+ Register

[Matt]

Do you prefer betting for variance to correct or for dominance to continue?

I usually follow a few different bet selections and will bet on the dominant side to continue being dominant.

There probably isn't much difference either way but I am interested to hear peoples reasons for each.

[Matt]

I have considered trying to play for the best of both by playing for variance to correct up until difference of 5, then for difference more than 5 play for dominance to continue.
Example:
Player 10 wins, Banker 14 wins- bet player wins will even out with banker

Player 17 wins, Banker 23 wins- bet banker will continue to dominate

[Gizmotron]

Do you prefer betting for variance to correct or for dominance to continue?

Answer: Yes

I never grow attached to a bet selection rule. It's just a tool to reveal the effectiveness trend. I never grow attached to the effectiveness trend either. The only trend I grow attached to is to exit a session once I've reached my win goal or my stop loss point. That basic rule has its limitations too. If I see a global effect that dominates for several hours then I demolish the casino, exploiting that trend path, for as long as it lasts or that I can stand playing.

[vo rogue]

Hi matt, my style is to bet doms after a 4 decision lead, +3u/-5 im out the door. Corrections can occur in the next shoe after we've gone home (hopefully). I try for parlays using FLD (if dom has 4+in this shoe).or OLD if dom is chopping. I flat bet hopeing for early win bank has gone nowhere though ,still around starting level.  what's your bet style for the corrections ?.      Cheers

[AsymBacGuy]

Do you prefer betting for variance to correct or for dominance to continue?

I usually follow a few different bet selections and will bet on the dominant side to continue being dominant.

There probably isn't much difference either way but I am interested to hear peoples reasons for each.

Hi matt.

If you think some patterns are slightly more likely than others (maybe because B streaks are more likely than B singles, for example) it's preferable to bet them toward the domination side.
On the other part, if such more likely events tend to be silent I have to wait the appearance of some triggers and now I bet toward the correction.
Differently to the domination betting line where the task is simpler, the correction line needs a deeper evaluation by assessing some side parameters and imo the most important one is discussed on my blog. Per any shoe and per any series of shoes.

If I act into too short terms, meaning I want to guess too many hands or too many patterns, I'll invariably fall into the widest part of the random world. And imo many trend following strategies oriented to guess right on the actual shoe results are sure losers itlr.

Differently to what many people keep thinking, some events are due as their probability is higher than their counterpart.
Of course they can't show their raised likelihood everytime or per every shoe or per any strict amount of shoes, expecially and more importantly whether the shifting factor was previously erased in some way. Sometimes they can anyway but this is only the product of a favourable binomial probability that can't last for long.

as.