Quote from: Gizmotron on August 11, 2018, 02:58:20 PM
It's not programming, but I did program my student #1 in just three short weeks. He won 43 sessions and lost 9 for a win ratio of 4.77:1 . A player using my method needs to win 2.333 times to make up for any lost session, for it to reach balance at 2.333:1 . My student is getting better also. My second student is just starting to practice. He does not want to use the practice software so he is doing all this training the hard way. The more the three of us work on this the more we will know about the win to loss ratio as it pertains to money. If I lower the win ratio to 4:1 then I will win four sessions to every 1 lost session. This should completely destroy the fallacy (1:1) known as the accepted mathematical truth. The house's edge will be the end of that "flat world" thinking.![]()
In case you can't figure this out, my stop win goal is lower than my stop loss point.
Mark,
I am not discounting anything you said/say, same as w/Lugi and some others to a certain point.
I cannot and do not and never took the time to learn the math and conversion to figures/stats with wins and losses, etc.
I have attempted to described and detail out my effective wager selections NOT so much based on guessing and trends/patterns and other influences, etc., but on other things such as; Money Management, my unique (1 + 4 Side Parlays) my positive progressions mixed along with flat betting, wins and pull downs or an outright press up for once or twice, etc.
Attempting to only lose or risk some of the win capital or limit myself to a 'at risk' buy in, etc. But of equal importance is the player's 'Level', 'Plateau', time management merged with his emotional, vision, focus and all of that. Problems come about no matter whom you are with false perceptions of bank rolls, increasing wagers, that million dollar pot at the end of the rainbow most everyone thinks is there for the easy picking---just wager 4 to 8 shoes a day and make several easy thousand consistently, times 30 days and 12 months and BOOM, they are instant millionaires, etc. That is what really hurts some of the best players and best thought out strategies, really.
But, lots of the things you mention and Lugi mentions, I have Incorporated and have been or did, etc., with positive results. Reference: 'Win to loss ratios', and other things along those very lines interfaced with the extreme short term of taking advantage of the weak/strong/chop-chop/doubles/ with or against or whatever it might be that somehow fits into the balancing act and numbers of overall shoes. The latter statement is the one members like Lugi, (the previous Xander-Soxfan and Jimske) will twist and turn and destroy and state that I stupidly attempt to read the trends and patterns and then wager for or against them. And that is not exactly correct by any means.