Quote from: AsymBacGuy on February 16, 2020, 10:59:34 PM
I'm wondering what we can do working together. 

as.

Only if we complement each other. I was working day and night for years to have a mechanical winner MM for long run that can handle the worst and win thereafter too, even if it is still below average. It should be good enough for playing average/a little below average sessions as well. No curve fitting into a session. Rather a masterkey that can unlock most locks if not all.
          All known progressions handle a particular kind of variance very aptly while seriously lack the capacity to survive bad patches and win thereafter. All ends by losing huge. With my RTM approach, one can play very safe and avoid the worst but I wanted an all over approach with playable bankroll. I think I have done it. Still will test more. Let me have any such horrible real game data. Only condition is I need at least twice spins/hands after the worst stretch. I mean, if someone sends me the worst 100, say 29/100 and if the next 200 hands have say 94 wins, I should be able to come out of loss or recover half of the lost sum in that very time.
                     I wish you all same degree of success. Just think out of box. No maths book tell us that a negative expectations game can not be won, in any manner. Your knowledge is your edge that no casino can take away.

@Lungyeh,
              Although you are talking of the game but your last post looks a bit off topic to me.

Noted. Sorry to intrude. 🤦🏻‍♀️  Not good at moving around here. Pls forgive

@Lungyeh,
           Nevermind. I removed the off topic post of yours. Are you into baccarat daily?

Nah not daily. Just a keen student of the game. But play regularly wherever I am where there are casinos nearby. Have been to Singapore regularly recently

since we want to avoid extreme variance,
and take advantage of rtm,
then we need to bet very long spin,
(as in Albalaha research)..of zumma,
lets ASSUME that worst ever EC,
is only 387hit/1000,
then we need a progression to squeeze,
at least 1u, in only 387hit/1000.
in theory, apart from
horrible staking, and table limit, labby must close,
in 33%,+1win
thus 387-330=57surlpus....
in hp.johnson,
we need 387*2=773zero and a single 1.
when the 387th win hit,
we have +1profit.
but of course, people will screams FOOL,
to bet labby and hp.johnny.

another Albalaha's zumma,
American roulette, worst ever found,no3.
hit only 329/15000spins.
then hp.johnny will bet,
329*35payout=11514zero plus a single 1,
when 329th win hit, will produce some profit, I think...
but i think i already heard someone shouting..
FOOLLLLL.

 
I just glance and one reply and know the whole topic - you don't need to win every bet to win - read that again - just one simple comparison if you trading tennis you would be an unintelligent to think you could predict each game correct and win them all - same apply to EC - the biggest and most silly mistake from most members - my opinion ...

For example, let's say you use a simple count system and flat betting 1 unit - then 87% of all sessions and attacks (hit and run) will win +1 unit or break even (if you stop).
It has been proven for 60.000 placed bets and is statistically significant.

Now let's say you make six placement for each sequential attack and lose -6 units and staking 2 units for the next six attempts (attack).
Now you only need to make +1 unit three times to break even with 2 units stake (simple)

That is 2,5 STDV if you lose again and now you can be realistic and start accepting loses.
Repeat and do the same thing with 4 units and win three times (the most common small regression sequence you will find) my experience.

That is 12 units if you win and are now -6 units, there is no reason to chase or try to win or break even because you are fighthing against a sequence worse then 3,0 STDV and should be happy with a three step regression during that sequence from hell.

Now assume you lose again, then you will face above 4,0 STDV sequence and should be more then happy if you find and catch a three step regression - that is Jackpot.
Lets say you staking 6 units and that would be +18 units with a three step regression.
You have lost 42 units and reduce that to 24 units - almost half the stake facing a 4 STDV sequence or worse - that is clever gambling to HEDGE a situation with realsitic expecataions.

But lets say you reach the 5 STDV territorum once in lifetime or maybe twice, then you staking 8 units.
My point is that you will lose but not bust - that is a hudge difference - and even if you bust you hade made some heavy and clever ways to minimize loses and try to hedge every given situation with realistic expectations.

Now the secret lies in that you only need to win twice within six attempts during any given sequence and start over until break even or reaching a three step regression.
All the situations you win your first bet or second bet you take the win or tie and start over with next table.

This way you can play BJ - Baccarat - Roulette - Sic Bo - Craps or any other game that offers 50% probability ....

Cheers Patrik

Quote from: PatternAnalys on February 19, 2020, 03:06:03 PM
since we want to avoid extreme variance,
and take advantage of rtm,
then we need to bet very long spin,
(as in Albalaha research)..of zumma,
lets ASSUME that worst ever EC,
is only 387hit/1000,
then we need a progression to squeeze,
at least 1u, in only 387hit/1000.
in theory, apart from
horrible staking, and table limit, labby must close,
in 33%,+1win
thus 387-330=57surlpus....
in hp.johnson,
we need 387*2=773zero and a single 1.
when the 387th win hit,
we have +1profit.
but of course, people will screams FOOL,
to bet labby and hp.johnny.

Why do u come to HP Johnson while I explained and illustrated already that HP Johnson will turn into a horrible Martingale at wrong times whichever way you play it? It may need millions of chips to finish with +1. If you can't comprehend that still I wonder what could be done for you. Basic labby is lesser horrible than HP Johnson or martingale but still could seek thousands of chips. These are only fool's gold and meant for frustrated player. I faced the given horror session that is not even likely to happen with 17 units bet as max bet and still won it. Just increasing or decreasing bet won't work as you never know what kind of variance will strike you.

@Sputnik,
            I agree with your first statement.

Quoteyou don't need to win every bet to win

But not so convinced with this:

QuoteNow let's say you make six placement for each sequential attack and lose -6 units and staking 2 units for the next six attempts (attack).
Now you only need to make +1 unit three times to break even with 2 units stake (simple)

Try this on the given 800 decisions and let us know your max bet and net win the way you offered to play. No regular MM can beat this that is meant for all over play. Winning in cases of clumping wins with a positive Parlay like progression is altogether different story. Playing the same all over doesn't work. We all know that.

Variance is not under our control and its length and shape can not be predicted. That is why every known progression fails to handle long run probabilities.

Have no time to argue, but I will make a short note about the topic, there are different styles of playing tactics and is combined with a players personality.
My trading personality is to win many times with small amounts on a regular basis with very hight strike ratio and take occasional loses.
The small wins add up over time and overcome the occasional loses, even if they hurt, but are part of the game.
That is one way to tackle the game and is based upon players personality, where some players want to win occasional but big and then we talking about other tactics.

I don't need to convince people how to play because I don't care if others lose or win - does who know - know.

Have a great day.

Cheers Patrik

Player's personality? Does it help too? I believe that a well defined and logical way of playing could be played mechanically without any personality traits.

QuoteMy trading personality is to win many times with small amounts on a regular basis with very hight strike ratio and take occasional loses.

Hmm. What will happen if you encounter losses as given in the session here? I am not discussing about psychological aspects of the game but a harsh truth that is called variance. My point is, can you overcome this and if not how much losses will you get by the end of this session? Variance management is a topic that irritates most here. When I raised the #3 zumma challenge, I did not get even one sane answer in years of the open challenge. It shows the hollowness of the so called gambling experts. Everybody jumps and states that he won't play such a bad bet as if he can control randomness.
           One who is not prepared enough to face the worst, is destined to lose.
By the way, I will wait for your short notes.

Albalaha, as a matter of curiosity, where are you based? Where do you game?

Thanks

Quote from: Lungyeh on February 21, 2020, 11:22:59 AM
Albalaha, as a matter of curiosity, where are you based? Where do you game?

Thanks

I m in India and although we do have casinos in a few states in India and neighbour Nepal and Srilanka, I mostly play online.

Cool. I went to one of the casinos in Sri Lanka and they had all kinds of dancing right in the centre of the gambling floor including pole dancing by Eastern European ladies amidst shouts of banker! Player!

Do you normally play baccarat? Or also roulette and black jack?