QuoteSir,
Why not you test the yet to broken world bm record of worst 69/200, that I believe will rtm after 800spins.

Do you have the real data after 69/200 too for at least 400 more spins? If yes, send me up. I have already tested the worst from zumma books of baccarat that I could spot so far. All got beaten without ever going below -250 or worse.

QuoteYou don't need bad data for an EC because you can be 100 percents for sure that in every long term game with every system you will meet such sequence -
WLLLLLLLLLWLLLLLLLLWLLLLLLLWLLLLLLLWLLLLLLLW         If you can survive this without big drawdown you have a grail. I have no grail but if i met 10 times such a sequence, for a 5 times i can survive easily...5 times not...

Real data gives confidence that I am not subtly fixing it to win somehow. The worst 800 that I created had superbad stretches but even if it goes 2x worse i,e. either it gets only 30 wins in 200(9.5 SD below mean) hands or 120 wins till 400 trials(7.4 SD below the mean), which is so remote that we may take it next to impossible, it still can be won, in the long run. Remember, do not try to beat the worst itself but only sustain that with bearable loss and win thereafter as you can not beat the worst possible itself with any money management in the world otherwise it won't be gambling, at all. I know my findings could excite many and many may take it as outrageous claim or even lie but it is doable. What is you loss in the worst case, decides whether you can recoup it or not.

Sir,
I don't have the data,
but I remember,
many months ago,
you had visited the casino website,
and download the data...
maybe you kept somewhere,
in your computer.

Your concept,
of maintain  minimum,
acceptable
losses, before recouping,
is really, think out of box,
and an essential to hg!

Quote from: Albalaha on April 01, 2020, 06:09:17 AM
Real data gives confidence that I am not subtly fixing it to win somehow. The worst 800 that I created had superbad stretches but even if it goes 2x worse i,e. either it gets only 30 wins in 200(9.5 SD below mean) hands or 120 wins till 400 trials(7.4 SD below the mean), which is so remote that we may take it next to impossible, it still can be won, in the long run. Remember, do not try to beat the worst itself but only sustain that with bearable loss and win thereafter as you can not beat the worst possible itself with any money management in the world otherwise it won't be gambling, at all. I know my findings could excite many and many may take it as outrageous claim or even lie but it is doable. What is you loss in the worst case, decides whether you can recoup it or not.

Can you survive safely that situation?   WLLLLLLLLLWLLLLLLLLWLLLLLLLWLLLLLLLWLLLLLLLW

Yes,
     Swiftly. Even a data double bad than this could be sustained with minimal loss and a recovery is easy thereafter.

interesting topic

Friends,
Let me try to explain Albalaha's Way, or concept.
I THINK,
Albalaha's way...
1)He can't predict, and won't forecast...
He says,
in long run, say 1000spins,
RTM, may always kick in, (Albalaha had found "only 387/1000" in Zumma, thou...).
2)in next 100spins, rtm always kicks in, but once in while,
extreme variance, also presents itself, now the pertinent question, is, in increments of 100spins, WHAT THE RATIO,
of RTM/EXTREME?
I, think Albalaha, regard, 6/2...

6rtm/2extreme,
as the ratio.

3)Extreme variance,
He regards , short term,6/20 as extreme, since labby can't close in 20spins.
And I think, any lesser than 40/100,
being extreme,( though labby could close, horrible staking causing br depleted).
4)Extreme avoidance...He apply 20spins, as stop loss parameter, anything less than 7/20, will alert stop, and see if next 20spins, has 7/20 or more, before resume betting.

5)I don't know about his progression,
I think he start small, (labby0,1,maybe),
to avoid hitting huge losses, if extreme hit...losing between 20 to 50u losses per 100spins...
and make hay, when hot!

Thus, in long term bet, he may encounter one or two extreme losing, seasons of 100 bet, but OFFSET, with few more winning seasons.

what you think?

I elaborated my techniques time and again:

1. play a progression that can get u a win in lesser wins than average
2. have mini stop losses points (I use 5 more losses than wins as a mini stop loss). Do not push bet to get back mini stop losses, it
    should come gradually. Do remember that even 10 mini losses could come one after another.
3. Have an absolute stop loss point: 4x to 8x of mini stop loss, as per  your comfort
4. Do not push to win absolute loss and take that as losses accepted or surrender point.
5. When things look to cool down after long haul variance, you may push your base bet upward.
6. RTM will be guiding principle. Nothing could be more unwise than pushing bet in worst times.
7. Remember that law of long run will kick in and things will gradually get smoother but they might not compensate for earlier superbad
    losses..
            With these guiding principals, you may form your own strategies. I have played with as many as 3 ways to beat the superbad session, ever without getting too deep in losses.

Would the Paroli method be combined with the modified Labby?

Quote from: 6th-sense on April 03, 2020, 10:08:06 AM
Would the Paroli method be combined with the modified Labby?

could you show example how the combined. ...method win with only 7hit in next 20spins?

in the other hand,
any method, must keep losses low, when hit with, say ,
only 30hit/100spins,
preferably under 100u,
(starting bet=1u),
and then next 200spins,
which has hit within expectation,
the winning could offset the losses...

Quote from: 6th-sense on April 03, 2020, 10:08:06 AM
Would the Paroli method be combined with the modified Labby?

By Paroli, do you mean reverse martingale of may be 3 steps?
We need negative progression while Paroli is positive one and it requires successive wins to get a net profit. I do not see it working well with labouchere of any sort. Can you put any example as to how you propose to use it?

Sir,
May you please test this...

imho...

Since your concept
is to minimise losses when extreme hit, especially 30/100 hit, and making hay when within expectation.

Hypothetically,
Say,
two person betting at same table,
applying your strategy and method to the book.
one person bet RED, and the other bet BLACK.
Thus if next 100 spins, within expectation, then both person will win within expected profit.
Then ,if say, RED, hit by extreme, then RED will suffer "x losses", but then BLACK will going through POSITIVE variance, and should make a huge killing, to OFFSET the RED's x-losses.

But then again RED&BLACK, respectively, will have offsetting extreme variance too,
thus, if RED goes through extreme, and suffer losses, the other side, BLACK, must gain positive offsetting value.
Then, no matter, extreme positive or negative variance, constant profit, albeit smaller, profit could be make.

Playing both sides(RED/BLACK) is like playing chess from both sides. No outcome can be ensured that way, unless both are played separately from each other. In that case, when one side might be winning, other will be losing. Again do not find any advantage.

Of course, I mean playing separate ly.

Since I can't do programming,
I hope, some long testing done,
with YOUR applicable strategy.

Without testing, we could only guessing.
The logic, if one person bet RED only and in next 1000spins,
he will encounter,
a hundred or two that hit with extreme variance, and come out with some profit,
thus another person playing separately, BLACK,
at the same table and same 1000spins, will also encounter,
same risk, and end with positive result.

I know two people that do that quite frequently, the only way they do not profit is if there is zeros or double zeros hit or if it is pure red black red black red black consistently. But when one of them wins, he will full parlay it for the second time only and then they go back to the original unit and then if they win again they parlay it.

While the other one that is losing only covers the original bet, he stays at the one unit so if there is lots of repeats (RRRR and BBBBB, etc.), they win a few units or if there's doubles they win a few units because they're winning on the parlay as well while the loser only covers the original bet.

Majority of the time they do win a few units but they are very conservative and they are larger bettors.