Quote from: alrelax on May 25, 2016, 05:41:11 PM
Hit them when the opportunity is there and try not to get caught up in all the superstition and false reasoning(s). Try not to think back on any other previous shoes or hands and play what the current shoe is producing. 

I still say, the mentality of the game has changed to the 'cut', thereby always missing the trends/bias, chops, clusters, virtually everything except the true 'cut' to whatever is opposite.

How do we know when opportunity is there?  Whenever I notice opportunity, it usually disappears more than not.  I USUALLY laugh when someone at my casino notices a certain trend only for it to end abruptly almost all the time.

I think many more woulda shoulda and coulda to come.

Quote from: Babu on May 25, 2016, 05:53:25 PM
How do we know when opportunity is there?  Whenever I notice opportunity, it usually disappears more than not. 

That is correct.  The are there and then they are not, and everything in between. 

I usually wait for a trend (streak, chops or any kind of pattern) and try to end it with three attempts.  I would stop after that. Today, there was a long pattern of 2s, with the exception of the 4th one with a tie.  Everyone one of on the table was following it except me.  I end up losing my three hands.  Then I thought about OPPORTUNITY and follow the crowd.  I did get one hand but loss the next.  So the OPPORTUNITY was short lived.  By the time everyone starting and begin to increase their bets, it ended.  Of course I did worse than everyone else.

When the board is not predominately 2's or doubles, I like to wager the opposite after a single that prevailed, then if there was a double, I stick on the side that was the double. 

Single, wager other side
Double, wager the same side and stick until it falls off. 

This is not a post about bet selection, even though at baccarat there are better BS than others as some events are long term mathematically shifted.
So for example and generally speaking wagering to break P 4s is a better selection than wagering to break ANY 4s and the worst option is a plan intended to break B 4s.
This because itlr B4<B4+ and P4>P4+.

In reality, the intermediate situation (wagering to break any 4s) may give us interesting statistical features as globally taken the 4s class will go more likely back and forward around the zero (equilibrium) point (at the same time giving a theorical lower probability to get strong one side deviations). That is a perfect situation to set up a very diluted progression.

The above statement is a sort of paradox, as many times we'll be forced to bet the mathematical disadvantaged chance (breaking B 4s), but globally taken such strategy will give us a slight lesser impact of variance as now we're wagering to not get two simultaneous opposite relatively high deviated situations for long time.

Imo the idea to include some breaking streaks strategy in our plan is well placed at baccarat for several reasons.

I want to mention only one here.

Let's take the casino war game, a st.upid game where the highest card between players and house will win (unfortunately giving the house a pretty high edge for the same card value rule).

Unfold several times a multi deck shoe, register the simple A or B outcomes (ignoring ties) and itlr you'll see that some events will be more likely than others.

Good, so why casino war game cannot be easily beaten?

There are several reasons for that: we have to play every single hand, the house edge is quite high, we can get a precise situation only playing heads-up with the house, but foremost we don't have the opportunity to bet the house side (obstacle overcome in some way by a large spread betting). Then now casinos are using continuous shuffling machines or cutting large portions of the deck.
Still the basic principle remain the same.

At baccarat things are more complicated as there are four different class of ranks having the same value (10s and pictures) and not only any side is getting a point adding two cards value but there's even a third card intervening with some structured rules advantaging B side.

The overall effect made by those particular features will produce a kind of slight specular baccarat situation than the casino war game produces.

Back to the progression topic.

No one progression can control the game (no matter how high is the bankroll utilized compared to the table limits offered) whenever we start the progression at a zero level.
Not even a so called flat betting winning strategy unless it was proven to get an astounding high edge on player's favor (we all know there's no way to do that).

What we can do, imo, is setting up a rigid plan on multiple economically connected situations where either multiple strong deviated and unexpected events had taken place within short periods of time and/or some multiple expected situations had stalled around the zero point within too large periods of time.

We see that there's no a precise direction to be followed: either wagering toward multiple expected deviations and/or waiting the appearance of multiple unexpected events roaming around the zero point for long time.

In a word, we shouldn't want to get mere single RTM or single deviation effects as any random world can't be controlled by those features.

Imo the key word to work on is "multiple".

Multiple events can't stall or deviate forever and ever but at the same time we cannot know when and how much such events will get their expected probability to "balance" the previous features in a way or another.

Therefore, imo, if we don't want to wait some rare favourable flat betting circumstances to bet, we must be prepared to set up a low and multilayered progression starting at a point different from zero. In a way or another (RTM or expected deviation), of course.

And the word "multiple" cannot act other than improving our expectation.

as.

Even though it could appear as a really weird subject, even some "subjective" situations might help us to find what should be our best course of action.

Naturally everything is based upon some objective mathematical and statistical issues where the subjective factor is just an indicator. So we must be very confident about the reliability of this subjective indicator. The pro of this type of "registration" is that a human guy could have experienced long positive or negative situations, meaning he/she carefully played a fair amount of shoes.

Let's say a guy/girl seated next to us is telling that his/her plan is to wager only toward the appearance of P doubles vs superior P streaks adopting a given MM. Unfortunately he experienced a 25 or something consecutive losing streak, that is he got 25 2+ P streaks with no one P double. I can assure you that this is just a sort of science fiction finding, anyway... 

First thought should be that in some way this guy knows some basic long term statistical features. We don't want to go deep in the process of assessing how he wants to get the best of it by this finding or if he carefully registered the 2/2+ P streaks ratio (and many other issues related to that).

If we believe in what he says, we know that he experienced a very long negative (for his strategy) sequence, a 5 sr deviation.

Since we're patiently waiting some other triggers dictated by our personal plan, we want to try to take advantage of this subjective deviation.

Hence our new temporary trigger will be shifted to any situation getting any BPP sequence, as now we know that our new "buddy" will be theorically more entitled to get more P doubles than P superior streaks.

It's interesting to notice that a random world cannot be affected by a subjective situation, in a word that the future actual shoe outcomes we are playing in cannot be influenced by a human.

At the same time and taking for granted what the buddy he's talking to us, the probability this player will get higher deviations on this very shoe (and even more on next shoes) will be very very slim.

Nevertheless, nothing can prevent this actual shoe to produce a slight predominance of P 2+ streaks, but the probability to get a 2/2+ P streaks ratio highly deviated to the right are almost non existent.

Now If we want to take as our new trigger such individual probability interfering with an objective probability, what will be our best course of action?

And what if this player leaves the table after one or two losing bets?

Does the probability to get more P doubles than P superior streaks be objectively influenced now or over the next shoes by an individual registration?

as.

If a cat can't capture a parlay once in 20 try he should quit the baccarats and sell pencil out of a tin cup on a streets corner some place. So, maybe try the following style, almost unbreakable, hey hey!

1-1-2-2-3-4-5-7-9-12-16-22-29-39-52-69-92-123-164-218 units bets
3-2-4-2-3-3-2-3-2-2-2-4-3-4-4-3-3-4-4-2 units profits

With m y current 13 step parlay progression I'm buckin up against a 95% win rate. So, I get clipped for 500 unit in progressions bust out every 100 shoe, so I can win well and regular by capturing just 10 units profits on the 95 winning shoe and I average better than that, hey hey.

Hi sox fan, 
What is your strike rate within the first 6 steps of your progression. Just wondering if it would get better result front end loaded.

Quote from: goez on May 31, 2016, 01:04:21 AM
Hi sox fan, 
What is your strike rate within the first 6 steps of your progression. Just wondering if it would get better result front end loaded.

I always like the back load cuz I like being able to capture more units profits the deeper I go in the progression, hey hey.

Quote from: soxfan on May 31, 2016, 12:18:17 AM
With m y current 13 step parlay progression I'm buckin up against a 95% win rate. So, I get clipped for 500 unit in progressions bust out every 100 shoe, so I can win well and regular by capturing just 10 units profits on the 95 winning shoe and I average better than that, hey hey.

Probably with my over selected BS tested on millions of shoes, your win rate will be close to 99.999999999%. 

as.

Quote from: AsymBacGuy on May 31, 2016, 01:19:57 AM
Probably with my over selected BS tested on millions of shoes, your win rate will be close to 99.999999999%. 

as.

I think you could get 98-99 percents winning shoe with that 20 step parlay style, hey hey.

Quote from: soxfan on May 31, 2016, 12:10:04 AM
If a cat can't capture a parlay once in 20 try he should quit the baccarats and sell pencil out of a tin cup on a streets corner some place.

Those who can't win once in 20 should quit. I don't know about a parlay once in a 20 parlay.   Anyone wants to buy some pencils from me?

Last week,Montecarlo casino:26 hands without 2 WIAR playing B.

Quote from: roversi13 on May 31, 2016, 09:51:39 AM
Last week,Montecarlo casino:26 hands without 2 WIAR playing B.

Thanks for the honesty.  I've gotten 2 WIAR on the first try many times as well as on 5plus progressions but many times fail to get 2 WIAR pass 20.  Some of the bust days will take away many of the small wins.  Luckily it's only in practice.  I don't like having to parlay large bets.  I've tried reset after 2 or 3 progressions but the wins are not satisfying for the long hours of play.