+ Register

[HunchBacShrimp]

It is commonly used as an example that a 7 or 9 step negative marty is doomed. A long harrowing journey trying to win one unit at a time, avoiding commission losses, 250 to 500 times before the impending bust. Almost always occurring well before you win enough to cover a bust that size. And if you do manage to surpass your bust limits. It's another arduous journey of 1u profits until that bust comes.

What I ponder is the opposite. It seems to me, and I'm sure many will agree that when you do bust your 9 step marty it won't be to a streak of exact length. It will probably be a longer streak. This imo is especially true once you get into streak lengths in the teens. Streaks of 4,5,6 and even 7,8,9,10 seem to occur with the necessary frequency.

But the longer streaks are a bit more random. That is to say, you will probably not see two streaks of 12 before you see 1 streak of 13, or two streaks of 13 before one streak of 14. You are more likely to get some odd streak of 15 or 17 before completely filling in the gaps of all the 14,13,12,11 streak distributions. Probably not see a single one of several of those at all until after a longer streak.

I ponder entering a very long positive progression on P to avoid commission. Thinking that I will hit it early, working with Murphy's law against the marty bet. Or even just keep at it until I overcome my draw down. It would take nerves of steel tho.

[Jimske]

It is commonly used as an example that a 7 or 9 step negative marty is doomed. A long harrowing journey trying to win one unit at a time, avoiding commission losses, 250 to 500 times before the impending bust. Almost always occurring well before you win enough to cover a bust that size. And if you do manage to surpass your bust limits. It's another arduous journey of 1u profits until that bust comes.

What I ponder is the opposite. It seems to me, and I'm sure many will agree that when you do bust your 9 step marty it won't be to a streak of exact length. It will probably be a longer streak. This imo is especially true once you get into streak lengths in the teens. Streaks of 4,5,6 and even 7,8,9,10 seem to occur with the necessary frequency.

But the longer streaks are a bit more random. That is to say, you will probably not see two streaks of 12 before you see 1 streak of 13, or two streaks of 13 before one streak of 14. You are more likely to get some odd streak of 15 or 17 before completely filling in the gaps of all the 14,13,12,11 streak distributions. Probably not see a single one of several of those at all until after a longer streak.

I ponder entering a very long positive progression on P to avoid commission. Thinking that I will hit it early, working with Murphy's law against the marty bet. Or even just keep at it until I overcome my draw down. It would take nerves of steel tho.

You could include a lot of different patterns to begin your Marty and therefore have more bet opportunities.  Doesn't have to be a 12 pattern, could be a 6 pattern or a 4 pattern to bet against.  It's all the same.

[HunchBacShrimp]

Jimske,

Not betting against a pattern, but for a pattern. And your right. I do still have to avoid B and its commission though. Waiting for six P and betting positively until I hit the table max around 16 P should be the same as betting P hitting the 2hole 9 times in a row. The latter of which shouldn't be more likely, but it would give me more opportunities to bet.

I'll have to think about that too. Right now I've got a picture in my head of a I think 1 million decisions showing the distributions of P and B singles and repeats. And once you get into lengths greater than 10 the distributions are not equal. I recall P's longest repeat to 19 or 20, did not have enough repeats of 14 15 16 17 or 18 to warrant it's appearance. Unlike all of the repeats of 10 or less which were dead on their expected values.

I'm just adhering to a fallacy that if you are going to bust your 128u negative marty before you make 128u with it, why not bet positively for 128u until it wins, netting the difference of what the phantom marty user lost.

[nobody1]

you don't gain units the same way with a positive progression as you do with a marty. with marty, you 'capture' a unit with a hit, regardless of when--- with a parlay, which is the true reverse of marty, you can win 6 in a row, and if you lose the 7th, you have no gain-- so you can't catch the units that are "in between"  like you do with a marty. consider it a little--

[Rolex-Watch]

If you got the balls to use a 7~9 step Marty on the Player side (let's call it 8 step for arguments sake).

You might as well use a template, at least then only 12.5% of any Banker 8 streak would be your nemesis, instead of any and every 8 Banker streak. 

If you require further info, pls ask gr8, "he can explain everything"
[smiley]semo/semo-icon_ft.ico-0.png[/smiley]

[Missmusibat]

You might as well use a template, at least then only 12.5% of any Banker 8 streak would be your nemesis, instead of any and every 8 Banker streak. 

Rolex - isn't that a misconception. You are running away from one and getting trapped into the other?

[HunchBacShrimp]

I'm not talking about playing an 8 step negative progression.

I'm talking about playing an 8 step positive progression. Against the phantom Marty player. Call it reverse logic for lack of a better term.

Anyone engaged in a 8 step negative Marty is headed towards a 255u bust. 8 steps is likely to be successful for some time. Let's say 175u before he busts out. Netting an 80u loss. The positive bettor would have lost 175u but won 255u. Netting 80u profit.

The fallacy of my thinking toward a negative Marty player is that he has missed out on several wins before starting the Marty. Nobody says "hey look I just saw 8 Banker, I bet Banker won't streak to 8 again before I win X number of units" No. He says " I don't see 8 Banker very often, I'm going to Marty against it and make a killing." It isn't really Murphy's Law that rears its head, but the Law of Averages.

In defense of the negative Marty player, his units won and lost come out exactly even minus the house edge on his action. Pick a simple 124 and bet it over and over and over again and you will see sometimes you get ahead as much as 21u or behind as much as 21u but it continues to pass back and forth over 0. Because of the house edge it does eventually lose some ground, but it doesn't tank to - 70u immediately. Nor does it always stay negative.

Two problems with the marty bettor is that he doesn't stick with it, and that he starts after missing out on several wins.

So, as a positive progression. It makes sense (though still a gamble) to see 9 Player, and wait out 75 or 100 virtual losses and then start playing FLD on Player for 9P. At about the same time some phantom bettor would decide to play a negative marty, destined to bust before he breaks even.

[Rolex-Watch]

Rolex - isn't that a misconception. You are running away from one and getting trapped into the other?

I don't follow your assumption.

[jsb02009]

HucBack, I have played your way with decent results.  But I use a 5 step POSITIVE progression then bet 1000 after...100-200-400-800-1600----1000-1000..etc.....Some important points

1. I bet on player to streak
2. You need to understand that you won't win every shoe but you can win everyday.  You need to bring at least a 200 unit bankroll because I have lost up to 23 units in one very choppy shoes that didn't have a streak over 3. That is ok, choppy shoes with no 5 in a row players is pretty rare.  I would guess probably around 1 in 6 or 7.
3. This method is all about positioning, for example when you first get to the casino.  Once you win your 5 step progression, get up and leave go on to a new shoe...Once I'm up 40 units (ie meaning you won around 2 positive progressions) then if in my new shoe I won my 5 step I will stay
4. As far as results go, I have been playing various baccarat methods for years.  This one has given me the best results.  It is not foolproof.  You will have a few small losses ie 20-30 units but I have had shoes that had alot of repeats where I have won over 10,000.  I have been playing this way the last 6 months and am up-44000 dollars....I have thought about increasing my progression unit size to 300-600-1200-2400-4800-2000-2000--etc
5. One final note, your mindset is correct.  Why not sacrifice small losses for big wins.  I think a 7 or 9 step progression is too risky.  You need to have enough self control to stick with this method even if you have a couple of choppy shoes.  For example, yesterday my day started with too choppy shoes in which no streak went over 3.  After those 2 shoes I was down 38 units (ie 3800 dollars). The very next shoe I had 8 players in a row  and 6 players in a row.  I made around 8000.  around 4000 for the day. I'm not saying this method is fool proof or a holy grail, but it has been working for me so far, lets see if it continues. 

[HunchBacShrimp]

HucBack, I have played your way with decent results.  But I use a 5 step POSITIVE progression then bet 1000 after...100-200-400-800-1600----1000-1000..etc.....Some important points

1. I bet on player to streak
2. You need to understand that you won't win every shoe but you can win everyday.  You need to bring at least a 200 unit bankroll because I have lost up to 23 units in one very choppy shoes that didn't have a streak over 3. That is ok, choppy shoes with no 5 in a row players is pretty rare.  I would guess probably around 1 in 6 or 7.
3. This method is all about positioning, for example when you first get to the casino.  Once you win your 5 step progression, get up and leave go on to a new shoe...Once I'm up 40 units (ie meaning you won around 2 positive progressions) then if in my new shoe I won my 5 step I will stay
4. As far as results go, I have been playing various baccarat methods for years.  This one has given me the best results.  It is not foolproof.  You will have a few small losses ie 20-30 units but I have had shoes that had alot of repeats where I have won over 10,000.  I have been playing this way the last 6 months and am up-44000 dollars....I have thought about increasing my progression unit size to 300-600-1200-2400-4800-2000-2000--etc
5. One final note, your mindset is correct.  Why not sacrifice small losses for big wins.  I think a 7 or 9 step progression is too risky.  You need to have enough self control to stick with this method even if you have a couple of choppy shoes.  For example, yesterday my day started with too choppy shoes in which no streak went over 3.  After those 2 shoes I was down 38 units (ie 3800 dollars). The very next shoe I had 8 players in a row  and 6 players in a row.  I made around 8000.  around 4000 for the day. I'm not saying this method is fool proof or a holy grail, but it has been working for me so far, lets see if it continues.

Very interesting, thanks for posting a reply. I hope this continues to work well for you.

I like how you reduce your bet after 5 wins and then flat bet the rest of the run out with a large bet. And yes, 7 or 8 steps is probably too many.

So, you bet every hand waiting for a player streak? Or do you wait for 1 player and then start your progression?

Thanks

[Missmusibat]

  I don't follow your assumption.

Hey Rolex - The idea you suggested was using a template to reduce the risk of getting into a trap of 8 banker streak. Am assuming when you say template it is a preconfigured set of decisions in sets of 3, 4, 5 so on... Lets assume you are taking a preconfigured template of 3 decisions. BPB. 8 decisions with this template will show BPBBPBBP. Now while you are reducing the risk of getting into a trap of 8 banker streak, you are increasing your risk of getting into the BPBBPBBP trap. That's what I meant.

Always loving - Musibat.

[Sputnik]

 @HunchBacShrimp it is very difficult to play one side only - because one side might get ahead 14 times or with 3.0 SD ...
So assume you would attack every time Banker show two times and bet 12 times on Player - then you would need to win twice within that window of 14 events.

It can be done - but it is a very bumpy ride where you might end up with recovery stage for 8 hours play.
I will get back to this topic and show you one simulation how it looks like.
You can use a 36 extanded progression with Three levels - it will never fail - but you will end up at recovery stage when you hit the big hole.

[Sputnik]

Here i bet each side against 3.0 SD - as you can see i lose 12 steps twice - total 24 steps or 2 x 3.0 SD and still i could recover to zero using the last level with 12 steps.
Same results you could expect just playing one side only.

[ezmark]

The one good thing  about  positive or negative progressions is that either may be sufficiently

long enough to take advantage of  the individual bias of 1's or 2's ...etc.

which will be in your bet selection favor .

The one bad thing about progressions is that the bias that you're depending on never shows soon enough

and you bust your progression more than once.