+ Register

[alrelax]

Apply all the cycles and all the math you desire to the game of baccarat.  You cannot and will not win it in any given portion (and able to be repeated with an exact mathematical formula) based on that and certainly not in the proverbial 'long run'.

Unlike blackjack and poker where certain cards are unilaterally better and more advantageous to a player, it is not that way in baccarat.  Something the majority of you fail to realize or don't count in as a mathematical factor. Not when a 9 and a 3 gets beat by a 4 and a 5 on the other side.  Or when two 9's get beat by a 7 and a 2 or a 6 and 3, etc.  If you only played a short time, like a couple of years--you probably still don't understand this, but it is 100% spot on.

Because in the game of baccarat, one can win with high cards, low cards, zero value cards, and any one kind of card or card(s) can equally help or hurt a player on each and every hand.

Even knowing where the 8's and 9's does not matter because you would have to have other cards in proper order also, such as other 9's or face cards, etc.  Think what you want but there is no mathematical way to gain an advantage of baccarat. 

[Nickmsi]

Hi Alrelax . . .

Glad to see that you have noticed the VDW math theorem.

I too held your same opinion for  a long time but am now convinced that playing Roulette or Baccarat with a NON RANDOM method like VDW is the way to go.

Look at it this way. Just as there is a math proof that shows 1 +1 = 2, there is a math proof that shows you will have a win within 9 hands/spins.

This is not speculation, this is fact.

You will ALWAYS have a winner in 9 hands.  No Doubt About It.

Give me any 9 hands (no ties) from any shoe anytime and I will show you a winner.

This is the premise for a Non Random way of playing.  Yes, the VDW does have some wrinkles but first you need to understand the power of ALWAYS PREDICTING A WINNER.

Cheers
Nick

[alrelax]

A winner within 9 hands or even less means nothing and a player can still go broke if he is flat betting or wagering any other amount of money that is less cumulatively totaled up then what he wagered on before that 1 in 9 hit. 

So if I am wagering $300 a hand, I would have to be prepared to wager $300 X's each lost hand when that 1 in 9 win comes. 

So say I wagered 8 times and lost, the 9th one would have to win but I would have to wager $2,400.00 on it just to break even.  Could not do locally, table max is $2,000.00, Vegas or AC is another story of course.  Still bad deal.   

[alrelax]

Yeah bros, I talk about my house because it will take down 5 figure bets AT ANY TABLE with near zero reservation by management.

I will tell you one time and one time only, stay off my threads and my blog, your responses will be deleted.  Thank you.

I know all about limits, Most Vegas properties I go to are up to $25k a hand and AC except for Tropicana is $10k a hand, Trop was up to $50k a hand when they got bought out and taken over a few years back.

You refused to tell us where you play or  any semblance on reality and checks and balances into your tales.  It's all good, don't come on my threads, shouldn't be a problem for you cause you have all the experience, answers and insults in the world anyways.  Thanks.   

[Garfield]

I'm not trying to argue with someone whatsoever, but I want to comment on Nick's statement "Always a winner in 9 hand"

After I tested the method, like I experienced there will be times when you have "no bet" situation because either side could complete the AP's series.

After the result came out, yes you could know which side is the winner. But before that, we don't know which side to bet.

So, IMO you still could have 9 hands without having a win.

[Nickmsi]

The whole point of the VDW is that it is NON RANDOM.

This means you don't "play the shoe".   You don't wait for streaks or patterns or lady luck.

You don't wait for anything.  You just play.

You play according to mechanical rules.

You play any shoe anytime.

And you win more often than you lose.

What more can you ask of any system. 

Do you have a better one, then I am all ears.

Cheers

Nick

[Sputnik]

Question:
Can you flat betting using VDW and reach 100 units after 1000 placed bets?

Cheers

[AsymBacGuy]

Al, I wouldn't be so sure that someone somewhere has found some edge at baccarat or even at roulette.

Actually a person capable to demonstrate that roulette is beatable (without electronical devices or by taking advantage of some wheels' defects) will get the same prestige got by Albert Einstein since nobody in the past had succeeded in that.

At baccarat the task is easier, still very few will have some interest in hearing that. 

as.

[Gizmotron]

Al, I wouldn't be so sure that someone somewhere has found some edge at baccarat or even at roulette.

Actually a person capable to demonstrate that roulette is beatable (without electronical devices or by taking advantage of some wheels' defects) will get the same prestige got by Albert Einstein since nobody in the past had succeeded in that.

At baccarat the task is easier, still very few will have some interest in hearing that. 

as.

Actually Roulette is easier to beat than any 50/50 only table game. That is my opinion because the 2/1 bets are far more opportunistic in Roulette. There is a mathematical based phenomenon that exists inside the balance point of two to one events that are in your favor if you know how to exploit them. But that takes overcoming human nature, fallacies, ignorance, and magical beliefs, not to mention chemical phenomenon that diminishes the capacity to utilize the logic centers of your mind.

I'm only telling you this much because I find it fits my hubris and ego at this time.

Don't bother explaining why I won't systematically explain it. It's a test to see what anyone can figure out with good hints.

I'll admit when someone discovers the secrets that work, but not until then. And it won't cost anything to read it if it ever happens. One day know this. It's all here at this website, the thing that really works. I know. It took a long time to figure it out.

[alrelax]

Al, I wouldn't be so sure that someone somewhere has found some edge at baccarat or even at roulette.

Actually a person capable to demonstrate that roulette is beatable (without electronical devices or by taking advantage of some wheels' defects) will get the same prestige got by Albert Einstein since nobody in the past had succeeded in that.

At baccarat the task is easier, still very few will have some interest in hearing that. 

as.

I see many win, win repeatedly and when they do give it back or lose it is generally because they played too long that day/session, etc.  Yes, baccarat is beatable to a certain aspect, but not consistently and over the long term on a daily full time basis.  And, baccarat cannot be beat using a set of numbers that are used for every shoe, every day, every table, every casino----can't work to the positive, no way, sorry, does not exist.

[soxfan]

Actually Roulette is easier to beat than any 50/50 only table game. That is my opinion because the 2/1 bets are far more opportunistic in Roulette. There is a mathematical based phenomenon that exists inside the balance point of two to one events that are in your favor if you know how to exploit them. But that takes overcoming human nature, fallacies, ignorance, and magical beliefs, not to mention chemical phenomenon that diminishes the capacity to utilize the logic centers of your mind.

I'm only telling you this much because I find it fits my hubris and ego at this time.

Don't bother explaining why I won't systematically explain it. It's a test to see what anyone can figure out with good hints.

I'll admit when someone discovers the secrets that work, but not until then. And it won't cost anything to read it if it ever happens. One day know this. It's all here at this website, the thing that really works. I know. It took a long time to figure it out.

Time for the Guinness and cashew, again, hey hey!

[Albalaha]

If nick thinks his vdw approach is. Anyway superior in picking bets he should go for all three parameters set by van Klein test. Thinking of any way of picking bets can have some edge is a fallacy. Correct simulations will confirm my statement. Blue angel also was jumping over his 37 delayed martingale but trackers of mine and azim proved that a bad failure.

[Lung Yeh]

Anybody on this forum knows about howtobeatbaccarat.com?

[alrelax]

Anybody on this forum knows about howtobeatbaccarat.com?

Guaranteed everything in their program has been gone over in one way or another on this forum.

If you really believe there are systems and programs that guarantee wins, all the time, as they do (and others) you better bring two VooDoo dolls, a rabbit's foot and some incense to the table with you.

Not making fun of you but you know inside of your heart that, there is no guarantee winning system such as they say, if there was many people would have it and he game would be pulled before you can say---Buddha is chubby. 

[Garfield]

Anybody on this forum knows about howtobeatbaccarat.com?

Yes I do. It's another from Alvin Tuarez iplayforaliving dot com.

His former site is closed and the other still remain

He decrease the price from $700 to I forget how much for monthly subscription.

Like other's method it may work sometime and may not work the other. But still 3-7 for the losing shoes.