Intelligent Target Betting.

[GLC]

I can't remember if I posted anything on target betting on this forum or not.  In case some of you don't know what target betting is, it's betting 1 unit on each spin until you have a win and then you bet the total of all the units you are down up to that point plus 1 unit. 


What this means is that anytime you win twice in a row, you are fully recovered and have 1 unit to add to profits.  All you have to do is win 2 times in a row before you run out of money or reach the table limit.  It can't always be done, although one person has a blog that he uses to publish how he has been winning thousands of dollars playing this system.  Granted he does have to bet upwards of $25,000 every now and then.


I have thought about his system for a while and I think I can better it a little.  Here's how.
We bet 1 unit until we lose.  After a loss, we stop betting for real but we continue to play virtually until we have a win.  Then we make a real bet.


This is the same thing as he does only we don't lose all those units during losing streaks that we have to bet after a win.


Here's how he does it.


Bet         W/L     Total
1             L           -1
1             L           -2
1             L           -3
1             W         -2
3             L           -5
1             L           -6
1             L           -7
1             L           -8
1             W          -7
8             L           -15
1             W         -14
15           W          +1


As you can see, he eventually had to bet 15 units to recover all his losses.


Here's how it would look with my tweak.


Bet         W/L     Total
1             L           -1
0             L           -1
0             L           -1
0             W          -1
2             L            -3
0             L            -3
0             L            -3
0             L            -3
0             W           -3
4             L            -7
0             W           -7
8             W           +1

As you can see, we only had to bet 8 instead of 15 to reach +1 the same amount of profit.
This will keep your bets much lower.


This is all well and good, but let's use the same idea and change things completely.


I recommend that we play this using the D'Alembert bet method, +1 on a loss and -1 on a win.  I think this will give us a much better chance of winning and will keep our bet sizes much smaller than the original target betting.


I have been testing this a little and it's working like gang busters!

Here's an example

My System                                   


Bet         W/L     Total
1             L           -1
0             L           -1
0             L           -1
0             W          -1
2             L            -3
0             L            -3
0             L            -3
0             L            -3
0             W           -3
3             L            -6
0             W           -6
4             W           -2
3             L            -5
0             L            -5
0             L            -5
0             L            -5
0             W           -5
4             W           -1
3             L            -4
0             L            -4
0             L            -4
0             W           -4
4             W            0
1             W           +1


Now I will show the above spins using the regular D'Alembert bet method




Bet         W/L     Total
1             L           -1
2             L           -3
3             L           -6
4             W          -2
3             L            -5
4             L            -9
5             L            -14
6             L            -20
7             W           -13
6             L            -19
7             W           -12
6             W           -6
5             L            -11
6             L            -17
7             L            -24
8             L            -32
9             W           -23
8             W           -15
7             L            -22
8             L            -30
9             L            -39
10           W          -29
9             W          -20
8             W          -12


So we see that the same spins result in a loss of 12 units with a high bet size of 10 units and a draw down of 39 units.


My system using the same spins results in a win of 1 unit with a high bet size of 4 units and a draw down of only 6 units.


Can anybody see any value in this approach or am I way out there with the Iceman?


GLC

[GLC]

It should go without saying that this is an even chance system.


I didn't suggest a bet selection method, but you can use your favorite.


Or, try this one.


We can bet any of  the 6 even chance bets, Red, Black, Odd, Even, High, Low.


Try to get a sense for one of them to bet on.  If you don't have a feel for what might spin next, just pick one of them randomly.  Since this is a random game, how can 1 location be better than another?  If you do have a little bit of precognition, it can only help.  And a little help is all you need to overcome the small house edge in roulette.


Can you get a precognition and it be for a losing location?  Maybe!  If you seem to be missing on your hunches, try betting the opposite of your hunch.  In other words, if you sense that Red is going to hit, and you're missing more than hitting, try betting Black instead of Red for this spin.  Can't hurt.


Just a thought.


GLC


Maybe I am joining Iceman in the twilight zone.

[Smee]

This looks really good GLC. Thanks for posting it and it gives me a few ideas....the first thing that popped into my head was if it could somehow work with something like the matrix systems. Would be very VERY rare for them to fail twice in a row with so many different combinations of evens.

[Tomla021]

Ive looked at Target before and you have to be impressed with the sports data that Seth provides. This Is an interesting spin on it. Thats whats good at having different eyes on one thing , people come out some nice variations with diff perspectives

[Shadowman]

Hi GLC

I have to say that I have recently been looking at the target method myself,  and your idea was a real “why didn’t I think of that” moment.  That tweak alone makes the system infinitely better than it was.
Also instead of waiting out the spins you could bet on the opposite even chance (2 different columns at the same time),  and alternate between the two as the opportunities arise. Of course chops would kill you…… 

A further tweak could be that once you start getting the hole with one of the selections you could possibly start dividing and sharing the load amongst them both,  which is an approach that I have been thinking about more and more lately.

I believe that Seth,  the originator of the method also developed the” turnaround” system many moons ago.

Thanks

Mike

[Tomla021]

I might be wrong but what I think your ending up with is a straight D'alembert using a win after a virtual win as your bet placement? It actually might be ok as your stretching the game out and letting it get back to equilibrium over time.
Like some other things a WLWLWLWLWL sequence hurts

[vladir]

Do you think this could be adapted to double dozens/columns  instead of even chances? Having 2 W in a row is more probable when playing double dozens...

[GLC]

I might be wrong but what I think your ending up with is a straight D'alembert using a win after a virtual win as your bet placement? It actually might be ok as your stretching the game out and letting it get back to equilibrium over time.
Like some other things a WLWLWLWLWL sequence hurts

Your right on Tom.  The chops are the killer.  I've been testing it running this bet method, as explained above, next to the Alembert betting on every spin and when I have a bet to make after win I bet whichever of the two methods is smaller.

This has been helping stabilize it some.

Smee, this can be adapted to any bet.  Just have to think about it for a while and I'll get back to you.

[Tomla021]

I think something like this might be great on single dozens--harder to hit but worth the wait kind of thing...


George I sometimes run a modified D'alembert on baccarat ----say 50 next bet 60, 70, 80 etc if I hit the fifty I start dropping back 5 as in 45, 40, 35

[GLC]

I think something like this might be great on single dozens--harder to hit but worth the wait kind of thing...


George I sometimes run a modified D'alembert on baccarat ----say 50 next bet 60, 70, 80 etc if I hit the fifty I start dropping back 5 as in 45, 40, 35

Tom, looks like a decent progression to me.

BTW, thanks for the e-mail.  Very interesting.  I posted something a couple of months ago that's very similar.  It's where I start our with 1-2-4 and every time I win, I add that win to one of the numbers.  The amount won starts climbing until you reach something like 2-6-12 where you take your 13 units of profit and start over with 1-2-4.

The best thing about it is that you increase your bets using the house's money.  The drawback is that 3 losses in a row ends that attack and costs you 7 units.  Ambi... uses the same idea but you can stay in the game until you get 4 losses more than wins.  Have you tested it very much?

GLC

[Tomla021]

no to be honest I just perused it..it looked interesting ....would be nice to have something where you can leave table and come back and finish up,,, im going to try to see how stable it is this week on a small test

[GLC]

I have tested it a little.  It seems to be pretty stable.  I've played it to +24.  That's a win on 1-1-1-1 for +4, on 2-2-2-2 for +8 and on 3-3-3-3 for +12.  It was somewhat of a grind since I lost on 1's twice and on 2's once.  Once I got to the 3's I breezed through them.


One of the best features is that you can only lose 4 units each attack.  So if you are having a really bad run of spins/hands, you can quit when you've had enough.  Keeps you in charge at all times.


That can't be bad.


This is another method of winning with the casino's money.  I like that a lot.



I'll be interested to know how you do with live play.


Good Luck to ya,


GLC

[GLC]

This looks really good GLC. Thanks for posting it and it gives me a few ideas....the first thing that popped into my head was if it could somehow work with something like the matrix systems. Would be very VERY rare for them to fail twice in a row with so many different combinations of evens.

Smee,


I don't know if you've tested this on double dozens yet, but I have.


I use the same rules.  I stop betting after a loss and start betting after a win.


My progression:


1-2-3-4-5-7-9-12-15-18-21-25-30-35-40-50 (of course each number represents 2 bets, 1 one each dozen)  A total loss is only 277 units.  You don't have to go that far before a stop-loss and you don't have to use this progression.


I like it because it gives you plenty of time to recover if you happen to have a really bad run of luck.  I also like it because it recovers more and more at each level if you get too deep in the hole.  If you used 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10 etc... it would work but you'd spend a lot of time digging out of the hole.  Although, maybe not so much that you wouldn't want the added safety.  You decide.


I've only tested it on betting on the last 2 dozens to spin and I've never had to bet higher than 15 units on each dozen and that was because of a horrendous losing stretch.  Of course we all know betting on the last 2 dozens is a loser in the long run.  I use it because it easy to test because all you have to do is push rebet when your in a winning run.


I have tested it to +150 units.  Not so much, but enough to let me know that it is at least worth looking at.


One thing I need to mention is that I never drop back on the progression.  I move to the next level after a loss and I stay at the same level after a win until I reach a new high bank.


Try it on your favorite matrix system and see how you like it.  I'd be careful using a 1-3-9-27 progression line.  I lost 4 in a row 3 or 4 times.  But like I said, I had some really bad runs during these tests.  I know because I test betting on the last 2 dozens to spin a lot and so I'm familiar with how good it can be and how bad it can be.


Good Luck,


GLC

[downthehatch]

I can't remember if I posted anything on target betting on this forum or not.  In case some of you don't know what target betting is, it's betting 1 unit on each spin until you have a win and then you bet the total of all the units you are down up to that point plus 1 unit. 


What this means is that anytime you win twice in a row, you are fully recovered and have 1 unit to add to profits.  All you have to do is win 2 times in a row before you run out of money or reach the table limit.  It can't always be done, although one person has a blog that he uses to publish how he has been winning thousands of dollars playing this system.  Granted he does have to bet upwards of $25,000 every now and then.


I have thought about his system for a while and I think I can better it a little.  Here's how.
We bet 1 unit until we lose.  After a loss, we stop betting for real but we continue to play virtually until we have a win.  Then we make a real bet.


This is the same thing as he does only we don't lose all those units during losing streaks that we have to bet after a win.


Here's how he does it.


Bet         W/L     Total
1             L           -1
1             L           -2
1             L           -3
1             W         -2
3             L           -5
1             L           -6
1             L           -7
1             L           -8
1             W          -7
8             L           -15
1             W         -14
15           W          +1


As you can see, he eventually had to bet 15 units to recover all his losses.


Here's how it would look with my tweak.


Bet         W/L     Total
1             L           -1
0             L           -1
0             L           -1
0             W          -1
2             L            -3
0             L            -3
0             L            -3
0             L            -3
0             W           -3
4             L            -7
0             W           -7
8             W           +1

As you can see, we only had to bet 8 instead of 15 to reach +1 the same amount of profit.
This will keep your bets much lower.


This is all well and good, but let's use the same idea and change things completely.


I recommend that we play this using the D'Alembert bet method, +1 on a loss and -1 on a win.  I think this will give us a much better chance of winning and will keep our bet sizes much smaller than the original target betting.


I have been testing this a little and it's working like gang busters!

Here's an example

My System                                   


Bet         W/L     Total
1             L           -1
0             L           -1
0             L           -1
0             W          -1
2             L            -3
0             L            -3
0             L            -3
0             L            -3
0             W           -3
3             L            -6
0             W           -6
4             W           -2
3             L            -5
0             L            -5
0             L            -5
0             L            -5
0             W           -5
4             W           -1
3             L            -4
0             L            -4
0             L            -4
0             W           -4
4             W            0
1             W           +1


Now I will show the above spins using the regular D'Alembert bet method




Bet         W/L     Total
1             L           -1
2             L           -3
3             L           -6
4             W          -2
3             L            -5
4             L            -9
5             L            -14
6             L            -20
7             W           -13
6             L            -19
7             W           -12
6             W           -6
5             L            -11
6             L            -17
7             L            -24
8             L            -32
9             W           -23
8             W           -15
7             L            -22
8             L            -30
9             L            -39
10           W          -29
9             W          -20
8             W          -12


So we see that the same spins result in a loss of 12 units with a high bet size of 10 units and a draw down of 39 units.


My system using the same spins results in a win of 1 unit with a high bet size of 4 units and a draw down of only 6 units.


Can anybody see any value in this approach or am I way out there with the Iceman?


GLC

another great system, seriously i wish i had your intellect, .
Cheers Dth

[warrior]

You could use the fibo on this ,you need two wins to be in profit  just a thought.