Progressive system?

Amad99

Active Member
#1
Last night my buddy was flat betting 5$ on the Royal Match side bet and did pretty well. Seemed to go on streaks, but there was never a long streak where 2 suited cards didn't come up. I was wondering about how you could use a progressive system in order to beat RM?

Single Deck
any 2 cards of the same suit pays 3:1
KQ suited pays 10:1

Because of the 3:1 payout, would it be necessary to double the bet after every loss? Say if you bet $5 4 times, upon winning the 4th bet you would break even if you lost the first 3. Perhaps if you lost the 4th you could raise your bet? Or maybe increase after every loss by a % of the initial bet? Anyone ever tried a progressive system for RM? thanks.
 
#2
Amad99 said:
Last night my buddy was flat betting 5$ on the Royal Match side bet and did pretty well. Seemed to go on streaks, but there was never a long streak where 2 suited cards didn't come up. I was wondering about how you could use a progressive system in order to beat RM?
You cannot. zg
 

MangoJ

Well-Known Member
#3
Amad99 said:
Single Deck
any 2 cards of the same suit pays 3:1
KQ suited pays 10:1
Probability of same suit (including KQ): 12/51
Probability of KQ suited: 8/52 * 1/51 = 2/663

House edge: 1 - (4*(12/51 - 2/663) + 11*2/663) = 3.77%

The house edge is independent of bet size, hence no progression system will work.
 

Amad99

Active Member
#4
MangoJ said:
Probability of same suit (including KQ): 12/51
Probability of KQ suited: 8/52 * 1/51 = 2/663

House edge: 1 - (4*(12/51 - 2/663) + 11*2/663) = 3.77%

The house edge is independent of bet size, hence no progression system will work.
What about something like a Martingale type system? Since the payout is 3:1, you wouldn't have to double your bet after every loss to make a profit, only raise it slightly. Therefore you wouldn't start doubling your bet past table/ BR limits after 5/6 consecutive losses. What about this example using a $5 base unit:

1. 5... +3
2. 5... +2
3. 5... +1
4. 5... even
5. 10..+2
6. 10.. even
7. 15.. +1
8. 20.. +1
9. 25.. even
10. 35..+1

The (+3,+2,+1,even) numbers are what you would end up being ahead if you won on that round after losing the other times before it. Total loss if you happen to run into a 10 straight losing streak would only be $135. Whereas other martingale systems after 10 straight losses you will be over $2,560 in the hole with a $5 base unit. If you happened to run into bad losing streak you could continue without having to risk extremely high amounts. You would flatbet $3 hands and play basic strategy.
 

MangoJ

Well-Known Member
#6
Amad99 said:
What about something like a Martingale type system?
Whatever you use as a system, it will not work.

If you give me $10 dollars, and I keep 3.8% of that, giving you $9.62 back, you just lost $0.38. It won't help your losses if you repeat the process, and vary the amount you give me by any system you think of. You will still lose 3.8% on any amount you give me.

This is a "game" without variance. I hope you understand that, without variance each and every betting system will fail. Only a moron would invent a fancy "betting system", continue to give me money, in the hope some miracle will happen.

The thing you need to learn about casino games is: even if you play a game with variance - in the long run the variance will disappear and you are the same moron thinking about betting systems on how to win a intrinsically losing game.
 
#7
Amad99 said:
What about something like a Martingale type system? Since the payout is 3:1, you wouldn't have to double your bet after every loss to make a profit, only raise it slightly.
No. But you CAN beat it with a card-counting system. zg
 
#8
AP means exploit your opportunities when you have an advantage

This bet is a loser. Mangoj's analysis looks solid. Any ramping of bet will result a quicker lose rate on the average. If I felt compelled to try to "beat" (what you propose is not beating the bet but risking more to hope you get lucky) such a bet by betting structure I wouldnt use a martingale like betting structure. You called the successes streaky. I would try to win 2 in 3 or 4 bets. This would allow your bet growth to be almost nonexistent. Bet 5-5-5-5-6-6-6-7-7 or something like that. Im not going to do the math for making it work well because like the martingale variation it wont work in the long run. Unless you are tracking suits to see when an exploitable imbalance occurs dont even make the bet to begin with!!!! This side bet has a low HE as far as side bets go because it is a hard one to be sure you have an advantage on while still trying to play AP blackjack.
 

MangoJ

Well-Known Member
#9
MangoJ said:
House edge: 1 - (4*(12/51 - 2/663) + 11*2/663) = 3.77%
In order to break even for this bet, you must do better than betting progression. In fact you must predict a suited pair with
probability pS' = 641/2652 or a suited King/Queen with pKQ' = 56/663

You could for example simply observe the suits of all Kings and Queens as they are dealt. You need then to memorize how many suited Kings/Queens are left undealt. If this number is M (M=4 on top of the deck), with N undealt cards probability of hitting a suited KQ is p = 2*M/N * 1/(N-1).

You now have a target 2*M/N * 1/(N-1) > 56/663, which means:

for M=4: N < (7+sqrt(18613)) / 14 = 10.24
for M=3: N < (7+sqrt(13972)) / 14 = 8.94
for M=2: N < (7+sqrt(9331)) / 14 = 7.40
for M=1: N < (7+sqrt(4690)) / 14 = 5.39

Unless you see fewer than 10 cards undealt before shuffling, keeping track of suited Kings/Queens is worthless.

The other advantage player approach would be to keep side counts for all 4 suits, and wait for an imbalance which favors the suited payout. But that you need to figure out yourself I guess.
 

21gunsalute

Well-Known Member
#10
This Martingale progression will work!

On the first hand bet $0 on the Royal Match sidebet. If you win, keep betting $0 until you lose. If you lose, double your bet and bet $00 (2x$0) on the Royal Match. If you lose again, double again and bet $0000 (4x$0, or 2x$00). Keep doubling until you win and then start over. Unlike other Martingale systems this one will save you 3.8% in the long run.
 

Gamblor

Well-Known Member
#11
21gunsalute said:
On the first hand bet $0 on the Royal Match sidebet. If you win, keep betting $0 until you lose. If you lose, double your bet and bet $00 (2x$0) on the Royal Match. If you lose again, double again and bet $0000 (4x$0, or 2x$00). Keep doubling until you win and then start over. Unlike other Martingale systems this one will save you 3.8% in the long run.
You forgot to mention, the variance on this betting system is awesomely low!
 
Top