Our members are dedicated to PASSION and PURPOSE without drama!

Luck of the Irish?

Started by soxfan, April 10, 2016, 01:04:22 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 16 Guests are viewing this topic.

soxfan

Quote from: AsymBacGuy on April 11, 2016, 09:58:39 PM
If you were able to pass such horrible sequence you must be good at this game.  :thumbsup:


as.

The baccarats is a serious thing but most cats ain't serious, hey hey.

Eight Iron

I simulated this progression over ten trials.
Starting with a BR of $18,000.
Betting Unit = $10

It busted 100% of the time.

Total number of hands to bust ranged from 8,500 to 26,000.

Average number of hands before busting was 16,000 hands.

Total Loss = $180,000

21 Aces

What was the bet selection you used in the simulation?  I believe Sox Fan applies experience based discretionary bet selection. You can't simulate that.
Life is something you dominate if you're any good. - Tom Buchanan

RouletteGhost

Quote from: Eight Iron on April 12, 2016, 10:05:57 AM
I simulated this progression over ten trials.
Starting with a BR of $18,000.
Betting Unit = $10

It busted 100% of the time.

Total number of hands to bust ranged from 8,500 to 26,000.

Average number of hands before busting was 16,000 hands.

Total Loss = $180,000

Your simulation would not matter because sox fan has a selective bet selection.

He does not bet every hand

When he busts (which he will its the price of gambling) he is still up or wins it back fast with his lifetime bankroll

Not everything is cookie cutter one size fits all
QuoteBecause the house always wins. Play long enough, you never change the stakes. The house takes you. Unless, when that perfect hand comes along, you bet and you bet big, then you take the house.

Eight Iron

Quote from: 21 Aces on April 12, 2016, 11:20:12 AM
I believe Sox Fan applies experience based discretionary bet selection. You can't simulate that.


Well, we know how well that worked out, don't we.

Ten losses in a row, then seven losses in a row, then ten more losses in a row.


RouletteGhost

Quote from: Eight Iron on April 12, 2016, 12:43:52 PM

Well, we know how well that worked out, don't we.

Ten losses in a row, then seven losses in a row, then ten more losses in a row.

Bet selection means everything

Your assuming he walks up to the table and just bets this progression over and over again.

Not true

So instead of attempting to find fault, make the glass half full and find how to make it work

We know all progressions bust.

Got to play smart

I can make a martingale work......
QuoteBecause the house always wins. Play long enough, you never change the stakes. The house takes you. Unless, when that perfect hand comes along, you bet and you bet big, then you take the house.

Jimske

Quote from: AsymBacGuy on April 11, 2016, 08:53:32 PM
"Do I contradict myself? / Very well then I contradict myself / (I am large, I contain multitudes)".

(Walt Whitman)

as.
Look - this really isn't personal with me though I can understand why it seems like a personal attack.  You may be a real nice guy with good intentions.  Same with Gr8 for that matter.

You now invoke Walt Whitman as if to justify two years of claims and promises.  Here's a quote that is more befitting:  "the emperor has no clothes,"

Jimske

Quote from: RouletteGhost on April 12, 2016, 01:07:57 PM
Bet selection means everything
Yes it does.  However, IMO, a formula does NOT exist whereby one can follow in order to overcome the HA.  If one such did exist than it could easily be demonstrated through "vector analysis" and would constitute "holy grail."  This no matter striving for a 12 step parlay, win more hands than lose, whatever.

There is no reason to doubt that he manages to maintain a higher percentage of wins in order to reap an acceptable profit but I'll guarantee it is due to an ability to deviate from some chosen mechanical placement.  If he disagrees he can say so.  I have worked with this prog quite a bit and have found that, like any other deep prog, it sure gets by an awful lot of breakouts.  So the key is to know when to deviate.  I don't know how he does it but I can tell you what I do.  Before I lose too many I look at the shoe and decide what placement will do better IF the most recent "bias" continues.  I'll choose from 4 different placements, some of which overlap.  Thus, it comes down to a guess, doesn't it?

A shoe from yesterday went South quick after some good wins:  LLLWLWWLWW....LLWLLLLLWLLLWW.  Didn't get a parlay until the 11th try.  If you'r Gr8 player with a 54% strike rate or me with a lowly 51.13% strike rate it shouldn't be too hard to overcome devastating breakouts.

Like Gr8, I don't have the nerve to go all the way and it has helped me out a few times (I did go all the way with the above).  So I use a hedge with the parlay based on MM and perception of individual shoe bias.

THUS IT COMES DOWN TO A GUESS, DOESN'T IT?

Gizmotron

Quote from: Jimske on April 12, 2016, 04:05:33 PM
  Thus, it comes down to a guess, doesn't it?

...
THUS IT COMES DOWN TO A GUESS, DOESN'T IT?

And the best guess involves the use of an existence of an occurring overall global dominance. It would be worth knowing what I'm saying. The term "global effect" and "global dominance" are characteristics of randomness coined by me. So you will only find the concept here at this forum. At least if I were to play deep I would use the slight advantage of the coincidence.
"...IT'S AGAINST THE LAW TO BREAK THE LAW OF AVERAGES." 

Jimske

Quote from: Gizmotron on April 12, 2016, 06:02:15 PM
And the best guess involves the use of an existence of an occurring overall global dominance. It would be worth knowing what I'm saying. The term "global effect" and "global dominance" are characteristics of randomness coined by me. So you will only find the concept here at this forum. At least if I were to play deep I would use the slight advantage of the coincidence.
I don't know what you mean by "global" but betting the dominance is what most players do.  Whether they're playing derivative roads or Ellis' NOR.  Sometimes the dominance in a shoe is more extreme than other times.  In way of an example you might find a shoe where P had no more than 2 IAR or maybe one side has few 1's IAR.  There are a lot of nuanced stuff like that.  Extreme you could find long dragon runs or chops or 22222 or whatever - happens all the time.

Gizmotron

Quote from: Jimske on April 12, 2016, 07:19:07 PM
I don't know what you mean by "global" but betting the dominance is what most players do.  Whether they're playing derivative roads or Ellis' NOR.  Sometimes the dominance in a shoe is more extreme than other times.  In way of an example you might find a shoe where P had no more than 2 IAR or maybe one side has few 1's IAR.  There are a lot of nuanced stuff like that.  Extreme you could find long dragon runs or chops or 22222 or whatever - happens all the time.

I gave it the term global because a global variable in the X-talk language is a way of keeping the data in that variable alive and accessible from any functionality in a running application. It's a way of declaring data as permanent and usable everywhere. So in randomness it is like a trend or set of patterns that are everywhere. For example, you might notice that every time the blacks hit that there is always a second black that follows it at least once. When it changes to red there is at least one red that follows it every time too. Then it switches and starts happening the same way in the odd/even bets. It looks like a dominance of doubles but it happens everywhere. I once saw a global dominance occur on four different Roulette tables at the same time and last for four and one half hours. I've seen thousands of different types of global effects that last typically for at least thirty minutes or more.

What I'm suggesting is using an existing global effect to risk a deep progression and only during one. You can pick the best time to go deep. Just trying to suggest a best guess.
"...IT'S AGAINST THE LAW TO BREAK THE LAW OF AVERAGES." 

Jimske

Quote from: Gizmotron on April 12, 2016, 08:45:34 PM
I gave it the term global because a global variable in the X-talk language is a way of keeping the data in that variable alive and accessible from any functionality in a running application. It's a way of declaring data as permanent and usable everywhere. So in randomness it is like a trend or set of patterns that are everywhere. For example, you might notice that every time the blacks hit that there is always a second black that follows it at least once. When it changes to red there is at least one red that follows it every time too. Then it switches and starts happening the same way in the odd/even bets. It looks like a dominance of doubles but it happens everywhere. I once saw a global dominance occur on four different Roulette tables at the same time and last for four and one half hours. I've seen thousands of different types of global effects that last typically for at least thirty minutes or more.

What I'm suggesting is using an existing global effect to risk a deep progression and only during one. You can pick the best time to go deep. Just trying to suggest a best guess.

So this shoe should qualify?  Didn't start so great for me but after W 5 and L 6 I won 67% of next 43 bets.  I did real well but any takers why some more aggressive players might have taken a good portion of the rack?  And what was the placement?

BBB ppp B pp BBBBBB p B p BB p B p BB p BBBB p BBBBBB p B p BBB pp B p BB p BBB pp BBB

21 Aces

Maybe Sox Fan can go back on everyone's behalf and call for a forensic review of the shoe based on the surveillance records.   :nope:
Life is something you dominate if you're any good. - Tom Buchanan

Mars Rocks

I googled "Luck of the Irish", and found the following text...
"During the gold and silver rush years in the second half of the 19th century, a number of the most famous and successful miners were of Irish and Irish American birth. . . .Over time this association of the Irish with mining fortunes led to the expression 'luck of the Irish.' Of course, it carried with it a certain tone of derision, as if to say, only by sheer luck, as opposed to brains, could these fools succeed."

Seems an apt title for the thread now that it's clarified.
The main skills I use to beat the casino are ignorance and confidence, it amazingly works just like Mark Twain said it would.

Show me a happy loser and I'll show you a loser!

Mars is the God of War btw, and I'm at war with the casino.

Gizmotron

Quote from: Jimske on April 12, 2016, 09:47:54 PM
So this shoe should qualify?  Didn't start so great for me but after W 5 and L 6 I won 67% of next 43 bets.  I did real well but any takers why some more aggressive players might have taken a good portion of the rack?  And what was the placement?

BBB ppp B pp BBBBBB p B p BB p B p BB p BBBB p BBBBBB p B p BBB pp B p BB p BBB pp BBB

That's a spectacular example of it. It's not 100% perfect but it's definitely a strong characteristic. Not only do the Bankers repeat a lot but the Players single a lot too. That's like when the casino acts like an ATM machine.
"...IT'S AGAINST THE LAW TO BREAK THE LAW OF AVERAGES."