I was not posting here for pretty long time for some personal reasons but since this debate has my inputs directly or indirectly, I thought it fine to speak my mind myself.
First of all, I do not have any enmity against the member blue angel or nickmsi.
Both are nice people and I have talked to them for long earlier.
Regarding this progression suggested by Blue Angel, I would just say, it is very easy to simulate in excel exactly as Blue Angel says. I have tested his version extensively. Marty can win any attack but the question is of max bet and drawdown that one is willing to have and casinos permit them too.
Any random session can get a bet of even a few thousands, if you simulate enough, this way.
I am working on BA's method's tracker to prove my point. I know Azim or Reyth are working on the same too. Whoever comes first, will prove my point. I guarantee this.
Stating that my way of picking bets is immune from dangerous hikes of martingale is indeed fallacious. Will be back here soon.
You are missing an important point, all these is NOT about just a progression, there is a selection too and NOT all the selections are the same!
Perhaps you want to pass it because you are very eager to prove that it fails, but what YOU are doing is NOT my method!
Even what Nick did is NOT my method, user betjack was betting always on Red and he lost after about 600 spins and with the same progression but different selection I've reached more than 1500 spins without even exceeding 16 units bet!
You want us to believe that everything is the same?!
Does the term regression towards the mean means anything to you??
Does law of large numbers ring a bell??
My progression alone without any bet selection criteria can win even 5.5 standard deviation!
Let's be realistic and realize that has never been worse than 5.5 SD in a LARGE sample of results, in a small sample like 20 spins you can see 20 Black or even 30 in a row, BUT I'm talking about a large sample which streaks like 30 in a row is just a piece of my hair for me, while someone who bets Martingale in the classic way he wouldn't win even with millions of units!
The truth is that there is HUGE difference between someone who bets the classic Martingale and someone like me who uses it differently, there is HUGE difference between someone who bets randomly and someone who uses statistics!
You don't want to understand?
Fine, it's YOUR problem not mine and you cannot prove that my method fails as long as you don't use my method!