+ Register

[VLS]

There are two ways of facing "the game":

1) Expecting the game to suit your ways.

2) Adapting your ways to suit the current flow of the game.

Only one of the above makes sense. Which one are you using today? 

[VLS]

#2 is the most propitious way according to yours truly.

I like the names:

Situational play
Strategic play
Adaptative play

It requires several ways in your gaming arsenal. Your game as a player is to evaluate current conditions, use the one method which matches it the most and test the validity of its continuation.

If it continues, you stick to it for as long as it is delivering.

If it doesn't, you go into "evaluation mode" again.

Curiously enough this methodology can be perfectly automated via software.

[Sputnik]

 
-
Nice topic ...

[Razor]

I don t believe in randomness flows(that can be traped) so I guess no 1 is the best way in my opinion.

[Max]

Playing ways which are less random than normal randomness.

A combination of 1 and  2 .

Regards
Max

[VLS]

I don t believe in randomness flows(that can be trapped) so I guess no 1 is the best way in my opinion.

It is all a matter of personal taste.


1 = Single Plan. "Plan the play and play the plan"... stoically. To the end of the bankroll if needed.


I've seen it so many times with other players. I even fell for it myself at one point.


This is what fuels: "There have been already 13 blacks... it can't go another one".
It ends with "if I only had another step in my progression" 


2 = Multiple possible plans. Pick the plan according to what's showing.


In here at least you have a shot at matching what's happening as it changes. Since change is the only true constant in the game, by means of "peaks and valleys" cancelling each other perpetually.


Of course, you stick to what is working for as long as it's working. it's not just change for the sake of change, but consciously adapting.


In here you aren't stubborn to the point of sticking into one ship till it sinks. Specially when you can jump to another ship that is currently looking better. Even if all ships can be sunk, at least you are picking on the one that is rising.


It can mean maximizing your chances of survival in the short period of a session's game-play.




It isn't a matter of absolute truths, since nobody has it. It is more a matter of doing our best to keep in game to have a greater chance of "being there" for the time of our success.


You aren't trying to TRAP random, you are trying to match random... 

[VLS]

Think of it in terms of the market.

#1 = you stock your store with a single product and pray for people to like it.

#2 = you do extensive market research, pick products wisely according to current market trends and you are constantly evaluating how are sales going. While you don't attempt to have every product in the world, you do give your store a range of flexibility. Re-stocking what is selling while it's selling, and not putting more shelf space on products which stall. You implement the policy of perpetually adapting to market conditions as they appear and change your store accordingly to reflect this new reality.



While it can be true people actually like the single product of your store, and it can happen your sole product stays fashionable for centuries, expecting the market to buy your product just because it's your personal choice... not a good idea. Like the game, the market moves on its own. It is the store owner's duty to adapt. We don't see many shops for train's spare parts these days...

While there is never 100% certainty, you maximize your chances by adapting, both in the market and in the game.

[Albalaha]

Every bet selection and progression/MM strategy is proportional in terms of risk and rewards. Some may be directly proportional and some inversely. Variance/dispersion and house edge forces a player to lose ultimately. If you can get over all this, you are a winner, otherwise a whiner.
            I prefer your later option Victor.

[Sputnik]

 
I apply both, but later i tend to option two more and more ...

Cheers