Differential Betting

[TwoCatSam]

Hello

Would someone--or more--explain differential betting from the get-go?  Use an example, please.

Next, explain the mathematical advantage to differential betting.

I have looked and Googled, but only find one system for sale by Itzak Mataya.

Sam

[nottophammer]

Think Ausguy might know a bit on differential betting, but whether he'll reply

[rouletteKEY]

Sam here you go...not complicated

Let's say I have a method that calls for me to play all 3 dozens simultaneously (this type of method would have multiple triggers on multiple methods embedded on top of each other / I would use that type of thing to take as much variance as possible out of the game because by limiting variance progressions become much more playable and once you can play a light progression you can make alot more money...I am aware of the going down in flames aspect as well)...in a case like this I may consider differential betting or I may dismiss it...depending on how the method is formed.

I use a dozens example because I would normally never dream of playing an EC because of the lack of ability to recover compared to the other bets available....but you normally see differential betting in EC's.

But for an easy example let's say i need to play 3 units on the first dozen...5 units on the second and 10 units on the third.

Where is the obvious problem with this?  0/00 loses 18 units and we generally would never play an insurance bet to hedge the green.  There are other problems...but the green is the one most everyone tends to focus on.  The other main problem that would besiege me is that I would normally play a progression and if I reduce my bet for the differential I won't make as much as I should on the victory that is sure to ensue as soon as I drop some units off to play it safe on the differential basis.

So.  I deduct the smallest bet from the remaining and play 2 on the second and 7 on the third so I am only exposing 9 units to total loss on a green...I realize this also exposes me to not winning 6 units if the first dozen hits...but if I had not deducted to bet the "differential" I would have lost 15 units on the 2nd and 3rd dozen in this example against the 6 unit win...still losing 9 units net.  Therefore it's a hedge against against the green.

Yes I know that green isn't my only enemy and that when I bet any single dozen...regardless of whether I am betting any of the others or not...on the American wheel I have 26 numbers that lose the bet.

It's used when using progressions so it really won't apply to most people based on what I read here and on other forums...although in live play I see alot of people using progressions...guess they don't participate in forums

[TwoCatSam]

Thank you, key.  I will study hard on what you wrote.

Sam

[rouletteKEY]

for most people....unless you are playing a progression (usually on the EC's)   it's a complete non-issue

[TwoCatSam]

MATH QUESTION

What I want to do is hit one of two dozens back to back.  That is, I bet dozens 1 and 2 and I want to get two wins in a row.

Odds of getting one win is 66.66%  Odds of getting back to back wins are 44.44%.  Now........suppose I have four tries to hit that back to back situation.  What are my odds of getting back to backs in four tries.

I know this is tough and there is a formula for it, but I can't find it.  I know it's not 4 x 44.44%; maybe not even 2 x.

Anyone?

Sam

[Chris555p]

@Roulettekey - Would it be possible to explain how u would play differential betting on ec thanks.


Chris

[Turner]

MATH QUESTION

What I want to do is hit one of two dozens back to back.  That is, I bet dozens 1 and 2 and I want to get two wins in a row.

Odds of getting one win is 66.66%  Odds of getting back to back wins are 44.44%.  Now........suppose I have four tries to hit that back to back situation.  What are my odds of getting back to backs in four tries.

I know this is tough and there is a formula for it, but I can't find it.  I know it's not 4 x 44.44%; maybe not even 2 x.

Anyone?

Sam

sam, I'll stand corrected if there are any math guys here...

The odds of hitting a double doz twice in 4 spins is:

How many 2's can you combine in 4 x (odds of a win)² x (odds of a loss)²

Its W² x L² because you need 2 wins. If it was 4 wins in 10, then its W⁴ x L<sup>6

4</sup>C² x 0.648² x 0.324² = 0.264 x 100%

or put another way

6 x 0.4199 x 0.105 = 26.4%

But you didnt ask that !!!!!

You asked about winning 2 in a row in 4.

You can only have 3 of these, 12,23,34 or it hasnt won 2 in a row in 4.


I think its 3 x 0.4199 x 0.105 = 13.2% because there arnt 6 possible 2's just 3

[TwoCatSam]

Turner

I think I may have worded it wrong.  Here is the scheme:

(1-2) (2-4) (5-6) (7-8)  That's if I always win my first bet and am trying for a two-fer.

If you lose the first bet it becomes 1 (2-3); 2; (3-4) and so on.

It could be a combination of win first/lose second or lose first.  Any combination.

I think I have stumbled onto a idea that has merit.  I like to "math them out" before I try them, but I am way-not-smart-enough to do it.

That said.......I know it's more than 44.44% because that is the odds if I just bet once:  Dozen 1 or 2 hits followed by dozen 1 or 2 hitting on the next spin.

Guess I'll just create the system and test it manually.

Thanks

Sam

[GLC]

Hello

Would someone--or more--explain differential betting from the get-go?  Use an example, please.

Next, explain the mathematical advantage to differential betting.

I have looked and Googled, but only find one system for sale by Itzak Mataya.

Sam

I'll splain it in Okieeze.

The first time I tried to use a betting scheme that bet on both sides of an e.c. bet, was when I first discovered the labby.  I won so regularly that I thought, if I play a labby on Black and one on Red at the same time, I can't lose.  That's how newbies think and I was for sure a newbie.  Well, it wasn't long before I realized that you could lose betting that way also because a long losing streak on either side escalated that side out of control still, and the other side was only winning a very small bet.  One thing I did notice was that it was a big hit when a zero came along. 

So, like Key said, if you subtract the smaller of the two bets from the larger and bet the difference the amount won or lost remains the same but the loss if a zero hits is less. 

Here's an example  let's say we're betting on Red and Black in our bet system and we start with 1 unit bet on Red and Black. 
Here's what will happen if we do put 1 chip on each color. 
If Red wins, we will win 1 unit on the Red bet and we will lose 1 unit on the Black bet.  That's a wash.  But if we spin a zero, we lose both of the units we bet for -2.
I thought to myself, which is who I think to on a regular basis, why bet at all when I have to bet the same amount on both spots because it doesn't matter if I'm betting 1 unit on each or 100 units on each.  Only one side can win and the other side loses the same amount so it's always a wash but if zero hits I lose everything I bet.  If I had not bet at all the results would have been the same, no net win or loss, but if a zero hits, I don't lose anything.  Wow!  big revelation.

Now let's say we're back to betting Red and Black simultaneously and we need to bet 1 unit on Red and 2 units on Black.

If we bet on both, and Red wins we will win 1 unit on Red and lose 2 units on Black for a net lose of 1 unit.
If Black wins, we lose 1 unit on Red and win 2 units on Black for a net win of 1 unit. But if a zero hits we will lose 3 units. 
Now, if we subtract the 1 Red unit from the 2 Black units and only bet the difference which is 1 unit on Black but no unit on Red, we will get the same results. 
If Red hits we lose 1 unit on Black and if Black hits we win 1 unit on Black.  Same result as above. 
But if zero hits, we only lose 1 unit instead of 3 units, so why throw those units away.
So, differential betting is only applicable to hedge against the zero and so we can play both sides on some other games that don't have a zero, but the casino may not let you bet opposing bets.

The other part of this scenario is that you have to keep track of your progressions on each color as if you were not betting differentially.
Let's say were playing +1 -1 on each color.  Whenever a color loses we add +1 to the bet line and whenever a side wins we subtract -1 from that side.
In other words or lines look like this: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 etc... for each color.  We move 1 step to the right on a loss and 1 step to the left on a win. 

Example:

We're just starting an attack so we bet 1 unit on Red and 1 unit on Black but playing differentially we know they cancel each other out so we don't bet anything.  (this saves us 2 units if a zero hits) 
We watch the spin and let's say Black wins.  That means we leave Black at 1 unit and we increase Red to 2 units.  Now we can bet differentially so we subtract Black's 1 from Red's 2 and we get a 1 unit bet on Red. 
Let's say Black wins again.  That means we lost the 1 unit we bet on Red which is what we would have lost if we had bet 2 units on Red and 1 unit on Black.
That means we leave Black at 1 unit and we move Red to 3 units.  B 1 from R 3 = R 2 so we bet 2 units on Red. 
Black wins again.  We lose the 2 units we bet on Red so we leave Black at 1 unit and we move Red to 4 units.  B 1 from R 4 = 3 R so we bet 3 units on Red. (These 3 units represent the 1 unit on Black subtracted from the 4 units on Red.  If a zero hits we would lose 5 units unless we bet differentially.  Three units can be determined by any bet amounts that result in 3 when subtracted from each other.  Let's say our next bets, according to our bet lines, would be 7 units on Red and 10 units on Black, differentially that results in a 3 unit bet on Black.  But look at the difference from losing 17 units on a zero and only losing 3 units on a zero.  That makes differential betting worth the extra math step.  Actually even saving 1 unit makes it worth it to me.)

Please ask any questions if something's not clear.

Regarding the advantage to betting both sides at the same time whether differentially or not, I don't think there's any advantage at all.  If one side has a winning streak the bets on that side get smaller and smaller until they're at the minimum and the bets on the losing side get larger and larger.  It's the same dynamic as what happens without betting on both sides simultaneously.  It's just slowed down a little initially in differential betting.


GLC

[TwoCatSam]

George

Thanks for that.  I'm off to lunch and and afternoon movie, so I'll print this out and take it to Church with me and read it while the preacher is ranting about the evils of gambling.

Sam

(Not Really!!  Geez....)

[GLC]

George

Thanks for that.  I'm off to lunch and and afternoon movie, so I'll print this out and take it to Church with me and read it while the preacher is ranting about the evils of gambling.

Sam

(Not Really!!  Geez....)

Gambling?
We're not gambling. 
We're entertaining. 
We're investing. 
We're rationalizing.
etc...

GLC

[huskerdu]

I think deifferential betting has chances only if we use positive progressions, because in case of a raw (negative from the one side - positive from the other side) we can have ay good result. But with negative progressions in case of a raw  it's a disaster.
Also I think that differential betting has negative results when there is no trend of any kind. If there is a series of similar outcomes from both sides we keep losing a little ofcourse but contisnusly and then we need a good trend to get us to a positive result.

[GLC]

Huskerdu,  What you say has much truth to it except for one thing.  If you're playing D'Alembert on both bets, then choppy spins are good and streaks are bad.  The same perils are present whether betting differential or one side only.  It's just off-set a little by the opposing bet.

I've never tested the positive progression idea.  It may be a better way to play it, but I don't expect it will be better enough.

GLC

[bikemotorman]

Hey guys this video explains Net Betting or Differential betting but he makes one mistake when he says you MINUS THE LARGE BET FROM THE SMALL BET.

ITS ACTUALLY YOU MINUS THE LOW SIDE FROM THE LARGE SIDE AND PLAY THE DIFFERENCE HIGHER BET SIDE.
YES THIS GUY WAS A PARTNER WITH ELLIS.

BUT THE VIDEO IS PRETTY GOOD.


link:s://:.youtube.com/watch?v=bF0stkqgiPU

Stuart