Unfortunately RJT, there will never be more that I can offer to prove my system to you personally. Even if I wrote a computer program you would mock the results. You would say that my computer program is flawed and biased. There is nothing I can do but to say that it works because I know it does.RJT said:We understand perfectly how your system works. Other people have not had success because your system is flawed. Now you are talking about winning 'streaks' and other such term that have been proved time and time again to hold no advantage over the long run.
100k hands doesn't prove anything i'm afraid and what you describe your system mirrors the results that any negative progression system will generate. Many small wins and every so often a catastropic losing streak. Because of the very slow nature of the progression you will see a slightly more balanced result, but it will not result in a long term win.
Where did you get this figure of $600? I've got to assume that it's come from the most you've ever gone down during your trials, making it anacdotal and worthless as any sort of limit in any mathematical sense.
Oh and btw, we do believe in systems that actually do gain an advantage, but only ones that can be proved. Just say, 'but i've never had a losing session' doesn't prove anything. Expecting people to back you up when you are discussing a progression system - a varient on systems that have been proved 100's of times over to be of no merit - when the only supporting evidence you can offer is 'it works for me over a relatively small sample of hands' is never going to get you anywhere.
RJT.
Licentia.