At this point it do well to mention number of trials in order to qualify what "early days" means.
I've been dabbling with this at the tables for approx 170 shoes since the beginning of Oct, starting off with 128/1 iteration, which is no where as robust as 256/1 for obvious reasons.
Yes, changing the W/L registry would certainly be the holy grail. As it is the expected LIAR for 4LIAR is about 2.3 occurrences per 75 hands.
Absolutely, I give you credit for getting me to focus on controlling the LIARs. I would have expected 4LIAR to occur approx once per 64 hands, as there exists 16 x 4 hand combinations, which equates to 64 decisions in total, but this merely semantics.
The word "trigger" condors up a specific occurrence which then suggests some pattern which can be defined even though you insist not a pattern .
To avoid sitting at the table and in a worst case scenario placing NIL BETS for an entire shoe, while other players may be milking it, and you're looking stupid, I've had to introduce other bet options, these are my triggers.
I've played around with a few options, some turn out rubbish and are ditched. The 3 I'm using at the mo' include, Birthday Paradox, risking 4 bets to win 1, bet the cut after a minimum of a 4 streak (could be a streak of 6 or 8, all depends how it falls), again risking 4 bets to win 1, Ditto bet for a repeat against a series of 4 chops minimum, risk 4 to win 1. And anything that might take my fancy when I do glance a the score board (usually betting against the continuance of something).
I'm confused here. Are you saying the "combinatorial probability" only occurs every few months? Binary outcomes sounds like patterns to me. How about Baccarat Code or Baccarat Pairs, both of which use computational probability to predict (read guess).
I was guessing that if it was possible to incorporate the 512/1 iteration (this would be possible where the game is endless and dealt from a CSM machine, I know of two casinos that offer this). I'm guessing that the player would encounter any trigger failures, but I really don't know because playing this way is not an option of me. I'm not converting or thinking of patterns when I need to bet, rather focusing on which side.
Following on from my early morn' post, there are enough 'bright sparks' on this board able to figure out, when I mention 128/1, 256/1 and 512/1, the number of decisions involved for each scenario.
This leaves you the player with a few issues still to resolve;
ONE - You can't be expected to having to bet X many times in order to win one single bet
, such an approach is just not feasible. You need to be creative to solve this issue.
TWO - You can't take to the table a bet methodology, not matter how robust it appears, that has you the player, betting once, twice, 3, 4 times, or even NIL times for any given shoe. Your patience won't hold up. If the Trigger fails, you could be waiting around a long time for a recoup. So once again, you need to put on your creative hat and find ways that a shoe can potentially create more bet opportunities than it normally would, this is not that difficult, however the 512/1 option a non-starter for me, thanks to Genting's paranoia of people counting the fortune 8 side-bet.
Due to some shoes presenting very few bet opportunities, I've also had to included 3 other triggers, as described above, basically I can't occupying a seat on a busy table and not be placing bets. At the half way point of a shoe, you are able to figure how many potential bet opportunities will present themselves for the remainder of the shoe, if it's really low (1 or 2) and there is a new shoe starting elsewhere, I may bail and start afresh.
MM is a major issue, yet 4LAIR sounds very manageable, but IMO is isn't, I've probably jumped ahead of myself. Let me clarify; this 256/1 bet option, while it hardly ever fails, it does occasionally, this will cost me 4 losing bets, which is nothing, Back to back failures are super rare. Yet after a single failure and 4LIAR, when the next trigger presents itself, your expectation is to win within 4 bets, not the very next bet placed.
Therefore 4LIAR could be followed by another 1, 2 or 3LIARs. Hence why I stated MM is still paramount. Add to to mix to additional bet opportunities to justify sitting down, sh1t sometimes happens. I sometimes play around with different MM values, with a higher chip value kicking in after 2L, while this spreads the load, it can be problematic trying having to wait for 2L before betting the higher value chips. MM is still work in progress for me. Incidentally I am of the view that nobody, not even system sellers should never instruct or suggest how others should or need to do with their money, this is a individual matter. Suffice to say, I personally use a multiple hybrid version of Johnson's Labby, because it offers me the most flexibility and control.
Again, I point to the 256 balls in a bag analogy, it doesn't require much acceptance, that the same number coming out twice inside 8 attempts would be a rare event, you can exploit and turn this proven mathematically fact with a bit of tweaking into a rock-solid bet methodology.