OSCAR GRIND MERGE

[alejobostero]

hello guys, this is my first post...before i start i would like to apologise for my english as im not an english speaker.

i have an idea but i would also like some feedback from you.

I have been testing betting strategies in even chances and i think that the best 2 betting strategies or bankroll management are:
oscar grind and "x" (i dont know the bame for this one)

EXPLANATION:
oscar grind: 1. everytime i win i add one chip 2. everytime i lose the bet stays the same 3. you never increase your bet if its going to give you more tha 1 unit profit
"X"             : 1. everytime you lose you add one chip 2. everytime i win i substract one chip

i believe that this are the best stretegies to manage your bankrooll in a safe way and i was thinking that if we could merge them both into one solid betting strategie we can have something really good, really powerfull and safe.

[alejobostero]

i was thinking on adding a chip everytime i lose and substracting a chip everytime i win but with a golden rule "as soon as you get a 1 unit profit, you quit the session"
there has to be also a stop limit but i havent think about that yet.

ANY IDEAS?

[TwoCatSam]

X is the D'Alembert or Alembert.  Might have spelled it wrong.  Google it.

[alejobostero]

thank you towcatsam, so the idea is to merge both betting systems DÁlembert and Oscar Grind taking the best from both systems and trying to work on one that could exceed this systems
please help me out creating it and establishing winning and loss limits.
i also plan to test it on blackjack but i would also have to mix it with a counting system.

thanks

[Loek2000]

Jean le Rond d'Alembert is the name of the game. The other is the cancellation system. Anyway, interesting idea of putting two systems together. But how?

The essence of Alembert is that the chance of winning is expressed in the units. So after a win you lower your bet because a lose is more likely.
The essence of Oscar is to keep bets as low as possible.
Common ground: Do not bet more then to get back on were you started or at least not more then +1.
Difference: Alembert lowers risk during play, Oscar stays the same.

I'm curious on what you have come up with. I myself like to play 2 different systems at the same time or the same system 2 or 3 times at the same time. I experiment with betselection versus system. Please give us your thoughts to start melting it together.

Good idea 

[alejobostero]

every time you win you substract one chip from your next bet and everytime you lose you add one chip to your next bet, but you will only add enough chips that in case of a win you will only win one chip.

To clear things up im going to put it in an exmple:

BANKROLL 20 CHIPS
so we are aiming to 21 chips
L -19 we lost 1 chip so we bet 2 chips now, if we win we will get the chip we are aiming for
L -17 we lost 2 chips so we have to bet 3 chips now
W - 20 we win, here according to alembert we would have to bet 2 chips but instead of betting 2 chips we are going to bet only one chip to get to 21 chips that was our starting goal

as soon as we have the 21 chips, we aim to 22 chips

[Loek2000]

every time you win you substract one chip from your next bet and everytime you lose you add one chip to your next bet, but you will only add enough chips that in case of a win you will only win one chip.

To clear things up im going to put it in an exmple:

BANKROLL 20 CHIPS
so we are aiming to 21 chips
L -19 we lost 1 chip so we bet 2 chips now, if we win we will get the chip we are aiming for
L -17 we lost 2 chips so we have to bet 3 chips now
W - 20 we win, here according to alembert we would have to bet 2 chips but instead of betting 2 chips we are going to bet only one chip to get to 21 chips that was our starting goal

as soon as we have the 21 chips, we aim to 22 chips

How does it look like if the losses are dominant?

L -17 bet  3 chips
L -14 bet  6 chips
L -8   bet 12 chips
Broke! And that after 4x play...
It's not uncommon to lose 17 times or more in even changes. I do not belief this will work, but give it a proper test. Good luck 

[Loek2000]

-