Some opinions:

Math Professor
Posted 03/20/06 

Someone quoted John Patrick as saying I don't win much but I don't lose much either.
Now he was critical of this statement but there is a reason for it.

We who have lived with gambling all our lives understand the relationship between what we win and what we lose.

The Equation is simple enough .
Magnitude of profit is usually a function of magnitude of wagering.

One of the most common failures in gambling is progressive betting.
Several small wins are satisfying but  when the next small win does not happen and it turns into a progression which often recovers the day but sometimes results in ruination.

Giving up on a progression is hard because losing can mean the erosion of several days work.

The gambling flaw is inherent in this.
Christopher Pawlicki highlighted this fact.
The equation for winning small returns often calls for a progression .
The progression  ultimately however snatches away the prevous wins.

For example 20 + 20 +20 +20 +20 has been achieved with 50 + 100 + 80 + 120 + 100  The final destructive act is a 100  that does not recover .
Even without a progression 100 absorbs the 5  sets of 20 + wins.

I call this the 20/100 flaw.

20 is therefore 20% of 100.
A good result by any standards.

In order to control the erosion of previous wins the ratio of win to wager
needs to be as close to parity as possible.

Say 80 + 80 +80 +80 + 80  with 100 + 100 + 100 + 100 + 100

If the 100 goes then we still have nearly 4 days work intact.
We can walk away and get them again another day.
Not many gamblers can achieve 80%.

This is the flaw.

There must be plenty of gamblers here who understand this but any replies should be better than 3 and out .
The math does not work.

JOHN PATRICK
Posted 03/20/06

excellent point but go back to your opening paragraph and it is not clear ............You said      "he was critical of this statement ................"

I THINK you meant he was CRITIZIED  for this statement ...............

and you're right..................there were a couple of people who laughed at it as meaning I was content with small wins..........adn that ALL I wanted to do was lose a little each day.........

I am glad you picked up on what I really meant by saying that (naturally) I would like to win more, but I am more interested in holding losses down.........

and THAT point that you made about people who do NOT gamble every day , not realizing this is the total and complete point I try to embellish in their minds every day............

Someone else (I think it was Rick K., a few days ago), also touched on that fact .................how really hard it is to win..........and that you HAVE to somehow, someway, condition yourself to win small to ensure you don't lose big ..........to be able to stay alive in this journey called gambling..........

You showed the SERIES you use ..........

What is the LOSS LIMIT and WIN GOAL you advise...........(percentage wise)

Math Professor
Posted 03/20/06

" What is the LOSS LIMIT and WIN GOAL you advise...........(percentage wise)"

Well that is my question to everyone ! 
What I am doing here is highlighting the problem we have with the percentage we go for.

The greater the difference between the amount we wager and the amount we accept ,as a win ,the more of a problem we have.
Lets say (as you have stated) that 5% is a professional aspiration. So we wager 100 for 5 .

That might seem reasonable but look at the result say over 5 days.
+ 5 +5 +5 +5 +5 = 25 . that's great we are winning 5 each day and we haven't lost. Now on day six we wager 100 and bust out !

We are now - 75 !   

We were going up and down with our 100.
But then we hit a bad spell and it eroded to 0.

The problem here is that we often have to go down to nearly zero
to make the continuous flow of 5's.



if our 5 day win was +60 +30 +20 + 120 +40  and this can be achieved with 100 and the 100 busts after 5 days we have .
won +170.  (270 - 100) .

I often work on 100 or 70 from 200. That is I am prepared to lose 200 for these great returns and if I can manufacture 70 od chips every day with a wager of 200 chips then I am going to survive if the cumulative value exceeds 100 after bust out.

What I would like to know from yourself is what your wager is in relation
to what you accept for that session and how do you overcome this flaw.

This is where Pawlicki is making the case that the crash will come and steal away your cumulative gains. Its the problem that haunts all gamblers.
Gamblers ruin.

Quote from: Rouletta on September 08, 2014, 07:30:37 PM
Hi

Is it possible to post the progression and recovery rules pls....? Thanks.

The topic explain the method and staking plan.

Quote from: warrior on September 07, 2014, 09:06:54 PM
]This  one saved me today thanks mr Sputnik

Cool that it help you.
Did you use it as recovery after some heavy loses?

Cheers

Hi ... i will test this ...

With Regression Up & Pull you can control everything.
And winning two out of three sessions on regular basis.

We all know the game has negative expectation and that you can not have a edge playing roulette ... if you don't use physics.

One thing i don't understand is when you can win ... then why do you win to much and get a ban.
If the holy grail is the gambler with the x-factor ... then he or she should lose some money back to the casino looking like a loser ... if he or she know how to win on regular basis.
What good does it do if you get a ban ... then your working place is closed or same as getting fired from work.

This also apply to AP players.
Laurance Scott wrote in one of his book about different casinos in Las Vegas.
Down Town you have less luxury and more poor casinos, they are grind joints, this means you can not win more then a certain amount of money, if you don't want to get heat and attention.
Then you have regular casinos, where you can have a higher limit.
You get my point.

Take a regular gambler.
Friday, Saturday you should aim to win more as tables are crowded and there is full action every where, set a good limit that don't give you heat or attention.
Monday and Thursday you should aim to grind with lower limit.

Any opinions about that?

 
One dozen can sleep for 32 times in a row and 2 dozen can hit 32 times in a row.
One dozen can hit 13 times in a row - all this is during 1 million trails test.

.
I wanted to test this method flat betting.
It holds up pretty good.
But two last sample looks chaotic, it has to be fluctuation.
.

 
This is how it looks like:
Testing a march capture does waves ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1JADaRRDAw

Tiny, medium and large waves of domination:

Here i cut the random flow into how they unfold with domination with one or two states present.

You can see 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 trails of domination - raw play.
Comparing with three states you can see them hit 5 10 to 20 times in a row.

NOTE:

We need to develop a march to take advantage of the domination.
This is just illustration with example.

LWWLLL
WLWLLWWWWWLWLWWLWLWWWWLWWLLWLWLLL
WWWWWLWLWWWWWWWWWWWWLLL
WWWWLLWWWW

Observation:

Here i cut the random states into sequential windows where you can see the domination clear as water.

There is three options:
First is that if you get one state to repeat, then you have domination - 33% probability ...
Second is if you get two states to repeat, then you have domination - 66% probability ...
Last is if you get all three states to show with no present domination.

NOTE:

I don't say you should play this way, this is illustration and education about domination.
I just want to show how the states look like.

LWWWLLWWWLWLLWWLWWLLL
WWWLWWWWLLL
WWWW

See attack file ...

The three states:

Lets define them and you only have three possibility - 1 in 3.

1) When two series chop after each other, then you have one state and then can chop many times in a row with any length.

They has to be at least two series that chop after each other.

BB PPP

And as i mention so can they come with any length:

BBB PP BBBB PPP BB

2) The other state is when you get series and singles alternating one each.
This is one present state.

BBB P BBBB

And they can come with any length:

BB P BBB P BBBB P BB

3) The last state is series of singles and they can come with any length.
To be a series of singles you need at least two.

PBP

And they can come with any length:

BPBPBPBP

Abstract experiment:

I was thinking about how you could change the probability using the even money bets.
My line of thinking was about roulette and dozen play, because it seems that two dozen always dominate and i wanted to change that into even money bets with the same probability.

I start testing and come up with three states or three clustering sequences with no other possibility.
Then i reckon does has to have the same probability as dozen play.

What i know from the past about dozen play is that 1 dozen can sleep for 32 times in a row and that 2 dozen can hit 32 times in a row.
I also notice that is very common that 2 dozen hit 34567 times in a row on regular basis.

Should also mention that one dozen hit 12 to 13 times in a row during 1 million trails.
So this is the benchmark we dealing with.

So in a nutshell i wanted to capture this phenomenon using the even money bets.
But the staking is not the same and the payouts is not the same, but the probability is the same.

Lets say i follow one state to repeat with even money bets, then i get +1 unit.
But if i follow one dozen to repeat with one dozen play bet, then i get +2 units.

Now both has the same probability being 1 in 3 and give me 33% to hit a repeat.
Now lets assume we lose our first bet, then we have two states that show or two dozen.

Lets say we will cover them betting:

Then i need to bet twice to cover the last two states that show with even money bet.
This mean i will break even with +0 if i get one of them states to show or i will get -1 unit (almost break even).

Here above i have 66% to hit or break or almost break even.
But if i lose then all three states show and i will be down -3 units.

If it was dozen and one of the two last dozen show again i would break even +0.
Also 66% probability.
If i would lose, then i would be down -3 units.

That is how it is different.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umgf2lWMIlk

 
It does not work to post youtube videos on this forum ...

Cheers