A progression without any voodoo.

[falling star]

Counters are playing to a 1 1/2% advantage.
Non-counters are playing to a 1/2% disadvantage.

Both groups are expecting their game to corralate to the stated odds in the long term.
In the short term, if there is any difference between the actual results and the odds, the
difference is calculated as variance.

Counters play and wait for their advantage to materialize.
Non-counters can't wait, they must overcome more than the 1/2% disadvantage in order to
make profit.

One method is to keep all bets low until the odds are satisfied.
How do you know when the odds have been accomodated, maybe the amount you're down
is just negative variance? Your record keeping will give you a good indication. You know,
ahead of time, how many units you should be down after 100, 200, 300 or 1000 hands etc..
It's all one continuous session with breaks of 10 minutes, 10 hours, 10 days or 10 years.

If you allow for a 2% disadvantage, when the actual disadvantage is only 1/2%, you can play to
to an expectation of 1 1/2% which is actually variance.

A good visual analogy would be a pendulum swinging back and forth, with your mean or centre point being set at -1/2%. On average, 1/3 of the time you'll be left of centre, 1/3 of the time
around centre and 1/3 time at right of centre.

I suggest you use a flat bet progression, as long as the pendulum is left of centre (negative variance) until you've recovered all the negative variance or until you show a satisfactory profit.
While you're letting the negative variance build

[lurppis]

Did you just say "keep betting until you win money"?

I recommend you investigate the gamblers' support services in your local area.

[Norm]

A good article on Gambler's fallacy.

[Three]

I thought you said no voodoo. Your odds of winning doesn't change based on the variance experienced. If it were that simple the casinos would go broke.

[AussiePlayer]

The title of this thread really says it all: Voodoo without any Voodoo

[falling star]

A good article on Gambler's fallacy.

I used it and it worked for me. The game was in phase with the odds and returned 400 units of variance as shown on my records. I even ended up with some positive variance before the game drifted back to the negative again. The last part of my post was lost when I posted. It basicly explained how the flat progression worked. A flat bet progression has a lot of benefits for players and is a relaxing way to play.

[falling star]

I thought you said no voodoo. Your odds of winning doesn't change based on the variance experienced. If it were that simple the casinos would go broke.

It is that simple and I'm not worried about casinos going broke.

[iCountNTrack]

A flat bet progression

This is something new

[falling star]

Did you just say "keep betting until you win money"?

I recommend you investigate the gamblers' support services in your local area.

Everyone is different. Some will pull back with a small win, others will push through to the limits.

[falling star]

This is something new

Because a flat bet progression isn't new to you, it doesn't mean it's not new to someone else.

[jaygruden]

Don't feed the..............
WQ_Mountain_Troll.jpg

[falling star]

A good article on Gambler's fallacy.

Good article and I agree with it, but fail to see its application to me. No where in the article does it say it can't happen, or it won't happen. What it does say is that the probability doesn't increase because you've lost whatever. It doesn't say there is no probability.

[bigplayer]

Counters play and wait for their advantage to materialize.
Non-counters can't wait, they must overcome more than the 1/2% disadvantage in order to
make profit.

Non-Counters, unless they are seeing the hole card or using some other advantage play technique, will not overcome the 1/2% disadvantage via betting progressions. Bet progressions simply change the shape of the normal distributions of session results from a bell shaped one to one that is skewed such that you will have many losing sessions of small magnitude and a few large wins (positive progression) OR many winning sessions of small magnitude and a few large losses (negative progression).

I will admit, that if you only play a very small handful of hours each year, like 8-12 hours a year on one annual trip to Vegas, then I find nothing wrong with a mild positive progression...it keeps money off the table during long losing streaks but gives a casual player a chance to run a series of wins into a large session win. Hit one or two big wins and you'll be ahead of the game for several years if you can keep a level head and don't suddenly get visions of grandeur and up your stakes. Just don't deceive yourself into thinking that it somehow changes the odds of the game. Sweaty casino pit bosses confuse positive flux with advantage play all the time. Progression advocates do the same thing. If you want to use a progression to try and hit a big score vs the casino feel free, it's your money...but please don't try to surround your own personal utility with some sort of mathematical nonsense. Posters to sites like this aren't easily baffled by bull****.