+ Register

[gr8player]

Question:  Is it possible for a loss to be a "good" loss?
Answer:  Absolutely.

OK.  So it begs the next question:  How can a loss EVER be considered a "good" one?
And now, the final answer:  When it is a "virtual loss".

Before I get into all of the inherent advantages that accompany "virtual losses", I will begin with the definition:

A "virtual loss" is, simply stated, any loss that you did not bet into.  Now, make no mistake of it, it is a loss; a loss to your preferred bet placement method.  It is to be marked as a loss on your scorecard (either physically or, at least, mentally) and it is a loss that counts as would any other; in other words, a loss is still a loss, "virtual" or otherwise, and should be treated as such.

BUUUTTT, the inherent advantages of "virtual losses" are HUGE:

1.)  They cost you NOTHING but time.  Not one cent of your bankroll.  (Begs another question, doesn't it?:  What is of more value to you in the long run at the Bac tables, your time or your MONEY?)

2.)  They serve to reduce stress; the stress related to the long-term battle that we face at each and every hand/shoe/session.  In other words, "virtual losses", losses that cost us nothing, can be rather relieving, especially to our psyche.

3.)  They can, most often, aid us in both getting (and betting) into the "more-favorable conditions" of our preferred bet placement strategies more often AND get us to our win goals easier/quicker.  How so?  Well, at Baccarat, we are playing, regardless of our bet placement preferences, basically a 50/50 game.  And in that 50/50 game, the swings, or "variances" (as I prefer to call them), can come in waves that can, at times, be rather difficult to navigate.  So it only makes perfect sense that the "absorption of virtual losses" into our preferred bet placement strategies can ONLY SERVE TO REDUCE OUR NEGATIVE VARIANCES.  Now, make no mistake of it, sometimes it may work better than other times, but, IT CAN ONLY HELP.

So what does this all mean to us in the end?  It means that when the patient and disciplined player is sitting at the table AWAITING THE CORRECT PLAYING CONDITIONS BEFORE PLACING A REAL BET, they are actually reaping the rewards associated with the ABSORPTION OF VIRTUAL LOSSES; losses that cost us NOTHING.

In fact, there are times when I'm awaiting my preferred placements to come to the fore-front, and I'm actually pleased with the wait.  I'm pleased because I KNOW that, sooner or later, MY preferred placement strategy will show itself.  And the longer I wait, the more sure of that fact I am.  And therein builds my confidence in my overall game.

So, you see what happens here?  It's all good.  Wading through virtual losses is GOOD.  And it's CHEAP. And it's REWARDING in the end.  Can you see that?

Here's hoping you can.  Stay well.

[soxfan]

I only start/keep making the real money wager if I win the majority of past three decision, hey hey.

[gr8player]

Hello, Soxster, I trust all is well with you.

While I surely can appreciate your type of play, my post refers more to losing more plays (plays, not money) than winning before commencing real betting.

You see, regardless our preferred bet selection method, we must, at some point or another, come to the realization that we will have to absorb losses.  And, IMHO, it is HOW we absorb those losses that will, in the end, define our success (or, alternatively, the lack thereof).

So I prefer the wait.  In fact, sometimes, the longer the better.  I feel that the more virtual losses that mount up, the stronger my plays will appear when they do.

Now, so that no one gets the wrong idea here, this is not an exact science.  In fact, rather far from it.  I am guaranteed nothing even when I do decide to pony up my bets.  I could be, and have been, wrong about the shoe now dispensing the decisions that I've been awaiting.  But, that said, it most surely is a viable and workable approach.  Why?  Because I can't be wrong forever, especially when already witnessing quite a few virtual losses passing me by.

And I'll tell you why I can't be wrong forever:  Statistics.  I play a tight game, and my game (my preferred bet selection process) is geared toward, shall I say, the "majority" of results, statistically-speaking.  I trust you can understand and grasp what I am trying to convey here.  Certain statistics are undeniable, and that all translates to certain results that are similarly undeniable.  It then becomes only a matter of time....of patience, of discipline, and of time.

And, last but not least, of course, money management.  I leave you with this one question:  Does there exist a much better or more important ingredient of any money-management process than the "no-bet"?  I think not.  I think loss avoidance is the key to anyone's money-management....heck, it's the key to anyone's overall Bac game, IMHO.  And know this:  Virtual Loss = Loss Avoidance.

Stay well.

[georgebac]

good answers gr8plyer, my question to you is what's the correct MM do you sue when playing bac. im sure you have bankroll you use to play your session or shoes. if i have 5k what's my base bets and what's the highest bet am i allowed without going suicide with my bankroll. 

[greenguy]

While playing one system I virtual play a second compatible system.

When the played system throws a curve ball (a certain signal that I call a 'red alert') I switch to playing the virtual system, and virtual play the played system.

I play the virtual system until it wins 14 units, or it loses 146 units, or the now virtual, played system loses a virtual 66 units.

I then switch back to the played system and virtual play the virtual system until another 'red alert' appears.

This type of set up is the best use of virtual bets I know of.

[Rolex-Watch]

I feel that the more virtual losses that mount up, the stronger my plays will appear when they do.

  Nope not really, the cards know nothing about prior hands, patterns, trends, you are "Anthropomorphizing the game" but too committed, emotional wrapped up to realize.

Now, so that no one gets the wrong idea here, this is not an exact science.  In fact, rather far from it.  I am guaranteed nothing even when I do decide to pony up my bets.  I could be, and have been, wrong about the shoe now dispensing the decisions that I've been awaiting.  But, that said, it most surely is a viable and workable approach.  Why?  Because I can't be wrong forever, especially when already witnessing quite a few virtual losses passing me by.

Too bad when the virtual losses are virtual winners, and then when you do bet, you hit more losses.  So you bet even more shallow, without realizing every hand is still 50-50, but you can't keep shallow betting forever.

And I'll tell you why I can't be wrong forever:  Statistics.  I play a tight game, and my game (my preferred bet selection process) is geared toward, shall I say, the "majority" of results, statistically-speaking.  I trust you can understand and grasp what I am trying to convey here.  Certain statistics are undeniable, and that all translates to certain results that are similarly undeniable.

Nope, it appears to me that you are trying to convince yourself more than anybody here, no substance, the reader is left guessing what you are getting at.   

I like to think I'm intelligent enough to recognize  certain traits, it can be useful to step back and listen to your own beliefs, analyse your beliefs as a third person would, then ask yourself why?  Why do some seek, need, are so desperate for acknowledgement from others, once you do that, you hopefully can become normal like the majority.

[gr8player]

While playing one system I virtual play a second compatible system.

When the played system throws a curve ball (a certain signal that I call a 'red alert') I switch to playing the virtual system, and virtual play the played system.

I play the virtual system until it wins 14 units, or it loses 146 units, or the now virtual, played system loses a virtual 66 units.

I then switch back to the played system and virtual play the virtual system until another 'red alert' appears.

This type of set up is the best use of virtual bets I know of.

Hello, Greenguy, I trust all is well with you.

Hey, if it's working for you, go for it.  Wonderful.  That said, I'm not a big fan of "switching" systems midstream, preferring to concentrate my efforts strictly on my preferred bet placement strategy. 

Stay well.

[gr8player]

good answers gr8player, my question to you is what's the correct MM do you sue when playing bac. im sure you have bankroll you use to play your session or shoes. if i have 5k what's my base bets and what's the highest bet am i allowed without going suicide with my bankroll.

Hello, Georgebac, I trust all is well with you.

There really is no "correct MM" for this game, I would suggest you keep your bets within your own personal "comfort zone".  By doing so, you will not suffer through any of the "hesitation" that is associated with "over-betting".

I am rather familiar with the "5K bankroll", as I used to buy in for anywhere from 5K to 7K as a rule.  That said, I've found that buying in for half that amount, and betting half my bet sizes, has allowed me to expand my money-management on a "shoe-to-shoe" basis.

But, to answer your question, a 5K buy-in can have you betting $100 as base bet with a $200 max bet.  I would use the base bet always, but after any win, I would parlay it to $200.  I'd have a "sliding scale" win goal....generally anywhere from $500 to $1000, depending on how my session started off...with a loss limit of $1500.

But please know, Georgebac, that these numbers were played by me as a very experienced player, and I would NEVER, EVER recommend playing these sorts of unit sizes to anyone that doesn't know HOW TO CONTROL them. 

So my advice to you or anyone else that decides to play this game:  PROCEED WITH CAUTION.  Play small rather than big, and, in that way, at least give yourself a chance at success.  Alternatively, if you happen to fail, it didn't cost you an "arm and a leg".  Take heed, and take care.

[AsymBacGuy]

Yep, to get a long term control over the game the virtual losses topic is of paramount importance, imho.

Are we losing the virtual winnings waiting for such virtual losses to appear so that everything will be proportionally placed or, even worse, negative oriented on our future actual betting?

The answer is very easy.

Let's say we want to wait a 2.5 sr deviation on some SELECTED betting situations.

After having patiently waited that our betting target has reached this point, we'll start to bet then registering the times when we'll have a slight RTM effect opposed to the times when that deviation will go up to higher values.
If the RTM effect will be superior to the opposite effect we'll get an edge and it remains to assess whether this is capable to invert the house edge. 

In a perfect 50/50 undependent game we are guaranteed to get the same number of RTM events/higher deviation events. So there's no point to wait for a given deviation in order to get a possible advantage.

Luckily and providing a proper registration of the MLE distributions, at baccarat such circumstances wholly considered tend to favor the RTM side.

At the same time, we could act on the virtual winnings knowing that some winnings will be more likely on certain patterns, so now we want to properly evaluate their lenght.

We don't want to wait very rare situations on two opposed "simple" patterns as some more likely distributions will automatically offer many betting opportunities that by magical reasons have shown a valuable propensity toward one side of action.

as.   







         

[gr8player]

Yep, to get a long term control over the game the virtual losses topic is of paramount importance, imho.

Are we losing the virtual winnings waiting for such virtual losses to appear so that everything will be proportionally placed or, even worse, negative oriented on our future actual betting?

No.  If my preferred bet placements are prevalent when I first get to the table, then, by all means, I'm on them from the get-go.  It is those times when they are not prevalent that I need to employ my "virtual loss" strategy, as I await their next arrival.

Luckily and providing a proper registration of the MLE distributions, at baccarat such circumstances wholly considered tend to favor the RTM side.
       

This is an absolute.  Only a matter of time.  And personal variance.  In short, statistics matter, especially as they pertain to the "most likely event distributions".  One needs only to know what to look for, and be patient and disciplined enough so that they allow themselves to profit by it.

Stay well.

[Rolex-Watch]

One needs only to know what to look for, and be patient a

In which case, what you look for could be defined, you could define many "what to look for triggers".  Then apply conditional statements, such as if this happens (you lose), then you do this (fold yer arms). 

What you end up with is repeatable and predictable behavior, er some might call it MECHANICAL[smiley]cps/noway.gif[/smiley]
Of course you could share with all your friends, what it is you look for, but never have and never will, I can only speculate why [smiley]toto/d200712191811061584.gif[/smiley]

[gr8player]

Johno/RolexWatch, I just don't understand why you feel the need to post your "steaming pile of stuff" in my thread.  You don't see me coming into any of the threads that you've authored in this forum, even if and when I've disagreed totally with your message.  Rather, I choose to keep it to myself, if for no other reason than to respect the rights of this forum and its members.

Where did you get this obviously uncontrollable urge to denigrate and demean anything and everything that I post in this forum?  What purpose is your blatant disrespect supposed to serve?  All you're doing is weakening this forum with your constant and unnecessary intrusions and accusations into anything and everything that is "gr8player".  How selfish must you be not to care.

Why don't you think of this for a minute before your next attack?:  There actually are members that enjoy reading me, and actually gain alot of insight about how to approach and play this game from reading my posts.  Some, believe it or not, have improved their results at the tables by incorporating some of my theories/methodologies into their own games. 

So it is with those members in mind that I will continue to post here in this forum, regardless what you, Johno/RolexWatch, think about it.  I'm not saying you shouldn't state your opinions, for that is what any public forum is for; I ask only for you to do so respectfully.

[AsymBacGuy]

Gr8player, I'm not saying that waiting virtual losses is the only valuable tool to get a control over the game.
Actually many positive starting shoes will end up positively.
And you know very well what I'm talking about.

as. 

[Rolex-Watch]

Where did you get this obviously uncontrollable urge to denigrate and demean anything and everything that I post in this forum?   How selfish must you be not to care.

You short memory when it suits you.  You have denigrated my style of play for years with your snide comments here and there, well now you have my attention and you whing about it, yeah typical. 

There actually are members that enjoy reading me, and actually gain alot of insight about how to approach and play this game from reading my posts.  Some, believe it or not, have improved their results at the tables by incorporating some of my theories/methodologies into their own games. 

Ha don't make me laugh we are all friends here are we not (LOL)?  It's not about helping anybody, other than you feeding YOUR URGE.  What do you actually post that you haven't regurgitated over the last 10 years?  Same old wishy washy lack no substance hot air waffle.  If you wanted to assist anybody, just one person, for one in the last 10 years you would post a shoe and explain how and why you bet, but you won't because you don't want to embarrass yourself, you don't want it to be known behind the hot air, there exists only a vacuum.   

You're too far gone, I meet people like you all the time in casinos, normal friendly people, but once the topic turns to gambling and bet selection in particular, then the insanity becomes prevalent.  Nobody could really lambaste how you play, because in the last decade you have never revealed anything other than handing over a very substantial 6 figure amount of coin to  the casinos.

   

[andrebac]

GR8,
IMO, in general I agree with you. The loss could be convenient, BUT as far as is played at tables.
if you don't put money for real, it doesn't change your variance curve.
when I "expect" losses I bet the minimum till the ranges get back to normal. This IS a convenient loss!