For more references read this: http://albalaha.lefora.com/topic/13069557/Virtual-limits-of-dispersionvariance#.VvthSeJ97IU

Remember, a virtual limit is only an expected or experienced limit. There is no actual limits so, that info may help you or may not.

The real art is being prepared for something that is too horrible temporarily, whether you seen that earlier or it is happening for the first time.

Trying to have a foolish progression that will win all cases upto virtual limits is neither possible nor desireable. In attempt of that you will land on idiotic stuff l

like martingale or labouchere or HP Johnson type silly variations of that.

                 We can play and fight only upto a limit and over that it is useless to work. RTM and Law of large numbers are perfect theories and they do

work but their span can not be pre-guessed. If you are aspiring for an MM that will beat all the probabilities to step into the casino, you will keep waiting

your whole life. Unless you take risk to win, there is no chance. We can't make a random game pay us always.

Virtual betting may work to curb the variance upto its virtual stretch if used with caution. To understand how it helps, you may read the last post of this topic of mine: http://betselection.cc/albalaha's-exclusive/if-roulette-has-no-memory-why-there-hasn't-been-succesive-36-hits-of-an-ec/

So virtual betting works best with these:
1. Chopping the virtual limit of the variance, even if an EC doesn't hit for 50 spins in succession, somehow, we will lose max 3 bets;

2. One has to understand the sequential probability

3. One has to understand the law of large numbers and Regression towards Mean.

Downside: There is only one downside of this type of pausing and virtual betting. If a win comes at the 4th spot i.e. immediately when we pause betting, it causes a bit of loss. However, wins at 4th or 5th places won't help us much with any sensible MM plan.

This is just one of the various practical usage of virtual betting.

To be continued later...........

VIRTUAL BETTING: Does it help? Mathematically, No. Virtual betting doesn't change the odds of the game and no past decisions can hint about future decisions but if we believe in sequential probability, very long series of losses or wins are not so easy or frequent. However, they can come up any moment upto its virtual/estimated limit.

For example, getting a Win after 25 Losses is possible and it can happen any moment. However, getting 2 such stretches of 25 losses followed by a single W in succession is so remote, we can kind of take that as not probable. Theoretically, every spin is different and unique and any result is possible in a particular spin, we do not see 30 or more consecutive wins/losses of an EC ever.

Any sensible money management that tries to fight with randomness needs to take care of the virtual limits and the fact that they may come up any moment. Technically, in long run, we can think of winning where number of Wins are closer to the number of Losses. Regression towards mean is guaranteed to work in long run but it is not possible to pre determine when it starts to throw near equal Wins and Losses.

Virtual betting can help, in a way to avoid the worst possible scenarios to a certain extent.

I suggest betting only upto 150% of the break even point as wins over it is meaningless and won't help much in recoveries. While an EC is almost 90% certain to win within three attempts, a win over it may take in even 25 extra losses.

Take a case of this Horror session of an EC: LLLLLLLLWLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLWLLWLLLLLLLLLWLLWLLWLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLWLLWLWLLWWLLLWLWLWLLWLLWWWLWLWLWWLLWLWLW
THE SAME SESSION WILL LOOK LIKE THIS TO A VIRTUAL BETTING GUY.

LLL LLL LLW LLL LLWLWLLWWLLLWLWLWLLWLLWWWLWLWLWWLLWLWLW

More later......

While 3700 spins might not be so good indicator of RTM in action for very small bets like singles or splits, it is enough to saturate Variance to an acceptable limits for bigger bets like EC, dozens, columns etc. I have simulated millions spins to see all these.

Trying to conclude things sooner than later led to hasty progressions like Martingale, Fibonacci and Labouchere which fails on very face of them. Everybody knows that one can get even 25 successive losses in a row failing martingale till a few million chips. Same goes to Labouchere and Fibonacci in one large bad stretch or tricky times like 25 wins in 100 trials or anything of that nature.
                  That is why I ask everyone to discard the obvious failure systems at the very outset.

Hit and run doesn't work as you are still in a random world and it gives you no immunity. Do not fool yourself.

A long run progression can be assumed to be helpful if:
1. They pass through even 25 losses in succession without ever betting too high. This bad stretch can come anywhere, in the beginning, in the middle or the last stretch. Do not put them into your convenient places to prove your pathetic progressions as good one.

2. They pass through Very tricky wins like 25 wins in 100 trials in a variety of ways followed by a below average span that is followed by an average span as per the principal of RTM.

3. Do not presume or expect  "corrective" wins after too bad stretch.

4. Never say my betselection gives me any advantage by itself. It is the most idiotic statement I hear from a majority of members. If you can not simulate your betselection, get help of a programmer but stop rumour monger regarding any bet without knowing reality.


  I can make "acid test" sessions for any MM or you can make a few yourself keeping all of the above in mind.

Dear BTW,
           Your question regarding how to beat the game in all probabilities is a bit weird in itself. There are many instances where taking/accepting losses is only wise thing, you can do.
  However, if you want to win surpassing the worst, you need to have a strategy with these features:
1. It should not go insane in multiple losses coming one after another
2. It should not go too high in successive losses in a stretch as marty, labby or fibo does
3. You may need to play too long to get into plus or to leave at not too big loss.

We may make an alert, trigger, pause and resume methodology that can use a reverse filter to sort the worst of the worst moments off the game.
My extreme variance management i.e. pausing at 1.5 to 2x of Break even is just one among them.
Then, your MM has to be very mild and reasoned to sustain long bad stretches and to win at last. Forgetting extreme moments and avoiding dragging them to win just 1 unit is also very essential. We need to understand that each and every situation can not be possibly beaten even with million chips.

Learn to simulate your ideas or that of many kindergarten system writers as they can harm you more than you can imagine and your short sightedness or inability to simulate can confuse you too much.

Quote from: BetJack on March 25, 2016, 08:44:50 AM
I agree to disagree with you ...
1000 spin not equal to 100 SPINS  x10 sessions is not equal to 50 SPINS x20  sessions

http://betselection.cc/general-discussion/how-true-1072r1077-my-results/msg39643/#msg39643

to understand what is long run I prescribed a topic from my blog: http://albalaha.lefora.com/topic/19400636/Long-run-in-gambling#.VvUmQOJ97IU

anything below that may quite vary from each other so a particular 100x10 may be slightly different from a particular session of 1000 spins but in larger perspective it is close to equal due to variance if your are familiar with the term.

Understand the basics of randomness and probability before jumping into an argument with me.

                             You may get a net win in very first bet you make. You may conclude your session with profit in say 100 spins of play but that won't hold when you get to face the worst. Say, you have a strategy that may seek even 2000 spins to get at net profit, if the worst shows.
  Say you play 100 spins in your first day and get 30 wins only that makes you lose till the conclusion of 100th spins. You are tired, frustrated and worried. If you keep on betting in that stage, there is strong likelihood of losing your temper and lose even bigger.
       Better way is, consider 100 spins of play as a pause and later when you enter casino again, resume your betting as if you played in a stretch. It doesn't change any probability and you are still on the same road. If you play 1000 spins in a go or 100x10, it doesn't change randomness or probability of the game while you get to relax and work on a calculated strategy.

QuoteIn practical terms nobody would sit and play for 1000 results in a go, thus not the best of approaches.

This is the joke of the millennium. A long run strategy doesn't ask to keep betting at a stretch. All sessions and spins are random, so you can pause your game any spin and later resume any other day. No need to bet 1000 or even 500 spins, in a stretch.

                A strategy for long run doesn't get you aching back or holding your piss for hours of non-stop play.

I suggest to be prepared for the worst as it come without warning you, any moment, any session. A nice strategy has to keep the worst in mind always. If anybody suggests you that he can avoid the worst forever or his betselection is immune from the worst stretches, he is either ignorant or a crooked. No betselection is better than all other and all are subjected to the harshest possible moments with whatever we chose.

Regarding playing for 1000 spins in mind, I have a few things to say:
1.Even 1000 spins might not be enough and you may need to bet ahead to get a win;

2. Betting long term like 1000 or more spins may not happen at a stretch. If you play 1000 spins in a day or in 20 days, doesn't matter. A long run could be construed as 100x10 or even 50x20. Long run simply means multiple sessions taken together that leaves no room for temporary bias against you or in your favour.

3. What could happen in 1 million spins could randomly show within 100 spins too. Never think you can do hit and run by randomly entering the game. Remember, randomness is dancing around you too and ready to "hit" you to make u run out of casino.
If you are a big fan of "hit and run" only way advised is try your luck in a spin like what Ashley Revell did and either win the maximum or lose the same on an EC bet of French Roulette wheel(he got to bet American wheel BTW). First and last bet to try your luck. Win or lose, never try that again.

4. Do not expect flat betting to win for you. Advantage player could be an exception but nothing else can win flat, in long run.

Ladies and Gentlemen,
               Indeed a case of 25 wins in 100 trials is not beatable. Same goes to 66/200. There may be a few isolated situations in those wins which may lead to win by a particular MM plan but if anybody claims to beat all types of 25/100 or 66/200, he is either very ignorant or a fraud.

Old Faulty progressions that we see relied upon very false assumptions and hence fail. If we ever encounter 25/100 or 66/200, only way to not doom is keep betting low. Never try to guess the number of wins that you will get and even if we presume 25/100 or 66/200 as limits, they can not be beaten by any MM plan with all scatters and clusters possible.

You are using a 200 years old joke called Martingale with a little pinch of salt and claiming to win any 25/100 or 66/200 situation

Quotealbalaha, earn it, sum it or whatever your name is,

1) Post a session with 25 wins out of 100 results and distribute those wins and losses anyway you like.

2) Post a session with 66 wins out of 200 results and distribute those wins and losses anyway you like.

Then I'll show you what's the meaning of this topic.

Are you ready?

I'm waiting...

and later running  away from the same in just one little unfavorable case. Hilarious.[/size]

You have nothing that even work slightly. First you proposed a delayed martingale that will go till infinite without winning at one point of time. Anybody can simulate that. Now you came up with even worse idea that can easily lead you to a loss of few millions in just one bad drag.

               Just one bad win followed by many losses will cause irreparable losses. Reverse engineering a progression in some particular favorite situations led us to martingale and labby type failed ideas already, do not make more comical versions of that.

I am talking of a progression that doesn't lose too huge while a bad stretch like 66/200 is encountered but later when things go near normal, we stand to win. That is the core of this debate.

It will indeed bust as HP Johnson does. If you guys look at my sessions done, all big bets came at the last since the creator of the progression had prior knowledge of the number of wins, so it tried to win back all at last with even thousands of chips. It is as much foolish progression as martingale and doesn't help at all.
                    HP Johnson was too much boasted upon roulette30 forum and none cared to understand the fact that it is merely a flat betting to begin with, a normal labouchere in the middle and it ends with a martingale that if went a little bad could take millions of chips to win one. It just needs a bad beginning and a bad last win to doom without any limit.

My verdict: It is a fool's gold. Even worse than BA's delayed martingale.

If someone tries to make good an unfortunate last win that sucked thousands of units without winning, it won't work either.

Wow!!!!!!!!
         No reply to this session? It seems the system busted finally.