Here are some pointers I posted on my own forum many years ago, still relevant today.
Money Management is KING
Rather than come and put into print the way I run my Labby?s. First I think I should explain the rationale behind it.
Yes I do believe in Progression Depth. This is usually achieved by throwing a lot of money at something, such as a Fibonacci, Sure-Win, Martingale or any other concoction, you normally (depending how much you are willing to risk) fizzle out at 12 steps. A crazy way to play, seeing your odds never change if you have 1 unit on the felt or 144 units on the felt.
What are these achieving? As far as I can see, they will produce a very very small profit of no more than two units, sometimes less than 1 unit if you consider the Banker commission, and of course you cancel a whole lot of prior losses, well that is the plan. Sometimes it doesn?t work out as you planned and you bust.
Of course Star can provide an equal amount of Progression Depth as a normal Fibonacci, but those LWLWLWLW or LLLLWWW can be a pain in the behind.
So rather than think, I?m going to play thus 10 step Fibonacci and let?s see how any units I can make from this shoe without busting. I gave up playing that way. Now I pre-determine a win rate, and depending how things have gone will repeat this 8 or 10 times in a given session.
No hard and fast rules here, I?m very flexible
My goal target is 6 units. Why six and not 5? (the extra unit is to compensate for the Banker commission?s).
Depending on the mood factor (safety or very safely) I?ll start a session like this; (lets begin safety)
Construct a single Labby string; 1-1-1-1-1-1
First bet is 1 unit (not 2u as per a normally Labby)
If the bet is won, you can either cross off 1 x 1 or simply do nothing (the latter will add to your profit later on).
If I lose the bet, I increment into the string, so the string becomes;
1-1-1-1-1-2 The next bet is 2 units, (note so far we are betting the right hand side only)
If we win the next bet, the string becomes, 1-1-1-1-1, or should we lose again, 3 losses in a row, the string becomes;
1-1-1-2-2-2 and the next bet is now 3 units.
Note* the Labby at the early stage is using increasing at the same rate as a Fibonacci.
The difference is the back end, the Fibo can get ugly very fast, the Labby presents more options to control your bets.
Let?s assume 4L on the bounce; I normally quit incrementing at this stage, because I always want to maintain at least a 1 on the left hand side.
1-1-1-2-2-2-3 Next bet is 4 units.
Is it smelling a bit like a D?Alembert, yeah seems that way, but it recovers a lot faster. By incrementing a few early losses, we can nibble a little bit at the 33%+1 Labby win rate, or in our case 33%+6 win rate.
I don?t really care what my win rate is, I don?t care how many bet?s it takes me to clear the goal target 6 units, the faster the better, but we are dealing with a random game here. All I focus on is keeping my strings in check. If I can clear two or three strings per shoe, then fantastic, if it takes me two shoes to clear one string, then so be it, I?ll take that than having to bet 20 units or more.
I generally don?t increment anything bigger than the figure 2 into a string.
What if things turn real ugly?
If I?m playing with scared money (limited bankroll), I?ll make a 5 unit bet, if this loses, I start another string and I?ll may do one or two things, either total the 2 values on the strings and divide by two and construct two strings, with 1?s on the left hand side, i.e
1-1-2-2-3-4-5 for a total of 18 units, I round up to say 20 units (after all we will have to play a little longer, so let?s make it worthwhile).
1-1-2-3-3 = 20 units once cleared.
1-1-1-1-1 (and simple battle to clear the second string before returning the top sting).
I am in the camp, if you try and clear prior losses too fast, it will cost you eventually.
What is this achieving? Basically it is providing cushion for the first series of losses, which for example will happen when playing any 3COL method.
I have lots of defensive moves, all with the aim of keeping bets low, here are a couple;
Your string is;
2-3-4 you lose a 6 unit bet. Rather than adding it to the right hand side of the string, as you would do with a normal Labby.
2-3-4-6 (so the next bet would be 8 units) sod that.
I do it like this,
1-2-3-4-5 (I add 1 to left and 5 to the right, so the last losing bet is repeated, rather than increased)
Say I win 6 unit bet, the next expected bet is 6 units right, so I could end up giving back those 6 units I just won. Sod that, I win a six unit bet, I remove the 5 and DECREASE the 4 to 3. So my string becomes;
1-2-3-3 (now the next bet is 4 units, so if I lose, I managed to keep 2 units)
Sure it does prolongs the time to clear. BUT it keeps bets low (which is my #1 priority), protecting my bankroll is ALWAYS my main priority, it is not reducing the win rate. Because at the end of the day, nobody knows if the last bet we lost is the beginning of a string of losses.
Hence I play with goal target of 6 units each time, it doesn't matter how long it takes, (half a shoe or 2 shoes), what matters is the pursuit of those six units I don't get cleaned out.
If things got really bad, I would split my lines into 2 or 3 or even 4. And this probably answers ****** comment about splitting and pushing up the win rate. This is fine for mechanical bet selections, unless you expect to hit a shoe full or 2's or full if 3's. That ain't gonna happen.
When compared to a Fibonacci I'll maybe bet 21 units occasionally when my patience is shot. However won't anywhere near betting 20 units when using a Labby. That might not make sense, but here is why.
Should you get to the stage of betting 10 or more units with the Labby, you are already in deep trouble already. Having to bet +10 units and there will be a few +10 unit bets sitting right behind it and behind that again. I will split or balance strings before I bet more than 10 units using the cancellation system.
A 21 unit Fibonacci bet will provide a decent recoup and regress option, the Labby doesn't, but if that 21U Fibo bet tanks, than you might as well say goodnight.
A normal Labby can have you placing bets of 3 or 4 units, or put you 15 units in the hole, for what? A potential one unit profit once cleared, less all the tax you pay, you might be lucky to break even in such situations.
If your winning fine there is no detriment doin' what I do. If I'm losing it pays dividends in keeping bets low. This is where confidence in your bet selection comes into play. For example if your playing a bet selection that wins against all patterns except a small percentage of a specific streak length, then any loss series you encounter, you should realize this is unlikely to repeat this shoe or maybe the next. However you really never know, the game might want to test your patience. Don't fail the test.
I can easily withstand 10 losses in a row starting with multiple strings and using a rotation between them, and still not hit double digits startgin with split strings. What I can't withstand is, 10L in a row, followed by a win or two then another other bad run of 6L or 7L, this will bust me or have me reverting to a full recovery usually with a Fibonacci.
Once you can beat / handle the worst case scenario you can find for what you intend to do at a casino, then when you hit the tables, you?re in a pretty powerful position.
Example of how to win 10 or 12 units at a time, then repeat the task over and over.
12 x 1's rather than 10 x 1's in order to takes care of the 5% B tax and provide a clear 10 unit profit, maybe a bit extra!!!
I run two strings from the on-set, first bet is NOT 2 units. First bet is ONE unit, second bet is 2 units should a loss occur, next bet is 3 units and will stay at 3 units for a short while, because I increment into the string. Or sometimes after a 2L loss, the next bet will be 1u then 2u. Meaning if I run into 4 losses on the bounce, it has cost me 6 units thus far.
It is totally dependent on what I am doin'. If I am playing OLD/AS my nemesis is streaks greater than 8. Should I run into an 8 streak when I first sit down, the cost will be a 9 unit draw-down.
I'm switching between the two strings. If one string is cleared and the other string is beginning to balloon, I have the option to balance between the strings, while also adding 1's on the left hand side to make the extra effort required worth it (the buggeration factor) AND to cater for the 5% tax. If I am struggling I have a few other options I deploy.
While you can't do anything about the next outcome because "it is random", you sure do have options when it comes to money management.
I have played around with such techniques for years at home, which is why if I hit 5L my bet size has rarely stretched beyond 3 units. I test for worst case scenario?s. Should you do this, it will become obvious why I prefer to start with 6 x 1's rather than 5 x 1's, irrespective of trying to cater for the 5% tax penalty. It makes a difference should you run head first into a run of losses. On a few occasions I?ve started with a single string of 10 x 1?s.
I try my utmost to avoid betting more than 10 units when using a Labby, if I have a digit value greater than 5 or 6 in my string, my alert bells are already ringing, again this comes from experience, hence the reason why I practise variations at home. I also monitor myself, if I feel impatience starting to kick in, or I?m taking a few risks which I know I wouldn?t have when I first sit down, I attempt to rein myself in and looking for an exit from the shoe/game. I know the longer you play something, the harder discipline will become, if you appreciate this fact, then you are less likely to succumb to it.
I also avoid any nonsensical pre-constructed strings such as 1-1-2-1-1 or 1-1-2-3 (unless in recovery mode). Starting off with strings consisting of digits greater than 1?s, will bite you in the behind quicker than you know it.
IT'S ALWAYS SAFETY FIRST, wins will take care of themselves, everything I do has no detrimental impact on wins, so there is no negative side to implementing a safety first approach. Multiple strings force the player to act, rather than leave things to ?how you are feeling? at the time? while having some dealer repeating to you, ?any more bets?. Your third bet after 2L is automatically 1u. Sure a 3u bet would have been preferable should you win the bet. But we don?t know this in advance, we can only act on what we know. We don?t know if we will lose or win the next bet, but what we should know is that losses won?t go on forever. Nothing wrong in a bit of forced ?bet sized? manipulation to ride out any storm that comes blowing your way.
You can always use any small wins to decrease large right hand side digits that may be in your strings, you don?t need to focus on reducing the win requirements, the goal target is the initial string length. It comes back to the level of confidence you have in what you are doing. So long as you eventually clear the strings, you hit a goal target. It really doesn?t matter if you do it now or a few columns from now, or even the next shoe.
I have the option of running a Contra Alembert against long chops if I am up, or just hitting the tables and a single lost bet will have very little impact, always cater for the worst case situations.