Progression methods in the long run always end up sinking you as we all know, but I do like to play with them and add theories to see how well they hold up until you finally do sink.

Got bored with the Paroli and D' alembert progressions pretty quick, and trying to change them to see different outcomes.
I have to say when I first came across the martingale I was pretty impressed. Though it had its major flaws. Long bad sessions eventually emptied you out and table limits would stop you in your tracks if you did have enough money to run with it.

After doing many games of using it and reading theories and statistics I thought of something that might let you win a little longer. Obviously always having the risk of losing a lot of money quickly.

From what I read (on the internet, so who knows how accurate) its about 1 in 250 hands that you will hit a losing streak that will last 8 hands or more. Seemed to be pretty close after playing a couple thousand hands using the martingale. Using table limits of $5 and $500, I would eventually hit the limit and would lose all the money.

So i thought for a second. What if you had someone sitting at a table playing a min bets or whatever. When the table goes through a long losing session and finally comes out, you sit down and start playing martingale. Play around 100 hands and get up. Wait for the table to go through another long losing session and come out and then sit down again.
It's obviously still going to happen. You will still get caught in a losing streak eventually, but Im curious to know how well it would work or how long you could go doing this. I know if you flip a coin, and it comes up tails, it has no impact on what it will come up the next time you flip it.. but the chances of going through a couple bad sessions in 250 hands should be cut somewhat no?
You can go through multiple bad sessions in 250 hands but slim chances.

Just something I thought about and think would be fun if you went with some friends to have fun and intended on losing the money anyways.