+ Register

[alrelax]

How do you go for it?   When do you go for it? Explain.

[alrelax]

Very interested in the 'nitty gritty' how other players go into a casino and 'get into' the swing of things. 

Please, with no insults or innuendoes, I am very curious as to others and how you actually do things.  I think in other wirtings here, I have attempted to explain things and how and why I wager the way I do. 

Let's pool our thoughts together and fingerprint our way of wagering.  Can we do that??

And, I am not talking about jumping in to follow someone, I am talking about 'pouncing on it'. 

[21 Aces]

alrelax, thanks very much.  Right now unless I link directly to the top thread under Baccarat directly, the site won't link.

Two consistent bad signs on a hand:
- A player places an outsized larger bet.  For example, they are typically betting $1,000 and they go $5,000 ++ because this hand looks very good.
- A player has some type of problem where the dealer/ and or floor manager get involved, and there is a delay in the game.
- A player is betting in-line with everyone, but they say something striking against that position.

Waiting for full access to come back on-line for me.

[alrelax]

One of the biggest things that I have found over the years, that holds up the highest majority of the times consistently, unlike the 'Voodoos' gut feelings of the others playing in relationship to the value wise numbers of their wagers, is point values.  I have written in detail about this before and it does prevail.  When it does and I literally pounce on it---there is always a pay-day, I kid you not. 

Whereas one side or any one type of section gets strong and keeps getting stronger and stronger.  It happens and it continues.  It is good for a section of 6 to 15 or so hands.  That is all you need for a section to pounce on to make some serious bucks! 

[alrelax]

(I copy and pasted this post from another posting I had on the board, this is in reference to defining winning and camaraderie as mentioned in another post)

Bet selection in it's truest form, seriously want to talk?? Or theory fantasize?

You know---here--I will lay it out why almost all baccarat players lose their butts in the game these days.

This show I will post from last Friday night, if it was prior to 2000 would have cost the casino an easy $100,000.00 at a $2,000.00 max table and if in A.C. or Vegas, the house would have lost well over $1,000,000.00 quite easy.  But these days, with all the systems and all the internet garbage, the most common thought in almost all players is the 'cut', the other side will always catch up and if chopping, then it has to repeat and make an abundance on one side---pure garbage like that.

I am so pissed off over these grossly misdirected players, they actually believe their pure trash thinking!  And to boot, they seriously do not make up their losses the way they play.  They continually grind themselves down in more ways then I just mentioned.

I won prior to this shoe and I won some on this shoe, but the extreme frustration level sat in and I failed to play my absolute normal way  This my friend is an easy $25,000.00 shoe for myself if not a heck of a lot more.  Here is what I wrote yesterday in an answer to a PM:

"Someone PM'd last night and asked, "Why in the world would you stop playing if you were winning"?

Well, I thought about that and here are the 4 things that influenced me to stop , other then what I wrote in the thread, "Topic: Bankroll/Buy-In & Psych Equals Your Decision".


1)  Other players and their actions;

2)  Failure to do what I planned each time I saw and identified shoe presentments;

3)  Frustration was setting in and effecting my play, I felt it;

4)  Failure to implement and try my '1 + 4 Side Parlay' wager even though I thought about it several times.

I felt it best to stop before getting 'sucked in' and falling in that proverbial horrible, 'rut'."

Here is the shoe:

(Picture of the score board in the original posting)

Here is the real money 'bet-selection' baccarat wagering:

Play what is coming out---DO NOT attempt to change the shoe!

Before the super great Banker streak with 10 Bankers and 3 F-7's (Total EZ money!!) it was 17 Bankers to 7 Players.  A key trigger point especially based on the fact that the Banker was so strong in the beginning and almost every hand reduced the Player to 0 or 1 that won for the banker.  Strong is strong, sorry---think what the heck you want--but strong is strong and so many times stays strong or gets even stronger.  Fizzles out at the end of the shoe, most times, except this shoe.  What the heck--old school, win one or two and stay on it until it falls off--only lose the last one?  These people are all pointing, yelling and screaming how the player would prevail, each and every hand throughout the shoe.  Stacking and stacking thousands up on the Player side, continuously.  Among the 6 of them, they had to burn through at least $50,000.00 to $70,000.00 repeated buy-ins.

With camaraderie we could have taking the casino for lots of their rack money--hands down.  Basically I was the only one with occasional support and high fiving and back slapping by the Asian guy next to me.  I actually got up and said, 'why do you all play trying to change the shoe'?  They are all in their 30's, I do believe.  Not very many years solid experience.  But proper eti

Look at the Bead Plate!  Perfect! Solid Banker on the first and last line---ALL THE WAY ACROSS, except for on Player on the bottom row of the Bead Plate late in the row!!  WOW!  Old School, we would be stacking it up on every one of those--at least.  That is why the board is there!  At least for the smarter players.  The average players just looks at it and says, 'the player has to equal out--it is a 50-50% game', etc.  So wrong!  It is in stats, not in reality.  This is the easy chance to rack in tens of thousands of win money.

Anyway, before the 10 Banker streak,it was 17 B to 7 P.  Right at 10 more than the other side.  True, so many times, the majority I would say, upper 80% at least, right at 9-0-or even 11, the other side with the deficit will start to come back--equal out.  But the thing here on this shoe, it was Banker strong, super Banker strong, like I said--a key thing in winning point values is continuous reduction of the losing side to 0 or nearly zero and that is what the Banker side was repeatedly doing, most every hand.  You can NOT change strong!  You cannot.

Also, many times, Player has a 6 and Banker has 0 for the first 2 cards.  And they are all screaming for a monkey when the dealer pulls the Banker's 3rd card--but countless times it would be an 8 or a 9.  The 3 F-7's on the 10 Banker streak, WOW!  I should have been on each one for table ma, I was on them, but not table max.  The repeated talk, actions, money, zero people winning, no camaraderie, etc., etc., sucks!  Even the tie on the Banker streak was, Players side had a 10 and Ace and the Bank side had a 2 and a 10.  The Player's 3rd card was a 9 and the Bankers 3rd card was an 8. That is actually the point when they all went heavy on the Players, true it usually does fizzle out after an F-7---so many times, like 90+ out of a 100, IMO.  But, I felt it in my stomach the Banker was going to get stronger and stronger.  I even stood up and said, "Please take your money down--I know you won't listen to a white guy--but half my family is Asian--Please".  They snickered.  The guy next to me knows me well and he is SE Asian as well and he nods his head to them.  They tell the dealer to get on with it.  It was actually sickening.  Seriously.  I lost what I could have actually won easily and all those people lost their hard earned blood money--they all borrow and pool their money together in the attempt to make money--truly sickening!  Even the dealer shook her head in disgust of what they were doing to the aura.  If it is not there, you cannot change the presentment of the shoe.  When it is strong--it is the time to realize it and flaunt it--exploit it and smack the casino.  Chop shoes, meaning 1's, 2's and a few 3's where whatever you do reverts to the opposite side are extremely frequent and hard as heck to capitalize on except for 1 or 2 or 3 units real quick.  But that is not the way to really put money in your pocket!   

And hey---I have told you guys and I have written it here on this board!  No ties or low ties, a key trigger to F-7's.  I hit many more F-7's when there is no ties or low ties 1-2-or 3 out there.  Something about that.  Take a look at when those 3 F-7's came, there was 1 tie out and 2nd one happened on the streak.  But no one listens.  This is Bet Selection to the 100th degree people!!  This was the time to stack it and leave it, just lose the last one.  Table max on the Banker and table max on the F-7.

Hand 69.  Bankers=44, Ties=5, Players 20.  The shoe finished at Bankers=52, Ties=6, Players=24.

Usually more naturals, but at hand 69 Bankers=16 and Players 6.  I am telling you, almost every winning hand for the Banker was a third card reduction to Zero or near Zero for the Players.  That is another key trigger to what I term "Strong".

And the other sad part is, these same people do the same thing when it is super strong for the Players, they cite Banker this or that and how strong the Banker will get and is and how it is a 50-50 game.  Th convince themselves of such foolishness.

I actually thought, right there at the casino about what Leungyeh said many times.  ...."Scared to win".  I actually said it out loud to one guy playing.  He would bet thousands on the Player side, did during that whole Banker run.  Lost $20,000.00 easily.  Then he starts to wager $50 or $100 on the Banker and he wins, I told him, "You are actually scared to win".  He takes a puff of his cigarette and says, "No one knows what is going to happen".  But my point is, shoe presentment and what the shoe is doing.  Then the guy I said that to turns to me in his broken English and says, "Look at last shoe 44 Players--to 32 Bankers, Players is stronger tonight, that's why I wagering Players heavier".  I broke out laughing so hard I almost physically fell off my chair, the floor person folded his arms--knew something was coming and the dealer wanted to get taped out. I told the guy, "Go ahead and keep wagering your borrowed money against your thinking and you dreams of winning unattainable sums of money--when it is an easy shoe you turn it to impossible to win basing this shoe on what last shoe did, you are truly a casino best friend".

Like I said, I won and I could have won numerous times fold what I did.  One of the largest player advantages in casino based baccarat is a table full of camaraderie, yelling and screaming when the dealer is paying out everyone across the felt.  I remember so many times in Atlantic City and Las Vegas, where I and another would hold up the game, make a big scene as to having the same amount of wager between us, same chips colors, same stack design, etc.  Fun, boasting each other and everyone else, telling the other not wagering much--"What wrong you chicken?  Go home, if you sit at our table you have to wager more".  Everyone gets in the mood, everyone positive and everyone against the casino.  When it is win time it its win time.

[AsymBacGuy]

Hi Al, nice to see you back!

About the camaraderie, I think you are right.
95% or so of the times when a player quits the table as decent or huge winner it's because almost every other player is winning. Very often in the same fortunate occasion one player quits the table as huge loser by stubbornly trying to get back the money playing a "counter-flow" strategy.
Hopefully we do not want to be in this player's position.

That means that thinking to get the power to alter what happens right now utilizing a strong negative progression doesn't work.

A winning table is a table where two or more players are getting winning streaks of two or more.
Sometimes some light negative progression bettors get the best of it crossing LWLWLW lines.
And sometimes just one player seem to get the driver's lead, that is capable to guess repeatedly some difficult shoe patterns by weird reasons.

Since it's not the amount of wagers that counts (otherwise progressions would make us millionaires) we should focus about our and other players' actual outcomes.
That's why many times I do not want to read the shoe results as my indicators will be the other active players at my table.

A simplified formula may be like this:
- best indicators are players who had won at least two consecutive hands.
- fair indicators are players who had won consecutively at least one hand per couple of attempts.
- anything different from the above scenarios are bad or very bad indicators.

The assumption that on the same shoe good indicators will get balanced by subsequent bad outcomes and vice versa, most of the time is not true.
If it were true, a simple fictional losing plan would give us easy profits.

The problem is an old one: losing players want to break even within too short intervals of time, trying to hope to get favourable and easily detectable situations. On the other end, winning players tend to not preserve properly the money won, not accounting that the previous favorite situations will slightly reverse.

Unfortunately our brain instructs us to bet too little or at a lesser degree too much on winning streaks and too much on losing streaks.

Maybe the 1-3-2-6, 2-6-4-12, 3-9-6-18, 4-12-8-24 and so on mechanically applied betting plan would help us to discover why we are losing ten times more than the expected mathematical negative edge applied.


as.

[alrelax]

Hi Al, nice to see you back!

About the camaraderie, I think you are right. (Camaraderie of the correct type, where it is genuine, rambunctious, wholehearted and believed--is probably the single biggest 'knock'em out punch a player can give a casino.  For those of you that have no idea what I am talking about and only know the type of baccarat tables where no one speaks to each other, all players have their heads down in their hands type of play, etc., you cannot and will not relate or understand)  
95% or so of the times when a player quits the table as decent or huge winner it's because almost every other player is winning. Very often in the same fortunate occasion one player quits the table as huge loser by stubbornly trying to get back the money playing a "counter-flow" strategy.
Hopefully we do not want to be in this player's position. (It happens, with or without thought by many, yes.  But I learned early on that the true back slapping, daring, challenging, high fives, and wagering as a crew---works most times.  If it was not, we wouldn't do it to begin with.  The problems arise when we challenge ea other under our breath, discount what another might know or feel, have that personalty that we are actually trying to show another will lose his funds awe will win, etc.  Then the problems start and build., etc.)

That means that thinking to get the power to alter what happens right now utilizing a strong negative progression doesn't work.

A winning table is a table where two or more players are getting winning streaks of two or more.
Sometimes some light negative progression bettors get the best of it crossing LWLWLW lines.
And sometimes just one player seem to get the driver's lead, that is capable to guess repeatedly some difficult shoe patterns by weird reasons.

Since it's not the amount of wagers that counts (otherwise progressions would make us millionaires) we should focus about our and other players' actual outcomes.
That's why many times I do not want to read the shoe results as my indicators will be the other active players at my table.

A simplified formula may be like this:
- best indicators are players who had won at least two consecutive hands.
- fair indicators are players who had won consecutively at least one hand per couple of attempts.
- anything different from the above scenarios are bad or very bad indicators.

The assumption that on the same shoe good indicators will get balanced by subsequent bad outcomes and vice versa, most of the time is not true.
If it were true, a simple fictional losing plan would give us easy profits.

The problem is an old one: losing players want to break even within too short intervals of time, trying to hope to get favourable and easily detectable situations. On the other end, winning players tend to not preserve properly the money won, not accounting that the previous favorite situations will slightly reverse. (Very prevalent the majority of the times.  The losing players are in a rush to get whole and block most of any vision or chance they really have to be able to recoup their funds and play the 'right' way.  They do it to themselves all the time, they are their own worst enemies without realizing it, I guess.   The winning players turn instantly to being conceded and of 'show-off statue and again, cloud their vision with limited success to follow, give it all back and then go into the chase mode, buy-in and buy-in trying to recoup the win money and lose everything a few times over.)

Unfortunately our brain instructs us to bet too little or at a lesser degree too much on winning streaks and too much on losing streaks.

Maybe the 1-3-2-6, 2-6-4-12, 3-9-6-18, 4-12-8-24 and so on mechanically applied betting plan would help us to discover why we are losing ten times more than the expected mathematical negative edge applied.


as.