Hey guys, I wanted to share something I've been toying with for a few years. The inspiration for it is not my own but I put a spin on the tracking and profit gaining aspect of it. The original idea was garnered from studying the works of Marigny De Grilleau and also "very near the infallible method" based on the law of series, and also from discussion with Tangram and Voila from the vip forum days (hello if you are still around :))
Getting right into the MM:
Use a 3,4,5,6,etc divisor for your current total deficit (pick one, for my example I will use a divisor of 4). The divisor is a number you will divide your total deficit by to get the amount you will place on up to the next 4 bets. If this attempt is successful you will have closed your deficit. Place the bets in this manner until a loss within the attempt then recalculate and place the first bet of your next attempt with your updated deficit. The minimal bet will always be 1 unit even if your total deficit is lower than can be divided yet. Often you will get a remainder while calculating your next bet, this is to get tacked to the last bet of the series in the recoup attempt.
Profit acquisition:
Add a unit as often as you are comfortable in doing. For example, add one unit every 10 decisions to your total deficit thus when the deficit is cleared fully or partially (more on this in a moment) this will reward you roughly with 1 unit every 10 hands/spins/outcomes you play. Don't forget to get payed! :)
Ideas on bet selection (for easier tracking if nothing else):
One way is to play with a partner betting on the opposite chance as you (pass/dp, b/r, banker,player) and play independently of them. Any streak on the opposite side that you are playing will profit your partner although it will add to your deficit at your divisor rate of 1/4 per loss in that opposite streak that they just used to win. A possible solution to this is to be more aggressive about profit acquisition I. e. each of you shoot for 1 unit per 5 decisions.
Playing with a partner will also cause strings of series of 1 to cancel on each of your tracking cards (I. e. +1,-1,+1,-1 on each of them).
Single player mode:
This is simply follow the last decision. For tracking reasons its quick and easy to see where the streaks were in your session but the trade off is instead of losing to streaks on the opposite side of a static selection, you must always jump on the new potential streak after the first (and maybe only) decision within it. This will cause each chop to increase your total deficit by 25% (not counting the remainder). Also series of 5 or more manifesting will be needed to cause a full recoup although you now get the benefit of this being accomplished on EITHER side of the even chance doubling the probability of the occurrence.
The math:
The law of series states that series of 1 are as likely as a series of 2 OR more. The series in my example is shooting for a series of 4 (or more which is 12. 5% likely in a fair game (series of exactly 3 are as likely as a series of 4 OR MORE which is what we are looking for . This means that 1 in 8 attempts at a recoup will be a success statistically per side. But wait, there's more . . .
The breakdown:
For my example of a divisor of 4, here is what you can expect regarding certain events likely during single play from EACH side of an even chance (based on a fair game) using FTL.
Series of 1 (50% likely) cause a 25% increase in the total deficit. (lost one bet)
Series of 2 (25% likely) cause no change in the total deficit (won one, lost one bet)
Series of 3 (12. 5%likely) cause a 25% reduction in the total deficit (won 2 bets, lost 1)
Series of 4 (6. 25%likely) cause a 50% reduction in the total deficit (won 3 bets, lost 1)
Series of 5 (6. 25%likely) cause a full recoup of the total deficit (won 4 bets)
OR MORE
Its simple to track live, here is what I do:
next bet/ w
/ total deficit (the dividing is done mentally)
I write a little W or L nearby for later review.
Over the course of testing playing and refining this set up it seems that playing on the expectation of series as "packaged events" instead of playing for or against individual decisions it takes massive standard deviations (I. e. ratios of harmful series to helpful ones) and keeps plugging along getting partial wins off of the decisions within the expected beneficial series until the pendulum comes back. O yeah good luck ever hitting the house limit. You can always split your total deficit and win it back in sections of any size you feel comfy with.
What thinkest thou?
TC
Not too bad,but. . . . . .
FIRST:following your example of dividing by 4:the probability of succes(recoup deficit) is 1 out 16 roughly and not 1 out of 8.
SECOND:if you don't want to be ruined quickly,in case you don't succeed in 16 spins to recoup deficit you have to increase the divisor to 8 after 16 spins,to 16 after 32 spins and so on. . . .
The risk is to get old at the roulette table
Thanks for the response.
Would not the law of series show that the probability of exactly 4 is 1/16 but 4 or more (to infinity) be 1/8 (the goal of this example)? The goal is to wait out the deviation of harmful series to helpful series, not reds to blacks individually etc. From a starting probability, series of 1 are 2x as likely as a series of 2 exactly but the same probability as a series of 2 or more.
This method seems to float within a 100 unit area, lower if you split the deficit where you decide. Its fun watching the dealer (I go bac usually) try to figure out how you are winning with such low bets especially the 6 divisor method. With the self added units going into your total deficit eventually you will be playing with a profit and a total deficit full of imaginary units. This will give you the opportunity to quit with a small actual profit and start over or go for the paycheck and play till you clear (or bust trying lol).
More input welcome Thanks
TC
Quote from: TC911 link=topic=16917. msg119902#msg119902 date=1283427267
The minimal bet will always be 1 unit even if your total deficit is lower than can be divided yet. Often you will get a remainder while calculating your next bet, this is to get tacked to the last bet of the series in the recoup attempt.
I have not understood this bit. Can you please give an example?
there is no reason to actually bet both sides of an ec, one should always bet differentially (if black and red bet is the same then no bet, if black bet is larger than red bet then bet just the difference on black.) it accomplishes the same thing with less bankroll and less loss to zeroes.
Hi TC911, thanks for posting your system. I too would appreciate a short example.
How long have you been using this method successfully?
Looks great,
I would love to see some examples or plays to better understand this technique.
Thanks for sharing,
Bob
It's correct that you can play both sides alone just be sure you are fast enough to do all the calculations between bets. One good thing about a partner is comps and at a bac table if one has a loss that means the other has won. Yay for no zeros to constitute an additional unfavorable condition where both players/comp farmers lose. Add another unit every so often to combat the banker fee. Alternatively you can send them to another table to play independently.
Here is an example of single "follow the last" play using red black with a divisor of 4. Keep in mind, remainders are added to the 4th (final) bet in this form of the method. No profit from self added units nor zeros will be used in this example.
R red: next bet is on red
R win +1 new attempt bet 1 on red
R win +1 new attempt bet 1 on red
R win +1 new attempt bet 1 on red
B loss -1 (total deficit on this recoup attempt is -1, -1 / 4= . 25unit (1unit is lowest bet:next bet is still 1)
R loss -1 (total deficit on this recoup attempt is -2, -2 / 4= . 50unit (1unit is lowest bet:next bet is still 1)
B loss -1 (total deficit on this recoup attempt is -3, -3 / 4= . 75unit (1unit is lowest bet:next bet is still 1)
R loss -1 (total deficit on this recoup attempt is -4, -4 / 4= 1unit (1unit is lowest bet:next bet is still 1)
B loss -1 (total deficit on this recoup attempt is -5, -5 / 4= 1. 25unit (1unit is lowest bet:next bet is 1)
R loss -1 (total deficit on this recoup attempt is -6, -6 / 4= 1. 50unit (1unit is lowest bet:next bet is 1)
B loss -1 (total deficit on this recoup attempt is -7, -7 / 4= 1. 75unit (1unit is lowest bet:next bet is 1)
R loss -1 (total deficit on this recoup attempt is -8, -8 / 4= 2unit (next bet is 2)
B loss -2 (total deficit on this recoup attempt is -10, -10 / 4= 2. 5unit (next bet is 2)
B win +2 (first win in this recoup attempt, remember, the remainder adds on to the last bet: next bet is 2)
B win +2 (second win in this recoup attempt, the remainder (r) would add on to this bet: next bet is 2+0(r))
R loss -2 (this ends this attempt at a full recoup, your total deficit has been reduced by 2 (2 wins and 1 loss=-8)
R win +2 (first win in this recoup attempt, remember, the remainder adds on to the last bet: next bet is 2)
R win +2 (second win in this recoup attempt, remember, the remainder goes at the end: next bet is 2)
R win +2 (third win in this recoup attempt, remember, the remainder adds on to the last bet: next bet is 2)
B loss -2 (this ends this attempt at a full recoup, your total deficit has been reduced by 4 (3 wins and 1 loss=-4)
R loss -1 (total deficit on this recoup attempt is -4, -4 / 4= 1unit (1unit is lowest bet:next bet is still 1)
B loss -1 (total deficit on this recoup attempt is -5, -5 / 4= 1. 25unit (1unit is lowest bet:next bet is 1)
R loss -1 (total deficit on this recoup attempt is -6, -6 / 4= 1. 50unit (1unit is lowest bet:next bet is 1)
B loss -1 (total deficit on this recoup attempt is -7, -7 / 4= 1. 75unit (1unit is lowest bet:next bet is 1)
R loss -1 (total deficit on this recoup attempt is -8, -8 / 4= 2unit (next bet is 2)
B loss -2 (total deficit on this recoup attempt is -10, -10 / 4= 2. 5unit (next bet is 2)
R loss -2 (total deficit on this recoup attempt is -12, -12 / 4= 3unit (next bet is 3)
B loss -3 (total deficit on this recoup attempt is -15, -15 / 4= 3. 75unit (next bet is 3)
B win +3 (first win in this recoup attempt, remember, the remainder adds on to the last bet: next bet is 3)
R loss -3 (this ends this attempt at a full recoup, your total deficit stays the same (1 win and 1 loss=-15 (no change)
R win +3 (first win in this recoup attempt, remember, the remainder goes at the end: next bet is 3)
R win +3 (second win in this recoup attempt, remember, the remainder goes at the end: next bet is 3)
R win +3 (third win in this recoup attempt, next bet is 3 and 3 as the remainder=6)
R win +6 (completion of a full recoup, total deficit is zero)
In this example the largest bet was 6 units due to the final bet including the remainder. The largest draw down was 15 units.
ratios of series in this example:
series of 1=16
series of 2=1
series of 3=3
series of 4=2
series of 5=1
Another way to deal with the remainder is to spread it out over the bets within the recoup attempt. For example if you are down a total of 7 you have a remainder of 3, you could plan to place the 4 bets of your next attempt like this: 1, 2, 2, and 2. I have done this method with success too although you will see your total deficit rise a little faster in bad stretches. This is the way I prefer with a 3 or 4 divisor.
TC
Not bad at all. Only 13 wins in 33 bets is a 39% win rate but the stakes and drawdowns stayed low. Of course it can get worse than this but it's a sane method of money management, thanks again.
Personally I believe that you need more than pure money management to win long term. You also need a way of selecting your bets which minimises those 'sequences from hell' which come along every now and then and wipe out all gains and more. Is it possible to avoid those long losing runs? I don't know, but stop losses and win goals don't seem to work.
Hi Mike,
Yes it's 13 won single decisions. In a method that seeks for only single favorable wins, 39% is good but the more interesting factor is the ratio of helpful series to harmful series as this method capitalizes on.
For the above example:
16 series of one = 25% deficit increases
1 series of two = no change
3 series of three = 25% deficit reduction
2 series of four = 50% deficit reduction
1 series of five = 100% deficit reduction
23 total series were realized.
Of 23 series, these would be the expected break down statistically (rounded up):
12 series of 1
6 series of 2
3 series of 3
1 series of 4
71% likely to see a series of 5
To see the expected breakdown of 23 series it would take roughly 42 independent decisions but the over all decisions are not the target here, only series.
As far as bet selection goes, its there too. It's set up in a way as to seek the occurrence of the mathematically expected series and benefit in part or in full from each decision within each one. It just so happens that follow the last fits the bill. The only harmful series is a series of one (chops) which cause roughly (due to remainders) 33% (3 divisor), 25% (4 divisor), 20% (5 divisor), 16. 7% (6 divisor) increases in the total deficit with each occurrence. Series of two will cause no change (minimal change will occur if you are spreading your remainder out). All other series will reduce your deficit partially or fully.
TC
Thanks for posting your method! It takes GUTS to post, much appreciated sir. Ken
TC911
Something I don't understand ...
After your first 3 wins your total is at +3
After you bet your final bet of 6 you say your deficit is at 0, but if you look at your total winnings your only at +2.
You didn't fully recoup if I'm not mistaken ... can you verify and explain what I'm doing wrong.
Thanks
TTT
Yes. The first 3 wins were just a random good run at the start and are counted as successful attempts. After the first loss the "recoup attempt" session begins. Remember also I stated I was adding no additional units for profit in this example. If they were being added you'd be in profit at the close of that session. You choose how often to add extra units to the deficit as profit you are seeking. Every 10 decisions I like to add 1 unit to the deficit so when it is closed completely I have a profit of 1u per 10 decisions played. Alternatively, if enough partial reductions occur within your ongoing attempt, your deficit will eventually be filled only with units you added for profit attempt.
You can stop at any point and pick up again later starting with the same deficit you left off with in case your time is needed elsewhere or you can start new sessions with a set deficit you chose if you are feeling aggressive.
This is not a set system, it's a method of play that is infinitely customizable to your play style (like a divisor of 8,9,10 etc which is snail like but still effective for grinders or a divisor of 2 for the hit and run player or the player with an "iron set".
Hi Ken, thanks for posting. As a short reply to your comment "sadly, all too true". By the way a hearty hello to Turbo if he is still lurking, Both you men have my respect.
TC
TC, thanks for the explanation.
I think maybe I've misunderstood one of the rules. In your example -
QuoteR loss -2 (this ends this attempt at a full recoup, your total deficit has been reduced by 2 (2 wins and 1 loss=-8)
R win +2 (first win in this recoup attempt, remember, the remainder adds on to the last bet: next bet is 2)
R win +2 (second win in this recoup attempt, remember, the remainder goes at the end: next bet is 2)
R win +2 (third win in this recoup attempt, remember, the remainder adds on to the last bet: next bet is 2)
B loss -2 (this ends this attempt at a full recoup, your total deficit has been reduced by 4 (3 wins and 1 loss=-4)
R loss -1 (total deficit on this recoup attempt is -4, -4 / 4= 1unit (1unit is lowest bet:next bet is still 1)
I don't understand why you have reverted to a 1 unit stake after after the loss on B. Do you never decrease your stake while you're in a win streak, but only after losses? or is it just because you are aiming to clear the losses within 4 bets (because the divisor is 4)?
Supposing the deficit after the loss on B had been -5 and not -4, would you then be betting 2 units again?
My bad, I should have RTFM :-[
QuoteThe divisor is a number you will divide your total deficit by to get the amount you will place on up to the next 4 bets. If this attempt is successful you will have closed your deficit. Place the bets in this manner until a loss within the attempt then recalculate and place the first bet of your next attempt with your updated deficit.