QuoteThus I'd let it go every other sequence not belonging to any WW, WLW, WLLW pattern.
After all, those are the main patterns to hope to get a flat betting advantage (besides a first W).

Extreme variance management and focusing on the first few bets of any cycle of an EC bet( a cycle ends with a W) is something I have been emphasizing upon in my writings for not less than 10 years. https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/albalaha/how-to-fight-with-the-worst-enemy-of-gambling-vari-t4332355.html . Hope to get a flat bet advantage by this is still fallacious. When we pause our bets after a WLLL, we still miss 50% of our wins that makes a WLLLW. So, we can't cheat on randomness with all these. Expecting a flat bet win, in the long run with all these gimmicks, is not prudent. This can easily be proved with simulations. No room for any wild guesses.

Then if you are able to finish ahead after those bad sessions, sincere congratulations.
You really discovered the HG. No jokes.

as.

Quote from: AsymBacGuy on May 03, 2021, 07:11:13 AM
Then if you are able to finish ahead after those bad sessions, sincere congratulations.
You really discovered the HG. No jokes.

as.

Not just finish in plus but with a reasonable bankroll and bet size that can practically be used in a real casino. Greater thing is, exactly same methodology can be used to play average sessions too. This is outcome of my persistent efforts over two decades. I do not daydream of any magical remedy, I strived very hard to get that. I m still fine tuning it to make it even better.
           I do understand that still I can't win each and every session as probabilities are near infinite but I m definitely having an edge over any random player and casinos. If I stand to win even 0.5% of all my placed bets averagely, it is enough.

SESSION #9: AN IMAGINARY SESSION WITH EXTREME HARSHNESS WAS CREATED:
                    FIRST 100 TRIALS HAD MERELY 25 WINS. SECOND 100 TRIALS HAD 47/100 WINS.
                     72 WINS VS 128 LOSSES
                     NET AT LAST=28 UNITS, MAX BET= 12 UNITS, WORST DD= -102

           
SEE GRAPH OF NET BALANCE:
[attachimg=1]

L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W

L
L
L
W
W
L
W
W
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
W
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
W
W
W
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
W
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
L
W
W
L
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
W
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
W
W
L
L
W
W
L
L
L
L
W
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
L
W
W
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
L
L
W
W
L
W
W
W
W
W
L
W
W
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
W
W
W
W
L
L
L
W
W
L
L
L
W
W
W
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
W
L
W
W
W
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
W
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
W
W
W
L
L
L
W
W
W
L
L
W
W
L
L
L
W
W
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
L


try

Sir,
You advocate that, 'extreme variance management', and "a special mm", the real way to beat casino.
I eager to know, by your experience with data, say, bet "player" only,what the ratio, of "within expectations vs extreme"?
If the ratios dependable, then we can fearlessly bet with "expected losses vs expected profit"...

If we can expect
"dependable consistency", in
the ratios of winning /losing sessions
then we go for best, or go for bust

Quote from: PatternAnalys on May 13, 2021, 05:18:34 AM
Sir,
You advocate that, 'extreme variance management', and "a special mm", the real way to beat casino.
I eager to know, by your experience with data, say, bet "player" only,what the ratio, of "within expectations vs extreme"?
If the ratios dependable, then we can fearlessly bet with "expected losses vs expected profit"...

  95% is within expectation winning sessions while 5% will be extremes that rush us to stop loss or close. With +50/-100 or +25/-50, if we get even 80% wins and 20% loser sessions, we will still be up, in the long run. That is what is my plan exactly. Earlier I was focused on getting +1.

Quote from: Albalaha on May 13, 2021, 07:19:28 AM
       95% is within expectation winning sessions while 5% will be extremes that rush us to stop loss or close. With +50/-100 or +25/-50, if we get even 80% wins and 20% loser sessions,

Sir,
95/5 w/l ratio..
Now, we could  grasp that 5%that caused us to lose our underwear!!!

And of course you won't give away your mm!? that +100-50.
But at least give a simple hint, since my brain power not good as yours!
It will save many sleepless night and headache and heartache

Quotetry

ice789,
                Your given session got two -100s stop losses unfortunately.

It is to be understood that no method can beat all types of cases. It is just not possible. Had it been possible, I would have become Richie rich overnight. People send me sessions to beat with all sorts of variance. Even after all my skills and safeguards like my extreme variance management and my money management, I will have to surrender to 5-10% of sessions with -100 but 90-95% of sessions that I will win with +50 each will give me an edge in the long run. It is even possible to get 4-5 or even more initial losses in a row still. That is the might of randomness. So no daydreaming, only strive to get the lion's share, in the long run with all the patience.

Albalaha,

  I may have asked this question previously but with these "W and L" sessions you post, can they be construed to be Red?Black or other EC wagers or perhaps "Player/Banker" in baccarat?

  If it's Win or Lose in an EC game then that presents an interesting proposition.

  Thanks,

  AD

It is representative of ultra bad sessions as W and L. Beating such a variety of worse sessions with one single pre defined approach could be termed as a grail.

QuoteL
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
L

Albalaha,

  Let me try to rephrase the question.

  In the above example from message #19 (the final 10 decisions), can we infer that this was similar to:

  Red, Black, Red, Red, Black, Red, Black, Black, Black, Red?

  If not, then would it be safe to say that the W/L results are from some type of play and those were the results of some chosen method of play?

  It makes a huge difference in the presentation for sure.

  I'm sure we've had this discussion in the past but can't remember what the eventual answer was.

  Thanks.

  AD