"The inherently unknowable nature of reality can be a tough pill to swallow, at least initially. It can send you down the rabbit hole and back many times. But the more you surrender to this simple truth, the more wondrous reality can become."

TO ME, THAT SENTENCE HAS GREAT VALUE!  Here is the rest of it that Gizmo inspired m finish early this morning:

Either you play for what the statistical results say which, there is no way to have a definitive appearing schedule of results and in proper order to follow.  When you play that way you will be playing for a few units here and there, as your mind-frame will not allow you to follow streaks, chops, patterns/trends or anything of the like. 

I am sorry, I have played for decades and I have encountered every kind of player's mind frame, the above statistical and mathematical beliefs will reappear in their exact order as reported or translates from the long run to the 1 or 3 or 5 shoe session the player is sitting in front of.  Those will argue until their death, which the results have to appear because they play so much and so long that the 51% to 70% something, always comes about in their multi sessions and thus, 1% to 20 something percent is their claimed profit.  Their bankrolls have to be huge IMO and experience and their profits if they religiously live in the casino and gamble everyday are very minimal.  Again, IMO experience and extensive exposure to casino management within and outside of my immediate family. 

Oh yeah, and by the way give your reasoning how Don Johnson and Phil Ivey and all the rest of the great wins by famous or infamous gamblers are all based on math, statisticals and their special knowledge of mathematical secrets!  It makes great press copy in the media and gives them something to say, rather than, just hit a great streak, saw the opportunity because of so and so, and ride it until I started to fall off, etc.  They say, they accomplished it because of learning the wizard's or the doctor's classroom teaching through years and years of study, I applied the math and I profited last night by millions of dollars, etc.  Here is the absolute truth to those people and their opportunities that they captured and exploited.  Opps, I just said the reason!  Anyway, if they really had that holy-grail through math and stats, they would apply it every day or once a week and win that same huge amount or greater amounts over and over.  Sorry that statement I just wrote is concrete reality, but go ahead and change it. 

Their beliefs are the same as almost any industry that has rules, regulations and guidelines for deployment of most anything.  There is classroom and there is reality and real-life situations.  I have cited plenty within my writings on this board.  One-Size does not, cannot and will never fit all!!   But it makes for others to have a daily say so without producing anything in their behalf except their continued and repeated words without, proof, pictures, W-2's, Win-Losses, something anything, but continually nothing.  They will only cite their fear of getting banned from a game that the casino never bans anyone from unless they are cheating, bothering players after being warned or some other wrong doing--but never ever for winning too much, never. 

Can their system work?  Sure.  IMO, less than the proper way to play the game in real life.  In the classroom and on the calculator, they win.  But in real-life they lose or push at best.  And they seldom if ever, claim in their opinion, or their experiences, or anything of the like.  What they cite, claim and will die by, is their statistics, math, charts, graphs, books, calculations and textbook reasoning, that their way is scientific, backed up by concrete and solid mathematical findings, etc., etc., and blah blah blah yadda yadda yadda. 

But as I said above, if you do deploy that type of relationship to wagering, you cannot deviate to anything else at the table.  Then you fail to follow your method and believes.  No matter what!  That is the kicker.  It would be the same as saying safe sex for my entire life, except with so and so because I know she is 100% clean and drug/disease free and never has any other relationship outside of my occasional fling with her.  No different, I am sorry, but exactly the same.

The issue of subjective and objective comes up here to really understand how a player's mind enters and goes along with his decision making process.  But that gets a bit complicated and off-track of gambling itself.  If you do not understand some basic psychology, you cannot and will not understand how you are influenced by problems, results, positive reinforcement or false positive reinforcement in gambling and baccarat. 

Or, you play the game of baccarat prepared for the risk of loss in the attempt to match the shoe presentments which do, can and will frequently come in larger 'waves' than those of attempting the match up of the classroom and math stats that provide false positives thus disallowing you to profit extremely well on those same 'waves' of streaks, chops, patterns/trends and other presentments that are in contradictory to their 1% to 20 something percent repeating statistics that will only come in units of singular to few, with far less frequency than the 'reality of real-life shoe presentments', that are actually contained within their own mathematical and statistical testing--just that they view those very same presentments as 'nonexistent' and they are unable to capitalize on them.  Bottom line is, even with a statistic found with an 80% return rate, the shoes ran will have to be a minimum of a 10 million shoes series test.  That person has the false positive reinforcement that they will win 80% of the time if they play long enough.  But as I have always said, they cannot play the entire series in one continuous session which blows their win/prevailing statisticals out of the water.  They contend, does not matter how many sessions or how long they play, they count on their concurrent play status to provide them with profit, not an individual session.  Okay, fine, but they fail to actually recognize, they may actually be always playing during that 2,000,000 shoes 'section' of the stats that produced the 20% loss with the rejection of their 80% hit rate of that certain thing/wager.  Hence, a false positive.  False positives produces losses.  Period. 

Here is one of the few papers in part, I saved from my college days.  I do believe it applies to baccarat and the player's vision and mind-frame as I have so often mentioned.  Sadly, many players do not venture past the score board or score card in figuring anything out that might help them with their decisions and play time.

"Any event that you can describe objectively will have an equivalent subjective explanation, and vice versa. It is similar to viewing the world through your left eye vs. your right eye. Your eyes don't contradict each other; they just see every scene from different perspectives.

If you will never know whether you are living in an objective or subjective reality, it is foolish to assume that you are living in one or the other since you would only be guessing, and you could be very wrong. There is no evidence-based way to know the truth. This is not a problem that any level of science or philosophy can ever hope to resolve. The truth is simply unknowable, and it always will be. No conscious being, no matter how powerful and aware, will ever be able to know the true nature of the reality which contains it.

Hence it makes sense to live in alignment with both possibilities. View your key decisions in life through both lenses, and lean towards deciding based on the combined perspective of stereo vision. Do not limit yourself to one perspective or the other. Learn to integrate both.

When you stray too far into one perspective or another, making decisions from only one perspective in such a way that those same decisions would seem irrational when considered through the opposite lens, you are at risk of making serious errors. You could be basing those decisions on completely erroneous assumptions about how reality actually works, and hence you are at risk of experiencing massive failure with such a mono-lens approach unless you happen to guess right and be perfectly consistent.

It is possible to make decisions using both lenses. I have been using this approach for years, and it has produced a wonderful flow in my life when I am consistent about it. It is similar to enjoying a meal that stimulates all of your senses simultaneously, in other words, a symphony of input.

The inherently unknowable nature of reality can be a tough pill to swallow, at least initially. It can send you down the rabbit hole and back many times. But the more you surrender to this simple truth, the more wondrous reality can become."

With great emphasis on this:

"When you stray too far into one perspective or another, making decisions from only one perspective in such a way that those same decisions would seem irrational when considered through the opposite lens, you're at risk of making serious errors. You could be basing those decisions on completely erroneous assumptions about how reality actually works, and hence you're at risk of experiencing massive failure with such a mono-lens approach unless you happen to guess right and be perfectly consistent."

I absolutely love, just adore the stuff out of the defensive argument thrown by each and every member here as well as on all the other boards about the great wins by all the great pro players, the very few there actually are, are all based and won by strictly mathematical wizards, AKA--'Math AP Players'.  But, what lacks is their answers to the following:  "Why don't they do it all the time, why only once in a while"?

Oh, let me answer.  How about we go with, 'they don't want to get banned'.  Okay.  Case closed, LOL. 

And for those of you that do not agree with that answer, how about we go with, 'those AP players rather not have too much money'.  Okay, once again, case closed.  LOL-again.   

"Oh yeah, and by the way give your reasoning how Don Johnson and Phil Ivey and all the rest of the great wins by famous or infamous gamblers are all based on math, statisticals and their special knowledge of mathematical secrets!  It makes great press copy in the media and gives them something to say, rather than, "I just hit a great streak—saw the opportunity because of 'so and so' and ride it until I started to fall off", etc.  They say, "I accomplished it because of learning the wizard's or the doctor's classroom teaching through years and years of study, I applied the math and I profited last night by millions of dollars", etc.  Here is the absolute truth to those people and their opportunities that they captured and exploited.  Opps, I just said the reason!  Anyway, if they really had that holy-grail through math and stats, they would apply it every day or once a week and win that same huge amount or greater amounts over and over.  Sorry that statement I just wrote is concrete reality, but go ahead and change it."

From my OP here in this thread:

"The issue of subjective and objective comes up here to really understand how a player's mind enters and goes along with his decision making process.  But that gets a bit complicated and off-track of gambling itself.  If you do not understand some basic psychology, you cannot and will not understand how you are influenced by problems, results, positive reinforcement or false positive reinforcement in gambling and baccarat."

BTW, I have read extensively, from some of the greatest and most achieved mathematical minds that have published some of the best and most comprehensions books on gambling, mathematics, statistical application of math, probabilities and theories. 

Here is an extremely short clip art I put together from on e of the greatest minds there is in math application theory and statistics and relating to gambling.  I will leave it rest at this is you can read for 2 min's and summarize. 

[attach=1]

Did 'Inspector Callahan' learn his foresight and knowledge that fosters positive responses in the police academy or from a text book, such as, "...........Tell them that Inspector Callahan thinks there is a 211 in progress at the bank"............................

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KqgGihIfq5U


Did 'Player 2' at the baccarat table learn his foresight and knowledge that foster positive wagering betselections based upon shoe presentments when certain situations have 'waves' and 'opportunities' being presented in clusters and sections, according to math and statistical results of 10,000,000 shoes or 80,000,000 hands dealt in the classroom or from testing on the computer, when it was all 1's and 2's and a 3 repeat thrown in for good measure--just before the second half of the shoe turned to all 5's through 8's repeating and the first streak of Bankers that produced 3 F-7's contained within it.  'Player 2' pumped it up and profited large and continually as compared to every other player citing, 'it has to cut back and stop because  of the statistical history showing 80% of the time it will', or something real close to that anyway.

 

Restored topic.