Johnson progression

[lazarous]

Here a system(loosing one in long term,boring,but quite resistent).Note 20 times the number 1 on a piece of paper.These will be your your profit.You play like Labby,playing first term plus last term(first bet 2).When you win you cancel the two terms,but when you loose,you don't write the loss,but you distribute it on the 20 terms,starting from the first one.If you loose the first bet the sequence becomes 2,2 and 18 times 1.And you continue like Labby,but with the modification,I mentioned.I know people winning for 10000 spins without problemes.After that,the disaster.........

[Belgian]

Hi lazarou, wouldn't it be wiser to limit your first labby? Was 20 some arbitrary number you picked? Very risky. 1,1,1,1,1 or even 1,1,1 would cut down on recovery time.

[SA]

I guess it goes like this:
11111111111 (etc)

WW erase two on each end leaving 16 1111111
LL becomes first, 22 11111111
2nd L becomes 33 22 11111111
WW off 31 twice, leaving 2211111111

LLLL would leave a line of 66 55 44 33 22 111111111
then WLW would be off 6-1, on 55, off 6-1
I hope this is right. Seems like a run of losses would be very difficult to recover as would a WLWLWL pattern.
Anyway, thanks for the information.

[Mocco]

Hi Guys

The way I thought it would go would be:

1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1

Then first bet is 2, so just using a long series of losses, the next bet would be 3 as in 2,2,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1, the next bet is 3 and as it lost the sequence would be 2,2,2,2,2,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1, - this then carries on until the sequence is all 2s. At this time the bet becomes 4 units, if this loses we have 3,3,3,3,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2. The next bet is 5 units and after the loss we have a sequence of 3,3,3,3,3,3,3,3,3,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2. This continues until the sequence is all 3s then the next bet is 6 units for one bet then 7 units until the sequence is filled and so on until whenever ......

I havent worked out how deep this progression can go but I guess at some stage you will win 10 bets and the sequence will be completed. The difficulty as with all cancellation methods would be when the numbers in the sequence have been reduced from 20 to say 5 and then the bad losing run happens. At that point I suppose the string could be somehow expanded again.

Regards
mocco

[lazarous]

Mocco has perfectly understood the method!At Handle I say that more the list of 1 is longer better it is. I know a professional gambler in Italy that starts with 50 times 1.
An additional rule: supposing we start from 20 times 1. You win,you loose and so on etc, just for example, you have at the end, the last four numbers: 8,6,6,5. You play 13 units. If you win, oK, you play then 12 units. But if you loose the 13 units, you have the choice to distribute them among the four remaining figures (I suggest not to do that and in any case, don't play more than 20 units per spin) or, other choice, to increase the remaining figures, for instance, once again, if you loose 13 units, the list could become 8,8,6,6,5,5. Or you can split even more, 4,4,8,6,6,5,3,2. This is the better choice! Don't forget that (it happens) if you have a losing streak, you can hypothetically, come back to 20 figures maximum. Personally I don't play this kind of progression (bankroll 3000/4000 units), but in Europe is very popular and played very often by people having at least 150 session a year. Sure not just for fun twice a month.

[Mocco]

Must admit this has got my interest. The problem with the labby is the strings can go on forever - this one limits the string to a predetermined 20. Therefore 10 wins and the 20 unit profit is made.

What I was thinking of was that all 3 even chances could be played, so there is 3 strings of 20 single units to start. Then losses can be distributed over all three and the strings can be adjusted every (say) 5 spins.

So if the strings have r/b still at 20, o/e is at 14 and h/l is at 14 then the strings could be redistributed so that there is a string of 16 on each.

Also I would expect that there would be an opportunity at some point to take a profit without canceling all the strings, so take a 30 unit profit and recommence instead of trying to complete the strings for the 60 unit profit.

Regards
Mocco

[Mocco]

SA,

The bets you listed would look like this
BET ...... SEQUENCE BEFORE BET .......... PROFIT/LOSS
W 2 ... 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .. +2
W 2 ....1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .. +4
L 2 .... 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .. +2
L 3 .... 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .. -1
W 3 ... 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .. +2
W 3 ... 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .. +5
W 3 ... 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .. +8
L 3 ....2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .. +5
L 3 .... 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 .. +2
L 3 .... 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 .. -1
W 5 .... 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 .. +4
L 4 .... 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 .. 0
W 5 .... 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 .. +5
L 5 .... 3 3 3 2 2 2 .. 0
W 7 .... 4 4 3 3 3 3 .. +7
L 7 .... 4 3 3 3 .. 0
.. 8 ... 5 5 5 5

Another 2 wins and the string is completed with a profit of 20 units.

[Hann]

This ones no good either, table limits.

Lets say your down to your last two bets and its 8,8. We cancel when we win, right? So we've had a series of losses and wins. I think you can already see where I'm going with this. Only one win left and we're out. But no, here comes another series of losses. At 16 units each bet it would increase exponentially. It would end up looking just like a martingale.

8,8 Lose
16,16 Lose
32,32 Lose
64,64 Lose
And so on. And thats just 4 losses!

I hope this isn't what you were talking about, lazarous. I've only played it the way mocco suggested, if its different then please state so.

[lazarous]

Mocco,
your suggestion to play the three even chances is correct and you can stop at a first positive situation. But there is another solution for making the system less aggressive or dangerous. You play for each even chance "en differentiel". That is, charting Black and Red separately, each of them with 20 times 1 and playing really the difference between the two chances. If charting Black you must play 10 units and Red 6 units, you play of course only 4 at Black. In this case the bankroll can be 2000 units and even below.

[lazarous]

Hann, you are also right, The case you mention occurs, but there is a simple solution. First, as I already said you decide NOT playing more than 20 units (this is a basic rule for 20 times 1). When you are at the end with 8,8 and play sixteen, if you loose you don't distribute 16 on the two terms, but the string becomes 8,8,8,8,otherwise, if it becomes 16, 16 you must play MORE than 20 units. So in your case it becomes, once again 8,8,8,8 or if you want to be more careful,it could be 4,4,8,8,4,4 and so on. The difficult part is really the last spins.The solution,still with max 20 unit of playing, depends on your patience, discipline, and win goal in a given time

[Hann]

So you did, Lazarous. Thanks for stating the obvious. Smile

[SA]

Unless there is more information, it is not for me. Thank you all for the help. As I see it, after 7W and 7L, I have no profit and am facing a dangerous situation. As far as betting all three chances, I do not like to bet BO or RE together because the casino has a big edge here. I will only bet RB and OU together. As for redistributing the bets, I have charted many, many RB and OU together. I find that they usually run together in loss patterns or win patterns. That is, if one loses, the other also loses. Now, I will go back and check betting the differential as Lazarous has suggested. I chart shoes a lot, and almost always come out with even losses and wins, or usually about two to six more wins. My problem is that I often lose 6 or 7 in a row and win 6 or 7 in a row. I am now experimenting using the Hot New Craps system with my charts using differentila betting. I would like to play a negative progression to pick up the WLWLWL, but it is too dangerous if I lose 6 or 7 in a row. So far, I have not found anything better than positive 1 2 or 1 3 2 (2). Thanks Mocco and all!!!!

[Belgian]

Hi Lazarous,

I enjoy reading your posts, they are heading IMO into the right direction.

Allthough people are very creative in proposing new way's trying to beat the game, once investigating a concept, it appears very hard to keep the overview and be able to look at the same basic concept from again totally different angles.

Lets take the Labby, IMO one of the most powerfull and dynamic progressions available, but again you can only profit from if you look at in new very flexible way's:

A labby doesn't have to be 11 or 1111, it can also be 01 or even 000001,
furthermore if you lose a bet you can decide yourselve where to place the lost units and in which way.

Secondly try to investigate the labby in this direction. Combine the bets on even chances not with 50/50 odds, but with 75/25 odds or even 89/11. If you do that the danger of long losing strikes is by far, far less and to win the last bets are not that difficult anymore.

Last but not least how longer the run will be, how better the chance of the needed 1W: 2L ratio will be reached, in other words try to keep the bets as low as possible in the progression.

Regards,
belgian

[lazarous]

Hi Belgian and thanks for the good advise. I tried already starting from 10 Zeros and 10 ones, both for even chances and Dozens/Columns. The system is more resistant. Very good the idea for 89/11, I never tried. In any case,at the end of the story, as I stated at the beginning of this topic a few days ago, the "Johnson progression" is a losing system, you can win for months, for a few thousand spins, but finally you lose. But it's, with "Group of seven system" one of the most resistant existing progression, as many professional players say! I'll post "Group of seven system" in the coming days, if someone doesn't know it yet!

[UK]

Hi Lazarous,

I've not heard of the "group of seven" and would appreciate you posting it. Also, you mentioned the "Breadwinner" system on another thread, perhaps you could post that too?

cheers,
UK