I have got a basic tracker of my recent MM that wins good and average sessions easily and with same methodology, I can sustain very worst cases too, playing all over with a fixed EC bet. This tracker of mine is coded in VB hence need to input the string of L(losses) and W(wins) manually, one by one. Please have a look at these sessions and let me know if you can handle such massive variance against you with any MM of yours? Over smart guys who will come up with I will play it Opposite or anything alike, need not comment. Whichever way they can pick bet could get such losses. Only thing one can do is to stop at a particular loss. If any of you can let us know any MM approach that can beat all these sessions within 500 chips bankroll, I would consider that person to be a legend.
Session #1: losses: 140, wins: 96, SD: over 2.5 SD below mean overall
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
W
W
W
W
L
W
W
L
W
W
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
W
W
W
W
L
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
W
SESSION#2: SUPERHARSH. FIRST 100 DECISIONS HAS ONLY 29 WINS AND OVERALL 133 LOSSES VS 79 WINS
I USED MAX BET 12 TO BEAT IT.
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
Session #3: 40 wins vs 66 losses, max bet used=9 units
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
wow
Hi. What's your win in units for this stretch?
Quote from: Albalaha on April 30, 2021, 08:07:31 AM
SESSION#2: SUPERHARSH. FIRST 100 DECISIONS HAS ONLY 29 WINS AND OVERALL 133 LOSSES VS 79 WINS
I USED MAX BET 12 TO BEAT IT.
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
Dear Albalaha,
I greatly admire your deep knowledge,
(practically and theory)...and learned a lot from your writing.
May I ask you a very important question.
Question:In all your lifetime experience, and millions of real casino's data analysing,
in 100spins, or hands,
what the worst extreme EC hit( in real casino data)?
I think it never less than 30hit/100.
Your answer, very important to me, since I try to create a method and strategy to mm and progression.
Thanks in advance.
Quote from: PatternAnalys on April 30, 2021, 04:57:23 PM
Dear Albalaha,
I greatly admire your deep knowledge,
(practically and theory)...and learned a lot from your writing.
May I ask you a very important question.
Question:In all your lifetime experience, and millions of real casino's data analysing,
in 100spins, or hands,
what the worst extreme EC hit( in real casino data)?
I think it never less than 30hit/100.
Your answer, very important to me, since I try to create a method and strategy to mm and progression.
Thanks in advance.
Wong,
I have observed millions of data, be it baccarat or roulette. I m gradually getting inclined towards baccarat more than roulette due to speed, fun and lesser house edge. It is rare to find below 30/100 but I believe it could go upto 25/100 as well. I m not afraid even if I get 15/100 or even worse. If we analyze billions of data, we might get to see something like that. Nothing bad or good is absolute. Never forget that. What you haven't seen yet, you might face today.
It is very wrong idea to try to beat 30/100 type cases. I only try to sustain such cases and win gradually. That too with bearable loss.
QuoteHi. What's your win in units for this stretch?
Session#2
I did not note that but I believe I got into net profit at the last win.
SESSION#4:
WINS:65 VS LOSSES: 108, WORST BR= -75, NET WIN=52 UNITS
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
W
L
W
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
Session5:
62 losses vs 38 wins. First 30 hands have only 4 wins. Max bet=7 units, Max DD=-39, won +2 net profit at 100th hand.
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
W
Now, let's have a look at an average session.
Session#6: 42 wins vs 58 losses, max bet=7, max DD= -21, Net win= 39 units.
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
SESSION# 7:
Simple bad session 41 Wins vs 59 Losses. Max DD: -28, Max unit used: 9, Net win: +24 units. No clumping wins.
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
SESSION # 8:
16 WINS vs 32 losses. something unbeatable even with labouchere, Max bet=5, Max DD= -22, net win=1 unit.
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
That's impressive.
Anyway, say I would only bet after a W hoping to get a W either consecutively or 1 and 2 gapped.
Thus I'd let it go every other sequence not belonging to any WW, WLW, WLLW pattern.
After all, those are the main patterns to hope to get a flat betting advantage (besides a first W).
Since here we are playing without a verified edge and by utilizing a progression, each of those patterns must escalate separately as the single pattern probability will change depending upon the previous situation.
Therefore only a (L)WLLL situation will form ALL of the three above patterns as losers but we may need just one or two patterns to get a slight balancement after a strong deviation happened at ALL three patterns.
So imo it's not about the simple number of times we'll be right after being wrong for long that matters, but just about catching the "right" distribution probability that must return even slightly to normal statistical values after strong deviations happened per each step considered.
as.
AsymBacGuy,
"We will bet only this or only after this", such things do not work in real life. Whichever way you might pick your bet, you may still get very bad patches ahead. Shying away from them or consoling or rather fooling ourselves that we can somehow avoid very long/bad patches of losses will not be correct, atleast for us having skills to test and have huge experience of playing.
I myself talked of triggers in one of my recent topic but I always insisted that do not take them as one will take with fallacious thinking. No amount of past variance guarantees better than average outcomes ahead. Always keep this in mind.
One money management meant to win the outcomes of long run, sustaining the worst possible meanwhile and also good enough to win good and slightly poor than average sessions is only way to beat the casino ultimately or rather say can extract net profit/regular income.
It is pretty doable but unfortunately I see almost no effort towards this direction. Everybody is striving to get an edge in betselection itself which is not doable in a purely random game which is not a game of skill but only of chance.
QuoteThus I'd let it go every other sequence not belonging to any WW, WLW, WLLW pattern.
After all, those are the main patterns to hope to get a flat betting advantage (besides a first W).
Extreme variance management and focusing on the first few bets of any cycle of an EC bet( a cycle ends with a W) is something I have been emphasizing upon in my writings for not less than 10 years. https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/albalaha/how-to-fight-with-the-worst-enemy-of-gambling-vari-t4332355.html . Hope to get a flat bet advantage by this is still fallacious. When we pause our bets after a WLLL, we still miss 50% of our wins that makes a WLLLW. So, we can't cheat on randomness with all these. Expecting a flat bet win, in the long run with all these gimmicks, is not prudent. This can easily be proved with simulations. No room for any wild guesses.
Then if you are able to finish ahead after those bad sessions, sincere congratulations.
You really discovered the HG. No jokes.
as.
Quote from: AsymBacGuy on May 03, 2021, 07:11:13 AM
Then if you are able to finish ahead after those bad sessions, sincere congratulations.
You really discovered the HG. No jokes.
as.
Not just finish in plus but with a reasonable bankroll and bet size that can practically be used in a real casino. Greater thing is, exactly same methodology can be used to play average sessions too. This is outcome of my persistent efforts over two decades. I do not daydream of any magical remedy, I strived very hard to get that. I m still fine tuning it to make it even better.
I do understand that still I can't win each and every session as probabilities are near infinite but I m definitely having an edge over any random player and casinos. If I stand to win even 0.5% of all my placed bets averagely, it is enough.
SESSION #9: AN IMAGINARY SESSION WITH EXTREME HARSHNESS WAS CREATED:
FIRST 100 TRIALS HAD MERELY 25 WINS. SECOND 100 TRIALS HAD 47/100 WINS.
72 WINS VS 128 LOSSES
NET AT LAST=28 UNITS, MAX BET= 12 UNITS, WORST DD= -102
SEE GRAPH OF NET BALANCE:
[attachimg=1]
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
W
W
L
W
W
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
W
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
W
W
W
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
W
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
L
W
W
L
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
W
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
W
W
L
L
W
W
L
L
L
L
W
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
L
W
W
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
L
L
W
W
L
W
W
W
W
W
L
W
W
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
W
W
W
W
L
L
L
W
W
L
L
L
W
W
W
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
W
L
W
W
W
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
W
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
W
W
W
L
L
L
W
W
W
L
L
W
W
L
L
L
W
W
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
try
Sir,
You advocate that, 'extreme variance management', and "a special mm", the real way to beat casino.
I eager to know, by your experience with data, say, bet "player" only,what the ratio, of "within expectations vs extreme"?
If the ratios dependable, then we can fearlessly bet with "expected losses vs expected profit"...
If we can expect
"dependable consistency", in
the ratios of winning /losing sessions
then we go for best, or go for bust
Quote from: PatternAnalys on May 13, 2021, 05:18:34 AM
Sir,
You advocate that, 'extreme variance management', and "a special mm", the real way to beat casino.
I eager to know, by your experience with data, say, bet "player" only,what the ratio, of "within expectations vs extreme"?
If the ratios dependable, then we can fearlessly bet with "expected losses vs expected profit"...
95% is within expectation winning sessions while 5% will be extremes that rush us to stop loss or close. With +50/-100 or +25/-50, if we get even 80% wins and 20% loser sessions, we will still be up, in the long run. That is what is my plan exactly. Earlier I was focused on getting +1.
Quote from: Albalaha on May 13, 2021, 07:19:28 AM
95% is within expectation winning sessions while 5% will be extremes that rush us to stop loss or close. With +50/-100 or +25/-50, if we get even 80% wins and 20% loser sessions,
Sir,
95/5 w/l ratio..
Now, we could grasp that 5%that caused us to lose our underwear!!!
And of course you won't give away your mm!? that +100-50.
But at least give a simple hint, since my brain power not good as yours!
It will save many sleepless night and headache and heartache
Quotetry
ice789,
Your given session got two -100s stop losses unfortunately.
It is to be understood that no method can beat all types of cases. It is just not possible. Had it been possible, I would have become Richie rich overnight. People send me sessions to beat with all sorts of variance. Even after all my skills and safeguards like my extreme variance management and my money management, I will have to surrender to 5-10% of sessions with -100 but 90-95% of sessions that I will win with +50 each will give me an edge in the long run. It is even possible to get 4-5 or even more initial losses in a row still. That is the might of randomness. So no daydreaming, only strive to get the lion's share, in the long run with all the patience.
Albalaha,
I may have asked this question previously but with these "W and L" sessions you post, can they be construed to be Red?Black or other EC wagers or perhaps "Player/Banker" in baccarat?
If it's Win or Lose in an EC game then that presents an interesting proposition.
Thanks,
AD
It is representative of ultra bad sessions as W and L. Beating such a variety of worse sessions with one single pre defined approach could be termed as a grail.
QuoteL
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
Albalaha,
Let me try to rephrase the question.
In the above example from message #19 (the final 10 decisions), can we infer that this was similar to:
Red, Black, Red, Red, Black, Red, Black, Black, Black, Red?
If not, then would it be safe to say that the W/L results are from some type of play and those were the results of some chosen method of play?
It makes a huge difference in the presentation for sure.
I'm sure we've had this discussion in the past but can't remember what the eventual answer was.
Thanks.
AD