+ Register

[Sputnik]

You can use educated guess work - but is not better then any existing mechanical betting - because no matter if you feel for each new bet or play like a robot - so will the results be 50/50.
You might feel that one thing is more common then others, trends and jump on board with two/three bets, but the entering points and exit points will not produce better results then mechanical betting.

Conclusion is that no matter how much experience you have and no matter how advance educated guess work you apply - so can you not betting more effective then a mechanical betting.
And no one can betting more winners then losers in the long run - as the game has negative expectation.
It does not exist any secret formula around 50/50.

So you want to read how other think when they play - this will not help you.
For example:

I always start with Follow The Last Outcome.
If it lose i have a single event, then i stop betting.
Now i wait to see if i get one isolated single event or if i get a serie of singes - because different results of the single event make me bet different.
I get one isolated single, next i feel for a new serie to chop and bet, lets say i lose and have one isolated single, then i bet the trends it will be a single isolated event as the previos single event.
But in this situation i will in reality get as many isolated single events as series of single events, so it does not matter if i follow the feeling or trend, because the game is 50/50.

[Jimske]

Hi Gr8,
I have read many of your posts and have great admiration for your knowledge and foresight on the game of baccarat. Would you obliged to play a game or 2 in simulation from one of the online casinos and then post the results here and explained your thought process on how you bet. This would immensely help the newbies like me in tapping and seeing your approach on how to win in this game. It is a tough game to beat, so it would be very very helpful if we can be guided by an experienced player like you to share your method. Thank you in advance

Don't hold your breath!  Search out his posts and you'll keep reading the same thing over and over again.  I don't mean to be harsh.  It's just a fact.  ND said it all quite succinctly.

What I understand Gr8player is saying    that it is  all a matter of FEEL when  and what to bet and that cmmot  be  taught.That`s the way it is  with the game of Baccarat.

But Gr8 could do what you asked if he cared to.  Problem 1 is it would be VERY time consuming to explain every reason for his bet.  It would be so subjective and each "rule" would have a mitigating change based on a number of parameters (read guesses).

However, he's a trender.  If he betting only about 20 hands per shoe most shoes than he is, unlike me, NOT starting out with a certain fixed placement but waiting for a trend to appear.  The trend is probably relative to a certain pattern.  Doesn't matter that much what he is looking for.  Could be more chops than streak or OTBL vs. TBL.  I like to key off the singles and bet the trend based on simple follow or repeat.  If singles are scarce I am going to get more repeats - duh.  If they're normal distribution than that is more difficult and I look at pattens and bet hoping they will continue.
He mostly flat bets so if he loses a couple, three units he probably stops and looks for what he considers to be strengths.  Could be side dom or lots of 2's or a run never going more than a certain length, etc.  So then he will probably make a couple of "big" 2 unit bets to see if he can recoup.  If he does he will look for a new trend if not he will look for an exit one or two small trial balloon bets.

The key for any trender is to attempt to exploit a shoe when the trend is working for you and keep losses low when it is not.  In this way scraping out a few units a shoe is not that difficult.  The hard part is there is NO set plays that HAVE AN EDGE.  Therefore it's just a guessing game and the play is always tentative.  If he had a true edge like asymbac claims then he would be making specific bets with much larger units and would have a bankroll to overcome the variance.

[horus]

I was reading some old posts on another forum from years ago (2009) and Gr8player did give a few clues as to what his bet selection involved.

''I play 4 different "trend" plays. I've played these same trends for years, and am very familiar with them.

I took my scorecards (actuals), and calculated their best "strike rates". In other words, in what position in each of these trends do they hit (win) the most often?

Suffice it to say, I found that exact play in each one of them, and, now, that's all I'll bet at the table. (I cannot go any further than that as to the exact bets; I have all of my statistics: strike rates, average drawdowns, variances, etc. I've shared plenty in this forum.) This I can say: Each and every one of them are performing at better than 50%, and my over-all strike rate is almost 54%. And with low drawdowns (average DD: 7 units) and tight variances.

I play them in a "one and done" manner. By that I mean, that I either hit it(win) or lose it, but, either way, it's only one bet per trend, per occurrence.

As you know, because of the high strike rates and tight variances, I am able to employ my slight negative progression (Gr8Player's Progression) in order to maximize both my time at the tables and my profits.''

I hope Gr8player doesn't mind me posting this up. It was on a public forum. It kind of gives a bit more insight into things.

cheers

[gr8player]

The key for any trender is to attempt to exploit a shoe when the trend is working for you and keep losses low when it is not.  In this way scraping out a few units a shoe is not that difficult.  The hard part is there is NO set plays that HAVE AN EDGE.  Therefore it's just a guessing game and the play is always tentative.  If he had a true edge like asymbac claims then he would be making specific bets with much larger units and would have a bankroll to overcome the variance.

Absolutely spot-on, Jimske, great job!

That was the basis of my "battle" at the Wizard of Vegas forum; while I espoused about my Bac play and the theories/methodologies regarding same, I could not ever claim any true edge, as so I retired from that board.

I have no true edge, no calculable, consistent, nor mathematical edge.  Nor have I ever claimed such.

But I do have me.  And my brain.  Yes, we are allowed to think at the tables, whereas the decision-spewing table cannot, it can only dole out results.  In that vein, I am of the opinion that my Player's Edges can trump the table's:

1.)  We can bet where we choose to.
2.)  We can bet when we choose to.
3.)  We can bet the amount we choose to.
4.)  We can exit the shoe/session as we choose to.

All our choices.  The bet selection process, the money-management, the exit strategies; all under our control.

The wise player...the serious player...learns to differentiate between that which he can and cannot control, and then willingly takes on that responsibility, and, in fact, turns that very control into their own personal "edge".

Yes, Jimske, I trend.  Oh, and yes, Sputnik, it'll all boil out to a 50/50 proposition in the long run.  My bet selection process is no better than any other.....oops, wait....scratch that.  That's not true.  Maybe mathematically, played mechanically, maybe then it's true, but I am the farthest thing from a "mechanical" player; for that would negate half of those Player's Edges I just espoused.

Look, I trend.  I trend for "clustered" results; results anticipated I as see each portion of certain shoes "trending towards" that propensity.  But, as Jimske said in the quote, it's all a tentative game.  But, you see, my friends, I both understand and accept that fact.  I've come to terms with it.  Heck...I've built my over-all Bac game around it.

Otherwise, again as Jimske stated, I'd "load up" and bet big on certain plays.  But I do not, because I am aware of the reality of this game.  So I am resolved to play, as long as that might take, armed with my patience and my discipline, to await those "clustered" periods where I can now reap the benefits of my Player's Edges.

That's it.  That, my friends, is all there is.  ME....YOU....against the non-thinking, decision-spewing table.  Who will win out, over the long term?  What can be said of you, as a Baccarat player, at the tables?  You write your own ending.....

[gr8player]

Sorry, Horus, but your post came up while I was busy with my last response, I did not mean to ignore you, my friend.

All relevant, but I do not utilize, certainly not as strictly, my Gr8Player's Progression as much anymore, preferring, again, a bit more "subjective" money-management plan where I'll adjust my bet sizes as certain "variances" trigger me to do so.

Stay well.

[Xander]

gr8player,

So do you believe that you have the edge?  If so, then what is it?

[Mike]

R-W,

You and Sputnik are correct in that there is no bet selection which will give you an advantage, but aren't you being a little hypocritical here?

You claim to be a professional Baccarat player, but if that's true, you must have an edge. So wherein is your edge? if it doesn't come from winning more hands than you lose, it must be from money-management, yes? but the math says money-management cannot give you an edge any more than bet selection can. And you are keen to point out that:

Math is great like that, once it's been proven that no method exists to do what you claim, it's not necessary to go through the details of your system to prove that it doesn't work. You claim that it does something which can be proven impossible, therefore, your claim is false. The details don't matter.

Perhaps you are not aware that progressions can't give you any long-term advantage, but I doubt it. In which case, it's a case of pot calling kettle black. It amounts to "my fallacy is superior to your fallacy".
                                                       

[gr8player]

gr8player,

So do you believe that you have the edge?  If so, then what is it?

Xander, I respect you as a man of intelligence, but as to your inquiry, if you'd simply re-read my penultimate post just above...

[gr8player]

I don't really want to get involved in this endless clap-trap, Baccarat being the most subjective nonsense on gambling forums.   

Surely you're referring to your own "joke of a forum" that you presided over....tell us, will you, Johno....how's that going for ya?

Those that denigrate or demean have no place in any civil public forum, so please, do us all a favor and crawl back under your rock.

Oh, but before you do, Johno, one last thing:

Nobody....NOBODY....is going to beat this game armed only with some money-management and bankroll.  Not now...not ever.  It is but a fool's dream awaiting only to collide with the inevitable wall (read: out of bankroll).  Tell us....how many times have you had to re-load yours?

Oh,and just one more last thing:

One's bet selection process is very, very critical to any sort of long-term success at this game.  You'd best get learn to get your money into the correct circle....more often than not....or simply give this game up.  Sure, you'll maybe win some shoes or sessions or even days, but in the long run, the casino will get your every dollar, because your losing runs will eat you alive.

Oh, and just one more last thing, I promise:

Nice seeing you again, Johno.  You're almost always wrong, but you're also almost always interesting.  Just....please, man....stay civil.

[Rolex-Watch]

Surely you're referring to your own "joke of a forum" that you presided over....tell us, will you, Johno....how's that going for ya? 

spiffing, how would you know if it is a joke or not, thankfully you ain't part of it. 

I'm hanging out in VIP rooms, that have hosts that cater to my needs, you are hiring a car to drive to AC with some fictitious friend, gambling fictitious amounts, thinking they can out guess coin flips over 53% of the time, no wonder Shackleford was just about to instigate a rule change to get rid of you.  Your deluded, any boozo can play a shoe and sometimes hit over 60%, 70%, only an idi0t would actually assume it meant something and then start labelling themselves an "experienced trender" .   

Nice seeing you again, Johno.  You're almost always wrong, but you're also almost always interesting.  Just....please, man....stay civil.

Not half as f00lish as you,

Giz, I can relate a story to you; happened a while back in a casino that I still play in.

A "suit" came down to watch us (my playing partner and myself) play. He was just observing, but made sure we knew that he was observing US. After the session was over, I walked over the CCC booth, and asked them one simple question: Can I, if I'm a consistent winner, be asked to leave by casino personnel? Their answer: No, sir, unless you are using a device or cheating. I said I was doing neither, and they told me not to worry about it. That's the last time I saw that "suit".

Another time, when I had asked a casino boss to "check my rating" because I was given unquestionably "short" comp dollars, I was told by him that it actually reads in their computer my EXPECTED WIN, not my EXPECTED LOSS. (Somehow, apparently, they calculate what you're generally expected to lose on a per session basis.) What I felt was amazing was that they actually had an "expected win" percentage for me in their computer.

http://www.gamblersglen.com/cgi-bin/teemz/teemz.cgi?board=_master&action=opentopic&topic=597&forum=Baccarat_Message_Board

[smiley]cxp/lol.gif[/smiley]

Do carry on, knocking mechanical modes when those with half a brain know there is absolute no difference.  You have to excuse me, I've better things to do with my time than let Walter who now has even more time on his hands impose on mine.  Should I wish to seriously discuss Baccarat, or simply chew the fat, I know the right place.

 

[HunchBacShrimp]

I'm still trudging my way through this method. It is imo unnecessarily confusing with A-1 pattern A-2 pattern B-1-3 pattern. I feel the author could have been less complex using OLD or FLD for bets A B X Y Z. He does however give long detailed examples of the play and I'm working my way through that searching for the losing pattern. Everything and Everybody loses 9 in a row eventually. Doesn't matter if you have a stop loss and a no bet/virtual bet rule, 9L is a reality and it's coming. I just wanted to discern the pattern and then look for it in my bank of Bac cards.
It seems several people have praised it and even made (to me) a small fortune with it. However, the "Attack" isn't much of an attack at all. It starts with a regression! of all things and then has a conservative progression from there. The result of which is not impressive.  10 5 8 10 13 16 20 is 7 wins in a row for 82. All win series end in a loss and this one would be -25. For a total of 57 for 7 wins in a row. Flat betting 10 for 7 wiar out performs this 'attack' by 3 bucks.
Conversely the retrenchment mode is far far more aggressive and is just shy of a true Fibo. So close to a fibo I don't understand why it isn't. 10 15 25 40 60 100 150 is the written retrenchment, 10 15 25 40 65 105 170 is a proper Fibo. Anyway, if you lose 7 in a row, and you will, theoretically equally as often as you win 7 in a row you bust out 400 bucks. A far cry from the lousy 57 you are going to win with its counterpart.
Now I know some of your 7 wiar aren't going to occur at the exact moment you make a "trigger" bet. And you will be in 'retrenchment' mode for part of it and complete a successful recovery. Yay, (sarcasm) the left over wins won't carry you far into "attack" mode which will net you less than the necessary amount of units to cover your incoming 7 liar, which is guaranteed to bring you to the 150 bet every time. Most times it will bust you out, you will have to be in 'attack' mode for 7 liar to bring you to the threshold of losing the 150 bet, and 8  liar is a guaranteed loss of 400. 
I mean, the fibo is not an unknown MM and it should be imo common knowledge for experienced bettors as an extremely dangerous MM to engage in. The real money maker in this scheme is a WLWLWLWL pattern. Especially in 'retrenchment' mode as the fibo is not executed in the orthodox manner of reducing your bet two levels. Which is its only, extremely unreliable, defense against ballooning out of control.
This thing of an unholy grail is mostly profitable in retrenchment mode with a WLWLWL pattern. There are much better MM schemes that exist that take advantage of this pattern with much less risk.

I post this as a warning to amateur gambler's that might jump right into this unwittingly.

[tdx]

As mentioned before, this method is only good for online casinos where you can wager only one dollar a hand.

If you are in a real casino betting $ 100 a hand, then a 150 unit bet is $ 15,000 and a 400 unit bet is $ 40,000

Anybody here willing to bet $ 40,000 on a hand of baccarat?

[WorldBaccaratKing]

As mentioned before, this method is only good for online casinos where you can wager only one dollar a hand.

If you are in a real casino betting $ 100 a hand, then a 150 unit bet is $ 15,000 and a 400 unit bet is $ 40,000

Anybody here willing to bet $ 40,000 on a hand of baccarat?

That would be a resounding, NO

[HunchBacShrimp]

I'm not picking a fight here....

But yeah, I could more easily stomach a bust out of 80 bucks vs 400. But that doesn't change how this system works. Someone who regularly bets 100 bucks a hand may have the same disregard for 400 dollars as I have for 80.

[21 Aces]

Baccarat Attack Strategy in live casino play....

The start of this thread had many commenting that they thought this strategy looked promising, and the trail end of the thread concluded it may be worthwhile with a lot of capital or for play at on-line casinos where the minimum bet sizes may be very low.


Any updates?  Thanks.