Paulnewman's method can be coded in excel and verified as it is mathematical. BA's method is similar but why ME changes periodically is a mystery which only he can describe best.

@programmers, please try.

Quote from: Albalaha on March 22, 2016, 02:57:42 AM
Paulnewman's method can be coded in excel and verified as it is mathematical. BA's method is similar but why ME changes periodically is a mystery which only he can describe best.

@programmers, please try.

Didn't I said that every time the bet raises so does the ME?

''Every time I win my bet I deduct from the minimum expectation the same amount I just won from my bet, if I raise my bet to 2 units I'm multiplying the remaining wins by 2, if I raise my bet to 3 units I multiply the remaining wins by 3 and so on...''

You have not paid attention and make me repeating myself.

One more session: 25/100            
L            
L            
L            
L            
W            
L            
L            
L            
W            
L            
L            
W            
L            
L            
L            
L            
L            
L            
L            
W            
L            
L            
W            
L            
W            
L            
L            
L            
L            
W            
L            
L            
W            
L            
L            
L            
L            
W            
L            
W            
L            
L            
L            
L            
L            
W            
W            
L            
L            
L            
W            
L            
W            
L            
L            
W            
L            
L            
W            
L            
L            
L            
W            
L            
W            
L            
L            
W            
L            
L            
W            
L            
W            
L            
L            
L            
W            
L            
L            
W            
L            
L            
L            
L            
L            
W            
L            
L            
L            
L            
L            
L            
L            
L            
L            
L            
L            
L            
L            
W            

Wow!!!!!!!!
         No reply to this session? It seems the system busted finally.

It will indeed bust as HP Johnson does. If you guys look at my sessions done, all big bets came at the last since the creator of the progression had prior knowledge of the number of wins, so it tried to win back all at last with even thousands of chips. It is as much foolish progression as martingale and doesn't help at all.
                    HP Johnson was too much boasted upon roulette30 forum and none cared to understand the fact that it is merely a flat betting to begin with, a normal labouchere in the middle and it ends with a martingale that if went a little bad could take millions of chips to win one. It just needs a bad beginning and a bad last win to doom without any limit.

My verdict: It is a fool's gold. Even worse than BA's delayed martingale.

If someone tries to make good an unfortunate last win that sucked thousands of units without winning, it won't work either.

Quote from: Albalaha on March 24, 2016, 11:20:33 AM
It will indeed bust as HP Johnson does. If you guys look at my sessions done, all big bets came at the last since the creator of the progression had prior knowledge of the number of wins, so it tried to win back all at last with even thousands of chips. It is as much foolish progression as martingale and doesn't help at all.
                    HP Johnson was too much boasted upon roulette30 forum and none cared to understand the fact that it is merely a flat betting to begin with, a normal labouchere in the middle and it ends with a martingale that if went a little bad could take millions of chips to win one. It just needs a bad beginning and a bad last win to doom without any limit.

My verdict: It is a fool's gold. Even worse than BA's delayed martingale.

If someone tries to make good an unfortunate last win that sucked thousands of units without winning, it won't work either.

I agree with what you said but you forget that I was the first who warned you about the ''Achilles heel'' of my progression.

I've found the solution but this is a different story...I've already said enough without being obliged to do so.

A clever person could read between the lines and discover what I've found.

You have nothing that even work slightly. First you proposed a delayed martingale that will go till infinite without winning at one point of time. Anybody can simulate that. Now you came up with even worse idea that can easily lead you to a loss of few millions in just one bad drag.

               Just one bad win followed by many losses will cause irreparable losses. Reverse engineering a progression in some particular favorite situations led us to martingale and labby type failed ideas already, do not make more comical versions of that.

I am talking of a progression that doesn't lose too huge while a bad stretch like 66/200 is encountered but later when things go near normal, we stand to win. That is the core of this debate.

Quote from: Albalaha on March 24, 2016, 03:26:21 PM
You have nothing that even work slightly. First you proposed a delayed martingale that will go till infinite without winning at one point of time. Anybody can simulate that. Now you came up with even worse idea that can easily lead you to a loss of few millions in just one bad drag.

               Just one bad win followed by many losses will cause irreparable losses. Reverse engineering a progression in some particular favorite situations led us to martingale and labby type failed ideas already, do not make more comical versions of that.

I am talking of a progression that doesn't lose too huge while a bad stretch like 66/200 is encountered but later when things go near normal, we stand to win. That is the core of this debate.

You don't know what I am capable so you are not in position to judge my abilities.

Nothing can be more hilarious than your definite statements, you sound like you already know everything but if you would then you wouldn't post such ridiculous comments.

If YOU are not able to do something this doesn't mean that nobody else cannot do it, except if you think that you are God!

You see, reality doesn't starts and ends at your own abilities, you are just a drop in the ocean!

You are using a 200 years old joke called Martingale with a little pinch of salt and claiming to win any 25/100 or 66/200 situation

Quotealbalaha, earn it, sum it or whatever your name is,

1) Post a session with 25 wins out of 100 results and distribute those wins and losses anyway you like.

2) Post a session with 66 wins out of 200 results and distribute those wins and losses anyway you like.

Then I'll show you what's the meaning of this topic.

Are you ready?

I'm waiting...

and later running  away from the same in just one little unfavorable case. Hilarious.[/size]

Ladies and Gentlemen,
               Indeed a case of 25 wins in 100 trials is not beatable. Same goes to 66/200. There may be a few isolated situations in those wins which may lead to win by a particular MM plan but if anybody claims to beat all types of 25/100 or 66/200, he is either very ignorant or a fraud.

Old Faulty progressions that we see relied upon very false assumptions and hence fail. If we ever encounter 25/100 or 66/200, only way to not doom is keep betting low. Never try to guess the number of wins that you will get and even if we presume 25/100 or 66/200 as limits, they can not be beaten by any MM plan with all scatters and clusters possible.

Hi Albalaha,
With your conclusion,


then,
do you suggest,

that,
we should concentrate,
to bet longer spins, say,
500, or better, 1000spins,
since they will almost always
near breakeven, and RTM?

Thanks.

I suggest to be prepared for the worst as it come without warning you, any moment, any session. A nice strategy has to keep the worst in mind always. If anybody suggests you that he can avoid the worst forever or his betselection is immune from the worst stretches, he is either ignorant or a crooked. No betselection is better than all other and all are subjected to the harshest possible moments with whatever we chose.

Regarding playing for 1000 spins in mind, I have a few things to say:
1.Even 1000 spins might not be enough and you may need to bet ahead to get a win;

2. Betting long term like 1000 or more spins may not happen at a stretch. If you play 1000 spins in a day or in 20 days, doesn't matter. A long run could be construed as 100x10 or even 50x20. Long run simply means multiple sessions taken together that leaves no room for temporary bias against you or in your favour.

3. What could happen in 1 million spins could randomly show within 100 spins too. Never think you can do hit and run by randomly entering the game. Remember, randomness is dancing around you too and ready to "hit" you to make u run out of casino.
If you are a big fan of "hit and run" only way advised is try your luck in a spin like what Ashley Revell did and either win the maximum or lose the same on an EC bet of French Roulette wheel(he got to bet American wheel BTW). First and last bet to try your luck. Win or lose, never try that again.

4. Do not expect flat betting to win for you. Advantage player could be an exception but nothing else can win flat, in long run.

Quote from: Albalaha on March 25, 2016, 05:43:10 AM

2. Betting long term like 1000 or more spins may not happen at a stretch. If you play 1000 spins in a day or in 20 days, doesn't matter. A long run could be construed as 100x10 or even 50x20. Long run simply means multiple sessions taken together that leaves no room for temporary bias against you or in your favour.

3

Hi Albalaha,
Just couldnt understand, how and why,??
1000 spins in a day or in 20 days, doesn't matter??

please explain...
Thanks in advance.

                             You may get a net win in very first bet you make. You may conclude your session with profit in say 100 spins of play but that won't hold when you get to face the worst. Say, you have a strategy that may seek even 2000 spins to get at net profit, if the worst shows.
  Say you play 100 spins in your first day and get 30 wins only that makes you lose till the conclusion of 100th spins. You are tired, frustrated and worried. If you keep on betting in that stage, there is strong likelihood of losing your temper and lose even bigger.
       Better way is, consider 100 spins of play as a pause and later when you enter casino again, resume your betting as if you played in a stretch. It doesn't change any probability and you are still on the same road. If you play 1000 spins in a go or 100x10, it doesn't change randomness or probability of the game while you get to relax and work on a calculated strategy.

I agree to disagree with you ...
1000 spin not equal to 100 SPINS  x10 sessions is not equal to 50 SPINS x20  sessions

http://betselection.cc/general-discussion/how-true-1072r1077-my-results/msg39643/#msg39643