+ Register

[soxfan]

  Yep it is so good, that Walter confessed he doesn't use it any-more, read = after leaving 1-ville, he pushed himself into mandatory situations of having to win more hands than he lost, couldn't achieve that, got badly burnt (probably in 4-ville), hence it was side-lined (dropped). 

Mr "hey hey" is another, can't explain a damn thing about his game, never has and never will.  And people wonder why it is preferable to run private forums than public ones.  Read - some serve no useful purpose.

But "hey hey", if it is posted on the web, then it's gotta be true. 

Next week I'll be at the MGM LV playing behind a rope, trying to make 100% of my buyin cake as per usual.

Geezz, I luv the internets hey hey.     

Why don't you bring yer fat, senile wog-loving behind over to this side of the pond? You can finally settle up with yer arch enemy the rinzler. Or, maybe you've been reduced to playin for peanuts on the dublinbet? You are and always will be john-o the clown, hey hey.

[Jimske]

(Just as a side note, if one were intent on playing any up-as-you-lose (read: negative) progression, one might want to have a gander at my Gr8Player's Progression (google it if interested), that is alot more conservative IMHO, and you aren't hurt with the typical W L W L betting results.  To this day, it's always, in some way, shape, or form, a vital part of my arsenal, as it plays into my statistical variances rather well....in point of fact, that's how I originally developed it.)

If you want to call it "your" progression that's fine.  True you are the only one I've seen discuss it on these forums.  That is if it is the 1111 22222 etc. thing which I believe we are talking about.  It's a pretty good stretched prog.  But it has been around for a long time.  Basically a cancellation prog.  You can do it with any odd number.

I agree that going to 5 may be optimum for most for the simple reason that we can expect to lose 5  or 6 IAR every 75 hands or so so using the 5 may help catching that losing streak in the middle somewhere where as 111 222, etc. can get stuck.  Of course it doesn't win mechanical.  As usual MM is important.

[gr8player]

Hello again, Jimske.

For clarification purposes:

My Gr8Player's Progression is a 7-number string, not 5.  While it's true, it must be an odd number, I've discovered (and, believe me, this was after exhaustive testing) that 7 is the optimal amount of plays per level; not 3, not 5, not 9.  Seven.

So it's 1111111, 2222222, 3333333, 4444444, 5555555.  You are correct about the avg loss streaks.....that's one of the main reasons that the seven plays is the optimal way to go.

Just remember that you only move to the next level after at least a minus 3 at the prior; so if you only lose a level 3W to 4L, you must remain at that same level.  Only at 2W vs 5L or 1W vs 6L do you move the next higher level.

I've played this so much and so well that I needn't even write the strings down....I pretty much know when to adjust my bet sizes almost automatically.  I will also employ a parlay play when I find that I'm consistently hitting that second consecutive win.

Stay well.

[tdx]

If you change levels after only 3 net losses on each string, you will have 9 net losses ( and don't anyone say they won't have 9 net losses because you are delusional ) 

You will lose :

111
222
333

Total of 18 units lost - which gets kind of ugly. And now you have to start betting 4 units.

Maybe better if you wait till you have 7 net losses on each string before going to the next string.

[Jimske]

If you change levels after only 3 net losses on each string, you will have 9 net losses ( and don't anyone say they won't have 9 net losses because you are delusional ) 

You will lose :

111
222
333

Total of 18 units lost - which gets kind of ugly. And now you have to start betting 4 units.

Maybe better if you wait till you have 7 net losses on each string before going to the next string.

Maybe, that's why Gr8 insists 7 is optimum.  I won't argue that point.  Likely any real study will show it is irrelevant itlr.  Any time we do something to reduce escalation we also reduce our potential profit so stretching the prog is just postponing the inevitable.  Losing 9 IAR doesn't come up that often but does come up.  Lifetime for me probably lost 9 IAR or more maybe 5 times (lost 11 IAR once tomla says I mentioned).  7 IAR ?  Lost it too many times to count.

Repeating this gets tiresome but ultimately we either must win more hands than lose OR win more of the larger bets than small ones (cumulatively) to win .  I've already posted a win of over 52 % for 7,200 live bets - not strictly mechanical.  Mechanical I get 52.31% for 7,706 trials.  Gr8 has stated he gets 54%.  Frankly I don't believe it and I don't think he has kept the stats to document it since he has never done so.

Will one of you guys figure out what the flat bet win is for 52.31% and the SD risk of ruin business?  I can't do it - too ignorant.  Also 54%.  Seems to me 54% would deserve flat betting and be the holy grail.

J

[Big EZ]

52.31% out of 7706 placed bets means you won 4031 to achieve that percentage?


If that is the case that means your z-score would be 6.99 [smiley]aes/thinking.png[/smiley]

With a flat bet win of 3675 units before commission

don't take my math to be set in stone I might be wrong.

[Sputnik]

 I know it is possibal - some one coded the TRNG march (will not mention name) and it end up positive after 50.000 placed bets - flat betting
And the march can be played with variations during the game and still have the same End Play.

So i am pretty happy right now.

[HunchBacShrimp]

Jimske,

I'm not intending to be disagreeable but I find it difficult to believe a career of only five occurrences of 9LIAR. I would think that you had overlooked them somehow. Perhaps, closing a session with several losses and opening the next session with several more. Equaling 9 or more but broken up in a manner not easily recognized.

You state that you can expect 5 or 6 liar every 75 hands or so. I don't know the math, but you can continue on and expect to see 9 liar every (I don't know) 500 hands or so.

It should be no different then the chances to see B streak to 9 or more. Should be I say. You do claim a greater than 50% hit rate and achieving that could be a simple as reducing long losing streaks.

52.31% is great. But have you considered what portion of that is B? Flat betting B only would produce greater than a 50% win rate. The profit for which is eaten up by commission. Forgive me if you have posted this in the past already. I was just sitting here thinking that winning 52 bets out of 100 isn't exactly a 52% hit rate as B should win 51% anyway. So instead of winning 2% over the expected avg, you are only 1%. Or thereabouts I'm not calculating this to the decimal.

Still over half, nothing to dismiss. I see no reason why someone can't maintain a very slight increase over half any more than someone could win a slight decrease from half.

[gr8player]

I have said it countless times, and it bears repeating here:

In the long run (read: over your long term play), one must utilize a bet selection process that will win more bets than lose IF they want to win over that long term.  In other words, one's bet selection process must prove as POSITIVE (read: above 50%) over the long term.

Lacking that, you'd either need the luck of a leprechaun or the bankroll of a casino.

Bottom line:  Gotta put your money into the correct circle more often than not.  And, even then, a money-management plan that is built around certain variance stats (i.e., avg drawdowns and avg win/loss streaks) is necessary as well.

That's it, folks.  Better learn to pick the winner in some form of a consistent and RELIABLE fashion, or you can choose to just be another ploppie that the casinos love.

[HunchBacShrimp]

I know it is possibal - some one coded the TRNG march (will not mention name) and it end up positive after 50.000 placed bets - flat betting
And the march can be played with variations during the game and still have the same End Play.

So i am pretty happy right now.

Again with this TRNG thing. Something you are not willing to discuss.
Any claim that it ends up positive can only be considered as nothing but an outright lie without proof.
Do you have any idea just how outrageous a claim of being positive after 50,000 placed flat bets is?
Any idea whatsoever?

What do you want from us? HEY MAN GOOD JOB. YOU DA MAN BRO. YOU DA MAN.

What exactly do you expect our reaction to be from a baseless claim?

I'd rather you mention the name of the guy that did the coding, because the coding is real. And not mention the TRNG march, because it is non existent without PROOF.

Put up or

[HunchBacShrimp]

Hello again, Jimske.

For clarification purposes:

My Gr8Player's Progression is a 7-number string, not 5.  While it's true, it must be an odd number, I've discovered (and, believe me, this was after exhaustive testing) that 7 is the optimal amount of plays per level; not 3, not 5, not 9.  Seven.

So it's 1111111, 2222222, 3333333, 4444444, 5555555.  You are correct about the avg loss streaks.....that's one of the main reasons that the seven plays is the optimal way to go.

Just remember that you only move to the next level after at least a minus 3 at the prior; so if you only lose a level 3W to 4L, you must remain at that same level.  Only at 2W vs 5L or 1W vs 6L do you move the next higher level.

I've played this so much and so well that I needn't even write the strings down....I pretty much know when to adjust my bet sizes almost automatically.  I will also employ a parlay play when I find that I'm consistently hitting that second consecutive win.

Stay well.

Question.

If at the first level you win 3 but lose 4 for a net of -1 and you continue on at the first level, and twice more win 3 but lose 4 for now a total accumulated net loss of -3, do you now move to level two? Or are you waiting until you net 3 losses in a single series of 7 bets?

I know it sounds like a stupid question, but you are not precisely clear. And I'm the master of misunderstanding.

[gr8player]

No problem, HBS, glad to be of assistance:

Whenever I lose any level with 3W vs 4L, I remain at that level.  However, should I lose it again at the very next series, even if only another 3W vs 4L, in that case I will move on up to the next number in my progression.  But I'll remain at that next level only until recoup of the prior loss.  For instance:

3W 4L = -1
3W 4L = -1
Now we go into "2-ville", and we get, say, -2 +2 +2, we end that series right there, as we've recouped our two lost units from our prior series' and so revert back to base ("1-ville").

One last thing about my progression, the numbers in the series needn't be set in stone.  You could choose:

1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25
3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
5 5 5 5 5 5 5

Just so long as you do have 7 numbers (7 bets) for each level.

Truly a Gr8 prog; again, to this day, my fall-back position when necessary.  (I say "when necessary" because I do alot more "flat-betting" now that my bet selection process has become better and better; and let's be frank here:  flat-betting is always the best choice, assuming you can get by with it.  but for those times when I simply can't, my prog can do wonders for me.)

Take care.

[Jimske]

Jimske,

I'm not intending to be disagreeable but I find it difficult to believe a career of only five occurrences of 9LIAR. I would think that you had overlooked them somehow. Perhaps, closing a session with several losses and opening the next session with several more. Equaling 9 or more but broken up in a manner not easily recognized.

You state that you can expect 5 or 6 liar every 75 hands or so. I don't know the math, but you can continue on and expect to see 9 liar every (I don't know) 500 hands or so.

It should be no different then the chances to see B streak to 9 or more. Should be I say. You do claim a greater than 50% hit rate and achieving that could be a simple as reducing long losing streaks.

52.31% is great. But have you considered what portion of that is B? Flat betting B only would produce greater than a 50% win rate. The profit for which is eaten up by commission. Forgive me if you have posted this in the past already. I was just sitting here thinking that winning 52 bets out of 100 isn't exactly a 52% hit rate as B should win 51% anyway. So instead of winning 2% over the expected avg, you are only 1%. Or thereabouts I'm not calculating this to the decimal.

Still over half, nothing to dismiss. I see no reason why someone can't maintain a very slight increase over half any more than someone could win a slight decrease from half.

Yes, I'm with you.  If 5 LIAR ocurr ever 75 hands than 9 LIAR should ocurr about every 1200 hands.  So over 15,000 that's not a great feat but lifetime?  I still think I'm close but don't really know.

Could very well be that one session ended with 5 LIAR and another started with 5 LIAR.  Something I don't keep track of.  I do keep track of 5 LIAR in one shoe and am at half what I think the expected value would be (once in every 75 placed bets).  Again, I don't keep track of the stop and go.

The other thing is most play shoe to shoe and restart after every shoe.  So in that instance the cumulative LIAR from shoe to show have less significance.  Of course if you only bet once a shoe you can never lose more than 1 IAR. )))

My main concern is could I flat bet and win.  But the fact is I bet P frequently.  Ratio?  Dunno.  Assume that I bet B and P equal numbers or even close and then the % has more weight..  But it all makes me wonder.  Why not flat bet smallish, wait for x amount of LIAR or % loss and then begin a recoup as needed if needed.  Could I still maintain 3.86 units a shoe win rate and improve on ROI?

J

[Jimske]

I have said it countless times, and it bears repeating here:

In the long run (read: over your long term play), one must utilize a bet selection process that will win more bets than lose IF they want to win over that long term.  In other words, one's bet selection process must prove as POSITIVE (read: above 50%) over the long term.

Lacking that, you'd either need the luck of a leprechaun or the bankroll of a casino.

Bottom line:  Gotta put your money into the correct circle more often than not.  And, even then, a money-management plan that is built around certain variance stats (i.e., avg drawdowns and avg win/loss streaks) is necessary as well.

That's it, folks.  Better learn to pick the winner in some form of a consistent and RELIABLE fashion, or you can choose to just be another ploppie that the casinos love.

Sorry Gr8 this just ain't so!  One must win more hands than lose (and overcome the vig) OR have larger winning bets than the cumulative losing bets (and overcome the vig).  So please stop saying that.  [Sidebar condescending remark  Come on, you're smarter than that.]

[HunchBacShrimp]

Yes, I'm with you.  If 5 LIAR ocurr ever 75 hands than 9 LIAR should ocurr about every 1200 hands.  So over 15,000 that's not a great feat but lifetime?  I still think I'm close but don't really know.

Could very well be that one session ended with 5 LIAR and another started with 5 LIAR.  Something I don't keep track of.  I do keep track of 5 LIAR in one shoe and am at half what I think the expected value would be (once in every 75 placed bets).  Again, I don't keep track of the stop and go.

The other thing is most play shoe to shoe and restart after every shoe.  So in that instance the cumulative LIAR from shoe to show have less significance.  Of course if you only bet once a shoe you can never lose more than 1 IAR. )))

My main concern is could I flat bet and win.  But the fact is I bet P frequently.  Ratio?  Dunno.  Assume that I bet B and P equal numbers or even close and then the % has more weight..  But it all makes me wonder.  Why not flat bet smallish, wait for x amount of LIAR or % loss and then begin a recoup as needed if needed.  Could I still maintain 3.86 units a shoe win rate and improve on ROI?

J

You are right, most people play shoe to shoe, and think from shoe to shoe, I too look at each shoe separately. But I never bought into trying to beat each shoe individually like most bac players do. I never tried to determine what type of shoe this was and bet accordingly. I play each shoe thinking it should be somewhat balanced. For instance if the first half of the shoe is all chops, I expect there to be some FLD wins on the way. Maybe not. It's just a guess.

Flat betting vs a progression. You will have to determine how you are achieving you greater than 50% win avg. Safest thing to do is flat bet if you don't have control over variance. If your wins are clustered 3 in a row, you could run a positive prog. If your losses are limited to 5 in a row you could run a negative prog. The real problem is how far you deviate from 0 wins and losses. It is not so very uncommon to lose 60 out of 100 bets and be 20 wins behind. This kind of occurrence can be more than what you BR can handle depending on the configuration of your W/L string.

If you do use a prog, you can expect much deeper draw downs than 20u. And you will have no choice to continue deeper into your prog to recover all of the excess units and the increased commissions.

From my perspective, you aren't gambling if you flat bet. You've beaten random. If you employ a negative or positive prog, you are now once again gambling with random. That's playing with fire.

Keep in mind even a small prog like GR8's series has you DOUBLING your draw down potential with the first step. Or increasing it by 50% if you can 1.5u bet. Either way, you get my drift. You will always be going backwards faster, since you will revert to a 1u bet when you get to even.

I've always thought anyone playing a 1 2 4 negative marty should always play a 1 2 4 positive prog simultaneously. Risking 7u to win 1, but never balancing that out with winning 7u with 1 seems, I don't know, unbalanced. I'm sure it all ends up the same either way, its just a matter of perspective.