Simple Trend Catcher

artattack · Mar 09, 05:22 AM 2012

Hi George, let me say, I adore your progressions and love to test them, they are good at not getting into a hole too quickly, but I have a quick question about this one.

How would the same session have performed with a simply marty?

How deep into it would you have gone?

The reason I ask is when I look back at my testing I find that marty would have easily done the job.

It reminds me of the scene from the movie Raiders of the lost Ark when India Jones faces the guy with the sword.

Arthur.

GLC · Mar 09, 09:21 AM 2012

Quote from: artattack on Mar 09, 05:22 AM 2012
Hi George, let me say, I adore your progressions and love to test them, they are good at not getting into a hole too quickly, but I have a quick question about this one.

How would the same session have performed with a simply marty?

How deep into it would you have gone?

The reason I ask is when I look back at my testing I find that marty would have easily done the job.

It reminds me of the scene from the movie Raiders of the lost Ark when India Jones faces the guy with the sword.

Arthur.

Arthur, You're correct a simple martingale would have cleaned house on this example. The problem with a marty is that there are worse sessions when we have many more losses in a row and the marty would climb to very high bets while this one is still keeping the bets small.

That's balancing act we have to perform. With enough money a marty wins steady and easily until the losing streak from hell at which time we have to decide if we have the moxey to bet 1024 units knowing that if that one loses also, our next bet is 2048 units. Scarey stuff.

With this method, we can keep our bets small and hopefully win a few chips each time we play. Testing and playing will reveal if this is valid or not.

I like your "Raiders of the Lost Ark" comparison.

GLC

P.S. Here's a tweak on one of my progressions.
1) Bet 1 unit.
2) If it wins we have 2 units on the table, let-it-ride.
3) If it wins we have 4 units on the table, take 2 units off and bet the remaining 2.
4) If it wins we have 2 units from #3, plus 4 units on the table minus the 1 unit we started with = +5 units.

5) If the 3rd bet loses, we still have +1
6) If the 1st bet loses, we lose 1 units.

GLC · Mar 10, 11:09 AM 2012

Had a real bear of a session testing the box bet progression. Got up to +7 pretty easily and then hit a really bad negative down turn. Dropped down to -28 a couple of times and finally got back to +3 and ended the session. The down turn lasted 134 spins which seemed like forever just to get back to plus but realistically I should focus on the fact that it did recover. I still haven't had to go to the 2 unit boxes.
I've been considering only having 4 or maybe even just 3 boxes. That would make recovery a little quicker but it will also increase the depth of our draw downs. The result will be that a larger buy-in will be necessary.
It really depends on your personal preferrence. Safety, with fewer units at risk or more units at risk for a little faster recovery.
The thing that I like about the idea of having only 5 boxes total and never going to the 2 or higher base bet levels is that eventually*, with patience, we can always pull out of the hole and we never have to place a bet of more than 5 units.
*I know that there's always a session that can't be recovered from, theoretically. But I do believe that it's pretty rare. At least with my limited testing, I haven't even come close to it.
We could always use Hermes' idea of 1, 2, 4 and just stay at 4 until we finally recover. I think it would be a very rare occurrence to get to 4 with this progression.
I notice that this is just a bit more than a flat bet. If my math is correct, the average bet size is 1.5 units. That's a total of 30 units in 20 bets = 1.5 units per bet.
GLC

GLC · Mar 10, 02:30 PM 2012

I'm having a really difficult time getting the box bet method to lose more than 30 units. Can someone please help me out?

I did hand pick the next result just to see what the spins would look like to cause a bust. A lot of choppy jumping around which doesn't happen that often for long enough time to kill us.

Tomla021 · Mar 10, 02:43 PM 2012

on baccarat 130 is no biggie --2 hours----On roulette couldn't you set a stop loss at some point? 130 is a ton I think ---Hey if it hasn't busted thats great one way or another
tom

GLC · Mar 10, 02:50 PM 2012

For some of you who were interested in JohnLegend's method of playing, you might consider using this method to win 5 units risking 80 units which is what 1-1 + 3-3 + 9-9 + 27-27 totals. It seems to win 5 units pretty quickly most of the time.
Just a thought.

Bettor 27 · Mar 10, 06:58 PM 2012

Quote from: GLC on Mar 10, 02:50 PM 2012
For some of you who were interested in JohnLegend's method of playing, you might consider using this method to win 5 units risking 80 units which is what 1-1 + 3-3 + 9-9 + 27-27 totals. It seems to win 5 units pretty quickly most of the time.
Just a thought.

Hi GLC,

Can you provide example of how this would be applied to a double dozen bet - how many bets to win 5 units?

Many thanks

marivo · Mar 11, 10:00 AM 2012

I am studying this and I am not sure why you go to K mode here:
[attach=1]
Thank you!

malcop · Mar 11, 10:16 AM 2012

Hi marvio,

(K) Killer mode, where you are betting for a 2-1 or 1-2 pattern i.e ABBABBABB as long as you keep winning in K (Killer) mode, if you look at the example you posted you can see the BRRBRRB pattern had started from spin 10, by hand 12 there was three Normal mode losses in a row, so I switched to K mode, at spin 15 but in fact I missed entering K mode I should have been playing K mode at spin 13, and lost a few potential winning bets, I make mistakes from time to time.

Well spotted

I hope this helps.

Thanks

malcop

GLC · Mar 11, 11:57 AM 2012

Quote from: Bettor 27 on Mar 10, 06:58 PM 2012
Hi GLC,

Can you provide example of how this would be applied to a double dozen bet - how many bets to win 5 units?

Many thanks

I'm sorry for the confusion. I didn't mean this box bet method could be applied to double dozens, I meant that we could use the hit-n-run method that JL likes. We could play Simple Trend Catcher betting the box method until we win 5 units and then take a break. We could risk 80 units on each session just like you would need when playing the double dozen methods like Code 4 on dozens and columns or Divide and Conquer or some of the other matrix methods.

The box method is a very conservative bet progression in my opinion. Although, I'm sure it will tank occasionally. Some people may think it's too slow and decide to just stay with the progression Malcop mentioned he uses in reply #8. It works very well also.

I should have never posted the box progression on Malcop's topic for bet selection.

If you have any more questions about the box method, I am going to start a topic under money management call the box method. Please join me there.

Bettor 27 · Mar 12, 07:40 AM 2012

Thanks GLC

nayan007 · Mar 13, 09:25 AM 2012

It's okie GLC, Finally you came to know that it was a confusion

marivo · Mar 17, 06:19 AM 2012

I have a question regarding rules:

Quote from: malcop on Mar 03, 06:07 PM 2012
Important information at all times keep track of what would have been a three (N) mode losses in a row and as soon as you see that you go into (K) mode and bet for the 2-1 or 1-2 pattern until a loss then back to (N) mode,

And before this you say regarding Interrupt Mode:

Quote from: malcop on Mar 03, 06:07 PM 2012
Streak of three or more

AAA-B now the streak has broke so you bet A for the streak to come back to AAABA now in normal mode you would be betting for a chop but we stay in (I) mode and bet A again to get AAABAA at this point you are no longer in (I) mode and back in (N) mode and you would bet A for the streak to continue,

Shouldn't we here comply with the rule from the first quote and go to Killer Mode because we "virtually" lose 3 Normal Mode bets in row?

malcop · Mar 17, 06:38 AM 2012

Quote from: marivo on Mar 17, 06:19 AM 2012
I have a question regarding rules:

And before this you say regarding Interrupt Mode:Shouldn't we here comply with the rule from the first quote and go to Killer Mode because we "virtually" lose 3 Normal Mode bets in row?

Hi marivo,

Sometimes you will find that the I mode and the K mode are directing you to bet for the same pattern.

In my examples I was trying to explain how each mode works, but you will see that the K mode will be the way to go based on three Normal mode losses.

But if I & K mode are directing you to place the same bet then it makes no real difference, until until such a point that K mode takes over.

Best way to think of K mode is an override once you have three normal mode losses in a row.

Thanks

malcop

marivo · Mar 18, 06:44 AM 2012

Again: i would go in Killer mode here as I understand your rules:

Quote from: malcop on Mar 03, 06:07 PM 2012
Streak of three or more

AAA-B now the streak has broke so you bet A for the streak to come back to AAABA now in normal mode you would be betting for a chop but we stay in (I) mode and bet A again to get AAABAA at this point you are no longer in (I) mode and back in (N) mode and you would bet A for the streak to continue,

Sorry for the insistence, but I really try to be sure I understand it.

News:

Simple Trend Catcher