Quotetry

ice789,
                Your given session got two -100s stop losses unfortunately.

Wong,
         Labby is good to be played on paper only. My ratio of 90 wins: 10 losses will not work as +50/-100 in labby. One single failure in labby can cost you even 100s of wins. I hope you understand this and do not ask what labby can do or not again. If you are happy with theoretical aspects, I said numerous times that labby, marty, fibo will beat any session at last but once you fail on them due to table limit or your bankroll, you will wet your pants and will never try them ever in your life Please try to understand that the power of marty or laby or fibo lies in their big bets compensating many of the losses at once but not doable practically, in any form possible. You have asked about labby and HP johnson so many times and I m tired of answering them. Better forget them or play them on paper only.

QuoteI 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.

Labby, marty and fibonacci are not feasible ways to play. I wasted years fine tuning them but while failing they give us such huge losses that suck all the wins, so far. They are mathematically winner but practically not. HP Johnson is the worst form of labby. Accepting losses in extremes are always wiser than dragging them. Mark my word today.

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.

+25 or -50 will change the win loss ratio slightly but will be practically doable easier too.

Quote from: PatternAnalys on May 13, 2021, 06:44:37 AM
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?

Betting both sides have no advantage. First, it will be difficult to compute together and bet in a real casino. Secondly, it will appear weird and will draw the attention of the casino. Since extreme will hit rarely(only in 5% cases, my way) it is not intriguing. I agree that while I will lose -100, I should win +50 easily too but not necessarily. I will evaluate those cases playing both sides to answer you.

Wong,
          I m tired of answering your single query in hundreds of way. We do not need to beat the extreme, we just need to surpass that with least harm possible. Whatever way we can play, randomness can beat that momentarily. It is always better to be prepared for that instead of dreaming of beating that too. Extreme cases are rare too and if they do not take away too much money, why keep bothering about them? Such silly thinking give birth to martingale type ideas that kills us finally. Next time if you asked how to beat the extreme, you will be in my ignore list. Just think of beating the long run consequences with a pre planned strategy.

Session #5

         I played this session today online. It ran across 3 shoes and took 174 hands to conclude with a +50 net. It went to +42 in the middle but lots of bad stretches thereafter. Atlast I got my target. This makes me think that instead of trying +50 or -100, I should try for +25 or -50. Pretty tired. Have a look.
   Max bet=5, wins 86 vs loss 88, max DD= -20.

L
W
W
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
W
L
L
W
W
W
L
W
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
W
W
L
L
L
L
L
W
W
L
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
W
W
W
W
W
W
L
W
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
W
L
L
L
L
W
W
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
W

QuoteThat's now that so called math experts must put their knowledge in their a.sses, even though they can easily opine that no matter what, our bets are getting a money return lower than 1.

           I DO NOT KNOW WHICH BOOK OF MATH SAYS SO. UNLESS WE ARE DESTINED TO LOSE EVERY HAND A PARTICULAR SUM OR WE KEEP BETTING FLAT 1 UNIT ALWAYS, HOUSE EDGE CAN NOT BEAT US DECISIVELY. When I simulated over 10 millions spins of roulette with Ophis with a progression based betting and beat that too, I understood the hollowness of such pseudo math claims.
          Take the case of martingale and any played session in the world. It will beat each. Did martingale change math? No. Same goes with labby and fibbo. There is no answer of this with any so called math genius. Math can beat the randomness and house advantage both but table limit or bankroll will stop it this way (but math is math). I went ahead and did it mathematically (with a dash of logic) within playable bankroll and table spread. I will surely win, in the long run, even if I get 6SD negative variance, meanwhile.

Session #4:
             Bad start of session and throughout it remains below average. Yet earned 56 UNITS. MAX DD= -31, MAX BET UNIT=6
                57 WINS VS 66 LOSSES

L
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W

QuoteHi Albalaha--I see youre still in the laboratory.

     It is my forte. I am into something everyone shies away to even discuss. A logical and mathematical way to earn from casinos.

QuoteGood thinking--To help with that worry and to "lay low" or "fly under the radar",...etc, you could maybe consider playing under an alias (e.g., Kung Fubac ).

Well, it is not so easy. I need a team to play my way all over. It is tough to find even one reliable person. I m playing myself online these days and haven't seen any losing session so far. Let's see how it goes further.

Session #3:
             47 wins vs 61 losses, Finished with +53, worst DD=-17, max bet=8 units

L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W

Quote This is interesting. I would hypothesize u should see this often enough at front end of shoes to make your wait time tolerable.
     Q: Am I correct you allow these triggers to present across two shoes??

Shoes doesn't matter buddy. It is only a sequence of wins and losses for me. Say it is coin flipping and if they change coin, should it change any probability? I do not understand why guys like you who has considerable knowledge of math and experience ask such questions.

Quote What is bet spread for most of your online casinos? Can u actually see the cut and dealers dispersing cards for each individual hand??

Online, it is 10 to 50k on most tables and 25 to 5k-10k on others. I hate restrained bet limits. Although my current methodology seldom requires bet of more than 15 units.

QuoteNext News Story: "ALBALAHA COMING TO AMERICA"

   Maybe some day. I do not want to feature in the black book of casinos. Thanks for the best wishes

#2 Throughout below average session won too with +50
          72 Wins vs 83 losses, Max DD=-25, max bet= 7 units

L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W

I was doing final tests of my latest methodology to see whether I get +50 or -100 first in some below average annoying sessions.
Got +53 in this session of 48 wins vs 64 losses, max DD= -16, max bet= 8 units.


L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W