AsymBacGuy. Good thread/ hope this finds you doing well.

Asym in post #1179:

"...a) Outcomes are randomly distributed? It's a total bighorn.sh.it.

b) Yes, any bet is "supposed" to be EV-, but there are more probable ranges where the EV is at least 0 (think about those hands not forming an asymmetrical hand favoring the Banker side) or where a "normal" flow is slightly more entitled to go toward the right side (CFS) at some points of the infinite shoe sub successions we can build up.

c) Gambling experts do not know a fkng nothing about how the randomness will work at baccarat.
Mainly as they haven't properly considered the RVM and M.V. Smoluchowski "theories" applied to slight dependent and asymmetrical finite successions.
Conclusion is that bac successions aren't randomly distributed. Period...."


Qs for you.

Approximately how many wagers do you make on average per shoe??
Do you ever wager bonus bets? (e.g., T,Panda,Fortune, Pairs,...etc)


Thx in advance.





Continued Success,

Hi KFB!

Say from 3-5 up to 12-15 bet per shoe.

Currently we do not make any action at side bets, people playing with us hate them.

as.

Thx Asym for your reply.
"...Say from 3-5 up to 12-15 bet per shoe.  ..."

My number of wagers per shoe is very similar to yours.




Continued Success,

Ready to rock.

See you soon

as.

The best tool why casinos will make a lot of money from baccarat is because no constant patterns can be exploited: everything changes whimsically, very often ridiculizing the math values.

After all baccarat is just a game of trying to approximate at best the actual card distribution along with the related most likely (and important) sub products: real results.

The core problem of baccarat is that per any shoe dealt we want to be ahead (or worst, to be a lot ahead) about a kind of taxed coin flip situation.

It's impossible.

In our opinion the only way to erase and possibly invert the HE is by putting things into frames and trying to find reasons and collect data to prove otherwise.

More later

as.

Keypoints:

a) average CFS

b) math expected and actual result asymmetrical/symmetrical patterns.

 

As you said, "In our opinion the only way to erase and possibly invert the HE is by putting things into frames and trying to find reasons and collect data to prove otherwise."

Possibly, 'Sections'?  As I have written about until I was blue in the face.

Yes Al, yes. 

Technically speaking a plan carefully considering the above two aspects is unbeatable as:

1) on average the columns filling speed cannot be too slow or too fast at most "sections";

2) for sure symmetrical patterns are going to be overwhelmed by asymmetrical situations being more probable than expected in relationshipo of an independent 50/50 proposition.

The fact that each bet is unfairly payed (B hands) or getting a slight unfavourable probability to show up (P hands) won't get us much hurt as itlr the average card distribution will be able to cancel/overcome such negative edge.

Example.

A streaky shoe is going to fill less columns than average, it means that key cards are somewhat clumped by an "unlikely" pace most likely forming unidirectional rhythms favoring streaks. Therefore slowing down the columns filling speed.
 
On the other end, long chopping lines favor the CFS as there's a strong force orienting the results to be prolonged at the right end of the shoe. Thus key cards are getting a 1 pace. 

Both such deviated events are the reflex of symmetrical situations being slight less likely than asymmetrical spots.

Now, pretend to play black jack and getting a negative count (symmetrical situations at baccarat), what are you going to do?

I guess you'll bet the minimum wager or, best, quit that table.

But at baccarat we have the wonderful option to stay away from betting as what came symmetrical most of the times remains proportionally symmetrical, unless we set up multiple random walks to rely upon, obviously directed to get back to back asymmetrical spots.

Ranges of asym/sym patterns
 
A pattern could be symmetrically placed one, two or more times.

Most bac players will hope to get a "more times" symmetrical pattern, unfortunately that's the less probable option happening.
In fact a slight stu.pi.d multilayered progression (see KFB ideas) made at getting asymmetrical spots after one or two symmetrical situations can't lose itlr.

Remember that streaks are the most important tool to set up a plan upon.
Remember that what happens after a given streak remains the most important tool to rely upon.

For example, it's impossible to get 3/3+ consecutive streaks happening at all four common roads (BR, Byb, SR and CR) and the same happens for every intermediate situation.
At baccarat the asymmetrical world slowly but constantly work toward asym patterns.

Once a pattern had shown up consecutively shaped (sym pattern), we're not interested to chase it.

Our edge comes out as a slight portion of the shoes will form univocal or most univocal asymmetrical patterns, as itlr the asym force will overwhelm the sym propensity, even if we are destined to endure some harsh negative situations.

See you in a couple of days.

as.

You say 'Streaks' as many do and desire.  Well I love long 7+ IAR streak, all Bankers or all Players.  But, I also have found 'Streaks' to be equally as beautiful and profitable presenting such events as, 'Chop-Chop', 'Doubles', and '1s and 2s'.  Although a bit harder to really get into, but they are prevalent nonetheless. 

As simple as it sounds, "I'm going to wager on whatever is being produced"; it is not easy to gear one's foresight towards all possibly streaky events.

So in all essence, 'Streaky' can most certainly be other events within a 'Section', other than a repetitive IAR series of Bs or Ps.  7-8-9 of anything is not a rarity within most shoes. 

Just for everyone's information from years of live B&M play.

Yup.
Any single shoe won't concede the room to get everything more or less balanced or even appearing once, otherwise the game would be easily beatable.

That's why, imo, is so important to focus our attention about ranges splitted into expected ranges and actual ranges.

A note: doubles are streaks and two or more singles are considered as streaks as well.

as.

Thanks Asym

"...is so important to focus our attention about ranges splitted into expected ranges and actual ranges..."

To clarify do you mean gaps or distance between said events when you use the word "ranges"  vs the expected distance between events(whatever the event one is observing)


Thx,