Quote from: BetJack on April 13, 2016, 06:42:14 PM
Hello
From reading through the pages I conclude that ...
Albalaha dislikes Negative progression ....
and all of them are wrong....
so if you change direction....
We will get...
a Long Run Positive Progression ...
Maybe if someone can make ...
this kind of animal....

It is not like that. Negative progressions can help but not in the way they have been used considering only short run. If one can prepare a negative progression considering odds of the long run, he is more likely to succeed as long run results are more likely to be closer to the mean. For example, due to the house edge, in 1000 spins, Red or black are likely to hit approx 486 times but due to the extreme run of variance against it may lead it to hit 10% lesser, i.e. (486-48)=438 times, one should still be able to win. That is the core idea.

Quote from: Azim on April 13, 2016, 07:29:43 AM
Ignore his. Look at the explanation by Gizmo.

You can't extract anything practically usable from this. If you can, please show us.

Blue Angel's Delayed martingale was foolish and it has been proved. Why are you quoting from him still? His method expects "corrective and successive wins" after initial bad stretches and he pushes with a martingale that can easily lead to loss of millions too at the worst moments.

Quote from: Azim on April 13, 2016, 06:26:04 AM
What happens if you have the worst numbers and have a go at it after a count is at a certain level?

Can you explain and illustrate as to what you mean?

No offence meant but I never saw Gizmo writing anything that can ever be put to real play in any defined manner. Can you point to the topic where Gizmo mentioned this?

Increasing in this manner doesn't help. Did you see the fate of Blue Angel's system? It tanked even hundreds of thousands. Azim's tracker prove that as well. How do you come up with loser ideas again and again. Increasing in patches of 37 or 100 or 1000 won't help.

Quote from: greenguy on April 12, 2016, 06:16:34 AM
By " incorporates all the harsh moments and ability to win in long run" do you mean a progression that never loses and never busts? One that eventually and always moves into profit no matter what?

Or do you mean a progression that busts from time to time but shows an overall profit for the long run?

It can be either way. It should not go bust in the long run after playing say 1000-2000 sessions or even more. It should be capable to surpass the harshest ever possible patches of too bad losses.

If anybody has a long run progression that incorporates all the harsh moments and ability to win in long run where only house edge remains as a constraint, he is a sure shot winner. That is the soul of a mathematical HG.

I have won about 40 no deposit bonuses so far but the most amazing came from betvoyager.com this time. They had a Goldfish Bonanza tournament on 7th, 8th and 9th of April 2016 whereby they distributed a hefty sum of E30k in prize money. I got lucky to win E100 as well.

Kudos betvoyager. My favorite casino.

[attachimg=1]
[attachimg=2]

I tried to define the so-called long run with context to roulette specifically here: http://albalaha.lefora.com/topic/19400636/Long-run-in-gambling#.Vwck-_l97IU

Quote from: Azim on April 05, 2016, 06:01:15 AM
It wasn't 16000 for 1 spin it was 16000 for 37 spins.

Yeah, I said 16000+ bet per spin. There is no guarantee that even betting this big we can win. Indeed this method can even seek betting a million chips each spin at some point of time.

I won't mind betting 4 units for 37 spins to win 1 unit if there is any assurance of that win. If that 1 unit of earning ask me to bet 16,000+ unit per spin, I would mind, of course. We can win all data of world with infinite bets and martingale. Anybody interested in doing that?

Martingale never loses. It only sinks hundreds of thousands of units before winning back 1 unit but we can not consider it playable for that capacity.

My point is who can bet hundreds of thousands of units of bets to win 1 unit on an EC and which casino will allow someone even if someone is crazy enough

to do so?

Thanks a tonne, Azim. My humble excel tracker proved the same but since too big claims were made regarding the greatness of this delayed martingale, as Blue Angel proposed it to work, your tracker removes all the doubts.

              Simulations are the best way to conclude an argument.

I reiterate: No way of picking bet is superior to any other. All will get good, bad, best and the worst moments.

Ok. I got your tracker working on my system. I simulated the attached file of 5k spins and found this result:

End balance:+7867

Max balance: +7873

Max bet= 16384

Worst drawdown point: -74600

Lol

Azim, can you confirm the same please?

P.S.: I confirmed this way back through my excel tracker that this progression is kind of a joke and only with endless hypothetical bets, one can play this.