You can apply the same logic to progressions too.

Making Money Management complex doesn't help in a random game

It is only partially true. Money management is the key to beat a game with slight edge. Not in short run but definitely in a long run. Before claiming this I did over 10 million spins of simulations. Since you are aware of only old school failure MMs, your presumtions are very narrow. Remember, unless an aeroplane started to carry people across world, it was considered a bad joke only. If you don't know something do not claim that it does not exist.

All I'm asking for is a little consistency. If you say no bet selection however complex is no better than betting on red, how do you know this?

If it's because the math says so then you also have to apply the math which says that no money management is ultimately better than a martingale, and that none of them gives a long term advantage. You can't pick and choose the math which suits your agenda; either the math is true or it isn't. The math says that NEITHER progressions NOR bet selections make any impression in a random game.

On the other hand, if it's because you have never found a bet selection which does better than betting on red, then I can say " Since you are aware of only old school failure bet selections, your presumptions are very narrow..."

Why should your denial that there is some as yet undiscovered winning bet selection be valid, and yet my denial that there is some as yet undiscovered progression be invalid when the same logic applies?

I'm not claiming that one or another is true. My position is that neither are possible in a random game, but you're applying double standards. 

Can you see the difference between the first half and the second half of these results?

QuotewwwLwLwLLLLwLwwwLLwLwLwLwLLwwLLLwLLwwLwwwwwwwwwwwLwwwwwLLwLwwLwwLwww

In the first half of betting on 24 numbers there is both a rapid or steady slow decent in bankroll. But in the second half there is a huge increase in wins.


These changing conditions occur without regards for the mathematical disadvantage in the payback on wins. They are just a changing phase. If you bet small when it's not good and bigger when it is good then there is nothing complex about the MM or the bet selection to figure out. Very few players can see how this simple method can be so effective. So it does not help much to complicate the bet selection.

As per Math no bet selection or progression can beat casino games with negative house advantage. There are claims by some that they are beating the game. They do not divulge the method, because they will be killing the hen that lays the golden eggs for them.

Normally, when you throw an object it will go away from you. But the Australian natives throw Boomerang that comes back to them. You can read the thermodynamic laws why Boomerang comes back in journals. Science can not refute or prove claims, unless the evidence is presented. Some people endowed with psychic powers can perhaps buck the house advantage. Unless the evidence is presented, Math can not prove the validity of the claim. It is very unlikely, that the evidence will ever be presented for the obvious reasons.

My knowledge of roulette lends me to agree system players should keep the bet selection reasonably simple and add more complexity to the staking plan rather than the other way around.

QuoteAs per Math no bet selection or progression can beat casino games with negative house advantage.

Maths or science are neither static nor flawless. New knowledge evolves with scientific out of box thinking and researches. Pluto used to be a planet just a few years back, not any more. By the way, which maths book said that bet selection or progression can not beat this game?

Quote from: Albalaha on August 03, 2017, 03:28:37 AM
By the way, which maths book said that bet selection or progression can not beat this game?

Pretty much all of them. 

For me, if NO bet selection is going to help, NO bet progression / money management will do the job.

Quote from: Gizmotron on August 04, 2016, 08:44:34 PM
I don't need to know the future in order to speculate on it effectively. You continue to imply that I claim that I need to. Let's call what you are projecting as some kind of pseudo mathematical fallacy. You run around on these forums like some kind of Don Quixote disguised as Barney Fife. You keep dropping your red herrings and then acting like it's your duty to save the world from your subjective based crusade. Get real. I don't need to know the future in order to take advantage of coincidence.

 

Quote from: 3Nine on August 06, 2016, 08:09:57 PM
Nope, I won't be telling you a thing.  Why?  Your mind is already made up.  Which is usually the case for most 'experts.'

 

Quote from: Albalaha on August 03, 2017, 03:28:37 AM
Maths or science are neither static nor flawless. New knowledge evolves with scientific out of box thinking and researches. Pluto used to be a planet just a few years back, not any more. By the way, which maths book said that bet selection or progression can not beat this game?

 

                                    Instead of saying that maths says that the game is unbeatable, one should say that no known math has so far worked to effectively and conclusively beat the game. House edge is there in blackjack too. That was conclusively beaten with card counting by Thorpe and everybody accepts that. Similarly, through bias analysis and advantage play people like Pelayo, Eudeamonic Pie did it. Some recent university level researches prove some sort of cloaking wheel and ball does help to determine where to bet with success. House edge wasn't different for them, yet they turned them down and won.
                               And if someone is smart enough to know that it can not be beaten and loss is inevitable, why the hell he is a member of a gambling community like this?

In every form of speculation or business startup, the speculator or businessman must fight a negative expectation (  except card counting in blackjack......which is no longer practical since you will eventually get thrown out unless you can put together a team such as the MIT team or the Holy Rollers )

In gambling, poker has the casino rake, dealer tip, and  after each pot, the band beat jackpot contribution as a negative expectation.

Roulette, baccarat and dice have a 1.3 % to 5.6 % negative expectation because of below fair payouts on winning bets.

In sports betting you generally have to bet $11 to win $ 10

In starting a business, you have a negative expectation of paying for business licenses, paying employees, paying rent for a location, paying utilities, paying for insurance etc etc etc.

In trading stocks or forex or commodities, you have the negative expectation of paying commissions for each trade, and "slippage", where you get the worst side of the trade ( you buy on the offer and sell on the bid price )

Whether you play casino games or start your own business, you have to deal with the 3 main reasons which will cause you to fail:

1. Poor business management....... failure to respond to changing economic conditions ( which now happen very rapidly )

2. Inferior, obsolete or poorly priced product that you offer to sell

3. Not sufficiently capitalized to handle the inevitable down swings in your business

Betting on casino games is basically just like running a business, and you must be able to deal with all 3 of the above situations.

1. Poor business management......is the game you are playing changing ? are the odds changing ?, are new odds or bets being offered ? is casino management changing as to how they monitor the game you are playing .  Is the game you are playing no longer beatable?

2.Inferior, obsolete or poorly priced product that you offer to sell....is your bet selection no longer valid, or does it have to be modified depending on the current spins of a roulette wheel or current texture of the baccarat shoe you are playing ?

3.Not sufficiently capitalized to handle the inevitable down swings in your business ...this is the most important...do you have sufficient bankroll to handle the worst drawdown possible ? Are you betting too high a % of bankroll on each bet or session ?

If you are trying to make a "career" in business, gambling or speculation, you must deal with the above   3 situations. 

The most important point to remember is that the main objective is not to "make money".....the main objective in bankroll preservation........you do not want to put yourself into a position where you lose most, or all of your business capital or gambling bankroll by risking too much as a % or capital or bankroll on any given bet or session.......because if you lose your business capital or bankroll, you are out of the game.

The only way to avoid failure is to risk a small % of bankroll on each bet and session, and try to stay in the game so that when the tome comes when you have to bet, and hopefully win, on your winning bets, you are still in the game......because in a negative expectation game, you have to win more on your winning bets that you lose on your losing bets.

Generally, you need a "big" bankroll to succeed......and "big" is a relative term......$ 50,000 may seem big to the forum members......but $ 50,000 is tip money for the waitress for Bill Gates.

If you are undercapitalized in a business startup, speculating in stocks, forex or commodities or betting on casino games........you will eventually fail.

Opinions are like asses, everyone has one!

Wouldn't be better to focus on what's working instead of what's not?

We have to keep in mind always what's the practical value of the information which we share, since we share shows an intention to help others, at least that's how it seems to be.

So if we really want to help wouldn't be better to initiate our own topic/thread and provide therein practical value information such as instructions of how to win frequently rather than poking our heads in others topics/threads and repeat for millionth time the same, vague, generic, useless things, furthermore to criticize how wrong they are and what they are believing/using is also failure.

If by calling others losers, failures, in an indirect way is useful, helpful and meaningful, then what's the point of such forums?

Why are we here and why we have decide to communicate?

If this is your help Mike, thank you I will not buy it!