IBOBA'S --BP-- Tweaked

[GLC]

Not wanting to muddy Teo's topic, I offer a small tweak for those of us who like his idea, but are a little short on dinero to play the original way.

A caveat.  Teo stated that this was bullet proof based on his way of playing it.  I am not making that claim based on this tweak.  I will say that I have tested many of his spreadsheets and have mirrored his original results as far as wins vs losses go.  The amounts won are much less, but the units risked are much less also.  As much as 8 to 10 times less.

To start with, we will use 18 bets instead of 9 bets between bet size decisions.  This means we will only make adjustments half as often as the original method.

Also, we will only add 1 unit or subtract 1 unit to the bet sizes rather than 1 or 3 or 5 or 7 or 9.  In other words, if we lose on a side, we add a unit to that sides bet and we subtract a unit from the winning sides bet size.  If we break even, meaning we win 9 and lose 9, there will be no change in the bet sizes. 

Any time a side reaches a plus balance, we reset that side to 1 unit bets. 

The only time we use a conscious decision is if we're betting a large amount, say 8 units, and we have a large number of wins by that side in the previous 18 decisions and we only have a small number of units to recover, say 10.  Instead of just subtracting 1 unit from our bet size on that side and betting 7 units, we can drop down to say 2 or 3 units on that side.  This will protect us in case we have a bad losing stretch on that side.  On the other hand, it limits how much we will win if we have a great winning balance on that side.  To each his own.

Test this method on some of the spreadsheets posted on the original topic and see if you don't think it at least is worth another look.

By the way, I have no win target.  Since we reset after reaching a profit, any time we have won all we want, we can walk.

I'm not saying this is better than IBOBA's, just  a little safer.

GLC

[GLC]

The unknown factor is whether such a small bet fluctuation will be able to recover losses as effectively as Teo's more aggressive betting.

It is a fact that the deeper in the hole you get, the harder it is to recover because the percent each bet recovers gets smaller and smaller.  That's why progressions like fibonacci were created so that as the draw down increases, the bet size also increases.  Each win recovers a larger portion of the draw down.

I'm looking at different bet progressions such as a modified "forced win" progression or a 1 - 2 - 3 progression instead of just a +1, -1.

Even though we can play this method with a smaller bankroll, generally speaking, if Teo's aggressive bet method always recovers and this one doesn't, is the smaller bankroll better?

[biagle]

i know, i was pushing to hard, but i had with orginal version drowdown of one even chance 2000units.

but they was recovered. So be warned before playing. and this was without zero's.

[jarabo002]

Betting in cycles is AMAZING!!!