+ Register

[alrelax]

Mostly Asians where I play.  And they're either following the roads, usually just two, or else following someone else on the table. But in casinos where there's a lot of anglo's I noticed they basically just look at the scoreboard and try to guess what's predominant from the past history. I think most have some rudimentary betting strategy but they're mostly just gamblers. You got to have a reason to make a bet. I bet most hands in the shoe and I have a reason for betting every hand.

So far Sputnik and Luigi are the only ones who have explain a bet selection. I'm still waiting for you, Glen, to explain what you bet and why you made that bet. This is your site and you post the most about the game but for some reason you avoid talking about actual betselection. Your choice.

J, Yes, I know it seems that way, (that I am avoiding the answering of it).  I am not, just side tracked the past couple of weeks since we started this.  My answer is not as cut and dried as the rest of them.  Nothing against them, I tried all that and it did not produce the results I realize when I win.  Yes, when I win I win extremely well and larger than any consecutive, repetitive based on wagering volume of scheduled hands, etc.  There is a difference with me as I tried to explain and it is rather broad and more complex than sitting down to play 60 hands out of 80 or the first 40 hands (first half) of the shoe and wager every hand or take the route of wagering every sequence of 3 or 5 or 8 hands because of how columns were recorded from a certain number of hands. 

I do promise you, I will get to laying it out soon.  I am attempting to get to it this weekend.  And yes, that is the same thing I said during the week and prior to last weekend.  Just do not forget, I have a business outside of this and gaming, I have the small kids and several other things going on as well.  Thanks for understanding, and once again, yes i will attempt to get it posted in some kind of actual explanation(s). 

[Jimske]

My answer is not as cut and dried as the rest of them.  Nothing against them, I tried all that and it did not produce the results I realize when I win.

What does "the rest of them" have to do with it?  You seem to harp a lot on how others play.  Forget them.  A shoe starts and we got to decide when and what to bet.  Don't you know why you made that first bet?  Second bet?  Third bet?  Maybe you got a different reason for every bet.  How hard can this be? 

J

[Johno-Egalite]

Mathematically if you can not win flat betting, you can not win with progressions negative or positive.

Have to disagree with that, it is the variance that is the issue, not the use of a negative progression. Hence the method I posted, an attempt to control the loss strings.

[roversi13]

The control of variance is impossible
If you can do it,you'll ll be next math Nobel Prize
If your method can reduce or cancel variance,flat bet is enough for winning,but progressions speed up your success

[Jimske]

The control of variance is impossible
If you can do it,you'll ll be next math Nobel Prize
If your method can reduce or cancel variance,flat bet is enough for winning,but progressions speed up your success

what all these flat bettors are saying is that variance is controlled by betting less hands.  "Variance Interruptus"  They go on to say that this allows them to win more hands than lose. 

If win more hands than lose then as you say "flat bet is enough for winning,but progressions speed up your success"  The flat bettors don't seem to get that part.

J

[Johno-Egalite]

The control of variance is impossible
If you can do it,you'll ll be next math Nobel Prize
If your method can reduce or cancel variance,flat bet is enough for winning,but progressions speed up your success

Yes, controlling variance is impossible, because it is independent RANDOM, zero correlation.  But that doesn't stop us from seeking options to which best achieve this. 

My "maths approach to Baccarat", goes someway to achieving this,  a repeating 1/128 chance cost you 3 losing bets providing you did not too move early, a worst case scenario, which will happen once you play, 200~300 shoes will cost you 6 LIAR, which then leads to, "how much did that freak shoe" cost you?  Which obviously is entirely dependant on the MM approach you decided to employ.

Flat betting is not enough, I would be extremely happy with any method that gave me.

LLW LLW LLW LLW LLW LLW LLW LLW etc a 33% win rate. 

I would take that all day any day, if it was guaranteed.  Which it can't be, so we settle for the next best option!!!!!   
 

Alternatively I could invent \ pluck out of thin air, claim a 65% strike / hit rate. so that you, hit me with 100's of questions which I will skirt around, eventually hoping that you will collapse in awe out of total adulation, in the vain hope I throw you a crumb of the lie.



 

[AsymBacGuy]

The control of variance is impossible

It depends on what you consider as controllable.
Baccarat is a finite dependent asymmetrical card process, it's not a coin flip endless succession, thus not every A/B fight will produce the same correspondent sd values a CF game provides. And neither a static 50.68/49.32 A/B probability model will produce what really happens per every shoe of baccarat. 
The deeper you analyze different A/B situations (random walks) the better the variance will be restrained, that is the pendulum swinging range.
I could decide to let it go some shoes not adhering to my statistical conclusions right at the start as no single, no streak, no pattern is equal to another one. It appears to be equal but it isn't.

Btw, thanks for your kind words.

as.

[Sputnik]

How about conditional probability or should I say the fictive conditional probability to control the overall performance of each shoe.
Let me explain, you have 37 numbers and around 12 will sleep for each and every cycle and no one have reported seeing all number hit once each for one full cycle during roulette history.
Now assume I know how to catch each and every repeat without tremendous losing sequences (without many attempts doing so) well i cannot do it with roulette numbers but I can do it with 50/50

You can create and cluster patterns based upon the same principal for baccarat and take advantage of the same situation with a 99.9% probability of success, my opinion.
This is not the same childish attempt by Eriscott to catch repeaters, this is based upon true bias within each and every shoe based upon Sputniks March using patterns and not regular outcomes.

Here is a sample for 550 trails: wlwwlwwwwwlwlwllwlwwlwwlwlwwwwwllwll

I have been warned to write to much details in public, so I will send this method for a private discussion with someone having the same skills as my self.

Cheers

[alrelax]

"It depends on what you consider as controllable."  By:  AsymB

IMO, your decisions and actions are controllable 100%. By: Alrelax. (Problem is, most of us do not even think about that)
But the shoe presentments are not, never will be. By: Alrelax. (Problem is, most of us do not really believe that either)

[Sputnik]

 Well, the problem with flat betting is that you will win maybe eight out of ten shoes overall.
Then you need to figure out the peak that makes you stay ahead overall.
We can not win them all.

I test my variants using Sputnik's March and say to my self, now I need to be satisfied and stop tweaking.
Maybe so many fail using flat betting principal because they don't know how and when to accept loses.
Also that each and every attack involves reversals and sometimes is better then continue playing for a profit.

This is today's random org file using one variant of Sputnik's March.

LW LLW W W W W W W LLL W W W W W LW W W LLL W LW LW LW W W W W W W LW LW LW LLW W LLW LLL W W W W W LW LLW LW W LLW LLW W LW LW W W LLL W LLL W W LLW W W

Now I say to my self it does not get better than this and still, I find my self tweaking and come up with different solutions.
This one those not work long term using flat betting, but I triple my bankroll several times using a smooth progression similar to Hollandish.
Two wins within three attempts staking 111 222 333 444 555 ...
Most of the times you make +2 units flat betting 3 units without placing higher unit values.
I have been up 4 units and then down to 3 and 2 and back to 1 to break even.
it's a grind and very stable with La Partage Rule.

Cheers

[Sputnik]

Stratege - I have been warned about posting to much sensitive information that others steel and try to sell - also get several private messages about the question of how to play.
To be honest I only feel I been meeting two that are on a similar level.
That is you and the member AsymBacGuy at betselection cc.

Now I stop revealing sensitive information and can only talk in general, I feel I moved from Marigny more and more and concentrate my research and development on my discovery.
The basic idea has already been posted as Sputnik's March and you can google it, the deeper understanding behind the concept I am willing to share with you and AsymBacGuy who I email yesterday.
The reason is that I might be missing some angle or tweak or other information that I might be unaware of where you could contribute - give and take.

No one has discovered such strong bias with random bits using any similar concept.
There have been close attempts that did not work - Like Ellis NOR method.

I reach a level of understanding where i can claim to know why and where larger series will unfold based upon math and probability with such likelihood that my odds is better than the average punter.
When you follow the norm and the traditional thinking you end up on no man land where there is no solutions.

I can isolate one bias among other bias sequences and pinpoint out what will happen next or I can use a march to try to take advantage of all angles because I understand how to read random bits.
This means that I been working on solutions to play Baccarat Tournament and try to win the first price - there you have the serious money.

Cheers

[Johno-Egalite]

We've all been there, some eureka moment, until you discover that it really isn't once you take it to tables.  It is a whole different world from the kitchen table to the casino tables.   We all imagine we are going to travel the world, living the high life, staying in five star hotels, drinking fine wines, while you bring casinos to their knees. 

When you start risking real money in the real world and you have made it, then perhaps you could buy this forum from Victor.

As somebody who has actually won a Baccarat tournament, it has nothing to do with bet selection, rather you are competing against other players, so this super secret method wouldn't work, because you have to look at your rivals chip stack, how much they are ahead bet accordingly sometimes on the opposite side of them if you are behind.

bloviating
To discourse at length in a pompous or boastful manner:

[Sputnik]

I work for a living and don't want to live on gambling money.
You can share your opinions and I am free to share mine.

I play online and been thinking to make a youtube channel and offering live sessions with Twitch TV.
We all have different conditions in our city's, I only have one local international casino in my town where I play.

If you play for a living that your way of life and keeps up the good work, I don't mind, or should I say I don't care.

Cheers

[Johno-Egalite]

If you chose to share this with AsymBacGuy and that you have been warned not post it (by whom exactly), then why not just do that. 

Why the need to tell everybody who you chose not to share, that you only going to share with one person?

Why even tell the board!!!!

You can share your opinions and I am free to share mine.

So long as it is not the system it-self

Are you seeking attention?


Cheers

[Sputnik]

I don't care so much about negative energy from others, so I wish you a nice evening and happy winnings.

Cheers