### Author Topic: Fritz Werntgen Unlosable Progression  (Read 3049 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

#### Johno-Egalite

• Moderator
• Full Member
• Posts: 143
• I used to be known as "MarkTeruya" FYI
##### Fritz Werntgen Unlosable Progression
« on: May 13, 2019, 12:43:35 pm »
Fritz Werntgen

Roulette Lexicon (K.V. Haller), unlosable progression, pages 444-448

Fritz Werntgen, who developed the "unlosable progression", had based this idea on the correct assumption that it is a lot safer to use an "up as you win" progression rather then a negative progression. With this positive progression you use only the money of the casino in your efforts to win big. dangerous in this concept will only be extremely long runs (over 100 spins) in where the balance between the 2 even chances is not disturbed (say RBRBRBRB, or RRBBRRBB). In this case your bankroll will slowly but for sure diminish gradually. It is not the progressions that will danger your bankroll, but the lack of opportunity?s to get into the progression. This is also the reason that he gave it the name unlosable progression, because the progression itself isn't the cause of losses.

As example for this he uses the American Labouchere betting, a cancellation progression. This progression, also called "Labby" was used a lot by the English in Monte Carlo before world war I.

For a long time this progression was thought of as The Holy Grail, anyway it was dangerous for the casino, as well as for players. For the casino, when a player with a huge bankroll combines it with one of the available systems that narrows the Ecart (spread of standard deviation), for the players when (the majority) they play simple systems, because the Ecarts will cause raising of their bets out of proportions. Nowadays the Labouchere is known as the American cancellation progression, too which the so called Johnson progression belongs as well.

In the Labouchere the units are noted in a vertical row and the first and last one sum-mated to get the next bet. A lost bet will be noted under the row in case of a loss, and in case of a win the 2 figures are cancelled. This continues till all figures are cancelled. (note Perkin: this Labouchere progression is important for this system because it will be used as the positive progression against the casino, so in other words things have turned around: now it is the casino trying to win back your money with the Labouchere, and you try to let the casino bust till you reach your win level)

Karl Alexander knew the disadvantage of the U.P. (unlosable progression):

When the balance between lost and win bets is not disturbed for a long period of time (so no streaks) the bankroll will slowly be consumed, so that even after we encounter a chance for the positive progression, it will take a lot of nerves in order to get out of the hole again. Therefore a way has to be found to reach first a small plus, before we can attack again. On top of this a way has to be found to compensate for the losses.

A solution for this would be defined as The Holy Grail progression (absolute progression). As everybody knows till now such a progression doesn't exist, and it is very doubtful if someone will ever succeed in finding one.

Yet there is a small group of people that play on a regular basis even chances and get almost every time a plus result playing a progression. The only explanation for this has to be that within their bet selection there must be a hidden concept that change the odds in their favours. The definition for a confident progression is that over the long run the win results are higher then the inevitable busts that are encountered with every progression so that there is a net plus result. (we will give an example of such a progression in the Dozen-chance section).(Perkin: it is not in this thread, but I assume you can find it in the book: The roulette Lexicon from K.V.Haller).

Back to the U.P (Unlosable Progression): Fritz Werntgen explains the essence of his progression as follows:

In the knowledge that over a long session of consequent spins in even chances balance will be reached (within the limits of the standard deviation), the ecards (big standard deviations) rule in the small parts of a long session.

Before Werntgen decided to make his system known to the public, he studied extensively the outcomes in all directions, to be sure that nobody will lose money using this system. Also other investigators, after publication came after extensive analysis of his system to the conclusion that any risks are almost impossible: THE RESULTS OF MANY THOUSANDS AND HUNDRED THOUSANDS OF SESSIONS ARE SO EXTREMELY WELL THAT IF BEEN PUBLISHED NOBODY WOULD BELIEVE THE RESULTS.

Besides the system leaves a lot of room for personal adaptations (tweaks) as also level of unit play, win-targets and bankrolls. You can prefer to win many "small" sessions as well as wait for the inevitable to come few huge winning opportunities. (Like we are always sure that with negative progressions the bust will come as well in due time). This is a sure fact that everyone can check by himself after learning this progression. But the large winnings are not coming that easy as well; one will need a lot of patience and discipline to reach the final goal, although less then players who win when they need to reach the balance between two even chances (50-50).

Like a player who uses a negative progression will probably have positive results in the beginning, probably will not encounter the bust in the first session, a player playing the positive progression has to invest first a sum of units before the favourite ecards will result in the winnings. In this way the U.P. player forces the casino in the role of the player using the negative progression. the casino will be forced to chase the winnings of the player with all the time higher stakes and is also forced to play on. the player however can choose anytime the moment of stopping and cash the winnings. this is a big advantage of the player against the casino.

I will give a more understandable translation; it is really not that difficult, when you get the point of it. Like I said before actually it is a kind of Labouchere cancellation against the house. Kind a reverse Labouchere:

It is a rare occurring incident that it is allowing you to make 11450 units from only 60 invested units. Also you will get problems with the bank limit as the highest bet is here 4317 units (but realize, this is not your money, but the casino's money). Fritz Werntgen gave an optimal calculated win stop of 100 U which is very well for practical use.

Here is my translation:

This post is picked up from the paroli-forum site, and this guy, nickname paroli, made very interesting threads about trends/pattern betting with a Personal Permanense as also the Paritair system. (Both flat betting systems on even chances) but that is beside this subject:

OK, underneath the explanation of Frank's table:

Column 1: running spin number and number shows
Column 2: Red/Black split. Only Red is played in this example
Column 3: Bet placed with win/loss result.(+ or-)
Column 4: Plus Balance during opportunities to get into the winning progression, so in here the former loss balance is neglected. It is clearly shown that in case the progression fails, there is no win or lost as compared to the start of this progression as it returns again to zero. This is because we play the progression with the money of the casino.

Column 5: Total balance of Loss units separated from the temporary winnings during the win progression as long as we don't reach our win stop level.

Column 6: used for keeping track of the progression and calculations for the next bet. Now this is the difficult part. When a bet (always 2 units here to begin with) wins it will be noted in this column. To get into the progression we always have to win consecutive 3x 2unit bets. Now the reverse Labouchere is coming in action. We now summate the last and first number (here in 2 2 2, hence 2+2=4) as our next bet to place. If it wins we have 2224, hence 4+2=6 as our next bet. If we loss a bet during the progression the bet is cancelled(noted in the table for example as 2~ above and as 2~ last) and again the next bet is calculated as the sum of the new first and last figure. (or if we have only one figure left, we bet this figure)

We proceed like this until we reach zero, which ends the progression or till we reach the first milestone: >+20units. Now we divide the sum of these units in new masses of units. For 20 U you divide them in 5 times 4:

4444, 22 units are divided in 55444. Now we proceed again with the summation of the first and last figure to calculate our new bet, for example 4+4 (after +20) or 5+4 (after +22). The second milestone is +40 units, which will be divided in 5 new masses of 8: 88888. Unfortunately in the Table's example the second milestone of 80Units is used, but that is because Frank set a win target of 10.000 units. You see, it is up to you to define your own milestones to define the new masses, the system is flexible here.

Column 7: Total balance in session
Column 8: Total balance of all sessions.

Maybe it is looking rather complicated, but if you get to see the light, it is actually rather easy; it is just a reverse Labouchere, with from time to time definition of 5 new mass-units, to accelerate the win amount during a streak. Notice, that when the winning streak is broken by 1 or 2 or 3 later in the progression, losing bet, it actually accelerates the progression to reach the target. It is the same with cancellation systems: if you win a bet and are losing afterwards, the risk of bust becomes a lot higher.

Paroli did test this system for millions of spin (computer analysis). In the very long run the wins and losses were balancing out. He didn't mention anything about the Highest Max and Highest Min in the run.

In my opinion this system can be very interesting, but it will take a lot of patience and consistency to wait out the winning streak. Off course how higher you set your win target, how longer you have play.

Perkin

Regarding the bet selection, personally I am using current trends of the permanence to bet on, switching trend after 2 consecutive losses, because this one give me small unit wins most of the times even with flat betting.
(It is based on the trend system from Paroli although adapted in a way to be able to play each bet). But I think bet selection is a personal matter, I don't believe in advantages of FTL versus DBL or other selections, they will balance out, it is just a guess which one will become out of balance first.

Borrowed Topic
Maths is great like that.  Once it's been proven that no method exists to do what you claim, it's not necessary to go through the details of your system to prove that it doesn't work.  You claim that it does something which can be proven impossible, therefore your claim is false. The details don't matter.  I use the names Junket, Junket King, Lugi, Mark Teruya, Rolex, Relex, Rolex Watch, Mark, Eaglite, JohnO & More depending on what day it is and whom I am attempting to be!