Hi KFB,
Thanks for yr comment,
As you already noticed,
money management,
is the key to win when betting both sides,
as a ...
TEAM.

As you see,

Albalaha said,
he must win when "hit within math expectation",
and could take manageable losses, and minimise cut losses to acceptable level and definitely,

will "recoup"
the losses,
with further 2 or three winning session...

Thus I suggest him to take a ...
partner,

to play as a team, playing both side.

The logic very obvious to you...

since,
when P hit expectation,
B also hit expectation...

And when P hit horrible negative extreme,

B must hit godsend positive variance, thus MINIMISE the losses of P...

thus, when within expectation ,

both side must win,

the team must win a sizeable profit,
and when 1 side hit

landmine of extreme negative,

the other side make sizeable profit...

and
minimise the
team's losses,

and recover with next 2 or three winning session.

You see, its boil down to mm.
I think Albalaha apply short term labby,
( he won't tell his secret , hahaha)..

only bet up to ,say,


eg.
target win 1u at a time,
if win, restart.

bet10 hand,
if lose ,say,

streak of 5losses,
or, say,

only 2hit in 8hand,

Then stop bet,

see how next ten hand behave,
to avoid long streak of losses,
and when next ten hand produce "within expectation",
resume betting.

Sir,
Since no betselection, avoid harsh negative extreme, then I THINK,
betting "both side", would at least,
"minimise losses",
and
"maximise profit",
and after long run, still profitable...

IMAGINE this,

Tom and Harry,
play as a TEAM,
(and using Albalaha's hg mm method).

Tom will bet
"Player",
and Harry will bet "Banker"...

both bet with same X units capital.

When
"within expectation hit ", as always,
both will win around some % of X " ,
and when
the EXPECTED unexpected
"harsh extreme ",
hit...

say BANKER,
hit only 30/100,

then Harry will lose all the X,
but Tom,
will hit jackpot,
but when "factoring in",
Harry's HUGE losses, resulting in minimal losses,
that will easily, neutralised,
with next one or two round of bet...

What you think?

We
need to do some long simulation, to see what happen ...(eagerly waiting for your finding...or am I too naive...hahaha...

Most of you already know, but post this anyway...

how much losses?
(If flatbet.)

in next 100spins.

win 50/lose50=0
win 49/lose 51=-2 losses
48/52=-4
47/53=-6
46/54=-8
45/55=-10
44/56=-12
43/57=-14
42/58=-16
41/59=-18
40/60=-20
..
30/70=-40losses!

as you see, in only 49hit vs 51losses, we lose -2.
it always 2,4,6,8...losses...
and no 1,2,3,4 ,5,6,7...losses..

We lose fast, if we use progression, and hit the losing side.

Quote from: Albalaha on May 26, 2021, 05:27:51 AM
In Player, 442 was the least hit in 1000 consecutive trials and 452 for Banker. I believe it could be 400/100 as the worst being 5SD. As I said repeatedly, it could be even 300/1000 ...

Sir,
As we can't foresee future, and then only three outcomes for next 100 or 1000 hand...

after 100 or 1000hand..the end result
may...

1)within math 50% expectation.

2) hit extreme negative...

3)hit extreme positive...

thus
I think, betting a fixed, "player only", or bet "banker only", will inevitably meet harsh negative extreme...

As I see it, after every 1000spins, or hands, the end result always quite  harsh, always around +-10 to +-30units, (and of course, with streaks of positive and negative And chops...too).

I think, we must think hard to , how to devise a system, to take advantage of positive extreme, by not betting fixed color or player only...

say, for next 1000, one side will positive extreme, and the opposite, will negative extreme ...then we need a way to place our bet, to lean our BET the positive side.

Let say, I had a data of 1000, (which you not yet see ),which in the end result "player" win +20units.
Then how to BET, this data, so that we stay at the player side eventually...Not to win the daid +20, but at least we have hit within mat expectation, and to avoid
trapped in extreme negative...

don't brush off this as fallacy or naive, before we think very hard about this.
we need to do extreme brain raking.

Sir,
Readers always wondering,
How long, is "long run"...

1000 is ok,
as for bacc. it only few hours in bm.

10000 is little too long.

Now, the million dollar
question...
What the worst ever
in 1000???
Since worstever for 200=69/200...

I assume..
69x5=345/1000

win 655
lose 345.

lose 310u
flatbet..

Thus we assume
only 345hit in next 1000,
how to mm to win at least 1u?

Gentlemen,
There no law stipulates, that in labby,
one must start from a single digit,
or must closed the long string og million digits string...
If you start a labby with a single digit,
say,
"1",
then 33.34%hit ,no matter how many bets,...needed to closed the labby.

If we start with two digit,
say,
(0)(1), then 33.34% +1more hit .
needed to closed.

say, three,
0,0,1.
then 33.34+ 2more hit,
and so on.
Thus in 2000bets, 900 hit almost certain...
2000x33.4~=667..-900=233long string

Sir,
thus 20000/100bet =200 sessions.
10700losses/200=53.5 losses average.
10 sessions probably negative/positive extreme variance.

But as you say, 900, hit, /2000
almost certain, then
"1100 of one "
labby, should be the winning when the 900th win hit...with 1100unit profit, not one unit....
and not try to win 1100, but few tens unit will not superfluous...

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

Quote from: Albalaha on May 04, 2021, 01:07:54 PM
It is pretty painful to never see any debate over how an MM for long run could be created. We all know that variance could be horrible only temporarily. If we see 20 trials, getting minimum 9 wins persistently is a trouble, while in 200 trials minimum 90 wins are more likely, if we take 2000 trials, getting minimum 900 wins are almost certain. If we see 20,000 trials, anything below 9300 wins is almost impossible.
          Why can't we do something to get a good net income that is assured after even 20k trials? Isn't it better than losing always, at last?
Isn't casino also striving for only 1% profit of all our bets placed?
          Anybody who has seen, experienced, read or tried anything that can work in long run? Let me know.

I think, of in20000 trials,
9300 is certain, .
Thus 10700 losses will closed by 9300hit 9300 certain hit will close the

thus 10700 long of "one" labby will closed before 9300th win hit.

Sir,
If your mm can +50, and -100,
then, there no law say you can't bet both side.
Say, have two person ,
bet with your mm,
if next 100bet produce within math, then both will win +50.
if extreme hit, then
1 person will -100, and the other +50, the end only lose -50.
what you think?

Sir,
after reading all your posts and contemplating hard your ideas,
it seems that, you are 100% confident in your unique mm,
then your real headache, and no1 enemy, is, extreme variance!
Then if, only if, if you could, have a way to hit "within math" , then you will not lose...
But then again, you say, it is impossible, to devise a betting selection that never hit extreme..(?)

If we can expect
"dependable consistency", in
the ratios of winning /losing sessions
then we go for best, or go for bust

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"...

Quote from: Albalaha on May 12, 2021, 01:03:44 PM
Session #5

         I should try for +25 or -50.. [

but that 25 -50, will change the sessions win lose ratios

Quote from: Albalaha on April 20, 2021, 04:50:18 AM
I would expect at least 8 hits in further 20 consecutive trials with at least 90% certainty.
       I know even events with less than 1% probability kicks in a random game very easily but this does not hold good in the long run. I would play for +50/-100. .

Sir,
Wow!
I think this trigger with 90/10 ,should be exploit to hilt!
$hould think out, (naively? ), a mm that win100, lose100, this shoud be our hg!