• Welcome to #1 Roulette Forum & Message Board | www.RouletteForum.cc.

News:

Almost every system has been tested many times before. Start by learning what we already know doesn't work, and why.

Main Menu
Popular pages:

Roulette System

The Roulette Systems That Really Work

Roulette Computers

Hidden Electronics That Predict Spins

Roulette Strategy

Why Roulette Betting Strategies Lose

Roulette System

The Honest Live Online Roulette Casinos

Progression play

Started by mogul397, Sep 21, 03:03 PM 2014

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

mogul397

So here is the thought. I can't remember a time when, while playing some kind of progression,
I didn't end up deep in the hole trying to get out. Not speaking to any method or specific progression.
But some are worse than others.

If you flip the thing upside down (which becomes up as you win) where you stop the progression when
you have tallied a profit for that run.. Same as if you chipped away winning 1 unit and then end up
in a negative progression that has you in the red.  You would play the opposite, taking 1 unit losses
knowing that that run is coming that is bigger than those losses. And you take profit and continue/
start over.

Since negative progressions seem like such sure fire losers (losing the ENTIRE bank) why not do the
opposite and snag profits during the inevitable losing streak?

NOBODY knows what you THINK they know

GLC

Here are some thoughts from a few years ago on this subject.  I have used it quite extensively.  It's not foolproof, but a little more exciting than flat betting. 


link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=7052.msg65174#msg65174


By the way, it works as well on other bets, i.e. dozens, lines etc...  Somewhat of a grinder, but what the hey.

While you're at it, check out this progression idea.  It just substitutes the Mongoose for the parlay.

link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=14350.msg121712#msg121712

There are a few typos in it, but intelligent people like us should be able to work around them.  For some of us English isn't our first language.  Not me, but some of us! :thumbsup:

I prefer the conservative Mongoose.  It gives us more possibilities to get to the end and it only falls short of the aggressive Mongoose by 1 unit.

GLC
In my case it doesn't matter.  I'm both!

mogul397

Thanks for this reply. And it is both funny and true that "who doesn't like a parlay".  Before I comment/add/adjust what I said, a few years ago I was getting heavy into the negative progressions
at craps. I began on roulette and worked into craps a bit, but somehow I must have an addiction.

So I think I was in sort of a D'alenbert mentality. And I had about $1000 (which is huge for a person that
99% of the time doesn't even bet). Once in a while you need to just put your money where your mouth
is and see.

So I read somewhere about hard 6 and 8's and $1 parlayed 2-3X on a win. I was doing that on
the  and 8.  But I was also parlaying on the pass line (or the line).  Well I had a good hit run.
One or the other but the line.  And it was the most fun I ever had in my life cause the crowd saw
it and they were going out of their mind. I had smaller chips and when they tried to push them my
way I pushed them back. And I saw a look of fear on the dealers face.  They didn't like this at all.
Almost purposely not coloring up so you had a big stack of small chips. 
It was a table like you
read about, and I think you can do it whenever you want. Just parlay.

Back to the topic.

So my original intent was to generically suggest the opposite as a parlay, which you seem to have
shown 100%.  But I don't necessarily mean a martingale.  Think about it from a standpoint of some
progressions where you get caught at a level to get back even and are fighting. YOu are stuck
4-5-6 levels in.  Maybe not even that high of a bet amount, but a place where you might need
2-3 wins to get back (in a negative progression).  Those are the ones that slip out of your fingers
and at some point make you lose (that progression) or certainly, if you were playing the "opposite"
(not a "parlay", but the opposite in that progression) where you would eventually "lose" (win) enough
to make you positive.

Like a D'alenbert, fib, some variation like that.  Not just the hard martingale.

I am happy that there is some support for this.

One question I had was what you meant by saying that you got bit, and it failed.  Didn't
see the particulars on that. (Did you lose a lot and give up?)

Cause sometimes I think that the table might not give you that sequential parlay. But
may always give you enough of that stupid chop in a different progression to keep you ahead.
I totally see the weakness of just hoping for the long parlay.

Thoughts?
NOBODY knows what you THINK they know

mogul397

Couple more things.

1) When I think about betting a progression on an even prop, I think about the results kind of
like a pendulum.  More or less the results will be even.  So the pendulum swings one way and you
gobble up all the 1 unit wins. Then it swings the other way and the neg progression. kills you.
It's like a bow and arrow. The bow eventually draws back enough to kill you.

2) I know that I'm not supposed to post anything from systems here. But from Silverthornes
Knock out roulette, you will see a progression on page 111. You can read it. It is one way
to do it.  The d'alenbert method increases bet amounts surprisingly fast, even compared to
a martingale, when you add it up.  And you don't get bounced out of the sequence.

NOBODY knows what you THINK they know

GLC

To be honest, progressions are of a couple of kinds.  Those that win a lot in a short time frame but also increase the bet amounts rapidly.  These require huge bankrolls and a big bet spread.  Then there are those that increase slowly and the bet amounts don't get so big so quickly, but a bad losing streak can put you in the hole for a very long time and without some luck you'll stay there forever.

I do like Iceman's win 4 or lose 8 with some buffers when you get down less than 8 and come back a little.

I guess my approach is a little different from many on this forum.  I play roulette with the attitude that I'm willing to lose the money I take to the casino but I hope to be able to win most of the time.  When I lose, I know it will be most of the money I take and in the long run, I expect to lose more than I win.  I just like an organized way to attack the game rather than the scatter method.

My favorite method is still the Tera TNT tames the mongoose.  I always retain half of my buy-in for it if I get in the hole with other less stable methods.  It takes concentration and being able to play it effortlessly.  It can get a little hairy at times, but with the stop loss factors, it's hard to lose more than you anticipated.  It's Achilles heel is if you have multiple bad runs close together, but so far that hasn't happened.  At least not more than I can handle.

When you find what you're looking for, let us know.

GLC
In my case it doesn't matter.  I'm both!

GLC

Quote from: mogul397 on Sep 21, 11:10 PM 2014
Couple more things.

1) When I think about betting a progression on an even prop, I think about the results kind of
like a pendulum.  More or less the results will be even.  So the pendulum swings one way and you
gobble up all the 1 unit wins. Then it swings the other way and the neg progression. kills you.
It's like a bow and arrow. The bow eventually draws back enough to kill you.

2) I know that I'm not supposed to post anything from systems here. But from Silverthornes
Knock out roulette, you will see a progression on page 111. You can read it. It is one way
to do it.  The d'alenbert method increases bet amounts surprisingly fast, even compared to
a martingale, when you add it up.  And you don't get bounced out of the sequence.

I am very familiar with this Silverthorne bet progression.  It's as good as any, generally speaking.  Losing 9 in a row is a real bummer.  Not as bad as a full blown marty, but not inconsequential either.

I guess there are only so many ways to re-arrange the bet sequences.  I have a friend who reminded me that each bet should  be thought of as being in the group of the same size bets.  It doesn't matter when you make the bet, it's really a flat bet in the long run.  The wheel doesn't care what you bet before a, let's say a 10 unit bet, or what you bet after it.  It takes all the 10 unit bets you make in your lifetime and it always comes out a little ahead of you.  Kind of a bummer when you think about it.

GLC
In my case it doesn't matter.  I'm both!

RouletteGhost

this

Knock-Out Roulette Betting Series for $5 Bets
   
                                                               
   Bet 5 8 12 20 30 40 60 80 120             

Move to the right on a loss, to the left on a win

still dangerous. easy to only win once in 9 bets and then not win again         
the key to winning with systems : play for a statistically irrelevant number of spins

link:[url="s://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nmJKY59NX8o"]s://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nmJKY59NX8o[/url]

mogul397

Let me add a thought with no probable answer.

It seem all too likely that you might lose 9 in a row.  Does it also seem just
as likely to win 9 in a row?  Does it seem skewed against us? Is it only a perception?
Or is there something about the selection method (any) that eventually goes against us
more than for us?

In a general way, table seem to "run" certain ways. Then the way the "run" changes. And the
thing that get you in trouble is sticking to one bet selection pattern and having the table pattern
change to something else. This is, in fact, the problem. I have said before (maybe not here) that the
problem is not knowing WHAT will happen. It's figuring out what ORDER it will happen.

Years ago I came across a guy named Victor Leung. Asian obviously. Claimed to play professionally and had
a small diner so that it looked like he had a source of income.

His strategy was this. He bought in for about $15K.  $500 chips. Waited for 5 3rd columb in a row then just
bet both the other two columbs for $500 each.  From there it mostly was "see what happens".  And he'd win.
Or if it felt bad, he's lose.  There was a common starting point, with the hope that after that the table would
run a similar way. HAving exhausted the 3rd columb I guess. There really wasn't much analysis or explanation.

But coupling this into the hit and run mentality (which is what it was) you are trying to get the odds in
your favor in these short term battles.  And supposedly by intuition, he was doing quite well.

It's more the method of thought that is working for you.
NOBODY knows what you THINK they know

-