I'm gonna pony up the streaks distribution stat for the 8 decks baccarats shoe in hopes some of you cats will find it useful, hey hey.
singles-17.8
doubles-8.7
triples-5.2
fours-1.9
fives or more-2.1
I'm surprised that no cats ain't chime in to comment on these streaks statistic, oh well, hey hey.
I tend to agree. I played Marty for a month against a streak of 4. Busted once
It's definitely a true statistic
But risky to play against
I know a shrewd cat who makes his daily bread grinding anti-streak play, but at the dices tables, hey hey.
Food for thought for that bubble craps
Quote from: soxfan on May 05, 2017, 08:05:13 PM
I know a shrewd cat who makes his daily bread grinding anti-streak play, but at the dices tables, hey hey.
Hello SoxFan......
Could you tell how he plays ?
Thanks ......go Red Sox !!............ ;)
Quote from: johnnycs1 on May 06, 2017, 12:28:40 AM
Hello SoxFan......
Could you tell how he plays ?
Thanks ......go Red Sox !!............ ;)
I never seen him play live but he said he only gets clipped by streaks of five, hey hey.
Electronic machin with real cards
Jump in when choppy
Lots of guys play anti-streak martingales on the craps tables.
They bet the Don't Pass Line and the Pass Line.
I don't know what their triggers are however...
But you can usually tell which guys are using anti-streak martingales at the craps tables because they are the ones who are not laying or giving odds.
Quote from: Patience777 on May 06, 2017, 01:02:22 AM
Lots of guys play anti-streak martingales on the craps tables.
They bet the Don't Pass Line and the Pass Line.
I don't know what their triggers are however...
But you can usually tell which guys are using anti-streak martingales at the craps tables because they are the ones who are not laying or giving odds.
I very, very rarely see cats at my local joint runnin any anti-streaks play, hey hey.
Soxfan you need to step up one level and forget about strikes as you know them using patterns.
I have seen 3.0 and 4.0 STDS with no strike depending on what you aim to catch and no progression would hold up against that.
If you explore the bias with the random flow and observe the random bits into states you might get better results.
I like the basic and the principal behind the NOR method from BTC - but reckon my own solution is much better.
For example if you know how to explore the EC as dozen probability then your betting become to be something different.
Assume you would aim for one dozen to repeat once, that would equal two winning bets using that clustering information for a EC bet.
Assume you would aim for one dozen to repeat three times in a row, then that would equal four winning bets using that clustering information for EC bet.
Now positive progression are in play where you can staking 1248 and win +15 units and only lose 1 unit when you fail catching three in a row, same as flatbetting but the return is much better.
Cheers
Any style of play will cause you to have serious downdraws. From my experience a cat could get clipped for 200-300 unit in the short term bucking up against the anti-streak style. But, over the long term the results using anti-streak smooth out and make it a good, but slow earner, hey hey.
Hi Sputnik.
I do not think it will stay in the longrun, but after your post I played something like that.
Bet selection alweys black, but I only play when in the last 4 decisions I have 2 blacks or more, if in the last 4 spins I have 1 or 0 hits I wait for the moment when we have at least 2 hits.
In this way we bypass all series of reds, and dominations of reds numbers.
I do not know if it will change the probality, but using 1-2-4-8 positive progression, I was positive after 1000 spins.
Both of you missunderstand my concept, when you play the regular way and winning once i do the same but winning twice.
Cheers
Yes , my post was unrelated to your game strategy.
I still do not know what exactly you are doing.
My strategy was related to bypassing the series and domination of the opposite color.
This can be used with any EC bet selection to reduce variance.
Quote from: soxfan on May 05, 2017, 02:31:12 AM
I'm gonna pony up the streaks distribution stat for the 8 decks baccarats shoe in hopes some of you cats will find it useful, hey hey.
singles-17.8
doubles-8.7
triples-5.2
fours-1.9
fives or more-2.1
Quote from: soxfan on May 07, 2017, 10:51:52 PM
Any style of play will cause you to have serious downdraws. From my experience a cat could get clipped for 200-300 unit in the short term bucking up against the anti-streak style. But, over the long term the results using anti-streak smooth out and make it a good, but slow earner, hey hey.
That maybe be the distribution for a lot of 8 deck shoes but if you play 8 plus shoes a day, you will know that this not the distribution for all shoes. There will be shoes consisting of two 5 streaks, 2 6 streaks and a few streaks greater than 6 for example.
Regardless of how you manage your money or use martingale for anti-streak, the end result is a fail if you play enough shoes. This applies to those waiting after 4 or 5 streaks to do anti-streak or chop. Here is the exact reason:
According to your distribution, singles, doubles and shorter streaks happen more frequent. Here is where a lot of people don't see. There are just the same amount of singles as there are doubles since streaks of 3s contain doubles, streaks of 4s contain doubles, streaks of 5 contain doubles and so on. If you add all those doubles, it will very closely equal to singles. You can also go up the later and compare doubles with streaks of 3s and so on. This is why every bet is only a difference of a little over 1%.
This is why those claiming to win anti-streaking is lying. Same goes to those claiming success by following streaks and chops for the LONG RUN
Quote from: Babu on May 16, 2017, 06:40:20 AM
That maybe be the distribution for a lot of 8 deck shoes but if you play 8 plus shoes a day, you will know that this not the distribution for all shoes. There will be shoes consisting of two 5 streaks, 2 6 streaks and a few streaks greater than 6 for example.
Regardless of how you manage your money or use martingale for anti-streak, the end result is a fail if you play enough shoes. This applies to those waiting after 4 or 5 streaks to do anti-streak or chop. Here is the exact reason:
According to your distribution, singles, doubles and shorter streaks happen more frequent. Here is where a lot of people don't see. There are just the same amount of singles as there are doubles since streaks of 3s contain doubles, streaks of 4s contain doubles, streaks of 5 contain doubles and so on. If you add all those doubles, it will very closely equal to singles. You can also go up the later and compare doubles with streaks of 3s and so on. This is why every bet is only a difference of a little over 1%.
This is why those claiming to win anti-streaking is lying. Same goes to those claiming success by following streaks and chops for the LONG RUN
Wrong, the streaks distribution are AVERAGES that play out true over time. In the short term you can get clipped but over time the result smooth out and you can count on them. That's why anti-streak style is the only mechanical style that will win regular and well, hey hey.
Quote from: Babu on May 16, 2017, 06:40:20 AM
That maybe be the distribution for a lot of 8 deck shoes but if you play 8 plus shoes a day, you will know that this not the distribution for all shoes. There will be shoes consisting of two 5 streaks, 2 6 streaks and a few streaks greater than 6 for example.
Regardless of how you manage your money or use martingale for anti-streak, the end result is a fail if you play enough shoes. This applies to those waiting after 4 or 5 streaks to do anti-streak or chop. Here is the exact reason:
According to your distribution, singles, doubles and shorter streaks happen more frequent. Here is where a lot of people don't see. There are just the same amount of singles as there are doubles since streaks of 3s contain doubles, streaks of 4s contain doubles, streaks of 5 contain doubles and so on. If you add all those doubles, it will very closely equal to singles. You can also go up the later and compare doubles with streaks of 3s and so on. This is why every bet is only a difference of a little over 1%.
This is why those claiming to win anti-streaking is lying. Same goes to those claiming success by following streaks and chops for the LONG RUN
Exactly right!
That is why I have wrote extensively about 'following the shoe', which does not mean---to follow only a streak with repeats, etc. It means--following the shoe no matter if it is strong, weak or in-between. That is the way that the real money is made at the bac tables.
Quote from: soxfan on May 26, 2017, 10:03:16 PM
Wrong, the streaks distribution are AVERAGES that play out true over time. In the short term you can get clipped but over time the result smooth out and you can count on them. That's why anti-streak style is the only mechanical style that will win regular and well, hey hey.
You are 100% correct soxfan!
I have had 5 step anti-streak martys win 156 straight times before on choppy tables.
Quote from: soxfan on May 26, 2017, 10:03:16 PM
Wrong, the streaks distribution are AVERAGES that play out true over time. In the short term you can get clipped but over time the result smooth out and you can count on them. That's why anti-streak style is the only mechanical style that will win regular and well, hey hey.
That's only if you limit yourself to the number of anti-streak that you will be doing. If you plan to ant-streak all the way, you'll meet your doom in the end.
One thing to remember. Babu is never wrong. ^-^ ;D
Soxfan
Quotesingles-17.8
doubles-8.7
triples-5.2
fours-1.9
fives or more-2.1
Sputnik
QuoteI like the basic and the principal behind the NOR method from BTC
For those who may not know NOR follows the flow by ascertaining the run distribution as either Neutral, Opposite, Repeat (NOR). Further, a suggested bet selection would be OTBL for N; OLD for O; FLD for R. Simple enough. Could also eliminate betting into N and wait for the imbalance to go to O or R.
There are no leadng indicators. It's just a benchmark to maintain focus. The rest is betting and bankroll. At some point guessing the bias to continue will pay off.
One might think that most shoes would show a significant bias but surprisingly many shoes end up very close to the averages.