+ Register

[Albalaha]

Why can't any of the money management strategies work?



It's because they do nothing to change the mathematical properties of the gambling proposition you've entered into. There's only one useful element to money management, and that's to have enough money in your pocket to play each situation correctly. If you've got that, you've optimized your money management. As for starting, stopping, pressing up and cutting back –- you're just jerking yourself around. Let's take the "quit while you're ahead" strategy as an example.

Suppose you were flipping a coin with your buddy every day for a dollar per flip. He'd play forever, but you could quit any time you wanted to. So you decide you'll play until you get just one dollar ahead, then quit for that day and come back tomorrow. Now, playing like that, what percentage of your days do you think would be winners? The answer is a little over 80%.

Well, 80% may sound like an impressive session win rate, but it's not good enough to make you an overall winner at the game if that's your sole strategy. Why not? Because you're still going to end up winning 50% of all your flips, and you can't get away from that. In a game with house edge, it is even worse.

The fact that you've hand-picked the points where you'll step back (quit) and admire your progress has done nothing to cause you to win more flips overall. All you're going to do is have a whole bunch of $1 winning days, and a few scattered days where you lose $3, or $5 or $10. Overall, though, the pluses and minuses will still add up to zero.

You see, gambling is a long run journey landscaped with many hills and valleys. When you quit simply because you're ahead, you're merely choosing to park on a hill rather than in a valley, but the road is still taking you to the same place. And that place is determined solely by the percentages of your gambling proposition.

The same would be true if you always quit for the day after losing, say, five flips in a row. All quitting here would do is put time in between your last flip and your next. You've got the same chance to win your first flip tomorrow as your next flip right now. So you might as well say, "I quit!", take out a notebook, log down your losing session, and immediately flip your next flip. Your coin flip odds remain 50-50, and 50-50 is still going to basically be your final result.

So then, what about applying a betting progression to your coin flip game? Say your buddy agreed to letting you "bump up" your bet after every winning flip with a $1-$3-$5 progression to take advantage of your streaks. But after each loss, you'll always bet just $1. Would you have the best of him then? The answer is, absolutely not and the reason can be confusing.

For any three coin flips, there are eight ways they can come out -– no more, no less. You can go:

W-W-W W-W-L W-L-W L-W-W W-L-L L-W-L L-L-W L-L-L

Furthermore, every sequence will eventually come up as often as any other. It's easy to see that going W-W-W with your progression wins $9. Yet, going L-L-L loses only $3. That may look enticing and I won't bore you with the rest of the math, but after you go through all the sequences, you'll have $12 won and $12 lost. See for yourself. This progression, and any other for that matter, will cancel itself out perfectly, whether it's over the course of three averaged bets or 3000. You can't get away from it.

[Albalaha]

Do our mathematics & stats experts agree with this?

[JohnLegend]

Why can't any of the money management strategies work?



It's because they do nothing qto change the mathematical properties of the gambling proposition you've entered into. There's only one useful element to money management, and that's to have enough money in your pocket to play each situation correctly. If you've got that, you've optimized your money management. As for starting, stopping, pressing up and cutting back –- you're just jerking yourself around. Let's take the "quit while you're ahead" strategy as an example.

Suppose you were flipping a coin with your buddy every day for a dollar per flip. He'd play forever, but you could quit any time you wanted to. So you decide you'll play until you get just one dollar ahead, then quit for that day and come back tomorrow. Now, playing like that, what percentage of your days do you think would be winners? The answer is a little over 80%.

Well, 80% may sound like an impressive session win rate, but it's not good enough to make you an overall winner at the game if that's your sole strategy. Why not? Because you're still going to end up winning 50% of all your flips, and you can't get away from that. In a game with house edge, it is even worse.

The fact that you've hand-picked the points where you'll step back (quit) and admire your progress has done nothing to cause you to win more flips overall. All you're going to do is have a whole bunch of $1 winning days, and a few scattered days where you lose $3, or $5 or $10. Overall, though, the pluses and minuses will still add up to zero.

You see, gambling is a long run journey landscaped with many hills and valleys. When you quit simply because you're ahead, you're merely choosing to park on a hill rather than in a valley, but the road is still taking you to the same place. And that place is determined solely by the percentages of your gambling proposition.

The same would be true if you always quit for the day after losing, say, five flips in a row. All quitting here would do is put time in between your last flip and your next. You've got the same chance to win your first flip tomorrow as your next flip right now. So you might as well say, "I quit!", take out a notebook, log down your losing session, and immediately flip your next flip. Your coin flip odds remain 50-50, and 50-50 is still going to basically be your final result.

So then, what about applying a betting progression to your coin flip game? Say your buddy agreed to letting you "bump up" your bet after every winning flip with a $1-$3-$5 progression to take advantage of your streaks. But after each loss, you'll always bet just $1. Would you have the best of him then? The answer is, absolutely not and the reason can be confusing.

For any three coin flips, there are eight ways they can come out -– no more, no less. You can go:

W-W-W W-W-L W-L-W L-W-W W-L-L L-W-L L-L-W L-L-L

Furthermore, every sequence will eventually come up as often as any other. It's easy to see that going W-W-W with your progression wins $9. Yet, going L-L-L loses only $3. That may look enticing and I won't bore you with the rest of the math, but after you go through all the sequences, you'll have $12 won and $12 lost. See for yourself. This progression, and any other for that matter, will cancel itself out perfectly, whether it's over the course of three averaged bets or 3000. You can't get away from it.

If we are talking about pure gambling, in the sense  that you mindlessly bet and hope for the best. What you have written holds true.

If however, you have identified a VIRTUAL LIMIT or VIRTUAL MINUMUM on random. it's a completely different ball game. For example, suppose I said to you that for every 8 bets I place. I will nearly always win at least 4 of them.

Now you have a framework of expectancy to work with. And using smart MM. You are certain to profit longterm.

[Albalaha]

JL,
       What is smart MM, as per you?

[JohnLegend]

JL,
       What is smart MM, as per you?

It depends on what you are using it for. For example, I have a double dozen method where I know I will virtually always win 4 out of every 8 bets I place. Now mathematically flat betting that's knowledge has no edge and will lose me money. But using a progression until a profit is secured.

I will win the vast majority of the time. Giving me an overall profit. Its the knowing Albalaha, the confidence is already there. When you see something happen hundreds of times, to every time it doesn't. The flip a coin mentality no longer exists.

[Albalaha]

JL,
         

I have a double dozen method where I know I will virtually always win 4 out of every 8 bets I place. Now mathematically flat betting that's knowledge has no edge and will lose me money. But using a progression until a profit is secured.

Your so-called "method" can not put the small ball in your desired pockets, when u bet upon them. Do not make claims that are faulty in itself or based upon "fallacies" only.
             What kind of double dozen bet u have that "virtually always" hit 4 times out of 8 attempts? Do you do some voodoo on those numbers to ensure this? "virtually" and "always" do not hold together.

[Albalaha]

Every money management/progression/regression/stop loss/flat bet/trigger bet/bet per spin work for gain in proportion to what it can lose.
No money management is better than other, principally. You may encounter a very good session with one MM while it may not be so good for other set of MM.
          In a nutshell, if u want to earn something in gambling without risking too much and believe that u won't suffer from the worst probabilities in  your session, "mild negative progression" is the only remedy. Again, if u get the worst in  your session, u won't win with it because "mild progression only works upon a session with "mild variance". Every thing is proportional and house edge further creates a pit for you, to cross along.

[JohnLegend]

JL,
                         Your so-called "method" can not put the small ball in your desired pockets, when u bet upon them. Do not make claims that are faulty in itself or based upon "fallacies" only.
             What kind of double dozen bet u have that "virtually always" hit 4 times out of 8 attempts? Do you do some voodoo on those numbers to ensure this? "virtually" and "always" do not hold together.

They don't have to, the VIRTUALLY is enough to show a longterm profit. there's no voodoo involved. Just an identification of a VIRTUAL MINUMUM bet selection. Once you have this. it's a different game altogether. This will all be proven over time in my challenge.

[Bally6354]

Here is a nice quote Albalaha....

There have been countless mathematical systems created for the random game. All of them fail miserably because the player still has a negative expectation each spin, regardless of the amount wagered. However what happens when the player has a positive expectation each spin?

Answer: Many of these worthless mathematical systems can then actually work!

[Ralph]

The progression must be balanced. To soft and you will not catch up on the winning streaks, too aggressive kills the bankroll in bad streaks.  Yes you have a negative expectation, it is more easy to handle than then the variance goes against you. The RFH is due to variance not the HE.


that's why some casinos can offer NZ. They tax a bit high nowdays, so I am no on zero wheel and face the negative expectation.


If you not get to heavy variance against you the 2.7%  can be overcomed which some luck.