Baccarat A Positive Negative Progression

I thought this might be attractive to some Martingale users. I never pulled the trigger on it myself. I've made mention my aversion to the Martingale.

BR is 21 units (maximum). Target is 7 units (minimum).

Open with a 1-2-4 positive progression. This will secure your 7 units.

If you lose the first 1u bet, continue with a 2-4-8 negative marty. Bust is 15u.

Once you secure that first 1u victory, you continue with the 2u bet.
If you lose this bet, continue with a 4-8 negative marty. Bust is 11u.

Once you secure that 2u victory, you continue with the final 4u bet.
If you lose this bet continue with an 8-16 negative marty. Bust is 21u.

You are just trying to win three bets IN ANY ORDER before losing 3 bets IN A ROW.
Four bets in a row for the first bet.

It can be manipulated to be more aggressive, this is about as conservative as I could get it. As a nickel player, that 16u bet is hard to wrap my head around, typically 80% of my win goal.
It hasn't been tweaked by me for maximum return, I haven't married it to a set of truth tables. More of a concept piece.
Keep it in your comfort zone.
Baccaritic

PS. Possible this has been done before and I'm just rediscovering someone else,s idea. I've
never come across it. I like the idea of a 3 successful coups covering the largest BR bust of 21u.

 

I have played something similar. Losing 21 units max is a lot better than a 1-2-4-8-16 (31 units) in the long run for sure. And a win on the 16-unit bet still only nets you 1 unit. The way this is presented is a 7-unit profit which is obviously far more desirable when you are having difficulty with winning 50% or better.

 

I don’t advocate a negative progression. Personally I flat bet. But if you’re going to play a negative progression, how about U1D2? It has less of a slope than a Marty. Starting with 1 unit, increase 1 unit when you lose and decrease 2 units when you win. Never bet more than 6 units.

 

Bet selection, bet opposites until you lose 3 in a row, then bet on the side that won last, until a loss. Then go back to opposites.

 

I like the U1D2 as well. Bet selection is immaterial really as long as you’re winning however your bet selection works as well as any

 

Agreed.

 

Thanks.
Actually chance of winning increases dramatically if you always bet on the side of the last 2 or more (instead of opposites). So basically you’re following the last 2 (it’s called F2 follow the 2) or more in a row. The only thing you will lose to is the terrible 2s. If you know how to handle them, then you will do even better, if you don’t, and you start seeing 2s show up, then you should stop betting. F2 bet selection beats opposites and repeats, you will be on all straight line runs from the 3rd bet.

 

So are you saying bet opposite until you see a repeat or wait to follow after 3 IAR?

 

I’m saying always bet on the side that had the last 2 or more in a row (2,3,4,5,6,7 etc).

 

Too bad I often faced 3 LIAR early on...

What about 1-2-3-6-12?

 

It looks like two different methods and different progressions with the examples.

 

I think that it’s suicidal. Why put yourself in a non recoverable position? There are more efficient ways to bet without such risk.

 

Suicidal or not is debatable.....just curious which one would one's prefer more....

 

It’s just a variation of F2. What’s important is you always follow (bet under) the 2 or more. When you have runs following runs you can exploit by starting your progression with a 2 unit bet instead of 1. So instead of your progression being 1,2,3,4,5,6 it would be 2,3,4,5,6. Because when your winning more of your first bets vs your second bet, you want a bigger bang on the first bet. In essence, you’re exploiting.

 

I don't quite grasp the F2...follow the last 2 decision, or follow one before last?

 

When your down 24 units in 5 hands, it will mess with your head and confidence and I assure you, you will not be able to continue making rational decisions.

 

No not TB4L, I’m saying always follow the side that won at least 2 (or more) consecutive bets in a row.

 

How do you handle the terrible 2's?

 

On row 8, your first 4U bet, why

On row 8, which is your first 4U bet you bet P but wasn't B the side with the last 2 or more? Maybe I'm missing something. Thanks

 

Yes you are correct, this is Ellis's scorecard. It's a mistake, that 4 unit bet should have been placed on the banker side.