Quote from: james on July 30, 2016, 08:04:30 PM
I respect the opinions of GR8 and B_A that some progressions can make money in a negative expectation game.

If you google, you will find equations by mathematicians why progressions will not work in a negative expectation game. If you can prove mathematically to the contrary, you will get accolades from mathematicians, but you will not see any money. There is more money using the progressions to make money than all the accolades.

You are true about what is important the most, however, there is nothing contradictory in an efficient progression and probability theory because, like I said, the order which wagering takes place as well the amounts don't change odds, we will still lose the times it's probable to lose but we will gain more when we win in order to cover any other losses.

In order house edge to be the main factor of losing, there shouldn't be any progressions but only flat betting, then we would lose sooner or later by the percentage of the house edge.
In order to realize how trivial is house edge in comparison with variance do the following, place 1 unit on red and another on black, see how long would it take to lose your bankroll by the 0!
But a martingaler could lose large sums of money within just a few spins because of the variance.

For an enterprise as the casino, 2.7% or more from the total action is a large sum, therefore important for them, but from the gambler's perspective, if you would lose 2.7% of 100 it's insignificant.
Another thing 2.7% from 150,000 and completely another 2.7% from 1,500!

QuoteI am of the belief that progressions do alter our odds at this game.

This is not true!
Odds cannot be altered, the objective of a progression or money management technique is to make an overall profit without changing odds, which means to lose more times but still be ahead.

But I agree about the linear progressions...also about the easy solutions, there are not really easy solutions, gambling is not exception of this rule.
There are very few guys who make "easy money" the hard way...it hasn't been proven but they don't want to.

From mathematics perspective, it's a fact that we would be overall winners if our fewer wins would generate more profit than the cost of more losses.
This is possible and don't rush to blast it just because you haven't found a solution, what you can (or cannot) do is not the limit of everybody...!

Quote from: james on July 30, 2016, 06:35:19 PM
If no bet selection produces an edge, can progressions give an edge mathematically?

I believe yes and I can prove it.
For example if we bet High, 1st dozen and 3rd line simultaneously we have covered everything but 0.
So if house edge was the only reason we are losing, the combination which I've just described wouldn't be able to win, but it can win by applying 3 positive progressions simultaneously and calculating 3 totals separately.
This proves that variance is greater threat than house edge, the 3 bet selections may lose only by 0, is not a matter if it comes but when it comes... !

Quote from: BEAT-THE-WHEEL on July 30, 2016, 09:25:33 AM
Gentlemen,

PA, in the "PA:preaching about HG", thread,

stressed the utmost importance of STABLE betselection
system or strategy.

We not going after a selection,
that always produce an EDGE,
but a selection, that STABLE.

That , if EC,
always hit, and LOSE,
[yes, LOSE!..not win]
WITHIN the probability of 50/50, minus HE!

When we bet THE stable selection,
with FLAT-bet,
after 100,1000,10000, or billion spins, of bet taken,
the result will always, around ZERO, minus the HE...

But people INSISTS that,
a stable selection, a nonsense.
or simply brush off as non existence...
and still look for selection, that produce EDGE!

The casino painstakingly, ensure that their wheels,
well-balanced, and no extreme biased allowed.

And every KNOWN theory, and debates
insist that, system that produce EDGE,
can't sustain run, or even exist.

Thus we go for the MOST stable selection,
that always produce result , when bet with FLATBET,
will produce losing result within the HE!



Nick, as he claimed, found a STABLE betselection,
thus after many spins, the result near zero.

Thus if he flatbet, and chart the profit-loss result,
with a single line CHART,

he will noticed that the line will move up and down, like a wave,
always crossing the ZERO value.

Up when the positive variance hit,
and then cross downward the zero value,
when negative variance hit.

The beauty of a stable selection,
when FLATBET, is the profit-loss line will
ALWAYS, never fail, to move UP over the ZERO value,
and then DOWN crossing the ZERO value,
again and again.



That line up and down,
"again, and again",
is WHAT we need most!

Then how are we going to bet, with... mild progression?

In an OVERSIMPLIFIED example,

say in next 100bet risked, there will be 50 hit, and 50lose decision.
The problem, as,
we all already know, the will  no,
win,lose,win,lose,win,lose,win,lose...

there will be always cluster of winning and losing,
in first half, or second half.

[imagine the UP and DOWN profit/loss LINE chart]

Say, if first 50bet, we bet 1unit, we see losses,
then the next 50bet,

we risked, 2units,
thus the first 50losses,
will be offset by,
the next cluster of next 50winning.

This is oversimplified example,

Then,
if we still lose after first 100spins,
then the next 100spin risked,
we need to add up units,
so the losses recoup,
and produce a single profit.
and rewind.

The billion question dollar question, is,
do you have faith that your bet selection, really STABLE???

Hope you understand my bad English.

By saying stable you mean less vulnerable to the swings of variance, you will NEVER find such characteristic on EC bets.
Besides didn't you admit that there are no better EC bets, so why are you still looking to find which EC bet has less ups and downs?
Aren't all the same regarding the mathematical approach?

Do not waste your time on dead ends, you are going around and around lime mice trapped inside a labyrinth!

Having the edge by betting EC's can be achieved ONLY by MM and NOT by selections, and even when you find the 1 in a million MM  you would still make peanut money, like 5 units per 100 results while risking MORE than what you win.

Yes, it's possible to win consistently on EC bets, I mean long term, BUT consider what I just said!

Quote from: NathanDetroit on July 29, 2016, 01:56:06 PM
# 5 I move on.


Not being in employ of the casino nor a member of the janitors union.( matters of legality )






PS. WHY was the drink spilled  to begin with ?

Pretty reasonable.

Perhaps because some would like to damage the felt or just been drunk.

Quote from: stringbeanpc on July 28, 2016, 04:39:12 PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_large_numbers

Blue_Angel,

To Ensure that I comprehend your meaning, I will use this example.

In the last 12 spins, there were a total of 5 Red and 7 Black,

hence the next bet could be on Red, and increase the bet amount by 40 % (because 7 / 5 = 140 %)

12 results is very small sample, to use this knowledge properly you should play longer sessions in which events tend to incline towards their average probability.
You cannot gain an edge from short sessions, it's just luck whatever happens during short sessions.
That's why I consider those who depend on hit 'n' run tactics that are depending on luck, you might easily win 1 unit but also you might easily lose 1 unit, the "coin" has 2 sides...

@ Nickmsi

What  percentage represents only the decisions for the "player"?

This is more like a fun quiz, not  like social gallop.

Therefore there are not wrong or right answers.

Just reply the first thing which comes to your mind.

@ Albalaha

I've 2 questions regarding your money management:

Is it only for EC bets?

How many units on average a player could expect to win per session?

Thanks in advance

@  stringbeanpc

Have you ever heard the law of large numbers?
How you could use this knowledge?
Keep a mental count, or write down the events as they occur, when the deviation is larger your bet should reflect the size of the deviation from the mean, the average probability.

@ MarkTeruya

If I was playing  Baccarat, I would stick always with the "player" because it is commission free, that's sufficient structure for me.

The principle of this system is simple, take advantage of first-hitters and repeaters, because for every 3 numbers 1 is going to repeat

Start by betting 11 streets, exclude the one which has hit on last spin.

Another number comes and now you remove the street which the new number belongs, but you also place 1 chip of the same value straight up on the hitted number.

You continue on this fashion by removing the chips from the hitted streets one by one and betting simultaneously the hitted numbers where the streets' bets have been removed.

The total amount of streets that you bet will look like this: 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1.
The total of the numbers you are betting will look like this: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10.

As you see the total amount of your bets never exceeds the 11 units, therefore by winning a street you get +1 unit net and by winning a number +25 units net.

You continue till you win a straight up bet and then restart by betting 11 streets.

We are going to cap the the total loss per round in 33 units (3 x 11) or less if you have already won street bets before you lose 3 times.
When you lose a round, repeat the process but this time with 2 units on each bet.

After each losing round increase bets by 1 unit, after each won round decrease by 1 unit.

Whenever you win a straight up number you stop right there and restart from the beginning, 11 streets betting.

"Bad Hair Day"
It looks like a rotten racoon has been installed on his head! 



And so modest too...



But always shockingly truthful...



As the Sinatra's song goes:  "The lady is a Trump!"

Some random Google searches yield the following results:

At that time they say that the Emperor Honorius in Ravenna received the message from one of the eunuchs, evidently a keeper of the poultry, that Rome had perished.

And he cried out and said, 'And yet it has just eaten from my hands!'
For he had a very large cock, Rome by name; and the eunuch comprehending his words said that it was the city of Rome which had perished at the hands of Alaric, and the emperor with a sigh of relief answered quickly:
'But I thought that my fowl Rome had perished.'

You are standing by the table and someone is spilling his drink all over the place, now what?

Please choose 1 of the following:

1) Help him/her out
2) Announce to the rest what just happened
3) Call the floor manager
4) Call the police
5) Calmly pick up your chips and move towards another table and/or the exit