Royal Panda roulette

Author Topic: Progressions vs flat betting  (Read 3124 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

scepticus

Re: Progressions vs flat betting
« Reply #15 on: January 02, 2019, 04:49:20 PM »
THOMASLEOR, thank you very much for your testimony. If you feel like you're learning it's great for you. It's a profit for me to know  :)   -  strategie

 :D :D

 

Stratege

Re: Progressions vs flat betting
« Reply #16 on: January 02, 2019, 05:11:41 PM »

SCEPTICUS evokes an error among players: want to win quickly and a lot. So the progressions are seductive.

Players often prefer to win 5 chips with 50 in their pocket than to win 1 token with only 10 in their pocket. It's mathematically the same thing but psychologically different (for some!)
There are many things like these that make illusion in the minds of players.It's a big psychological job to overcome those illusions that prevent you from winning.
« Last Edit: January 02, 2019, 05:14:51 PM by Stratege »
 

gizmotron

Re: Progressions vs flat betting
« Reply #17 on: January 02, 2019, 05:31:58 PM »
So, what would you recommend for a just starting roulette player? Progressions or flat betting?

Never go to a casino, including online casinos, until you have proved to yourself that you can win in the long run. In that way you can come to the conclusion that there are no progressions that can benefit you in the long run. There is no way to determine when to use a progression. So timing tricks are just fallacies. You must learn how not to dig deep holes. In the end an axiom that is older than the 19th century come true. "Bet bigger when you are doing real well and bet smallest when you are doing bad." I would add to that to stay in the logic center of your brain no matter what. Most problem gamblers let their emotions carry them away to the pleasure center of their brains where they don't mind losing much at all.
 
The following users thanked this post: mr j

Third

Re: Progressions vs flat betting
« Reply #18 on: January 02, 2019, 06:10:26 PM »
Probability can be used successfully with progressions to profit.  Its not easy or simple but possible.  It does seem like a good idea to practice flat betting so one can get the proper perspective on how to use progressions as conservatively as possible.
 

mr j

Re: Progressions vs flat betting
« Reply #19 on: January 02, 2019, 06:26:27 PM »
I prey on the progression attics. I saw a guy bet the 0/2 split for at least 50 spins (progression). It never hit.
He stayed for a few more spins after he went broke. My PLAN was to only bet it, $100 split, for 8 spins. It hit on the 3rd try and I thanked him, then laughed at him sarcastically. I never would of bet it had he not done that. Similar >> 00 wheel, guy bets $25 on 17 & 20. (rofl) I put $100 on the 32, yep 32 hits. Was it luck? It sure was but I'll take it.
 
The following users thanked this post: Third

gizmotron

Re: Progressions vs flat betting
« Reply #20 on: January 02, 2019, 06:47:40 PM »
Probability can be used successfully with progressions to profit.  Its not easy or simple but possible.  It does seem like a good idea to practice flat betting so one can get the proper perspective on how to use progressions as conservatively as possible.

So you know when to use a progression then? You use statistical inferences to signal a future position of advantageous prosperity. It sounds so magical to me. Knowing when to pay $10,000 just to win $50 must be massively rewarding. I have noticed that the most elaborate and well thought out progression still comes all undone enough to take back all the progress. That is the only magic that works. You pull the pointed, star clustered, magician's hat down over your eyes and hope for PRESTO.  I hope you get off this progression stuff this year. It's a baloney festival at best.
 

Third

Re: Progressions vs flat betting
« Reply #21 on: January 02, 2019, 07:03:53 PM »
I know how to use a progression responsibly, with losing in mind and in conjunction with statistics.  My goal is to make my progression even stronger (i.e. safer) this year.
« Last Edit: January 02, 2019, 07:08:33 PM by Third »
 

Stratege

Re: Progressions vs flat betting
« Reply #22 on: January 02, 2019, 07:08:37 PM »
THIRD, a method with a positive expectancy, effectively combats variance and therefore capital with progression or flat betting is weaker. It is therefore possible to win with a progression as I explained in my first post.
But with a method with negative expectancy, deviance + zero (or even 00) becomes a problem without solution. The mirage of progress is that you win 99 parties and only 1 is enough to lose everything. If a player takes a test at home and wins 600 parties without losing one. He believes he has a definite advantage. He will then play in a casino and there he meets 2 or 3 losing parties fairly quickly. This is statistically normal but the player has lost more than normal.
For those who absolutely want to play a progression (since everyone is free), the best is to follow 100 or 200 different progressions (or different chances). When a progression is very losing (very abnormal difference), it will really play to recover some chips at 5 or $ 10. This is the least risky strategy in progress because we put very low and few spins.
Here, I believe, THIRD, you have an opinion that leaves you free. I can’t do better than tell you this strategy.
« Last Edit: January 02, 2019, 07:12:10 PM by Stratege »
 

Third

Re: Progressions vs flat betting
« Reply #23 on: January 02, 2019, 07:20:01 PM »
You said that 1 loss is enough to lose everything but then you say that 2-3 losses is enough?  Which do you mean?
 

Stratege

Re: Progressions vs flat betting
« Reply #24 on: January 02, 2019, 07:39:36 PM »
I mean for example that 99 parties win in total 990 chips and one game loses 1000 chips. A player at home tests progress and wins 600 parties without losing. He earns 6000 chips at home on his computer. He believes he has a winning method. He goes to the casino to play 100 parties and he encounters 2 or 3 losing parties (2000 or 3000 chips lost). Statistically it's normal. On 700 parties (computer + casino) he had 2 or 3 losers. His method had a favorable variance for his progression but he earns a lot at home on his computer and loses a lot in a casino!
« Last Edit: January 02, 2019, 07:42:41 PM by Stratege »
 

Third

Re: Progressions vs flat betting
« Reply #25 on: January 02, 2019, 08:06:33 PM »
It sounds like from your example that the person in question is working at a very close to 1:1 statistical ratio of expected amount won:expected amount lost.  This is the first thing they need to fix.  There are techniques to do this.  You want a ratio like 3:1 or even 2:1, try to get it as high as you can. 

Here is an example of this kind of thinking pointed out by Gizmo:

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

« Last Edit: January 02, 2019, 08:09:54 PM by Third »
 

gizmotron

Re: Progressions vs flat betting
« Reply #26 on: January 02, 2019, 08:48:14 PM »
It sounds like from your example that the person in question is working at a very close to 1:1 statistical ratio of expected amount won:expected amount lost.  This is the first thing they need to fix.  There are techniques to do this.  You want a ratio like 3:1 or even 2:1, try to get it as high as you can. 

Here is an example of this kind of thinking pointed out by Gizmo:

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

That stock trading video is flat betting based. He gets out at 4:1 on wins and 2:1 on losses. It's a single priced buy in. That is the same as 2 net wins for every 1 net lost. He expects to lose half his trades. So he wins 1 net win for every trade in the long run. He wins by attrition. But it is all tactical where he waits for the beginning of an uptick trend.

What I do is use 7 net losses in a session verses 3 net wins in a session. Only I expect to win at least 4.5 or better for each lost session. It takes 2.333 won sessions to pay for each lost session. With a win rate of 4.666 to 1 I have an equivalence of 2:1 win ratio in actual results. This is so far beyond the mathematical expectation that it is a fundamental shift in known probability predictions.

There is no way to know when to use a progression. I play a flat bet or a non-monetized selected bet, a virtual bet, that tells me if I'm on the money or not. But it is always a flat monetized bet.
 
The following users thanked this post: Third

scepticus

Re: Progressions vs flat betting
« Reply #27 on: January 02, 2019, 09:56:01 PM »

SCEPTICUS evokes an error among players: want to win quickly and a lot. So the progressions are seductive.

Players often prefer to win 5 chips with 50 in their pocket than to win 1 token with only 10 in their pocket. It's mathematically the same thing but psychologically different (for some!)
There are many things like these that make illusion in the minds of players.It's a big psychological job to overcome those illusions that prevent you from winning.

I play only Flat Betting  .

My Thomas Lear post was meant as a joke whichI think Thomas- and some others  -  will understand .
« Last Edit: January 02, 2019, 09:58:41 PM by scepticus »
 

mr j

Re: Progressions vs flat betting
« Reply #28 on: January 02, 2019, 11:29:22 PM »
If your method cant win flat betting, it won't win LONG TERM RESULTS with a progression. Geez, I remember my progression days. Glad that s**t is in my rear view.
 

palestis

Re: Progressions vs flat betting
« Reply #29 on: January 03, 2019, 12:51:06 AM »
I mean for example that 99 parties win in total 990 chips and one game loses 1000 chips.
Not all progressions are the same.
Most players think that progressions involve doubling ( EC bets), and tripling (2 dozens or 2 columns).
They also think that you have to progress indefinitely until you get your hit.
Then you run into the black swan and you run out of B/R  by continuing  the progression beyond the system's limits.
That's how you lose everything you won up to that point.
Before you incorporate a progression into your system, you have to know your system's most frequent winning range. Then you progress only within that range.  If it doesn't work this time you wait for the next time.
If the winning range is very wide ( as in the case of playing very few numbers), then you can bypass the initial steps with virtual losses.( if you don't want to risk a full range progression).
The winning range cannot be constantly breached, against long term tests. It has to comply with the statistical findings, at least most of the time.

« Last Edit: January 03, 2019, 12:53:05 AM by palestis »
 
The following users thanked this post: Third