Hey everyone.
Being new here I thought I'd start a topic of my own to break the ice with the forum.
I find it very odd that most gamblers think they can overcome house odds by changing their betting amounts instead of
trying to pick the wining bet more often with a winning bet selection.
I guess one requires more time and effort than the other.
Your thoughts?
It's the "winning bet selection" that's so often the sticking point for many.
And that's probably why they join forums such as this!
[Hope you enjoy your stay here.]
One of my favourite gambling authors Stetson Bailey says you have to accept the fact that you are going to have more losing bets than winning bets. He then goes on to say that you will need to find a way to have more money on the winning bets to make up for the higher percentage of losing bets. So you would have to use some kind of progressive betting if old Stetson is correct.
One thing I have learned through experience is that there is never really a right or wrong way. (Or maybe a better way of putting that is that it does not pay to have too much of an extreme view one way or the other when it comes to gambling. ie.. bet selection vs progressions) The truth normally is somewhere in the middle. It would be beneficial to understand the benefits of both bet selection and good MM. They can both be used to good effect.
Welcome to the forum HoneyBooBoo. :thumbsup:
BET SELECTION.
With school maths (11 or 12 years), one would say that no bet selection is better than any other in the long run.
With more than that, .... i am still living to learn. >:D
It is my belief that all bet selections should be tested flat betting. After that we can speculate knowing the "usual" fluctuation / variance of our bet.
After the above and taking into account expectation and probability, one can skip bets and try reduce negative expectation.
Cheers
In horse racing, the conventional wisdom is that if a method doesn't make a profit flat (level) betting then it's NOT going to work with progressive/loss recovery-type betting.
Nothing I've experienced so far has prompted me to disagree with that wisdom.
Welcome to the forum HBB,
I agree with Bally. The answer lies in pondering both sides of the spectrum.
If you get your hands on a winning selection, you're basically set for life, but one could say the same if you get a money management which can hold the dispersion of a "regular" selection within the confines of table limits and the personal bank.
Both ways are valid. if one helps the other then one might say the better. In the end it's winning more than losing what counts.
Enjoy your stay around.
Quote from: Bally6354 on December 19, 2012, 11:42:58 PM
One of my favourite gambling authors Stetson Bailey says you have to accept the fact that you are going to have more losing bets than winning bets. He then goes on to say that you will need to find a way to have more money on the winning bets to make up for the higher percentage of losing bets. So you would have to use some kind of progressive betting if old Stetson is correct.
I have a copy of his book "Win $1000/day playing Craps Guaranteed". I like his approach, but the "foolproof" method isn't quite foolproof although it can work very well MOST of the time. :P He makes a good case for using negative progressions rather than positive ones, but in my experience you need a good bet selection to make them safe. IMO you can't just slap a progression on top of a bet selection, it needs to be carefully designed to complement the selection and to a certain extent make up for its deficiencies.
Quote from: Bayes on December 20, 2012, 09:55:31 AM
I have a copy of his book "Win $1000/day playing Craps Guaranteed". I like his approach, but the "foolproof" method isn't quite foolproof although it can work very well MOST of the time. :P He makes a good case for using negative progressions rather than positive ones, but in my experience you need a good bet selection to make them safe. IMO you can't just slap a progression on top of a bet selection, it needs to be carefully designed to complement the selection and to a certain extent make up for its deficiencies.
I recon that foolproof is one of the best progressions i know off. It suits EC systems with low fluctuation and from my experience, it needs a coherent stop loss to be effective (survive inevitable huge drawdowns). I believe you introduced it to me ago.
We have similar views on roulette (me and Bayes) and that the stacking plan Must be designed for the bet selection is one of utmost importance. From all the advice members can get from this forum, this kind of subjects are not enough explored, and they are the gems of gambling.
Always nice to have objective contributions.
Cheers
Hello guys
I have added Stetson's book to my dropbox account just in case any of you are wondering what the fuss is about.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/zmwixa1giyo9rsm/Stetson%20Bailey.pdf?m (https://www.dropbox.com/s/zmwixa1giyo9rsm/Stetson%20Bailey.pdf?m)
Ignore the Craps title. This can be applied to most things! :thumbsup:
I think bet selection is the key...without it you are almost certain to fail.
That being said... progressions have their place. If a method is normally profitable on a fairly consistent basis (all methods no matter how good have their failures too and most failures wipeout alot of profitable sessions in one big swipe) a small progression with a stop-loss can be pretty effective.
The next logical step would be if a method or combination of methods had a very high session win rate (something of the order that a second or third straight losing session is in the seemingly statistically insignificant classification) You could flat bet or use the slight negative progression and if a loss (using a stop-loss so it doesn't dig to deep of a hole) then increase your base bet in the next session or two. Maybe scale the betting to earn back the loss in two sessions in lieu of going big and possibly going home with a big bust.
It's all common sense stuff that's been discussed tons before.
Bet selection and money management...the heart of it all...consider everything and all potential outcomes...then you are almost prepared for the outcomes you failed to even fathom. Surely if you dismiss any aspect of the entire betting process it will certainly raise it's ugly head to let you reassess your deficiencies in a quite unsettling and financially destructive manner.
Just my opinion
Playing without a method is like playing blindfolded.
The first step is to study the game. The second step is to see what happens together with how to identify them. The third step is to take advantage with good bankroll management with special attention to personal discipline.
If someone is going to play just for playing better stay at home. The player must use the game as a trading activity. Nobody makes trading blindly.
It is my belief that all bet selections should be tested flat betting.
After that we can speculate knowing the "usual" fluctuation / variance of our bet.
After the above and taking into account expectation and probability, one can skip bets and try reduce negative expectation.
There is no other way around. O:-)
Quote from: Bally6354 on December 20, 2012, 01:02:10 PM
Hello guys
I have added Stetson's book to my dropbox account just in case any of you are wondering what the fuss is about.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/zmwixa1giyo9rsm/Stetson%20Bailey.pdf?m (https://www.dropbox.com/s/zmwixa1giyo9rsm/Stetson%20Bailey.pdf?m)
Ignore the Craps title. This can be applied to most things! :thumbsup:
Thank you.
It was an interesting read once we got past all the "general gambling" stuff.
AD
Both well defined and well reasoned bet selection and money management required to keep winning more and losing less.
"foolproof" is a very stable bet if used judiciously
Quote from: Tomla on March 31, 2013, 09:52:47 PM
"foolproof" is a very stable bet if used judiciously
foolproof ,,, is that a progression ,,, ?
Cheers
I was lead to believe that the Foolproof Progression is 1 up every time u bet... [size=78%]win or lose.. Till in plus. [/size]
The author states that in order to bet more when you're winning and less when you are losing, you can adopt the following:
raise one unit when you Loose and bet the same amount when you Win until you break even or ahead.
It would be foolproof if there were not table limits...
In my vast researches, studies and experiments, I have found that all the bets are fundamentally same. No trigger gives any certain edge. If we want to take chance we need some bet selection, so we argue over it. Money management (that includes progressions, win target, stop loss, session bankroll and life bankroll) is the real core of gambling, in my humble opinion. No progression, that has been created since the game itself was created can make you an absolute and perpetual winner.
Quote from: Albalaha on April 02, 2013, 05:20:54 AM
... No progression, that has been created since the game itself was created can make you an absolute and perpetual winner.
The (in)famous martingale progression is mathematically a winner. The table limits came as an additional rule to prevent its use.
There are others... Ralph explored another "mathematically safe" way @ one of his threads.
As for bet selections, from my research some perform better than others.
Buddy,
I don't undermine your research and experiences but martingale or even fibo or labby that can definitely beat any session at last are considered proven failures, in real life not just because of table limits but due to our bankroll limits too. It would be better if we discuss things that we ourselves like to play. You know marty wins for sure. Do you have infinite money to risk for gaining one unit? I am sure, answer will be "no".
We are not attending kindergarten classes of gambling. Are we?
Quote from: Albalaha on April 02, 2013, 07:43:31 AM
We are not attending kindergarten classes of gambling. Are we?
Is this your question?
FYI. I am not Buddy. Again you must be mistaken me for someone else.
QuoteAs for bet selections, from my research some perform better than others.
Really? Which ones are them? Let us all know the biggest breakthrough in gambling theories. :nope:
if you want to pay for it...
Quoteif you want to pay for it...
Gladly. If you can prove your point in the biggest data that I give you like my Holy Grail had beaten 10 M data plus data provided by other forum members.
If your betselection has proven edge, I will certainly pay you, rather everybody who plays professionally will pay you. Ready to prove?
i wish you the best of luck.
Why are you scared of proving anything? Go read a good book on gambling and stop daydreaming. Don't make statements that you don't understand.
Thing is that i am tired of your off-beat comments. And almost every time you try to destruct others opinion, thinking that you know better. Then you brag about illusional achievements. I have shown you once... I have no interest to show you again. You are always trying to phish out some idea or concept, but the real problem is that you can not cope with them.
For Your Information i do play daily at a live table and i make double paycheck of my day job every month. I do it for fun.
I remember at some other forum the stuff you shared... speaks for itself. As for your so called HG, people had to pay for it. So in the terms of a sharing community your "dark" commentator position equals nothing.
So from my part the case is closed, and your past behavior with others, doesn't get you in the good graces with me too. So from me you get Zero.
Cheers.
:bye:
I may look like a "dark" commentator to you since you speak too loud while have nothing to show but I don't spread fallacies and "darkness". I can't clap on your "new set of fallacies". :no:
Hello everyone. I'm new here, and am looking around for good info on roulette.
Quote from: Bally6354 on December 20, 2012, 01:02:10 PM
Hello guys
I have added Stetson's book to my dropbox account just in case any of you are wondering what the fuss is about.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/zmwixa1giyo9rsm/Stetson%20Bailey.pdf?m (https://www.dropbox.com/s/zmwixa1giyo9rsm/Stetson%20Bailey.pdf?m)
Ignore the Craps title. This can be applied to most things! :thumbsup:
Bally: I have downloaded this book and read it a couple times. One of the best books on gambling I have read. Thanks for sharing it with us. One problem though: pages pages 84 and 98 are missing. Would it be possible to upload the book with missing pages included?