Thoughts on progressions

[beretta28]

Even if I suggest to read seriously my previous post in this thread,I must confess that your progression is not bad at all.

I'm also a big supporter of 3/2method and I used to play it like you said at the beginning (3/2,9/6 two times etc.etc.).
I was killed not only  by clusters of  the  sole double street I didn't bet,but by the ZERO!

What you suggest is exactly a D'Alembert progression on five double streets, if the bet line is 5 times 1,five times 2,etc.

It's a slower D'Alembert if the bet line is 6 or more times 1,six or more time 2,etc.

Because more time you spend at the table,higher is the risk to lose all bkr,what I prefer is the following bet line:3 or 4 times 1,3 or 4 times 2,etc. with a small unit.

P.S. when we suggest a progression it would be also fundamental to suggest
- bankroll
-win goal
- max number of spins to play...

Conclusion:nice progression but very low wins and high risk of bankruptcy
                I gave up playing like that..

[GLC]

B28,

Thanks for your analysis.

I thought it might be very close to a D'Alembert.

One difference is that you can land in the middle of a level and only have to bet 1, 2 or 3 times before dropping to a lower level.

I know this will eventually have a loss.

I guess it's a possible candidate for a hit-n-run session.

I was getting the sense that a bank of 250 units would give you a fair chance at a lot of 25 to 50 unit wins.

I'm still not finished with testing this, but will be factoring in your input.

Thanks.

Any other observations?

Happy Thanksgiving to all,

George

[beretta28]

I think that 250 units as Bkr with 25/50 units goal,it's a too difficult objectif.

In my opinion,playing 5 units for winning 1 unit is a very low pay-out.
That's why your win goal seems too ambitious to me.

But I prefer to wait for your tests.

An additional observation:generally speaking.whatever is the progression,the win goal must not be too low,otherwise,to recovery a completly lost bankroll is very long and difficult.
As far as 3/2 method is concerned is even worse,because the "recovery power" is very low!

[GLC]

I will do some more testing, believe me, I know how quickly a winning system can turn into a losing system.

I also know that even if I win and get up a lot of units in the testing period, it can still turn and head down at any time.

I am very cautious.

I'll keep us posted.

George

[GLC]

I will do some more testing, believe me, I know how quickly a winning system can turn into a losing system.

I also know that even if I win and get up a lot of units in the testing period, it can still turn and head down at any time.

I am very cautious.

I'll keep us posted.

George

After further testing I have come to the conclusion that Baretta28 is correct.  

This method is too volatile.

It's amazing how many losing numbers can come so close together which drives you so deep into the hole that it's almost impossible to climb back out.

Please do not try this bet selection method with this bet selection unless you have tested it thoroughly so you know what to expect.

George

[Kav]

Fellow Seekers,

If you are a player who doesn't like to get to deep in the hole, you should use a flat bet or maybe the bread winner, 2up 2 down  system or another slow progression.  Lanky's 6 point divisor is an excellent system for this category because you can keep your bets low or let them excalate as you wish.

If you have plenty of bank and don't like grinding then some of the more aggressive progression should suit your style.  I think the most agressive is the grand martingale then the standard martingale, Alexembert, fibonacci, pluscoup, boffins etc...

The 6 point divisor is much more aggressive than Pluscoup in many cases.

[GLC]

The 6 point divisor is much more aggressive than Pluscoup in many cases.

Sorry I missed your post mate,

I know what you're saying about the 6 point divisor.  It can be very aggressive.

The thing that tames it is the brake option which can be applied at anytime to reduce the size of your bets.  Of course that trade-off is that it takes a lot longer to dig out of a whole the more you use the brake.

Cheers Kav,

George