Does anyone use multiple bet selections simultaneously, that require bets most hands?
Does anyone have any thoughts or feedback on this?
For example im running 5 different bet selections, 3 of which require a bet on banker this hand, 2 require bet on player this hand. 3-2= Place 1u banker.
There are many who throw disdain at the many bet selection methods posted on the casino display ie Main Trend, Pearl, Big Eye, Small Road, Cockroach & Sixth.
I find them helpful for references for bet selection. Ridiculous as it may sound, each one of the charts do show short term distinct trends, sometimes longer trends, but which inevitably breaks into random results. Sometimes the Main Trend is totally random but a pattern or trend emerges in the sub charts. Sometimes these sub charts predict contradictory results.
The skill, if I may say so, is in choosing a bet from the many on prediction. Hence, making fewer bet selections on more pronounced predicted trends is ONE of several approaches to improve our win ratios.
When it breaks, the historical trend does not apply anymore and here is where most Asian players continue on betting on the misplaced idea that history will repeat itself. MM is of utmost importance then. Negative progression bets on this changeover of trends is what decimates our bankroll and leave us desperate to chase losses.
I have made 3 winning runs to Marina Bay which has let me recover from my Genting debacle. Self control, money management, discipline and a whole host of other attributes have helped me. I hope I can continue on this run from now and not divert from my game plan for each and every trip.
Quote from: Lung Yeh on December 18, 2015, 10:43:04 AM
Negative progression bets on this changeover of trends is what decimates our bankroll and leave us desperate to chase losses.
Correct. Much better to accept the quick profit whenever you've read the current trend correctly rather than continue to bet into the impending "changeover" and thereby risk losing all profit or, even worse, falling into the red.
Quote from: Lung Yeh on December 18, 2015, 10:43:04 AM
I have made 3 winning runs to Marina Bay which has let me recover from my Genting debacle. Self control, money management, discipline and a whole host of other attributes have helped me. I hope I can continue on this run from now and not divert from my game plan for each and every trip.
I could not be happier for you, Lung Yeh. Yes, self control and discipline combined with conservative money management; now you are controlling that which you can control. Do not "divert" from your winning game plan. It may not succeed every time (what does?), but it'll provide your game the consistency it might've lacked before.
Again, great job, and I wish you only continued successes. Stay well.
Yep, good job Lung!
About the original post.
If you bet a lot of hands and you utilize an aggressive or semi-aggressive progression the differential betting strategy might be helpful.
But generally speaking such strategy tends to operate on the losing ends of the patterns, not the wisest thing to do, imo.
I meekly suggest to focus about bet selections working unidirectionally, so if bs A dictates to bet Banker, bs B or C or D must stay still and not suggesting to bet Player in the same spot.
Imo, you want to bet a specific plan along the way, maybe not so rigid but never considering ther exact two opposite situations.
as.
- Congrats also!
- Marina Bay looks SWANK.
- Started watching the derived roads recently and would like to start considering it.
- I am trying to add another aspect to my approach to increase edge, but so far inconclusive. It is signaling for more activity, but I want to understand it's performance better. The plus is that it gets me in there more. I would bet every hand if the extra bets have a decent expected result.
(https://betselection.cc/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.placesandfoods.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2010%2F05%2FMarina-Bay-Sands-Casino8.jpg&hash=5967853713c9da63398ab0da30b4f1fa2b5b8df0)
(https://betselection.cc/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F-eQM6C4cbj5Y%2FVBRlJbkiLPI%2FAAAAAAAAHCU%2FH9-L6hFHkGA%2Fs1600%2F6812515515_0eb5474b9c_z.jpg&hash=2fbf3c4f049daa641a01494c5b38f5ff8cc0dbf5)
Quote from: Matt on December 18, 2015, 09:34:16 AM
For example im running 5 different bet selections, 3 of which require a bet on banker this hand, 2 require bet on player this hand. 3-2= Place 1u banker.
Rather than change the subject to the narrow perspective by some I will actually respond to the question.
Right. You end up with "net betting." Ellis Davis was big on this with some of his systems. The final result tends to soften the curve by reducing the swings that inevitably ocurr using any single fixed bet placement. Because of the reduced bret sizes one could actually increase ones base unit while maintaining the same bankroll. Using more than two placement simultaneously would be fairly difficult to navigate I should think.
For fun just pic any two you like and see how they perform together. Ideally you would not too many want overlapping bets. If not you might end up with some pretty large bets which were not intended by the original placement alone.
Sometimes too many method could "kill" you. Haha.."Too much love will kill you" by BM of Queens
I believed simple is better. Could more BS method could guarantee to profit you more? If not, why make thing difficult?
But not all like simple. Some believed the more complex the BS could bring more profits. Is it true?
It only about will the next result be an opposite, or a repeat?
It's like 5-2 will bring the same result as (10/2)-(2x1). Different approach with the same result.
All bet selections are 50/50. The only exception may be playing tight with variance?
IMHO bet selection doesn't exist.
Bet selection is useful because the player is obliged to be disciplined.
Apart from that it's an illusion,another "gambler fallacy".
A Casino manager told me that baccarat tables with display earn more than tables without.
Variance,the law of third,trends, cold or hot patterns are not exploitable.
EV is always negative,of course even playing only a few hands per shoe.
The solution is the progression.Please don't laugh...
For sure not the progressions(negative or positive) known for centuries.
There are very complicated progressions related to statistical appearances of a given pattern.
Boring,small wins,huge BKR,risk of ruin very rare but existing,long time spent at the table.
It's not for me....
If bet selection can not win flat betting, progression will make it a winner is another "gambler's fallacy". Actually you will lose more, since the average bet becomes bigger.
You are completely right,if standard and very old progression are used.
I'm speaking about very complicate progressions,or better "modification of bet",often decreased.
All is related to the statistical expectation of a given pattern.
But it doesn't matter:it's impossible to explain it in English for me.
In two foreign Forums all is explained,not in English and....free of charge!
Hi ,,, can you pm me the links to does topics ,,, then i can try to use google translate ,,, many thanks ...
I would like the link also please
Only two ways to win regular at the baccarats and betting flat don't feed the bulldog, hey hey.
Quote from: james on December 20, 2015, 02:33:39 PM
If bet selection can not win flat betting, progression will make it a winner is another "gambler's fallacy". Actually you will lose more, since the average bet becomes bigger.
Quote from: soxfan on December 20, 2015, 05:59:15 PM
Only two ways to win regular at the baccarats and betting flat don't feed the bulldog, hey hey.
The only way is to beat the worst and extreme with progression, no other way.
There is no way flat betting, nonsense.
Quote from: Matt on December 18, 2015, 09:30:48 AM
Does anyone use multiple bet selections simultaneously, that require bets most hands?
Does anyone have any thoughts or feedback on this?
I run multiple bet selection and progression simultaneously. It seems to work pretty well.
If I remember correctly, I think our old friend Garnabby, RolexWatch etc etc etc ( plus about 20 other names ) used a template to make random bet selections and used some type of progression to size his bets................however you would probably need a humongous bankroll to survive the drawdowns.............not sure if that approach ever proved successful.
Also you might consider chopping up your bankroll into 2 or more parts, say chop a $ 1000 bankroll in two $ 500 bankrolls and play two different methods.