Progression system

I was just thinking for fun today about The D'Alembert System. Actually I understand all the principles of progression systems but this system just keeps bothering me. I highly believe systems dont work, but I just need an explanation for this one.
Example: Assuming minimal bet is 5 and your progression is 2. So first bet is 5. If you lose, bet 5+2=7 else 5. And if you win, lower your bet for 2. That means whenever win/lose swings you get profit of 2. The point is, you get 2 bucks always on peek of the win/lose curve. So you actually get more profit from blackjacks and all other wise doubles and splits. If you play BJ with correct basic strategy you will lose around 43 games, push 8 and lose 49. I think so. Can someone confirm that?
So you have to cover 6 lost games. Lets say you get 4 Blackjacks in 100 games so that will cover 2 games and there is some profit left. So the question is can be other 4 lost game covered by wise doubles or spilts. Or maybe with profit from swings? If the question is yes, I believe this system could work.

To be short. Can someone run a simulation for me please? :laugh: Can someone tell me why this system doesnt work?

But how much do you lose when the system fails? Answer: More than $2. Even though you are winning $2 fairly often, your occasional losing streaks will wipe out all of your profit and then some. You are still playing against the house edge and no amount of random bet adjustments can change that.

Yes that is true.

http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showthread.php?t=7109

-Sonny-

The problem with these types of systems is the patterns of the wins and losses. An example system: You increase your bet after a win and then win the second hand and then drop your bet. This looks like a great system while the patterns work in such a manner. But the patterns will change to the point where you will not be able to win 2 hands in a row. Then you will have your bet high for the second hand and you will lose that hand. It will occur exactly according to the house edge.

Licentia.

Ok I get that.

http://wizardofodds.com/gambling/tenbet.html

But this simulation was tested only at roulette and craps. Your loss is definetly the same as if you'd flat bet. But the thing is there you cant make decisions like in blackjack. In blackjack you can dobule your 11 agains 6 and you have a good chance of winning. And blackjack pays out differently. Doesnt this make any difference since you can directly affect playing? I find it quite strange.

One more question =) So when I count cards, if I have an edge of 0.5% any system would work, ya? Eh this is logical. But would a progression system then make my bankroll grow faster?

Not really. Even if you play perfect basic strategy you are still playing against the house edge and should expect to lose money. A progression system doesn’t care what game you play. As long as you are raising your bets when you are still at a disadvantage, the system will lose more money than flat betting.

No, the fastest way to increase your bankroll is to bet proportionally. Most people call it Kelly betting. If you always bet your money in proportion to your advantage then your bankroll will grow exponentially. Just like how compound interest increases your money faster than linear interest, proportional betting leverages your additional funds to earn money faster. It also has the added bonus of de-levering your bankroll when you hit a losing streak. That helps to limit your overall risk of going broke.

A progression system is not a smart way to bet your money. In fact, even if you have an advantage you are very likely to go broke. If you are increasing your bets after every win/loss/whatever it won’t take long before you are making very big bets in order to recoup your previous losses. You could easily go broke by losing only 6-7 hands in a row. Your overall risk is very high because you are often overbetting your advantage.

Imagine a coin flip where you always bet your entire bankroll on every flip. It only takes one loss to bankrupt you. If you start with $635, bet $5 and double-up after every loss, you will be bankrupt after losing 7 hands in a row. Even a $1275 bankroll will not last 8 hands in a row. And, as you mentioned earlier in this thread, the house is always more likely to win the next hand. Even after a loss (or series of losses) you are still more likely to lose the next hand. Why would you increase your bets if you are expecting to lose?

Even if you have an advantage you will probably go broke during a normal unlucky swing. You are either underbetting at the start and not making much money or wildy overbetting after a few hands and risking your entire bankroll to win back a few dollars. A progression system is a very dangerous way to bet your money. It can easily turn a winning player into a loser and turn a loser into a broke loser very quickly.

-Sonny-

A progression system can be very valuable in certain circumstances where you want your best shot at making a small amount of money and don't mind a small chance of catastrophically losing all your money.

For example, let's say you're absolutely broke, so you borrow $1,000 from Vinnie the Loan Shark at an interest rate of $100 per hour. After borrowing the money, you suddenly realize you had some money buried in your aunt's backyard, but Vinnie refuses to take back the money. "You gots to pay me back $1,100 in 59 minutes or I shoots ya," he says. You have one hour to make $100 and it doesn't matter whether you have $0 or $1,099. Your best chance of not getting shot is to run to a casino and play a $100 progression system, preferably at the lowest edge 1:1 payout game you can find (e.g. Don't Pass line at craps). You will only die 1/1000 of the time.

Aside from that scenario, don't use progression systems.