official zumma book are in the left column, and those from Izak's "zumma" are in the right column. An asterisk denotes a difference.

I won't post the whole zumma book, I have sent the file to Teo, so he may upload it if you ask nicely.

B B
B B
B B
B B
P P
B B
B B
B B
P P
P P
P P
P P
P P
P P
P P
B B
B B
P P
B B
B B
B B
P P
P P
B B
B B
B B
B B
P P
B B
P P
P P
P P
B B
B B
B B
B B
P P
P P
B B
B B
P P
B B
B B
P P
P P
P P
P P
P P
B B
B B
B B
P P
B B
P P
P P
P P
B B
B B
B B
P P
B B
B B
P P
P P
P P
P P
B B
P P
B B
B B
B B
P P
P P
P P
B B
P P
B B
P P
P P
B B
P P
B B
P P
B B
P P
B B
B B
B B
P P
B B
B B
B B
B B
P P
P P
P P
B B
P P
B B
B B
B B
P P
P P
B B
P P
P P
B B
B B
P P
B B
P P
B B
B B
P P
P P
B B
B B
P P
B B
B B
P P
P P
B B
P P
B B
B B
P P
P P
B B
P P
B B
B B
P P
B B
B B
P P
P P
B B
B B
B B
B B
P P
B B
B B
B B
P P
B B
P P
B B
B B
B B
B B
P P
P P
B P *
B B
P P
B B
P P
P P
B B
P P
B B
B B
P P
B B
P P
P P
P P
P P
P P
P P
P P
P P
B B
B B
B B
P P
B B
P P
B B
B B
P P
B B
P P
B B
P P
B B
B B
P P
P P
P P
B B
B B
B B
P P
P P
P P
P P
P P
B B
B B
P P
P P
P P
P P
B B
B B
B B
P P
B B
B B
P P
P P
P P
P P
B P *
B B
P B *
P P
P P
P P
P P
B P *
B B
B B
B B
B B
B B
B B
P B *
P P
B P *
P B *
P P
B P *
P B *
P P
B P *
B B
B B
B B
P B *
B P *
P B *
B P *
P B *
B P *
B B
B B
P B *
P P
B P *
B B
B B
B B
B B
B B
B B
B B
B B
B B
P B *
B P *
B B
B B
B B
P B *
B P *
B B
P B *
P P
P P
P P
P P
B P *
B B
B B
P B *
P P
B P *
P P
B B
P P
B B
B P *
B B
B B
B B
P B *
B B
B P *
P B *
B B
B P *
B B
P B *
B B
P P
P B *
P P
B P *
B P *
B B
B B
B B
P B *
P B *
B P *
P P
B B
B P *
B B
P B *
P B *
B P *
B P *
B B
B B
B B
P B *
B B
B P *
P B *
P B *
B P *
B P *
B B
B B
B B
B B
B B
P B *
P B *
B P *
B P *
B B
B B
B B
P B *
B B
P P
P B *
P P
B P *
B P *
B B
B B
B B
P B *
P P
B B
B P *
B P *
P B *
P B *
P B *
P P
P P
B P *
P P
B P *
P B *
B P *
B B
B P *

In the first couple of hundred decisions there is only one difference, but then they come thick and fast. I expect Izak reckoned people wouldn't check beyond this number (cunning Izak). In total, there were 20,197 changes - that's about half the book. There are also 267 more decisions in Izak's version than in the official version. Not sure why he added those, perhaps just to boost the profits a little more.

Why didn't he use the same Zumma results that he used for his SFBBS system? I guess that would make too much sense. He admitted finally that it was the programmer's fault and that the results were doctored. Yet he still sells the system. LOL

And he never refuted anything about BB, now did he.

The guy is a conniving, lying, manipulating bastard. Very sick indeed.

HO HO HO

I see PerryB, that scamming snake, has added his 1 cent to the discussion. (I would say two cents but his thoughts or systems aren't worth two pennies LOL)

Those scammers stick together, no?