+ Register

[Denzie]

My style is "trending" for lack of the better term, but I make some subjective plays depending on circumstances, hey hey.

I did a session just now. Ended +60 using your 13 step.
Thx

[roversi13]

A parlay(WW) occurs 1 out of 4 double decisions.
Your progression(13 steps) is too weak and it can't face a big variance.
It has the same probability of W of a 6 terms standard martingale.
A dream....

[Jimske]

I did a session just now. Ended +60 using your 13 step.
Thx

Wow.  Surely not one shoe?  How deep did you go - how many bets?

[Jimske]

A parlay(WW) occurs 1 out of 4 double decisions.
Your progression(13 steps) is too weak and it can't face a big variance.
It has the same probability of W of a 6 terms standard martingale.
A dream....

Assuming your math is correct.  It would depend on bet selection.  Progs of any kind don't win without subjective input.

[soxfan]

A parlay(WW) occurs 1 out of 4 double decisions.
Your progression(13 steps) is too weak and it can't face a big variance.
It has the same probability of W of a 6 terms standard martingale.
A dream....

Cats are gonna win close to 50% of placed bets so shouldn't be too hard to capture a single coup of back to back win regular within the 13 steps progression, hey hey.

[roversi13]

Even with a good bet selection,that in IMHO doesn't exist,13 steps are not enough.
A very strong bet selection() can't face, with only 13 steps, a big negative variance that will  occur for sure(good or bad bet selection!)

[roversi13]

soxfan
...shouldn't be too hard.....:MATH IS MATH!
Stop dreaming

[soxfan]

I did a session just now. Ended +60 using your 13 step.
Thx

Sixty units is a nice proposition, hey hey.

[Denzie]

Wow.  Surely not one shoe?  How deep did you go - how many bets?

Just over 2 shoes. Online though. Highest bet was 11u which I parlayed. Happened once. On average I not going further than 1-3 units. How many bets I don't know. But I follow the trend. And today it was pretty easy. Long streaks.

[Denzie]

Even with a good bet selection,that in IMHO doesn't exist,

Not sure how to say it but...if you look what's going on at the moment then it shouldn't be to hard to get a WW. Of course it will bust too. But the wins should be more than the losses. So bet selection. ...that is different each session.

[AsymBacGuy]

I really appreciate soxfan writings but at the same time I agree with roversi.

Even utilizing a very solid BS, strong negative progressions will come along the way no matter what.
We should remember that trying to win two hands in a row is just a different way to pose the question: "are we able to control the outcomes?"

The obvious answer is a loud "NO, we can't"

Nonetheless, the distribution of outcomes is limited in some way by three factors (card distribution limitation due to finiteness of parameters involved, asymmetricity, very slight propensity to get the opposite hand of the last result).

Imo, we could improve the precision of our strategy starting our given betting plan very far from a "zero" starting point.

It's not about WHAT we are utilizing to try to control the outcomes, it's all about WHEN we are trying to do that.

So even utilizing the strongest betting selection ever invented coupled with the most sophisticated MM ever set up, we know that we won't get the best of it betting this plan right from the start.

Betting after some strong deviations have appeared will definitely improve our results by a 99.99999% accuracy. Especially if we're betting the mathematically most expected side.
It's not asymbacguy who tell this but very very long tests.

One, two or even five or ten shoes is nothing compared to the long run.

Casinos can endure such "short" losing periods as they know they will win itlr.
And we all know that they will win by a well higher degree than what the 1.06/1.24 mathematical percentage dictates.
So something wrong is made by bac players (I'm discounting the high negative side bets ignored by the most part of very high stakes players creating the main portion of house earnings worldwide).
Main reason for that? I guess it's all about wanting to break even within too short intervals of time. For example.

Is it possible that anything will be possible anywhere and anyhow?

Only in the short run.

The like casinos will lose only in the short run.

We can't win mathematically, we might win only by statistical features maybe enforced by some MM features.
And, imo, they can work only itlr. Slowly but steadily.

as. 














 



 

   

[soxfan]

I hate to keep harping but what is this "long run" peoples speak of with such certainty? The baccarats is my fulltime gig and in a year's worth of fulltime play I only buck up against about 44 thousands decision. Cats talk about millions of shoe or decision being a long run but over several years of fulltimes play I AIN'T EVEN COME CLOSE TO ONE MILLION DECISION, hey hey.

[21 Aces]

I hate to keep harping but what is this "long run" peoples speak of with such certainty? The baccarats is my fulltime gig and in a year's worth of fulltime play I only buck up against about 44 thousands decision. Cats talk about millions of shoe or decision being a long run but over seve I AIN'T EVEN COME CLOSE TO ONE MILLION DECISION, hey hey.

Have mercy on us.  Please!  You might summon him!!!!

The Dark Wizard and His Black Riders
http://betselection.cc/off-topic/the-dark-wizard-and-his-black-riders/

[AsymBacGuy]

I hate to keep harping but what is this "long run" peoples speak of with such certainty? The baccarats is my fulltime gig and in a year's worth of fulltime play I only buck up against about 44 thousands decision. Cats talk about millions of shoe or decision being a long run but over seve I AIN'T EVEN COME CLOSE TO ONE MILLION DECISION, hey hey.

I understand your point.

But we have to take into account that very negative situations can come up along the way anytime and anywhere.

For example, I can set up a multilayered betting plan working on cutting P streaks of 4s and 5s. I know that itlr I could get the best of it, meaning that itlr I'll have more P streaks of 4s and 5s than 5+ P streaks. Still I have no guarantees that a long run of P 5+ streaks will come out destroying my careful set up MM. The like I can't have guarantees to get two W in a row within a given range of played hands.

Again for example, I can set up a multilayered plan to get at least two P singles in a row (the most likely outcome the baccarat world will produce, since two B streaks in a row is a less slight occurence) but still I can get many unlikely consecutive shoes not forming such feature (or forming it at an insignificant degree).

I'm not necessarily saying that a long term winning plan must be good after millions of shoes, I'm just saying that sooner or later we'll have to endure a 16 or 20-25 no single winning hand session. Let's figure out about the likelihood to get TWO WIAR in those strong negative deviated situations.

If the overall amount of W/L sessions will be proportionally shifted on the left side, that's good. No matter what very long term trials tell us.


as.






   


 

[greenguy]

You can never beat the 'long run' to the satisfaction of the mathboyz because they'll just keep moving the goal posts and making it longer.

You can as a player win or profit from the game for a life time. Anyone who accomplishes such a feat cannot be denied the term WINNER.

But just because you are a lifetime winner does not mean you have beaten the game. This is because the long run is unreachable in one's short lifetime.

Your success therefore will always be put down to or involve some luck.

This is why serious system testers run simulations over millions of spins. Not only to see if they can win money, but to see if they can beat the game. They are two different things.

If you run a losing simulation of 10 million spins, and then cherry pick some brief periods of upward bankroll movement, you can see how if you were lucky enough in live play, you could end up a winner despite the overall long run loss of the simulation.

This is why you will never satisfy the mathboyz.

If you want to prove you can beat the game, you need the long run. If you just want to play and win money, you don't need the long run.