QuoteSir,
Why not you test the yet to broken world bm record of worst 69/200, that I believe will rtm after 800spins.

Do you have the real data after 69/200 too for at least 400 more spins? If yes, send me up. I have already tested the worst from zumma books of baccarat that I could spot so far. All got beaten without ever going below -250 or worse.

Every EC bet will get same streaks good and bet. Do not waste your time on finding the best betselection. Rather learn to beat it, even if it goes the worst momentarily.

I have been hearing that mathematics tells us that casino games with house edge/negative expectations are unbeatable. I asked many that which book of mathematics says so, none answered so far. I am not any scholar of mathematics but Math was a subject of mine till 12th class. I read algebra, geometry, trigonometry, calculus, probability, statistics and basic arithmetic but never heard of any such concept in text books, at least. Fortunately or unfortunately our schools do not teach us casino odds or gambling theories.
      Is the concept of games being unbeatable a theory or a law?
Wikipedia says that: Online slot games often have a published Return to Player (RTP) percentage that determines the theoretical house edge. Some software developers choose to publish the RTP of their slot games while others do not. Despite the set theoretical RTP, almost any outcome is possible in the short term.
It means one can win, even in slots.
Mathematically, only one thing is certain about the casino games(with house edge or negative expectations) that if you keep betting 1 unit consistently on any bet, you can not win, in the long run due to that. I admit and accept this as pure maths.
   Can anybody enlighten me with mathematical concepts that I am unaware of that confirms that a gambler has to lose in a casino game in the long run, whatever he choose to bet or howsoever he bets?

Hey Guys,
        After beating a virtually "worst possible session" for an EC bet that I created, I m up for real bad sessions. Can someone provide me with real bad data for an EC bet where super bad ratio persists for 100 or more continuous bets followed by average wins thereafter( no clumping or compensatory wins). Try to provide me with at least 500 hands, in succession after the worst one.
           I want to prove that even the worst patches could be recovered and finally won without betting or losing huge and nothing really is unbeatable in the random world. Hope to get such data soon. Thanks in anticipation.

@Wong,
              You are getting closer. Do you read my mind?

@Wong,
          You have lots of repeated questions and I got tired of repeating my answers. Playing for long run with world of uncertainties and a boxing match are quite different. A knockout punch may help one win a boxing match decisively but in gambling it could guarantee that a player get knocked out and finally leave bruised and wounded.
          Gambling is not about beating a 30/100 or 1/20 case, it could be far worse. Don't create new set of fallacies but learn the truth. I m tired of forums with no positivism and only rhetoric and fallacies. I think, I do not belong to these places. I have written enough. People are unwilling to change and enjoying losses or fictional plays. Let casinos prosper. It was rightly said : gambling and smoking are taxes on ignorance. 

@Wong,
             Increasing bets rapidly will win most cases till it kills itself losing all back plus more. You know that a basic labouchere wins in 35%(approx) win rate than 51%(required for a normal person to win). You want to win at 30% hit rate only or even lesser and have no restraints for how much you can bet? Just do a tweak. When you do normal labby and it stretches over six numbers, instead of adding left+right to bet, you do a simple tweak: Add the leftmost +the next number in right of the leftmost+rightmost number. You won't need even 30% hit rate then. Remember one vital thing, a ten step labby wins in only 10% hit rates but at times it will get exhausted and still lose. Hence, instead of winning all possible cases with pushing bets, make a strategy that goes mellow in the worst cases to lose minimal that can easily be recovered back further.
             My latest work with labby that is some sort of HG in itself taught me big lessons.
Never believe upon big bets alone.
Do not push to win.
Do not try to win the worst case while it is still the worst.
Learn to face variance of all sorts and learn to survive even the unthinkable variance with grace.
Make a strategy for all over play. Escaping variance doesn't help.
and aboveall, one strategy that beats average or slight below average cases and survives the worst possible along.

HG lies within yourself. Anyone getting what I got can create one. Play for the long run.

Not pushing bets too much in any case, is the key. If you try to win the worst with only increasing bets, it will never work.
0,1 labby is my starting point, you are right upto this point but there are lots of other safeguards including mini stop losses and increase in base labby on specific conditions, so that even 0/100 case comes, it won't take away huge money.

@Argalim247,
          Wow ! Your first post straight to my topic. You must be some old member with different username. Anyways,
The money managements you named are all seriously flawed mathematically and are meant to plunder players only and help casinos win bigger and faster. I analysed each of them very minutely and found what is lacking. Martingale is meant for super losers who is looking for the easiest way to run out of casino. Labouchere caught my attention but basic labby could drag you to dangerous levels in bad times. I worked upon bettering that. I assessed thousands of ways variance could strike. I sorted worst of the worst sessions. Tried my tweaks on them. Improved them further and so on. Now, I am capable of handling the worst sessions upto their virtual limits even if the remain below average after being too harsh. The same money management does great in good sessions and below average sessions too.
            I don't need any advantage play or identifying trends/patters or precognition or bias analysis or roulette computers. My mathematical and logical approach is a kind of mathematical advantage play.

Quote from: PatternAnalys on March 19, 2020, 12:40:37 PM
no, I didn't mean hp.Jhonny
but normal labby

but another assumption,
I guessed, you bet with labby ,
sort of starting with ( 0-1), or (0-0-1),(0,xx,1)
and bet only, say, 10spins only, then
cutloss, restart, stop at first 1u profit, restart.

thus when only 60/200, you sustain -+120u losses,
and ,if within expectation, you win -+30u./100

This is really close to what I do.

Extreme Variance Management as I illustrated in a topic of mine is only way to get rid of the worst but yet one may face bad and unbeatable moments so I shifted my focus from any trigger based strategy with pauses to an all over strategy without any pause. I can handle even the worst that one might not have seen ever, so I am not worried of any extremities.

Nope. HP Johnson is the worst form of labby. Tweaking the original labby with additional safeguards is my way. You need to consider all probabilities the game can offer you ranging from great to average to the worst.

Wong,
          I told this numerous times and once again I am reminding you. Do not try to beat the worst with any progression. It is not doable with anything in the world. Just make a strategy with that you can survive the worst and win thereafter in a slight below average hit rate. Trying to beat the worst is like trying to fight a tiger bare handed. You have no chance. However, your strategy should be meant for an all over play and not only for playing the worst. I know it is tricky but doable. I have done that in many ways.

Trigger based games are not feasible to be used in real life and they can still have extreme variance. Better think of playing all over.

11/100 of a dozen could be taken as Virtual limit although anything lesser than 15/100 is very very rare to be seen.