1) Powered by a Flat betting advantage.
2) Humanly playable sessions.
3) Never 4, 5 or 6-figure draw-downs in one go.
4) Small banks.
Regarding to #1: it should be able to be compounded inter-session. Also you should be able to throw in a positive progression to compound in-session, by the power of the already-present flat betting advantage.
Regarding #2: This slicing into humanly playable chunks allows for re-evaluation and adjusting.
Regarding #3: Large drawdowns are a no-no. Otherwise it wouldn't be a "grail".
Regarding #4: Keeping bankrolls small allow for adding cushion in between the player and the total ruin. If you need +100 minimal (base) units to have another bank in between you and the casino it is better than having to build a 1000-unit bank before enjoying the "cushion".
I'm not claiming to own a holy grail, I'm just vouching for it to be determined within realistic boundaries.
Also, it should be possible to play on any roulette wheel in the world.
A true holy grail should based on solid, universal principles :)
Quote1) Powered by a Flat betting advantage.2) Humanly playable sessions. 3) Never 4, 5 or 6-figure draw-downs in one go.4) Small banks.
Victor, in my humble opinion:
1) It is not possible to keep on winning with flat bet only. Since it is impossible to guess what is to come next, unless you are extremely lucky, no strategy in the world can get you guaranteed profit, in the presence of house edge, with flat bet alone. Only a person with "magical intuition" can do that. ;)
2) I agree to this that it should be humanly playable.
3) I agree to this to the extent you do not play a single session whose spins go in 4,5 or 6 figures itself. If you target to beat millions of spins, a drawdown of 10k should be bearable for you too.
4)Small banks can have high number of chips, if you can play with 10 cents. Inside betting upon straight up bets need higher number of chips than an EC method does. Bankroll should be proportional to your average win target.
Quote from: Albalaha on March 28, 2013, 03:02:59 AM
Victor, in my humble opinion:
1) It is not possible to keep on winning with flat bet only.
Dear Sumit, thanks for your participation.
I agree all single triggers
per se are completely doomed flat betting them mechanically.
This fact does not rule-out a flat betting
strategy based on timing. Having all the degrees of freedom the unfolding game might need, exercising the right to modify your bets under a conscious way, in real-time.
Nobody forces a person to continue using what isn't delivering at the moment.
In this short-circuited game when a certain something is not appearing even once,
it means something else is appearing twice or more.
The smart strategy accounts for this fact, even the one that is flat.
Victor,
I may sound a little "bragging" but people are still blank about how a holy grail be made and I have came across many of them, rather created a few. When I say this, people come up with shouting over me, "he is liar". In my definition of an HG, it is nothing but a strategy that wins for sure, if u keep on playing, sessions after sessions. Nothing can beat 100% of probabilities because if u cover 50% of wheel, 50% is always standing against you and you can do nothing to stop them coming better than what u r betting at. You can not chose a "better" betselection, that can fail randomness. All bet selections and progressions/money management techniques work in a particular type of probability and other probabilities that can not be covered can always strike.
Reading randomness or trigger betting etc can't work to WIN MORE AND LOSE LESS. They are new varieties of "fallacies". If you don't believe me, code them into a bot and run over a simulation of 1 million spins. It will fall flat.
House edge ensures losses with flat bet, in long run. No betselection can get you to win flat bet, in long run. I am making this statement and challenge everybody to disprove me.
Even if you have a technique that is a holy grail (WIN MORE AND LOSE LESS), you are not going to become a millionaire overnight with 100 chips bankroll. You can just be safe and ahead in bankroll slowly with a grail. It is my firm belief and experience. If everybody is looking for anythng that will win in all probability, in every session, he is trying to make a ladder to go haven.
If u want to earn a million with a real holy grail, you need to risk at least half of that from your own pocket.
QuoteYou can not chose a "better" betselection
We can agree to disagree here.
I've seen with my own eyes bet selection makes a difference. "Farting" numbers versus carefully choosing bets according to current conditions certainly contrast.
Any case, I'm about to "dance naked" for the public eye to see with my betting tool. Everyone can see if flat has advantage under this light or not.
Quote from: Albalaha on March 28, 2013, 04:24:00 AMIf u want to earn a million with a real holy grail, you need to risk at least half of that from your own pocket.
Our ways to face the game are certainly different.
It is my opinion the better your strategy, the lesser your initial bankroll should be.
If your strategy works, you should actually start with the very
very minimal unit, then start compounding in the grounds of your positively crafted bet in order to make your base unit grow over time.
Risking half a million to make a million doesn't sound like a solidly based strategy
to me.
Well, in any case, there's enough "space" for all approaches. Each person comes closer to the tree (strategy) that gives the best shade according to him/her. We all know "best" is quite subjective. To some people "best" even means risking all your lifetime bankroll in one single roll. Let's be smarter than that when making our strategic play. Picking your bets can make a difference. Compounding and smart inter-session money management can make a difference too.
Unless you have the "motor" of the operation right (your bet/selection) the rest will have it quite hard to work on its own. Even when you have a solid progression/money management, you can always help it perform more fitting with a better-delivering selection; don't scratch smarter betting at once.
Regards.
QuoteIf your strategy works, you should actually start with the very very minimal unit, then start compounding in the grounds of your positively crafted bet in order to make your base unit grow over time.Risking half a million to make a million doesn't sound like a solidly based strategy to me.
Even the best methods may get big drawdowns, momentarily. One can not be lucky enough to earn a million units with 100 units in pocket. It will be like an 80 years old man making a world tour by bicycle, in a week. Keep realistic targets. We are not into Hogwarts school of magic.
Quote from: Albalaha on March 28, 2013, 04:48:47 AMWe are not into Hogwarts school of magic.
Are you sure? The simple fact of declaring an officially unbeatable game as beatable is considered to be an "out of proportion magic" itself.
As to whether it is feasible to start with plenty of small units, compound Interest does the trick.
http://news.morningstar.com/classroom2/course.asp?docId=142858&page=2&CN= (http://news.morningstar.com/classroom2/course.asp?docId=142858&page=2&CN=)
The beauty of small banks is you have more cushion. 1000 = a single gaming unit. Inflexible, harder to compound. 100 units = 10 gaming units to use, adapt and act as cushion in between the player and the total risk or ruin. Furthermore, it is quicker to multiply base unit banks with smaller 100-unit entities. In gambling having bankrolls is having oxygen. If it were for me I'd use a bankroll of 10 units to compound... (but I'm using single-number strategies, based on 36 unit cycles as a minimum).
...When compounding,
more frequent is better. Gladly, in this scenario a transaction generating interest isn't a year of wait as in a bank or 1000's of units to be built, but rather single entities which can be played within shorter spans (within the day), giving the player a better chance for adding up net gains by the compounded interest at an accelerated pace.
"Would you rather have $10,000 per day for 30 days or a penny that doubled in value every day for 30 days?"Those who don't choose the penny may need to seek other venues :nod:
Vic,
You can't compound so easily in gambling, it is not a credit card interest. lol. You do not know whether if u win in first two sessions and rushed say 1000 unit to 1200, if u raise unit size to 1.2 now and lose two-three session consecutively, how will compounding work?
Compounding can work only if you can win every session which is impossible.
Don't "LoL" so fast!!
You compound ONE of your many session banks (first bankroll), which explodes its unit VALUE, while adding base value banks in between you and the casino at a higher rate. If your strategy is truly solid, building multiple banks with your compounding strategy is more important to stay in game than depending on a single bankroll not to have bad luck.
I *do* hope you manage to have a great time amidst those huge progressions and huge draw-downs .. Now, the strategy I'm talking about here is firmly grounded in that "Win more when winning, lose less when losing" motto; concatenated winning transactions (sessions) explode the unit value on chained winning sessions, yet in concatenated losing sessions you give the casino minimal value units :)
i.e. What you make in a single session with inflated units, might take the casino ten "sessions from hell" of minimal units for them to have it back. You are creating a disparity in units during the strategy's good times, aiming for it not to equate to what the bad times can take in the same playing length. All geared to maximizing profits as well as your chance to stay in game, beyond an unique bank's fate.
Vic
What you say is all well and good--if a person can do it! There's the rub.
If anyone can show me a method that does not hit the wall from time to time, I'm all ears. What works so well on Monday will not work at all on Tuesday. Might work Wednesday; might not!
I have a "bankroll" I break down into "sessions". Sessions are battles; the bankroll is the war. While we all lose battles, most of us lose the war, too. My goal is to lose a few battles but win the overall war.
Most huge progressions are based on the hope that "things will turn around". They may and they may not. There is no guarantee they will. When they don't turn around, one must either quit or dig into their personal money for a new bankroll. Enough of this will ruin a person's life. People are ruining their lives daily at the Oklahoma Indian casinos.
I understand compounding and am working to do that daily. But--before you can compound--you must have a win to compound. If you don't have a sufficient bankroll to get those wins, you're toast.
I think when people learn their "Holy Grail", they find they have turned an exciting game of gambling into a low-paying part time job. Thus, the robots to do the work for us.
Last night I heard robots are doing tests for cancer cures. They can do in weeks what would take fifteen years to do manually.
So we plod along........
Sam
Very interesting read Gents, thank you. When will you be " dancing naked for all to see" ( in your words) Vic??
QuoteReading randomness or trigger betting etc can't work to WIN MORE AND LOSE LESS. They are new varieties of "fallacies". If you don't believe me, code them into a bot and run over a simulation of 1 million spins. It will fall flat
It's been said time and time again, reading and working with random does work if you know what you are looking at, I do it and so do a few others.
QuoteIf anyone can show me a method that does not hit the wall from time to time, I'm all ears
there's that word again, method, I doubt there will ever be one that works on an a-b-c system, sad but true.
QuoteCompounding can work only if you can win every session which is impossible
Maybe for you it is, I never finish a session down, as long as I stick to my play I come out ahead, every time.
QuoteOur ways to face the game are certainly different. It is my opinion the better your strategy, the lesser your initial bankroll should be.
Spot on Vic, Bayes has seen me take a 20euro bank to over 150euros twice already, without huge drawdowns, anyone who says huge drawdowns are needed needs to do some rethinking it all depends on how much you bet and when you bet it, let's face it, most gamblers don't want to think they just want to follow a few easy steps, good luck with that.
QuoteMaybe for you it is, I never finish a session down, as long as I stick to my play I come out ahead, every time.
Oh. Really? I forget that you can fly too. :scared:
Why don't you guide us all how to win all sessions? You should earn a million overnight playing with E100 chips minimum.
P.S.: You should always stick to your play, if it can win in all probabilities.
I think the win goal also can work reverse, lets say you win goal is three units - then you start from 0 to hit +3 then if you are down three units in the hole you aim to break even and are down -3 toward +0 (like having the same win goal twice) and if you fail then you go all they way hitting loss limit.
.
That is a pretty solid methodology ... or you could put it like this ... we have 2 chances out of 3 to succeed ...
QuoteOh. Really? I forget that you can fly too. :scared:
We can all fly, they call them airlines Quote
P.S.: You should always stick to your play, if it can win in all probabilities.
You don't need guidance you already have stated you have many HG's but you're still knocking everyone, probably because they won't pay for your methods
I don't play to make a living, I don't need to, this is my last reply to you
Quote from: Superman on March 28, 2013, 01:15:12 PM
there's that word again, method, I doubt there will ever be one that works on an a-b-c system, sad but true.
Perhaps in the combination of several methods may we see something better. Or is it your experience that to have multiple methods is the same?
wait for this
then do method a
if lose - do method b
if win - do method c
Or is there something in the multitude of methods in your opinion.
Thank you.
QuoteOr is it your experience that to have multiple methods is the same?
Yes, because we could only jump to another method after one has failed, when we jump would probably be the wrong time too. We only know after the fact what would have worked prior.
The easiest way to play random is follow what's happening, this will either tell you to follow the last or opposite to last, we know we get series and singles, the length of them is all that's different, this is what I base my play on although I prefer to follow the last most of the time, during a chop or RRBBRRBB 2's I would usually drop to 1 unit until I 'think' its ending, I never try to recover all in one bet either if I am behind.
Superman (My letter between D and G does not work.)
I take it you don't like the word "method". I'm sure you don't like system. What about "way o* playing"? What do you call your play?
This is my_____________________.
I* you can win every session, you are good. No, you are exceptional.
Sam
So Sams keyboard is a bit F'd :o
QuoteThis is my_____________________.
way of Playing
Quote from: VLS on March 27, 2013, 10:05:27 PM
1) Powered by a Flat betting advantage.
I would change point one in this topic where regression is superior then flat betting ...
With regression you always hold a profit after each win and you capitalize more on hot strikes then flat betting.
You also capitalize on zig zag distribution where flat betting break even.
Regression put you more into the positive side of things when flat betting even out ...
Yes, Superman, my eph does not work. Hope(eph)ully it will dry out more and start working. Kauphgy and computers don't' mix!
Like Ol' Blue Eyes, you do it your way!
Sam
Quote[size=78%]I would change point one in this topic where regression is superior then flat betting ...[/size]
With regression you always hold a profit after each win and you capitalize more on hot strikes then flat betting.
You also capitalize on zig zag distribution where flat betting break even.
Regression put you more into the positive side of things when flat betting even out ...
Nothing is inferior or superior and none has proven advantage over all others. Every betselection and progressions/MMs are proportional and work better than other in different conditions.
QuoteNothing is inferior or superior and none has proven advantage over all others. Every betselection and progressions/MMs are proportional and work better than other in different conditions.
-
You are welcome to show me in what situation flat betting is better then regression, feel welcome doing so ...
Really? I can put a few real smartlive sessions here where I will play an EC flat bet and you with regression. Ok?
-
I ask you to show me how flat betting can be better in some situations then regression ...
I don't play online casinos and are not interested comparing my methods with your methods, but i still would like you to show me how flat betting can be better then regression.
I can just not see how it can be so, feel free to open my mind and eyes so i can see the light ...
I am playing Red and you are playing black. I am doing flat betting and you go by regression. Hopefully, it will sprinkle some water on you.
[attachimg=1]
I am with Victor here. Compounding is a very powerful concept.
One big bank, turned into a dozen little banks all working independently towards a common goal of each being "friggin huge" (it's a trade term) banks on their own. Plus, like has been said...we don't have to wait a year for each to compound...each one can move every day you play. Start with small units and increase unit size as each of your "mini" banks grow. Not getting too big too fast keeps you in the game in case of a really bad run and there's nothing wrong with winning a little less versus losing alot more.
Compounding is the building block on top of a foundation of good bet selection. Get rich slow (slow meaning not overnight) instead of getting broke fast...it's just common sense and good business planning.
Quote from: Albalaha on March 29, 2013, 10:04:18 AM
I am playing Red and you are playing black. I am doing flat betting and you go by regression. Hopefully, it will sprinkle some water on you.
[attachimg=1]
Lets assume you play each time red show ...
Why don't you just tell us that it takes 3 reds to win 1 unit if you follow red ...
4 reds to win 2 units and 5 reds to win 3 units ...
-
Lets assume you just play red as it is ...
Then it takes 2 reds to win 1 unit and it takes 3 reds to win 2 units and so on ...
-
I can't still see how regression and up and pull would lose if you where flat betting and we play red.
Sputnik,
Why don't you demonstrate how u will do in this session with your "regression" while playing on "black"? With Flt betting, anyone see that I am winning betting on Red only. I am not a fan of flat betting but you seem to be awestruck with "regression". Now do that and prove your point and educate all of us, how it is better than flat betting here.
I would not play black with your example, still you twist it and say i should.
Lets say we play the same winning and losing bets and compare results.
.
I just show you that one loss cancel out one win when you flat-betting.
The other side is when the distribution goes zig zag you break even flat betting and you capitalize with regression.
.
That is two points i made that make regression superior towards flat betting.
Now with regression you would use Up&Pull when the hot strikes hit and capitalize way beyond flat betting.
.
I will pick some examples to illustrate it ...
Cheers
QuoteI will pick some examples to illustrate it ...
You will give suitable examples for your "regression" and I can give those not so suitable for you, so what does it prove? Everything is proportional. No betselection or money management is better than all others in all situations. Do not confuse yourself and others. It seems everybody is enjoying creating an "indigenous set of fallacies".
Public forums are sadly not growing as places to educate and learn from each other than "fallacy mongering group", showing new approaches of losing money faster than ever in gambling.
Why don't you write something we don't know, that has been known for the past 300 years ...
Regression, progression or flat betting, nothing is perfect and none helps in winning in long term with any surety. You can't use anyone blindly considering that the best.
when it loses, it all loses the same. But when flat bet wins, regression wins more risking the same.
Seeking for proof? Just test it and see.
Cheers
I have dozens of trackers/bots made to see any bet in long run. Advise this to others.
Flat bet doesn't win in long run by any well defined method. Prove it and I will stop writing or advising anything on any forum for my entire life. :thumbsdown:
You seem to understand something beyond what i just wrote. Read it again.
Pick up the bots and the trackers. Get any winning session flat bet. Then apply regression up&pull to it. then compare.
Cheers
If something wins flat bet, in a particular session it is the quality of the session. Any positive progression like parlay and reverse labouchere can also do very well (depends upon frequency and consecutive wins).
Do not talk of dream sessions. Being realistic, most sessions will suffer variance/dispersion and house edge will kill flat betting, than not.
QuoteYou seem to understand something beyond what i just wrote. Read it again.
.
I agree he twist things that has nothing to do with the subject and of course you can illustrate some loss and winning sequences and its not about winning or losing method - its about comparing flat betting and regression Up & Pull
You came, made a statement and when your statement felt flat, new set of excuses. Anyways, Flat betting won't win in long run. House edge ensures this. You need to use progression (mild or harsh, choice is yours), in attempt to win. If you are lucky enough, you won't get huge unbearable variance and ultimately win, otherwise losses are meant for you.
Trying to perpetually win with flat bet is like trying to paddle a boat with hands.
Quote from: MarignyGrilleau on March 30, 2013, 02:36:59 PM
You seem to understand something beyond what i just wrote. Read it again.
Pick up the bots and the trackers. Get any winning session flat bet. Then apply regression up&pull to it. then compare.
Cheers
MarignyGrilleau he still keeps talking about other things then simple fact to compare two different staking plans ...
No idea keep answering him as he does not understand.
I understand everything. You should not make statements which your not sure of yourself. In a favorable session, even the silliest stuff wins. What are you trying to establish?
Everything is proportional in gambling, be it flat bet or martingale. Every technique has its advantages and disadvantages, in different situations. Do you have anything to counter this statement of mine, which I am saying since beginning?
Read again and deal with it ...