+ Register

[soxfan]

If you were able to pass such horrible sequence you must be good at this game. 


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.

[RouletteGhost]

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

[Eight Iron]

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]

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......

[Jimske]

"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]

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]

  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.

[Jimske]

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]

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.

[Jimske]

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.   

[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.

[Gizmotron]

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.