Thread: Gr8Player's Progression

First time post here. I read a few days back in a post about "gr8player" progression and I cant find it now. Can someone please point me too it?

It was like 1111111 then 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 and so on.

Thank you.

If it isn't here I do recall the gr8888888888888one posted his progression over on the gamblers glen, hey hey.

Originally Posted by soxfan

If it isn't here I do recall the gr8888888888888one posted his progression over on the gamblers glen, hey hey.

That site is bad. I cant do search that good there. Sorry.

Anybody else remember seeing the post I remember?

It is easy to search for things on the GG site, use Google

Type what you are looking for followed by site:

Example

izak site:gamblersglen.com

note the : <full colon>

Originally Posted by confusedgambler

First time post here. I read a few days back in a post about "gr8player" progression and I cant find it now. Can someone please point me too it?

It was like 1111111 then 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 and so on.

Thank you.

Hi, confusedgambler and welcome to the forum.

I think this is what you've been looking for:

1 1.5 1 1.5 2.5

Up-as-you-win.
After you win the first 1, continue up the series until two consecutive losses, then I sit out unitl I have a "virtual win" and return to the start of the series.
Whenever I win the 2.5 unit bet, I continue at that same bet size until a loss, then return to the 2nd 1 unit bet (1 1.5 2.5).

Originally Posted by confusedgambler

That site is bad. I cant do search that good there. Sorry.

Anybody else remember seeing the post I remember?

Here it is (was on the EZBaccarat thread "Thanks me later":

. Ok-part 3. money management. I used a lot of them and liked a certain system seller's up as you lose and down as you win. But the swings were too much for me. If I lost 7 or 8 bets in a row which we all do constantly , I was betting 8 units then 9 or 7 depending on the decision. I decided to scrap it and look for something "better". I have been very honest here and will continue to be straight. I was reading gr8player at gg and he talked about his mm which I tweaked a bit and started using. That was the final piece of the puzzle. Not much risk and good for me. It works something like this. I equate it to a hockey series (for Canadians) or basketball series (for Americans). You play 7 games or hands at 1 unit. If you win the series or 4 hands or more- you remain at 1 unit. If you lose 6 or 7 out of 7, you go to 2 units. If you lose 4 or 5e units your next level is 1.5 units. Same deal on every series. Lose the series and go up gently to next level eg- 1.1.5,2,2.5,3,4, 5. If you get smoked on every series you go 1,2,3,4,5 with 5 being my highest bet and down when you win a series at 5,4,3,2,. You will find that virtually all situations help you. Now when you win 27 bets and lose 27 bets you will make a few units. This is so much better than losing a few units. Your confidence and bank roll improve. I have over simplified it tonight. So fire away with any questions

Punvit, thank you. Not the progression I was lokking for but I like it.

Supdawg, yes that is it. thank you.

Originally Posted by confusedgambler

First time post here. I read a few days back in a post about "gr8player" progression and I cant find it now. Can someone please point me too it?

It was like 1111111 then 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 and so on.

Not sure how gr8 is playing this, as his posts can be confusing (excuse the pun), one week he can be increasing his bets "albeit" mildly, the next week he swears to only using PARLAY'S. So as with everything posted here, you have to take it all with a grain of salt.

However if it's mild your after, how about the standard 25 step progression

It runs like this;

which has been posted in a few places over the years. 1-1-1-1-1-1--2-2-2-2-2--3-3-3-3--4-4-4--5-5--6--7--8--9--10

It consists of 10 stages and achieves the same thing as what a few posters on this site have suggested / eluded too, as being the way to go. A series of "same size" bets for at least 5 of the 10 stages.

Egalite, how does one decide with the 25 steps as to when to move up or down?

thanks.

Originally Posted by supdawg

Egalite, how does one decide with the 25 steps as to when to move up or down?

Throw the figures into Excel, knock together some simple formula's and play around with it.

My take is basically you would move up 1 after any loss and stay at the next stage until the previous losing stage had been recovered. Once recovered step back to the stage prior to the one you have just recovered. You can recoup via winning more bets than you lose, alternately Parlay so not so many wins are required.

1-1-1-1-1-1--stage 1
2-2-2-2-2----stage 2 (wins v's losses needs to be +3 before regressing)
3-3-3-3------stage 3 (you need 3 wins v's losses AND 1 @ 2u, or 3u x 4)
4-4-4--------stage 4 (3 wins v's losses, step back to 2 u)
5-5----------stage 5 (3 wins etc)
6------------stage 6 (2 wins v's losses required or 1 succesfull parlay)
7------------stage 7
8------------stage 8
9------------stage 9
10-----------stage 10

This is not my creation, I suggest throw the numbers into Excel and play around with it, I'm sure others that have looked at this have their own variation.

For those that recall gr8's "1 ville", "2 ville", "3 ville" progression posts on GG, it is more or less a stretched version of that. GR8 quits at stage 3 (I think, it may depend which way the wind is blowing though).

Confusedgambler, pardon me please for not responding sooner to your request, but I hadn't visited the site and now just got back from my weekly AC trip. Please allow my, albeit tardy, response:

If I may say so stright upfront, even at the risk of apparent conceit, I consider my "Gr8Player's Progression" to be the absolute best and most efficient negative progression that I've ever seen. And, that's exactly what I had in mind when I designed it: efficiency. It's both mild enough to allow for your "variance" to correct itself, yet raises your unit sizes just enough for efficient recouping.

It's based upon a use of "7-series". Can't use my progression with 3, 5, or even 9; for the 7 works best. That's what the professional sports leagues use, the 7-game series. And it seems to work best here, as well. Seven seems "just right" to ascertain exactly "who's getting the best (or worst) of it", before one needs to make a bet-sizing "adjustments".

(Sidenote: I currently do not utilize this progression, but that's should not be viewed as anything against this MM method, as much as it is a reflection of just how far my Baccarat game/trending has come; I no longer feel the need for any "drawn out" negative progression for MY play.)

Onto the progression:

1 1 1 1 1 1 1
2 2 2 2 2 2 2
3 3 3 3 3 3 3
4 4 4 4 4 4 4
5 5 5 5 5 5 5

Starting at the 1-unit level (or, as I call it "1-villle"..."ville" because that's where you want to "live", in 1-ville, for we don't like to live in 3-, 4- or 5-ville) you remain there unless you lose by more than a -1. In other words, obviously any "plus" after the 7 bets and you remain; if you were to lose the series at 4 losses to 3 wins, so a -1, stay at the same level. If, however, you lose 5 and win only 2 (for a -3) or lose 6 and win only 1 (for a -5) or lose all 7 (for a -7), you move up to level 2.

Now, say you're at a -3 for the first level, and you move up to level 2, as soon as you are at a +2 in level two, you end that series and return to level one. For example:

-1 +1 -1 -1 +1 -1 -1 = -3 on to level 2:

+2 -2 +2 +2 = +4 now you're at a +1 for the group (-3 +4 = +1), go back to level 1 immediately.

You are ALWAYS seeking to return to "1-ville". I did not design this progression as an excuse to raise my bets; on the contrary, I designed it for it's EFFICIENCY in recouping and relative "mildness". So lower those bets as quickly as you can.

One more thing, in another thread in the Forum (it's in the "EZbaccarat" thread), a fellow Forum member, "usernametaken", has been using this progression currently and is experiencing some good results; those interested might want to check his posts out.

Oops, sorry, forgot to mention:

You can utilize the other version I posted at GG:

1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5

It's a personal choice. This one's a bit milder than the original, but one should know that the "trade-off" is the more wins needed for recoup. As I said, a personal choice.

Gr8player, if you are - at the end of shoe, do you start over at 1 at new shoe or do you keep going in the progression on new shoe?

In your post #11, what if you went -4 and +3 at the 2 unit level, do you still still stay at level 2 or do you move up to level 3 ?

Originally Posted by tomddxx

In your post #11, what if you went -4 and +3 at the 2 unit level, do you still still stay at level 2 or do you move up to level 3 ?

Huh, why would you, you're only -1 overall.

i must say thats a brilliant progression------seen many, but many could play this and do well on multiple things-ie=even chances etc

So, Gr8, have to ask, what type of MM did you move on to? Thanks for sharing this MM approach, I do remember your many posts (including this progression) on GG.

And, have you ever busted this MM? What type of total BR do you suggest for it? Just adding up each row would suggest 105 units.

Confusedgambler, no, I don't restart at a new shoe, I simply continue with the progression.

Tomddxx, there's can be no such event as a -3 when you're in "2-ville", as the results will always come in even numbers while betting 2 units. In my example, I was "two-over" (read: 3 wins vs 1 loss) while at level 2, and that produced a +4 in units. After I was at -3 in "1-ville", if you add the +4 from "2-ville", you're left with a +1 unit, hence the return back to level one.

Tomla, thank you for the kind words.

I should have expounded a bit on my second example (post #12):

1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5

2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25

3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4

5 5 5 5 5 5 5

Do you see the difference between this one and my original 1, 2, 3, 4, 5?

This one is alot more "balanced" of a progresssion, whereas the original is more "front-loaded".

This one raises one's unit size an even 50% at each new level.

My original progression sees bets raising as follows:

1111111
2222222 ... 100% raise from prior level
3333333 ... 50% raise from prior level
4444444 ... 33% raise from prior level
5555555 ... 25% raise from prior level

The latter one; the one that raises bets at 50% more at each level, is better for recoup in the higher stages. I didn't go past "3-ville" very often, so, for me, I was served well with the original progression.

But, for long term play, I'd probably prefer the latter version, for the times when you need a more effiecient recoup at the higher stages. Also, my latter version costs less units than the original, 92 units vs 105 units. Just food for thought, and, again, a personal choice to make.

Supdawg, thanks for your kind words, as well.

And, yes, I have "busted" this progression, using 200 units. But, that was me, not the progression. I was so sure of myself, that I used a unit size that was PURE STUPIDITY. I was over-betting, and, when "push came to shove", I "chickened out" when, well, I shouldn't have. 'nuff said......

While I have another minute, I'll give you a bit of background into the "birth" of this progression:

Tah Mahal weekend trip, maybe 8 or 9 years ago, the worst recorded strike rate trip I ever had.......I don't remeber the exact figures, but I do remember that they were absolutely horrendous.

I back-tested every progression you or I had ever heard of and, in the end, only ONE progression beat that trip. The progression (original version) in this thread.

Now, had I used the "conservative version".....

Remain at the same level even if it showed a -1. Only proceed to the next level at a -3, -5, or -7.

And, 1, then 1.5, then 2.25, then 3.4, then 5. Works much better in the more difficult sessions. (And, frankly, isn't that exactly why we employ any negative progression....the "more difficult" sessions?)

......my results would've been that much better.

Heck, even the lone "bust-out" that I mentioned just above probably doesn't happen if:

I would've played a much more realistic, comfortable unit size;
and used my "conservative version".

But IF don't get my money back, now does it?

That's one of the main reasons I post in these Forums, so that you needn't make some of the mistakes that I already made. I have no qualms with pointing out my many shortcomings when I was a relative novice to this game, not the least of which was "over-betting". And "greed". (They pretty much go "hand-n-hand anyhow, no?)

Play within your comfort zone. Always. In that way, you won't miss out on any of your plays because you were reluctant to put up the money; which is the DIRECT REASON for my "bust-out" of this progression.

Live and learn. Right here in this Forum.

ever tried this on blackjack?

I don't play Blackjack, T, but I have no reason to think that it shouldn't serve you well in any EC game.

Do you have those Tah Mahal shoes or can you remember the losing runs?

The more I play this way the more I like it. It seems to keep the baccarat game a grind like it should be but still get a few units. I don't like baccarat to be all or nothing game, I can be patient and grind.

I probably do still have them, somewhere, in my vast collection of Baccarat shoe scorecards. But finding them, Sting, would be quite a feat.
If I come across them, I'll let you know.

Good job, Confusedgambler, good job. >I can be patient and grind.< Yes! Now you're giving yourself a chance, a real chance, to win. Winners are patient and disciplined. Good job, man.

ok thanks for the opinion

Gr8player, do you have a moment when you say to yourself stop with the progression this shoe, or maybe stop the progression and take a loss? Im sorry for my questions but your experience is more than mine.

If I only play to 3 on the progression then I have less units and more grind. Is this true?

Can I do it and still win at the casino?

Confusedgambler, you needn't apologize for asking questions, that's what this Forum SHOULD be all about: the exchange of ideas, baccarat-related.

When I played this progression at first, I was "in it to win it", meaning that I re-started only after a profit was realized.

Then I learned an interesting fact: most of my wins came within the first 3 levels. And, when I say most, I mean well over 95% of my series were "settled" and "with profit" within the first 3 levels.

So I learned to adjust the progression for only the first 3 tiers. And it worked wonders for me. So, Confusedgambler, I do happen to like your use of the 3 levels and the "grind". Nice job, my friend.

Isn't it better to pay the price of time rather than the paying the hefty price of one's bankroll?

Thank you for your time. I think I am learning. Yes Time is better than big loss.

GR8, can you clarify on your progression on the following:

I played your progression last night live as:

Start at 1 ville and stay there until seven bets result in a loss of -1 or more.

So, if I was hitting +1 either with the first bet in the series or at any time in the series, I would "book" that 1 unit profit and reset my 7 bets in 1 ville. This essentially elongates the 7 bet series to continually "remove" any positive result. Does this make sense to you?

EG. If my bets went like this: +1] -1, +1,+1] -1,-1, +1,+1,+1] -1,-1,
-1,+1,+1,+1,-1]

Each of the end brackets indicates where I basically reverted to the 1st bet of the seven series of bets constituting 1 Ville.

I still use the -3, -5, -7 (but without including prior profits) as triggers to move to the next ville.

i did very well overall last night and went to 2 ville twice for two bets each time and quickly reverted to 1 ville.

What do you think?
Thanks, Supdawg