Betting methods comparison

[GLC]

The following has been presented by myself and others on this forum, but I don't know if I've ever posted this document.

It is food for thought.

GLC

[Ralph]

The following has been presented by myself and others on this forum, but I don't know if I've ever posted this document.

It is food for thought.

GLC

It is rather simple to understand a negative progression gives more often winning, but to a price of a larger bust in time. It would not help very much to increase the bankroll. A higher bankroll make the game last longer, and if we do not stop play forever after some winning it will at last lose. There is a probability a player never meet a bust or so seldom the player will stay on plus during very long time, but it is not the kind of progression used which make it. A flat bet session for a player in the whole life, for 100 of thousend spin can end up on plus, but very unlikely due to the unfair odds. On a NOZ it is much more likely, but anyhow not common. A run of 500 000 spins can differ 5000 on an EC, just pick the right side, and you are a flat bet winner in the "long run".
Getting 10 loss in a row  will  happen every player, which make stepper negative progressions  sure losers.

It is a game of chance, if the method we use, happen to suit the outcome, we win.

Flat or positive progressions wins not at the rate as negative, but the risks are lower, and most using it stays longer in the game.

We can mix the methods as well, and we must count of some luck.

[Chris555p]

GLC

@ everyone

Thanks for posting this article, I have never seen it before on this forum. It looks like if we start with small bets at first, have a good size bank roll and we are happy to get out after some winnings, not play for hours, not be too greedy etc..... negative progression gives us the best chance to beat the game consistently......  Do you agree....?



Cheers

Chris

[Big EZ]

It all comes down to bet selection. A progression is no good UNLESS you have a good bet selection.
If you dont have a good hit rate and dont know the parameters of your own bet selection then stick to flat betting.


Just my 2 cents.......

[Ralph]

It all comes down to bet selection. A progression is no good UNLESS you have a good bet selection.
If you don't have a good hit rate and don't know the parameters of your own bet selection then stick to flat betting.


Just my 2 cents.......

I think opposite, if there are any good bet selection, and we master it, we will have less losing bet, and do not need a progression, rather higher unit value and can bet flat.

Most of the time on a zero wheel the losing bets are more than the winning, in such a case we can not win with flat stakes.

[Ralph]

Knowing one test on a few spin not will tell all, I did some play using  guetting progression, martingale and flat. Target 20 units on NOZ.

The first picture shows the Guetting which run for 79 spins. The second is martingale running for 65 spin and the third is flat running the same color for  386 spins. The flat went down 20 units, but it was then a chose of wrong color.

The game is not possible to predict sure enough to make a winning, it is if the right numbers just shows, and many progression can
make us win even if more bets are lost, it is about getting plus in chips and theire value. Long streaks of winnings are rare and on a zero wheel  very.

[Big EZ]

I think opposite, if there are any good bet selection, and we master it, we will have less losing bet, and do not need a progression, rather higher unit value and can bet flat.

If I/you/we can hit  around 50% or above on any even chance and also know that you do not loose 10 bets in a row and to even see 8 losses in a row is rare from all the testing and live play I/you/we have done then why would you not use a progression?

[GLC]

GLC

@ everyone

Thanks for posting this article, I have never seen it before on this forum. It looks like if we start with small bets at first, have a good size bankroll and we are happy to get out after some winnings, not play for hours, not be too greedy etc..... negative progression gives us the best chance to beat the game consistently......  Do you agree....?



Cheers

Chris

Up to a point Chris.  Remember this test is based on 1-2-4-8-8-8-8-8 etc...

Computer Run Testing Different Betting Systems

Comparing the Bankroll Used and the Length of Time Played.

Chance of Not Losing Bankroll

Bankroll        Number       Flat       Positive     Negative
                        of Games
250                   100             69%         66%           56%

500                   100             96%         94%           83%
750                   250             93%         87%           80%
1,000                500             90%         81%           76%
2,000                750             99%         98%            94% 

Remember, with only 250 units, you only have a 56% chance of not losing your whole bankroll.  And you can tell from the results that the numbers aren't exact.  Look at the chance of losing bankroll with 1,000 games vs 750.

A large bank is important, but it's not the only factor we should consider.

[Ralph]

A casino visit may be 200-300 spins, but many do more than 1 visit in theire life.  The larger bankroll can not very many effort and at the same time be able to lose it without harming. Slowly build one is extremely hard, a short burst of lucky hits on inside bets may be the way to do it.  On line we can bet with a "large" bankroll using less than 100 Euro. The larger bankroll  stands longer, but still it is a larger loss when it is lost.  I have lost 1000 units many times, been back 2000 and coming back, with Euro bets it should be a bit scary.

A 40% better chance to survive using a larger bankroll, will in time even out, as we do not stop playing forever while a head.

We have to play different depending on where we play, penny methods or BM there we may have 7 Euro min bet. The chance to net something I think is easier using a larger bankroll, with small value and no zero. It is much more probability to make a net.

Comparing to other ways of winning as Lotto or Horses, roulette (NZ) has rather good chances, If we dare to parlay a straight up the
chance to get  6480 Euro this way for 5 Euro is larger than such as Lotto or Horse betting, using the same stake. The way to win more and risk less is to use positive progression, to win often with higher risk negative, flat will often win little, and losing at the same rate as many positive progressions, it is for those trying to win one or a few units.

The  way for many of us to get a much money is winning, a way is to parlay three times a straight up twice a week instead of spending 10 Euro weekly on a lottery, here roulette is far better. 226800 from 5.

[Ralph]

If I/you/we can hit  around 50% or above on any even chance and also know that you do not lose 10 bets in a row and to even see 8 losses in a row is rare from all the testing and live play I/you/we have done then why would you not use a progression?

Here is your way to 44000 dollars! Can you win 4 units in  20  sessions in  a row? Just go for it.