Parlays

[GLC]

I was just musing about my favorite system (currently) which uses a parlay and it dawned on me that all a parlay does is expand a bet progression.  It keeps your bets smaller but I'm not sure that you gives you any advantage other than taking a longer series of losses to reach a stop loss.

Here's what I mean.  A standard martingale is 1 2 4 8 16 32 etc...  A standard martingale based on a single parlay is 1 1 1 2 2 3 4 5 7 9 etc...  The basic marty is based on winning 1 time in a row and the single parlay marty is based on winning 2 times in a row.  If someone could do the math, we'd see that the advantage of winning 3 units for a 1 unit investment resulting from a double win is no different than winning 1 unit for a 1 unit investment resulting from a single win.

What it does is allow you to make more bets at smaller amounts.  Think of it this way.  If we win 1 time for every two bets at 1:1 we will break even every 2 spins.   We win 2 times in a row every 5 bets which also breaks even  because we lose 1, we lose 2, we lose 3 then we win 1 and let it ride (parlay) which nets us 3 units which offsets the 3 we lost.  That takes 2.5 times more spins for a cycle, thus we can play longer for smaller bets.

In roulette, the frequency for a single win vs a double win are in direct relationship with one another so that the odds of winning or losing don't change, the double win just takes longer to develop.

Same thing for a double parlay, triple parlay, or as many as you want.

My favorite parlay bet is what I call the flat bet parlay.  It is based on a 1 unit bet that you let ride until you have recovered all past losses.  So, if you have lost 7 times, it means you are -7.  If you start with a 1 unit bet and let it ride 2 more times, you will have won 7 units and will be back to even.  Here's the math. 1 unit bet wins 1 so we let the 2 units ride.  2 units wins 2 more and we let the 4 units ride.  4 units wins 8 and we take back our original 1 unit and we have 7 units which breaks us even.

Our next bet is 1 unit and as long as it wins, we don't let it ride.  As soon as we encounter a loss, we go into our parlays until we have enough wins in a row to recover previous losses.

Though boring, the flat bet parlay is a very strong bet method.  The best thing about it is that you never end up having to bet large bets of your own money in a very bad losing streak.  The only weakness is that it can go into a series where you lose more 1 unit attacks and never quite reach the next parlay level soon enough to fully recover.

Another strength of it is that if you are down say 21 units and you have just won 4 times in a row, netting you 15 units, you can always end the parlay sequence and reduce the -21 units by the 15 you're ahead leaving 6 unrecovered units.  That means you can start again at 1 unit and all you have to do is win 3 times in a row to recover the remaining 6 units.

The other way to play this is to play a bread winner type system.  In other words if you lose 5 attacks starting at 1 unit, you move to starting at 2 units until you fully recover or lose 5 attacks at 2 unit startings.  Then you move to starting the attacks at 3 units etc...

If you like keeping your units low, the parlay method(s) are worth looking at.

GLC

[biagle]

and your favorite bet selection for this is?

[GLC]

and your favorite bet selection for this is?

link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=12071.msg105177#msg105177

[donjuan]

Hi if my result is WLLWLWLLWWLLLLWLLLLLWWLLLLWLLLL            

what is MM progression that can use for recover or the right way?


Thank you

[GLC]

The only progressions that can beat a losing result like that is a 6 step martingale or a fibonacci.

The problem is that a with a 29% win rate, you're bound to have much longer losing streaks than the ones shown meaning that you would have to use more than a 6 step marty.  And then, where do you throw in the towel and take the loss?

If this is just a rare anomaly, then you can still use this flat bet parlay idea because your recovery streak is yet to come.  Using my flat bet parlay, you are at -16 which means 4 wins in a row starting on the next spin gets you back to even and hopefully the beginning of a better win vs loss session.

[donjuan]

   many thank GLC.   I'm new forum's member.  please write your flat betting parlay system.  is it 1 1 1 2 2 3 4 5 7 9?  or what is link that i can read your flat parly?

[Ralph]

It is allways a small chance we will lose!

I did many 1000 spins using martingale style parlay, and won not bad. In 200 spins it is a good chance you will meet 7 in a row.
We play FTL and parlay 1,2,4,8....

The first new high reset to one.  we can  fall back  a lot, we try to expand the parlay until plus. As we lose  just one every trials we can hold with a bankroll of a few hundred until we have a reasonable chance to recover in series of 6 to 9.

This method have a high wagering through rate, and have a chance to survive a bonus which call for 30X.

I did my play on a NOZERO wheel online, which accept 0.05 Eurocent as minimum bet. Still I won over 500 Euro.

The advantages of positive progressions, is we never come in a situation of large bets seeing the bankroll deplete in just one session, if we  are unlucky we have time to consider to stop it takes the same number of  sessions as we have risking units.

[mogul397]

What about 2 2 3 4 6 8 12 16??

[GLC]

What about 2 2 3 4 6 8 12 16??

You can use any progression you like.  Just remember that we're trying to keep our bets as small a possible until we can have a winning streak long enough to recover our losses.

A friend of mine uses this idea but with multiple wins for a recovery.  He usually picks 4 wins in a row.  He starts every attack by betting 1 unit.  He let's a 1 unit bet ride until it loses or he reaches a new high bank balance or he wins 4 times in a row.  If he wins 4 times in a row and hasn't reached a new high bank balance, he will have reduced the losses by 15 units and he starts another attempt beginning with 1 unit.

On very bad sessions he might get so deep in the hole that it takes 5 or 6 wins of 4 in a row to fully recover.  He likes this method of play  because he decides how much his stop loss is by how much he buys in for.  Since he only loses 1 unit per attack, when his buy-in is exhausted, he walks.  No ifs, ands or buts!  Hard to get into too much trouble playing this way.

When you get familiar with how systems are developed, you realize that you can tweak any system many ways to suit your own playing style.  The same with this system.

My advice to all members is to study different topics on this forum until you understand how systems are developed so you can make your own tweaks.  Stop asking posters so many questions about minute details.  They don't matter in the long run.  Every tweak just changes the sequences that cause your idea to lose.  It will never eliminate them altogether.

Cheers,
George

[beretta28]

GLC
your 1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,7,9(35 units) has the same probability of losing as 1,2,4,8,16(31 units).
If it seems incredible,no progression is better than a classic martingale as probability of W or L.

[GLC]

GLC
your 1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,7,9(35 units) has the same probability of losing as 1,2,4,8,16(31 units).
If it seems incredible,no progression is better than a classic martingale as probability of W or L.

I totally agree with you beretta.  It has taken me years to reach that conclusion.  The longer I tinker with betting methods the more obvious it becomes that nothing is better than a flatbet in the long run.  No bet selection is better than a bet on Red every spin or on zero every spin or any other bet.  I have enjoyed playing around with bet progressions and it's hard to kick the habit.

I know an elderly gentleman named Gene who loves to play roulette and has played it most of his life, and he's older than me.  He plays 1 unit on the hottest dozen on our airball machine.  A dozen has to be the hottest dozen for 3 of the last 4 trips to the casino.  He plays for $25 units, the most you can bet on our airball machine.  The casino posts a list of hot numbers so it's easy to determine the hottest dozen.  He plays that dozen until another dozen is the hottest for the last 3 out of 4 trips.  He says that it is not common to play the same dozen for 16 or more trips.  Once he played the same dozen for 31 sessions.  That's his record.

His reasoning is that playing this way takes advantage of any imperfections in the wheel system. 

Playing this way is just a little tick away from a flatbet always on the same dozen but he feels like he's doing something that moves the odds his way.  Is he right or wrong?  He's still winning so maybe he's right.

Since he's retired and lives a couple of miles from the casino, it's a good form of recreation for him.

I haven't seen him for quite a while, but that's not uncommon since I don't get out there very often and when I do, it has to be at the same time he's there.

Just a little anecdote for your consideration.  Do with it what you will.

To the wise, a hint is all that's needed!

GLC

[beretta28]

Interesting little anecdote.
I know also some old and wise man,who are convinced that playing in a given way,they have an advantage.
For instance (and I confess that I studied a lot about it) an old player in Montecarlo Casino plays all the time the even chance looking for "SINGLE"
RRRBRRRRRBRBRRR:here we have three SINGLES at Black an one at Red.
His theory is the following:
Singles are the same as the sum of patterns of 2 + patterns of 3+ patterns of 4 +………patterns of 150(just an example)…. + patterns of 270(just an example)…..and so on.
Because he'll never see a streak of 150 or 270 or more in B or R,he's convinced that SINGLES take a small advantage vs higher patterns.
SINGLES must hit more often in order to offset the higher patterns that he'll never see in his life,but must hit too sooner or later(very later….)mathematically.
I hope you can understand my bad english

[thelaw]

Interesting little anecdote.
I know also some old and wise man,who are convinced that playing in a given way,they have an advantage.
For instance (and I confess that I studied a lot about it) an old player in Montecarlo Casino plays all the time the even chance looking for "SINGLE"
RRRBRRRRRBRBRRR:here we have three SINGLES at Black an one at Red.
His theory is the following:
Singles are the same as the sum of patterns of 2 + patterns of 3+ patterns of 4 +………patterns of 150(just an example)…. + patterns of 270(just an example)…..and so on.
Because he'll never see a streak of 150 or 270 or more in B or R,he's convinced that SINGLES take a small advantage vs higher patterns.
SINGLES must hit more often in order to offset the higher patterns that he'll never see in his life,but must hit too sooner or later(very later….)mathematically.
I hope you can understand my bad english

Hey Beretta,

That sounds interesting. Can you give a few examples?

Thanks!

[GLC]

Interesting little anecdote.
I know also some old and wise man,who are convinced that playing in a given way,they have an advantage.
For instance (and I confess that I studied a lot about it) an old player in Montecarlo Casino plays all the time the even chance looking for "SINGLE"
RRRBRRRRRBRBRRR:here we have three SINGLES at Black an one at Red.
His theory is the following:
Singles are the same as the sum of patterns of 2 + patterns of 3+ patterns of 4 +………patterns of 150(just an example)…. + patterns of 270(just an example)…..and so on.
Because he'll never see a streak of 150 or 270 or more in B or R,he's convinced that SINGLES take a small advantage vs higher patterns.
SINGLES must hit more often in order to offset the higher patterns that he'll never see in his life,but must hit too sooner or later(very later….)mathematically.
I hope you can understand my bad english

What you're saying is that he bets opposite the last because in 1,000 spins he has the following break down

500 singles
250 doubles
125 triples
62.5 quads
31.25 pentets ?
15.625 sextets ?
7.81 7 in a row
3.9  8 in a row
1.95  9 in a row
0.976  10 in a row

Now if we only have 493 ea.  2-in-a-rows or more that means we must have 507 singles.  This means that if we bet on singles we have a small chance of winning more than we lose.  This assumption is based on the idea that we might not have but four 7's in a row, two 8's in a row, one 9 in a row.  Everything else being spot on, this means we will have 7 more singles than 2 or more in a row.

Since it is more likely to have fewer long runs in a row than singles, we can expect that in the long run, betting for singles will give us a very small advantage over normal odds.  Whether or not that advantage is enough to overcome the house edge is debatable, but at least it's a rational concept.  That puts it toward the top of the pile as far as systems goes.

Is the above correct B28?

GLC

[beretta28]

GLC
it's almost exact! He doesn't bet OTL,but:

R(no bet),R (no bet),R (no bet),B(now he bets R,because he hopes that B becomes a SINGLE,between two R)

R(no bet) R(no bet) B(play R,but B hits again),now no bet until a R hits and then he plays B(looking for a SINGLE  R)
Clear?

The theory is that number of 2 in a row or more = number of SINGLES
But in the category "more than 2 in a row" there are also very very long streaks(100 in a row,…200 in a row….300 in a row….,that we 'll never see in our life)
Because of that ,SINGLES hit a bit more than x in a row,because they must take an advantage for compensating very very long streaks that theoretically exist,but no player will never see.
Clear?

Test with RX extreme confirms, this theory but not enough to offset - 1,35% house advantage,that becomes around -1%