Is a Progressive Betting Approach Ever Warranted for a Player with an Advantage?

[Overkill]

Hello all,

I'm sure this has been covered ad nauseum previously, but some (like me!) could use a refresher please.

We know progressive betting systems are, for the basic strategy player, for instance, mathematically unsound and are therefore to be avoided.

But what about for the player with a POSITIVE advantage, but not for the entire shoe.

Consider Bob playing at a 6-deck table with one other player. Bob know that, on average, as he plays he will encouner certain conditions which provide him with a 4% advantage on about 2 hands per shoe.

So, for example, he is flat betting $10 per hand, and, after, say, Hand #8, he realizes he now has an advantage of 4% for Hand #9 and bets, say, $40 on Hand #9. As he continues playing, he comes across another player favorable Hand - maybe Hand #20, and so he also bets $40 on Hand #20.

Because his player favorable hands are so few and far between (about 2 hands per shoe), would Bob be better off progressively increasing his bet on the 4% advantage hands until he wins one of them (and starting over after he wins one of them)? (Perhaps the progression would go like the following: $20 on Hand #9, $50 on Hand #20, and then $100, $400, $500.).I realize Bob will lose the roughly $1070 (plus losing doubles, splits) at times due to losing 5 hands in a row (maybe .25% of the time?) and subsequently coming up against the table max.

I'm guessing the variance will be much higher if he uses the progression (or, more generally, ANY progression) rather than if stays patient with his $10 flat betting and $30 betting on the uncommon though player-favorable hands. And I am guessing he will also lose money with the progression in the long run, correct?

**But, at what player-advantage is a particular progression appropriate, if ever? Playing with a 12% player advantage for roughly 2 hands per shoe? Playing with a 28% player advantage for roughly 2 hands per shoe?**

I am asking because even though the player has an advantage at certain times, those times are so infrequent as to be psychologically difficult for the non-progression player during negative swings. I am hoping a particular progression can be devised given a certain player advantage at times.

[Cacarulo]

Hello all,

I'm sure this has been covered ad nauseum previously, but some (like me!) could use a refresher please.

We know progressive betting systems are, for the basic strategy player, for instance, mathematically unsound and are therefore to be avoided.

But what about for the player with a POSITIVE advantage, but not for the entire shoe.

Consider Bob playing at a 6-deck table with one other player. Bob know that, on average, as he plays he will encouner certain conditions which provide him with a 4% advantage on about 2 hands per shoe.

So, for example, he is flat betting $10 per hand, and, after, say, Hand #8, he realizes he now has an advantage of 4% for Hand #9 and bets, say, $40 on Hand #9. As he continues playing, he comes across another player favorable Hand - maybe Hand #20, and so he also bets $40 on Hand #20.

Because his player favorable hands are so few and far between (about 2 hands per shoe), would Bob be better off progressively increasing his bet on the 4% advantage hands until he wins one of them (and starting over after he wins one of them)? (Perhaps the progression would go like the following: $20 on Hand #9, $50 on Hand #20, and then $100, $400, $500.).I realize Bob will lose the roughly $1070 (plus losing doubles, splits) at times due to losing 5 hands in a row (maybe .25% of the time?) and subsequently coming up against the table max.

I'm guessing the variance will be much higher if he uses the progression (or, more generally, ANY progression) rather than if stays patient with his $10 flat betting and $30 betting on the uncommon though player-favorable hands. And I am guessing he will also lose money with the progression in the long run, correct?

**But, at what player-advantage is a particular progression appropriate, if ever? Playing with a 12% player advantage for roughly 2 hands per shoe? Playing with a 28% player advantage for roughly 2 hands per shoe?**

I am asking because even though the player has an advantage at certain times, those times are so infrequent as to be psychologically difficult for the non-progression player during negative swings. I am hoping a particular progression can be devised given a certain player advantage at times.

I think you know the answer. If the player doesn't mind increasing his risk of ruin by over-betting, that's his problem.
Normally, when the count is positive, one bets based on the expected value and the variance at that positive TC. There is an optimal betting scheme that
minimizes the ROR and maximizes the SCORE. One can bet a larger amount than the optimal scheme says, but keep in mind that the ROR is also going to be higher.
I don't think there is an appropriate time for a progression.

Sincerely,
Cac

[Gronbog]

Progressions, the Martingale in particular, can be a powerful tool in tournament play.

[Midwest Player]

How about a betting progression in roulette? Recently an online casino was offering $2 in free credits for every $77 bet on roulette. The online game also offered single zero roulette as a playing choice which made the game just about breakeven.

How about a progression sytem for this promotion.
https://www.telemediaonline.co.uk/th...-for-roulette/

PS. Can someone explain a little better how the Fibonacci system works?

[iCountNTrack]

How about a betting progression in roulette? Recently an online casino was offering $2 in free credits for every $77 bet on roulette. The online game also offered single zero roulette as a playing choice which made the game just about breakeven.

How about a progression sytem for this promotion.
https://www.telemediaonline.co.uk/th...-for-roulette/

PS. Can someone explain a little better how the Fibonacci system works?

Just about break even is in fact -2.70% advantage for the player, and you can try every single possible variation of a betting progression and it will not change it. Just like a deck of cards, a roulette wheel does not have a memory

[Midwest Player]

Just about break even is in fact -2.70% advantage for the player, and you can try every single possible variation of a betting progression and it will not change it. Just like a deck of cards, a roulette wheel does not have a memory

What you are forgetting is the free credits earned. Assume house edge of 2.70% on bets of $7,700. You lose $207.90, but win $200 in free credits. Pretty close game.

[DSchles]

What you are forgetting is the free credits earned. Assume house edge of 2.70% on bets of $7,700. You lose $207.90, but win $200 in free credits. Pretty close game.

YOU forget that "free credits" aren't free money; they're half free money (and with variance, to boot)!

Don

[Midwest Player]

YOU forget that "free credits" aren't free money; they're half free money (and with variance, to boot)!

Don

The free credits only have to be played thru once. They can be played on blackjack and have less than .005 house edge if played on blackjack. I just did it this past weekend.

I have another question on single zero roulette. This site mentions two different numbers for house edge on single zero roulette. One number is 2.7% and the other number is 2.6%. I thought the house edge was the same on all bets on roulette.
https://pokerfuse.com/news/casinos-a...te-house-edge/

Well, have to go. I have to play $100,000 on blackjack (maybe some Spanish 21 also) by midnight Wed to win $1,000 in free credits. Hope I can make it in time.

[21forme]

The free credits only have to be played thru once. They can be played on blackjack and have less than .005 house edge if played on blackjack. I just did it this past weekend.

It's the same as a promo chip that's collected after the bet. Suppose you bet $25 in free credits. You win and you get paid $25. You don't get your original bet back. So Don, of course, is correct.

[Midwest Player]

It's the same as a promo chip that's collected after the bet. Suppose you bet $25 in free credits. You win and you get paid $25. You don't get your original bet back. So Don, of course, is correct.

Not correct. At the online casino I play the most at, this is how it works. If you bet $25 in free credits and you win the bet the free credit is converted to cash plus you get the $25 you won. If you lose the bet then you lose the $25 free credit. If you push the bet, then the free credit is converted to cash. So pushes still win.

[21forme]

Sounds like a good deal the way you describe it.

[Midwest Player]

Well, have to go. I have to play $100,000 on blackjack (maybe some Spanish 21 also) by midnight Wed to win $1,000 in free credits. Hope I can make it in time.

What a wild run on my journey to $100,000 in table play. It was divided between blackjack and Spanish 21. Pretty much couldn't lose on the first $50,000 of play. At the $50,000 mark, I was up $3,000 on mostly $50 bets. A few smaller bets and a few doubling bets were made. On the second $50,000 pretty much held my own, but went steaming towards the end and lost about $500. Ended up with a little over a $2,500 win before my $1,000 in free credits. I should have lost around $500 on my $100,000 play. Oh, the play also saw a 14 hand winning steak by the dealer. Switched games at this point.

It was a good few days at this casino. Up almost $12,000 at my favorite casino in the last 10 days. Now just waiting for it to go the other way. The Cash Climb promotion starts tomorrow. Hope they offer a good promotion.