Do you think that a stop-loss point can save us from the long run losing?

[RouletteExplorer]

Let s say that we have a system like the " Possible H.G " of Turbo Genius that requires a progression.

As we know it s a nice and effective system BUT in the Long Run its a loser because there will be a point that the numbers(or streets or anything) will not be hitting and the progression will grow nasty and even if we will win all the bets we will be very down.....

So do you think that a stop-loss can save a system from the long run losing???

The above system is just an example.... I speak here about all the systems that require a Progression......

I think not.....but maybe its an intresting point to look out.

[LuckoftheIrish]

Let s say that we have a system like the " Possible H.G " of Turbo Genius that requires a progression.

As we know it s a nice and effective system BUT in the Long Run its a loser because there will be a point that the numbers(or streets or anything) will not be hitting and the progression will grow nasty and even if we will win all the bets we will be very down.....

So do you think that a stop-loss can save a system from the long run losing???

The above system is just an example.... I speak here about all the systems that require a Progression......

I think not.....but maybe its an intresting point to look out.

A stop loss will not make ANY system a winner that already is not a winner in the long run.

[iggiv]

A stop-loss will not make ANY system a winner that already is not a winner in the long run.

аgree. though stop-loss may reduce the losses dramatically. dangerous progressions can devastate the player and multiply his losses

[Chrisbis]

Yes,

stop-loss is a must.

You can try and recovery another day, with a different sun in the sky.

(the moon is always the same one by the way)........ 

[MrJ]

This is one of FEW roulette subjects I am on the fence with. I see both views.

What I do for a WIN GOAL (have posted this at JP's site), I shoot for 20% of my BR but if my win passes that 20%, I continue to play until if/when it drops back DOWN to 20%, then leave casino. So my BR is 1K (example) and I get a nice hit and am now at $1,350........I continue to play. Maybe it'll drop to $1,200 (quit), maybe it won't.

For a stop loss, I'll usually quit at losing 70% of my BR.

Ken

[GLC]

I think a stop-loss can save us if we don't limit our winnings.


A stop-loss can tell us that we're having a lousy day and should call it quits.


If we're having a really good day, no sense limiting wins.


My brother plays 2 or 3 systems exclusively.  He has relatively small stop losses.  50 units for each system.  He has no win target.  He does limit his losses to 25% from his high point after reaching a certain level.  Same idea MrJ posted.


His winning days and losing days are about equal, but he's way ahead of the game because some of his winning days are monsters.


Luck?  Maybe.  But you'll never get him to admit it.


By the way, his favorite game is betting 1 unit and going for 3 parlays before pulling his money back.  When this does well, he can rake it in and all he's betting is 1 unit per attack.


I wonder where he got that idea from?

Oh yeah, I must tell you that he's a sucker for slots.  Go figure.

[Bayes]

It's a tricky one. If you've done your research then you should know the limits of your system and design any progression accordingly, but there's always the remote chance of that freak event or sequence. What do you do IF that happens?  in my opinion there should be a plan for any and every scenario, and that may include the option of cutting your losses.

[RouletteExplorer]

"""It's a tricky one. If you've done your research then you should know the limits of your system and design any progression accordingly, but there's always the remote chance of that freak event or sequence. What do you do IF that happens?"""

I agree

[ego]

Let s say that we have a system like the " Possible H.G " of Turbo Genius that requires a progression.

As we know it s a nice and effective system BUT in the Long Run its a loser because there will be a point that the numbers(or streets or anything) will not be hitting and the progression will grow nasty and even if we will win all the bets we will be very down.....

So do you think that a stop-loss can save a system from the long run losing???

The above system is just an example.... I speak here about all the systems that require a Progression......

I think not.....but maybe its an intresting point to look out.

Well if you reverse the frog-perspective to bird-perspective.
Assume you have 50K bankroll - i am sure some one could play for a life-time using roulette systems and that with out past results - just play every trail as they come as there is no difference.

Lets assume you have air-ball roulette with minimum 0.10 Euro.
Then some one could play against one pattern of 12 witch is 1 in 1024.
But that is maybe 12 black or 12 red that appers once.
If some one play zig-zag like BRB then there is only one show of 12 that is due to show.
This could happen in the begining or take for ever.

Now if the progression is 1 1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 89 using 0.10 you will gain what you risk or part of it during your play - if we assume the sequense does not apper when you place your first bet.
Then when there is a total loss - some one move up playing regular tabel with minimum 1.00 Euro to gain back the % of losses using 0.10.
If a rare moment and being unlucky - then move up to a baccarat tabel with minimum 2.00 Euro or any other tabel with higher minimum with larger maximum.

I belive that playing three different tabels and end up with 12 with out gain back the previos losses are almost impossibal - but i know it could happend - but i assume that is what we call gambling.

Does who want to find out could order the code from UX software and run milions of simulations with would be with milions of placed bets every trail :-)