+ Register

[soxfan]

Everything boils down to the 50-50 proposition, right. Some cats like to work with the strictly mechanical bs style and other like my own self use a style with some subjectivity involved. In the end everything is a trade off and you MUST use a mm/progression scheme that will match up with the bs style. The john-O claim or used to claim that some mechanical, template bs style is very good at picking off a single win within 4 or 5 decision. If so, then a cat could deploy a 5 step grand marty to grind out the profits. Of course, with my progression/mm a single win within a few decision is worthless as I need to capture a coup of back to back win to profit and reset my parlay progression. On the plus side with my style I can win well and regular winning just 16.66666666 percents of my placed bets. But in the end any style of play is gonna buck up against serious losing streak so in the end, as I have said before it will at times boil down to having the bankroll and the balls to put cake at risk to back up yer play in those worst case scenario. It ain't rocket science, baby, hey hey.

[Sputnik]

Bet selection and guess work is 50/50 no matter what you do - so i vote for MM/Progression ....

Cheers

[mahatma]

Does this "Stetson Bailey" play with an unlimited bankroll, and, even more important, have the faith in his selections to pony up big bucks on this next even chance decision after his losses mount.

I mean, think about it....that's what you're saying when you're attempting to "bet more on a winner than a loser".  If you're going to adopt that silliness, you'd darn better KNOW the difference between a losing decision and a winning one....oh, and here's the kicker....you've got to know it in advance.

Silly, isn't it, when you really think about it?  And that very notion gave birth to these long, suicidal negative progressions.

No, the real answer to the "bet selection v. money management" dilemma lies in the CORRECT USAGE of both.  And that means having a proven bet selection process (with a proven "tight variance") AND a proven money management plan BUILT AROUND the variance of that bet selection process.

One last thing:  In my original post in this thread I forgot to mention another VERY IMPORTANT piece of any serious player's money management arsenal:  the "No-Bet".  Very important to "back-off" those shoes (or portions thereof) where your preferred plays are simply not hitting.  See that....I said "back-off", as opposed to "loading up" on our bets, hoping that we're doing so on a winning decision.  The player that keeps "loading up" is the player that simply will not last at this game, especially over the long term.

You see, even when you win those larger-than-normal bets, it's sending you the wrong message.  A message like..."everything will be alright, no matter the losing jag, because you're only one (or a couple) of "big bets" away from bailing yourself out".  That, my friends, is NO WAY TO LIVE at this game.

Much better to keep your bets small.  Unit-wise, I'd say 3 (4 at absolute most) units for any bet.  And, even at that, I'd bet that amount only as a parlay, where, at least, I won the last bet and now my plays might (I say "might") be coming alive.

So I basically use a combination of both a conservative negative prog combined with a conservative positive prog.  And I utilize them as I see fit, based both upon certain stats that I keep and exactly how the current results are going for me.

I play a very subjective game.  A game based upon my vast experience.  For it is ONLY in that that I will trust putting my money onto the felt.  Nothing else.  No "magic" bet placements and no "magic" bet sizes.  Just me and what I think will happen next in this portion of the shoe.  When I'm right, I'll lock up some sort of profit.  When I'm wrong, I'll "back-off" and await my next betting opportunity.  But the absolute last thing I'd ever do is "load up" on my next bet, because I've no true idea if I'd be "betting more on a winner".  Patience....discipline....conservative mm combined with conservative goals....now THAT'S the true/real way to live at this game.

And, as always, I wish it for all of you.  Stay well.

HILARIOUS   

Like an old K-Tel record, please do tell, how is what you do PROVEN?  PROVEN by whom?  Verified by WHOM? 

UNBELIEVABLE, trending a shoe?  I could have swore a month of so ago (when I couldn't be as$ed to respond, that what you posted was a a "never falter bet selection strategy", don't change, don't switch, i swear it sounded mechanical, I would bump the post, but Dulay's eyes will turn red. 

[mahatma]

As many stated that any "mechanical" BS will eventually lost itlr, wouldn't be fair to say that any "mechanical" MM will suffer the same too?

The quest for the holy grail often reffered to BS method, could it be found in MM method? Is there a holy grail for MM?

IMO, I don't think so.

In BS,the factor that affect the most is to have a BS that win more than it lose. Maybe that how we could measure our BS performance in the particular shoe.

For MM, what is the factor to measure? Do we measure our MM by observe how many LIAR it could handle?

Your staking plan needs to be extremely fluid and flexible, any bet selection provides a structure, when and when not to bet, it provides a methodology nothing more and nothing less.   

[AsymBacGuy]

Imo, MM topic involves several issues (simple progressions, multilevel betting plans, recovering plans, capital utilized per any given session and so on) whereas BS is a more restricted topic.

Nonetheless there's no MM without a kind of BS: trying to follow trends, preordered betting schemes, a mix of the above, looking for a precise outcome into a given amount of martingale trials, playing toward a RTM effect and so on.

Of course a simple progression will work very good on EV+ spots (flat betting positive long term events) and on many "low variance" situations, otherwise we'll be caught sooner or later by the negative edge and by the binomial uncontrollable variance.

In a word and as many have pointed out, no progression could have the best of it but by the contemporary use of some selection adjustments we might lower or erase the negative expectation and naturally enhancing the EV on profitable spots.

I could look at 22-25 or more Bankers in a row, but I know it will be very difficult to have the same 5 sr deviation on many other so called 50/50 spots.

as.   

   

[Garfield]

Just realized something. Should it be moneymanagement.cc instead of betselection.cc LoL

[21 Aces]

Often I see players playing the entire field of tables looking for specific progressions to make bets (That is jumping around).  I have even seen one of the most experienced players call a leveraged bet correctly on a fly by (They didn't bet on it).  I recently saw two $X,XXX one off bets placed on two different developing dragons - one with trend and one against trend.  Surprisingly, the against trend bet won.

I think the strategy can be and is successful for many as they are playing on consistent progressions that they have found to play out favorably, but I would exercise extreme caution on bet size because one can never know.

[21 Aces]

I change my vote to money management with the following qualification.  Money management can protect a player from taking excessive risk and going 'on tilt'.  If you are crappy at bet selection, but tight on money management, fine - die your death of 1,000 cuts.  At least you exercised control over what you can control.

Some players are very strong on money management always whereas others have excessive risk taking right on tap just waiting for when the chips are down.  Don't be the latter.  From what I have seen all in, placing a wager north of 3-5 units is not smart at all unless you have already well capitalized on a progression and are throwing profit in for the hell of it.

An interesting article:
The Difference Between Bankroll and Money Management

'Bankroll management, on the other hand, is the decision how to stake your selections ONCE you have found a profitable approach. It is when you are winning, that you need to think about how to stake your money, NOT before you have shown that you can turn a profit, using a specific approach by betting level stakes, which is simply, the same amount every bet.'

[21 Aces]

Continuing on the magic 'When to Stop Playing'

- Within 30 minutes last night I was up a very good amount on an easy progression.
- Thoughts were 'I need a break so leave' vs. 'I have a fast start and let's see what we can do'
- Spent nearly the next 3 hours trading paint and improved the high water mark by a few bets including many shots at high payout bets that were very close (3 card 6 and 8 wins on Bank side for Dragon)
- ATTEMPTED to keep a trailing stop on gains, but a couple bad plays and I gave back 1/3 of it.
- Got into tilt and placed half of the remaining gains at risk at a table I just walked up to with a decent progression (and one of my favorite dealers FML).  Won it 9-7 Natural vs. Natural Bank wins.
- Stopped near initial gain mark noted in first comment.

A fast start with 30 minutes of play and a very good result may have led to a decision to stop playing and leave from both a bet selection and money management view.  One could have easily laid in heavier during it, but that is harder to do when you just show up.  Setting money management based stops on the down and upside and looking at time of play can all be part of how one plays.  If you score a personal best or are way up versus usual, maybe its best to lock it in.  If you have little time left then consider that.

STRONG PLAYERS DON'T GIVE A F AND WIN, WIN, WIN! LEAVE, STAY EASY SHOE, DIFFICULT SHOE - WIN.

This is your bank roll - Use it and feed the bulldog.

[Joe]

both.

[21 Aces]

Which one is better?

1. Start with full unit size from play one.
2. Build profit with bets lower than full unit size to provide an extra margin and then play full unit size.

[AsymBacGuy]

Which one is better?

1. Start with full unit size from play one.
2. Build profit with bets lower than full unit size to provide an extra margin and then play full unit size.

Without no verified edge, mathematically the first option is preferable.

as. 

[21 Aces]

My strike rates are very high during win back mode conditions.  My bets tend to be bigger as well in those times and pressure is like a hammer.  There have been times where I capture that performance and zone from the start, but I want to do that more consistently.

BTW, the biggest performances in a night I have seen so far are from players starting with around 10-15 large that push into deep five, even six figures of win.  Definitely shocking to see and strong Bank/ Player hand is juiced by high payout bet wins.

[alrelax]

I won't get into the bet selection process, it is too personal and too many beliefs.  But here IMO:

IF YOU WIN:

1/3, 1/3, 1/3.  And 1-3-2-6 on the progressions. 

Again, not touching the B.S. process.  VooDoo, Magic, rub the stuffed animal in your wife's purse, hold your lucky rabbit's foot key chain, whatever.  Dragon's trail belief and all that.  If you are winning.

Set an amount like double your bankroll, triple, quadruple it, whatever. 

Then do the 1/3rd for your new bankroll, take 1/3 lock it up and have the will power not to use it, take the other 1/3rd and use it as a reserve bankroll if you go bust-----AND----still try once again. 

You will be a winner and walk a winner if you have the willpower.  If you don't have the willpower, nothing will help you no matter what you employ. 

And, if you straight lose from the beginning of your buy in, no matter what your bankroll, chances are you will not get up and walk and call it a day.  So, best to stop trying to figure what the magic numbers are for walking away a loser from the beginning.  If you lost enough times after winning (I said after winning) then you can understand my system above, if you have not, you will not understand it.  Lose more and then re-read it.

[21 Aces]

Nothing better than betting consistently and clipping a strong strike rate.  Watch the chips move fast in your direction with controlled risk. One day I want to get good enough that I am not always looking around scavenging and take on the most difficult shoes.

Send us into the worst. Is that all you have?

There are times where I am doing the exact opposite so I should call everyone over to play against...