+ Register

[Xander]

Update list, not complete, others are within my writings, but I am updating some:

Additions and Reductions, on 3 card draws. As soon as one side begins to get additions, particularly the player side and the banker side is reduced by its 3rd card—be alert for that event to continue.  Once it happens a 2nd time in a row—particularly within the first half of the shoe or the middle section, it might favor the continuance of doing that numerous times.  Likewise a reduction to the Players side and the banker winning with the first 2 cards or the third card that increases.  However, IMO and experience the first one is usually stronger overall and continues longer.

6/7's & 8's/9's. Without anything else, I have found that 1 point wins and 1 point losses for both hands, tends to lend itself to the worst rationalization of what the next hand will bring, more often than not.  As well as any other numbers that prevail and lose this is the worst that brings total randomness, continuance and any other chain of events that almost no one can profit off of.

Naturals-alternating. An event exists to be exploited when alternating naturals appear frequently.  Naturals have a huge tendency to 'WOW' the players and they convince themselves that the side just got 'strong' and aggressively wager the same side that the natural just prevailed on.  However, naturals are frequent and have a tendency to bounced or alternate back and forth for a short event more often than not, especially when the '-' or '+' is close together.

Naturals.  When one side is producing naturals over the other side's 6-7 or 8's and winning—it is an event that can be exploited frequently.  Meaning, for example, P has 6 and B has 7, then P has a N8 and B had a N9, etc., or the opposite.

Fortune 7's (3 card Banker winning 7's, 40:1).  Zero to low ties.  Within the first 10 hands.  And hands 16-23.  Those are the most frequent events when the shoe produces the F-7 hand.  Frequently shoes have 1 or 2 F-7's.  Some shoes have none.  If a 3rd F-7 does appear, generally there is a 4th.  5 and 6 F-7's are a bit infrequent or rare but do occur.  Or, should I say you will not generally see that in every other shoe or every third shoe, etc.  By the way, the reason there are more F-7's in the beginning of the shoe than elsewhere and on a more frequent basis is the number of cards in the shoe of course.  Frequently there are many 10's that form the first 3 or 4 cards dealt and then a larger card reducing the players side 'under 6' or remaining at 6 and drawing an Ace through a 7 to make the 3 card 7 on the Banker side, etc.  F-7's and the next hand 'cut'.  The highest amount of the F-7 appearing hands will 'cut' to the Players side with the upcoming hand to be dealt.

Panda 8's (3 card Player winning 8's, 25:1). Panda 8's will appear a norm of 3 to 6 times.  Panda 8's appear frequently in the beginning of the shoe in multiple more than F-7's generally will by far.  Panda 8's will also appear in clusters (repeating themselves in a shorter hand-span) with greater frequency than F-7's generally do.  Panda 8's appear with less consistency within certain clusters of hands than F-7's but with a greater appearance of anywhere in the shoe from the beginning to the end.  Panda 8's also with great frequency tend to 'cut' to the Banker with the following hand to be dealt after the appearance of a Panda 8. 

-10/+10/+20. Frequently the total count will hover around '-' or '+' 10 somewhere between hand 15 and midway or so.  And then favor the deficit side in smaller hit rates for its attempt to "catch-up".  It happens and happens repeatedly.  Much rarer an event, one side will continue to +20 and continue to rise.  Infrequent by far.  I have only witnessed a handful of shoes be able to provide the + side that was already well over +15, say +17 to +20 or so and then produce a streak on top of that.  Depending on how far into the shoe it is, the deficit side usually (USUALLY) makes a pretty good attempt to "catch-up" to the other side. The key thing in this event as I have found, is the deficient side will usually 'catch-up' in a slow grind by not allowing the + side to streak or repeat as it was doing or presenting, previously.  Depending on the hand of the shoe, I have done extremely well and won larger wagers based on these events siding with the '-' or the '+' of a side to win or lose.   

Equaling Out.  The highest numbers of shoes will equal out in how many winning hands each side ended up with and if not equal, within 3 to 5 of each other as next most favorable.  An event to be exploited along the shoe after the first 1/3rd of the shoe, many times.  If not, after the midway or 60% point.  Another easy exploit that comes along frequently is when it is within 1 or 2 of each other.  Example, 27-28, then 28-28, then 28-29, then 29-29, then 30-29, etc.  That event to me has won many a large wager, the same as a streak of any one side continuing—when it is there, it is there without reason, comparison or definitively being able to define the reason why.   

½ Way to End of Shoe.  More often than not, when the first half of the shoe was 'strong', frequently repeating B's and P's and other distinctive continuing trends that formed, the second half is one to be extremely careful of it continuing.  Sure, great if it does.  But when you play long enough, this is one of the easiest and most profitable events that can be exploited big time for it to be almost the opposite of the first half.

Alternating & 2's.  No rhyme or reason, nothing I have ever found that will point to the successful and continued outcome of chops and/or 2's.  If they appear within a section they can be exploited as it is an event that frequently happens.

Players Side Repeating Within Beginning/First Section.  Players repeating hands in any form of clusters have a frequent tendency to appear within the beginning of the shoe, in the first section.  Meaning, 3 + Players with a frequent 1, sometimes 2 Bankers and each time the winning hand is Players it repeats with 3 + occurrences.  This kind of section is frequently followed by a section of 1's and 2's in various configurations when the first section losses its Player dominance stance, frequently around the 15-19th hands.

Sections & Turning Points. The card or board needs to be visualized into 'sections and turning points'.  There are usually 4 of them easily identifiable within a shoe.  There might be 3 in the extremely weak or very strong shoes and a possibly of 5.  Following 'waves' and the 'sections' makes it easier to follow the flow of cards and the presentments many of the times.  Following the 'waves' and attempting to wager heavier within the middle of them, is my key to increasing my wins with heavier wagers rather than all too often wagering at the very end of any weak, strong or continuing neutral presentments happening.  The key to using it while it is happening, is to identify a new section and with a multitude of other quickly rationalized out thoughts, find yourself within the start or the middle of a presenting 'wave'. 

Sections Identified. The sections with their turning points will reflect the 'waves' of the shoe.  The sections are basically, one of three things.  1)  Weak; 2) Strong; and 3) Neutral.  Baccarat shoes will produce those three series of events in a random order.  However, the shoe will generally have many consistencies which will represent 'weak' or 'strong', patterns/trends/clusters, etc.  For sake of a 'non-arguing/non-challenging' definition, the 'weak-strong-neutral' clusters which I put into 'sections' appear in random presentations without being repetitive according to any one thing.  However, numerous factors when present, have proved them to myself with frequency that is noticeable and identifiable as I have described within the above paragraphs.  How long will the 'clusters' last?  Unknown.  From a few to numerous. 

Weak.  'Weak' is a representation of the most prevalent events that happen within a shoe of baccarat, usually.  'Weak' can be the traditional 1's or 2's or say 1's followed by a 3 repeating side.  'Weak' can be a situation where say the Player had 3's and 4's to the Bankers 1, each time the Banker beat the Player.  Thus, "The Banker is weak".  Or, say the shoe produced 4 Banker runs of 6 to 9 and 3 Player runs of 5 to 7 with a 3 repeating Banker.  Then there was a turn to presenting 1's and 2's.  Thus, "The shoe got real weak".  Or, the Player's 3rd card consistently reduces them to zero or near zero total point value and the Bankers are winning with the first 2 cards or adding up to 7-8-9 total value with every 3rd card pulled.  Thus, "The Player is weak". 

Strong.  'Strong' is a representation of the third most prevalent events that happen within a shoe of baccarat, usually.  'Strong' can be the traditional streaks and runs of either Banker or Player in consecutive order, one after the next.  'Strong' can be a situation where either side, Banker or Player, consecutively produces series or sections of winning hands in multiple.  'Strong' can very well be a section of alternating hands, a continuous 'chop-chop' of alternating Bankers and Players for many times.  'Strong' can very well be a section of 'doubles' or 'pairs' that are produced side-by-side in a continuous result for 6 or 8 or 10 times, etc.  'Strong' can be a series of 1's-2's-3-3-2's-1's, or many other things along those lines.  'Strong' can very well be where a deficient side lost +10 or even +15 or more times and then began to catch-up and equal out the deficiency it was holding.  'Strong' can be where either side is adding point value with every 3rd card drawn for many successive hands in repeating shoe presentment. 

Neutral.  'Neutral' is a representation of the second most prevalent events that happen within a shoe of baccarat, usually.  Neutral happen repeatedly throughout the shoe in many ways.  The most obvious is the +10, -10 or +20 situations with the 'total running' count.  The shoe will frequently, very frequently 'equal' out, meaning the deficient side will catch up and then balance out.  See, 'Equaling Out' in the above paragraphs.

Consistent.  'Consistent' is when the shoe is producing presentments that are holding a repetitive pattern, that replicates a several to numerous previous hands, whether those hands lost or won.  Consistency is one of the easiest things to spot in an upcoming wave about to happen or one that is happening.

Inconsistent.  'Inconsistent' is an event that occurs, not quite rare, but with a lot less frequency than weak/weakness.

Dominant.  'Dominant is the same as strong and consistent events that occur.

Singular. 'Singular' is an individual event or 1's, that occur.

Multiple.  'Multiple' is repeating, dominant and strong events that occur.

Frequent.  'Frequent' is the same as strong events that occur.

Rare. 'Rare; is the same as inconsistent events that occur. 

What so many players, regardless of their experience fail to recognize are the identifiable events I touched on here.  Oh yeas, they do after they are presented and history of course.  That method gives them their fuel and energy to continually label the game as guessing and luck because when they attempt to use that presented information as the sole basis for wagering, the wagers are not within the 'wave'. 

As well, so many people believe baccarat goes only two ways with its presentation, which are attempted to be identified.  'Strong', which they label only as streaks and runs and we all know how that goes.  And secondly, with the 'weak' meaning they interpret 'weak' as being related to chop-chop or possibly the presentments proving 'non streaks', etc. 

Baccarat can be frequently identifiable with the correct vision of a player that has the correct frame-of-mind coupled with other emotional, judgement and physiological issues being present or absent.

By chance do you have any math to backup your ideas?  It looks interesting, but I don't quite see how the math could possibly prove that it will provide an edge.  Mike Shackleford's calculations based on counting bac in general seem to contradict much of what you've written above.  I'm afraid that the edge just isn't there.

Best of luck,

Xander

[alrelax]

By chance do you have any math to backup your ideas?  It looks interesting, but I don't quite see how the math could possibly prove that it will provide an edge.  Mike Shackleford's calculations based on counting bac in general seem to contradict much of what you've written above.  I'm afraid that the edge just isn't there.

Best of luck,

Xander

I have written it and said it numerous times in numerous threads on this board, there is no way possible you have not read my thoughts, style of play and results.  However, for respect and so new members do not think I 'avoid' questions, I will answer it one more time.

No, I do not know how to or I am interested in engaging in math or compiling statistical data for my discoveries, methods and key triggers/betselection as to their outcomes.  For two reasons, 1) I do not believe in it and it would only provide false data for greed realization or shying away from what works and provides me with more win profits than my loss results over any section of months and years of playing this game; 2) I do not know how to and I will not take the time to learn math or statistical methods as I have no use for them. 

As I wrote last night within the thread, "Baccarat Unbeatable Plan #1, thsse are my reasons.  Here they are for sake of answering your question and for the benefit of you, truly not understanding my posiiton, play expereince and the profits I realize from baccarat which far outweigh my lost buyins countless times over.  Now no one has to bring up the question to me regarding my thoughts or desire to become engaged in math or statiscal realization and application that led me and every other person to, attempting to replicate the classromm success of it in the long run.  Same as I would nver become a lawyer or a doctor to attend to my families legal or medical needs, the same as I would never become a labortory for all of my soil and water testing for OA-1's, OA-2's, TPH's, EPH's, TCLEP's, etc. for my hazardous material clean up business, etc., etc., and so on. 

You are 1,000 % correct!  Math, engineers, scientists, grest doctors and attorneys that actually devote their lives and to research and application of their professions are usually thankless and underpaid choosen fields for the ones that bring about needed changes and advancements that help mankind! 

However,  with definitely applying mathematical and models to a game such as baccarat, the casino will always win as our bankrolls will never ever ever ever ever, never ever outlast our own greedy and desirous minds!!!  Every once and awhile a Don Johnson comes along and does what he did at The Tropicana in Atlantic City a few years ago,  and that $15,000.000.00 loss to The Trop probably made their bottom line profits hundreds of times that very same amount from thousands of attempts to replicate that!!!  There was a relatively new owner of the casino when that happened and the limits at the tables were an unprecedented $50,000.00 A HAND FOR WALK IN NO FRONT MONEY PLAYERS!!! Even higher than anywhere in Las Vegas which is $25,000.00 a hand at only a few places. If you look it up about the Tropicana at that time a few years back there are interviews with the owner and he made a superb and phenomenal sense in what he said how he allowed that to happen and the revenue and the exposure with advertising and marketing it has brought his Casino. So who was actually the winner, was it the Tropicana or was it Don Johnson and the baccarat public??  End of story on that one, because I see not one downside to the casino, even though they lost 15 million dollars they won thousands of millions of dollars from players exactly like that as I mentioned and they're wild thoughts that they can replicate that easily with 50,000 a hundred thousand or even a few hundred thousand dollar bank roll. I know several of the hosts that are at that casino that went there just before that happened from when Bally's Grand closed down next door in Atlantic City and they laugh everyday about that situation and tons of players that have repeatedly and consecutively tried.

Anyway you get my drift.  However stories like that which are actual events such as the horse racing story you just mentioned in international news gives such Fuel and Fire to people that want to argue and cause drama, such as those on this message board as well as every other message board, that all of their mathematical and statistical discoveries and rehashing of plain and simple mathematics and statistical facts, backup and support every single thing that they've ever stated on these message boards. Which is true, however it cannot for 99.99 percent-plus of everybody that goes to the baccarat table. Me and you and everyone else will lose their money in the attempt to make a greater amount of money that we will never ever be able to do. And then you have the people that want to poke fun, twist turn and be a message board hero, for their classroom applications which are 100% true and there is your catch 22.

So when I go to the casino now in the last 15  plus years and I start to hit it I smack it and pounce on it, the way that I've described and we have done extremely well and when I lose, I lose very small amounts unlike what my close friend H-Money has the past month or so did,  I'll lose $500 to $1,500 continuously but when we win we win $5,000 to $40,000 plus, very often and as I've stated with money management and everything else that I've described in great detail and great time with here.  It is also and I stress also, 1000% true and my wins are far far greater than what my small losses are because I do not do what H-Money did and likewise 99.99 percent of everyone else does at the baccarat tables. Just say for whatever reason I've discovered what I did and it definitely works. And I don't care if the bottom line is I sprinkled magical dust on them cards and peaked and peeled at them. and I got lucky, it does not matter not one bit because a win is a win and it doesn't matter if Voodoo or a dream or luck or whatever it is one bit, that the game that night, I still cashed out what I did with them pictures and we still had a blast and like I said the bottom line is, it out does the small amount of losses if you can hold and maintain your emotional and psychological state of mind and realize what it takes to win the game. And what it takes to win this game is exactly the way that I've outlined it, showed pictures and described. That  doesn't mean that I'm any smarter than or any better than that of the mathematical or statistical teachers and professors and extremely intelligent people that recite all the mathematical and  statistical facts, but they are only correct in the long run and in the classroom, it doesn't apply to the casino. At least for the player with any kind of obtainable and realistic bankroll in order to apply it to do what Don Johnson did and other phenomenal and lucky gamblers have done. Some people get that lucky break and get to apply their bankroll and they're prevailing the same way that certain actors have in the movie Industries and became internationally famous and apply their talents that millions of other people have just as well,  that just could not find the proper opportunity or other people to nurture them and get them into the spotlight in order to be a success such as Bruce Willis, Clint Eastwood, Al Pacino Robert De Niro Woody Harrelson and many many others actors have successfully accomplished.  A Perfect Analogy.

Just like what we did the other night and I've posted a few pictures which are extremely hard to take and only acceptable at a few casinos when they really know the players and you don't abuse the privilege of snapping a picture that they see of the table without faces in it especially the employees. And if I continue to sit there and do what I did the people that caused the drama on these message boards would be exactly right, however I do not do that any longer. I take the money and I do the most important thing that I've ever discovered and I've tried to let everyone know and it's simply called, resetting and refreshing. End of story once again. And that is the way you can profit extremely well at baccarat. Thank you, goodnight.


***************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************

[alrelax]

You know Xander, Mike, and Blue Angel:  I drive 14.8 miles between my house and my business property.  My buisness property sits in a rural setting adjancent to a highway system.  My house is in a small city.  If I speed the entire way to work, there and on the return trip, chances are I will get numerous tickets very quickly.  However, if I only speed a certain distance, in several spots, depending on the weather, visability, time of day, knowledge as to which police officer or state patrol tropper is working, what color cars those officers drive, staying alert and scanning the side of the roadways for those cars, etc., etc., etc., with numerous other factors--and speeding only in a very short distance of flat open land without hiding places, will greatly forbid me from the liklihood of ever getting a speeding ticket.  And, the kicker is, whatever the math or statistical percentages are of receiving a ticket, really has no bearing on how I will speed if I feel the urge, but I will apply what I call the 'reality factors and advantages' to my situation--the exact same as I do at baccarat. 

Also, a math or statistical expert with a fantastic mind or a super smart labortaory technicaian, may know something about hazardous materials clean-up like what I have been very successful at over the years, the highest majority and everyone I ever saw in the field, failed every common sense and certification required to work at an emerigency situation to be totally in compliance with state officials, county emergency management protocols, OSHA, EPA, etc.  It does not mean that they are stupid or anything of the like, it just means that they are not prepared or have knowledge as to the application of their scientific and mathematical discoveries and research in the field for the application of same.

The key is the application of same.

Also, why would people with such a great and fantastic minds desire  gamble (let alone arguing or occupy their time on internet message boards) when such an intellgent person could easily apply such knowledge in a corporate or private business setting and take down  mid-6 and 7 figure saleries, 401k's, retirement plans, health insurance and a mulitude of additional perks and benefits?  Seriously.  Period.

As well in closing it would be beautiful if you would just state what your definitive mathematical and statistical Edge has proven and provided you in the amount of wins, cash and profits, as well as the definition as to what that edge is, so you can make your contribution to the board and allow other players to profit the same way that you are claiming or say that you have or did in the past. But I have yet to read that and you have yet to post that unless I'm missing it and if I'm missing it, please post it for everyone else to profit off of which you defend that you so, and claim.  Thanks. 

[Xander]

Alrelax,

Maybe you already know this..maybe you don't.  Don Johnson won because he used math to effectively exploit the rebate process.  He didn't have a system to beat bac.  He did however count cards at bj for a bit.

Like it or not, the math matters.

As well in closing it would be beautiful if you would just state what your definitive mathematical and statistical Edge has proven and provided you in the amount of wins, cash and profits, as well as the definition as to what that edge is, so you can make your contribution to the board and allow other players to profit the same way that you are claiming or say that you have or did in the past. But I have yet to read that and you have yet to post that unless I'm missing it and if I'm missing it, please post it for everyone else to profit off of which you defend that you so, and claim.  Thanks

.

In roulette my edge is 10 to 50% edge.  Method is vb and biased wheels.

In bac my edge is much lower.  1.5 to occasionally 23%.
My favorite was the lucky nine side count.  Bac however is far less lucrative than roulette.

Posting pics of  winnings, and money, I feel, is tacky and ghetto, like wearing thick gold chains and wearing a grill.

[AsymBacGuy]

In roulette my edge is 10 to 50% edge.  Method is vb and biased wheels.

Sorry, but biased wheels are just history (Garcia-Pelayo family) and VB theories cannot work on modern low slots edge wheels featuring an astounding bouncing effect due to a very low ball weight.
Even utilizing electronic (illegal) devices, there's no way one can predict the most likely landing area the ball will drop.

For that matter, even the Caro or Abbiati brand Monte Carlo wheels (the best to try a VB approach as they feature a huge slot edge) cannot guarantee an edge even by the use of instrumental devices as dealers spin the rotor at a very huge velocity which endores at maximum the random effect.

as.   

   

[8OR9]

In Las Vegas. using any kind of electronic device in a casino will get you up to 5 years in prison.

[XDotNet]

......Additions and Reductions, on 3 card draws.  As soon as one side begins to get additions, particularly the player side and the banker side is reduced by its 3rd card—be alert for that event to continue.......

This is an interesting phenomenon to be aware of .... We've all had stretches where the bet we choose just keeps reducing and getting beat. I just never really thought to be aware of it.

It's also interesting because, this is something that you would only see after playing 1000's of shoes and being observant. It's one of those intangibles that only come with experience. I'm going to start keeping an eye out for reductions..... interesting.

[alrelax]

......Additions and Reductions, on 3 card draws.  As soon as one side begins to get additions, particularly the player side and the banker side is reduced by its 3rd card—be alert for that event to continue.......

This is an interesting phenomenon to be aware of .... We've all had stretches where the bet we choose just keeps reducing and getting beat. I just never really thought to be aware of it.

It's also interesting because, this is something that you would only see after playing 1000's of shoes and being observant. It's one of those intangibles that only come with experience. I'm going to start keeping an eye out for reductions..... interesting.

Let's emphasize repetitive/continued to the picture.  It is a frequent thing at times, not too rare, depending on the way you break down what actually happens, meaning what is producing the shoe presentments, in other words.  And, I have found often, that when it is a repetitive redundant happening, it continues for a bit.  To myself, it is an identifiable trend/event that happens.

[marinetech]

Long time since I've been on this board or posted. Seems dead. Anyways, I've play baccarat in Vegas Ac, mohegan and Foxwoods in ct, etc Biloxi, Florida, you name it.....

Baccarat is different every day and every shoe. I tend to split the game up. Meaning, I'll post the players and bankers against a certain pattern, any pattern really. Repeats, opposites, following pattern, against it, etc. we all know sometimes it works, other times no.

I've tried more strategies than I readily want to admit. I've also lost way more than I care to admit! It's a hard game. You need bankroll, patience, discipline and a goal. What your willing to win/lose. Without that, you're simply a gambler, recreational player, etc.

I was ahead 20k 3 weeks ago. Week later later 26k, next day lost 7k, 2 days ago I won 8k.....

I bet 300-3k. Usually 500 in my minimum bet but table max when I'm reaching and thinking that this stuff has to revert back to the mean....some can call it a strong bias, others like me think because I've seen it countless times, the other side will catch up. Sorta like 2-3 standard deviations above/below. Don't always happen.......

Anyone who says they have a trigger is kidding themselves. They may work occasionally like anything will, but nothing is guaranteed.

Luckily for me, sports betting is my cup of tea. In 2016 I won about 500k (cash) between Las Vegas and my local who cut me off. 5 weeks ago I won 30k in 2 weeks. Mad bet was 5k. World Series and super bowl, NHL playoffs, college baskets and can bowls, I bet 20-40k on a series.

In 2017 because of my success the prior year and a divorce, I travelled and took it easy. I enjoy life. Now, I'm getting back into it and now that the Supreme Court legalized it, I'm waiting for New York to get some casinos to accept bets and build the sports books.....

Like the other night my little was visiting from North Carolina, I said hey, bet 5k on Cleveland down 2-0 at home, and in hockey take Tampa bay at home against caps, well, Cavs won by 30 and Tampa won.....she didn't bet it but I did.

I sit and watch and wait and pounce.....easy 10k cash. I can do this every week or month, whenever the situation arises. 27 years experience with sports betting.  Not many in the world as good as me. Sounds arrogant I know but I've came a long way from a 20 dollar a game bettor to a mad bet of 50k.....

Stupidly, I've won 30k one month, go to Vegas 2x in a month and lose 27k playing baccarat....did this many times. I have an edge in Sports, house games, very few ever do.

I'm a contrarian bettor......hard to go against the herd but if you have the balls and fortitude, it will pay off handsomely.....

[alrelax]

That is absolutely correct, it is 'almost' a different shoe and game with the same rules, with each and every shoe.  And that is why the highest of the majority of players lose their money in complete awe when the cards are presented. 

How You Lose—Why You Lose

With all the beliefs and subscriptions as to easy money—'sure fire winning'—'I can beat the game'—and numerous other ones, there seems to be widespread disagreement amongst the factual raw data of gambling with games that are either fair or extremely low house advantage.  Baccarat falls into that description of being a fairly low house advantage.  However, it is all dependent upon how the player is attempting to wager, mostly with time and length played and actual number of hands.  All the rest of the game beliefs, strategies, illusions, perceptions, influences and player frame-of-minds are subjective and individual to each player.

It is rock solid, will not change, cannot change that, there is a definitive explanation of what actually happens to a player that plays too much.  And that is, what will happen to a player with finite resources continuously playing will inevitably go broke against a player with infinite resources in a fair or negative-expectation game. However, this is also true in a positive-expectation game if the player with finite resources continually plays and increases his stakes when winning, but does not reduce them when losing.  And you-the player have finite resources.  And the casino-your opponent has infinite resources.  Period, no discussion, factual.

You can believe it, not believe it, incorporate it into your play or totally disregard it and be the first King Kong gambler to overtake and bankrupt any and all casinos you enter with your play and unlimited hours.  I learned and I learned the hard way.  It wasn't in any one gaming jurisdiction or any one casino property, I was hard headed and I had to have my lights knocked out by several in each.  But one day I actually did read, understand and became 100% conscious of the time and number of hands factor.  But I did learn and moved all (well all that I know of anyway) from my subconscious to my conscious frame-of-mind when I am in the casino chair there is no magic time or number of hands whether you are winning and should stop or if you are losing and should not continue any longer.  It is individualistic and ideal to each person and their situation, experience and comfort levels.  The problem with the internet, is it causes 'lazy learning' in my opinion.  Meaning, "I can just go on the internet, read something, learn it, be versed in it, use it and profit from other's mistakes and misery".  Well, partly correct, but to really work and work in your favor the best that can—is you have to tweak, twist, turn, bend, conform and adapt—what will actually make you a winner.  And that my friend, will take trial and error, blood sweat and tears and cash.

Here is why I say that, because I might be able to go into a casino with $2,000.00 and play two shoes and win $15,000.00.  With the same buy-in and shoes and time played, you might be able to win only $2,000.00 or perhaps lose all together.  No matter the protocols and set-parameters of buy-in's, wagering and time played; Game beliefs, Strategies, Illusions, Perceptions, Influences and player Frame-of-Minds will enter the picture and you will have different responses and reactions to the numerous things that happen within the course of the baccarat shoe being played out, than what I would, as long as we were not sitting side-by-side and agreeing on each and every hand with an exact wager, etc. 

So, amongst gambling analysts, casino personnel, statisticians, 'experts', related professor type non-casino others, and of course, the me's and you's—the fresh or let's say under 10 years of playing and the been there crowd, more than 10 years of playing people.  But the fact is, experience is realty and reality is made-formed and experienced every day at the casino, any casino, every casino.  Realizing reality is different—depends on the events produced, however it will always repeat itself, but in a random way, when it is ready.  What is a random way?  At a future date past the hand you are currently experiencing.

Your actual results diverge from being somewhere and doing something.  The more you do that 'something', the more you engage—the more your results just diverge at a slower rate--faded—clouded—non meaningful, etc.,  even though you play the same amount of hands and shoes per session.

Reason being, your subconscious tunes out the 'norm' and what you are comfortable with the majority of the times.  So then, the actual ratio of results will eventually translate into either good or bad—lucky or unlucky—negative or positive, and so on.

Here are my two examples of why people lose—oh, there are many more but this is not a novel, this is just part of a series of baccarat play I am writing about.  #1) A most famous example I can give of why gamblers lose is, in a game of roulette at the Monte Carlo Casino on August 18, 1913, when the ball fell in black 26 times in a row. This was an extremely uncommon occurrence, although no more or less common than any of the other 67,108,863 sequences of 26 red or black. Gamblers lost millions of dollars betting against black, reasoning incorrectly that the streak was causing an "imbalance" in the randomness of the wheel, and that it had to be followed by a long streak of red.  What could they have done different?  Pounce on it.  But that is just a written and published example of what I call, false illusions and playing against what is happening.  #2)  The mistaken belief that, if something happens more frequently than normal during a period, it will happen less frequently in the future, or that, if something happens less frequently than normal during a period, it will happen more frequently in the future.  As well, and must be included is also the following.  In which a gambler decides, after a consistent tendency towards one side or a certain type of event, that the same side or event is more likely out of some mystical preconception that fate has thus far allowed for consistent results of that side or event. Believing the odds to favor that side or event, the gambler sees no reason to change to the other side or possible events from happening and then 'regression to the means' occurs, which is a proven outcome in gambling will happen, not might happen or could happen, but will happen.

I saw it the other night, super clear and like my little boy taking a bit of candy from the box in his hand and shoving it into my mouth, telling me to taste it.  No choice and obvious—is what I am trying to say.  A younger gentlemen working two cards for the Players side, working them-squeezing them-peeking and blowing and dinging.  Flops a 'Natural 8' over.  His facial expressions, his excitement, his tallying up the forthcoming win—all so ever present.  Defined, bold, a statement as to his believes-convictions and perceptions.  Then an elderly female with little fanfare and a bit of excitement, but not much.  Flops a 'Natural 9'.  The sheer disappointment and quick slam of the table by the younger gentlemen, I actually felt kind of bad for him.  But, what was the most interesting part to me—was the comparison on excitement and expressions which was a direct reflection of each person's illusions, perceptions, influences and player's frame-of-minds, regardless of the wager size from each.  The female had a much larger wager by the way than the younger gentlemen did.

The female player could have easily have had a total of zero or anything up to an 8 and lost the hand.  She didn't know any more or less than the younger gentlemen did as far as what was going to come out of the shoe next.  But, there was distinctive influential factors as to what each had go through their decision making processes prior to the hand coming out.  There was talk from each about 'how and why' each would prevail.  And I also say, the younger gentlemen could have had the advantage of not being 'hard core' and set in his ways the way so many older and seasoned players certainly are.  In fact, I do believe that being fresh to a game going on or fresh in the number of years played, both have certain advantages over a player that has been at the table for many shoes as well as his having many more years of experience than the other person. 

Point being---and I do wholeheartedly believe an important point.  The harder and longer one plays, the more callous and laziness that person becomes to the important info—signs—trends and values of the sections within each shoe.  Whether that is the total number of hours and shoes for the session or the number of years of experience.  Same as most workers say for example on a construction site.  The newer workers are seemingly alert, watching everything, everywhere, all the time.  Never letting their guard down, etc.  Super CAREFUL and METICULOUS (!!!!!!!!!!!) with all capital letter and exclamation points after.  As the months and years roll ahead, that same person pays less attention and has noticeably less concern for his surroundings.  Although he is now experienced and seasoned, he opens himself up to the immediate and surrounding hazards and obstacles he once was worried about, was always conscious about, avoided and stressed over.  Eventually there came a turning point where most of those things went into his subconscious.  In fact, so many become a bit lazy as well.  By the proper definition of the word 'lazy' as in physically lacking output, etc., I am not referring to that.  But what just happened with this type of worker, is he just became a bit hard-headed, egotistic and in fact—a bit overconfident.  Probably not much different than the highest majority of all bac players that have 'been there and done all that', as the saying goes.  And those very same seasoned players I am referring to, will wager 12 times against a Banker run of 15 because of the things I laid out.  Then those exact same seasoned players, will win their 16th hand which is the 'cut' to the other side they were so adamantly convinced was going to happen 13 hands ago, they won far less than even because of table limits or their own bank roll.  Of course they also missed the 12 streak of the other side immediately coming out next only because, "that is so rare and cannot happen".

Be smart, stay conscious—stay alert—keep your brain working and fill your conscious with the illusions, perceptions, influences and correct frame-of-minds that will lead you to profitable and non-egotistic and knoweldabgle wins with the correct time to stop and retreat.  Be ready to pounce on those small sections identified by their turning points when the shoe does produce welcoming opportunities to clearly 'smack the casino' as they say.  But you are only going to be able to do that by not getting lazy, not getting over confident, not believing negative progression will make you whole, not being overly influenced with garbage, false illusions, fake and worthless perceptions and a proper frame-of-mind. 

If you have convinced yourself that you can win with merely wagering with or against what you have statistically calculated should and will happen, while under the believe that is all there is to this game,  come back and read this in a couple of years. 

So go ahead you'll, plop down your money--you are experienced, researched and extremely knowledgeable.  You can't lose and if you do lose--you only gave back a mere portion of all that win money--just a tax, no??  Gamble harder, longer, faster and larger.  Look down on everyone and tell us you'll know all the answers but everyone can't know them all because  the casinos will close or something along those lines anyway.  LOL.

[alrelax]

Hi Al!
Snow? I told you several times to move to South Nevada or, better yet, to South Arizona. Nonetheless you keep living on the ugly side of US. Good universities there, but very bad weather tough.
Of course I'm joking, still I'm trying to get you on the right side of US. :-)

as.

Mississippi Delta Region!  Where right is right and good deeds are appreciated.  No Starbucks or Panara Bread in the downtown of the little town I am moving to! 

[alrelax]

Worth a bump.

[KungFuBac]

Good review and worth the bump.

"...Be smart, stay conscious—stay alert—keep your brain working and fill your conscious with the illusions, perceptions, influences and correct frame-of-minds that will lead you to profitable and non-egotistic and knoweldabgle wins with the correct time to stop and retreat.  Be ready to pounce on those small sections identified by their turning points when the shoe does produce welcoming opportunities to clearly 'smack the casino' as they say.  But you are only going to be able to do that by not getting lazy, not getting over confident, not believing negative progression will make you whole, not being overly influenced with garbage, false illusions, fake and worthless perceptions and a proper frame-of-mind.,,,"


My great uncle once told me:

"Grasshopper, when at the Bacs table one should play scared, but play with no fear"

                                                                               --Confucius

[alrelax]

Please make sure you have throughly read #24. 

How You Lose—Why You Lose

With all the beliefs and subscriptions as to easy money—'sure fire winning'—'I can beat the game'—and numerous other ones, there seems to be widespread disagreement amongst the factual raw data of gambling with games that are either fair or extremely low house advantage.  Baccarat falls into that description of being a fairly low house advantage.  However, it is all dependent upon how the player is attempting to wager, mostly with time and length played and actual number of hands.  All the rest of the game beliefs, strategies, illusions, perceptions, influences and player frame-of-minds are subjective and individual to each player.