What I like about this system is that it is very unlikely to spiral out of control like most negative progressions. If you ever played a Martingale, Fibonacci, D’Alembert, Labouchere or even Oscar’s Grind (technically speaking, Oscar is a positive progression in the sense that the bet is increased following a win not after a losing hand, but you are still running after lost money) you know what I’m talking about. Losing 10 to 20 hands in a row will kill your progression or your bank roll, but this is quite unlikely to happen with this system. For it to happen you would have to lose many hands in a row while 5 or more players at the table lose at the same time as yourself plus counting there is no reshuffle in between. Otherwise you are flat betting and waiting to play your bigger bet. Of course, your increasing progression could lose on 10 to 20 separate occurrences immediately following 5 or more loses at the table and probably killing your bank roll. My bet is that this is also unlikely to happen, because winning and losing streaks usually happen in just that: streaks. If the deck is hot for the dealer, more than likely you will be flat betting in no time. If the deck is hot for the player, you will win flat bets. If the deck is about even, you are likely to fulfill your progression. After 4016 hands, my biggest bet was 55$, peanuts. Most losses in a row so far is 10 and 6/10 of those where flat bets! The problem I find playing this system is what do you do if the table suddenly has less than, say, 6 players? You can take a break or flat bet until the table is mostly full or use another more risky progression. Anyways, I prefer approaching blackjack playing perfect basic strategy and employing a conservative/negative progression, it certainly gives me more than an edge over your run of the mill ploppy.
