While we all concentrate our efforts on developing the very best bet selection process along with the very best money-management plan in order to enhance our chances for success, sometimes the very best place to start on our quest is in the recognition and realization of knowing what we cannot do:
1.) Control the cards....can't do it. The cards will fall as they may, and there's simply nothing we can do about it. So, knowing that, why let yourself get emotionally involved in the outcomes? I'd try to detach myself from the hands as best that I'm able to, and simply record the results on my scorecard. Tough beat, bad beat....bottom line, you lost the bet, no sense stewing over it. It's just a wasted emotion anyhow, because you have nothing to do with the dealing or the natural order of the cards, Best to realize that from the outset; you can't control the cards.
2.) Win every session...can't do it. It can't be done, so why waste all of your good time and energy in trying to come up with an "infallible" method of play when "infallible" is simply "impossible"? You must learn to "walk a loser". I've spoken of this a million times; if you cannot learn how to lose you will never, ever learn how to win over the long term. Trying to win every session will, at some point or another, leave you in a hole so deep that it will swallow your bankroll whole. Much better to try to limit the severity of your losses rather searching in vain for some sort of total avoidance, and much cheaper too. Losses are inevitable....so much so, that they are actually accounted for in my game. That's where my "recoup mode" comes in. But not in this particular session; no, recoup will simply have to wait. But there'd be no recoup mode at all if I ever let any session loss become too large and too unrecoverable. So you learn to walk a loss. Best to realize that from the outset; you can't win every session.
Knowing what you cannot do is probably the best beginning to trying to hone in on the specialized play that you're trying to develop, so that you can concentrate on what you can accomplish as opposed to what you cannot. There's something very empowering when you know and learn to accept your limitations, for only then can you develop your play around your strengths.
For instance, I prefer a tight mode of play within rather short sessions. I do not like elongated sessions, and so I play a tight game with a relatively-small win goal. But I'll do that 2 or 3 times a day. Why do I prefer shorter sessions? Because I play a "variance" game, where I can adjust my session unit sizes based upon the recent results of my latest sessions. So, more sessions equals more input, more stats. And "tighter" (read: more relevant) stats. And so it goes for my style of play, my approach to this game.
I must be doing something right, for I'm quite certain I'm as close to a "flat-bettor" (read: level stakes) as most any player could be. Especially in the midst of a session; I'm mostly flat-betting, only with occasional 2-unit or, dare I say, a 3-unit bet. My play is probably the most boring thing you'd ever wish to witness. Two units up, one unit down or three units up, two units down....flat-betting can take a toll on a player's patience. But if your bet selection process and its accompanying variance is worth its weight at all....flat-betting with session-to-session "adjustments" (read: variance-based unit-size movements) is the be-all and the end-all; it's unbeatable.
And it all began with knowing what I cannot do, knowing what I couldn't control....only then could I develop a game that played to my strengths, all by learning to control that which I am able to.
As always, I wish it for all of you.
Know what you can't do, and you will know what you can do.
Correct, James.
I know that I'd like to play for higher unit sizes, but, alas, I also know that I cannot do that without sacrificing a vital step in my pre-planned recoup/recovery modes(s). And so I do not, and thusly accept my grinding style of play and the slow but sure profits over the long term.
Greed can be our undoing, of that there can never be a doubt. So we must learn to accept our limitations, especially as it pertains to our unique money managements requirements. For me and my mode of play, in a sense, the lesser my unit sizes, the more actual profit, dollar-wise, I will make in the long run. In this way, I effectively afford myself the maneuverability of my unit sizes, all based upon my most recent variance statistics.
Wins will always add up rather nicely, especially when there are no monster-sized (sorry, still in "Halloween-mode") losses to offset/negate them.
Stay well.
Quote from: gr8player on October 31, 2015, 08:15:48 PM
You must learn to "walk a loser". I've spoken of this a million times; if you cannot learn how to lose you will never, ever learn how to win over the long term.
Gr8,
One of the hardest things to "learn" is how to lose. Very few talk about it but it is very important aspect of one's overall game.
Thanks for bringing it up.
AD
F' losing!
Useful considerations, no doubt.
But without a verified edge, I'd add under the "what we can't do" category the "we can't control the negative variance" issue.
So if you are able to control the game in some way it must imply the concept that you can benefit of an edge.
Take care
as.
My biggest downfall is that when I am in a losing situation, where I am down 7,9 or may be even 12 units, I don't just quit the shoe, no use fighting it. So I don't limit my damage. I continue playing thinking this can't be happening to me, I'm frequently on the winning side, what the hell is going on type of mentality. So the 10 unit loss never quite goes back to break even, in fact it compounds into a 15 or 20 unit loss. In the same token, when I am up 6 or 7 units at best, I bail out of a shoe, especially if its early on in the proceedings. In a nutshell, I don't limit my losses when I should, and I don't extend winnings when I'm in a position to do so.
That being said, my personality is more in line with GR8, boring may be tedious, but one never goes broke when in profit. Using larger units and winning a few in a shoe is dynamic. It must realign my thinking. It's not how many units you win, it's the amount of of profit you make. Can't buy groceries with units.
Ciao
Joeu
Quote from: AsymBacGuy on November 01, 2015, 10:42:26 PM
Useful considerations, no doubt.
But without a verified edge, I'd add under the "what we can't do" category the "we can't control the negative variance" issue.
So if you are able to control the game in some way it must imply the concept that you can benefit of an edge.
Take care
as.
Hmmm...a "verified" edge? I am quite certain that I haven't any verifiable edge, yet my "negative variance" is rather manageable.
I happen to believe, ABG, that the "edge" that I am "benefiting" from arises from the totality of my play, the entirety of my play, rather than any one singular, specific edge to my game.
Stay well, my friend.
Quote from: joeystyle on November 02, 2015, 02:23:44 PM
My biggest downfall is that when I am in a losing situation, where I am down 7,9 or may be even 12 units, I don't just quit the shoe, no use fighting it. So I don't limit my damage. I continue playing thinking this can't be happening to me, I'm frequently on the winning side, what the hell is going on type of mentality. So the 10 unit loss never quite goes back to break even, in fact it compounds into a 15 or 20 unit loss. In the same token, when I am up 6 or 7 units at best, I bail out of a shoe, especially if its early on in the proceedings. In a nutshell, I don't limit my losses when I should, and I don't extend winnings when I'm in a position to do so.
That being said, my personality is more in line with GR8, boring may be tedious, but one never goes broke when in profit. Using larger units and winning a few in a shoe is dynamic. It must realign my thinking. It's not how many units you win, it's the amount of of profit you make. Can't buy groceries with units.
Ciao
Joeu
Hello, Joey.
Yes, you just happen to bring up, in your first paragraph, the dilemma of many a player....betting more and more into our losing jags while cutting back from our winning ones. My friend, you are not alone in that regard; you see, we, as players, are "wired" that way. We inherently don't believe that anything will last; and so we believe that our losing jags will soon end, and so we "chase" for an immediate upturn, and we don't believe our winning jags will last, and so we back off of them for the sake of preserving our win.
So what's the answer to this "pre-wired" dilemma? A variance plan. Exactly the way that I approach it. You see, my friend, when you have it all pre-planned based upon your actual statistics, there is no "chasing" of losing jags and there is no "second-guessing" of cutting wins short. There exists only LONG TERM RESULTS. That is all I care about and that is all I play for. And that is how my play is designed, so that I'm better prepared to back-off the current losing jags (read: pare my losses) and better-prepared to maximize the upturns (read: efficient recoup and/or profit).
Lastly, Joey, your "one never goes broke when in profit" is PURE GOLD. If I were you, I'd write that at the very top of all your scorecards when you're playing, it'll keep you anchored and focused with a long term mind-set.
Look, Joey, knowing your shortcomings (as you enumerated in your first paragraph) is the first step towards eradicating them. Do something about it. Taper your game down with some specific rules/guidelines for yourself and you'll be on your way towards long term success.
As always, I wish it for all of you. Stay well.
Thank you gr8 for your practical sound advice. Casinos love emotional players. I'm sure they have done extensive studies on tapping into a player's emotions to have a major advantage over them because of it. Afterall, we are gamblers in their eyes ( are we honest it ,ourselves?). So, I will tamp down my emotions, and climb slower and continue to progress as a successful Baccarat Player. And, yes I will write in bold letters my motto!
Blessed day everyone!
Ciao
Joey
Quote from: gr8player on November 02, 2015, 07:14:47 PM
I happen to believe, ABG, that the "edge" that I am "benefiting" from arises from the totality of my play, the entirety of my play, rather than any one singular, specific edge to my game.
Stay well, my friend.
That's really a good answer.
Period.
as.
Quote from: gr8player on November 02, 2015, 02:14:47 pm
[quote Gr8]I happen to believe, ABG, that the "edge" that I am "benefiting" from arises from the totality of my play, the entirety of my play, rather than any one singular, specific edge to my game.[/quote]
[quote as]That's really a good answer.
Period.[/quote]
Make up your mind as. There is either a verifiable edge or not. Gr8 says not while you have been touting the opposite for months. BTW, still waiting for the book you promise here and on other websites.
Hi Jimskie!
Wait, I sayed that gr8player answer was the best he/she could provide as he/she cannot identify a verified edge.
I strongly believe that without a verified edge we are in big trouble to make a living at this game. At the same time, gr8player got my respect because he (for simplicity I assume is a man) illustrated many useful general approaches to get the best of it at baccarat.
Gr8player ideas of diluting the betting, properly considering the w/l ratios not in term of shoes or single sessions played but wholly assessed are, imo, viable options to get the best of it no matter what. After all, casinos aren't worried about a couple of losing sessions, we players do and this thing tend to worsen our game.
Moreover, he spoke about a "recovering plan". For what I know, the most brilliant gambling systems not including a mathematical edge have considered such important tool. I don't know the details of his recovering strategy, but again the idea is well placed.
In a word and imo, gr8player's posts are valuable in a sense or another.
Nonetheless I prefer to rely onto an edge. A verified edge, that is a statistical (or mathematical) very long term proof that my bets will win more often than not by a mechanical bet selection strategy.
There are many systems capable to get a mathematical edge over the house, all focused on the side bets. Few players utilize them and this is a pity as almost all high stakes rooms offer huge maximum side bets limits.
Of course a mathematical edge means counting cards and carefully registering them, a thing many high stakes players aren't willing to do.
Unfortunately and even though many casinos continue to offer very deep shoe penetrations (excellent for card counting procedures) there's a possible countermeasure. Yes, burning cards or cutting away from the play a substantial final portion of the 8-deck shoe). This being the case, we're done.
About BP bets nothing emerged in the literature, so the BP bets are considered unbeatable worldwide.
Yes, mathematically speaking they are (or better sayed they are insignificantly beatable by a card counting method).
After years of studying I've found that this is not the case.
My conclusion came from very long pc and real observations, maybe gr8player got the same conclusion by another perspective.
Both conclusions are scientifically unaccepted as fully denied by mathematics.
Good for us.
Once it was the sun to circle around the Earth, isn't it?
My book will be released soon, I don't know if it will be widely spread or restricted to few.
The reason to restrict its diffusion is because I don't 100% trust live automatic shuffler machines after possibly having instructed by humans what to do.
We never know.
as.
Quote from: AsymBacGuy on November 08, 2015, 11:27:55 PM
Hi Jimskie!
Wait, I sayed that gr8player answer was the best he/she could provide as he/she cannot identify a verified edge.
If you don't have a verified edge then we are basically playing a guessing and betting game. Gr8 variance no different than mine or yours.
Quote from: Jimske on November 09, 2015, 01:59:08 AM
Gr8 variance no different than mine or yours.
That may very well be true. The differences are apparent, however, by the tracking and subsequent utilization of our variance(s).
Take this week's trip, for instance:
I struggled last week, as I expanded upon in my trip report, and picked up only a total of 4 units for the entirety. And so, this week's trip, I will be upping my basic unit size (just slightly, but noticeably), all in anticipation of a "strike-rate correction" in the upward direction. If I am correct (and you'll be able to read of it right here in this forum at trip's conclusion), I will maximize my profits just following an "off" week; again, all variance-based play, all the time.
Stay well.
Quote from: Jimske on November 09, 2015, 01:59:08 AM
If you don't have a verified edge then we are basically playing a guessing and betting game. Gr8 variance no different than mine or yours.
The trick to winning is allowing yourself the chance to win. That's the edge. Gr8player has been alluding to this concept for years.
If you have a bet selection method, like I have, you have a method that produces every type of swing in expected durations. These durations can be used against the casino. A duration of a losing streak can be defended against by betting only the minimum allowed. A duration of moderate effectiveness can be treated as the same as negative duration. When you get into a winning streak you must attack with your current attacking level of play. This is an amount based on your bankroll & MM.
You use the power of your bet selection to produce these waves of durations. You must know how to handle the losing streaks. You can't avoid them.
A wise player knows from experience what a win streak looks like and how often they generally occur in a normal session of play. Wishful thinking and magical belief makes a poor substitute for ambitious and blind guising. Yes, you only have a guess. It's what you do with those guesses that makes the difference. I control the flow of changes and how they have an effect on my bankroll. There is no guessing involved in that.
Well said, Giz, and, even more importantly, well played.
The savvy player learns exactly how to play those "swings", as you call them, or "variances", as I refer to them.
Lastly, as to the term "guessing", that's a rather nebulous term that can mean vastly different things to different players. I, myself, inherently hold a rather negative view as it refers to that term. I suppose that is due to the fact that I do not, ever, never, "guess". IMHO, there simply exists no room in this game for any guesswork, either at the tables directly or even as it relates to one's general, overall thinking regarding same.
To my way of thinking regarding this game, there exists only statistics. Proven statistics, based strictly upon my (and only mine) method of play, both bet selection- and money management-wise. I make adjustments to my play based ONLY upon those proven statistics, both inter- and intra-session(s).
(Sidenote: As I close this post, I wish to make it very clear that while there are players....Jimske, yourself, and various others....that do prefer to use the term "guess" and/or "guessing", and I do not; that does not make me right or them wrong. More than likely, it probably could all come down to semantics, different terms for virtually the same thing. So I am by no means knocking anyone's usages of any terms; this forum, nor any forum, can never prosper in that scenario, for only the unrestricted use and application of anyone's verbiage....assuming that it is kept civil....can and will serve as the vehicle that keeps us all moving forward within this forum.)
Take care, and stay well.
You can call it semantics, Gr8, but there is an important difference between an edge and guessing. An edge is when you can identify certain events in the past and predict with certainty some positive expectation. That's an edge. If you want to call it an educated guess that's fine. The problem I have with the term edge and "personal variance and statistics" is that it portrays to the uninitiated that there is a true mathematical edge. If only they could have the "right" bet placement. Nonsense!
Now asymbacc says he HAS an edge. A predictable advantage from some past set of circumstance. That's an edge! Except it's still a mystery. got to wait for the book I guess.
Speaking of nebulous, Gr8, Gizmo here is the master!
Quote from: Gizmotron on November 09, 2015, 06:04:37 PM
The trick to winning is allowing yourself the chance to win.
I'm speechless! IOW, you got to bet in order to win? Profound.
QuoteIf you have a bet selection method, like I have, you have a method that produces every type of swing in expected durations.
So your bet selection actually produces the future events, huh? Okay. Can't argue with this "fact." :))
QuoteThese durations can be used against the casino. A duration of a losing streak can be defended against by betting only the minimum allowed.
My favorite. Has it ever ocurred to you that a streak can only be identified AFTER the fact? Apparently not.
QuoteA duration of moderate effectiveness can be treated as the same as negative duration. When you get into a winning streak you must attack with your current attacking level of play.
Another beaut. So what is your definition of a winning streak? WIAR? % WR?
QuoteThis is an amount based on your bankroll & MM.
Well, finally some sense to this post! IMO, the biggest downfall of gamblers is too high of a bet spread. When you lose that big recoup bet you're stuck with some hard decisions and either gonna win a LOT of "normal" base bets (unlikely) or have to go deeper (you in trouble).
QuoteYou use the power of your bet selection to produce these waves of durations. You must know how to handle the losing streaks. You can't avoid them.
A wise player knows from experience what a win streak looks like and how often they generally occur in a normal session of play.
You seem to consider yourself very wise. How about giving an example of what a win streak looks like and tell us how often they ocurr? I'll go first. MoSun Shoe #779 WLWWWLWWWWWWWWWWWLWLL Quit at hand #48. Unusual but it happens. I think my most ever WIAR was 12 so this 11 IAR close to a new high. Maybe I'll get another one sooner than 5000 more hours of play? :)) Interestingly enough that was only a 57% WR in that shoe.
QuoteWishful thinking and magical belief makes a poor substitute for ambitious and blind guising.
Is it me or does this make no sense at all?
QuoteYes, you only have a guess. It's what you do with those guesses that makes the difference.
Gizmo is coming back to earth - fortunately!It's a guessing game and a betting game. Why? Because that's how you defeat a random EC game.
QuoteI control the flow of changes and how they have an effect on my bankroll. There is no guessing involved in that.
Giz apparently stopped smoking the weed now. Yes, you got to control yourself but you can't predict the outcome.
Perhaps it would be a lot easier to just sing: "got to know when to hold 'em, no when to fold 'em" Doesn't that about sum up your theories?
J
Jimske, Thanks for letting everyone know what you think. I can't help thinking that none of what you have to say are actually questions but rather so much rhetorical posturing. I'm very glad that you are where you are at, as a gambler, and/or as an internet forum pest. I will never respond to such a demanding beggar if this is where you are really stuck. And I think this is where you ARE really stuck. I actually want people to fail at gambling. I need that for the casinos to stay in business. So thanks for gambling.
Gr8, after your comments regarding "guessing," I'm willing to interject what it is exactly that I do. I probe three levels of triggers to see what consistencies are revealed among 12 different sets of dozens with considerations of their sleepers or singles. My probing produces exact results. There are decisions to be made even though there are no guarantees of the outcome. My method handles the losses easily. So I'm actually probing the real-time flow of randomness. When I see what I like, I place attacking bets. There is actually no guessing involved.
Quote from: Gizmotron on November 10, 2015, 05:11:53 PM
Jimske, Thanks for letting everyone know what you think. I can't help thinking that none of what you have to say are actually questions but rather so much rhetorical posturing. I'm very glad that you are where you are at, as a gambler, and/or as an internet forum pest. I will never respond to such a demanding beggar if this is where you are really stuck. And I think this is where you ARE really stuck. I actually want people to fail at gambling. I need that for the casinos to stay in business. So thanks for gambling.
Gr8, after your comments regarding "guessing," I'm willing to interject what it is exactly that I do. I probe three levels of triggers to see what consistencies are revealed among 12 different sets of dozens with considerations of their sleepers or singles. My probing produces exact results. There are decisions to be made even though there are no guarantees of the outcome. My method handles the losses easily. So I'm actually probing the real-time flow of randomness. When I see what I like, I place attacking bets. There is actually no guessing involved.
BWHWHAHAHAHA!!!
Please, go back under whatever rock you crawled out from!!! I will keep it clean but you're probing is BSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS. Real time, lol, your real time is what you JUST SEEN which is the PAST. So, now bet what you just seen and it changes, you now bet again, changed again. So, your entire way of playing is flawed like your mind is warped. You have as much of an edge as I do, ZILCHHHHHHHHHHH. In your little brain you may "think" you have one, but we all know that is BS.
Post your 3 levels of triggers and I would bet a good amount that within a day, it will be debunked and proven it is CRAPPPOLLAAAAAAAA.
I certainly will not hold my breath, like most others on here, you talk and talk and talk and provide 0000000000000000000000000000000 substance, A WHOLE LOT OF FLUFF YOU DO ENTERTAIN US WITH!!!!!
Now, it's time to carry on with lunch. I actually stopped eating because I was so compelled to respond to you utter nonsense! Carry on.............
Quote from: WorldBaccaratKing on November 10, 2015, 06:07:37 PM
BWHWHAHAHAHA!!!
Please, go back under whatever rock you crawled out from!!! I will keep it clean but you're probing is BSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS. Real time, lol, your real time is what you JUST SEEN which is the PAST. So, now bet what you just seen and it changes, you now bet again, changed again. So, your entire way of playing is flawed like your mind is warped. You have as much of an edge as I do, ZILCHHHHHHHHHHH. In your little brain you may "think" you have one, but we all know that is BS.
Post your 3 levels of triggers and I would bet a good amount that within a day, it will be debunked and proven it is CRAPPPOLLAAAAAAAA.
I certainly will not hold my breath, like most others on here, you talk and talk and talk and provide 0000000000000000000000000000000 substance, A WHOLE LOT OF FLUFF YOU DO ENTERTAIN US WITH!!!!!
Now, it's time to carry on with lunch. I actually stopped eating because I was so compelled to respond to you utter nonsense! Carry on.............
More rhetorical posturing... Real-time depends on the results of the latest bet. Thanks for stating the obvious. You are good at it. I'm just guessing, but you seem to think that the unknown future is something that I'm oblivious to. I have stated for years that my bet selection method produces three types of characteristics; "works great, works flat, or works badly." I win because I play the results that I'm getting. I suspect that you need to be hand fed like all beggars do. Thank you for gambling too.
P.S. "I've noticed that in EVERY forum that I see you participate, that your main complaint is that nobody is telling YOU how to win." I just love this comment regarding you. That defines "BEGGAR" to a
T.
Quote from: Gizmotron on November 10, 2015, 05:11:53 PM
Jimske, Thanks for letting everyone know what you think. I can't help thinking that none of what you have to say are actually questions but rather so much rhetorical posturing. I'm very glad that you are where you are at, as a gambler, and/or as an internet forum pest. I will never respond to such a demanding beggar if this is where you are really stuck. And I think this is where you ARE really stuck. I actually want people to fail at gambling. I need that for the casinos to stay in business. So thanks for gambling.
Not to worry, Giz, most people here already know what I think. "Demanding beggar" "stuck" ?? :)) You sure you read my post? Maybe it's time for you to come back down to earth from Uranus?
LMAO. Good fodder! Every once in a while we get someone who comes in intimating that the casinos may close if they find out their exclusive knowledge! Of course they go on for months saying nothing. So sorry I'm not a one to assuage your ego. You types are itching to tell the world your secret but . .. you can't otherwise the game will be ruined! hehehehehe.
Hey, Giz, you really got to look up the word "nebulous" re-read your post and reference something that is not hazy, vague, cloudy! May I suggest you get together with asymbacc. Perhaps you could write a chapter in his new book.
QuoteGr8, after your comments regarding "guessing," I'm willing to interject what it is exactly that I do. I probe three levels of triggers to see what consistencies are revealed among 12 different sets of dozens with considerations of their sleepers or singles. My probing produces exact results. There are decisions to be made even though there are no guarantees of the outcome. My method handles the losses easily. So I'm actually probing the real-time flow of randomness. When I see what I like, I place attacking bets. There is actually no guessing involved.
Ahaha! That explains everything! Finally willing after over 600 posts!!!!!!!!!!!! (frankly I never heard of you until these latest) What were you writing about Hero? Giz, you are not obligated to explain your winning ways. But if you say you will then . . . just do and quit beating around the bush! It's so very tiresome.
QuoteWhen I see what I like, I place attacking bets. There is actually no guessing involved.
I love it! Can't make this stuff up! Making the obvious seem profound, Giz? Confessional: I do as well. I mean why not? If you see something you like, after all? I used to have a thing for redheads. I still do but I have to keep it to myself else you know who will lock me out!
I better stick with Bacc Attack! Too funny!
Quote from: Jimske on November 10, 2015, 02:47:11 AM
The problem I have with the term edge and "personal variance and statistics" is that it portrays to the uninitiated that there is a true mathematical edge. If only they could have the "right" bet placement. Nonsense!
Hmmm....strange, a player such as yourself who's hitting at a 52% strike rate calling the "right" bet placement "nonsense".
It's not "nonsense" to know which circle to put your money into, Jimske; rather, it takes a keen sense of the game to do so, especially if one's goal (and it sure should be) is to keep those strike rates as high as possible.
And the kicker is: A bet selection process that will carry a better than 50% strike rate over the long term will, inherently, maintain rather tight variance statistics; so much so that the serious player just might be able to profit from the "movements" and their corresponding "corrections".
The funny thing is, Jimske, you probably play virtually the same way I do, at least, in many ways....it's just that you do it without labeling it or even realizing it. But, trust me, Jimske, you're hitting at over 50% for a reason and you're adjusting your bet sizes for a reason....you don't want to call it variance play, fine....but you're doing something right, and that's no "nonsense", my friend.
Stay well.
Quote from: gr8player on November 10, 2015, 09:02:13 PM
Hmmm....strange, a player such as yourself who's hitting at a 52% strike rate calling the "right" bet placement "nonsense".
It's not "nonsense" to know which circle to put your money into, Jimske; rather, it takes a keen sense of the game to do so, especially if one's goal (and it sure should be) is to keep those strike rates as high as possible.
And the kicker is: A bet selection process that will carry a better than 50% strike rate over the long term will, inherently, maintain rather tight variance statistics; so much so that the serious player just might be able to profit from the "movements" and their corresponding "corrections".
The funny thing is, Jimske, you probably play virtually the same way I do, at least, in many ways....it's just that you do it without labeling it or even realizing it. But, trust me, Jimske, you're hitting at over 50% for a reason and you're adjusting your bet sizes for a reason....you don't want to call it variance play, fine....but you're doing something right, and that's no "nonsense", my friend.
Stay well.
No right bet placement because there are many. People, IMO, make a big mistake searching for the optimum bet placement. I did for years (still fool around with them from time to time-they're fun). Yeah, I know we do have similar plays from past discussions.
I get I have a reason to make every bet and an expectation of what I want/need to see in the immediate next several hands or else a red flag goes up! That red flag is information I use to improve gain or reduce loss. But after the red flag I got no idea which way it will turn, therefore, a guess! LOL
I played BJ for years until I was flat betted. I never knew what any outcome would be due to variance BUT I knew what my edge was up to 2% every hand. That's the difference between a guess and an edge.
If guys like asymbacc and gizmo got some definitive bet placement and bet procedure to win let them say it or just shut up about it. I recognize you don't claim to have a verifiable edge and kudos to you for that.
If I knew how to show someone how to win without any guesswork at all I wouldn't say or else I'd just sell it to some high rollers for a million bucks. They would too and not be on some gambling site mouthing off.
Quote from: WorldBaccaratKing on November 10, 2015, 06:07:37 PM
Post your 3 levels of triggers and I would bet a good amount that within a day, it will be debunked and proven it is CRAPPPOLLAAAAAAAA.
Have at it Burger King:
| X | X | X | X |
|-------------------| X | X |
| X | X | X | X |
| X | X | X | X |
| X | X | X | X |
| X | X | X | X |
| X | X | X | X |
| X | X | X | X |
| X | X | X | X |
| X | X | X | X |
| X | X | X | X |
| X | X | X | X |
| X | X | X | X |
|-------------------| X | X |
| X | X | X | X |
| X | X | X | X | 25 -- W
| X | X | X | X | 1 -- W
| X | X | X | X | 2 -- W
| X | X | X | X | 19 -- W
| X | X | X | X | 24 -- W
| X | X | X | X | 8 -- L
| X | X | X | X | 20 -- L
| X | X | X | X | 11 -- W
| X | X | X | X | 20 -- W
| X | X | X | X | 16 -- W
| X | X | X | X | 10 -- W
| X | X | X | X | 9 -- W
| X | X | X | X | 13 -- L
| X | X | X | X | 20 -- W
| X | X | X | X | 25 -- L
| X | X | X | X | 30 -- W
| X | X | X | X | 15 -- W
| X | X | X | X | 24 -- W
| X | X | X | X | 26 -- W
| X | X | X | X | 22 -- W
| X | X | X | X | 31 -- W
| X | X | X | X | 11 -- L
| X | X | X | X | 23 -- W
| X | X | X | X | 2 -- L
| X | X | X | X | 6 -- L
| X | X | X | X | 34 -- W
| X | X | X | X | 35 -- L
| X | X | X | X | 26 -- W
| X | X | X | X | 18 -- W
| X | X | X | X | 26 -- W
| X | X | X | X | 32 -- W
| X | X | X | X | 22 -- W
| X | X | X | X | 10 -- L
| X | X | X | X | 25 -- W
|-------------------| X | X | 0 -- L
| X | X | X | X | 6 -- L
| X | X | X | X | 16 -- L
| X | X | X | X | 25 -- W
| X | X | X | X | 24 -- W
| X | X | X | X | 17 -- L
Quote from: Jimske on November 10, 2015, 09:01:03 PM
Ahaha! That explains everything! Finally willing after over 600 posts!!!!!!!!!!!! (frankly I never heard of you until these latest) What were you writing about Hero? Giz, you are not obligated to explain your winning ways. But if you say you will then . . . just do and quit beating around the bush! It's so very tiresome.
My three triggers are not the basic -- if you see (this) then do (that) kind of mechanics. They are tests to see which trigger is offering the strongest characteristic of global effectiveness. I've explained in detail what I mean by the global effect. In fact I've written extensively, at this forum exclusively, how I take characteristics and apply them to my bet selections. I've gone on to explain how these characteristics show phases of opportunities. I have even delivered my practice software so that you can prove to yourself how good you are.
Attacking me does not make you any more impressive than no doubt you are impressed with yourself.
Jimske -
QuoteIf guys like asymbacc and gizmo got some definitive bet placement and bet procedure to win let them say it or just shut up about it. I recognize you don't claim to have a verifiable edge and kudos to you for that.
If I knew how to show someone how to win without any guesswork at all I wouldn't say or else I'd just sell it to some high rollers for a million bucks. They would too and not be on some gambling site mouthing off.
Bring me a Million-Dollar High-Roller, that closes the deal, and I'll put 10% in the closing Escrow for making that deal.
I have it. I will never share it here. It's dangerous knowledge that would wreck table games of chance. How do I know this? Because I can easily code it as an algorithm. And an algorithm is mathematical proof of concept. You don't know why I'm here. It's legacy, I'm going to die of heart failure. This forum is the only place I have disclosed any clues. It's almost all here. I have no tolerance for lazy backbiters. You are not fun. Winning is fun. Why don't you try it. The knowledge I have disclosed is the definitive work on gambling and randomness studies. I dare you to find a greater compilation of randomness characteristics with regards to Roulette anywhere on the internet. I'm just grateful that Victor has this forum still active.
Quote from: Jimske on November 10, 2015, 02:47:11 AM
Now asymbacc says he HAS an edge. A predictable advantage from some past set of circumstance. That's an edge! Except it's still a mystery. got to wait for the book I guess.
It's not the past to influence the future, it's just the rules and the nature of the game which RESTRICT the possible outcomes.
as.
Quote from: AsymBacGuy on November 11, 2015, 03:10:11 AM
It's not the past to influence the future, it's just the rules and the nature of the game which RESTRICT the possible outcomes.
as.
I get that and don't necessarily refute such. It's just that, frankly, we've been hearing a lot about that but . . . where's the beef?
Quote from: Jimske on November 12, 2015, 10:23:54 PM
I get that and don't necessarily refute such. It's just that, frankly, we've been hearing a lot about that but . . . where's the beef?
The beef is in a place called NEVERNEVERLAND! Ever hear of it? Want beef, head to burger king and get a whopper......you have a much better chance there finding a baccarat player than in this dump.........
Quote from: Jimske on November 12, 2015, 10:23:54 PM
I get that and don't necessarily refute such. It's just that, frankly, we've been hearing a lot about that but . . . where's the beef?
Jim, within a decent amount of trials the general features of the game cannot be disappointed.
Sometimes it takes a long time to get such features happening.
After 1 shoe, the features could be easily disappointed. Even after 2,3 or 5 shoes.
Within a 10 shoe period, such features must appear, at worst almost levelling the previous unexpected outcomes.
This situation cannot be found at other 50/50 games.
In a word, a given most likely situation cannot miss for long time.
as.
Quote from: WorldBaccaratKing on November 14, 2015, 05:53:52 PM
The beef is in a place called NEVERNEVERLAND! Ever hear of it? Want beef, head to burger king and get a whopper......you have a much better chance there finding a baccarat player than in this dump.........
And yet you continue to come in here for some reason.
Forums that I find boring and/or uninteresting I just don't go back to.
Evidently you find something here worth your time.
AD