Deviance said:If you come out ahead in a session due to a progression, it is not an unusual result. Essentially, some progressions will give you a higher chance of coming out ahead than behind in a session. Consider the following distribution of scores using the negative martingale (double the bet after loss, return to 1 unit after a win) in four hands of blackjack:
WWWW +4
WWWL +3
WWLL -1
WLLL -6
LLLL -15
LWWW +3
LLWW +2
LLLW +1
WLWL +1
LWLW +2
WWLW +3
LLWL +0
WLLW +2
LWWL +1
LWLL -2
WLWW +3
The Mode of this distribution is a positive outcome. Interpreting this data, a winning session is a more likely, however, the losing sessions are big enough to eliminate the gains accumulated from them. Though you will have more winning sessions than losing sessions, your Average session (μ = ΣX/N) is a losing one. In fact, you stand to lose more than a flat bettor employing a progression like the one above assuming a large sample size.
In summary, you will tend to win in the short run using these progressions, but be cautioned.
Tribute said:Deviance is right. I do not deny that. I am not making a case for or against progressions. Most of my attempts work like this:
Assuming a 10-15-20-25
Win the 10.
Lose the 15. Go back to 10.
Win the 10. Lose the 15.
Very seldom do I reach the 25!
PROGRESSIONIST said:I've read the books by Donald Dahl,Walter Thomason,and Fred Renzey.Enjoyed them all alot,all great books! People say betting progressions don't work-say there's no basis for them,etc,etc.
O.K., all I can say is this,I use Freds' Kiss III count and it's great.At times I've gone to the casino WAY UNDERFINANCED and played a positive progression and walked out a BIG WINNER in a short amount of time and my head wasn't hurting!
I guess I understand why people say positive progression betting systems don't work,but the reality at the table is that I walk away with $$$ and no headache,no hiding my playing ability,no concern about pit critters,etc.
What do you all think? I'd like to hear a fair reasoned unemotional response.
Thanks,and good luck to all!
Prog
ihate17 said:And if you lost 10 hands in a row? It is statistically normal for any blackjack player to have 10 losses in a row in every 24 hour group of play.
And if you lost 22 hands in a row which happened to me once and yet I was in the black for the day about an hour later because I count and do not use a progression.
ihate17
PROGRESSIONIST said:I use tge 1-2-3-5 positive progresion,Tribute says he's come out ahead on 5 sessions on one day,I have too. How can any reasonable person argue with something that works?
Prog
unclenorm said:Just a note on progression betting....
1. you have a 50/50 chance to win one hand....
2. It is very hard to win the next hand.....
3 It's almost impossible to win three hands in a row.....
4. By some miracle you might win four hands in a row..
5. Winning five hands in a row should make you go home and count all of your money you have just won.....
Now you know how to do progressive betting.....I do it and win 80% of the times I play. Even with that I still can not get by the $25.00 starting bet.
Ray said:Your chance to win any number of hands in a row: 47.5 ^ n
Example: First hand is 47.5....Two in a row is 22.5, etc
Your change to lose any number of hands in a row: 52.5 ^ n
Example: First hand is 52.5.....Two in a row is 27.5, etc
joeb6363 said:Shouldn't your odds of winning any hand be 47.5% regardless of the last hand outcome and the way you bet the next hand? Its a random event, where the outcome of a previous event has no factor in future events, right?
jasonphd said:That's true, however, the chance of you winning x times in a row is .475 to the x power. Just like flipping a coin. If you say it will land on heads on one throw, you have a 50% chance of being correct. If you say it will land on heads twice in a row you have a .50 to the 2nd power chance of being correct (or .50 X .50 which is .25 or 25%)
Renzey said:Nickels -- The six step progression you're describing can be broken down and analyzed completely by looking at all possible W/L combinations for six consecutive bets. There are 64 of them in all; such as WWWWWL, WLLLLL, WLWLWL, etc. I won't go thru the work here, but have done so with many other progressions.
Anyway, if you do take the trouble to list all 64 possible W/L sequences and write the result for each sequence next to it, then subtract the total losses from the total wins -- they will add up to Zero (break even)! And remember, this is in a game where you win exactly as many bets as you lose (you'll find that you have 192 W's and 192 L's in all). But breaking even is how you would do in this game if you bet the same amount on every bet.
Now apply that to blackjack where you lose more bets than you win, which puts more "L's" into the sequences than "W's", and you have to come out behind in the big picture. This is true even counting your B/J's and doubles since that still leaves you playing less than an even game.
All the above is true with any progression, even though you would be "banking" a net profit on certain sequences where "this" or "that" happens. You need to view the whole picture to realize that they all contain equal and opposite counterbalances which cancel each other out. Going 50-50 on your bets and yielding a net win by merely sizing your next bet according to the last result would be bending the mathematical laws of Mother Nature, and you can't do that. That is -- unless streaks in blackjack somehow occur more often than by random probability
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!