Progressions:
Progressions, like hammers, are tools, and the tools themselves are neither good nor bad. A hammer can be used to chisel the Michelangelo or break any mother's head, or they can be used for any good or ill.
Always within a clear bankroll management strategy, the use of progressions can serve the purpose of limiting the time of recovery phases or amplifying positive cycles.
The limits to a recovery strategy based on progressions are to avoid falling into the childlike simplicity of trusting simply wagering more each time you lose would inexorably produce the recovery of the investment sometime. These systems, ultimately catastrophic, are extremely popular for their alleged logical end: “at some point I have to win and when I win I recover all”, so they say.
What they forget or do not know those who adhere to this logic is that sooner or later the unwelcome situation on which the series of losses is extended to such extent that it leaves the player without a bank, or we reach the table limit, or we could not get there in time to cover the 36 that was the number that recuperated the balance and precisely it’s what shows.
Relying on this is to rely on luck and to place us in the first group mentioned and deserves no further discussion.
Unfortunately playing this way most of the time you win, but as the players don’t put an appropriate and reasonable limit to assume a loss aiming to win in the overall balance, limited series of large losses will be high enough to become unrecoverable with long series of low profits.
Besides, violent progressions (I call violent those in which the stakes are always higher in each ball over the previous spin, but I do not open trial on their goodness or lack of it without putting it in context) produced a nervous state in the average player, which most can not tolerate even playing positive progressions and winning.
Progressions, like hammers, are tools, and the tools themselves are neither good nor bad. A hammer can be used to chisel the Michelangelo or break any mother's head, or they can be used for any good or ill.
Always within a clear bankroll management strategy, the use of progressions can serve the purpose of limiting the time of recovery phases or amplifying positive cycles.
The limits to a recovery strategy based on progressions are to avoid falling into the childlike simplicity of trusting simply wagering more each time you lose would inexorably produce the recovery of the investment sometime. These systems, ultimately catastrophic, are extremely popular for their alleged logical end: “at some point I have to win and when I win I recover all”, so they say.
What they forget or do not know those who adhere to this logic is that sooner or later the unwelcome situation on which the series of losses is extended to such extent that it leaves the player without a bank, or we reach the table limit, or we could not get there in time to cover the 36 that was the number that recuperated the balance and precisely it’s what shows.
Relying on this is to rely on luck and to place us in the first group mentioned and deserves no further discussion.
Unfortunately playing this way most of the time you win, but as the players don’t put an appropriate and reasonable limit to assume a loss aiming to win in the overall balance, limited series of large losses will be high enough to become unrecoverable with long series of low profits.
Besides, violent progressions (I call violent those in which the stakes are always higher in each ball over the previous spin, but I do not open trial on their goodness or lack of it without putting it in context) produced a nervous state in the average player, which most can not tolerate even playing positive progressions and winning.
