Quote from: monaco on February 25, 2013, 01:09:02 PM
Further down in the original article posted by Bally, there's a discussion between a couple of people, & a point where SethBets argues that progressive betting can win out over the HE:


What you bet on (Banker or Player, Red or Black, Odd or Even) is irrelevant – the only thing that matters is how much you bet and the relationship of each bet's value to the amount you need to recover in order to end up ahead in spite of losing more rounds/wagers than you win.
The suggestion that progressive betting seeks to magically change the house advantage (simply defined as the ratio of losses to wins) is, again, disingenuous piffle!
I know for sure I can't change negative expectation in the long run, because casinos would not exist if there was a way for me to win more bets than I lose.
What I can do is make sure I win more when I win than I lose when I lose so that losing more often than I win won't hurt me in the long run.




There are at least a couple of people even here on the forum who do well at roulette, yet (correct me if I'm wrong) do not claim to be able to win flatbetting.


In these cases, their way of progressive betting seems to allow them to win, contrary to the article's assertion that progressions are simply different level flatbets, & therefore if you can't win flatbetting, then you can't win..


Of course the goal is to win as many bets as possible, more wins than losses then Happy Days, but does not being able to win flatbetting really mean you cannot win for any decent length of time beyond just being lucky?

We have to be "just lucky" to win for a longer time, if we progress or not.  A  progression distribute  the  win loss other than flat. A negative takes more  smaller winnings and bigger losses. A positive a lot of small losses and larger win.   Too many  misinterpret theire luck, and call it skill, and it is nothing to do about it, they will not recognize it. Flat bets can win if bet less than the payout, have the variance with us constantly, which means we must have entrypoints which are at our favour.



There are methods with a likehood of winning 99.9999% of the time, still it takes all at 0.0001% of the sessions. It can for some take longer time then they ever play, with some of the luck we need.


In the shorter run we have to stand the variance, which make us win or lose, at a longer perspective the HE works. The NZ wheel has no HE, and they use to have smaller spread, so the variance will work so the casino can survive.

Quote from: esoito on February 25, 2013, 04:04:10 AM
Why has this discussion morphed into bonuses??

The thread started with a proposal regarding affiliates.

Probablly because we expect on line casinos to be honest, and then it's double standard to cheat that way. Bonus is in the relam what
we can try.

There is always a limit amount of money we want to risk, so what's really we mean with bankroll, all the money we possible can lose, or the amount we have set for the current play.  We can of course stop if we feel it is not going our way, but otherwise a stoploss is the same as reduce the bet, change strategy or take a break. The fact we stop after using for example 80% of that we call bankroll, means we have to start on a lower level next time.  If it is next session, current session and if is days between do not change the fact we have lost the session.  There is rational reasons for waiting and play later, we may be mentally not on track, we feel for any reason it is not my day.


The win target  as the stoploss (the money we decide before starting we can risk) must be a realistic amount for the method.


The win target can be different, some methods ends with more or less plus, and we may have no time to reach any predefined. It is not as the risking amount something which is possible to decide before. Is there reason to stop if all what we count as good conditions still are there. There is also a limit we can push a session before reset it, depends on method.
If we believe in HAR things are different.   There are many aspects of the play there illusions are common. Stop while a head is one of those illusions, we feel good on the way home until next time we play. We can of course not lose if we not play, that risk comes next time. If we during the play find other use for the winning money including that we were risking, it is rational to stop, in that case the win target is you suddeny can effort some you could not before, that is a win target.  Some times on a BM casino I play very short as the stakes here is at least USD 7, and I do not want to risk much. I set a side some money for the dinner, and play some money to let the luck decide the class of it, if I win  I spend it on better restaurant.

If you take bonus and the wagering is not over 30x, and EC is a valid bet. It is not hard to pass trough, you should have a part of the bonus at least.  Done it some times, but the casinos still to try I do not trust. One casino gave 5000 dollars bonus and never pay and I was wagering through.  Some have in very small print, the bonus is only for slots, and you get know that after the playing. Open account just for that, means a mailbox spamming.
I think even the payment provider, forum owners, and other sources as google leave out addresses. We can see a peak of spam after certain things we do. At one point I got 300 mails from casinos in a week.

I have here played (for demonstration, as I never serious use it) using two EC. Using two Ec at the time is as all hedge not very good.
We win about a quarter of the bets, half are of no use, and only 1/4 wins.   In the shorter run as a session is, a good streak on the color will decrease at the odd or the other EC play .  The though you can win more, due to playing on more chances is not valid.


A loss of 16.8 units in  380 spins. And I expect the chance to win was minor, so it is not done in real mode.  Hedging is never a good method.   

Quote from: Marshall Bing Bell on February 23, 2013, 07:02:17 AM
Don't even think about EC progressions until you can 100% guarantee you pick more winners than losers, or at least 50/50.

If you can do that, then a mild  1 -1 progression with a touch of ingenuity can really puff up the smoke cloud.

It is not possible to guarantee a pick over 50%, if that's possible you must own millions by now.  1  -1 is a very famous loser method.

When using one up on loss, one down on win. The player can assume a win comes after a loss, and the opposite. That is a kind of GF.
He can also assume the EC will even out and then the method has some merit. That is in one sense right and in another view wrong.
The even out process is a very long one, and the difference in numbers can increase forever, and the % part of the difference can still decrease. This method has a risk to rather fast go out of hands.

Would it be better to try to extend it, so betting the same stake for 10 spins, go up if minus, stay if even and go down on a win.
If we win, the EC is dominant, so we may change to opposite chance. From a mathematical view it will not help at all (from that view you must have luck to win in the short run and in the long you will lose), but delay the problem of a loss, most of the time. That because the risk of the depleting the bankroll, will be somewhat lower. The winning will most of the time be lower, as the bet are lower. 

On a NZ the zillions of spins will make it break even. So in the limit time we will win or lose, and break even if we chose to stop at such point if reached.


I have tried this before, and did some play today. It is from my experience less risky, but gain less. This time I got  60 units in 180 spins.
The highest pile was 6 units, I start with one went up, and down to one in this 180 spins.

121 spins and just one unit.

It took 132 spins to win 20 units.


It is possible a RFH can come, even a wheel with 50% chance, can meet a losing streak which will even out after millions of spins.
It can dive and stay below zero for years. I have 1000 units as stop loss. The opposite is also possible, it can win for the same length.

After 1600 spins the plus is 7.80 wich is 156 units.

To  this we may include a discussion about "lock in the win".  The positive progressive method  1,3,2,6. It we bet  1,2,3,6 or even
6,2,1,3  should not matter on a larger sample.

1197 spins done, the result is plus, but not much, as at BV we must bet every spin, waiting for a deviation cost some bets where we should be waiting. (It is possible to make mutual, but not liked by the casino).


119 unit plus.   Some progression done, as that the only way to hit harder when it is time to bet, as all spins were played.

I think it is well known . The negative expection makes it near impossible to win in the long run. The long run is here very long.
Some math model stress the negative expection, so it  should be impossible at all to win. In the shorter time it is the variance which is the killer,and the way to overcome the HE as well, the shorter comes before the longer. BV has fair odds on NZ and trust to make a share of the money bet.  The 10% in tax can not make the profit, some have to lose as well. The puritan math model says all should go break even  in a game with  an expection of no advantages to the house.  Despite the HE,  the main money is distributed among the players, winners and losers.


Progression can not  overcome the HE, but often the variance.

I have some thoughts about the variance on EC bets. It is the thing we have to try to control, on a NZ wheel it is just about that, stay on the right side is needed if we want to win.  We have two common ways of doing it, that is progressions and study the deviation.
None of them is easy and powerful. I will test to combine it, so the first is to use the variance, which is to use the history. And some kind of progression to enhance the chances to correct a drowndown. The progression will be used spare, and a longer run will be used to try to catch up.


I have done  542 spins and used more than one chip in about 50 spins, highest 6 chips.

50 more spins. plus 13 units. I run this in shorter periods, as I think the method can be used on a land casino, trying to win about 100 units in an evening.


As always nothing is sure in the game, use only the money you can possible lose, or play fun.