+ Register

[alrelax]

I am planning to post some pictures which will be live tonight.

I am fairly certain the floor people on will not say anything.  I have done it before on a limited basis. 

My goal is to outline my wagers and the results on the board and table. 

Regardless as to what some people think or claim they know, I attempt to average about 10-25 wagers a shoe, depending on wins and my successful progressions, etc. 

My play will be conforming to the shoe presentments, rather than scheduled and pre set wagers looking for a few unit win or employing a few unit stop loss.

Rather than just W's and L's without any kind of insight, I thought this way might be better?

Thanks, Alrelax/Glen

[alrelax]

[attachimg=1]

[alrelax]

Tried to do it while there,  couldn't get it done.   Explain later.

[alrelax]

[attachimg=1]

[alrelax]

The first two sections were the places to make the money on this shoe.  The first section, although most are not warmed up (as they say) was really the section.  All balanced out, old school way really.

The second section was typical, super strong Player streak came to balance out and catch up sort of.  And Player was super strong, if not a natural, a third card to make it 7, 8 or 9 virtually every time. 

There were 5 (3 card 8/9s) in this shoe!  Which is a WOW, especially at 200:1 payoff each time.  Plus back to back Panda 8s. Not a single Fortune 7 with all that action going on.

4 of the 3-Card 8/9s were within 7 hands and there were 5 total presented within 16 hands.  Just $10 bet on that would have got you $10,000.00 return.  The best bet IMO in baccarat with Bad Beat Bac is the 3-Card 8/9 any-side wager, it comes far less than the 200:1 from what i have been seeing for nearly a year now. 

[alrelax]

The 6-Rs come into play here big time!  Think about it.  This was a shoe where a $500.00 buy in could have made you $10k or better in reality.  Bac is positively the 6-Rs.


Recognition
Realization
Reaction
Results
Reductions
Raises

[alrelax]

You have to apply perceived as well as visual. 

If you do not, you are short changing yourself into all kinds of perception.  The wrong kind of perception, IMO.

Stop, or at least cut down on the losing times, and you most certainly can do that with real perception instead of false perception. 

[AsymBacGuy]

The five 3-card 8/9s bad beat happening into a single shoe isn't a WOW, actually is literally a miracle.
A kind of probability more believable whether the shoe was fixed in some way.
The probability to get ONE 3-card 8/9 bad beat is 0.41% involving the worst house edge (16.65%). The probability to get five such bad beat within a single shoe is something having many zeroes before a number.

About the remaining outcomes:

- a simple "bet two times B after each new occurence of B, then stop the betting until a new B streak shows" strategy worked beautifully until the second section (classified when two B singles came out), then restarted to work on the third section for 3 situations.

- up to the long dragon, P side mantained a costant trend, that is not surpassing the double cutoff, then it restarted to work on section 4.

In some way, even though those are just "post hoc" assumptions, your subdivision seems to be worthwhile.

I'm curious to hear Sputnik or Jimskie impressions (or anybody else) about this shoe.

To make the things more complicated, I dare to make some outcomes' changes:

1- say the fourth P appearance instead of being a single were a P 3 streak, what does this change would do in our strategy?

2- say that in the third section, instead of having a B double in third position we would get a B single. Does it mean something?

Everybody knows here that everything could happen anytime and anywhere but we also know that something must happen.

as.









   

[alrelax]

The five 3-card 8/9s bad beat happening into a single shoe isn't a WOW, actually is literally a miracle.
A kind of probability more believable whether the shoe was fixed in some way.
The probability to get ONE 3-card 8/9 bad beat is 0.41% involving the worst house edge (16.65%). The probability to get five such bad beat within a single shoe is something having many zeroes before a number.

About the remaining outcomes:

- a simple "bet two times B after each new occurence of B, then stop the betting until a new B streak shows" strategy worked beautifully until the second section (classified when two B singles came out), then restarted to work on the third section for 3 situations.

- up to the long dragon, P side mantained a costant trend, that is not surpassing the double cutoff, then it restarted to work on section 4.

In some way, even though those are just "post hoc" assumptions, your subdivision seems to be worthwhile.

I'm curious to hear Sputnik or Jimskie impressions (or anybody else) about this shoe.

To make the things more complicated, I dare to make some outcomes' changes:

1- say the fourth P appearance instead of being a single were a P 3 streak, what does this change would do in our strategy?

2- say that in the third section, instead of having a B double in third position we would get a B single. Does it mean something?

Everybody knows here that everything could happen anytime and anywhere but we also know that something must happen.

as.

Anything and everything, all the time or none of the time!  Yes, spot on!

As far as 5 3-card 8/9s within one shoe.  Same as 5 or 6 Fortune 7s within one shoe.  It happens. 

But, and a huge but that makes those wager on it, keep wagering on it and those that do not, look at actually wagering on it when it hits and hits repeatedly.

Hey, go back through my writings, I write often and I write truthfully.  At times it seems far fetched, but that is because it will happen and yourself, others and myself, we know that.  We just DO NOT know when it will, how long it will continue or if it will even come about.  And that is bac!

I have seen 7 shoes straight at the same table and in concession without a single Fortune 7 at this same casino last year.  It happens.

As far as 3-Card 8/9s any side.  One the average, meaning a mean average, but not one to spend your last money on.  1 or 2 per shoe when they come.  Some shoes none of course.  You have to look at it as extras, a found jack pot not counted on, same with F-7s and P-8s, etc.  Where I have allocated a certain amount of win money set aside to further my chances to capitalize on a presenting opportunity, not to go looking for one.

There were 4 Panda 8s coming that shoe as you can well see.  Zero Fortune 7s.  The next shoe had 2 Panda 8s and 2 Fortune 7s.  The third shoe had 5 Panda 8s and 1 Fortune 7.  So out of 240 hands dealt you had 11 Panda 8s coming.  Pretty close to 25 to 1, yes in deed.  But, many time I have seen the same 240 hands with maybe 3 or so Panda 8s.  Just depends when you sit down in the overview of it all.  Same with Fortune 7s.  Out of 240 hands you had 3 total Fortune 7s.  Certainly no where near the 40 to 1 chances as stated or payout.  But 1 averaging every 80 hands is low, but then again is it?  I have seen plenty of shoes with 3 or 4 or 5 Fortune 7s as well.  Plenty. 

Once again, I have seen plenty of 3 Card 8/9s.  There is another casino within my region and a few nights ago, 2 shoes had 5 of them.  Three within one shoe and 2 within the following.  But they do not have Bad Beat so every time it appears, everyone is like that is a $1,000.00 per $5 red chip bet at SO & SO Casino, etc. 

[AsymBacGuy]

I agree that rare events tend to come out in clusters or nothing at all, still there's a huge difference between F-7s/pandas  and 8/9s bad beat.
F-7s have a probability to appear once per 45 hands, 8/9s bad beat once per 250 hands.
That is 5.5 times less likely.

I had a lot of trouble trying to get the best of it by using strategies applied on the less disadvantaged B/P hands, let's figure out about hands that have a 16-fold worse probability to appear.

In reality the huge bac bad beat disadvantage could be overcome by card counting and the best opportunity is to count the natural 8s/9s bad beat.
I do not know any valuable card counting regarding the three-card 8/9s bad beat.

as. 

[alrelax]

And just to refresh your memory, Been There and Done That.....

Here are two back to back shoes I think it was, with 3 F-7s in a row each time!!!!!  Not often like this you have to admit:

[attachimg=1]

[attachimg=2]

[alrelax]

There is no counting solutions. 

However, an allocation of win money is a good allocation if you are going to play it.

Not much else besides from that. 

I just got off the phone with a dealer friend of mine that wanted to go to the casino tonight and play.  I am just not desirous to go so we chatted on the phone for a bit as we live a good distance away from each other and when he is at the casino dealing I go to, we have little time to actually talk shop. 

So I brought up the subject of side bets, the F-7s, P-8s, 3 card 8/9s and the other ones.  He said, last night he dealt numerous shoes that had plenty of them in each one, then a period of time went by with a greater amount of shoes where seldom any side wager hit and if a side wager did hit, maybe 1 or 2 hit in the entire shoe, out of all of the side wagers possible. 

Like I said, allocation.  An allocation of win money set aside for that purpose alone.  The same way I allocate a certain portion of win money to complete a 1 + 4 Side Parlay Wager of mine, well worth it and overall I am fairly successful at those and the winning ones far offset the losing ones I total.  But, if I increased the frequency and the amounts I have developed it would exploded upon me with doing that same thing. 

[AsymBacGuy]

Perfect, so you seem to agree with me about this.
Everything is about the "frequency" of what we are looking for.

as. 

[alrelax]

I agree and I realize they come in clusters, more than so called properly spaced apart, of course.  Some people count on wagering when they have not seen whatever it is they are looking for, for quite some time or overdue, etc.  At times that works, at times it will not.  A 40 to 1 might not appear for 150 hands, then again, it might appear 3 or 4 or 5 times within 20-25 hands or less.  And if you sat at a table and that same 40 to 1 did not appear for say the 150 hands, you might start wagering for it and it might very well appear and it might not. 

But there are false positives that I have identified that will hurt you.  Which is, something is due, something has not shown in well past it's due factor, something has appeared more than normal and it is reappearing as well.  Coupled with all kinds of other factors, including that of, winning and setting aside all forms of conservative play and allocation of win funds.  Almost all time it will go extremely horrible when you employ no stops and get that greed! 

You know, another thing I discussed with that dealer friend a little bit ago.  How almost at the end of the night almost no one is playing any longer the past couple of years around here.  Because of their greed factor kinks in after they won early on in the evening and almost every one of them lose it all or they continually bought in, shoe after shoe and lost it all within a few hours.  We seem to have a newer crowd of players the past 18 months in a distinctive turn over from 4 to 5 years ago. Likewise, we have some of the older experienced players but they are so far into the game with such losses, all they see is recouping it all every time they really start to win something.  Then they are harder and harder, longer and longer at the table until they bust out.  Every time.  Out of every 100 around here, the upper 90's would never leave or stop when ahead.  Sure a few do but we are talking in reality like less than 5 out of 100.  And out of those 5 that left a winner, their next sessions are larger and longer until they lose what they previously won.

Almost none of them are into plateaus and levels or anything similar to my 1/3rd money management method and sticking by it.  Such a shame.   

You know something he told me and I think I have to agree with it to a certain point.  A while back I would not have, but now I see his point and I do have to agree with him.  Wager against some of the regular larger players that are on their continual mission to recoup.  Because they never do.  And this is a dealer that works 8 plus hours everyday with plenty of over time.  He is at the tables 50 to 60 hours a week, dealing hand after hand.  But do it in sections with turning points as well and never forgetting to respect your wins and do not alter your choice of wagering because of wins themselves.