Thread: Unlimited negative progression

if you use,,,, up 1 when you lose, down 1 when you win, and you only bet on bank, will it always come back to a bet 1? i think it would, but before it does the bet can be so large that the commission eats up all the profit, but what about all the numerous times you would be collecting smaller profits? just curious if anyone has ever tried this.

This is called the D'Lambert progression and i've had success with many times. It is often misunderstood, however.

To begin with the assumption that things even out over time is incorrect. What actually happens is the results get further apart as times goes on, with the house edge insuring that the casino doesn't loose.

Secondly the D'Lambert is designed to give you a 1 unit profit with each winning result. Therefore 5 wins and 5 loses in any order will give you 5 units profit. - This will ony be the case if we start with several units. Too many people think they can start with 1 unit, but watch what happens in the following example.

starting with 1 unit
W,W,W,W,W * L,L,L,L,L
+1,1,1,1,1* -1-2-3-4-5 total -10

starting with 10 units
W,W,W,W,W * L,L,L,L,L
+10,9,8,7,6 - -5-6-7-8-9 total +5

Have fun and pocket your profits as you get them.

Originally Posted by gamblinggrant

This is called the D'Lambert progression and i've had success with many times. It is often misunderstood, however.

To begin with the assumption that things even out over time is incorrect. What actually happens is the results get further apart as times goes on, with the house edge insuring that the casino doesn't loose.

Secondly the D'Lambert is designed to give you a 1 unit profit with each winning result. Therefore 5 wins and 5 loses in any order will give you 5 units profit. - This will ony be the case if we start with several units. Too many people think they can start with 1 unit, but watch what happens in the following example.

starting with 1 unit
W,W,W,W,W * L,L,L,L,L
+1,1,1,1,1* -1-2-3-4-5 total -10

starting with 10 units
W,W,W,W,W * L,L,L,L,L
+10,9,8,7,6 - -5-6-7-8-9 total +5

Have fun and pocket your profits as you get them.

It is standard deviation and dispersion of results that make this progression a killer on paper it does look a gr8 mm but as we know betting on E/C anything does and can happen

Hello Natural9,

I just got back from The Blue Heron casino here in Ontario. They have a "no commission" baccarat game. If the Banker wins with a 6 they only pay half your wager, all else is the same.

I agree, no progression works where flat betting fails. However, we are discussing gambling and we can walk away from the casino with many small wins (maybe 30-50% of buy in) by using well timed progressions.

Placing all of our money on one bet is the best chance we have of completely doubling our money.

hey grant, i've experimented with starting out at higher than 1 unit bet and if you win more than you lose it's great, but often as the case is, you'll hit a little losing streak and you're up there betting some pretty high units...my question though is, since banker wins more hands, no matter how far player gets ahead of banker, eventually banker will catch back up, and if you bet 1 up on a loss, and 1 down on a win, how can you lose? need to remember now, i'm talking about goin' unlimited, you might run into 4 or 5 player dominate shoes in row and you might be betting a 70 bet or 80 bet or more, but eventually banker catchs up, i just think the commission of all those high unit bets eats up all the profit, however that no commission casino sounds interesting for this particular system.

Originally Posted by gamblinggrant

Hello Natural9,

I just got back from The Blue Heron casino here in Ontario. They have a "no commission" baccarat game. If the Banker wins with a 6 they only pay half your wager, all else is the same.

I agree, no progression works where flat betting fails. However, we are discussing gambling and we can walk away from the casino with many small wins (maybe 30-50% of buy in) by using well timed progressions.

Placing all of our money on one bet is the best chance we have of completely doubling our money.

gamblinggrant,

Because the winning banker-bet on a six is paid roughly half that of the corresponding player-bet, wouldn't playing more when there are fewer sixes left in the deck help to prevent that "unfair" situation entirely (for the banker-bet)?

Hi Takethewin

I think that you are probably right about banker catching up to player over several shoes. I don't know what the worst case scenario would be. I've personally seen 18 more Players than Bankers in less than 50 hands. This of course isn't a problem with an unlimited bankroll it is just a matter of time. In theory the commission would not be a problem because such extended loosing periods would be rare. While the bet may have regressed to the original level you might need more time to overcome the lost commission, my experience tells me that in most shoes you would be ahead.

If your in a positon to try this I'd like to know how it turns out.

My prefered method is a limited negative progression while I'm down and a positive progression when I'm up.

Garnabby

You might be right, I never thought of that. Today is my first day playing this game at Blue Heron.

Since you're from Kitchener maybe you remember the extra bet they had on the $5 blackjack tables in Brantford last year.
It was a bet on the A's. People kept counting the A's and not betting the bonus when too many had come out. They've since removed the bet.

I think if this "no commision" Baccarat could be exploited they would change it. I have'nt done the math but it is probably worse than paying 5%.

By the way how about an invite to your project baccarat forum, it sounds interesting and I may be able to contribute something.

gamblinggrant,

Here's the latest list of "no-commission" from the "Wizard of Odds", with the one it appears you're playing at Blue Heron:

♠Baccarat Appendix 6 — Commission Free Baccarat — The Wizard of Odds .

Yes, the house-edge over the banker-bet has additively gone up about 0.40% (on the standard 1.06%, accounting for tie-outcomes), or multiplicatively by about 1.38 . So i suppose it would be too much to expect to find enough-fewer [sixes and/or tens] situations just to bring the commission back to normal... about 28% fewer, by my quick calculation. (Takes 28% less of 1.38 to bring it back to 1; and the very-close to half of the P-B end-totals involve ten's with the total, hence the effect of doing this is cut by 1/2, but at the same time the banker doesn't lose to the player-six 1/2 the time then at twice what it could win. Not "proof-read", but at least it's a starting point.)

P.S. You're invited... i hope you can find at least one thing from there useful.
--------------------

Edit:

Removing as many sixes will likely as much hurt the banker-chance in other ways; but slightly more help the tens. So somewhere around 20% fewer tens left will make a big difference, but still not an-edge-over-the-house difference.



takethe win,

That progression tries to catch up ever-less quickly later: by doubling the 1 to 2; then by adding 1/2 the 2 to bet 3; then by adding 1/3 the 3 to bet 4; etc. (1 more; 1/2 more; 1/3 more; etc.) Interesting in itself, but more so the way you play it with the banker-bet, which shall always eventually catch up. I'll get back to this thread when i've had longer to think about it. For now though, no matter the betting structure, some sort of bet-selection strategy will be required, if only to know when to bet the banker.

Originally Posted by gamblinggrant

Garnabby

You might be right, I never thought of that. Today is my first day playing this game at Blue Heron.

Since you're from Kitchener maybe you remember the extra bet they had on the $5 blackjack tables in Brantford last year.
It was a bet on the A's. People kept counting the A's and not betting the bonus when too many had come out. They've since removed the bet.

I think if this "no commision" Baccarat could be exploited they would change it. I have'nt done the math but it is probably worse than paying 5%.

By the way how about an invite to your project baccarat forum, it sounds interesting and I may be able to contribute something.

bro, don't play on B6 table, "no commission on Banker" is a bait. you can imagine out of 4hands, 3hands won by B6 (pay only half) your actual wining is 2 and 1/2, not 4. I rather go for 5% com. table in this case my wining is 4 units less 20%. B6 table, casino's plan to kill the gambler, kills the system player, don't play there.

Gernabby is right. A count of 6's would be advantageous in this arrangement.

Henry is also right. The casino is never going to come up with a new arrangement that doesn't favor THEM.

Originally Posted by Ellis

The casino is never going to come up with a new arrangement that doesn't favor THEM.

What about the old one(s)? (There's a contradiction here somewhere.)