Progression play

Reading about Progressions used to be fun and, in fact, very informative. Why cant we have "Progression talk" on this forum?

how many times can you read the same crap over and over again? i got an idea, why don't you just search through the archives and read the old ones?

This link may help you, and hopefully end this thread.

Progressions are a waste of everyone's time.

I'm always willing to discuss the benefits of progressive betting, but attempting to seriously discuss this subject on this site is a waste of time and energy.

Although my attitude has changed over the past couple of years regarding progressions, mostly because of well written posts by some counters, I'm still convinced it's the way to go. Only now I realize that it must be in conjunction with an identifyable advantage. If you can't identify where the advantage is, and tie the progression bets to it, it will eventually collapse under it own weight.

Understanding progressive betting is important and a good way to start.
Knowing the cummulative effect of increasing ones bet and the danger of going beyond your sustainable bankroll is a definite 'need to know'.

Was it nonsense and a waste of time? Not to this reader. To those who are rigid in their thinking, probably so.

I tried to do this a while ago...

Basically, positive counts won't last long enough for the progression to have a decent effect.

If you use a neg prog. with the count, you might have a losing streak on a high count, and then find yourself high up your betting ramp with the advantage turned against you.

Using a pos prog. seems more sensible. You only up on wins, which will occur slightly more frequently on pos counts, but you may also get that DD, SP or BJ on a large bet. It's also easy to bring the bet size back down when advantage is turning, or has gone.

It'd lead you to to quite a bit of wonging, and I don't think it'd be as profitable as counting (more efficient).

Also, you will be overbetting using a progression.

It just seems easier to count, instead of tying in a progression to advantage play.

There was a proposed method posted here some years ago which combined a progression with counting with a one to ten spread used only on positive situations in a single deck game. I calculated the DI for it and the DI for a two spread and the two were about identical. Variance ate up even this massive spread for single deck.

The only acceptable progression is one where the average bet is lower than what the player would normally flat bet. This would result in less money wagered and less money lost to the casino. It gives the progressionist the opportunity to exploit a long win streak they so desire and yet lose less money. If a progressionist player would be a $15 flat bettor then starting his progression at say $7 or $10 could make his average bet lower than $15.

I don't know how to do the math but maybe we could work out a progression for them that results in a lower average wager for each corresponding flat bet. We could store it in the archives then when the progression posts come up we could refer them to it. We know it won't give them an edge but it least it cuts their losses to a lower figure.

People who use progressions purely to profit, don't understand that they are at a mathematical disadvantage.

They have experienced many wins (if using a neg progression), and haven't hit that big loss (I like to call it a correction) yet.

Progressions can work IF YOU have the advantage. Unfortunately this is not the case in any casino games (under normal circumstances).

The problem with progressions is (assuming you have an advantage to start with) that you are overbetting at some point. A progression just isn't as efficient as other betting methods. The variance is larger than if you were betting a % or flat betting. Since the progression won't change the advantage, there is no point using it (whether you already have an advantage or not).

We know the variance encountered by a person playing advantage blackjack slows the rate at which the player wins. One would then think this could be turned around and one would lose slower on the average in a negative game using a progression to increase variance but that proves not to be true, you lose at the rate of Ev*average bet. The speed of losing on average can be cut, however, by selecting a game with internal variance, slot machines, roulette, video poker, which helps to explain the popularity of those games.

eh MrJ, you said:
"Since the progression won't change the advantage, there is no point using it (whether you already have an advantage or not)".

So are you leaving the progressions???
what happen with your D'alembert???

saludos