As I said, he's a highroller with insane amounts. All his money was never lost. I was describing the concept of the Marty. After each win, it brings the player back to break-even, at least. I think we agree on the concept, now for the rest...

And in that fantasy concept, there is still negative expected value, and changing bet sized based on previous results is not profitable in the long run for the bettor. Saying that it is, is trolling the forum. As I understand it, trolling is done to someone, not a forum. If the definition includes groups, then sorry, I think your idea of trolling is completely different to mine. I don't agree that negative progression systems can't turn a profit for the player. I've proven it over and over on free software. If it happens a few times on software, one can not necessarily be certain. But over and over, there's not much doubt.

Also, it is not possible for me to start from scratch until you provide the starting point, which is something you will not do.

Again. Not so. Don't believe everything you read from other posters. I have previously had CharliePatrick run some simulations for me. If you peruse the bottom of page 10 of this thread (only 1 or 2 pages back from here) you will see this:

E.g. normal Fibonacci sequence: 3, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34. Adjusted Fibonacci: 3, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 13, 17, 21, 27, 34.

Why don't we use the adjusted Fibonacci I've put together here, as our starting point? So, the player starts betting with $3. A zero can be added if it's too unrealistic. Every time the player loses, he goes up the sequence...3, 3, 4, 5, 6,....You will note I have placed an integer half-way between each ordinary Fibonacci integer. Between 3 and 5, is 4. Between 5 and 8 is 6. Between 8 and 13 is 10.

If we are to use this as our example, an integer will need to be placed half-way between each number on the Fib sequence.

Each time the player wins he moves down the sequence, but misses every third number. E.g. if the player loses every bet from 3 till 13, then wins 4 hands, he will win his hands on 17, 13, 8 and 6. Notice he misses 10. This is to ensure he uses less bets to recoup his loses, than that used to create the loses. This will result in a profit for the player when bonuses from BJ's, splits and doubles is factored in.

Then go ahead and tell us how much they will make. What do you mean? How much profit? Not sure, but profit they will. Tell us what the lowest and highest bets are. Lowest: $3 or $30. Highest: $100,000. Tell us what triggers changes in bet sizes. Already mentioned Tell us the game, or the odds of the game. BJ And how many total bets they make. 300. Once you do that, lots of people here can show you the math (and "math theory"), including overall chances of winning or losing, and overall expected profits. Your continued refusal to provide any of these details throughout your word salad posts is another example of trolling. I've already debunked this sentence

For another example of trolling: you only talk about concepts, then seem to want other people to speak of concrete details that you refuse to provide. Ditto to what I just wrote

Depends how you define catastrophic loss! E.g. Are you suggesting every hand dealt for 3 decks will favour the dealer? Highly unlikely, even if it's some highly abnormal turn of events.

Given enough opportunities, virtually any sequence of results that could be defined as a catastrophic loss will occur, including the one you described. I don't think so. There are limits. If people want to concoct fanciful extreme results to protect a statistical theory, then yes these fanciful extreme results are sure to occur, in people's minds. There are limits to how long streaks will go on for. Maybe 20 hands, but up around 30...hm 🤔

If you make a series of negative expectation bets the total result will have a negative expectation. Reference one single positive expectation bet from your hundreds of posts. Just one.

Quote:sabreYour repeated refusal to use the forum's quote feature is impressive, if not intentional.

If you make a series of negative expectation bets the total result will have a negative expectation. Reference one single positive expectation bet from your hundreds of posts. Just one.

If you're so full of it Sabre, empty it far away. You're gonna need a lot of space 😁

Quote:WellbushIf you're so full of it Sabre, empty it far away. You're gonna need a lot of space 😁

Name one positive expectation bet you've described in any of your posts. Just one. Use the quote feature.

If you lose a single bet, your bankroll is no longer infinite, and no matter how much you win, your bankroll would still be infinite.

Quote:billryanIt must suck to have an infinite bankroll. What is your upside?

If you lose a single bet, your bankroll is no longer infinite, and no matter how much you win, your bankroll would still be infinite.

That’s not how infinity works.

Quote:WellbushYou want me to look at your post, Sabre? 😃 Go back to where you belong! I know what your posts are made of. You must sit there all day, waiting for someone to attack, like a dog in a pack. Are you proud of yourself?

Name one positive expectation bet you've described in any of your posts. Just one. Use the quote feature.

Quote:unJonThat’s not how infinity works.

Perhaps not in your world.

Quote:billryanIt must suck to have an infinite bankroll. What is your upside?

If you lose a single bet, your bankroll is no longer infinite, and no matter how much you win, your bankroll would still be infinite.

Agreed! The answers to your questions are, well..infinite!