+ Register

[alrelax]

The misuse of testing models to real-life situation is a huge factor why so many people believe in the results of various computer testing or statistics and applying those as triggers in Baccarat wagering.  Those testing models and results will never allow a gambler actually wagering on a shoe the ability to know what is going to be presented with any kind of real-life accuracy on a consistent basis.  Even if thought the inconsistent basis is acceptable, the matching up of a live shoe will never offer the gambler enough wins to make up his losses. 

Why?  Because predictive mathematical models used to predict outcomes, as well as apply simplified statistical data in complex domains, cannot work as expected for the reasons I post below.  And Baccarat is a complex domain of unknown numbers to be presented. 

Statistics is applicable only in some domains where the results have to come in certain orders or groups of things that are visible known and defined as, have to happen, etc.  However, in gambling game statistics with mathematical purity---what the gambler has against him and almost every attempt in using statistics, modeling and test results, are the following: 

*  It is impossible to be in possession of the entirety of available information and expect the shoe to fit into the expected results, errors and variances of the studied upon group of shoes statistically analyzed and deduced down to a wagering pattern developed from other shoes.  Simply, the systematic and random errors almost have to be of a greater or lesser quality than what was modeled in the statistics that were used to form the system or wagering schedule.

*  Small unknown variations in the data yet to be produced in the unplayed shoe, will certainely have a huge impact.

*  Theories or models based on statistical data, computer testing of RG or Live Shoes will never give out the results to predict events which are previously produced in a different order than what is set-up in the shoe about to be wagered upon and almost every time the results will have a tremendous negative impact to the player simply because the variances and errors cannot be known.

The results of a shoe of Baccarat can never be mathematical purity and will fail to constantly follow any system or mathematical wagering schedule based upon testing results, because of the various possible patterns the numbers are set-up to present.

[AsymBacGuy]

*  Theories or models based on statistical data, computer testing of RG or Live Shoes will never give out the results to predict events which are previously produced in a different order than what is set-up in the shoe about to be wagered upon and almost every time the results will have a tremendous negative impact to the player simply because the variances and errors cannot be known.

That's why a solid method should be built from a strict dispersion point of view.

as.

[Albalaha]

Prediction is just not possible with any past results. Those who say they can predict are either naive or fraud.
Prediction with a certain degree of accuracy is possible in the long run though. I have defined the long run very clearly in a post of mine in my section. For example, trying to predict any ratio in next spins is not possible with any respected degree of certainty but it is definitely possible to do the same for 10k spins.
          It is highly unfortunate that even after decades of studies and debates people did not learn the basics.

[alrelax]

The whole point of what I am saying, is to capitalize on what is being presented rather than attempting to apply a schedule of your findings/results through whatever means, to the Bac shoe in front of you producing whatever it is set to produce. 

[PatternAnalys]

enuff of bull,

only one question.

what the worst ever seen of
"player"per 100hand.?
(i heard it never less than 30/100)?


Moderators Warning:  Do not insult or disgrace any poster or member. 

Ask questions and post your results or concerns.  But DO NOT insult others, thank you.