Martingale Progressive Betting in BJ

Hi -- I'm new to this board, and I was hoping I could get some advice or comments for my question. I apologize for the length of my email in advance.

I've been practicing a variation on the Martingale progressive betting strategy on my home PC. The software I'm using isn't terribly sophisticated, and it purports to use random shuffling, not casino shuffling. I have added my own modifications to the Martingale strategy in an effort to combat some of its biggest criticisms. Here's how I'm doing it. I'm beginning my bets at $10 and increasing them by $5 with each successive win. When I lose, I pull my bet back to $5 and begin again. I set thresholds from which I start the negative progression based on the size of my theoretical bankroll. When I fall below these thresholds, that's when I begin the Martingale technique of doubling my bets for each successive loss in an effort to get my balance back up to that threshold. As I win after successive progressions, the thresholds rise. I also limit negative progressions to $200 - $500, depending on bankroll size, so as not to risk ruin in the event of a prolonged successive losing streak (one of the harshest criticisms of the Martingale technique). Also, while the $5 increments may seem low, it adds up fairly quickly and certainly helps insure against ruin if one has a bankroll of a decent size.

I hope that makes sense, I tried to explain it the best I could. I came up with the modifications myself, based on nothing in particular besides what I consider to be conservative common sense. The results, at least according to my simple software, have been surprisingly very excellent. So excellent, I'm suspicious that the shuffling feature in my software must favor the player over the dealer. Perhaps not, though. Maybe this really is an effective strategy.

So, my question is, has anyone here ever had any sustained success employing the Martingale technique or variations of it? What are your opinions of it and what has been your experience? Thanks to anyone who can help or who has some comments to contribute.

See link below

The most popular form of progression - parlaying ones bets - will lead to many losing sessions and some very rare "breakthroughs"
Your negative progression - a mix between D'Alembert and Martingale - will have the opposite effect of giving you many winning sessions and occasions to celebrate.
The flaw is that it greatly increases your risk of ruin and you are doomed to suffer a total wipe out sooner or later.
Your "precaution" to limit the progression to $500 is a bit abstract because usually you won't even be allowed to bet that much at a $5-table.
I don't wish you bad but to fall on ones nose has in most cases a very curative effect.

Francis Salmon

Counting is not all that important in a tourney because of the circumstances. If you read Stan Wong's Tourney book you will see that under the right circumstances a 7 unit do-or-die progression of 1u 2u 4u is recommended. This is "Almost Certain Death Strategy."

Progo's can also be great cover. If you have read Cellini's book once they tag you as a progo queen, they don't bother with you because they know in the long run you will lose, hopefully at their casino, hence, the pit suggesting you hit the buffet for free, etc to keep you around. All of which can be hidden within your counting attack. You will not be Kelly betting mind you, but over and underbetting around your advantage to keep them off your tail.

Under another circumstance, playing online, they can also be effective. Once again, good cover, but more so putting in the required action when your max loss is limited. For example, you buy in with 50 and they give you a 200 bonus. You have a finite series of events, much like the 30 hands in a tourney. Remember the "many small wins and one giant loss?" Your giant loss is limited to $50.

Nothing beats making the exact sized Kelly bet vs BR at a superior felt game (other than onLine), so unless you are using it for cover based around your count, word up, check the link in this thread, and get back to your indices and building your bankroll!

Your house is on fire and you are going to lose all your blackjack books. Do you go in to try to save them?

Your house is on fire and you are going to lose all your family members. Do you go in to try to save them?

Thanks for your thoughts. I'm a relative rookie to BlackJack, only having started playing seriously in the past year. I love the game, though. I've learned the K-O counting system, and I like it. But at this point, I have a hard time "enjoying" the game while counting, as I find I have to concentrate really hard and have to ignore those around me, which cuts down on the fun. Also, when I'm concentrating on the count, I begin to get a bit paranoid that I'm being scrutinized by the bosses. I'm much friendlier and more social when I'm just playing Basic Strategy, which is why I had a beginning interest in progressive betting. The curious thing to me is how successful my method has been in practicing on my computer at home. I tried again last night using different software, and I ended up plus 50%! Almost every time I practice with it I end up way up. But maybe that's some wierd sustained fluke or maybe the different blackjack software programs are all faulty. I dunno. Anyway, thanks for giving me something to think about without insulting or dismissing me like a nuisance. I appreciate it.

As long as you're not proficient enough with counting I agree that it can be very boring to flat bet minimum and play BS. I remember when I started out I used to try counting during the first hour of a session but as soon as a quick dealer came in I was forced to switch systems.I must admit I also used a negative progression but not as aggressive as yours. It was the pure D'Alembert Sytem which consists of raising the bet by one unit after a loss and reduce it by one unit after a win.
It brought me much fun and many session wins but also some catastrophies.
You should be aware of the fact that no progression whatsoever can make you win in the long run.The problem with your software might not even be a programming mistake but you probably didn't run it long enough.
Anyway you should train counting at home every day until you're comfortable with it.I'm pretty sure you'll make your way.

Francis Salmon

Nothing cuts down on the fun more than KNOWING you will be a loser in the long run if you just play basic strategy and put in substantial hours. Counting gives you a mathematical edge versus the casino and nothing is more satisfying than KNOWING you, at the very mimimum, have a good chance at being a long-term winner.

SeaSpike-
Get the book "21st Century Blackjack"by Walter Thomason. I use the Positive Progressive Betting System with Quit Points he writes about in his book and it sure works for me! I know card counters discredit such thinking but hey,it works! Good Luck!

Grift

First, look at this one:

http://www.bj21.com/bj_reference/pages/10537.html

Then, if you still feel a need to play progressions, and still think you can win with them, please click the link below.

Sorry -- Neither link you provided provides any real insight or scientific proof that unequivocally rules out success of any sort using progressions. While I'm certainly willing to learn, all I read in the first link was rhetoric and assertions along the lines of "you will definitely lose all your money using progressions." OK, fine. Can anyone point me or others who might be interested in the direction of some definitive studies that might have been done proving that, or explaining why? I'm glad I posted my question, because now I do have strong reservations about employing progressions in live play now. That may very well be a good thing. However, I would like to learn why, rather than just accepting as truth dismissive comments of people who obviously prefer, again with good reason, card counting. And the link to Gambler's Anonymous? Is that supposed to be some sort of insult? I play for fun and fun only. Sure it's great to win money and to gain an edge, but fortunately, I have another job that has nothing at all to do with gambling. That, along with a conservative albeit experimental gambling approach, has done a fine job keeping me away from the desparate straits which might contribute to or lead to an addiction.

Thanks again to those who can help or have comments that contribute a bit more than referring to inquiring minds as "nonsense" or "silly."

"you will definitely lose all your money using progressions." OK, fine. Can anyone point me or others who might be interested in the direction of some definitive studies that might have been done proving that, or explaining why?

"Why" is simple mathematics. You cannot take a series of negative expectation bets and magically turn them into a positive expectation.
The need to "prove" something is on the proponents of it. It has been mathematically proven that card counting gives the competent counter an advantage. No one has ever been able to prove, with a statistically meaningful sample size, that a progression works. Common sense tells you that it does NOT work.

And the link to Gambler's Anonymous? Is that supposed to be some sort of insult?

It was not intended as an insult. The link was intended to be a wake up call for those who might think that progressions are an easy way to win money from the casinos. Winning money from casinos is work, it is not easy. A progression scheme is easy -- so easy that anyone can do it, without training or knowledge. But it is a loser's "system."

If progressions worked the casinos would have closed a long time ago since any idiot can play a positive progression and follow a basic strategy card.

All progressions do is re-shape the normally balanced bellcurve of possible session results and skew the results to the left or right depending on the type of progression.

Progressions simply put changing amounts of money into action across the full spectrum of casino edges. Since the net casino edge on the sum total of all bets must equal the basic casino edge on the game you are bound to lose exactly the mathematical casino expectation. Casino's love progression players and wisely comp them generously.

Nuff said!

Hi, I've been playing BJ for 20+ years, learned basic strategy at the outset and have always rigidly followed it. Along the way, I started keeping a simple plus/minus count, usually with a six-deck shoe at most places I've played. Having read so much about casino security, etc., I've tried to be non-obvious when taking advantage of the information, although such things as insurance bets are likely to give you away and are one of the biggest edges gained by a lazy counter like myself. Anyhow, I played a positive progression before starting to count, and have continued to play a slow positive progression since then, in the belief that I can more easily cover my actions that way. If the deck gets good when I already have a big bet on the table and I lose, I drop back less or keep it the same. If I win I increase more, which is easy to cover after winning a BJ or a DD or split situation; it just looks like enthusiasm. I frequently go through hours of ho-hum seesawing and certainly go losers fairly often during a session, but almost always the right set of circumstances will occur during a session and I'll hit some sort of usable run. This has worked very well for me. I hope I'm not nuts. I also had some fun with the "silly sevens" side bet, by making the bet when the deck became 7-rich, winning $500 twice on a total of maybe $50 at most bet on these ever. But those tables seem to be disappearing; maybe this has something to do with that. It was hard to do my lazy plus/minus count and also the 7's, anyhow.