Single dozens with progression

[psimoes]

[rouletteKEY]

GLC has suggested to look for a sample with a win rate of only 17% to test dozens progressions.

A win rate...if consistent at half the expected rate is profitable with most progressions...

The key to progressions is the consistency of the win rate...you have to take the variance out of the equation as much as possible.  3 wins in a row and then a streak of 12 losses surely wreaks havoc with a dozen/column progression.  Then look at the same win rate as 1 win against 4 losses...and then repeat a couple times (very manageable and profitable).  The trick is to manage the attack...and that can sometimes be quite the trick.

If your attack is well thought out and played you will make money on both examples...that's your target...make money regardless of how the wheel screws you over.

Control the variance and you can control the game for the most part.  Big bankrolls and discipline are a necessity along with the ever present bet selection issues...but if you can forecast the variance to a certain degree and have countermeasures in place in case that well laid plan fails (as it still will from time to time) you will be successful in the long run.   With progressions the win rate is always higher...but the losses can be catastrophic if you don't think it thru on the way into the abyss (not all progressions have to have you in profit with a single win)...it takes alot of work to be successful and I think someone also posted something to the effect of "more to it than you will find on an online free forum".  There's alot of truth to that line of thought.

There is alot of good information on the forums...it's sifting thru the other 99.8% that is the issue

[psimoes]

...it takes alot of work to be successful and I think someone also posted something to the effect of "more to it than you will find on an online free forum".  There's alot of truth to that line of thought.

Won't agree with it until the claims are substantiated.

"You won't find it on a free forum" like in "yes there is but it'll cost you"? Either it's naiveness or spam-the-scam.

[rouletteKEY]

Won't agree with it until the claims are substantiated.

"You won't find it on a free forum" like in "yes there is but it'll cost you"? Either it's naiveness or spam-the-scam.

Nice job cherry picking that post to take that completely out of context

No...not at all like "yes there is but it'll cost you" as you suggest  ***Side Note (also certainly not... that I would propose to sell anything roulette or gambling inspired if that was the next divergent thought)

More like this...there's no free lunch and if you think you can come on a forum and glance thru a few hundred or thousand posts and find that miraculous key to wealth and success you are naive and you are the likely candidate to get scammed if that is where you want to take this.

It's hard work to be a self-made success at almost anything and should we collectively choose a game of chance with the highest house edge to try to conquer it's gonna take work.  Of course this thread is about progressions and somehow none of my comments regarding variance or progressions were mentioned.  Which is odd...because usually when I talk about progressions blood starts shooting out of unintended orifices of all the flat bet only crowd...which seems to be the majority.  Don't get me wrong I get the whole flat-bet thing...it's just not for me...I prefer thought out progressions and know that the possibility exists that I go down in flames...and I accept that risk.

The "more to it than you will find on an online forum" is my belief...and a belief shared by others because honestly if someone researches and plays for thousands of hours to become proficient...why in the world would they post all their work for free? and beyond that...why would they mentor, write a book or do anything else to give away the proverbial golden goose on the internet of all things?  If you have a truly proficient method of play...anything you do to try to sell the method or system or whatever you want to call it would simply short-change the seller if it was really worthwhile.

If it makes you feel better take the word free out of the "online free forum" sentence.   Let me spell it out....more to it than you will find on a forum.

What claims did you need substantiated?  Trying to see what you thought was a claim that needed substantiated...grasping at straws here
1. win rate profitability potential?
2. consistency of win rate and variance?
3. need for big bankrolls and discipline?
4. thinking out an attack?
5. takes work to be successful?
6. a lot of good info on the forums...problem being sifting thru the other stuff?

If you are just upset because I think it takes work to be successful we can just end it here...I won't change my mind on that or waste time substantiating the value of hard work

[psimoes]

Hmmm at first I was reading your reply and thinking "WTH is he talking about, is he calling me lazy or what", but I see where you're coming from.

It's all because I quoted the entire sentence. Sorry about that.

...it takes alot of work to be successful and I think someone also posted something to the effect of "more to it than you will find on an online free forum".  There's alot of truth to that line of thought.

Now that makes more sense. I even agree it takes a lot of work to be successful. If you read my Even Odds thread You'll see I'm not averse to hard work as I went to great lengths testing and comparing different bet selections and by putting a lot of thinking into it.

More to the point, what I don't agree with is the idea of "High Quality bet selections" posted here:

Progression without a high quality bet selection will always fail.....; Unless we have eveidence of the high quality of the
bet selection it is a waste of time and energy to test anything at this point. Just my 0.02

This is so self-contradictory it's kind of absurd - assuming a HQ bet selection that never fails exists, how do we have evidence of it unless we test it? And if/when there is the evidence, why test it anyway?

If the poster is being sincere, there's naiveness in assuming there are bet selections that never fail in a game of negative expectation. We all went through that. AP is a different story, but then we're not talking about bet selections, are we?

And here:

Of course there are such bet selection; However, u will probably not find it freely on display
on public forums.

First, saying "of course" is no real argument. Then, "not find it freely" is kinda smelly. The whole HQ bet sel. term sounds like 
the hi-fi vendors that say "See? Gold-plated connectors at the back. This stereo system is High-End".  Either the poster believes in the marketing blurb of the commercial betting systems or he is selling them. IDK.

This is where I'm coming from by stating "won't agree with it until the claims are substantiated". So, not cherry-picking to avoid your comment regarding variance. If you read here:

link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15232.msg130569#msg130569

... and here:

link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15232.msg130650#msg130650

You'll see I reached the same conclusions as yours. So I didn't comment on your comment. Plus you'll have to agree it's still kind of vague, isn't it? Aknowledging the need to reduce variance is just recognizing the problem. HOW to reduce it is the solution. And HOW does one do that? There's the substance to the HQ bets claim that I require.

Still working on the "shifting the bet selections by 90º" thing. It's my off-the-wall  idea, but who knows it might work.

Just for the record I'm not naive anymore into thinking there's a Holy Grail somewhere in a public forum. There's none, anywhere.

That would be akin to a human being able to run forever. Some run to catch the bus and be happy. Some jog in the morning, some run the marathon. There's no Forrest Gump. I mean, there's one out there, it's documented, but he seems to suffer from some kind of brain damage.

What we do in a public forum is learning how to run that extra mile. But there will come the time where we reach the point of no return.

Regards