+ Register

[alrelax]

Simple, not protocl, not scheduling, not mechnical systems, etc., just reality and reality in hardcore actual doses that exsist at all live casinos.

Besides all the M.M.S., Emotional, Vision, Frame-of-Mind, Etc., that I have detailed out in numerous threads, there is the simple--Shoes present what they will hands forming whatever results happen.

What I mean is most players will desire to define what is happening and follow it or wager strictly against it.  Not much else of anything else.  Streaks/Strong---they love to follow and continue.  If you win one and pull down the winning, the rest are on the casino.  No easier win there is at bac.  Lose the last one.  Great energy, motivation and all that.  Play the cut and it sticks with the streak, a heavy factor for frustration and clouded vision to sit in, quickly for most. 

Streaks can be anything that continues, in a row--chop-chop--- doubles, etc., many more.  Anti or cuts, are whatever there is no repeats, simple.  And so many players always go for the cut, and that to me is simply wrong.  There are numerous indicators that work countless times and, as well--will not prevail at an equal amount.  It is a matter of, realizing you can easily prevail in the '10-15 Min's of Fame' and then reset and refresh again.  But seldom does that happen.  Just bigger and bigger wagering, larger stacks of chips and growing desires.  ALmost everytime I play I witness that, numerous times, everytime--at least 96 out of 100 sessions or so.

But what I have found over the years, are some simple redundancy of shoe presentments.  Sure there are the memorable occasions where there are the repeating/similiar 3 shoes in a row or the times where all day there are never over 4 or 5 streaks in any shoe, or where there are any one of numeorus 'other' patterns/trends/presentments, etc.

However, I do believe seriously and watch this and record if you desire.  A second shoe at the same table will generally be different in the majority of the key triggers, the presentments, the notable outcomes and how they came about.  I do believe in the defining seconds before each presented winning hand, the defining way each came about.  Watch with an open mind and note that.  I do believ in a group of 3 shoes that you will see the first one, the second one that partially copied the first but the majoirty of the actual hands were formed in contrast to that of the first.  The third one, yet different or the same as one of the 2 previous ones just concluded.  Again, nothing to do with scheduled, 'have to hands' for placing wagers.  And just watch the inexperienced player as well as the expereinced player--their facial expression does express their thoughts and disbeliefs as to what just did not appear as they wagered. 

The hands will be dealt, the cards will be presented with great fanfare or not, the cards will come out the way they were set, with or without any instruction or rules from humans to produce something or not.  In other words, random but limited by what forms each hand of 4 or 5 or 6 cards combined.  As much as we all want to or desire to blame a dealer, the house, another player or anything that caused us to decide wrong, it does not actually happen that way.  We found an excuse to let off steam--is all that actually happened. 

What I have found is the inner emotional crutch that directs us to wager one side or the other, based upon something.  That something might be correct or wrong, those are the two choices or reasonings that happen at the end of each hand.  But back to what I was saying.  One shoe, than another one.  That second one will not or only on a very rare occasion really follow the first.  There will be some similiar presentments, but most will not be.  Be aware of that, just we all want to play and play and spend time there continuing to play and win.

Please explore your mind, your decision making process, your emotional state and how it affects you, your vision and your thoughts.  Realize what you base your wagering decisions on each time, right then and there.  I do believe that will help the majoirty of you.  No matter if you are correct, wrong or flip-flopping, you need to discover your own thoughts, because  the cards are set.  The cards do not change.  You are matching your thoughts and what you need to a 'pre-set' loaf of food already baked, waiting to be served.

What I am saying is no different than you like a certain type of taste in your bread.  The loaf that is not going to change after that burn card is done.  Realize that.  If that loaf is spicy, and you do not like spicy--it will not change.  However, if you get it into your mind spicy is cool, tasty and what you really seek for 1 hour, then you can alter your taste to suit the shoe.  If not, you will have conflict that will not go away, period, end of story. 

When there is a shoe with 3 streaks of 8 plus repeating B's and P's, watch everyone and their hype and desire and wagering for that same thing to continue.  All natural and never changes.  However, it will.  Might be immediatley and might be real slow.  Problem is, most players expect and desire with conviction, not exploring or treading the waters.  Instead of going in for the kill with guns blazing (which to complicate things--works sometimes but only the few minority times in reality) and everything you have to clean house--how about rationalizing it out, realizing and actually understanding the presentments and each session as a section/short result, rather than a long series of randomness that has to match or equal out in the long run, etc.?

Baccarat is no different than auto or truck repairing.  There are tons of stuff to learn, expereince and master.  Someone that actually has done truck repairing for 20 years can make a mistake that is viewed as a mistake or a fluke.  That same thing committed by a newcomer to the trade, say with 6 months expereince would likely be deemed as a mistake, a blantely committed unintelligent mistake.  The newcomer has the advantage because he does not have all the baggage and the possibilities with him at the time.  The expereinced person could be influenced either the bad/wrong way or perhaps might avoid something because  of the expereince he actaully holds, etc.  Most of the time it is not even defined.  I used to own a heavy wrecker service and a tractor trailer garage for 15 years or so.  I had one mechanic that knew when to tear apart the whole turbo system and replace everything or just clean most everythign out and replace only the turbo itself, etc., in a semi truck.  Could be the difference between $2,000.00 and excess of $6,500.00, in just parts plus more, etc.  He was never wrong, never.  But he went to work for me after he had a good 20 plus years of experience.  What did he do worng before he went to work for me??  I don't know.  I had a new comer one year and my expereinced guy trained him for the better part of one year.  One day the expereinced guy was not around.  A turbo job came in from anational over the road trucking company.  Heavy wrecker bill for two units for a hundred plus mile tow.  Complete and blanket authorization to make a 225 mile, 450 mile round trip in the middle of the night parts run to get the parts.  Just fix it, no problem with instant payment at the end,  great customer.  My new guy called and discussed with my other guy whom was not there.  The decision was, if so and so was going on involving the performance of the truck prior to the break-down and if such and such was present in the garage when torn apart, etc., then replace the whole system, if not just the turbo.  Natutrally I wanted to sell a whole system with the mark ups, but I dopn't want to gouge a great client whom might find out we were dishonest in a decision. 

We only replaced the turbo and it was the wrong decision for whatever reason.  So, a bit down the road the new turbo was effected and also went out once again.  I had to eat the entire forst round, towing, repairs and cost of turbo charger.  No different than bac, IMO--mistakes are mistakes and beliefs are beliefs.  But a mistake is very different than a belief.  One is factual and one has many reasonings that have to be deduced down, defined and rationalized out---with no concrete way to assure they are the proper or successful results to come about---eacha nd every time.  Reality may or may not repeat itself,  non-reality comes into play to complicate visions no matter if we realize it or attempt to control it.  After all, we can not be 100% positive what is yet to come in most anything.  Bac presentments or otherwise.  Bac does resemble life in so many ways, not always but many ways--during so many shoes and times. 

And maybe my other guy back then would have made the exact same decision regarding the turbo as what was made with the newcomer.  I don't know for sure and possibly repeated, possibly not.  Easy as hell to armchair quarterback it afterwards, but the time to really focus is the present. 

[Blue_Angel]

I've told to AsymBacGuy before, but he found his "unbeatable plans", that as a general rule the 2nd shoe will be 50% same/different from the 1st and the 3rd will be 25% same to 75% different in regards with the 1st.
thus, if someone would bet the exact decisions from the 1st BUT by reversing their order on the 2nd, then on the 3rd to bet reversed AND opposite from the 1st, he could has plenty of opportunities to quit with a net profit.


Money management is simple, 1 unit flat bets for entire 2nd shoe and 2 units flat bets for the entire 3rd shoe.
Stop anywhere with a net a profit and restart charting, if you cannot find 1 single occasion where you are on overall profit during the course of 2 entire shoes of betting then God may help you because nobody else could!


This is NOT hit and run, quit after...(place your absurdity here), this is going on in continuous basis.

[AsymBacGuy]

Alrelax ideas are surely effective to end the sessions closer to the negative expectation, a thing that 99.99% of all baccarat players cannot achieve as they wish to always win or to break even per every session played (day, week, month).

And Blue is right. More shoes we are playing/observing having a target shoe to compare the subsequent results, higher will be the probability to get opposite outcomes. It's a proven sure indeniable mathematical fact.
But this line of thought cannot work so plainly as variance may be so harsh that sometimes after 4-5 shoes the change of outcomes doesn't shift so much the results. Think of a couple or three consecutive shoes where we got many long streaks on the same side and on the almost same positions.

So we are forced to restrain the variance at most and the better thing to do is classifying the events by patterns.

Actually we are working hard on pc and live samples to present very soon a strict mechanical plan where some A bets are more likely than B bets after vig, so getting the player an advantage.
That is to demonstrate that this fkn game is beatable by taking into account its long term asymmetrical features.

Of course "long term" means to wait the favourable opportunities to wager as variance acts at most on short terms, curiously the same terms where baccarat players think to get an edge.

as. 



 





   

[alrelax]

 I would strictly let my money management system of governance how long lthe time and wagering I would continue to make after I already had a positive and upbeat session.  I've learned from experience every which way and trying to handle it with flat betting or betting a certain amount of units until I win or lose but is nothing that can match the governance of the 1/3 system or even a 25% system that one covering you and allow you to Continue to win the maximum amount that is available without a long  continuance of play and too much risk.

And yes as what was just mentioned I would end it 99% of the times on a negative note rather than a continuance Buying in and the continued attempts to make something happen. I just know through experience that is such negativity and such frustratation the majority of the times it just doesn't pan out for myself. Out of 100 times less than 10 times I might be able to come back.  The other 90 times far outweigh what I profited those ten times or so.  I know this from decades of playing it doesn't work that way and that's for the long run the long run meaning decades at a time 10 years +10 years +10 years you can just call that my long-term and I'm already at that.

[alrelax]

Here is what happened at the Racino where there are multiple regular 'full-time' 'pro' players.  I know a few of them from the place and most I do not know.  But I been going there for like 5 years and it is an extremely busy popular place with live games, poker 24/7 in a population base of 3 million people.  Limits are 3 spots at $300 each and unlimited 'on top' of others if they are under table max, which most are because  they do from $10 to $100 as a norm. 

I walk in the place and there is 41 or 42ish hands played out already.  All 1's and 2's and a single 3.  No ties, no Pandas, No F-7's.  Personally to me, that is a gold mine waiting to happen.  All the 'pros' are playing/wagering for the doubles, etc., and then the cut of course.  They are winning 1 and losing 2 and then winning 3 and losing 1.  Great, no problem.  I see something else.  I see one side or the other, or both going to get classically strong and I see a cluster or at least 3 F-7's coming within the section of the 50-70 hand presentment quarter.  I play straight Banker and $25.00 (max on spot on F-7) straight.  In about 10 hands it goes to B--B--T--B--T--B--T and then back to players.  They are all floored, mouths literally dropped opened, like WOW, impossible.  LOL.  They drag each other in their theories and beliefs, the only thing really wrong with what they all think is, they attempt to get the shoe to do the same thing all the way through, hand 10-20 to reporduce the same presentments during hands 50-80, etc.  Then after the single player, the F-7 comes.  Then another Player and another Banker and then the second F-7 comes as well.  I had 2 quarters on two F-7 spots now.  Shoe finished with a 4 player and a 4 Banker.  Witht he average bac players mindset they disallow themselves to have the ability to be on the infrequent side or the side that the variance will rear its head--because  they get sucked in with the score board, the theories, the fallacies and the beliefs that it follows or it does not follow. 

To me, more times than not--it is worth my buy-in risk to go for the variance that will most likely come about.  Problem with all being, is the repeatitvness players demand--desire--attempt--and play for things like this.  All day, every shoe, every casino, bounce table to table.  No way-the only thing you will do is go broke. 

Then I hit the two F-7's with a bunch of table max's in seceral spots in the following shoe, all within the first 12 hands or so.  The following shoe was different then the one that just finished by far and large. 

I cashed out the $5k up or so and got back my $1,500 or so two time buy-in.  Lots of talk about how stupid I was during those first 10-15 hands where it never went past 2 times, except a single 3 player earlier in the shoe.  But as they were talking in their foreign language I just happen to understand a great deal of, they fail to even realize about 'sections' and 'turning points' that will happen more often than not. 

BTW-- people here and on other boards that cruise here--I strictly write about what I play and what I expereince.  I am not a math--theory--PC simulation guru or an on-line gambler.  Just so you understand. 

[AsymBacGuy]

I got many more personal positive experiences playing like that, but I fear that my mind is forgetting the more frequent negative situations that happened to me.

(But ties are always a good opportunity to bet)  :-)

as.

 

 

[Xander]

Sorry guys, but too many of your streaks and pattern discussions look an awful lot like gambler's fallacy.  My suggestion is that you revisit logic, basic probability and the math before venturing too far off into voodoo land.  Before too long someone will probably post an absurdly long post about how they need to eat pasta and wear red socks in order to win.   

[Gizmotron]

Sorry guys, but too many of your streaks and pattern discussions look an awful lot like gambler's fallacy.  My suggestion is that you revisit logic, basic probability and the math before venturing too far off into voodoo land.  Before too long someone will probably post an absurdly long post about how they need to eat pasta and wear red socks in order to win.   

Ten reds in a row is meaningless.  It's no more relevant than a bear pattern in the clouds.  I don't know why you're enamored with it.

Money! I want free money. I want money that comes from my acquired skill where there are people like yourself that say it is impossible, like without an edge. Money earned in this way is far better than being paid as some functionary. And it's bragging money too. It can be earned in 5 minutes or more likely under 2 hours. It's not a comp gathering game either.

I'm so fascinated by the world you see around you. You have an edge. You claim that there can't be any kind of edge in guessing. You won't even acknowledge that there is such a thing as a streak of reds. That it's some kind of meaningless cloud formation that needs to be ignored. How can you be an expert at using it if you can't see an edge in it?

Try this logic. I proposed it at least a decade ago to the mathBoyz: If you see a meaningless pattern occurring, can you use it as if it means something, even though we all know that it is meaningless? Can anyone pretend that it has a beginning, a middle, and an ending? If it has no meaning, can it be used to give you a meaningless temporary edge?

Now, I'm still waiting for the mathBoyz to respond. They all chickened out. Perhaps you will not. I know what to do with 22 black numbers in a row. You apparently don't. We all know that the color of a slot on a Roulette wheel is symbolic only. We also know that the table layout is not a real representation of locations on the wheel. But the only thing that matters is that the casino will not just take money laid on the table. They will also give money even if you have a meaningless experience. I like that too. You have raised my conscientiousness a degree. It makes making money off a casino even more rewarding that it is meaningless and without an edge. Yep, I really like that.

[Xander]

Gizmo-Money! I want free money. I want money that comes from my acquired skill where there are people like yourself that say it is impossible, like without an edge. Money earned in this way is far better than being paid as some functionary. And it's bragging money too. It can be earned in 5 minutes or more likely under 2 hours. It's not a comp gathering game either.

I'm so fascinated by the world you see around you. You have an edge. You claim that there can't be any kind of edge in guessing. You won't even acknowledge that there is such a thing as a streak of reds. That it's some kind of meaningless cloud formation that needs to be ignored. How can you be an expert at using it if you can't see an edge in it?

Try this logic. I proposed it at least a decade ago to the mathBoyz: If you see a meaningless pattern occurring, can you use it as if it means something, even though we all know that it is meaningless? Can anyone pretend that it has a beginning, a middle, and an ending? If it has no meaning, can it be used to give you a meaningless temporary edge?

Now, I'm still waiting for the mathBoyz to respond. They all chickened out. Perhaps you will not. I know what to do with 22 black numbers in a row. You apparently don't. We all know that the color of a slot on a Roulette wheel is symbolic only. We also know that the table layout is not a real representation of locations on the wheel. But the only thing that matters is that the casino will not just take money laid on the table. They will also give money even if you have a meaningless experience. I like that too. You have raised my conscientiousness a degree. It makes making money off a casino even more rewarding that it is meaningless and without an edge.

Ok Gizmo,

Ten reds in a row just hit.  What should we bet next and why?  (Please show the math.)

[Gizmotron]

Ok Gizmo,

Ten reds in a row just hit.  What should we bet next and why?  (Please show the math.)

I asked you first. "Try this logic. I proposed it at least a decade ago to the mathBoyz: If you see a meaningless pattern occurring, can you use it as if it means something, even though we all know that it is meaningless? Can anyone pretend that it has a beginning, a middle, and an ending? If it has no meaning, can it be used to give you a meaningless temporary edge?" But I have been waiting for more than ten years.


So I will answer your question just to show you how it's done.


"Ten reds in a row just hit..."  I'm already done. I was only down two net bets. After the fourth in a row, knowing that a swarm of 4's were not occurring, I bet big in a fifth spin to win on red. I recovered my two net losses with spins 5 and 6, and went on to win my  2 - 1 MM tactic by the 8th red in a row. Then I was done. Now you can easily say that you are a genius and I'm not, and therefore the only conclusion is I never had an edge. But I still say there is a middle to every streak. You don't need an edge if you can hit the casino in the middles.


Then there is the other side of this too. You are not a genius and you can't exploit the middles. All it takes is one single speculative bet to see if you are still in the middle. Only you can't see how to play even chance games unless you have an edge. You are more than likely an ill advised ignoramus for always, and I mean always, grand standing on your soapbox / throne that the world is only the way that you see it and everyone else must bow to your intellect. You act like the "edge" is somehow superior to all other methods that ever was in the universe. That's just not true and you are not right. (The Math) It takes one single bet to see if you are in the middle of a streak. If that bet is an even chance bet, 50 / 50, then if you win, you can't lose anything more on the rest of the streak. But you can win more. If you lose then you know you were at the end of the streak. ((1 + 1) - 1 = 1) or ((1 - 1) - 1 = -1)

[Xander]

Gizmo,

I asked you a question.  Now can you answer it or not?


Ten reds in a row just hit.  You were not able to bet on them until after they had hit. Now, what should we bet next and why?  (Please show the math.)

[Gizmotron]

Gizmo,

I asked you a question.  Now can you answer it or not?


Ten reds in a row just hit.  You were not able to bet on them until after they had hit. Now, what should we bet next and why?  (Please show the math.)

NO!

[Xander]

Gizmo-Money! I want free money. I want money that comes from my acquired skill where there are people like yourself that say it is impossible, like without an edge. Money earned in this way is far better than being paid as some functionary. And it's bragging money too. It can be earned in 5 minutes or more likely under 2 hours. It's not a comp gathering game either.

I'm so fascinated by the world you see around you. You have an edge. You claim that there can't be any kind of edge in guessing. You won't even acknowledge that there is such a thing as a streak of reds. That it's some kind of meaningless cloud formation that needs to be ignored. How can you be an expert at using it if you can't see an edge in it?

Try this logic. I proposed it at least a decade ago to the mathBoyz: If you see a meaningless pattern occurring, can you use it as if it means something, even though we all know that it is meaningless? Can anyone pretend that it has a beginning, a middle, and an ending? If it has no meaning, can it be used to give you a meaningless temporary edge?

Now, I'm still waiting for the mathBoyz to respond. They all chickened out. Perhaps you will not. I know what to do with 22 black numbers in a row. You apparently don't. We all know that the color of a slot on a Roulette wheel is symbolic only. We also know that the table layout is not a real representation of locations on the wheel. But the only thing that matters is that the casino will not just take money laid on the table. They will also give money even if you have a meaningless experience. I like that too. You have raised my conscientiousness a degree. It makes making money off a casino even more rewarding that it is meaningless and without an edge.

Hmmm...now didn't you write the post above?

You make these absurd claims, and then you're too scared to reply.  What's that about?? 

[Jimske]

Don't you guys ever get tired of this?  This time I read every word of Glen's post.  Just like the rest of ya'll it's the same stuff from the beginning of time - except - he didn't drone on about trucks in a ditch and Asian food.  You're really slipping Glen.  Could it be you are even boring yourself?

[Blue_Angel]

ABG, ties are more probable to occur when you see plenty of Js,Qs and Ks.
For example for the last 4 decisions there were more than 50% figures from the total of cards been dealt.


If there's already 1 tie within last 4-5 hands then bet for 1 more on 4 to 5 bets max.
This strategy should be considered as "special guest", the main principle is the totals but not in the conventional RTM sense...