Too many systems use negative progressions to recover. I'd say most systems I've seen here use a negative progression, but as soon as it recovers starts over with flat bet....never using up as you win positive progression. Think about it, negative progressions has the potential to multiply losses and kill bankroll. But on the flip side, positive progressions have the potential to grow wins exponentially into much larger wins.
Quote from: Scarface on Aug 10, 06:19 PM 2018
Too many systems use negative progressions to recover. I'd say most systems I've seen here use a negative progression, but as soon as it recovers starts over with flat bet....never using up as you win positive progression. Think about it, negative progressions has the potential to multiply losses and kill bankroll. But on the flip side, positive progressions have the potential to grow wins exponentially into much larger wins.
Yes indeed.
I use a combination of both negative and positive progressions. My negative are very conservative though, relying on 2 or 3 clusters of hits to recover. If I'm in profit, my positive progressions are based on a percentage of my bankroll.
If bankroll for that day is 1000 units, my base bet is 5 units (only .5% of total bankroll).
If variance is against me, and I start to see losses (negative progression):
1. First, reduce amount of numbers played. I can start out with a total of 5 units and play 30 numbers, and parachute down to less numbers after each loss. Doing this prevents me from having to raise wagers at all.
2. If playing few numbers, I will only raise wager by 1 unit per number and only after a hit that has went beyond expectation. For example: playing 4 numbers should hit within 9 spins....if it goes beyond 9 spins with no hit, keep flat betting until you do get a win. Only after a win, raise wager 1 unit.
If variance is on my side, and I'm in profit. I use positive progressions based on percentage of my bankroll (usually 5%)
1. I'm up 100 units in profit. My base bet is 5 units. 5% of my profit is also 5 units, so now my base bet is $10. If I were up 500 units, my base bet would be 30 units.
2. If you were to drop in profit, say from 300 units to 200 units, be sure to lower your base bet accordingly!
3. Set a stop for positive progressions profits. I normally use 25%. If you are up to 1000 units, and it drops 25% to 750 units, stop and take your wins.
Can you give an example of parachute bet you do
Thanks
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Aug 10, 07:33 PM 2018
Can you give an example of parachute bet you do
Thanks
I posted an example in your lines thread. Start with 5 lines...then 5 quads...5 streets...5 splits..5 singles
oh ok ill go check thanks
RG, the idea behind it is to keep recovery wagers low as possible.
Consider this scenario: 3 different people are playing the exact same system. The only difference between them is type of progression used. Assume the wheel has fair payouts.
1. Player 1 flat bets the entire time. He stops if his wins or losses reach 200 units.
2. Player 2 flat bets as he's winning. If he starts to see losses, he uses a negative progression raising wagers as he loses
3. Player 3 raises wagers as he's winning. If he goes below his original amount, he flat bets as losses come.
Now, assuming all 3 players are playing the same system for the same duration, which player fairs better?
Well, player 1 flatbets, so roughly half the time he'll win 200 units, and half the time he'll lose 200 units
Player 3 will win 500-1000 units half the time using a positive progression. And he'll lose 200 units the other half of time, because he flatbets on losses
Player 2 will win 200 units half the time, but lose 500-1000 units other half time due to using negative progressions
Player 1: wins 200=loses 200
Player 3: wins 500-1000>loses 200
Player 2: wins 200<loses 500-1000
Scarface, I can't see how you came up with those figures. Do you have any actual maths or is it just speculation? You're saying that the positive progression guy wins as much as the negative progression guy loses, but if it's a fair game none of them should do better than break even in the long run, according to expectation. If you're using a progression the variance will be higher so this is the best option if you want to maximise your profit in the short run, but you run the risk of maximising your losses too. That's the trade off with progressions. >:D
Quote from: Joe on Aug 11, 03:39 PM 2018
Scarface, I can't see how you came up with those figures. Do you have any actual maths or is it just speculation? You're saying that the positive progression guy wins as much as the negative progression guy loses, but if it's a fair game none of them should do better than break even in the long run, according to expectation. If you're using a progression the variance will be higher so this is the best option if you want to maximise your profit in the short run, but you run the risk of maximising your losses too. That's the trade off with progressions. >:D
The positive progression guy will only raise bets if in profit.. if he's below original bankroll, he'll flat bet. So, he'll never see the losses negative progression guy sees
I'd like to run a simulation on this. How about an even chance bet? I could use a martingale for the negative progression and a reverse martingale for the positive progression, and get some stats after a 100 sessions. No house edge.
Quote from: Scarface on Aug 11, 05:40 PM 2018The positive progression guy will only raise bets if in profit.. if he's below original bankroll, he'll flat bet.
That's not how I understand a positive progression. To me it means raising bets after a win no matter whether you are above or below the original bankroll, but that's ok, I can simulate it that way. I assume you still only bet after a win even when your bankroll is above the original?
Quote from: Joe on Aug 12, 05:36 AM 2018
That's not how I understand a positive progression. To me it means raising bets after a win no matter whether you are above or below the original bankroll, but that's ok, I can simulate it that way. I assume you still only bet after a win even when your bankroll is above the original?
Yes, you're right. But in this case I'm talking about only use positive progression when above original bankroll. So, 1 player will only use positive progression when above original bankroll, and flatbet when below. The other player does the opposite, and uses negative progression when below original bankroll and flatbet when above.
Quote from: Joe on Aug 12, 05:30 AM 2018
I'd like to run a simulation on this. How about an even chance bet? I could use a martingale for the negative progression and a reverse martingale for the positive progression, and get some stats after a 100 sessions. No house edge.
It's worth a shot if it's easy to test this way. But in actual play, I wouldn't play this way. Martingale on single spins would give bad results if choppy back and forth.
The way I normally play positive progression is based on a percentage of my total wins. For example, if playing 1 unit on 5 numbers...if my profit goes up to 100 units, I'll start playing 2 units on 5 numbers. If profit goes up to 300 units, I'll play 3 units on 5 numbers.
Also, if profit were to go down, go back down with units. So, if profit were reduced from 300 units back down to 200 units...change bet from 3 units back down to 2.
Joe, how about this. Not sure how difficult this would be to code.
Player 1 - flatbet 1 unit on 5 numbers
Player 2 - bet 1 unit on 5 numbers. If in profit, raise wager by 1 unit per number for every 100 units in profit (ex. 100 units profit bet 2 units, 200 units profit bet 3 units, etc). Also, lower if profit comes back down. And always flatbet if below original bankroll
Player 3 - play the exact opposite of player 2. Always flatbet when in profit. If bankroll hit negative, then raise wager by 1 unit per number for every 100 units down.
Player 1 will be the control group. Player 1 will flatbet, and the session ends for everyone when he either wins or losses 500 units.
The longterm expectation for Player 1 is he'll break even. He'll win 50% of sessions, and lose 50%. Player 2 and player 3 will also win/lose 50%. But player 2's wins should be much higher than player 1, while losses will be roughly the same since they both flatbet when bankroll is in the negative.
In theory, player 2 should have a clear advantage compared to the other 2 :)
i will follow your advice...
Negative progression are powerful!
Only if you possess a system that gets you an edge even a negative edge in the range of -1 to 0 is enough for that progression
People tend to give wrong advice showing poor knowledge about negative progression
Usage of negative progression must be bad......bla bla bla.....
Ofc all of that written is not correct
Players can profit from the proper use of negative progression only IF they know the extent of the negative variance of the system they play
The issue is not with the negative progression you apply
The real issue is whether you know the extent of the variance which is a knowledge thing
Would it be right to say there are situations where one or the other is best suited? Say pos prog if odds are <50% (ex: playing 14 nrs) and neg prog if playing >50% ( 19+nrs)? or opposite?
If using neg prog, for sure stay away of rising prog to be above water in one hit. There probably is a custom way of calculating if safe to use neg progs to recover in 3,4 or 5 hits.
There was a video I saw, the guy was pleading for a 25% of br waged on ECs, which gives compounded interests on winning streaks. So pos prog for him.
Got it: Adam Kucharski:
link:s://:.youtube.com/watch?v=E6OXuTENvXc
He even wrote a book on this, I just saw on Amazon.
What do you guys think?
About positive progression, people got it wrong again.
Usage of positive progression, ie. 'up as you' win is a good thing when you have a positive edge.......bla, bla, bla........
Again what is written is shallow, no surprise there
Here is the proper math fact
Whether your method has a positive or negative edge, there are streaks of wins and losses
The related probability can be calculated
link:s://:.soccerwidow.com/football-gambling/betting-knowledge/value-betting-academy/learning-centre/betting-terminology/science-calculating-winning-losing-streaks/
The proper use of positive progression is to exploit this win streak
This brings us back to step1 - do you know the win rate of your method ?
This has nothing to do with the application of positive progression
Again, this is a knowledge thing
I have contributed 2 posts about the proper usage of negative and positive progression
Update your knowledge and the next time "the resident experts" write nonsense, be obligated to call him out.
If the player has the edge, then an up as you lose progression isn't logical. ::)
An up as you win progression will win exponentially more money.
Quote from: The General on Sep 21, 11:09 PM 2018If the player has the edge, then an up as you lose progression isn't logical. ::)
If the player has an edge and says it is significant - only logic is to bet as much, as possible in some period. To play max bets is good when you have the unlimited bankroll and you are sure, that will not get the ban. If are chance, that you can be banned - you must think about how to avoid that...