Positive Progression Betting - luck or variance?

[tomhham]

I have been using a positive progression betting system for the past year and have been very sucessful. I have played approximately 42 sessions (1 to 2 hours per session) with 30 wins and 12 losses (I started keeping a record after about four consecutive winning sessions). During each session, I try to win $500 or stop when I lose $500.

My questions is how many sessions with what winning percentage are needed to say that this system works?

 

[Nazgul]

My questions is how many sessions with what winning percentage are needed to say that this system works?

None. You don't need to waste your time using these systems to know that they will fail. Read the thread at the top of this forum.

 

[davidmcclung]

Tom:

Do not be surprised if your positive progression continues to produce good results. I too am playing a positive progression and my results are 30 wins and 4 losses after 34 sessions for net win of $3410. I am playing DD with good rules, simply starting at $10 and increasing by one $5 unit after each win(no regressions) with max bet of $20 and then keeping at $20 until the end, then starting over with the same betting sequence after the next shuffle. $500 session bankroll with win goal of plus $100 per session. How are you playing your progression, Tom?

 

[shadroch]

I have been using a positive progression betting system for the past year and have been very sucessful. I have played approximately 42 sessions (1 to 2 hours per session) with 30 wins and 12 losses (I started keeping a record after about four consecutive winning sessions). During each session, I try to win $500 or stop when I lose $500.

My questions is how many sessions with what winning percentage are needed to say that this system works?

Infinity plus one

 

[Thunder]

Infinity plus one

:laugh::laugh:

 

[standard toaster]

the truth is that it is all luck. What you have expirenced is not a suprise you will win more sessions with a progression system. The downfall to it is that you will always lose. There is no way to overcome the house edge with a betting strategy such as yours. Im assuming a martingale? Ive been writing a lot about gambling and have been working on this book... I havent loaded a new version or new pages on in a while but all you need read begins on the second page. (Dead link: http://www.keepandshare.com/doc/view.php?id=988174&da=y)
i understand your thinking as i was once a progression believer like most of us were. Just do yourself a favor and read that section and believe it. I dont think many skilled players will argue with the voodoo section in there.
You can feel free to argue and make comments ill answer as well as well as i can.

I would suggest stopping your progression while you are ahead.

 

[fredperson]

Progressive Systems

Well, there is one progressive system that at least worked for 20 years...

Using computer simulation, I developed a win streak progressive betting system, loosely based on the Fibonacci series, that worked for 20 years.
Winning trips outnumbered losing trips by a ratio of 3 to 1, and average win
was 5 times greater than average loss. So we're talking about a total profit of literally tens of thousands of dollars.

I keep reading on this forum that a progressive system cannot possibly overcome the house advantage, and that the only way to win at BJ is to count cards. So, all you progressive betters, don't give up. There is hope.

 

[johndoe]

Well, there is one progressive system that at least worked for 20 years...

Using computer simulation, I developed a win streak progressive betting system, loosely based on the Fibonacci series, that worked for 20 years.
Winning trips outnumbered losing trips by a ratio of 3 to 1, and average win
was 5 times greater than average loss. So we're talking about a total profit of literally tens of thousands of dollars.

I keep reading on this forum that a progressive system cannot possibly overcome the house advantage, and that the only way to win at BJ is to count cards. So, all you progressive betters, don't give up. There is hope.

Please provide evidence for this. You either got very lucky over those 20 years, played very little, or are BS'ing.

 

[Sonny]

You either got very lucky over those 20 years, played very little, or are BS'ing.

Or there may have been a mistake in the simulator program. I don't know of any commercial software that handles progression systems so this might be a homemade job. If he can post the code I will be happy to look through it. At the very least I could run the system through one of my simulators and compare the results.

-Sonny-

 

[sagefr0g]

Or there may have been a mistake in the simulator program. I don't know of any commercial software that handles progression systems so this might be a homemade job. If he can post the code I will be happy to look through it. At the very least I could run the system through one of my simulators and compare the results.

-Sonny-

sage blackjack has ways of handling progression systems.
to what extent, i'm not sure.
it seems sage blackjack's website is no longer functioning.

 

[fredperson]

Or there may have been a mistake in the simulator program. I don't know of any commercial software that handles progression systems so this might be a homemade job. If he can post the code I will be happy to look through it. At the very least I could run the system through one of my simulators and compare the results.

-Sonny-

I wrote the simulator...1979-1980. Ran on a Z80 Radio Shack model III computer (slowly). It allowed stategy variations, and betting pattern variations, and combinations of both, and produced reams of statistical data
to allow for iterative simulations for analysis. The stategy was 2 years in development. It was sucessfully used from 1982 to 2002, 8 to 12 trips a year, to Vegas or Atantic City, average stay, 3 days...average sessions around 12 per trip.

 

[Sonny]

Does the data from your program correlate with the data from other sims? Things like win/loss/push frequencies, split/double/BJ frequencies, dealer/player bust frequencies and things like that should be able to verify your program’s accuracy. What sort of data did your program track? Do you have any sample data or any code from it? I'm always interested in seeing what other people have come up with.

-Sonny-

 

[standard toaster]

I wrote the simulator...1979-1980. Ran on a Z80 Radio Shack model III computer (slowly). It allowed stategy variations, and betting pattern variations, and combinations of both, and produced reams of statistical data
to allow for iterative simulations for analysis. The stategy was 2 years in development. It was sucessfully used from 1982 to 2002, 8 to 12 trips a year, to Vegas or Atantic City, average stay, 3 days...average sessions around 12 per trip.

Can you tell us what it is? If you managed to find a positive progression system that wins in the long run you have done something no one has been able to do since the birth of gambling

 

[fredperson]

Can you tell us what it is? If you managed to find a positive progression system that wins in the long run you have done something no one has been able to do since the birth of gambling

Over the years, I have met a few other BJ players who also claim that they use a successful progression system. Also, A couple of dealers have remarked after a few winning shoes, that my system is the best that they have ever seen.

 

[ihate17]

Not really any kind of proof

Over the years, I have met a few other BJ players who also claim that they use a successful progression system. Also, A couple of dealers have remarked after a few winning shoes, that my system is the best that they have ever seen.

Blackjack players tend to lie when it comes to their overall results. Also, progressions often tend to work in a short term situation before a few devistating periods.
Those couple of dealers if representative of the dealer population know little to nothing about playing blackjack, much less being a lifetime winner at blackjack. Everything looks good after a few winning shoes and compliments might get a few more dollars into the toke box.

ihate17

 

[davidmcclung]

Fred:

Why not just post your BJ system, we are all here to help each other beat this crazy game. Since it worked for twenty years, what happened after 2002? I hope you are not one of those infamous systems sellers where the advertisement is always better than the product..

 

[Cherry7Up]

In theory the rate of winning/losing should correlate with the count of a deck (that is the whole point of counting). As a result, a progression betting system that is based on that rate should have the potential to increase expected value.

However, rather than using win/loss rate as an imperfect, indirect proxy for the count, I would expect that any betting system would be more successful if based directly on the count instead.

 

[fredperson]

Blackjack players tend to lie when it comes to their overall results. Also, progressions often tend to work in a short term situation before a few devistating periods.
Those couple of dealers if representative of the dealer population know little to nothing about playing blackjack, much less being a lifetime winner at blackjack. Everything looks good after a few winning shoes and compliments might get a few more dollars into the toke box.

ihate17

I beg your pardon....
And do you consider 20 years a "short term situation" ?
And I toke very conservatively, I have a system for that too.
Also, not only do I not publish my system, I have no intention of ever selling it, to anybody !
If card counters would have kept counting systems private, then casino blackjack would be better for everyone, counters, and non-counters.
We wouldn't have 6:5 blackjacks, and all the other countermeasures your bravado has brought down upon is all.

 

[standard toaster]

In theory the rate of winning/losing should correlate with the count of a deck (that is the whole point of counting). As a result, a progression betting system that is based on that rate should have the potential to increase expected value.

However, rather than using win/loss rate as an imperfect, indirect proxy for the count, I would expect that any betting system would be more successful if based directly on the count instead.

But this is where you are wrong. Counting in fact does not really increase the win/loss rate it just lets you know when more bj's and pat hands are comming your way. And no progression system can overcome the house edge or increase your EV.

Any type of system that uses only a betting strategy to win will ultimately fall trap of basic math. To prove this three experiments were conducted and validated by (Dead link: http://www.thewizardofodds.com) to prove the HE could not be overcome by any strategy based solely on betting systems.. The experiment was conducted on a computer simulation of a single zero European roulette wheel HE=.052632. Player one did not use a betting strategy he simply flat bet the same amount every single time $1. The second player used a progression strategy where he would bet $1 after a win he would raise his bet by a single dollar a loss would drop the bet back to $1 and restart the series. Player three started at $1 as well used the double up strategy where after a losing bet of $x he would bet $2x (the Martingale). A winning bet would constitute the end of a series and the next bet would be $1.

After 1,000,000,000 rounds the results were as follows.

Player 1



Total amount wagered = $1,000,000,000
Average wager = $1.00
Total loss = $52,667,912
Expected loss = $52,631,579
Ratio of loss to money wagered = .052668
Player 2



Total amount wagered = $1,899,943,349
Average wager = $1.90
Total loss = $100,056,549
Expected loss = $99,997,018
Ratio of loss to money wagered = .052663
Player 3



Total amount wagered = $5,744,751,450
Average wager = $5.74
Total loss = $302,679,372
Expected loss = $302,355,340
Ratio of loss to money wagered = .052688


As you can see the ratio of loss to money wagered is always extraordinarily close to the normal house edge of ~.052632 by 1/19. By these results you can conclude that the more you wager the more you will lose over time no matter what. With a System that doubles up after a loss you are betting substantially more (~574% or $4,744,751,450 ) you are bound to lose at a devastating level.

 

[standard toaster]

I beg your pardon....
And do you consider 20 years a "short term situation" ?
And I toke very conservatively, I have a system for that too.
Also, not only do I not publish my system, I have no intention of ever selling it, to anybody !
If card counters would have kept counting systems private, then casino blackjack would be better for everyone, counters, and non-counters.
We wouldn't have 6:5 blackjacks, and all the other countermeasures your bravado has brought down upon is all.

Are you rich at this point? After 20 years of a guarenteed winning progression you should be over your head in benjamins. If you are not living off your bj game and living in a huge mansion driving the best cars you should sell your system. You would make much more through writing a little book than you would from counting or playing at the casino.

All this assuming it really works which i cant see. Hell if you go and submit it to wizardofodds.com and it really works through computer simulation he will give you 10k on the spot. Hes had that offer running for a long time now. No one has ever come close. For a good reason unless you are counting a betting system can not and will not overcome the house edge.