+ Register

[gr8player]

.... if you claim that your methodology can filter the horrible runs out?

Ahh, therein lies the rub, my friend.  The paradox; that which separates the best from the rest.  "....filter the horrible runs out"....yes, this is, in fact, the very key that opens many doors for the astute player; doors that lead to both win/loss goals and the money-management process that'll serve them best to expedite those goals.

Albalaha, I question none of your statements, none of your gaming beliefs; you are a learned and well-intentioned member of this forum, of that I've no doubt.

But I believe that you might be making the most common of mistakes when looking broadly at the scope of playing this game, and I believe that it might be causing you to come to certain conclusions that just might be a bit prejudiced by those same mistakes.

For one thing, Albalaha, I must inform you that NOT EVERY PLAYER encounters these "25 of 100" or the "65 of 200" losses in their play.  Astute players have certain "built-in brakes" that are applied in order to prevent such calamities.  And so they are effectively, as you put it yourself just above, able to "filter the horrible runs out".

That's all I have time for right now, Albalaha....I'm leaving for Mo Sun in an hour, and will be there for a few days.  I'll catch up with you at a later date.

Take care, and stay well.

[21 Aces]

What the hell is that orange thing, a foreign stoner's take on the legendary 'General Lee'?

It's THE DIRTY LEE (A Ford -> Ford vs Chevy).  Sure it's here in 'Merica - I like.

[Jimske]

            Are you endorsing him on a commission? You are defending him without giving any answer of the queries asked about what he does.

Re-read what I said and you'll answer your own questions.

[Albalaha]

For one thing, Albalaha, I must inform you that NOT EVERY PLAYER encounters these "25 of 100" or the "65 of 200" losses in their play.  Astute players have certain "built-in brakes" that are applied in order to prevent such calamities.  And so they are effectively, as you put it yourself just above, able to "filter the horrible runs out".

Dear Friend,
                 25/100 or 65/200 are inevitable to come. Your safety break could lead you to stop at 4/20 or anything like that momentarily but you can not eliminate to get 25/100 as 4/20,5/30,6/20,10/30 or anything alike despite your so called "safety breaks". I know many gentlemen here who says, oh! I won't get 25/100 ever as I am so smart to quit earlier. I agree that you can quit but you can still get 25/100 in the manner I described in 4 sessions of yours or so. I hope you must have caught this point of mine.
                        Since, in a random game we have no control over what will happen in the next spin, anybody claiming to never get 25/100 is a naive only.

That's all I have time for right now, Albalaha....I'm leaving for Mo Sun in an hour, and will be there for a few days.  I'll catch up with you at a later date.

It seems Mohegun Sun is a hot favorite among many of my friends here. Best of luck for your coming days of play.

[Jimske]

     Dear Friend,
                 25/100 or 65/200 are inevitable to come. Your safety break could lead you to stop at 4/20 or anything like that momentarily but you can not eliminate to get 25/100 as 4/20,5/30,6/20,10/30 or anything alike despite your so called "safety breaks". I know many gentlemen here who says, oh! I won't get 25/100 ever as I am so smart to quit earlier. I agree that you can quit but you can still get 25/100 in the manner I described in 4 sessions of yours or so. I hope you must have caught this point of mine.
                        Since, in a random game we have no control over what will happen in the next spin, anybody claiming to never get 25/100 is a naive only.
         It seems Mohegun Sun is a hot favorite among many of my friends here. Best of luck for your coming days of play.

That pic is Foxwoods.

I didn't see Gr8 today but I was only there a short time in the early afternoon.  Maybe he was napping getting ready for a new session.

My worst shoe ever was a 32% strike rate.  Once.  Before that a 38% and more than once.  In about 60 hands or so.  Perhaps I've had a couple similar back to back but I don't recall.  Looking back at my sessions over 10,000 live bets since I've been keeping track it hasn't occurred.  But even so it doesn't mean that one cannot win consistently even with such encounters.

For the most part I got to agree with Gr8 post regarding "built in brakes."  It's a betting and MM game more so than the elusive holy grail bet selection that you seem to think is a necessity for success. But selection is important.  I had a 52.13% strike rate for over 10,000 bets and re-started my stats 1,316 bets ago after some bet selection tweak.  Now at 54.64% strike for those hands.  I don't necessarily think it will hold up forever but then I don't care much about forever.  I play for the short term.

BTW, I'm still trying to figure why betting less hands is better.  Are there certain places to wait for that have a better chance of winning?  If so I'd sure like someone to clue me in.  Today I had my best win ever % wise.  Won 39 of 55 bets placed.  I think that's like 71%? 

[Albalaha]

I had a 52.13% strike rate for over 10,000 bets and re-started my stats 1,316 bets ago after some bet selection tweak.  Now at 54.64% strike for those hands.

Betselection never gives an edge to us, so far it is very random and has no physical bias or tampering. Variance could be by your side for long enough to give an illusion of an edge but if you are capable of simulating your wise betselection idea over random data, it will tell you the truth itself.

That pic is Foxwoods.

   Nope. foxwoods is this:
                 

and what I shown was Mohegan Sun:

[21 Aces]

This is the Mohegun Sun setting behind the rock.  So bright you can still see it.







Looks like a very cool place to play.

[Garfield]

@Jim maybe the best implementation of less betting is we stop after maybe 2 LIAR. Yes according to theory it might not help but at least it gives you time to cool down a little bit, maybe?

Somehow I have to agree with Lung Yeh when he said that there will be "sar chi" phase , when everything you do is always wrong, no matter what.

[Jimske]

                Betselection never gives an edge to us, so far it is very random and has no physical bias or tampering. Variance could be by your side for long enough to give an illusion of an edge but if you are capable of simulating your wise betselection idea over random data, it will tell you the truth itself.
   Nope. foxwoods is this:
                 

and what I shown was Mohegan Sun:

Oooops, you right . . .  about the pic.  Sorry.
What you mean is mechanical bet selection never gives us an edge.  No argument there.  In order to get the edge one must adjust the bet selection to conform to the bias.  And yes this amounts to guessing for sure but it also relies on statistical limitations which exist in random elements but more so in closed systems such as Baccarat. 

Unlike Roulette we know there is a bias in every shoe.  We don't know what it is of course.  Perhaps the bias is caused by card value accumulations and/or depletion.  In the end I am betting on consistency of a particular, albeit forever changing, bias.  The rest is just MM and betting which is the greater key IMO.

IMO, attempting to get an advantage over each and every next individual decision is a mistake.  That is what mechanical selections do and the derivative roads I believe.  It is necessary to look at groups or patterns.  At least that's how I do it.  I never concern myself with the point values of the decisions.

Finally, I think players complicate and read into the game too much.  Anyway Alb, you can have the last word.  These conversations go nowhere.

Good luck.

[marinetech]

Oooops, you right . . .  about the pic.  Sorry.
What you mean is mechanical bet selection never gives us an edge.  No argument there.  In order to get the edge one must adjust the bet selection to conform to the bias.  And yes this amounts to guessing for sure but it also relies on statistical limitations which exist in random elements but more so in closed systems such as Baccarat. 

Unlike Roulette we know there is a bias in every shoe.  We don't know what it is of course.  Perhaps the bias is caused by card value accumulations and/or depletion.  In the end I am betting on consistency of a particular, albeit forever changing, bias.  The rest is just MM and betting which is the greater key IMO.

IMO, attempting to get an advantage over each and every next individual decision is a mistake.  That is what mechanical selections do and the derivative roads I believe.  It is necessary to look at groups or patterns.  At least that's how I do it.  I never concern myself with the point values of the decisions.

Finally, I think players complicate and read into the game too much.  Anyway Alb, you can have the last word.  These conversations go nowhere.

Good luck.

I thought you frequented foxwoods and mohegan sun? One should surely know the difference between the 2 as they are vastly different....

But, a lot of people on these boards say a lot of things!! 

[Jimske]

I thought you frequented foxwoods and mohegan sun? One should surely know the difference between the 2 as they are vastly different....

But, a lot of people on these boards say a lot of things!! 

Caught red handed!  You found me out!  Truth is I don't even play and I live in California.

[marinetech]

Caught red handed!  You found me out!  Truth is I don't even play and I live in California.

That's too bad. Thought you might have been legit but I've been fooled yet again...............

[soxfan]

That's too bad. Thought you might have been legit but I've been fooled yet again...............

The jimske is a serious, serious cat, hey hey!

[Lung Yeh]

Jimske is as real as real can be. 👍🏼👍🏼

[vo rogue]

Jimske for president.