...Because the single session bank is a "soldier". You should go to the battlefield with an army.

Your inter-session money management plan should account for losing a session bank as a natural (even expected) circumstance when betting. This is done by implementing a betting framework letting the wins build more session banks.

Please look at these for context:

[attachimg=1]

[attachimg=2]

[attachimg=3]

Also, read the original threads featuring the images above:

50% Money Management
75% Money Management

A very practical approach to the old adages regarding "not chasing" and "letting wins take care of losses".

Back to the analogy above, your goal should be to have the largest reserve army possible. With as much backup soldiers as possible; always ready to take part of the action.

This means putting as many minimal-unit bankrolls as possible between you and the casino.

Each and every one of them has the potential to grow and build more mini-banks. Akin to recruiting more soldiers to increase your army's numbers.

The more troops on reserve, the better.

...When betting, your bankroll is your oxygen. You can only do good to adjust your betting framework to build as many "oxygen tanks" (bankrolls) as possible while minimizing the leaks so losing a session bank is nothing but a "blip" on your winning road.

Vic

Buy-In, 1-3-2-6 & 1+4 Wagering, Money Management System
« on: June 14, 2017, 08:43:08 pm »

I personally feel that those having a 'set anything' in gambling, especially playing baccarat is adding to the negativities and the volatility of the game against you.  What I am referring to is wagering and your money management, which are two of the most important things in gambling at baccarat.

After decades and decades of gambling at baccarat, I wholeheartedly believe and subscribe to a few different attacks on the game.  I normally do get into the mind-set of using all three when I sit down, at times I forgo one of them, but usually stay on track simultaneously alternating or combining them.  Here they are.

1)   My buy-in.  I do not like to re-buy in at all.  I feel that is a negative and a false cushion.  Many I observe with a low buy-in to their fund that they will risk and if lost, they re-buy in once again.  If they bring say $1,800.00 players might buy in up to 6 times with $300.00 each time.  I feel, that they have a false-cushion with safety and planning that way.  They are always saying, 'if I lose this in front of me—I will just buy in once again', etc.  I rather see all my risk money in front of me before I win and divide it up, add to it and place some in reserve;

2)   1-3-2-6 Positive Progression.  My positive progression used the majority of the time.  I do not subscribe to negative progression unless it is a series of 2, possible 3 times and then only—if the pattern, trends and previous shoe outcomes warrant it, IMO;

3)   1 + 4 Side Parlay Wager.  I try to always have a side wager going for myself, when I am on a 'run' I can profit huge with my '1 unit' and then parlay that 1 unit, four times.  The one unit would normally come from a previous win amount.  As a rule, say I won $800.00, I might put $500 in my stack and then with the 3-$100 amounts, attempt a couple of 1 + 4 Parlay wagers.  I can't view it except anything but my 'lucky attempts' and my 'lucky money' if I succeed with doing that;

4)   1/3rd, 1/3rd, 1/3rd Money Management System.  When I double or triple my buy-in, I employ a money management system.  I divide up whatever amount I am winning, into thirds and put 1/3rd with my current buy-in, 1/3rd with a reserved amount in my pocket if I lose and desire to stay for whatever reasons and the other 1/3rd into a 'locked up' status that will not be deviated from.  I constantly divide up the win money every so often into those categories if I won.

To me, it is all second nature.  And, after thinking back each time, I have noticed countless times, that one or the other saved me from the complete depletion of my buy-in.

Getting ahead and quitting is very hard for myself without certain parameters that I mentioned above.  It allows me to see clearly at the table, focus on what I won, put away, have available, etc.  Instead of having a pile of chips and trying to be conscious of what I will gamble, hold, cash out or keep for later play, etc.  It works well for me the way I outlined.  It has nothing to do with wagering or strategy, it is simply a quick and easy method for all my misc., other than bet placement/bet selection method.  It does allow me to win more if I can and hold a certain amount without giving it back, etc.

Here is my reasoning.  'A Goal'.  If it comes you are stopping--the true joy, the true ecstasy of the greatest game and easiest way to earn money, etc., etc.   If it doesn't come, you are going to fight, demand and feel hurt—abused—and cheated.  "Why am I here—why did I come here tonight, boy this life sucks", etc., etc., and so on.  But with both of those, you will always have, 'small losses and small wins'—that is, if you stick to your stop loss and stick to your 'small win-immediate leave' protocol. Some how, at some time and inevitable--you will be busted out, ground down.  The question is not if---the question is--when.

So if you feel comfortable wagering a set amount of money and timing yourself with the wins as well as the losses, so be it.  You are, IMO, hampering any chances you truly have in this game.  I have seen hundreds turned into tens of thousands and thousands turning into hundreds of thousands.  It is all up to you, how you play, think and attack the casino.  But, what happens more times than others, is that you will feel shorted and used when you lose forcing yourself to allow repetitive buy-ins.  When you win you might be overcome with another personality and aura that will deplete all of your win and buy-in funds without offering you any chance to continue winning or maintain a certain amount you previously committed to stashing away.

@ Allrelax,

Do you know user "Bombus" from "gamblingforums"?
I'm asking because he mentioned you over there and I've replied him: "why don't you let him (you) know?"
Bombus said: "I'd do so but Esoito's moderation wouldn't allow me to".

So what's the buzz about?

I sure don't, sorry.  No idea.

Apologize for the off topic deviation.

A simple progression is to bet flat as long as you are losing and when you win check your balance, if you are down then place the amount required in order to recoup in next win, assuming that you lose again then keep that amount till you win again, when you win calculate the recoup for next 2 wins in a row, for example:

Lose -1,Lose -2,Lose -3,Lose -4, Win -3 so far 4 losses in a row and 1 win, the next bet should be 4 units in order to recoup in 1 more win, let's say it continues like this:

Lose -7,Lose -11,Lose -15,Lose -19, Win -15 another 4 streak of losses breaks by a single win, now the next bet should be 8 units because -15/2 = 7.5 , let's say it continues like this:

Win -7, Lose -15, Lose -23, Lose -31,Win -23 now the next bet should be 8 units because -23/3 = 7.67 , let's say it continues like this:

Win -15, Win -7, Lose -15, Lose -23,Win -15 now the next bet should be 4 units because -15/4 = 3.75 , let's say it continues like this:

Win -11, Win -7, Lose -11,Win -7 now the next bet should be 2 units because -7/5 = 1.4 , let's say it continues like this:

Win -5, Win -3, Win -1, Win +1

After every losing streak add 1 more expected win and calculate next bet by dividing the total by 1,2,3,4,5,6...etc wins.
Every losing stretch could be 1 loss or more while you add only 1 expected win in order to counterbalance it.
You continue till new high or table limits or bankroll buster.
Obviously is good only for EC bets.

Blue Angel, very interesting MM.
How does it behave in longrun?
How will the situation appear with virtual limits and lost 10 bets in a row?

Quote from: ozon on September 29, 2017, 11:34:04 PM
Blue Angel, very interesting MM.
How does it behave in longrun?
How will the situation appear with virtual limits and lost 10 bets in a row?

I've not tested it because I don't bet EC's, first of all I'm examining principles, this helps me to realize what's the potential of such betting strategy rather than testing let's say 1000 bets because the next 1000 bets would be a different story.
A valid principle though could work long term.

The focus here should be on how recovers, this could be achieved by a single winning streak.
I suggest to be capped on up to 6 consecutive wins (including the initial win which breaks the losing streak).
After passing the point of 6 consecutive wins (expectation) there should be only units increasings.

The bottom line is: how many times I could lose before a winning streak occurs? (from 1 up to 6 wins in a row)
By expecting a winning streak this doesn't equate with any EC side streak expectation, I could achieve a winning streak by betting intermittence (chop), by betting randomly or by betting a preconceived sequence.

Hopefully your doubts have been dissolved.

Dear Victor,

I appreciate your proposition, I've to pass it though.

The reasoning of after 1 win, whether it is a bet, a session or both, another 1 is more probable is as good as expecting a win after 1 lost bet/session.

A single bet is a miniature of a session, many bets create a session, many sessions what we call long term.
There are sessions which favor win after win, while others which favor win after loss, whether you implement such betting strategy as a progression during a session and/or  from session to session as money management makes no difference as the only difference is the scale, in other words the degree of gain/loss and not turning negative into positive.

If we disregard bet selection completely then we left only with hope that when we bet more money there would be more wins than losses.

Why the wins and losses sequence has to be unfolded in a certain way when there are too many ways it could occur?
Half of all times your results will be favorable and the other half will be negative, it's like that you believe that red is more likely than black.

The proper selection must has rock solid pillars which in turn would allow the gradual growth of the capital.
These pillars are representing a valid principal, what it could be, can you imagine?
Winning every single bet is impossible, winning every session could be a realistic expectation because a session is a series of bets which we should aim to become overall winners.

Therefore the next reasonable step is to determine within how many bets to conclude for net profit, in other words the amount of time and money to be invested till total return is greater than total expenditure.
What should be the target is the million dollar question, before 6 wins or repeats happen there will be 5, 4, 3, 2, 1...the same goes for the opposite, before 6 losses occur there are going to be 5,4,3,2,1...

Quote from: alrelax on September 29, 2017, 08:05:53 PM
4)   1/3rd, 1/3rd, 1/3rd Money Management System.  When I double or triple my buy-in, I employ a money management system.  I divide up whatever amount I am winning, into thirds and put 1/3rd with my current buy-in, 1/3rd with a reserved amount in my pocket if I lose and desire to stay for whatever reasons and the other 1/3rd into a 'locked up' status that will not be deviated from.  I constantly divide up the win money every so often into those categories if I won.

A little bit of giving credit where credit is due doesn't harm anyone:

http://betselection.cc/blueangel's-mindsphere/tier-et-tout-revised-aka-tetr/

I'm glad it has served you well as it has been for me long time ago.

Losing a day's bankroll is not catastrophic at all, provided your average win is also close to the same figure. When I play for a week, I lose my day's bankroll once or twice but overall wins compensate them pretty much. If someone plays a dangerous progression, his losses could be irrecoverable and a single loss could be catastrophic for him. What is important is to understand that even the worst of worst showing up in early days of your plays should not suck you up.

All are relevant Summit, if you split 1 larger bankroll into smaller session bankrolls you are risking less but you are going to lose it more frequently, while someone with 1 large bankroll he is risking it every session but till he loses it he could has won more than what his bankroll worth.

For example let's say you have 2100 $ total and you split it into 7 parts of 300 $ each and you call it a session bankroll, while I have the same amount as 1 single unified bankroll, during the 1st week of our contest you win 210 units net and I win 1400 units net on the same results.
With this kind of pace in the gain it's not hard to imagine who will be ahead on the next week and how long it will take you to gain 2100 units when you average 30 units net per 300 bets.

The aftermath is not to consider only 1 side of the coin because there are 2, you focus only on the risk/loss but how about how much you are winning when you are winning, how often this happens...don't you think this side is also important?

Whether you pay 1000 $ in 10 terms of 100 or all at once has no difference regarding the edge, the same goes for the amounts of the bets, edge comes from selecting the winning number/side most of the times or with a high degree of certainty within a specific range of bets.
There's nothing on how you divide your money and please don't fool yourselves by saying I'm betting with casino money, since you won it it's yours and every single bet, regardless of if it's after a win or a loss, has risk.

Excuse me if I'm stating the obvious but it seems it's not so obvious for everybody.

Quote from: Blue_Angel on October 02, 2017, 12:00:26 PM
All are relevant Summit, if you split 1 larger bankroll into smaller session bankrolls you are risking less but you are going to lose it more frequently, while someone with 1 large bankroll he is risking it every session but till he loses it he could has won more than what his bankroll worth.

For example let's say you have 2100 $ total and you split it into 7 parts of 300 $ each and you call it a session bankroll, while I have the same amount as 1 single unified bankroll, during the 1st week of our contest you win 210 units net and I win 1400 units net on the same results.
With this kind of pace in the gain it's not hard to imagine who will be ahead on the next week and how long it will take you to gain 2100 units when you average 30 units net per 300 bets.

The aftermath is not to consider only 1 side of the coin because there are 2, you focus only on the risk/loss but how about how much you are winning when you are winning, how often this happens...don't you think this side is also important?

Whether you pay 1000 $ in 10 terms of 100 or all at once has no difference regarding the edge, the same goes for the amounts of the bets, edge comes from selecting the winning number/side most of the times or with a high degree of certainty within a specific range of bets.
There's nothing on how you divide your money and please don't fool yourselves by saying I'm betting with casino money, since you won it it's yours and every single bet, regardless of if it's after a win or a loss, has risk.

Excuse me if I'm stating the obvious but it seems it's not so obvious for everybody.

False concept---'more is better' or 'win more with larger bankroll'.  Double edged sword--big time!  You do buy more time to play, but you also buy more time to lose.  Can easily work against yourself.

As far as the 'casinos money'.  Truw 100% it is yours when you win each wager.  However, baccarat is also psych and being comfortable with a clear mind, vision and confidence level is a huge plus in this game. 

I still rather win quickly and merge some of the win money with my buy-in and continue with the extra confidence and comfort level.  At least IMO and in my experiences.

QuoteHowever, baccarat is also psych and being comfortable with a clear mind, vision and confidence level is a huge plus in this game.

The best in my consideration is to receive win and loss in the same manner, cold and distant, like it were not your money that you win/lose.
Whatever you could see, it cannot surprise you or get you of the track because you've seen all these before, yet again for some, impulsive decisions prevail against disciplined plan.
Personality is all the money.

Quote from: Blue_Angel on October 02, 2017, 12:53:28 PM
The best in my consideration is to receive win and loss in the same manner, cold and distant, like it were not your money that you win/lose.
Whatever you could see, it cannot surprise you or get you of the track because you've seen all these before, yet again for some, impulsive decisions prevail against disciplined plan.
Personality is all the money.

Correct.  But, ideal versus reality.  Computer theory exploring something in the office and then living it in the field, huge difference.  Thinking of going to Vegas and watching a concert at the Mandalay Bay at night time with a drink in hand versus, actually standing there with machine gun fire killing people all around you while you relax and get into the groove of some music, etc.  Huge difference. 

Quote from: alrelax on October 02, 2017, 01:11:05 PM
Correct.  But, ideal versus reality.  Computer theory exploring something in the office and then living it in the field, huge difference.  Thinking of going to Vegas and watching a concert at the Mandalay Bay at night time with a drink in hand versus, actually standing there with machine gun fire killing people all around you while you relax and get into the groove of some music, etc.  Huge difference. 

There's always difference between theory and reality, theories are representing how things should be but real life examples are far from it.
It's not about if differs but how much difference there is.
Nothing really is what it seems to be, the phenomena could be deceptive...