Here's a tweak on an existing bet progression that has some merit to it.
I have read a few systems that use the following bet progression.
1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10-11-12-13-14-15-16-etc...
Just keep increasing your bet by 1 unit every spin whether you win or lose until you reach a new high bank.
I have tested this on numerous bet selection methods with average luck. The problem is that it can fall into a pretty deep hole before climbing back out and the bet sizes can get astronomical. But, having said that, I've never not pulled out for a win on my tests with any even chance bet selection.
I even tried a bet selection method in which I tried to pick a loser for each spin and I still ended up winning eventually. It was an average session. What does that tell us?
Of course it works because it is based on the idea of betting more when you win than when you lose.
So I've tweaked it this way. We start off betting 1 unit. As long as we're winning, we continue to bet 1 unit. As soon as we lose, we add 1 unit to our bet. We continue to bet 2 units as long as we lose (yes, I know I said lose. That's what I meant to say). As soon as we win, we add 1 unit to our bet size and bet the new amount as long as we continue to win. As soon as we lose, we add 1 unit to our bet size and stay at that amount until we win etc...
So, anytime we switch between winning and losing or between losing and winning, we increase our bet size.
In the original method we increase our bet by 1 unit every spin. As you can imagine, this can increase our bets rapidly.
With my tweak, we still take advantage of winning more when we win than we lost when we lost, but our bet size climbs at a slower pace.
Like all of these methods, as soon as we get a good run of wins in a row or a high ration of wins vs losses section, we will recover and quickly reach a new high.
We can shoot for +1 then reset or we can pick a larger number to shoot for like +10 or +15 etc...
Option:
We can slow the climb substantially by using the following progression:
1-1-1-2-2-2-3-3-3-4-4-4-5-5-5-6-6-6-7-7-7-8-8-8-9-9-9-etc...
In other words we need 3 chops between win vs losses before we add 1 unit to our bet size.
We can do any number of steps at the same level if we want. The more steps before increasing bet size, the more of a grind it becomes and also the harder it is to recover from a really bad series of spins.
Try this with any e.c. bet selection method.
I'm thinking also that it might work for dozens or even double dozen bets.
Jointu is already using something like it for a double dozen bet on the Divide and Conquer system and it seems to be working fine for him.
GLC
Hi George I tested 123456 a few weeks back,, very scary but like you i found that I couldnt bust it on 50 baccarat shoes,,,, will check this out...Im guessing you also looked at 11223344556677?
best wishes
"No Whining just Winning"
Quote from: Tomla021 on Oct 27, 10:49 AM 2011
Hi George I tested 123456 a few weeks back,, very scary but like you i found that I couldnt bust it on 50 baccarat shoes,,,, will check this out...I'm guessing you also looked at 11223344556677?
best wishes
"No Whining just Winning"
Was it FTL type or some more exotic bet selection?
Jeromin
Quote from: Tomla021 on Oct 27, 10:49 AM 2011
Hi George I tested 123456 a few weeks back,, very scary but like you i found that I couldnt bust it on 50 baccarat shoes,,,, will check this out...I'm guessing you also looked at 11223344556677?
best wishes
"No Whining just Winning"
Tom,
I haven't tested 11223344etc... but I'm sure it will work also. It should take into the hole a little less than 123456etc... off-set by small wins as well.
I like the Winning part. I'm getting my health card so I can safely drive that stretch limo.
:thumbsup:
GLC
jeromin --I tested using that malcop trend catcher that you know.....George the idea is to be driven in the limo not to have it crash!! no crash=no health card needed:)
First image from first test, enjoy ;) RB FLTL...
4096 RNG spins, failed, I will try to measure max bet though ;)
...
It is a very mellow progression.
Hmm, my previous implementation was wrong, I have forgotten to set balance to any value, so previous results are just random. The correct version is this. Never forget that any implementation of any system might be coded wrongly. Hopefuly now it is correct...
"Improved" version:
a) we alway increase bet by 10% of it's size or 1 unit, whatever is bigger
b) never bet more than to be in profit +1 compared to maximum bankroll balance reached in past
A few big holes and nice pavement in between...
Quote from: mr.ore on Oct 27, 04:45 PM 2011
"Improved" version:
a) we alway increase bet by 10% of it's size or 1 unit, whatever is bigger
b) never bet more than to be in profit +1 compared to maximum bankroll balance reached in past
A few big holes and nice pavement in between...
I guess to have a can't lose bet method all we need is Fort Knox's gold. Or a reasonable stop-loss and hope we don't hit the stop-loss so many times that we can't stay ahead of it with our wins.
Doesn't look any better than other progressions.
Thanks for the reality check my friend.
GLC
There is a need to mix in positive progression in some way. I will look into it in the evenening. Today I will go to work even if this is a state holiday in our country to get some extra money :twisted:
thanks mr ore,
was the above with 123456 or the new 111, 222,333 etc?
"No Whining just Winning"
I've been thinking about this system of betting and just wanted to mention the equivalent bets for other bet odds. I know the easy one, but after that it gets a little confusing for us laymen.
If we take 1-1-2-2-3-3-4-4-5-5-6-6-7-7-etc... as a good line for even chance bets, that gives us 1:1 payoff = 2 steps.
If we convert this to dozens/columns we get 2:1 payoff = 2X2 = 4. therefore 1-1-1-1-2-2-2-2-3-3-3-3-4-4-4-4-5-5-5-5-etc...
For double dozens which is 1:2 payoff = 1/2X2 = 1. 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-etc...
5:1 = 5X2 = 10. 1111111111222222222233333333334444444444
8:1 = 8X2 = 16
11:1 = 11X2 = 22
17:1 = 17X2 = 34
35:1 = 35X2 = 70
So we can adjust the formula anyway we want.
What if we wanted 12345678etc... to be the bet for 1:1
Question for the math guys. Would double dozen be 1-3-5-7-9 etc... or 1 - 1.5 - 2- 2.5 - 3 - 3.5 - 4 etc...?
What would be the line for 5 double street bets?
Thanks,
GLC
I don't think enough of the readers really appreciate the power of this little bet for double dozens.
For double dozens and double columns the line is 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-etc...
That means that since we are betting of two locations, our line is really 1-1; 2-2; 3-3; 4-4; 5-5; etc....
We just add 1 unit to both bets on a loss. When we get a win, we continue to bet at the same unit amount on both dozens until we bet back to +1. If we are down -3 units and our next bet is 6-6, we only bet 4-4 which will give us a +1 win.
If we are down -3 units and our next bet is 3-3, we increase it to 4-4 so we can get +1 on the win. We never increase our bet by more than 1 on each dozen to get to +1. In other words if we are -5 and our next bet is 4-4 we don't increase to 6-6 so we can be at +1, we go ahead and bet the 4-4 and if we win, we will be at -1, so we bet 2-2 next to reach +1.
The thing that you're not noticing, and it's my intention to point it out to you, is that all you need to do is win 1 bet more than you lose to reach +1.
Since we have 2 chances to win our of 3 bets, winning 50% plus 1 is very easy to do.
For those of you who have given up on the dozen matrices, you might look at them again with this progression. I've never really gotten into any trouble playing this way.
Here's an example. It's worth a thousand words. Right?
1-1 lose -2
2-2 lose -6
3-3 lose -12
4-4 lose -20
5-5 Win -15
5-5 win -10
5-5 lose -20
6-6 lose -32
7-7 win -25
7-7 win -18
7-7 win -11
7-7 lose -25
8-8 win -17
8-8 win -9
8-8 win -1
2-2 win +1
Reset to 1-1
I noticed that this progression took 2 wins more than losses. That is pretty rare.
There is a maneuver that I want to point out that can add a small amount of safety to the progression.
I'm going to start with the 1st 8-8 bet in the above series:
8-8 win -17
8-8 win -9 (At this point we can see that if we win we will be at -1 and will have to win again at 2-2 to reach +1. Instead of betting 8-8 and risking losing 16 units, we see that we have to bet a total of 10-10 in the next two bets to fully recover, so why not bet 5-5 twice. That way if we are unlucky enough to lose the first bet, we will only lose 5-5=-10 units instead of 8-8=-16 units. Then we can continue at 6-6 if we lose the first 5-5 bet.)
5-5 win -4
5-5 win +1
Re-set to 1-1.
As with all progressions, we need to have a series of wins or a cluster of high wins vs losses to recover after having more than expected losses in a series.
You will notice in the above example that we had 6 losses and 2 wins in the first 8 bets. This is almost reverse of what we should expect. We were only down -32 units at our largest drawdown.
All in all, I think this is a pretty safe double dozen bet method.
G
Quote from: GLC on Nov 05, 12:36 AM 2011
For those of you who have given up on the dozen matrices, you might look at them again with this progression. I've never really gotten into any trouble playing this way.
I take this statement back. This progression will not work on most matrices double dozen bets becasue they are based on winning 1 out of 3 or 4.
This bet will work fine, I think on D&C.
Quote from: GLC on Nov 05, 01:57 AM 2011
I take this statement back. This progression will not work on most matrices double dozen bets becasue they are based on winning 1 out of 3 or 4.
This bet will work fine, I think on D&C.
Indeed mate.
ON D&C - it works - since even on worst sessions if you have a loss rate around 40-45 % it wins.
If you want to avoid long sessions- is better to start betting after a series of virtual losses on first virtual win until +1, than wait another series of virtual losses than bet after first virtual win until +1.
Is quite safe and with a high unit value you could get a constant profit dailly.
However, if you are in the whole is unlikely to recover and you will need high bets and a long serie of wins- this is the problem with double dozen- one loss requires two wins to get back into the game.
So a stop loss is required.
very interesting thread people
When playing this way, I usually test it by playing the 1 and 2 dozens only.
If I get a lot of 3rd dozen hits, it will put me down, but with a good bank, I can keep playing and a good run of 1st and 2nd dozen hits will pull me out.
You can play it by betting on the last 2 dozens to hit.
You can play it by betting on the dozens other than the last one to hit.
You can play it by betting the last and the oldest dozen to hit.
You can play it using D & C bet selection method.
I stated above that I didn't think it would work so well on the matrix bets because we're looking to hit 1 out of 3 or 4 bets, but in reality, it will probably work just as well on them because with this progression we're not trying to get a hit in a certain number of tries, we're just trying to get more wins than losses before we run out of bank.
With a 2 to 1 win ratio, that should be pretty doable more than 99% of the time.
That less than 1% chance of hitting more losses than wins for a long enough time to wipe out our bank, is the reason that we need to set a stop-loss.
Pick your own stop-loss. I like the range of 300 units. The higher you make it, the less often you will reach it. Use Winkel's 10,000 units and you can probably play the rest of your life and never hit it. Of course if you do, it's 10,000 units out the door. Se la vi!
Cheers,
George
P.S. By the way, I'm getting ready to post another double dozen progression that's very similar to another one I posted a few months back. I think it's better so I want to get it down on paper for posterity's sake.
If your talking 2 Dozens play, just take at look at this guys 2 Dozens performance. Outstanding!
Third Day of Play (link:://:.youtube.com/watch?v=hGGGPsllpFE#)
Almost 10minutes of cool, sure footed 2Dozens play, and a good profit to boot! :xd:
What the system is, I have not found out yet!
If the originator is a member or Guest here, please get in touch! ^-^
I have registered at this site, and confirmed my email registration.
link:://great-system-review.blogspot.com/ (link:://great-system-review.blogspot.com/)
Nothing directly for sale here, but some very interesting stuff that I was 'Pointed' towards! :twisted:
@GLC and all interested Parties, watch this system play, and lets see if 10 minutes can reveal what system/sequence this player is following! ?!
I'm certain we can break the code George! (and others)
Chris,
I have watched the beginning of the video. He is betting a standard double dozen martingale starting with $15 bets. If you watch the wins, they are C15 or C45 or C135. I didn't watch long enough to see if he goes to the 4th or 5th steps.
He seems to be betting mostly on 1-2 and 2-3. Rarely does he bet on 1-3. I can't see any rhyme or reason for his bet selection, but I notice that he isn't really hitting a higher win to loss ratio than normal.
My first impression is that this video could have been made by you. Just pick 2 dozens at random and play a marty and choose 10 minutes that didn't result in 6 or 7 losses in a row. Put it on the internet and sell your system to one of those suckers that are born every minute with a money back guarantee that you never honor. Any you're in the chips.
Of course, no one that frequents this forum would ever fall for such an obvious rip-off.
That's what I think without further proof. Remember that TurgoGenius posted a double dozen system using the marty where he bet against the last 4 dozens hitting in the exact same pattern. He was using $5 bets and won thousands of dollars with his demonstrations from real spins. Eventually it will have losses, but it can win a lot of money between losses or it can hit a lot of losses close together. I doubt that we'll every see those runs posted by a system seller.
I could be wrong!
G
If we really wanted to, we could write down every bet he makes, where he puts his bets, the numbers spun etc... and probably figure out what his bet selection method is.
I wrote down the 1st 18 bets, but can't really see a pattern. It can be quite complicated to work backwards. I don't know if it's worth the effort. I don't really have enough time to invest since I don't think it's a long term winner anyway.
Even with a really good bet selection method, you will still lose runs using a martingale.
Ok George.
Thanx.
When I get some time, I will reverse engineer it, and see if I can figure out the bet selection.
BTW... I didn't make it.
But someone unknown to me, did point me towards it.
Advertising I feel.
And as they say, any publicity is good publicity!!
Cheers George for spent a few moments of Ur time on it.
We will discuss at another time.
GLC,
If you used your method of betting doubles on John Legends methods would it improve the results? :thumbsup:
Quote from: Dutchy on Nov 07, 01:32 PM 2011
GLC,
If you used your method of betting doubles on John Legends methods would it improve the results? :thumbsup:
Dutchy, I haven't tested this betting method against the matrices. I'm a little hesitant to say yes because we are playing for a win within 3 or maybe 4 bets. If you win once every 3 or 4 times with this system you will not be ahead because the progression is too slow. This progression works best when you expect to win every bet.
Let's say you are playing the Slide or Reverse Slide. If you Lose and then Win, you will be even. If you Lose, Lose and then Win you will still be at -3. With the marty, you would be at +1. With this progression, if you Lose, Lose and Win, Win you will be at +1. With the marty you would be at +1 and +1 or +2.
This progression doesn't do as well if you are getting 2 or 3 losses followed by a win but it also doesn't tank if you get 5 losses in a row. If you think your hit rate in the 1st 2 bets is very high then this method will work. You will have to continue the progression beyond the 3 or 4 bets for each Slide. In other words let's say you wait until you get the 1st 4 spots on the Slide, that means you have 3 bets to get a win. With this system, you may lose the next 3 bets, but you continue the progression to the next Slide formation. If you happen to get a win on the 1st bet on the next 2 slide formations, you will be at +1.
In the above example, you played through 3 games before reaching a new high. Safer but slower.
Test it and see what you think.
GLC
Hi GLC,
Would this work on CODE 4 played DC style then by playing every betting opportunity?
It seems to win a lot more than it loses?
Woods
Quote from: woods101 on Nov 07, 06:33 PM 2011
Hi GLC,
Would this work on CODE 4 played DC style then by playing every betting opportunity?
It seems to win a lot more than it loses?
Woods
The more I think about it, the more I believe that this progression will do just fine on any double dozen or double column bet selection.
Like I said, it does very well when I just play the 1st and 2nd dozen exclusively. The same for dozens 2 & 3 or dozens 1 & 3.
It shouldn't make any difference if you play every spin or use triggers and only bet sporadically. It's really the progression and your money management that makes the difference. We're just trying to win 1 or 2 more than 50% to reach a new high.
Let's take JL's record for playing Code 4. He plays 1400 games. Half of the time he wins on the first bet. Another 418 times he wins on the 2nd bet. That means he won 1121 times on the 1st or 2nd bet. Only 279 times did he have to go beyond 2 bets before getting a win. Now there's no way to know what his maximum drawdown was, but with 1350 games winning on the 1st, 2nd or 3rd bet, it stands to reason that he wouldn't have had to go too deep in the hole before pulling out to a new high.
I doubt that this forced win progression would have won as many units as JL did but I'm pretty sure we'd have won close with little fear of busting our progression.
All I can say is for those of you who like the matrix systems, test this to see if it's comparable to the standard martingale.
GLC
Quote from: GLC on Nov 07, 11:44 PM 2011
I doubt that this forced win progression would have won as many units as JL did but I'm pretty sure we'd have won close with little fear of busting our progression.
All I can say is for those of you who like the matrix systems, test this to see if it's comparable to the standard martingale.
GLC
dear George
JL's matrices uses standard martingale for maximum 3/4 steps and strikerates are very high. if we can start this progression with tweaking after loosing 2 or 3 or 4 martingale steps, any possibility to defend ourselves against annihilation?
thanks
catalyst
Quote from: catalyst on Nov 09, 07:02 PM 2011
dear George
JL's matrices uses standard martingale for maximum 3/4 steps and strikerates are very high. if we can start this progression with tweaking after losing 2 or 3 or 4 martingale steps, any possibility to defend ourselves against annihilation?
thanks
catalyst
I don't see why not. Remember some of my other progressions for even chances start with 1-2-4 and sometimes even 1-2-4-8 and then we go into double and triple parlays for the rest of the progression.
If you lose 1-1; 3-3; and 9-9 you will be down 26 units which is a little less than losing 1-1; 2-2; 3-3; 4-4 and 5-5 in my progression. You could start my progression with 5-5 and with a win on the 1st bet and the parlay, you will recover 15 units. Then drop to 4-4 which recovers 12 units if both bets win and you're at +1. Of course that means you have to win 4 times in a row.
You have to weight this against losing 26 with a 3 step loss on the martingale or 80 on a 4 step loss. I can't really say which is the safer bet in the long run. With my progression you don't climb in bet sizes so quickly, but you may gradually climb until you reach your personal stop loss which to give you more stability should be fairly high.
For this progression to be really safe, you probably need to be willing to set a 300-500 unit stop loss or more and expect to not reach it that often. Or you might decide to set a 100 unit stop loss which you will reach more often. As with all these progressions, you have to test different scenarios to see which fits your playing style.
Until someone can report a winning record like JL does, it's all a guess which is best.
G
I have no idea why more people aren't posting about this....
This looks amazing and I'm going to test it out this coming weekend. I think I will start with a 100 unit stop loss and see how that goes. Once I build up my bankroll from that point I'll probably do 200 and then gradually get it up to 500 units. I think with 1000 unit stop loss you'd probably hardly ever reach it.
Quote from: Anthony on Feb 09, 03:06 AM 2012
I have no idea why more people aren't posting about this....
This looks amazing and I'm going to test it out this coming weekend. I think I will start with a 100 unit stop-loss and see how that goes. Once I build up my bankroll from that point I'll probably do 200 and then gradually get it up to 500 units. I think with 1000 unit stop-loss you'd probably hardly ever reach it.
Good luck Tony. Sounds like you're going to use caution until it proves itself. Remember some of Mr. Ore's charts. There's some pretty deep cracks in the pavement.
LoL,
GLC
P.S. I think people aren't that interested in this because it does have some bid draw downs on occasion and folks are looking for the magic bullet which this ain't.
You're right, but using double dozens how many times are you going to go long periods of time and remain under 50 percent? I'm guessing not that many. With the right approach on double dozens I'm willing to bet I can squeeze out a few units.
Good luck Anthony. Let us know how it goes.
I've been testing the system proposed by GLC on his first post for two dozen, that is, increasing the bet by one unit each location when appears the figures WL or LW.
And been operated very well, but there is the same old problem, the drawdons. Perhaps, if we find a way to limit them, together with a large bankroll, we will find a quite effective method that could give many gains.
Maybe it must work well betting in 5 lines too. ;)
Any ideas? GLC?
Very interesting post n comments!
indeed willie
GLC is a great man
some crazy progressions but a good guy who likes to help
he has had some very very good ideas
betting on 2 dozens at the same time and adding one unit to each until in profit is something i have thought about
Quote from: GLC on Nov 05, 01:57 AM 2011I take this statement back. This progression will not work on most matrices double dozen bets becasue they are based on winning 1 out of 3 or 4.
I'm sorry but what's matrices double dozen bets? Is it any kind of system on the thread?
I love this approach so far. I don't know what matrices are and how are played but betting on 2 dozens as you stated with 11-22-33 progression is so nice and safe so far. I will keep testing it.
Needing a 50% (+1) win ratio on a 66,6 % win chance bet and with such slow progression and stop limit looks great. :)
So. About stop limit? Should we say that we reach -100 bankroll we stop progression and restart hoping we will be in front on average after many sessions? Looks plausible.
Looks great so far. If I find anything important to improve the system I will post it here. I hope this thread won't die soon enough. It's very good stuff
PS: Any idea why there are times that +2 wins is needed instead of +1? I don't see why since wins and bet increases are steady. Will we ever have to reach +3 or even +4 wins?
Iboba i think his name was. Or flatino. Same person?
RIP
In regards to betting 2 dozens at once he said he did very well with the gr8 progression
Gr8player gets a lot of slack on the baccarat forum but what else is new on these forums
The gr8 progression
1 1 1 1 1
2 2 2 2 2
3 3 3 3 3
4 4 4 4 4
5 5 5 5 5
He made it for bacc but flatino used it on double dozens
How it works is you bet 2 dozens at 1 unit each for 5 spins. If up stay at 1 unit
If down go to 2 unis. At any point you reach a high back to 1 unit. If down after 5 spins move up to 3 unit level
I think he stretched it to 7
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
2 2 2 2 2 2 2
3 3 3 3 3 3 3
4 4 4 4 4 4 4
5 5 5 5 5 5 5
im not advocating this just being a messenger
With a good double dozen bet selection it may be good. Test test test
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Sep 15, 07:48 AM 2016Iboba i think his name was. Or flatino. Same person?
Yep...and Vile....in here too
Real name was Ivica or Iveca. Was Croatian
Quote from: GLC on Nov 05, 01:38 AM 2011I noticed that this progression took 2 wins more than losses. That is pretty rare.
Quote from: GLC on Nov 05, 12:36 AM 2011Since we have 2 chances to win our of 3 bets, winning 50% plus 1 is very easy to do.
Quote from: BellagioOwner on Sep 15, 07:02 AM 2016Any idea why there are times that +2 wins is needed instead of +1? I don't see why since wins and bet increases are steady. Will we ever have to reach +3 or even +4 wins?
It's not rare or steady. I just noticed it's proportional... the longer we have to stay into the progression the more wins we will need above 50%. Not only 1 or rare 2. I finished a testing with 32 spins into the progression (19 wins/13 losses ). I ended needing more than just 1 win over my losses to be in positive BR. I needed 6 wins more than the 50%. So instead of 50%+1 win that we think it is I needed 59,3% win rate (19/32 spins) on a 66,6% win chance bet (2dozens). This of course is
still very good percentage but nowhere near the 50%+1 win. So the more spins the probability screws us the more wins we still need.
In a progression needing 11 spins I needed +1 win
In a progression needing 16 spins I needed
+2 wins
In a progression needing 32 spins I needed +6 wins
etc..
You better hope not to stay long in a progression as the odds are catching us up ;)