I
Quote from: ADulay on March 20, 2015, 02:35:41 AM
Friday is a casino day for me. (Good clam chowder and fry bread, too!).
If you would like, I can post up my shoe (which will obviously be fabricated). I can explain to anyone who will listen just how it was played and what the secret was/is. Yes, I only play one shoe.
But then, that would be an exercise in futility for all involved.
None of the "herd" would believe it, no matter what the outcome.
AD
All (well, at least the three guys yelling the loudest),
Here is your long awaited "POSTED SHOE". What a thrill it is to post this up. The anticipation, the planning, the stress, the juggling of multiple strategies and system plays to come up with the OBVIOUS solution for this particular shoe.
So, I'll just skip all the happy casino junk and get to it.
This is the shoe I walked up on. Two people at the table already playing. I'm in spot 1 (dealer's left for those who care).
You need not be a rocket surgeon to look at the first 14 hands and see that this is a shoe crying out for Time Before Last wagering. At least it was for me. System 40 (chops) didn't look good and neither did any of the system plays requiring a lot of paperwork. As I would have spent half of the remaining shoe just getting a score card "up to date".
KEEP IT SIMPLE.
Hand 15 starts the wagering with a simple 1,2,3 progression. Why? Because that's what I like. Lose two of those and call it a day.
Notice the single "two" at the start. This is good. We don't like twos running TB4L, right?
Look at hands 30-33. Here's our first chance to make the "3 wager. It wins. I continue with a single "test" wager. It wins. I continue on.
If that wager at hand 33 loses, I'm done. I take the +7 and call it a day.
Uh, oh. At hand 37 another "3" wager. I don't like the way this is shaping up. Too close but it wins and I continue on. Once again, if it lost, I was done for the shoe/day.
Damn. Hand 45 and another "3" wager. It hits for the third time, but I'm not liking having to make it. I probably should have taken the +15 at hand 44 and blew the rest of it off but the logic of the moment said if it lost, I was still at +12 so go for it.
Hand 49 should have been a stopper (+13) but I wanted to take a single flyer, one more time and it won so I stayed with it. Obviously had that lost, I would have been done.
Notice the final wager is a "2" and not a "3". Never ever drop back under a +10 when you were so far ahead of it earlier. If the 2 unit bet wins, I'll play on a bit more. At it was, it lost so I was done.
That's the play and the thought process. No paperwork is involved. The only thing you need be aware of is where you are with reference to your "goal" in the shoe. I could have easily left that shoe much, much earlier but early on, it was running perfectly so why quit on a run?
So, that's it. Time Before Last was the big secret wagering plan. Other system plays would work too, but this was the one I used this time. Had that first "3" wager lost at hand 33 and I'm done. I'll always take the safe win over a chance for a "big" win.
I don't know what else to add.
(https://betselection.cc/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fandy.smugmug.com%2Fphotos%2Fi-t3p7rcV%2F0%2FL%2Fi-t3p7rcV-L.jpg&hash=fb16a9e54267dccedf3c1fd24ae13beedbfb639f)
Ad,thanks for posting that and giving your explanation as to the" why"of your betting selection.You caught a shoe bias.I have no problem believing you.Your betting progression 1-2-3(up as you lose I presume)so if you lost your first two bets you are breaking even on your third bet(3),so 12 unit stop -loss per shoe.Continue with your very good play.[smiley]aes/cool.png[/smiley]
Jim-good point. I understand my posts should stick to facts and refrain from immature personal attacks. I shall refrain from such actions in the future. Thank you.
I wouldn't have minded playing the shoe posted up by ADulay....
PB
BP
PP
PP
BP
BP
PP
PP
BP
BP
BP
A nice streak of 10 Players on the second result of each pair to start of the shoe.
+6 is nothing to grumble about. [smiley]aes/money.png[/smiley]
[attachimg=1]
I agree with that Preston Bailey cat. Yeasr ago Itested double zz against craps decision P-Dp using star as written and it did seem to be efficient at capturing the back to back win, hey hey.
Quote from: Jimske on April 01, 2015, 08:31:35 PM
Very true, Horus. Key to this shoe is continuity or conformity, if you will. Anytime a shoe presents similar structure to our betting plan we will win. Even if it lasts justs for a bit. Again - prediction is the key.
Jimske, The whole shoe was a good one for trending IMO. It reminds me of what PerryB always said....''control the losses and the wins will take care of themself'' I use a basic template like the one above and then only get funky if need be. One thing I have noticed which is a bit strange and I have seen other posters on different forums comment on it before as well is how the last portion of the shoe can often just completely go against everything previous. I have noticed that testing from several different sources. Obviously there is an easy answer....just don't play the last portion, lol. But it's strange none the less. I think the same applies to Roulette a bit. Too much data/information is not always a good thing. My success seems to come in short spells in both formats.
cheers
Quote from: horus on April 02, 2015, 08:54:46 AM
One thing I have noticed which is a bit strange and I have seen other posters on different forums comment on it before as well is how the last portion of the shoe can often just completely go against everything previous. I have noticed that testing from several different sources. Obviously there is an easy answer....just don't play the last portion, lol. But it's strange none the less.....My success seems to come in short spells in both formats.
This is true. It is inherent into the very nature of the game, just as in any EC game.
It's what I like to refer to as the "unravel".
And make no mistake of it, Horus, the very recognition of it is essential to the serious Bac player. And to stay in step with the subject of this thread, it appears that Adulay is of similar mind, as he is consistently monitoring his "exit strategy" while he is playing his preferred trend, forever vigilant of its ominous "unravel" (good job, A).
Look, I realize that my bet selection process will do absolutely nothing to eradicate that daunted house edge. I get it, and I've long ago comes to terms with it.
So I need a strategy, much like Adulay's, that'll see me get my money and then plan my exit. Take advantage of my "10 minutes of good", maximize on those better portions of the shoe, and then back off, awaiting my next betting opportunity. All planned and done in the name of minimizing the potentially-damaging...yet inevitable..."unravel".
Now we can begin conversation regarding the house edge. Now, armed with solid entry and exit strategies, a consistent bet selection process, and, last but most certainly not least, a solid money-management plan (a shoe progression is considered as solid as they come, IMHO), and now the serious player can talk about overcoming that house edge; by utilization of their "collective" Player's Edges.
Stay well.
Quote from: soxfan on April 01, 2015, 09:20:21 PM
I agree with that Preston Bailey cat. Yeasr ago Itested double zz against craps decision P-Dp using star as written and it did seem to be efficient at capturing the back to back win, hey hey.
That's "Stetson" not "Preston" but yeah he states himself that double wins seem to be more prevalent with this placement. It does seem that he may have something there but I haven't tested it thoroughly.
Quote from: horus on April 02, 2015, 08:54:46 AM
Jimske, The whole shoe was a good one for trending IMO. It reminds me of what PerryB always said....''control the losses and the wins will take care of themself'' I use a basic template like the one above and then only get funky if need be. One thing I have noticed which is a bit strange and I have seen other posters on different forums comment on it before as well is how the last portion of the shoe can often just completely go against everything previous. I have noticed that testing from several different sources. Obviously there is an easy answer....just don't play the last portion, lol. But it's strange none the less. I think the same applies to Roulette a bit. Too much data/information is not always a good thing. My success seems to come in short spells in both formats.
I think Roulette a different animal. Nevertheless, I agree (Gr8 as well) that for some reason the second half of the shoe seems to "unravel" or change. Perhaps it's due to the normal change of card distribution as some cards become unavailable OR maybe just selective memory. After all the deck tends to change all the time.
*******************************
Maybe this will kick off a discussion of bet selection. Here are the questions. I've tried to raise them before but doesn't seem to go anywhere. Maybe Andy shoe will kick it off. 1. Is there a bet selection that wins more hands than loses? 2. Do different bet selection change the flow of W and L even though the total W/L rate remains the same?
Let's take a look at TBL vs. XXOO vs. OTBL vs. ZZ for simple starters. Choose favorite templates if you want. Does one or the other produce choppier W and L? Does one or the other produce longer runs of W and L?
It's often been said that it is important to match one's betting scheme with one's bet placement. If there is truly a differential between placements as mentioned above then this would be a key to winning wouldn't it? There is a reason why some achieve a higher win rate than the EV. I'm not going to do any hinting like asymbacc. People will have different opinions.
Take a shoe like Andy's for instance. He didn't lose more than 3 IAR. Suppose we play ZZ against that shoe. What do the W and L rates and runs look like? How do they compare? Assymbadc said "progressions, progressions, progressions." We all know that progressions don't change expectation but . . .would different progressions perform better with different placements? Can we use the W and L rates and composition to actually win more hands than lose?
Anybody interested?
J
All good questions, Jimske.
And they're all questions that every serious player has tackled, some multiple times.
The bottom line, IMHO, Jimske, is that all bet placements will perform relatively similarly. Same W/L patterns and/or streaks and/or strike rates; so if one is looking for the "magic formula" bet placement, one will find only frustration.
BUUUTTT, let's not "throw the baby out with the bath water", shall we? Just because all bet placements, OVER THE LONG RUN, will perform the same, does not preclude one from using their preferred bet placement strategy to their own advantage.
Look, everyone here (me, you, Soxster, Horus, Adulay, even Johno...EVERYONE) has their preferred bet placement strategy. Why? Because that's their own personal comfort zone, where they are MOST FAMILIAR with their BP's actions, both good and bad. And then, given that familiarity, they build their own personal entry and exit strategies (read: to either bet or "no-bet") and their own personal MM strategy; all built around their familiarity with their preferred BP's and preferred attacks (read: playing) on same.
That, in a nutshell, is how this game is to be beaten, especially long-term wise. By learning to master their own personal play, those characteristics, those necessities, will serve to overcome the house edge in the long run. Not any one of them alone....no, it will take it all; the BP, the MM, the "bet vs no-bet", the entry/exit strategies, the LONG TERM VISION....it'll take it all, collectively, to put you over the top in this game.
Quote from: gr8player on April 02, 2015, 03:52:14 PM
All good questions, Jimske.
And they're all questions that every serious player has tackled, some multiple times.
The bottom line, IMHO, Jimske, is that all bet placements will perform relatively similarly. Same W/L patterns and/or streaks and/or strike rates; so if one is looking for the "magic formula" bet placement, one will find only frustration.
BUUUTTT, let's not "throw the baby out with the bath water", shall we? Just because all bet placements, OVER THE LONG RUN, will perform the same, does not preclude one from using their preferred bet placement strategy to their own advantage.
Look, everyone here (me, you, Soxster, Horus, Adulay, even Johno...EVERYONE) has their preferred bet placement strategy. Why? Because that's their own personal comfort zone, where they are MOST FAMILIAR with their BP's actions, both good and bad. And then, given that familiarity, they build their own personal entry and exit strategies (read: to either bet or "no-bet") and their own personal MM strategy; all built around their familiarity with their preferred BP's and preferred attacks (read: playing) on same.
That, in a nutshell, is how this game is to be beaten, especially long-term wise. By learning to master their own personal play, those characteristics, those necessities, will serve to overcome the house edge in the long run. Not any one of them alone....no, it will take it all; the BP, the MM, the "bet vs no-bet", the entry/exit strategies, the LONG TERM VISION....it'll take it all, collectively, to put you over the top in this game.
The operative words in your post are "relatively similarly." So by that you mean there may be differences, albeit, small differences. Let's not forget that this is a game of small percentages and small differences can mean a great deal.
J
Jim, you can safely assume that the WL sequences are very different depending what you are registering.
Some players, as gr8player, prefer to get some hint on the actual trend and side domination (well knowing what theorically happens most), others prefer to base their play just on relatively rare long term findings (me and many others), others prefer to utilize progressions giving to the bet selection a minor or zero impact.
IMO, there's no way to get any hint without observing/registering a decent amount of outcomes.
So, for example and imho and providing a simple BS, it's better to wait a WLLLW to bet than wagering on simple W or L or WL or LW or LL sequences.
The problem is to grasp the BS providing better reliable outcomes than others.
If the game would be a 50/50 game, any sequence (I can't use anymore the word disposition) will form identical results, so the number of a sequence like WWWLL will be equal to the identical counterpart of WWWLW.
That's not the case for many situations.
as.
Anyway, getting back to MY discussion. Some people thing that a bet style should conform to the bet selection. What do you think? Are there discernible differences in bet selections? Gr8 seems to equivocate; Asym seems to agree.
[/quote]
Jimske, you are a good man, and a smart one as well....heck, I'd venture as far to say that you're an adept Baccarat player, as well. So let's "cut to the chase" here, if you will:
You are spot-on in your BP evaluation index of effectively "reducing the LIAR". That, my friend, is the name of the game. For the "secret sauce", if you will, of this game lies in the player's ability to both familiarize and then workaround the all-so-inevitable losing streaks/losses of their preferred BP method.
So it then becomes the player's responsibility to do whatever it is in their power, whatever it is in their control, to LIMIT LOSSES.
Then, there's but one question left:
Which BP process might serve that solitary goal best?
As I stated at the outset of this post, Jimske, you're a smart man and an astute player; hence, the answer should be clear. (Sidenote: Fact is, I think you already know it.)
Stay well.
FTL is too streaky, zigzag the same, my guess would be that TBL would be most compressed?
At the Jimske suggestion I eyeballed a coupla few recently played shoes applying the double zz style, hey hey.
1.llwlwllwwwlwwwwlllwllwllwwlwwlwlwlwllwllwlwllwwlwwllwwlllwwwlwlwllwwwwl
2.wllllwwwllwlwwwlwlllllllwllwwllwwlwwlllwlwwlwwlwllwllwwllllwwlwwllwlllllwl
3.lwwlwwlwwwlwlllwwwwwwwlllwwwlllwlwwwlwllwwlwwwlwwllwwlwwllwwllwwwwllllwlww
4.llwwwllllwwllwwwwwwwwlllllllwllwwlllwwlwlwllllwwwlwlwwwwwlwlwwll
Quote from: horus on April 03, 2015, 10:59:41 PM
Here is about 1000 hands worth of my idea. It did hit one sticky patch....but apart from that performed ok.
worst -2.
best +40.
It is not that simplistic, there are three bets involved in securing a win, therefore some sort of progression needed, which then leads to "how do you recover from any single failure".
Example, bet against number #2, BBP involves betting PPB, you can't flat bet it.
Horus, a year or so ago when we we discussing pairs. BB = 1, BP = 2, PB = 3, PP =4
Written in columns of 2's. then betting that the same pair number would not repeat in the same two hand sequence every 8 hand group (I called it non-binary repeat).
Example
1-1-3-3
B-B-P-P-
B-B-B-B-
You now now bet the opposite of 1-1-3-3, so the bet sequence would run, PP (opposite of BB), etc, stopping after the first win.
The average win rate against my own 100 shoes came back at a massive 74%, I was staggered and the feeling of elation which lasted for 9 minutes was amazing. In the 10th minute I realised the error of my ways, I simply looked at the results as pairs, as opposed to the bet technique requiring TWO BETS to snare any win, a crucial over-sight. But hey, who cares, maybe if I do it properly it might come back at 55~60%, that still makes it a winner, or maybe I just need to be extra creative regarding MM?
Few years later the penny finally dropped, all I was in effect doing was taking an 8 hand sequence and betting it won't repeat, actually it isn't that bad but could get ugly (rare event). Now for those that have long memories, you might remember Izak once describing a system of his, were he used the analogy of a white van driving past a spot at the exact same time and it is unlikely to happen that many times. So I started applying that principal to this bet selection, for a specific spot as an additional bet option. In other words you wait for an event to repeat, in this case a repeating binary number, then bet it won't happen three times, if it does, then it won't repeat four times. The true beauty of it is every time you make a move, you have a 75% chance of grabbing a win and a 25% chance of losing both bets. Pears are nice to eat.
Thanks R-W for an interesting idea. I had to read through that a few times to get it. I will do some testing with that idea along with my new idea above and see how they go. The problem will be when that 'Black Swan' turns up I suppose. Maybe we need a gun, lol. I remember reading some of your posts where you used a kind of an inverted mirror effect and things could get particularly hairy with that as well.
cheers
Quote from: horus on April 04, 2015, 09:04:30 AM
Thanks R-W for an interesting idea. I had to read through that a few times to get it.
deliberate on my part.
Quote from: horus on April 04, 2015, 09:04:30 AMI remember reading some of your posts where you used a kind of an inverted mirror effect and things could get particularly hairy with that as well.
Betting against symmetry, off the menu after seeing a few 30+ hand reverse mirrors. The problem with it is you need to win within three bets and having the discpline to stop when you don't, you can get sucked into thinking it becomes more due and continue betting into the oblivion. More importantly is that you are now anthropomorphizing the shoe / results, and I'm trying to wean myself off such modes of play, because they lack rational logic and don't make sense other than to yourself.
Quote from: Tomla on April 03, 2015, 09:14:34 PM
FTL is too streaky, zigzag the same, my guess would be that TBL would be most compressed?
Correct, Tomla, good job.
Singles and threes...the filet mignon of TBL...played correctly...let me repeat that...played CORRECTLY...and that means patient and disciplined triggers only...is absolutely GOLDEN.
The loss gaps, or losing streaks, or even the variance downturns, are at once both manageable and, even more importantly, readily recoverable.
You see, my friends, it's all in the "how you approach and, ultimately, manage" your preferred bet selection process.....that will serve as the ultimate solution to all of your Baccarat puzzles.
Just to say guys....after testing the idea a bit more (both ways), it bombed out.
Oh well, live and learn I suppose. Sorry if I got anyone's hopes up.
cheers
Singles and threes...the filet mignon of TBL...played correctly...let me repeat that...played CORRECTLY...and that means patient and disciplined triggers only...is absolutely GOLDEN.
[/quote]
It seems to me that singles and threes are more of an otbl trigger than anything else....
Quote from: soxfan on April 03, 2015, 10:20:32 PM
At the Jimske suggestion I eyeballed a coupla few recently played shoes applying the double zz style, hey hey.
1.llwlwllwwwlwwwwlllwllwllwwlwwlwlwlwllwllwlwllwwlwwllwwlllwwwlwlwllwwwwl
2.wllllwwwllwlwwwlwlllllllwllwwllwwlwwlllwlwwlwwlwllwllwwllllwwlwwllwlllllwl
3.lwwlwwlwwwlwlllwwwwwwwlllwwwlllwlwwwlwllwwlwwwlwwllwwlwwllwwllwwwwllllwlww
4.llwwwllllwwllwwwwwwwwlllllllwllwwlllwwlwlwllllwwwlwlwwwwwlwlwwll
So in this small sample the parlay on a win produced 11 more wins than losses from my count. ??? Question still is the same . Can one bet placement produce significantly different run lengths (LIAR) than another. If not then we are barking up the wrong tree. If so then we can tailor our bets accordingly.
Quote from: Trbfla on April 05, 2015, 03:48:40 PM
It seems to me that singles and threes are more of an otbl trigger than anything else....
WEll, no, singles for TBL and 3+ also for TBL. OTBL likes 2's and solo 1's or what I call Alternate 2 (A2's) PPP B PP.......
Does anyone understand what asym is saying?
Say it ain't so, AsymBacGuy....please enunciate your true intentions. I am always leery of members that delete their own posts, and so I'd prefer to read some clarification from you.
Quote from: Jimske on April 06, 2015, 03:47:23 PM
So in this small sample the parlay on a win produced 11 more wins than losses from my count. ??? Question still is the same . Can one bet placement produce significantly different run lengths (LIAR) than another. If not then we are barking up the wrong tree. If so then we can tailor our bets accordingly.
The LIAR is not so important for me cuz I can withstand 10L and capture my coup of back to back win for a nice profit. I still maintain that different bs style offer up different w/l cluster. Some bs style are better than other for capturing back to back wins. So it isn't a one size fit all proposition as far as matching bs style with progression/mm plan, hey hey.
1+3
1+2
1+1
2+3
3+4
3+1
4+1
6+3
8+3
10+1
39 units in all simple parlay clears out a lot ************
Quote from: soxfan on April 08, 2015, 12:41:43 AM
The LIAR is not so important for me cuz I can withstand 10L and capture my coup of back to back win for a nice profit. I still maintain that different bs style offer up different w/l cluster. Some bs style are better than other for capturing back to back wins. So it isn't a one size fit all proposition as far as matching bs style with progression/mm plan, hey hey.
That's another way of looking at it -clusters of wins and losses. That as opposed to losses in a row.so with clusters were talking about frequency of events in groups. I think maybe even asym said something about that. Rare events. Defining clusters and predicting them by understanding their frequency is the task. But as far as matching up that selection with the clusters how does that work?
Quote from: soxfan on April 08, 2015, 12:41:43 AM
The LIAR is not so important for me cuz I can withstand 10L and capture my coup of back to back win for a nice profit. I still maintain that different bs style offer up different w/l cluster. Some bs style are better than other for capturing back to back wins. So it isn't a one size fit all proposition as far as matching bs style with progression/mm plan, hey hey.
I've never lost 10L as far as I can remember. Don't think so. Lost 9 IAR twice. 7 IAR numerous times. I can't quite figure how a back to back win can recoup 10L IAR. Did you post that prog once before?
Quote from: Jimske on April 09, 2015, 03:44:47 PM
I've never lost 10L as far as I can remember. Don't think so. Lost 9 IAR twice. 7 IAR numerous times. I can't quite figure how a back to back win can recoup 10L IAR. Did you post that prog once before?
I post up my progression style, again, so you can see it can stand 10LIAR, then capture back to back win and skate with 25 unit of sweet sweet sweet profits, hey hey.
2-2-2-6-8-10-15-20-25-35-50 units bets
6-4-2-12-12-10-15-15-10-15-25 units profit
I was reading the Barstow book again last night. (Beat the Casino) He has a lot of ideas for progressions and partner play. It's a good little book. He is fond of a parlay bet himself and said after much experimenting that he found a series of six parlay attempts to be a good compromise.
I always thought this thread by Mike was one of the most interesting threads ever posted on this forum.
http://betselection.cc/even-chance-8/how-to-get-an-edge-flat-betting-%28in-theory%29/msg22774/#msg22774
cheers
Quote from: soxfan on April 09, 2015, 08:46:26 PM
I post up my progression style, again, so you can see it can stand 10LIAR, then capture back to back win and skate with 25 unit of sweet sweet sweet profits, hey hey.
2-2-2-6-8-10-15-20-25-35-50 units bets
6-4-2-12-12-10-15-15-10-15-25 units profit
Yup, I remember. Thanks.
If you lose all 11 bets, your loss will b 175 units. In a $10 table, the loss will be $875. Unless you have a bet selection that wins a parlay within 11 tries, your loss will be excessive. In my testing usual bet selections, DBL, ODBL, OLD, FLD etc. are losers with 11 step parlay progression.
Quote from: james on April 10, 2015, 12:22:58 PM
If you lose all 11 bets, your loss will b 175 units. In a $10 table, the loss will be $875. Unless you have a bet selection that wins a parlay within 11 tries, your loss will be excessive. In my testing usual bet selections, DBL, ODBL, OLD, FLD etc. are losers with 11 step parlay progression.
My lifetime bankroll is 1800 unit so a single progression bust don't clip me for more than 10% of my roll. My bs style is "trending" but with 10% subjective plays. And, on average I buck up against a coupla progression busts every week but that's just the cost of doing business, nothing more or less, hey hey.
Quote from: james on April 10, 2015, 12:22:58 PM
If you lose all 11 bets, your loss will b 175 units. In a $10 table, the loss will be $875. Unless you have a bet selection that wins a parlay within 11 tries, your loss will be excessive. In my testing usual bet selections, DBL, ODBL, OLD, FLD etc. are losers with 11 step parlay progression.
Yes, I believe you are correct. But those bet selections and others are too simplistic. Consider simply betting one side - P B; R B; O E, etc. All you need is a run of 10 or more to bust the prog. Pretty easy to lose. So you need a refined bet selection.
According to IMSpirit going to lose 10 or more about every 1200 bets. So if that is accurate then I just ran through 7200 bets (actually way more) without losing 10 IAR. Anybody figure the SD on that?
The Frank Barstow in his book said he knew of an oldtimer who made a good income for 30 year just usin a parlay progression grinding it out at the dice tables, hey hey.
I think Frank was onto something with the parlays Soxfan.
I was just working out a 12 stepper which won't break the bank.
1) 1-2-4 +3/-1
2) 1-2-4 +2/-1
3) 1-2-4 +1/-3
4) 2-4-8 +3/-5
5) 2-4-8 +1/-7
6) 3-6-12 +2/-10
7) 4-8-16 +2/-14
8} 5-10-20 +1/-19
9) 7-14-28 +2/-26
10) 9-18-36 +1/-35
11) 12-24-48 +1/-47
12) 16-32-64 +1-63
It's a bit basic...but there you go.
Then there was that Seth guy with his 'Target Betting' approach.
bet 1 lose -1 (stay at 1 on a loss)
bet 1 lose -2
bet 1 lose -3
bet 1 win -2 (now add your current loss and add 1 = 3. bet that sum to gain +1)
bet 3 lose -5
bet 3 lose -8
bet 3 win -5 (so 5 +1 = 6.)
bet 6 win +1. reset. This one could get scary.
cheers
I liked seth and his target approach but its just a hidden martingale in reality --- the bets get so out of hand
Quote from: Jimske on April 10, 2015, 09:57:00 PM
All you need is a run of 10 or more to bust the prog. Pretty easy to lose.
Even easier to "bust the prog" than you'd think, Jimske.
You see, my friend, with Soxter's parlay progression (or, frankly, any parlay method), the losses needn't necessarily come in "consecutive" fashion, and yet the player could still be in trouble:
W L W L W L.....this scenario is just as precarious (probably even more so) for the parlay player, because even though they've won half their bets, they'll find themselves going into step #4 of their progression ladder, having failed to complete either of the first three parlay attempts.
So it's not just consecutive losses than can hurt this player, but how the losses pan out in their current play is just as vital. The player that is currently finding that second consecutive win rather elusive will not do well with their parlay bids.
Now, that all said, I happen to be a fan of parlays. But I prefer to measure my "sense of timing" at this particular shoe and/or session BEFORE simply "blindly" parlaying. In other words, what is my current strike rate AFTER any particular win? Am I winning 2 bets in-a-row with any consistency right now?....If that answer is affirmative, then by all means, the parlay is an important part of my MM arsenal.
So MM becomes a bit like trending.....adjusting usages to the current conditions.
Soxfan progression requires two consecutive wins in 11 attempts. This is not easy to achieve. For every parlay win there are three losses. Actually with HA the parlay losses will be slightly more than three. At every bet level for every win there are 3+ losses and the losses at higher bet levels will be more.
I believe in precognition and some people with subjective bet selection can achieve a parlay hit within 11 attempts. For those not gifted, this is a dangerous progression.
Quote from: james on April 11, 2015, 11:08:12 PM
Soxfan progression requires two consecutive wins in 11 attempts. This is not easy to achieve. For every parlay win there are three losses. Actually with HA the parlay losses will be slightly more than three. At every bet level for every win there are 3+ losses and the losses at higher bet levels will be more.
I believe in precognition and some people with subjective bet selection can achieve a parlay hit within 11 attempts. For those not gifted, this is a dangerous progression.
I disagree, totally! If a cat can't capture regular coup of back to back wins then he need to quit the baccrats and sell pencil outta the tincup on a streets corner somewhere, hey hey.
Quote from: gr8player on April 11, 2015, 08:22:47 PM
Even easier to "bust the prog" than you'd think, Jimske.
You see, my friend, with Soxter's parlay progression (or, frankly, any parlay method), the losses needn't necessarily come in "consecutive" fashion, and yet the player could still be in trouble:
W L W L W L.....this scenario is just as precarious (probably even more so) for the parlay player, because even though they've won half their bets, they'll find themselves going into step #4 of their progression ladder, having failed to complete either of the first three parlay attempts.
So it's not just consecutive losses than can hurt this player, but how the losses pan out in their current play is just as vital. The player that is currently finding that second consecutive win rather elusive will not do well with their parlay bids.
Now, that all said, I happen to be a fan of parlays. But I prefer to measure my "sense of timing" at this particular shoe and/or session BEFORE simply "blindly" parlaying. In other words, what is my current strike rate AFTER any particular win? Am I winning 2 bets in-a-row with any consistency right now?....If that answer is affirmative, then by all means, the parlay is an important part of my MM arsenal.
So MM becomes a bit like trending.....adjusting usages to the current conditions.
Hmmm? Thank you Gr8. But you see, my friend, the prog probably restarts on break even or any win so WLWLWL not a problem. Can't lose more than 175 units if not get a double win but can win and restart along the way.
After WLWLWL you already lost the first 3 bets in the progression and now you have to bet the fourth bet in the progression.
Quote from: james on April 12, 2015, 03:06:14 AM
After WLWLWL you already lost the first 3 bets in the progression and now you have to bet the fourth bet in the progression.
stop and restart on a W 2, -2, 2 restart win 2 units.. or 2, -2, 2, -6, 8 restart win 4 units, etc. Risk 175 units.
Quote from: james on April 12, 2015, 03:06:14 AM
After WLWLWL you already lost the first 3 bets in the progression and now you have to bet the fourth bet in the progression.
Losing the first three parlay attempt is no big thing. In fact, I prefer to lose the first three attempts as my profit potential is 10-12-15-25 units past the first three rung on my progressions ladder, hey hey.
Quote from: Jimske on April 12, 2015, 03:52:45 AM
stop and restart on a W 2, -2, 2 restart win 2 units..
That's not how parlays work, Jimske. There's no "W 2, -2, 2 restart with 2 units.."; rather, it's W 2, -4, so now, down 2 units, we move one step to the right in Soxter's listed progression.
Beware of confusing "double wins" with "parlays". Double wins are bets of the same size made twice consecutively, whereas parlays are of the "let it ride" variety, where all is risked in the attempt to procure two consecutive wins. Double wins procure two units of profit, while parlays will net you three units of profit. BUUUTTT, never forget that all unsuccessful parlay attempts effectively "forfeit" your initial win, whereas the "double win" play will have you break even whenever the initial win is followed by a loss.
now what bet placements lead to more double wins ? WW
Quote from: Tomla on April 12, 2015, 05:19:37 PM
now what bet placements lead to more double wins ? WW
Hello, Tomla, I trust all is well with you, my friend.
I honestly can't answer the question that you've posed, but I can tell you what I look for: Dominations.
The majority of doms are ripe with double wins, even the most minor doms, such as:
P P B P P B...a rather minor P-dom, but, nonetheless, betting for P two consecutive times after the B appearance will get you those 2 wins; and, again, that's but a minor dom example.
Most any dom, just by its very nature because of the dominance of that one side, will suffice to evoke your double wins.
When I choose my parlay play, it is most-assuredly due to the appearance of my dom trigger.
Quote from: gr8player on April 12, 2015, 03:22:47 PM
That's not how parlays work, Jimske. There's no "W 2, -2, 2 restart with 2 units.."; rather, it's W 2, -4, so now, down 2 units, we move one step to the right in Soxter's listed progression.
Beware of confusing "double wins" with "parlays". Double wins are bets of the same size made twice consecutively, whereas parlays are of the "let it ride" variety, where all is risked in the attempt to procure two consecutive wins. Double wins procure two units of profit, while parlays will net you three units of profit. BUUUTTT, never forget that all unsuccessful parlay attempts effectively "forfeit" your initial win, whereas the "double win" play will have you break even whenever the initial win is followed by a loss.
Let's not get carried away here. I don't know how sox plays the prog he posted. All I'm saying is if you follow the prog until you get a win which means you won 2 IAR and restart the only way you lose is if you don't ever win 2 IAR before you get to the end.
Quote from: gr8player on April 12, 2015, 06:48:49 PM
Hello, Tomla, I trust all is well with you, my friend.
I honestly can't answer the question that you've posed, but I can tell you what I look for: Dominations.
Unless you can define dominations and say how to predict them the rest of the post is utterly meaningless.
QuoteThe majority of doms are ripe with double wins, even the most minor doms, such as:
P P B P P B...a rather minor P-dom, but, nonetheless, betting for P two consecutive times after the B appearance will get you those 2 wins; and, again, that's but a minor dom example.
Most any dom, just by its very nature because of the dominance of that one side, will suffice to evoke your double wins.
When I choose my parlay play, it is most-assuredly due to the appearance of my dom trigger.
Aha! So now you have a "dom trigger." That should be definable. What is it?
Started my vac today, I am driving to AC this morning and will be there through Sunday....we'll converse again next week.