Dynamic and flexible 3 dimensional money management
The money management that I have used in the video that I posted in the puzzle is a very complex one. It is what I call a target based money management system. It starts with setting a target win for the session. In all the examples I posted in the puzzle it was race to 50, so it's a target of 50u+/-. Then you oscillate the stakes on the table up and down based on whether you are winning or losing and how close you are to the target. So essentially there are 3 Dimensions in play here.

Dimension 1 is the regular progression, positive, negative or mixed or whatever you would like to use that we use day in and day out.
Dimension 2 is you varying your base unit size depending on whether you are losing or winning. If you are in a losing trend, your base unit size gets smaller after a set of predefined range and if you are in a winning trend, your base unit size gets bigger. All this variance happens independent of the progression in Dimension 1.
Dimension 3 is on how close you are to your target. The more closer you are to your target, the smaller your base unit size becomes at predefined intervals. This way, you are always focussed on your target and will not amplify your losses to go far from your target.

Now, Dimension 1 can be explained and taught and is specific to this framework. Dimension 2 and 3 is very complex (at least I haven't figured out a simple way) to explain and is not restrained to this framework. It can be applied very effectively in any system that you are using and any game you are playing. There are no hard and fast rules for Dimensions 2 and 3, except the fact that you have to stick to what you have planned and play your plan. I have shared the concept, I will encourage anyone interested to understand this concept and try looking at their own interpretation of implementation.

I will post more on Dimension 2 and 3 in a separate topic when I figure out how to explain it in a simple manner. Dimension 1, as I said can be explained and taught and that is what I will focus now as part of the explanation of this framework.

Dimension 1 – Progressions for Double treble
Step 1 – Independent progressions and breaking evenTo start with, let's see what will be our progression independently for each playing position. As we are betting a position that is going to return 1:3, we are going to follow a simple progression, 1,2,3,4,5. Needless to say the progression is reset on a win. This is how the BR impact looks like.

[csv=,]
Step, Outlay
1, +2
2, +3
3, +3
4,+2
5, even
[/csv]
 
So as you see, 5 is our breaking point and we don't go beyond that. Beyond that we reset our progression to 1.

Step 2 – Recovery process
Now let's get the complexity factor in. As we are breaking even at 5, until 5 it is a productive bet. But if we lose, we lose 15 units in entirety. It will be a crime to not have a recovery progression built in. How do we do it. We add another 5 steps. So essentially, your progression could either look like 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10 or 1,2,3,4,5,2,4,6,8,10. This is how the outlay looks for both of these progressions.

[csv=,]
Step,    12345678910,   12345246810
1,2,2
2,3,3
3,3,3
4,2,2
5,0,0
6,-3,-11
7,-7,-9
8,-12,-9
9, -18,-11
10, -25,-15
[/csv]

I use 1,2,3.. 8,9,10 because of the simplicity in remembering stuff and the recovery potential early in the elongated progression (6th and 7th step). But as you can see in the above table, a better recovery bet is the second one (1,2,3,4,5,2,4,6,8,10). So essentially it depends on your style of your play. For the examples that I show, I will use 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10. But you can use what suits you. The essence is to have a production and recovery progression built in.

Step 3 : Complexity of two positions
Now let's see how it plays across when you are doing two positions. Essentially you will follow the progressions independently on your dozens and columns. Three rules for resetting your progression on both the positions.
• New BR high
• one of the progressions reaches 10
• win on both the betting positions
In all these three cases, we reset the progression on both positions to 1. We do independent resetting of the progressions as the case might be where we win only one position and any of the above rules are not met.

[csv=,]
30, Track. Bet on 3rd dozen & 3rd column – 1-1
31, Win on only dozen but we are at a new BR high. So reset progression to 1-1 and bet on 3rd doz & 1st column
9, Loss move to 2-2
19, Win only on column. But our BR is now even. So reset to 1-1 and bet 1st col & 2nd doz
2, Loss move to 2-2
6, Loss move to 3-3
2, Loss. 3 spin cycle over. Change bet selection to 1st doz & 2nd col 4-4
20, Win on column only. Not at a new high. Reset the progression where you won and continue where you lost. Also if you remember the bet selection rules - we are going to switch to the winning trend(columns for 3 spins). 1-5 but all bets on 2nd column.
35, Win on both betting tracks. So reset progression to 1-1 on 3rd doz & 2nd col
[/csv]

So now digest this information, before we go ahead and look at minor tweaks to the play on how to avoid reaching 10th step of progression always where it is least profitable, how to play mini-games to taper steep draw-downs and cyclic progressions in my next post when I find some more time. Any questions pls ask, will be happy to respond as always. It is very essential that we understand this bit about how the bet-selection and progressions, go hand in hand.

I have also posted the spins that Buffalowizard and Turner gave and the way this is played using what I have explained so far. There are couple of things around cyclic progressions, not reaching 10th step of progression always are things, mini games are stuff that I haven't spoken about, but follow it up in further posts. Till then, pls shout if you need to ask anything.

Quote from: GreatGrampa on June 06, 2013, 02:06:55 PM
I have also posted the spins that Buffalowizard and Turner gave and the way this is played using what I have explained so far. There are couple of things around cyclic progressions, not reaching 10th step of progression always are things, mini games are stuff that I haven't spoken about, but follow it up in further posts. Till then, pls shout if you need to ask anything.

why is the game lost at spin 12 (number 29)? you bet 9 units then - shouldn't it gone 1 more step and you bet 10 units?

Quote from: soggett on June 06, 2013, 03:16:42 PM

why is the game lost at spin 12 (number 29)? you bet 9 units then - shouldn't it gone 1 more step and you bet 10 units?

Quote from: GreatGrampa on June 06, 2013, 02:06:55 PM
not reaching 10th step of progression always are things, mini games are stuff that I haven't spoken about, but follow it up in further posts. Till then, pls shout if you need to ask anything.

Sogget, will post some of the further money management rules when I get some more time. Not always we will go to 10th step. I will explain in my later posts. At the moment, assume that we will go to 10th step and then reset, until I explain it.

Quote from: GreatGrampa on June 06, 2013, 05:00:02 PM
Sogget, will post some of the further money management rules when I get some more time. Not always we will go to 10th step. I will explain in my later posts. At the moment, assume that we will go to 10th step and then reset, until I explain it.

I thought so 

Mini games
We play this whole framework in mini games of +50/-50. So every games is stopped or started when we reach -50 or +50 respectively. If we get to -50, then next game will be played with doubling the units, with an objective to reach +50/-50units and not +100/-100units. As soon as we reach +50/-50, the game is reset again. My advice would be not to chase losses and don't go beyond the 2nd step. But that's how I play and you might want to play a derivation that suits you. So this is essentially a way of implementing the cyclic progressions.

Sogget, to answer your question. The game stopped at spin 12, even before reaching the 10th level in progression because of mini game was over at a loss. So we tracked one spin and started the game at 2nd level.

That's pretty much all of it for the moment folks. I will try to post a video to show how this is played.

Here comes the video.

Double treble

@GreatGrampa


Principal question for you .......


Why, in principal, do U move the bet selection on a Win, but don't move the bet selection on a loss?


Why is it we chase the loss, with progression, yet keep the same bet placement?
Just wondered. 
(BTW......another very good video from Yourself    )

Chris mate! I dnt think I understand your question. do you mind rephrasing for me?

Sure thing GreatGramps


In  your video example.............
First number spun, from the free spin bet selection is #4


So,  your first bet is 1 unit on Doz1 and 1 unit on Col1.(U are following the spin result.)
The next spin result is #16, which is a Loss on the Dozen bet, and a Win on the Col bet ..net +1 (br +1)


Second bet is to following the spin result again, and is 1 unit on Doz2 and 1 unit on Col1 ( U move the loss component, but retain the winning component where it was......cause it won!)


The next spin result is #26, which is a loss on Both components, net -2 (br -1)


Third bet is to leave the already moved Doz bet at Doz2, (even tho that has lost), tho now with 2 units on it, and leave the new losing Col1 bet?, again putting with 2 units on it.


Now the next spin result is #17, which gives U a win on the Dozen 2. and a loss on the Col1...........


I just wondered why U only move the losing bet selection, when only one of the bets has won, and one has lost, and not move both components?


I don't mean specifically this example U have shown in the video, but in general.
I wondered, why we don't always chase the position of the last spin, and expect the result to come back to where we have already moved to!

Quote from: Chrisbis on June 12, 2013, 10:25:22 PM
I wondered, why we don't always chase the position of the last spin, and expect the result to come back to where we have already moved to!

The simple answer is "It doesn't matter". The key in this framework is the money management across two 1:3 paying positions and ride on the position which is trending for your bet selection.

Want to know the reason behind the simple answer. Attached is an excel with randomly generated dozen bets. Try changing the yellow cell with different values to see different values getting generated and the % wins for each strategy. It varies for different sets of randomly generated numbers and there is no clear winner for the bet selection strategy. You can ofcourse, add as many bet selection strategies as possible to this excel, you will not find it consistently having higher "W" percentage than any other bet selection.

However, if you note, under each bet selection strategy, there will be clusters of "W". This is what we are trying to ride on by doubling our bets on the trending playing position. Also, you will figure out that the "W" percentage  is consistently below 33.33% for any bet selection method. Your bet selection strategy has to win more than 33.33% to win using flat bets.

Chris, hope I answered your question.

GG, in a game lost (-50). Start fresh and go to 2 units in the cyclic progression until how many steps? 2 - 4 - 6 - 8 - 10 ... 20(is 10 steps)? And Stop / Loss for progression with 2 units is  -50 or -100?