Last night I lost about 14 in a row on 6D. Fortunately, all a mimimum bets. Ended the 1.5 day trip up 145 units.
If you ignor the the advise of the pros on this site and continue to think you can continuously beat a casino with a progression, you're in for a brutal azz whippin'. Why not learn how to win with mathematics and perfect play execution? Take whatever money you were fortunate enough to win and apply it correctly. This is a good place to start learning.
you are one old mother...
And if you are that old, you must be ugly as hell too.
:)
The pros here are giving you sound advice. If casinos could be beaten with progressions, they'd be out of business by now (one can simply change tables to get higher limits -- most would run out of cash before running out of table limits in Vegas). You really didn't discover something new, you know.
The formula is simple. Expected win = average bet X player advantage X # hands played. As you can see, since your advantage is negative (-0.5%), your expectation is negative. For the Martingale progression, take the simple example of betting on a coin toss (win on heads, lose on tails). On average, you'd go quite a while before losing eight in a row. However, that one occurence would wipe out your winnings and then some ($255 times your starting bet). And that's a game without a house advantage. The probability of eight tails in a row is 0.5^8 = 1/256. That's why you haven't seen it yet. The probability is low, but the expectation is a killer. Unfortunately, you will see it with ANY play regularity.
Don't believe it? Well, just construct a simple Excel spreadsheet, using the random number function [=RAND()] and populate a column down a few thousand rows. Make a second column with an IF statement that returns one value for random numbers from 0 to less than .5 and another value for the rest. See how many times you get eight or more "tails" in a row. Next, make a profit/loss colums and graph it -- see what happens. Finally, add in a house advantage and see what happens. It won't be pretty!
Now for the worst part: If your starting bet is $10, you'll run through your available bankroll with eleven losses in a row (not including insurance, splits, or double-downs). For a $1 min bet, you can take 14 losses in a row. The probability of 11 "tails" in a row is 1/2048. Those odds may sound okay, but you can play that many hands in only 20 hours or so. 20 hours to ruin, vs limited win potential? Doesn't sound good to me. I'd rather bet it all on one hand myself.
So, there you go. Best of luck with it, but cannot make money by chasing losses or wins.
why doesnt progress when you win progression work. u only lose the min. when u lose but every time you win u are progessing. u could lose 10 in a row and than win 8 in a row and be ahead. card counting is not for everybody. its complicated and it takes a big bank roll to do it effectively. also just because the count is good doesnt mean u will win. u could still run bad. for the amatuer the average gambler basic strategy and win progression is the best bet. yes card counting is optimal but dont count out win progression. also in one of the books the author challenged a card counter and won.
Even if you don't believe the explanations and mathematical proofs that can be found to demonstrate that progressions dont work, ask yourself this?
Given that progression systems can be explained inside 60 seconds and require no skill whatsoever to implement, if it was possible to win consistently from the casino using such a system, how come casinos continue to offer blackjack and yet remain in business? Would they offer a game that anyone and everyone could beat so easily?
Doesn't it strike you that these facts simply cannot be consistent with the hypothesis that one can win using a progression system?
okay where can i find this mathematical proof. i would think that since your progressing while u win and only betting the min. when u lose the house edge is decreased. also the k-o system can be explained in 60 seconds are u going to discount that.
A proof can be found in:
Theory of Gambling and Statistical Logic, Richard A. Epstein
Somehow I doubt you will believe the mathematical proof presented.
You also missed something in my post. Counting requires a little skill and a lot of dedication. Not just anyone can do it. Following a progression, in comparison, is childs play. I'm sure I could train a monkey to do it for me.
Another piece of empirical evidence for you to consider. How come internet casinos remain in business if progressions work? Wouldnt someone have written a bot to play using a progression with numerous accounts at numerous casinos? Would be dead easy to code, surely? I would expect that if progressions worked, all internet casinos would all be burnt to the ground in hours, wouldnt you agree?
im sorry did u read my first post. u pretty much repeated what i said. yes i agree card counting gives u the best edge i even said that in my post. but thats not for everybody. win progression along with basic strategy lowers the house edge. so i will state this again for the amatuer or average gambler its better than just using basic stategy. yes u will still lose because the house has the advantage but it does work cause it lowers the house edge and gives the player a better chance at winning.
No betting system alone will alter the house edge. To say that a progression lowers the house edge is just wrong.
no one actually answered this person post. his question was which progression would be the best. i find it funny that no one answered him. win progression gives the non card counter the best chance because when u lose u lose the min. when u win u progress. you minimize your losses while u increase the chance to win.
2 2 3 3 4 4 6 6 10 20 20
if u lose after 2 wins u will be +1
after 3 wins +4
after 4 wins +6
after 5 wins +10
after 6 wins +12
after 7 wins +17
after 8 wins +20
after 9 wins +30
after 10 wins +40
after 11 wins +60
and so on.
so if u go on a bad streak and lose 11 in a row at 2 units u would be down -22 units whereas u can make that up in a 9 row win streak or a couple smaller streaks.
"no one actually answered this person post. his question was which progression would be the best. i find it funny that no one answered him."
WTF?!?!?! We ALL answered it, by explaining that progressions don't work. None are best; stay away from the voodoo -- that's the answer. I don't know why you keep insisting your voodoo nonsense works, but please don't ask for answers when you just ignore us when we explain the truth.
To deconstruct your argument, please recall that the EV of each hand is the bet amount times the player advantage. Also, recall that the odds of losing a hand are the same whether the preceding hand was a win or a loss. Therefore, total EV is the sum all bets times the player advantage. Since the player advantage in this case is negative, EV is negative. It doesn't matter when the bet is made, because the preceding hand result doesn't impact the next hand (for a noncounter). Randomly distributed wins and losses appear to occur in streaks by definition -- this isn't some magic of the cards that can be foreseen. Coin tosses occur in streaks as well. Too bad the streaks cannot be foreseen. I assume you aren't clamimg you could win long-term betting on coin tosses, are you?
If you wish to go around betting progressions, more power to you. I like you progression-betting ploppies just fine, as your foolish play helps mask my profitable play. However, we don't advocate voodoo or other such nonsense on this board. We play for money, not to gamble. As I said, more power to you.
