We're ready to literally destroy some bac premises.

as. 

Quote from: Lungyeh on February 21, 2020, 06:59:40 PM
Cool. I went to one of the casinos in Sri Lanka and they had all kinds of dancing right in the centre of the gambling floor including pole dancing by Eastern European ladies amidst shouts of banker! Player!

Do you normally play baccarat? Or also roulette and black jack?

Roulette is my first love and I still love to earn on inside bets but house edge and super variance in inside numbers and higher chip requirement are pushing me towards baccarat and my favorite bet is Player and not Banker and I have my reasoning for picking Player instead of Banker.

QuoteWe're ready to literally destroy some bac premises.

as.

Yeah. More or less preparations are done and its time to start hammering. Being able to beat the worst gave me confidence of Thor level. Lol. I still have to see some other aspects of my money management before being cent percent confident.

That's what I want to hear! 

as. 

if you 100%sure,
bac's player ,
never less then 29/100,

then , the simple modified labby ,
could close everytime.
what you waiting ,
and searching for then?

Quote from: PatternAnalys on February 23, 2020, 01:07:23 AM
if you 100%sure,
bac's player ,
never less then 29/100,

then , the simple modified labby ,
could close everytime.
what you waiting ,
and searching for then?

What is modified labby? How will it always close at 29/100 or even better? My method sustains the worst, doesn't beat that. I win a net after the horror passes and thereafter I get average/below average sessions. Since you do not know how did I modified it, wild guesses won't work. It has many mini and absolute stop losses too that stops bets going sky high, in any eventuality that I could witness.
           I never claimed that I can beat a 29/100 or even 35/100 case. It all depends on how things work after the worst. However, my approach is all over and I can beat below average normal sessions very easily.
         I am waiting for other similar sessions where my methodology shows some trouble that I m not aware of right now.

Hi,
          I had another approach to beat this horror session with a large bet of only 327 and a drawdown of -528 and ending Profit of 145.  I am tweaking it further so that bet never goes over 50 units max. I think I have achieved my HG finally but yet think that it can be bettered. It is winning even the worst possible, mathematically.
[attachimg=1]

Sir,
I not asking how your method.
I only want to argue with the chart point of view.

Your chart show promising slow upward line
with two very horrible drawdown.

If we study the chart, and draw a line parallelism
to the upward line, like the stock tracking method,
then, with your whatever approach, if you stop real betting when the profit line cross below the  parallel line, and resume betting when the profit line cross above the parallel line, then you could avoid horrible drawdown....( i assumed that you bet every spin, of course) ...but even  if you applied many mini stop,
that charting strategy will be your hg...i think

About the modified labby, i can't believe, you yet understand how , only30hit/100, won with labby...
if you show me any permutation with only 30hit/100spins, i can show you how math could close, even its not 33%+1hit, think hard, and you find the answer, only sadly the staking will too high for bm casino.

What you are speaking of is my RTM rules that I wrote at length about. Extreme variance could be managed to a large extent by playing trigger based game like if we play after a WLLL for only 1 or 2 bets(to get a win and move to next trigger), we do not need to worry for super horrible variance ever but it can still not be warded off fully. I mean playing with any trigger can not safeguard us completely hence I worked on an all over strategy. I formed a 60/200 case which is unseen, yet possible. You need to understand that I do not win 60/200 case but survive that and win later. No progression in the world can beat 60/200 in all the ways it could come.

QuoteAbout the modified labby, i can't believe, you yet understand how , only30hit/100, won with labby...

If you know how to make such modified labby, I can provide you a 30/100 case to showcase your expertise.

Sir,
labby is just another marthy, which instead of one hit, disperse to as many win preset.
and sadly needs hundreds of chips to win only one unit. thus unplayable in in bm.

and outrageously,
me,
like you and
others who claims having hg,
simply
just can't post our hg here...
lest casino close shop!
for those interested,
just keep thinking hard,
labby could only win with 33%+1win...
then the eureka, aha!..moment will knock.

Hey!
         In another methodology of mine, this 800 gets beaten a bit differently with 52 units net profit. Max bet=18 units.
[attachimg=1]

Sir,
With due respect.
I try to make some
interesting
analysis.
The 345/800 is within math
rtm expectation.

With your method,

you bet 749attempt
out of 800,
waiting out 51spins,

hit 338winning out of 345/800.
that's waiting 7win as trigger..../345win.

the first 200 extreme variance,
caused
-119u losses,/200
=60losses per 100round.

then the next 600 make +119+52=171u/600=28u (per 100increment).

Thus, the reward risk ratios 60/28=2x.
great as long as extreme not hit.... frequently.

now if you could look at billions spins, how the 30/100,or,60/200,visavis, expectation/200

Trigger based games are not feasible to be used in real life and they can still have extreme variance. Better think of playing all over.

but  I see that you must have ,stop bet ,after certain x losses, to avoid extreme variance and resume when a virtual won hit.

I guess, your progression,
must be labby, with string of , thirty '1',
since every within expectation, could land you ,30 units, but less than 33.34%, causing severe losses.

Nope. HP Johnson is the worst form of labby. Tweaking the original labby with additional safeguards is my way. You need to consider all probabilities the game can offer you ranging from great to average to the worst.