+ Register

[alrelax]

You get into complicated long and detailed explanation that can be interpreted any number of ways.

In baccarat you will also have bias, always and that will not change.  How long a bias will be is unknown and not based on anything else, unless and only unless there was a long bias of anything within the one shoe, then it is more apt (but not compelled or must, etc.) to change to the opposite or bias' as you so mention.  Other than that, no. 

1's and 2's and 3's are not necessarily bais' at all.  And those are the easiest ones to one with 1 wager or so, possibly 2.  But a series of those wagers gets extremely hard if not nearly impossible to win continually.

[Sputnik]

 Here is the Dozen example to make this conditional facts more clear.

Assume dozen 1 & 2 hit for five times in a row 11221 and end with dozen 3 now if there is not bias into the next state you will have 321 or any other combination 312
If there is a bias into the next state you will receive 11221 / 313 or 11221 / 322 or 11221 / 311 or 11221 / 331 or any other combination where the events repeats at least twice within three attempts.
And as you can see that past state events are part of the future state - so if your expectation is that a bias state will follow by new bias state - then you can predict the future.

Cheers

[Sputnik]

1's and 2's and 3's are not necessarily bais' at all.  And those are the easiest ones to one with 1 wager or so, possibly 2.  But a series of those wagers gets extremely hard if not nearly impossible to win continually.

I don't agree with your perspective - i see all baccarat shoes into sections where there is more bias section then neutral sections - but that is up to everyone to explore for them self - i just show the framework and each state has winnings or break even positions and i have never seen any one do better then that.

But everything lose to something and in this case neutral states - but they can also be explored and i know NOR does that with out telling any details.

Cheers

[alrelax]

If you are referring to a neutral section as something along the lines of: Chop-Chop 1's, or Doubles 2 by 2's, or triples 3 by 3's or alternating streaks of 4's, etc., etc., then you are correct.  Their are more inconsistent bias than neutrals. 

However, if you are saying you have profited and prevailed largely wagering a continual series of bias' within each and every shoe on 1's, 2's and 3's, so one and so forth, I say you got extremely lucky and your streak will eventually end big time.  I recall you saying you have not been playing baccarat a long time(?). 

To throw up a large wager on a inconsistent 'cut' is easy and down all the time.  Yes, I agree, I do it too and witness it down each and every casino session, without a doubt.  However, the consistent winning and larger continual wins are accomplished on consistent prevailing hands of some type.  And that does not matter on bit if it is weak or strong, repeating or not.  That is what I am saying.

As far as wagering on 1's, 2's or 3's and the bias' that you are saying will happen because of previous events, to me is not going to hold up with any kind of consistency. 

[Sputnik]

If you are referring to a neutral section as something along the lines of: Chop-Chop 1's, or Doubles 2 by 2's, or triples 3 by 3's or alternating streaks of 4's, etc., etc., then you are correct.  Their are more inconsistent bias than neutrals. 

However, if you are saying you have profited and prevailed largely wagering a continual series of bias' within each and every shoe on 1's, 2's and 3's, so one and so forth, I say you got extremely lucky and your streak will eventually end big time.  I recall you saying you have not been playing baccarat a long time(?). 

To throw up a large wager on a inconsistent 'cut' is easy and down all the time.  Yes, I agree, I do it too and witness it down each and every casino session, without a doubt.  However, the consistent winning and larger continual wins are accomplished on consistent prevailing hands of some type.  And that does not matter on bit if it is weak or strong, repeating or not.  That is what I am saying.

As far as wagering on 1's, 2's or 3's and the bias' that you are saying will happen because of previous events, to me is not going to hold up with any kind of consistency.

I think you missunderstand me - i not saying 1s and 2s and 3s are most common and i don't and i think we use different lingo or terms.
I know there is 1000 of 1s and 500 of 2s and 250 of 3s - but that is not my perspective or understanding with my framework with this topic.

I only use three events only - you might call it clustering patterns or formations or whatever you like - but for me there only exist 1s and 2s and 3+
Notice the plus sign after series of three where series of three and higher is the same - i see 3+ and use them as one event only.

So when i use one example with 1s and 2s and 3+ that is with the odds 1 in 3 - no more or less ...

If i understand you correct so was you thinking 1s and 2s and 3s and betting does for what they are as events - that has nothing to do with bias states or my perspective.
I only look at the combination where only two of them hitting and where one of them is sleeping.

Cheers

[alrelax]

Sorry, I do not understand, your lingo is different than people I have played with or talked to for well over 3 decades of actual H.L. room baccarat play. 

I read your stuff and I assume at this point a totally misunderstanding and wrongful comments, sorry. thanks.

[Sputnik]

Well i join beat the casino forum - so i am learning the baccarat lingo they use and it take time to learn - so i am sorry that i can't be more clear with my languish.

Cheers

[BEAT-THE-WHEEL]

What Sputnik means,
is,
whe he bet s1,series2, series3+,
in an arrangement,
the result of hit, and lose ALWAYS,
within Math EXPECTATION.


Thus easily won, with mild progression.

123 permutation, always hit around 33%,
take or give, 2 or 3%.
and, or but the result, always near 50/50.

[Lungyeh]

Are you using Google translate? 😬

[Sputnik]

Funny "google translate" why should out of the box solution become easy to understand ... this is only the beginner material and get more advance with further observations ...
Members never learn and understand that when you hit two loses you should hold your bet and consider what to do next ...

You see members betting into the hole and being part of the negative expectation and use negative progression to recoup loses ...
We should reduce loses and have good expectation and explore the bias.

No, No, everyone still using patterns and betting for a change and that did not working 300 years ago and is not working today.
That is one reason why i did not buy Baccarat Buster 2 software - because i don't need pattern search - because you can not win that way.

[BEAT-THE-WHEEL]

if you do a long list of baccarat,
say around 300 to 500 decision.

in single 1, and series2, and series3+...

eg.
xpx ...p= single 1.
xppx...p=series2.
xpppx...p=series3...and more than 3, also stated as series3.
xppppx, or xpppppx, or xpppppppp..x....p=series3.

thus, eg.

b1
pp2
bbb3
pppp3
bbbbb3
pppppppp3..

a simple example..
p1
bbbb3
pp2............(that 132 )
bb2
p1
bb2
ppppp3.  ....(that123)
b1
ppppppp3
bbbb3
p1
b1
p1
bb2
pppppp3.....(123).....and so on.

you will see, whether, as in rolling form, or in pinwheel style,
the 123 permutation, always , well, almost always, hit AROUND 33%.

THE purpose, of this bet selection, is to have, win/lose ratio,
that hit within MATH EXPECTATION.

thus, when, you very confident that the future result, will hit within expectation,
you could win, with mild progression.



you need to wait, for a prospect, of 123 permutation , to hit..
say, when, 12 hit, you may bet for 3, to hit or not to hit, accordingly.

TERIMA KASIHHHHHHH

[BEAT-THE-WHEEL]

Sputnik, says ..
EXPLORE THE BIAS.
he means, ..
wait for, a Variance, or extreme variance,
to hit first,
than since, the hit will within expectation,
then the remaining will produce,
well over expectation...

[Kattila]

What do you guys think about this :

Last 18 different  numbers ordered in 123 ..... pattern:
1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 (some numbers can repeat but must be in the same group /order)
so each group have 6 numbers ( for now )
What would you bet in the next few spins ?     

[BEAT-THE-WHEEL]

hi Kattila,
do you mean, that, since...

single1, series2,series3+,

will have hit  ratio,

of  (3:2:1.)

thus,

===========
(s1)(s1)(s1)
(s2 )(s2)
(s3)
===========
above SET, of illustrasion, have exactly SIX,
decision, of ,
single1=three. hit,
series2=two hit...
series3+, =one hit.

Then, we make, 100sets, of that illustration,
on a piece of paper.

then, we tick, or strike out, with pen, when a single, or series2 or 3 hit.

if a EXTREME VARIANCE HIT,
when we go through halfway,
then we bet, the not yet hit, single series...accordingly.

theoritically,
all will strike out,  about  evenly, when, the bet goes on.

eg,

p1
bbbb3
pp2...will note down, as tick, or strike out as...

s1(/ ),s1( ),s1( ),
s2(/ ),s2( ),
s3 (/ ).

=======
so, as we bet, all should , about to fill up, as the bet goes on.

and..
thus,
when we see, a BIAS, OR VARIANCE, we bet the, empty, not yet hit.

[Sputnik]

What do you guys think about this :

Last 18 different  numbers ordered in 123 ..... pattern:
1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 (some numbers can repeat but must be in the same group /order)
so each group have 6 numbers ( for now )
What would you bet in the next few spins ?     

Kattila i can not get into details as i am part of private forum - but i can mention the next level where you bet for the (most common) and not the (least common) MC/LC
Assume you have following bias results - see attach image that lose with three loses BB PPP B P then you would continue to aim for singles and if you lose bet it will be a serie of two and if it lose bet it will be a serie of three and lose if you get serie of four or higher - another three bets - if you win during the random walk you look back to see what bias state you ride and change the betting to explore the bias state and not using MC/LC strategy.