The PONR (point of no return) effect was one of the decisive tools that helped me to discover some favourable betting opportunities.
What's a PONR?
Every experienced baccarat player knows that after every session where the losses were too high, the subsequent efforts to recover partially or totally the deficit were almost always ineffective. Moreover, any effort to try to break even not only was worthless but even added more losses. More often than not.
Trying to erase a one unit deficit is quite simple, trying to erase a two unit deficit is an unproportional (not linear) more difficult task. And so on.
So I name as PONR a given point where the odds to recover the deficit are so bad that we better quit the betting.
Notice that the exact opposite situation, that is getting many consecutive winnings with very low possibilities to lose the entire gain are less likely placed for obvious reasons.
So itlr, the probability to get many winnings in a row is lower than to get the opposite situation.
With important consequences on a possible RTM effect.
The concept of "session" could be confusing as any player intend to consider a session as:
- a single shoe
- a given amonut of shoes
- a day
- a week
- a month
Most people consider a session as a given amount of played shoes or a day.
We see that the parameter is the time factor, even considered in form of shoes played or in form of hours or days or weeks.
All due to both mathematical and humanly related considerations, the PONR will most likely show up on short terms as the humanly related factor will have the predominant part over the mathematical factor.
Computing the sum of the average bac player outcomes, there's almost no one player in the world losing 1.06% or 1.24% of the total bets wagered itlr. They lose far more than that, not only for some of them wanted to wager the very negative odds of side bets.
Since most part of players like to bet many spots, we can safely assume that the PONR will more likely act on such players than on more selected bettors.
Of course, diluting the betting for itself isn't a valid reason to expect less losing patterns, yet we have to assume that the PONR will be more likely encountered by frequent bettors as the PONR factor will be proportionally placed with the bets wagered. Because almost every single bet we place is EV-.
The PONR factor represents just the bottom of the canyon we want to avoid falling into, there are many intermediate steps along the way.
Actually each time we're trying to climb up toward the ridge we'll meet an opposite stronger force bringing us more and more toward the invariable descent.
The fact that along this invariable descent we are hoping to find some handholds shouldn't give us much confidence. Such handholds are rare and most part of the times they are too weak.
Good news is that per every PONR it exists a slight lesser amount of opposite PONR, meaning that in some circumstances our whole expectation is more oriented toward a climbing mood than a descending one. But we better restrict our terms of intervention as the rule is to get a descending mood and not a climbing one.
Our task should be focused about those rare occurences where the opposite favourable PONR presence will be so high that the counter force cannot overwhelm it.
The same way a negative PONR will act, now on the opposite side.
PONR and opposite PONR.
It's all about making the wrong move at the right time, just to quote the C.K. movie.