+ Register

[Garfield]

"You don't need long run to be a lifetime winner"

So true, so good indeed. I only have my lifetime, not a long run. It is also true that the border of "itlr" keep getting further and further, where the mathboyz is alsi there.

[audiokinesis]

"You don't need long run to be a lifetime winner"

So true, so good indeed. I only have my lifetime, not a long run. It is also true that the border of "itlr" keep getting further and further, where the mathboyz is alsi there.

In my experience (more than 2 billion random simulation), the long term is pure sum of our short runs, and in proportion to the time we can win fewer and fewer short runs, due to the math. So the earnability (money winning) depends only on time and luck (positive variance) backed a proper money management.

In my understanding, the (worthy) system playing has inherent limitations: time, luck, and money (management). The "lifetime winning" is difficult journey, in my view it just depends on how often do we play and/or how many days we can play.

[gr8player]

In my experience (more than 2 billion random simulation), the long term is pure sum of our short runs, and in proportion to the time we can win fewer and fewer short runs, due to the math. So the earnability (money winning) depends only on time and luck (positive variance) backed a proper money management.

In my understanding, the (worthy) system playing has inherent limitations: time, luck, and money (management). The "lifetime winning" is difficult journey, in my view it just depends on how often do we play and/or how many days we can play.

This is a very poignant, insightful post, Audiokinesis; great job.

Yes, the "long run" consists, for each of us as individual players, as the total of our personal "short run" (for lack of a better term) sessions.  And, just as true, our "earnability" (as you put it) is mostly dependent on our session time (read: win/loss goals & quitting points), our session money-management, and, yes, our variance (or, as you put it, luck). 

Let's not discount luck, for it is very vital to our session successes (or, for that matter, our session failures, as well).  After all, I am a firm believer that part of our play includes a certain "feel"; a sense of recognizing when the cards are falling our way, and (probably even more importantly) when they are not.  Though it's really variance at work, there's no doubt that it's much more universally recognized as luck.  Either way, our reactions to same are paramount and vital to our "living" (both long- and short-term) at this game.

Look, we all, each and every one of us, begin "behind the 8-ball".  We have the worst of it, right from the time our money hits the felt.  We don't have the odds in our favor (let's not forget the house edge), nor do we have the time in our favor (the cards are continuously dealt...commonly called "continuum"), and, last but certainly not least, we don't have nearly the bankroll that the house carries.

And so the savvy player takes all of this "negativity" (again, for lack of a better term) into mind when they set out to devise a mode of play that might, just MIGHT, overcome those difficult odds.

And that, my friends, is the real BIRTH of session play.  Why?  Because that's all we've got.  We can't control much, but we can control our session play.  Our buy-in, our money-management, our biases and/or trends that we are both comfortable and knowledgeable with, our strict quitting points (read: both win and loss goals), all wrapped together with the very necessary Patience and Discipline to make it all WORK FOR US.

Then when you need to total up those sessions to account for your long term results (remember what Audiokinesis stated just above..."the long term is the sum or our short runs"), you just might get to a positive number.

So, yes, in my humble opinion, even given those negative odds facing us over our long term play, we can advance our own odds of success by carefully constructing a mode of short term (read: session) play where we give ourselves the very best chance to leave the table while ahead.  (Sidenote:  In difficult sessions, where we are experiencing negative variance (or tough luck, if you will), quitting at an opportune time, either even or as close to it as you can get...I call that "loss avoidance"...will suffice to fend off some of those daunted house edges I mentioned earlier.  Why?  Because our easier, winning sessions then become mostly retained profit.)

There are those that say that "quitting while ahead" is nonsense, rendered meaningless over the long term.  Me?  I say that those are the same people that either don't even play the game OR they don't have the wherewithall to know when to effectively end a session.  Those that do know, those that have this sort of efficiency built into their session play, those are the players that know all too well how correct I am about this.  And they probably share my passion for the game, and, even more importantly, trying to get the best of it.

And, as always, I wish it for all of you.  Take care, and stay well.

[audiokinesis]

This is a very poignant, insightful post, Audiokinesis; great job.

Yes, the "long run" consists, for each of us as individual players, as the total of our personal "short run" (for lack of a better term) sessions.  And, just as true, our "earnability" (as you put it) is mostly dependent on our session time (read: win/loss goals & quitting points), our session money-management, and, yes, our variance (or, as you put it, luck). 

Let's not discount luck, for it is very vital to our session successes (or, for that matter, our session failures, as well).  After all, I am a firm believer that part of our play includes a certain "feel"; a sense of recognizing when the cards are falling our way, and (probably even more importantly) when they are not.  Though it's really variance at work, there's no doubt that it's much more universally recognized as luck.  Either way, our reactions to same are paramount and vital to our "living" (both long- and short-term) at this game.

Look, we all, each and every one of us, begin "behind the 8-ball".  We have the worst of it, right from the time our money hits the felt.  We don't have the odds in our favor (let's not forget the house edge), nor do we have the time in our favor (the cards are continuously dealt...commonly called "continuum"), and, last but certainly not least, we don't have nearly the bankroll that the house carries.

And so the savvy player takes all of this "negativity" (again, for lack of a better term) into mind when they set out to devise a mode of play that might, just MIGHT, overcome those difficult odds.

And that, my friends, is the real BIRTH of session play.  Why?  Because that's all we've got.  We can't control much, but we can control our session play.  Our buy-in, our money-management, our biases and/or trends that we are both comfortable and knowledgeable with, our strict quitting points (read: both win and loss goals), all wrapped together with the very necessary Patience and Discipline to make it all WORK FOR US.

Then when you need to total up those sessions to account for your long term results (remember what Audiokinesis stated just above..."the long term is the sum or our short runs"), you just might get to a positive number.

So, yes, in my humble opinion, even given those negative odds facing us over our long term play, we can advance our own odds of success by carefully constructing a mode of short term (read: session) play where we give ourselves the very best chance to leave the table while ahead.  (Sidenote:  In difficult sessions, where we are experiencing negative variance (or tough luck, if you will), quitting at an opportune time, either even or as close to it as you can get...I call that "loss avoidance"...will suffice to fend off some of those daunted house edges I mentioned earlier.  Why?  Because our easier, winning sessions then become mostly retained profit.)

There are those that say that "quitting while ahead" is nonsense, rendered meaningless over the long term.  Me?  I say that those are the same people that either don't even play the game OR they don't have the wherewithall to know when to effectively end a session.  Those that do know, those that have this sort of efficiency built into their session play, those are the players that know all too well how correct I am about this.  And they probably share my passion for the game, and, even more importantly, trying to get the best of it.

And, as always, I wish it for all of you.  Take care, and stay well.

Thanks for your detailed answer, I appreciate it. English is not my native language, so I need some time to interpret all of the words. At first, I see my main problem: I did not find yet the optimal quittings from my sessions...particularly when I am in the lead. I've tried many variable stop loss and win target theory and setup, but I could not "cheat" the math. Sooner or later the negative variance (and the HE) "eat me". Sure, in long term, with our short sessions, one wrong chosen quitting point can be more dangerous, and one more cleaver quitting point can be more profitable - in proportion of time, but in the end, the results are almost same; 1+1=2. And personally I did not find any superior mechanical betselection, without any empirical guessing, divination, "almost there" terms., etc. Note: I am just talking about my own experience in terms of problematic coded flows in matemathical base, so I need to know, I must to know the exact rules for the chartflow. Without rules, I can not coding properly, and the result will be not properly, and in that point we can step into the nowhere, the guessing land. It is bad? I do not know, because I am not an experienced person in the emprical hypothesis. And in given situations the pure guessing is valid? I do not know too. (Sure, it is my weakness, and it is my fault.) And evidently, without superior betselection, the flat betting is not working; only on relatively short term and only in lucky moments (positive variance).

One good chart speaks better than words; it shows us the positive and negative sides regarding to the bankroll movements. With any one of the table ECs, with continous betting plan, with strict money management rules, like hybrid progression and resets, it can survive almost 100 million spins sometime, but with some surely problematic DDs (mainly from the 43 million and 64,5 million points on y-axis), due to the mentioned and inevitable random phenomen, the back-to-back loser sessions. Does not help anything against them, except 1.) the complete off game (no game) and 2.) the unbeatable progression within table limits, which unfortunately does not exist (yet). No, it could not reach the table limit, or any exclusion, just needs heavy bankroll and proper money management. Sometime. And in other time? You can see the 2nd graph. The 2nd graph technically a continuation of the previous day graph. 

I think, most people, who not can simulate enough spins/bets, never can realize the most critical part of the random flow - in terms of gambling (I mean system playing). The timing. If we can step into the random flow with good trends (or with luck, or with positve variance, the appellation is meaningless) we can survive, or mostly we can win - yes, it can be cumulative positive, so it can be the mentioned "lifetime winning" situation. But if we step into the random flow with (strong) negative variance, according to our money management reistance, we can lose forever (or in favorable event break-even). Please see my chart at near 72,5 million no zero placed bets; what would be our feeling, if we step into the game at tomorrow morning with this negative variance junction, and till almost 15 million continous betting we can suffer with this long and heavy "downroads" (DDs)?  Fatal.
(Based on my own experience.) Regards