08 Print Page - Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac

BetSelection.cc

Forums => Baccarat Forum => Topic started by: alrelax on July 20, 2018, 05:02:39 pm

Title: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: alrelax on July 20, 2018, 05:02:39 pm
In order to 'beat' randomness and 'define it' to mathematical and statistical outcome, you would have to be able to compress all the strings of outcomes, that are possible in baccarat.  And, that feat cannot be done and converted to a schedule of definitive presentments that will happen with certainty or even near certainty.

The reason no one can develop a schedule of upcoming winning hands in baccarat is, that the upcoming sequence(s) will not repeat themselves in a 'cyclical order' with definition and preset values that have to happen. 

The reason baccarat goes to only 9 and cancels out, is not dragon trails, luck, certain low numbers divisible, Gods, myths, or anything of the like, especially Asian.  The whole Asian end of it was added once the game began to die off in the USA and elsewhere and the casinos saw the light with the amount of money the Asians were willing to risk, pool together, commit crimes to get, etc.  Then all the Asian myths, twists and turns were integrated into the game. 

Back to the 0-9 values and what the cards represent.  The game cannot be cracked with a system according to mathematical and statistical figuring out, because of 'LOG' and 'pi'.  In short, the Pi will have the first 6+ billion places each developed from 0 to 9, showing up around 600 million times, if I am correct as the basics go. 

Anything that the shoes produce with similarity to what the tester found, is just coincident data, with no real reoccurring lock to discover and place into a schedule of digits that form events, that will repeatedly present themselves, time after time after time within any section, etc.  It is impossible.  It has to do with Binary Logarithm or 'LOG 2s' as they call it I believe.

Where gamblers and system writers, etc., fall prey, is they want the value 'x' = Log2 to convert to their 'wishful dream thinking' of discovering standard mathematical functions that come about on a repetitive basis.  When you mix in 8 decks of cards and limit each card value between 0 and 9, your outcomes jump to 10's of billions of possible results.  I did not invent the game, I am not a mathematician, I am not a computer programmer.  I am a realist and I know the game.  I know the basics about math and stats and a long time ago realized there is no way to continually apply those to the game and when in any type of scheduled plan based upon discovering the future presentments of the cards. 

Then the programmer or casino wizards, whatever they are called, go into their analysis of the algorithms to locate the frequency and use of Log2's, etc., to make-up some kind of structure, which they claim is a system to Beat The Casino, etc.  At least that is how I see it all over these years.

The problem being, the manual cards will not match up to the mathematical reoccurring logarithms.  In other words, those cards have an exposure value and not a programmed value.  Additionally, IMO, the gambling system finders and tester, etc., are claiming they input real numbers, 'x' and the outputs from their computer science they apply, are equaling some type of 'mapping'.  Which will be something like greater than, or equal to (whatever they are working with).  Then they count down or up and justify whatever it is the balance they found.  The result in that balance if it appears several times is their 'key', or their 'holy grail', etc.

But they really found nothing that will repeatedly and with any consecutively repeats itself every time that certain events or values they deduced down, come about.  Why?  Simply because of manual presentments from those cards valued 0 to 9.  And those very same cards not being programmed.  That's why.  Any type of shuffle and cut, kills any thought of a pre-set value that can be determined. 

If you truly understand what a logarithm is, you would understand what I am saying.  When you mix 4-5 and 6 cards of values limited to 0 through 9, to get the outcome of a W or a L, that is not based on the previous W's and L's, or what is left, that is where the different schools of thought surface as to what can be systemically invented or discovered by a mathematician or a statistical professor involving baccarat.

In short, they will never find that 'a' means anything to 'b' equaling 'x'.  Period.  They will find that 'a' and 'b' affect the value of each other, but there are billions of combinations possible and within a round of 80 hands or so, the impossibility will remain. 

That is why I take the stance I do regarding the conversion of math and stats to the value of the cards and attempting to realize a repetitive schedule to play by.  The cards can never present themselves the same way, based on anything to coincide with a planned schedule.

Here is one more way I will attempt to explain it.  If the shoe of baccarat was a pre-programmed event of 76-84 hands and written by a programmer with cards installed to produce sporadic events at any given time, or in fact not produce them, then you got a chance at discovering the presentments and learning the 'how and why' certain events will always present themselves or not. 

But the way the manual cards determine the value of a winning and a losing hand, is solely based upon the order of the cards that a computer did not direct, and therefore those cards are not governed by what you are developing according to math and stats.  And, since a computer program is not directing how the shoe will be presented (at least in a B&M Casino) there would be no way you can reduce any series of tests to become a universal scheduled plan to dictate your wagering, allowing you to win with certainty.  You will never figure out a system to learn how and when the cards will present themselves with an advantage according to mathematical and statistical adherence.

I told you, I'm not a mathematician or a statistician or a computer programmer. So maybe I just stuck my foot so far up my butt, I made myself look like a clown standing on my head. Quite possibly.
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: 8OR9 on July 21, 2018, 12:21:38 am
As stated in previous posts, there are 416 cards in an 8 deck shoe ( 52 x 8 ) and the number of possible combinations those cards can create is 416 !       ( 416 factorial ) which is 416 x 415 x 414 x 413 x 412 x 411 x 410 x 409 x 408...........all the way down to 2 x 1.... and that number is so big that no human being can understand it.

No mechanical system can handle all those potential combinations.....                   
 and that is whyevery baccarat shoe is totally different from the last shoe.

Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Mike on July 21, 2018, 07:33:10 am
I have no argument that there is or can be a successful math system to beat Bacc (or roulette), so I agree with Glen. But what I disagree with is the notion or suggestion that there can be any "non mechanical", intuitive way of playing which is superior; a way based on experience. If there was such a way then of course the rules could be found and hey presto, you would have a successful mechanical system after all. To deny this is incoherent and contradictory.
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: 8OR9 on July 21, 2018, 01:20:05 pm
The following is an old post of mine as to my opinion as to how to beat the casino......there are probably other methods, but this is one I prefer


"Follow these 6 steps and you have a good long term chance  of beating the casino at any game,...... dice, baccarat, sicbo etc


1. Select a bet size where by your bankroll will not run up against the table maximum when you use your money management methodology to recover from a drawdown.

2. Use a very conservative money management methodology where you can recover a significant drawdown without hitting the table maximum......for instance, play at
a $ 15 dollar minimum table and use a money management methodology  such as
111111111111111 22222222 etc etc ....where you bet 1 unit, and if on any series of bets you are down 15 units, then bet 2 units until you are ahead 1 unit and then go back to betting 1 unit...there are of course many other methods you can use......but they must all be conservative.

3 Ensure that your bankroll can withstand a 100 unit drawdown flat betting

In the above example, your bankroll should be at least  $ 1,500
 ( $ 15 bet size x 100 unit worst case drawdown = $ 1,500 )

4. Make sure that your bankroll is in real dollars, not some wet dream,  and place the bankroll and all the accumulated future profits and losses in a separate place,,,,,,,,,such as a small portable safe.......walmart sells one for about $ 30.

5. Keep a spreadsheet of your beginning bankroll and all future profits and losses

6. You must have patience to follow your money management plan and not go on "tilt" like poker players who are on a losing streak.

Size your bets using your money management methodology so that you can eventually make up your drawdown even if it takes 3,4 or 5 sessions of betting.

Number 6 above, patience, is probably the most important......trying to make up a drawdown by raising your bets too large and too fast and neglecting your money management, methodology will probably ruin any chance or achieving profitability.

Also, if you are using a progression betting system ( like a labby, reverse labby, upside down labby, conservative martingale etc etc) , all the above gets much more complicated since you can easily lose 10 to 20 units in a bad shoe...and you will have numerous bad shoes.

Using a betting methodology where you can lose 10 to 20 units on a  bad baccarat shoe requires a much more intense analysis of bet size and money management methodology versus flat betting.........and a very, very large bankroll.

The higher the risk, the higher the bankroll required.

So that's how you beat the casino...and maybe 1 out of 10,000 customers in a casino will follow all 6 steps."
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: alrelax on July 21, 2018, 01:25:58 pm
Lots of people get real confused on Bankrolls and Buy ins.

What they are and actually how to use them or, what they mean to each of us.

I believe I defined my thoughts and subscriptions to each of them numerous times. 

What I am driving at is, that to one member/person a bank roll is his total play money and what he buys in for each and every time.  To another person a buy in is totally separate from the bank roll.  A bank roll is never brought to the casino in almost any situation. 

On and on and on.

Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Sputnik on July 21, 2018, 02:18:50 pm
The following is an old post of mine as to my opinion as to how to beat the casino......there are probably other methods, but this is one I prefer


"Follow these 6 steps and you have a good long term chance  of beating the casino at any game,...... dice, baccarat, sicbo etc


1. Select a bet size where by your bankroll will not run up against the table maximum when you use your money management methodology to recover from a drawdown.

2. Use a very conservative money management methodology where you can recover a significant drawdown without hitting the table maximum......for instance, play at
a $ 15 dollar minimum table and use a money management methodology  such as
111111111111111 22222222 etc etc ....where you bet 1 unit, and if on any series of bets you are down 15 units, then bet 2 units until you are ahead 1 unit and then go back to betting 1 unit...there are of course many other methods you can use......but they must all be conservative.

3 Ensure that your bankroll can withstand a 100 unit drawdown flat betting

In the above example, your bankroll should be at least  $ 1,500
 ( $ 15 bet size x 100 unit worst case drawdown = $ 1,500 )

4. Make sure that your bankroll is in real dollars, not some wet dream,  and place the bankroll and all the accumulated future profits and losses in a separate place,,,,,,,,,such as a small portable safe.......walmart sells one for about $ 30.

5. Keep a spreadsheet of your beginning bankroll and all future profits and losses

6. You must have patience to follow your money management plan and not go on "tilt" like poker players who are on a losing streak.

Size your bets using your money management methodology so that you can eventually make up your drawdown even if it takes 3,4 or 5 sessions of betting.

Number 6 above, patience, is probably the most important......trying to make up a drawdown by raising your bets too large and too fast and neglecting your money management, methodology will probably ruin any chance or achieving profitability.

Also, if you are using a progression betting system ( like a labby, reverse labby, upside down labby, conservative martingale etc etc) , all the above gets much more complicated since you can easily lose 10 to 20 units in a bad shoe...and you will have numerous bad shoes.

Using a betting methodology where you can lose 10 to 20 units on a  bad baccarat shoe requires a much more intense analysis of bet size and money management methodology versus flat betting.........and a very, very large bankroll.

The higher the risk, the higher the bankroll required.

So that's how you beat the casino...and maybe 1 out of 10,000 customers in a casino will follow all 6 steps."

Can you be more exact on what kind of progression you apply?
I have been testing Holloways Progression and considering memorize it.
As with my test, there is always a reversal playing bias tables.
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: alrelax on July 21, 2018, 02:34:08 pm
IMO, and please do not take it the wrong way!

Reason for the topic I detailed out.  Progressions and a wagering technique (I feel through experience and years in the casino) will only cause a player to become wiped out repeatedly, every single last time he attempts to play on wagering theory with progressions or not (flat--positive and negative).  There is more to it beside a wagering plan. 

Again, please do not take this as an insult, or anything else. 

I have witnessed huge amounts lost without wins and as well, huge amounts won and the player continued with the exact same progression wagering techniques/plan.  Everyone failed if they stuck to it.

Yes, nothing last forever in a casino, of course.  Said and understood as Basic 101 gambling.

However, a crutch, a belief is a huge and a powerful thing at the table!  That is my point.  A progression (either way) can win or lose, but not control the physical aspect ( I hope that is the correct wording) of the player.  It only controls what is won or lost.  And once again, my point exactly. But, I do really believe the aspect of both the wins and the losses compiled by progressions are one of the strongest and worse 'crutches' that influences a player.

Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Sputnik on July 21, 2018, 04:03:17 pm

Yes, I understand, assume someone knows how to flat betting. then there will still be variance and fluctuation, even when Caleb play a biased wheel that has a defect he and his team will face variance and fluctuation, that is part of the game.
He might use Kelly Staking Plan to optimal he's game having a positive expectation.
Then what is the difference if someone increases a smooth conservative staking plan playing EC if he also takes advantage out of bias sequences that last for very long periods with occasional drawdowns.

There are more examples, take sports betting where you have "value betting" to determine if a bet will win or lose.
Where one player won 16 months using a smooth staking plan.
I assume he triple his money during that period of time.

We all know everything loses in the long run, but for example, 16 months of action is part of the short run.
And I reckon he was satisfied even if he's staking plan finally tank.

The debate is not about using or not using a staking plan, is about tackle variance and fluctuation even when you know how to spot bias.
That is my opinion.
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Polemic on July 22, 2018, 03:30:46 pm
The initial post in this thread is very impressive.  It is the mathematical truth.  Sadly, the opposite of those factual statements are the basis for "system" sellers everywhere. 
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: alrelax on July 22, 2018, 04:09:14 pm
The initial post in this thread is very impressive.  It is the mathematical truth.  Sadly, the opposite of those factual statements are the basis for "system" sellers everywhere.

Thank you!

Not just in gambling really look at life in general. Look at the Cosmetic commercials on TV,  look at the Landscaping commercials how products will turn your yard into
An overnight painting, look at how they talk  about car additives and how they will rejuvenate your car, the list is endless.

 People wake up and realize there's no quick or easy way out of most anything do it the right way.
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Nickmsi on July 23, 2018, 03:53:27 am
Ok, we are just talking here so let’s have an intelligent discussion.

Interesting topic of Why you can never have a successful math system to beat baccarat?  I was looking forward to learning your reasons, facts, results etc. to back up this claim. 

What I think I read was just some of the reasons the game of baccarat/roulette is random, and therefore you shouldn’t be able beat a random game.

When you say you can Never have a successful math system to beat baccarat you are trying to prove a “negative” and that is not easily done.

It is easier to prove a “positive” like how to use math/statistics to beat baccarat.  This I can do and have done in Part 1 and Part 2 of my series ‘Use Math/Statistics to beat baccarat/roulette”

I have been unable to beat baccarat/roulette using random methods.  If you can with your 25 years’ experience, knowledge and bankroll, then God Bless, I wish you continued success.

I don’t have 25 years of life left to devote to learning what you know and most of us don’t have your temperament and bankroll to help us on our journey.

What I am looking for is a simple, mechanical system that has a mathematical EDGE to win.  I have not found one using random system but using Non-Random systems I can.

Math is a Non-Random.  Groups of Spins are Non-Random.   A physically biased wheel is Non-Random.

A Non-Random system does not care what the card count is, it does not care how many 9’s are left, it does not care how often you shuffle, none of these things matter in a Non-Random system.

Math says 1+1 will always equal 2.  Math says that in 9 spins you will always have an Arithmetic Progression.  Math says that you will have an 2.5/6 edge in using Triplets.

In my next post in “Use Math/Statistics to beat baccarat/roulette” I will explain more and actually show results of 100,000 spins using the Triplets system. I think with these facts and empirical data you can make up your own mind whether Math/Statistics can help you beat baccarat/roulette.

Cheers

Nick
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: james on July 23, 2018, 12:06:46 pm
We can never have a successful math system to beat Bac, because Math says so. However, we look forward to a winning gambling system to make money.
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Mike on July 23, 2018, 12:14:48 pm
In my next post in �Use Math/Statistics to beat baccarat/roulette� I will explain more and actually show results of 100,000 spins using the Triplets system. I think with these facts and empirical data you can make up your own mind whether Math/Statistics can help you beat baccarat/roulette.

Nick,

Looking forward to that. Although I don't believe that any mechanical system can get an edge, I'm with you in that I think it (a MECHANICAL system) should be the goal. I just don't find it interesting to keep hearing that it's discipline, experience, intuition etc which is the key to success. Discipline by itself means nothing if it's applied to a losing system, of course, and I don't know why people keeping banging on that it's some kind of substitute for an edge. As for experience, what use is it if you don't learn from it? and learning from it means, essentially, learning "rules" about what to do and what not to do in a given situation, what decisions to make. So anyone who denies that mechanical systems can work but experience can work is being contradictory.
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: alrelax on July 23, 2018, 03:18:48 pm
We can never have a successful math system to beat Bac, because Math says so. However, we look forward to a winning gambling system to make money.

You are correct, IMO.

There are ways to profit, possible not every session of course, but that also depends on numerous other factors we each employ, believe in and subscribe to as we are playing.

We destined ourselves through many experiences or research when we play. 

Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: alrelax on July 23, 2018, 03:33:29 pm
Ok, we are just talking here so let�s have an intelligent discussion.

Interesting topic of Why you can never have a successful math system to beat baccarat?  I was looking forward to learning your reasons, facts, results etc. to back up this claim. 

What I think I read was just some of the reasons the game of baccarat/roulette is random, and therefore you shouldn�t be able beat a random game.

When you say you can Never have a successful math system to beat baccarat you are trying to prove a �negative� and that is not easily done.

It is easier to prove a �positive� like how to use math/statistics to beat baccarat.  This I can do and have done in Part 1 and Part 2 of my series �Use Math/Statistics to beat baccarat/roulette�

I have been unable to beat baccarat/roulette using random methods.  If you can with your 25 years� experience, knowledge and bankroll, then God Bless, I wish you continued success.

I don�t have 25 years of life left to devote to learning what you know and most of us don�t have your temperament and bankroll to help us on our journey.

What I am looking for is a simple, mechanical system that has a mathematical EDGE to win.  I have not found one using random system but using Non-Random systems I can.

Math is a Non-Random.  Groups of Spins are Non-Random.   A physically biased wheel is Non-Random.

A Non-Random system does not care what the card count is, it does not care how many 9�s are left, it does not care how often you shuffle, none of these things matter in a Non-Random system.

Math says 1+1 will always equal 2.  Math says that in 9 spins you will always have an Arithmetic Progression.  Math says that you will have an 2.5/6 edge in using Triplets.

In my next post in �Use Math/Statistics to beat baccarat/roulette� I will explain more and actually show results of 100,000 spins using the Triplets system. I think with these facts and empirical data you can make up your own mind whether Math/Statistics can help you beat baccarat/roulette.

Cheers

Nick

You know, just the possibilities of what can happen in a bac shoe are in the multi billions, IMO. 

That is staggering if you really clear your head, sit down and think about it.

I could not even think of how to set up that math equation, maybe one of the math gurus here can??

8 decks of cards, remove the first 2 to 11 as the burn cards, cut off the last 15 or so.  416 cards minus, say 25 or so.  How many possibilities on a declining scale does a player actually face?  Huge amounts!  Especially when you are not looking to have optional draws like BJ, etc.

Why do I bring that up?  Because that sets the premise for attempting to figure anything out.  That is why. 

Do you remember throwing pennies or quarters against the wall when we were kids?  One day there is a champ and he remains for so long, and then another loser takes over and no one can beat him. 

What about the grandma at the Atlantic City Bogota back around 2009 rolling 154 rolls?  Did she practice?  What was her research?   How could it happen to a recreational player and not an expert or a professional?  Long list of questions.  Because it just happens.  Why not parlay a few times and then ride it out as it is happening without figuring it all out?

Don't attempt to beat it.  Try to strike and wager with positive progressions and parlays when you win with the capital you risk each time.  Be sure your buy in affords you numerous chances for your bank roll.  Their is no magical answers or solutions that will afford you guaranteed chances to accumulate or continue wins.  None.  '

But there are numerous things you can do as I have outlined. 

Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Nickmsi on July 23, 2018, 04:13:04 pm
Hi James and Glen,

I understand and agree there are millions and millions of possibilities.  You are correct that it is impossible to conceive of every possibility there is.

But that does not matter. 

That does not change the Law of Math.

1+1 will always equal 2.

1+2=2 regardless of the millions of possibilities.

Do you agree that 1+1 will always = 2 no matter what happens in a deck or on the roulette wheel?

If you will kindly advise that you understand this fact, then my next post in my thread will make more sense.

Cheers

Nick
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: alrelax on July 23, 2018, 04:37:22 pm
Hi James and Glen,

I understand and agree there are millions and millions of possibilities.  You are correct that it is impossible to conceive of every possibility there is.

(That is why I do not believe in or subscribe to the theory of what should or needs to come out to catch up, equal out or meet any expectation of theory)

But that does not matter. 

(It matters as my mind set will focus on what is happening more so than what has happened or what needs to or what should happen, I rather wager with what could happen, most times).

That does not change the Law of Math.

(Yes correct, but the law of math is different than the law of theory application and individual shoe adherence to game theory)

1+1 will always equal 2.  (Yes)

1+2=2 regardless of the millions of possibilities. (No, 1 +2 =3) IMO

Do you agree that 1+1 will always = 2 no matter what happens in a deck or on the roulette wheel?  (Yes)

If you will kindly advise that you understand this fact, then my next post in my thread will make more sense.

Cheers

Nick
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Babu on July 25, 2018, 05:29:37 am
Baccarat = random = disorder

To win strategy:
1. play anti-orderly
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Johno-Egalite on August 12, 2018, 10:28:49 pm
In order to 'beat' randomness and 'define it' to mathematical and statistical outcome, you would have to be able to compress all the strings of outcomes, that are possible in baccarat.  And, that feat cannot be done and converted to a schedule of definitive presentments that will happen with certainty or even near certainty.

The reason no one can develop a schedule of upcoming winning hands in baccarat is, that the upcoming sequence(s) will not repeat themselves in a 'cyclical order' with definition and preset values that have to happen. 

Haven't read the complete thread, just wanting to chime in.

It is indeed possible to "compress all strings of outcomes" that are possible in Baccarat, no matter what size chunks you decide to break any given shoe into, it does not matter that these "chunks" do not follow any particular cyclical order.

The true reason why is it impossible to beat baccarat is because everything resolves to a 50-50 mathematical state, meaning there is no possible edge. Leaving system players exposed to the house edge requiring a negative or positive progression for long term success which then exposes the player to variance.
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: BEAT-THE-WHEEL on August 13, 2018, 02:43:40 am
Gentlement,
My 1cent,

In next shoe, no matter how many quadzillion, sisilion, or gigglelion of permutation, one thing is sure,

B >  P,  or
P < B....
P=B.....highly impossible.

Now, if only , we have a method that always produce near 50% win/lose ratio.....( if ...only...).

If you could think out a strategy that hit, that ALWAYS HIT WITHIN NEGATIVE MATH EXPECTATION....in 100 to 300 hands/spins,
A simple 1....2....4  progression, will always win...


@NICKMSI,
If the vdw, even if the not produce edge, BUT negative1 to 3 % HE, then, it a breeze!
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Johno-Egalite on August 13, 2018, 07:04:06 pm
A simple 1....2....4  progression, will always win...
This will NEVER win, NEVER EVER.

Not a single chance in hell.

For every 3 losses in a row, you have to win 7 times more than lose just to recoup.
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: alrelax on August 13, 2018, 11:37:38 pm
No bets are ever guaranteed to win, whether flat betting or positive progressions they can go for 8 10 12 15 times in a row without winning.

All positive progressions do whether a 1-2- 4 or a 1-3-2-6 is allow you to stack up more win quicker, if you're winning rather than flat betting.

There are also strategic reasons for doing a positive progressions.  My favorite is the  1-3-2-6, but I'm still risking the first two bets, however the last two I have no risk if I did win with my risk capital, that I put forward to attempt to win the 4th one for 12 units return. But again no guarantee whatsoever.

What many don't realize is, I'm risking two units to win 12 units. The first wager one unit is at risk yes, of course.   If I won that first unit first wager, than my second wager is 3 units, if I lost,  I lose two units if I won I have my two units replaced with  two units profit and my third wager of two units is covered.   If I lose the third wager I still have two units profit and my two units that I risk is returned.  If I win that third wager of two units, I move to my fourth wager which is 6 units and I'm putting up the two units I had  reserved and the four units that I realized off the third wager. If I lose that fourth wager of 6 units,  I still have my first two units that were at risk are returned.   I have no profit but I have no loss for those for Wagers.  If the last wager of six was won, then I have 12 units profit, then I reset.

And again another important point is, that if I lose that third wager I still have two chances, in and above my risk money for those two additional chances to pull the same thing off to win 12 units without touching my buy-in.

 Which to me makes a lot more sense than 1 2 4 8 16 because it's so hard to win consecutively without anything being pulled down or covered. 
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: BEAT-THE-WHEEL on August 13, 2018, 11:51:44 pm
Hi Lugi,
With respect,

Its 1u for 100spins, 2u for next 100spins and 4u for next 100spins.
Thanks, sorry for the misunderstanding.
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Johno-Egalite on August 14, 2018, 08:01:08 pm
Hi Lugi,
With respect,

Its 1u for 100spins, 2u for next 100spins and 4u for next 100spins.
Thanks, sorry for the misunderstanding.
I thought you were referring to a negative progression.
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: alrelax on August 14, 2018, 09:45:27 pm
Haven't read the complete thread, just wanting to chime in.

It is indeed possible to "compress all strings of outcomes" that are possible in Baccarat, no matter what size chunks you decide to break any given shoe into, it does not matter that these "chunks" do not follow any particular cyclical order.

The true reason why is it impossible to beat baccarat is because everything resolves to a 50-50 mathematical state, meaning there is no possible edge. Leaving system players exposed to the house edge requiring a negative or positive progression for long term success which then exposes the player to variance.

In response to "chunks".  As I see them, or referred tot hem in the past, was something along the lines of "sections & turning points".  But I use that to identify what has happened and what has not happened with the shoe. Not necessarily as to what is going to happen.

People look at the score board the 5 roads within most of them.  The big road is what it is, what the current score as to what happens as it happens.  The 3 smaller ones on most board set ups are the more complicated ones and the ones that mislead most all players with the tails and the other various interpretations as to what they do or do not stand for.  As far as the 'Bead Plate' I have personally won more off that at times (key word being AT TIMES), rather than a steady diet.  The rows going horizontal when they follow themselves have been very good to me.  It does not matter that they might not follow or ever come about again on a future shoe in the same scenario.  Any member here that specializes in beating down other members will certainly have a field day with what I just cited.  But I have seen countless times a Bead Plate row continually reflecting a steady Player, or a steady Banker or a steady alternating pattern, etc.  To me, these are the  "Chunks" or part of the "sections & turning points" depending on how many hands are out.  I view the shoe in 3 to 5 sections as a norm.  Again, to me, it is relevance and not perceptions. 

Compress al you want, the facts and the figures still will not match the majority of the shoes you sit down to play.  There is only 1 of 2 possible choices each hand can be.  As far as what chance a player has, say if he wagers 2 hands, his chance of getting 2 in a row would have to be 1 in 4.  If he went to the table and was only going to bet one hand and then stop, it would be a 1 in 2 or a 50-50 chance to win.  But two hands would expand to a 1 in 4 chance.  Because the more you play the greater the odds turn against you.

Your chart has 16 possibilities for 4 chances shown, that is correct.  Which proves my point, IMO.
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Johno-Egalite on September 05, 2018, 12:05:03 am
In order to 'beat' randomness and 'define it' to mathematical and statistical outcome, you would have to be able to compress all the strings of outcomes, that are possible in baccarat.

I felt like resurrecting this thread, to make a few points, firstly, as I've stated, it is quite possible to define and show all the possible strings that can exist in a Baccarat shoe, you might need a decent computer, but it is far from being impossible.  As I've stated elsewhere, it is also possible to manipulate such data into simple manageable chunks so you can apply various strategies no matter what the shoe throws at you, these can be either static or dynamic options.

However the main reason for resurrecting the thread, is the title; "Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac".   

In order to be able to answer that question, you would have to define what would constitute a successful math system?  What would be the measure of success for a successful math system for Baccarat?

One that could predict the next winning hand?  Hmmmm, believe it or not, actually that is probably quite possible, seriously, but relies on such an event, it is unlikely to ever happen.

Or, a system that wins more hands than it loses against a given reasonable sample of hands, or all possibilities? That is mathematically impossible, so isn't going to happen, not due to the system, simply because mathematically, such a system can't exist, however there is caveat.  For the same reason why it can't exist, also makes it impossible that the system will lose more hands than it can possible win.



     
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: james on September 05, 2018, 11:20:45 am
No mechanical system can beat Baccarat. But some believe that a flexible system, "Follow the Shoe (FTS)" can beat Baccarat. As its name implies, you bet according to what the shoe is doing. It is claimed that some have become millionaires playing Baccarat, using this approach.
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: alrelax on September 05, 2018, 03:43:21 pm
I felt like resurrecting this thread, to make a few points, firstly, as I've stated, it is quite possible to define and show all the possible strings that can exist in a Baccarat shoe, you might need a decent computer, but it is far from being impossible.  As I've stated elsewhere, it is also possible to manipulate such data into simple manageable chunks so you can apply various strategies no matter what the shoe throws at you, these can be either static or dynamic options.

However the main reason for resurrecting the thread, is the title; "Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac".   

In order to be able to answer that question, you would have to define what would constitute a successful math system?  What would be the measure of success for a successful math system for Baccarat?  (There are no successful math systems that can be reduced to any type of playable system on a scheduled plan, that would prevail all the time or even the majority of the time, no way, never ever).

One that could predict the next winning hand?  Hmmmm, believe it or not, actually that is probably quite possible, seriously, but relies on such an event, it is unlikely to ever happen. (No it is not likely or possible.  Easy to say, but you do not have it, nor do you have the outline, the system or the gross product to reduce to anything to play)

Or, a system that wins more hands than it loses against a given reasonable sample of hands, or all possibilities? That is mathematically impossible, so isn't going to happen, not due to the system, simply because mathematically, such a system can't exist, however there is caveat.  For the same reason why it can't exist, also makes it impossible that the system will lose more hands than it can possible win.

(As far as that last couple of sentences, you wrote confusingly, maybe for a purpose?  Maybe not?  But, when you start talking small sections with turning points, yes---reality is much more in the picture and not so broad.  However, the emotional and the frame of mind will divert most all players from even beginning to recognize the possibilities and their best chance to prevail in most all cases.  However, a select few might understand and side with me, that there are chances to realize redundant wins much greater than 50% but the same problem and complexity will usually be present---that is, the ability to define, limited oneself and move forward to employ using just those. But as you mentioned, 'caveats', and if a player follows the correct caveats it can be very profitable if he understands the caveat and the non-caveats as well.)

   
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: alrelax on September 05, 2018, 03:55:49 pm
Read the O.P. once again.  Look up things, take the time to understand.  Go down the roads things can lead you to.  Might prove interesting?  Stop the reading of one or two sentences and challenging.  Stop the attacking of the posters, the messengers of reality.

....."In short, they will never find that 'a' means anything to 'b' equaling 'x'.  Period.  They will find that 'a' and 'b' affect the value of each other, but there are billions of combinations possible and within a round of 80 hands or so, the impossibility will remain. 

That is why I take the stance I do regarding the conversion of math and stats to the value of the cards and attempting to realize a repetitive schedule to play by.  The cards can never present themselves the same way, based on anything to coincide with a planned schedule......"
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Bally6354 on September 05, 2018, 04:21:18 pm
No mechanical system can beat Baccarat. But some believe that a flexible system, "Follow the Shoe (FTS)" can beat Baccarat. As its name implies, you bet according to what the shoe is doing. It is claimed that some have become millionaires playing Baccarat, using this approach.

Maybe that's true and maybe it's not. But if Norm was betting 5k units as was mentioned, then it only takes winning 200 units to reach the first million. You could argue that someone somewhere is going to get lucky and win a few hundred units. He was reportedly using a 1,2 loop progression which makes it even more achievable with such high units.
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Johno-Egalite on November 10, 2018, 02:55:36 am
No mechanical system can beat Baccarat. But some believe that a flexible system, "Follow the Shoe (FTS)" can beat Baccarat. As its name implies, you bet according to what the shoe is doing. It is claimed that some have become millionaires playing Baccarat, using this approach.

I'm just winding down after a successful jaunt at the tables. "No mechanical system can beat Baccarat" I am confidently going to disagree with you over this one.  Early days at the moment, fairly confident I've got the better of this game.  It's only taken a decade trials, tribulations and some losses on the way. Yes I know it is a bold statement, however having dabbled with a math based approach over the last month, this is the strongest methodology I've produced in close on 15 years of study of this bloody frustrating game.

This does not mean I can predict any single winning hand, otherwise I would go "all in".  My approach has always been to control the LIARs, for me to lose 4 in a row is rare.  Yes 4LAIR, is an extremely rare event.  Occasionally I do see it, say once per session, 6~8 shoes, even if it happened twice, it is no sweat, merely a buggeration factor.   

Downside, is not enough betting opportunities per shoe, so I'm having to introduce other triggers which are not as robust.   Where I play, they burn cards at the start of a shoe and cut a whole deck at the back cos' they are paranoia fcukwits about the likes of John May counting the super egalite Fortune 8 side-bet, so I'm only getting on average 65~70 hands per shoe.

If I could get close to 80 hands then I could unequivocally state the game is well and truly beat, as a shoe would have to defy mathematical odds of 512/1  'after a trigger' presents itself for a short series of 50/50 propositions, it simply doesn't happen, however always remains possible. 

It is so rare, you could play for literally months and you'll never see it, alas I am having to make do with the 256/1 iteration, which also is strong, but have a gut feeling the '512' version would be unbeatable, as well as possibly being unplayable as a stand-a-lone method, you need to introduce other triggers to maintain game interest. 

As always MM is paramount, because it is based on winning a bet within a series of bets, plus you just never know!!!   YES, it is 100% mechanical, it has no bearing on what the shoe is doing or what pattern has transpired or might transpire.  It is based on  treating Banker and Player results like binary outcomes and applying combinatorial probability.....
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Blue_Angel on November 10, 2018, 09:26:59 am
You are a GREAT LIAR! ;D
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Johno-Egalite on November 10, 2018, 09:52:18 am
You are GREAT AT CONTROLLING THE LIARs! ;D

I've fixed that for you.  :P
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: alrelax on November 10, 2018, 03:21:48 pm
Express all thoughts, experiences and theories (you have actually tried in a B&M live table) by all means!

However, I still hold true to the bottom line removing all M.M., Money Allocation and types of wagers, etc. 

Whatever anyone comes up with as a 'schedule' to bet, meaning: "I will wager on the cut/opposite side after 3 in a row, or I will wager on the cut/opposite side after 5 in a row when it makes those", or "I will wager on the repeat after so and so", etc., or anything else no matter what the 'schedule' might be, it will eventually do one of two things to your buy-in, bank roll or total available gambling funds. 

1)  It will either retake all your winnings and cycle you through wins and losses that will only be sustained by a large enough bankroll/total available gambling funds;

2)  Take everything you have and whatever you re-fuel your bankroll/total available gambling funds with.

I stand by that. 
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Bally6354 on November 10, 2018, 03:55:17 pm
You are a GREAT LIAR! ;D

BlueAngel,

 Not that I need to speak up for Lugi, but this guy is pretty much as straight as a die and it's always worth reading/considering his posts because of the experience he has. Actually, he is one of the few posters I respect 100% and I am sure a few others who know what time of day it is concur as well.

Cheers
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Jimske on November 10, 2018, 07:43:17 pm
I'm just winding down after a successful jaunt at the tables. "No mechanical system can beat Baccarat" I am confidently going to disagree with you over this one.  Early days at the moment, fairly confident I've got the better of this game.
At this point it do well to mention number of trials in order to qualify what "early days" means.  By using this phrase one would assume there is not even a modicum of trials for one to take the claim that you "got the better" seriously.
Quote
It's only taken a decade trials, tribulations and some losses on the way. Yes I know it is a bold statement, however having dabbled with a math based approach over the last month, this is the strongest methodology I've produced in close on 15 years of study of this bloody frustrating game.

This does not mean I can predict any single winning hand, otherwise I would go "all in".  My approach has always been to control the LIARs, for me to lose 4 in a row is rare.  Yes 4LAIR, is an extremely rare event.  Occasionally I do see it, say once per session, 6~8 shoes, even if it happened twice, it is no sweat, merely a buggeration factor.
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.  This regardless whether you use closed shoe or continue to next.
Quote

Downside, is not enough betting opportunities per shoe, so I'm having to introduce other triggers which are not as robust.   Where I play, they burn cards at the start of a shoe and cut a whole deck at the back cos' they are paranoia fcukwits about the likes of John May counting the super egalite Fortune 8 side-bet, so I'm only getting on average 65~70 hands per shoe.
"other triggers"  ??  The word "trigger" condors up a specific occurrence which then suggests some pattern which can be defined even though you insist not a pattern . . everything has a pattern regardless of the frequency.  Remember the title 1 Million Random Numbers and Their Normal Deviates?  there's always patterns.  So then you apparently have several of these patterns which ocurr infrequently but each trigger has its own win % no doubt?  Have you determined the different math advantage?

Quote
If I could get close to 80 hands then I could unequivocally state the game is well and truly beat, as a shoe would have to defy mathematical odds of 512/1  'after a trigger' presents itself for a short series of 50/50 propositions, it simply doesn't happen, however always remains possible. 

It is so rare, you could play for literally months and you'll never see it, alas I am having to make do with the 256/1 iteration, which also is strong, but have a gut feeling the '512' version would be unbeatable, as well as possibly being unplayable as a stand-a-lone method, you need to introduce other triggers to maintain game interest. 

As always MM is paramount, because it is based on winning a bet within a series of bets, plus you just never know!!!   YES, it is 100% mechanical, it has no bearing on what the shoe is doing or what pattern has transpired or might transpire.  It is based on  treating Banker and Player results like binary outcomes and applying combinatorial probability.....
Don't need much MM if you can keep LIAR to 4 !!

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).

J



Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Johno-Egalite on November 11, 2018, 07:51:49 am
BlueAngel,

 Not that I need to speak up for Lugi, but this guy is pretty much as straight as a die and it's always worth reading/considering his posts because of the experience he has. Actually, he is one of the few posters I respect 100% and I am sure a few others who know what time of day it is concur as well.

Cheers
Nice one, glad to see you know what time of day it is ;-)

Express all thoughts, experiences and theories (you have actually tried in a B&M live table) by all means!

However, I still hold true to the bottom line removing all M.M., Money Allocation and types of wagers, etc. 

Whatever anyone comes up with as a 'schedule' to bet, meaning: "I will wager on the cut/opposite side after 3 in a row, or I will wager on the cut/opposite side after 5 in a row when it makes those", or "I will wager on the repeat after so and so", etc., or anything else no matter what the 'schedule' might be, it will eventually do one of two things to your buy-in, bank roll or total available gambling funds. 

1)  It will either retake all your winnings and cycle you through wins and losses that will only be sustained by a large enough bankroll/total available gambling funds;

2)  Take everything you have and whatever you re-fuel your bankroll/total available gambling funds with.

I stand by that.
Nope, can't agree at all, what you are describing is a failure of some sort of methodology.

IMO the reason for many small wins and huge single catastrophic loss that consumes the many small wins, is down to the individual not always the methodology.  Lack of control, frustration, over confidence, time constraints, wanting to speed up a prior recoup. The reasons can be many, but generally it is the player, not the method which is the reason for the rinse and repeat of giving it back.

I would post more, but i'm buggered at the mo, over 12 hours in a casino, does my head head in, but I simply can't get out of betting conservative mode, hence it takes me a long time to rake in 100% of my buyin. I play it safe, too safe.  I really need to catch up on some ZZZZ'zz's then I will post more as well as answering Jim's post. 

FYI I've played this method now for approx 50 ~70 shoes, I don't need to play 300 ~ 400 shoes to be able to form an opinion of it, it makes perfect logical sense (which I'll explain with a simple analogy) and requires a bit of creative thinking in order to make it playable.


I'll leave you with this;

Take 256 balls, numbered 1 through 265.  Place them in a bag.  Remove 1 ball and record it's number and return the ball to the bag.

Repeat the exercise 8 times only.  How often do you think out of 256 different numbered balls, will you expect to pick  the same numbered ball twice, more than twice within the 8 picks??

"I'll be back" later..




I just want to add, as I did elude to it in an earlier post.

Once you thought about the 256 balls analogy, just imagine instead of 256 balls, there were 512 balls in the bag.  Wow, it's slam dunk, "game over".  Alas not for me, I don't have that privilege.
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: alrelax on November 11, 2018, 04:52:50 pm
Second paragraph you wrote about the individual, I have wrote extensively about in detail in the series of 10 posts, in my highlighted section under my blog you're correct and I detailed it out.

It is always going to be about the individual interpreting how he should wager

Always, and  I still stand fast and everybody that's played for decades will tell you, that scheduled wagering will only Break Even or lose money, you will never win money in baccarat over a period of years, with the same schedule of wagers.

It is always about the individual and how the individuals sees what is happening at the time it is happening.
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Bally6354 on November 11, 2018, 05:53:48 pm
Less is more when considering how to cut down on LIAR. I prefer to go for one bite of the cherry and take the win or loss. Attempting to ride a run guarantees you are going to end on a loss. Personally, I wouldn't contemplate looking for or betting on weaker triggers when a specific bet placement in whatever shape it arrives is a strong one. Then again, it could get pretty damn boring sitting there twiddling your thumbs for most of the shoe. Luckily Genting have these terminals which are linked to the live dealer now similar to their linked roulette tables. You don't feel as awkward sitting there waiting for a bet.
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Johno-Egalite on November 11, 2018, 06:59:40 pm
Briefly, 

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.

 
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Johno-Egalite on November 11, 2018, 07:19:21 pm
Second paragraph you wrote about the individual, I have wrote extensively about in detail in the series of 10 posts, in my highlighted section under my blog you're correct and I detailed it out.

It is always going to be about the individual interpreting how he should wager

Always, and  I still stand fast and everybody that's played for decades will tell you, that scheduled wagering will only Break Even or lose money, you will never win money in baccarat over a period of years, with the same schedule of wagers.

It is always about the individual and how the individuals sees what is happening at the time it is happening.

You are way to active here for me to be aware of all your postings, I'm sure you have covered every thing about the game from your prospective and beliefs.

Just so you are aware, I've played for a few decades, some stand still, some don't rest on what they know and keep striving.

I don't agree about it being about what the individual sees,  every single casino visit, I see players, get ahead, feeling good the guessed a few decisions right, I could count on one hand and ll have 5 fingers spare those that leave in profit.  When things turn sour, they lose it, table hop, then their "what is the shoe doing now" goes to pot. .

I can only state my opinion, playing the game of Baccarat with no bet methodology, rather relying on the score board is a DISASTER waiting to happen, like I say, it is just my opinion, take it or leave it.  The score board is for newbies that know no better and / or have no alternative (been there done that).     Those few players that I've suggested mechanical ways (pattern capturing) to play, be it as simple as betting DBL, have thanked me, stating, it takes away the useless mentally draining pressure of having to guess.  Yes I also informed them of the nemesis of DBL.  Casinos (in particular the greedy one I play at) love it that the punters simply have no clue. The young Chinese overseas students, blowing literally tens of thousands gambling instead of studying.

Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Blue_Angel on November 11, 2018, 07:42:20 pm
There is something better than Johnson's progression, the side you bet doesn't matter, but perhaps you might prefer the "player" for commission free profit.


For every 10 lost bets (more than your wins), raise by 1 unit.
Half wins  of your total lost bets will fully recover any losses that far.


For example, say you lost 60 bets and won 30, after 10 first lost bets the BR is -10 (1 unit x 10 losses), after the second 10 losses your balance would be -30 (2 units x 10 losses plus -10 previous debt), after the third 10 losses the balance would be -60 (10+20+30) because you've lost 10 more times by 3 units.
Therefore, in such occasion you would bet now 4 units, thus the -60 from 30 more losses would be wiped out by 15 wins (4 units x 15 wins = 60), however, the overall W/L registry would indicate that you still have 15 losses more than wins (30-15=15).


No matter how many losses you suffer on the way, you'd always need HALF as much in total in order to recover any drawdowns.
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: alrelax on November 11, 2018, 08:22:08 pm
I wrote from reality and experience the 10 articles, all posted within my Blog, 1 to 10 in a series of 10.  First page. Highlighted section. 

I am sorry you think I'm too active here and I write too much you know what I will be certain to stop the writing, thank you, good luck.
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Jimske on November 11, 2018, 09:48:34 pm
Less is more when considering how to cut down on LIAR. I prefer to go for one bite of the cherry and take the win or loss. Attempting to ride a run guarantees you are going to end on a loss. Personally, I wouldn't contemplate looking for or betting on weaker triggers when a specific bet placement in whatever shape it arrives is a strong one. Then again, it could get pretty damn boring sitting there twiddling your thumbs for most of the shoe. Luckily Genting have these terminals which are linked to the live dealer now similar to their linked roulette tables. You don't feel as awkward sitting there waiting for a bet.
LOL.  Yeah, can feel pretty unintelligent watching a 12IAR go by while everyone is taking in the rack BUT. . . also LOL; we find most times everyone else is doing the same!

I don't think Luigi is looking at following P/B runs as we normally understand them.  But yeah, one bite makes sense however I think it will take a few bites.

J
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Bally6354 on November 11, 2018, 10:02:26 pm
Here is something I was just looking at. I was running off 100 shoes on the BB2 Simulator and looking to see how many times on average you get a sequence of any 9 results.

In the following example, the sequence is BBBBPPPPP and it came out 11 times.

[attach=1]

So how about if you waited for any BBB combination and then bet against the remaining BPPPPP with PBBBBB. It would cost you 63 units on a failed attempt.

How many times did BBB appear?

872 times was the answer!

[attach=2]

It's more of just thinking out loud rather than anything else based on what Lugi posted.

Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Jimske on November 11, 2018, 10:06:04 pm
and everybody that's played for decades will tell you,
What's funny is I play similar to you - I guess too.  The difference may be that I will start with a regimen and if winning will stay with it until it breaks down.  When it does I will either quit winner OR guess FTS to recoup if it din't pan out from the get go . . .like that.

Maybe you'll ban me again . . .fine . . . but the arrogance of that statement which I quoted above is just too much for me to ignore.  Very "trumpian."  Glen, there is absolutely no evidence that "everybody" is of the same opinion.  Yet in one sentence you have relegated anyone who might disagree to insignificance. 
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Jimske on November 11, 2018, 10:17:46 pm
Luigi, I'm starting to understand what you mean by combinations since you invoked Birthday Paradox.  You're not D. E. are you?

I was looking at some of his writings and methods based on Birthday Paradox and also some of Dr. Tom's stuff, which like some others, attempts to break down the B and P outcomes from a whole different perspective.  One such one from my old friend and partner was Ultimate Baccarat where he interpreted the B and P as OTBL ("O's") and TBL ("S's").  When one gets into permutations of sets there is a math based outcome that can be exploited with appropriate MM.

J
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Johno-Egalite on November 11, 2018, 11:17:20 pm
There is something better than Johnson's progression, the side you bet doesn't matter, but perhaps you might prefer the "player" for commission free profit.


For every 10 lost bets (more than your wins), raise by 1 unit.
Half wins  of your total lost bets will fully recover any losses that far.


For example, say you lost 60 bets and won 30, after 10 first lost bets the BR is -10 (1 unit x 10 losses), after the second 10 losses your balance would be -30 (2 units x 10 losses plus -10 previous debt), after the third 10 losses the balance would be -60 (10+20+30) because you've lost 10 more times by 3 units.
Therefore, in such occasion you would bet now 4 units, thus the -60 from 30 more losses would be wiped out by 15 wins (4 units x 15 wins = 60), however, the overall W/L registry would indicate that you still have 15 losses more than wins (30-15=15).


No matter how many losses you suffer on the way, you'd always need HALF as much in total in order to recover any drawdowns.

That's great, cheers for this.  A lot of stuff I read doesn't appeal, but this is right down my alley, thank you, this is something I could and probably will make use of once i digest it further. It may come in handy when either having to play solo, or just to maintain interest by placing bets, i.e DBL, or FLD.  At the moment I use the STAR progression when required.

LOL.  Yeah, can feel pretty unintelligent watching a 12IAR go by while everyone is taking in the rack BUT. . . also LOL; we find most times everyone else is doing the same!

I don't think Luigi is looking at following P/B runs as we normally understand them.  But yeah, one bite makes sense however I think it will take a few bites.

J
I agree, I don't think it is possible to gain an advantage over a single outcome, I think it is possible within a short series of bets, yet still won't be 100%.

I wrote from reality and experience the 10 articles, all posted within my Blog, 1 to 10 in a series of 10.  First page. Highlighted section. 

I am sorry you think I'm too active here and I write too much you know what I will be certain to stop the writing, thank you, good luck.
I've seen some of your musing, your opinions maybe valued and appreciated by others, same applies to a lot of posts everywhere, I don't feel compelled to read them all.  I'm more interested in the maths stuff, oh and interesting gambling tales, I skim a lot. 

I won't name names, but some posters I keep an eye open for, as I sometimes find titbits of interest.  I'm sure there is a lot of good stuff on his board which I have missed, that is okay, no harm in that, time is precious.  Don't let my lack on interest and odd appearance here  influence your contributions to the board.  I don't visit this or any other forums on a regular basis, but thought I'd share a bit of direction, which was down to feeling overtly optimistic switching from 128/1 to 256/1.   The former occasionally gave me grief, the latter has yet to.

Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Johno-Egalite on November 11, 2018, 11:28:24 pm
Here is something I was just looking at. I was running off 100 shoes on the BB2 Simulator and looking to see how many times on average you get a sequence of any 9 results.

In the following example, the sequence is BBBBPPPPP and it came out 11 times.

(Attachment Link)

So how about if you waited for any BBB combination and then bet against the remaining BPPPPP with PBBBBB. It would cost you 63 units on a failed attempt.

How many times did BBB appear?

872 times was the answer!

(Attachment Link)

It's more of just thinking out loud rather than anything else based on what Lugi posted.

Nice one, what was the closest repeat gap between the 11 occurrences?

I'm not using sets of 9 results because it won't generate enough betting opportunities unless the shoe consists of "close to 80 hands"  No way Gent's shoes will achieve that. 

Just a couple of pointers regarding your suggestion, you are risking too many bets attempting to win a single bet, hence the 63 unit loss when it doesn't work, nope.  While it could be an option, I don't use any form of pre-defined sequence, then bet against it appearance. 
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Johno-Egalite on November 11, 2018, 11:37:07 pm
What's funny is I play similar to you - I guess too.  The difference may be that I will start with a regimen and if winning will stay with it until it breaks down.  When it does I will either quit winner OR guess FTS to recoup if it din't pan out from the get go . . .like that.

Maybe you'll ban me again . . .fine . . . but the arrogance of that statement which I quoted above is just too much for me to ignore.  Very "trumpian."  Glen, there is absolutely no evidence that "everybody" is of the same opinion.  Yet in one sentence you have relegated anyone who might disagree to insignificance.

I probably should have given it more time before responding to Alrelax.  Those that play to what the shoe is doing, A Chinese guy killed my small local casino over a decade ago on over two night to the tune of £120k, I posted about it elsewhere at the time, it was a freak thing, cos he gave it all back in another city soon afterwards.  I appreciate Jim successfully plays this way, I've observed a couple of Chinese regulars overseas  successfully manage playing this way with a degree of consistency, other than the four I've mentioned.  I've seen players get seriously ahead, none of which can maintain it, or reproduce it on a regular basis.

   
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Johno-Egalite on November 11, 2018, 11:45:34 pm
Luigi, I'm starting to understand what you mean by combinations since you invoked Birthday Paradox.  You're not D. E. are you?

I was looking at some of his writings and methods based on Birthday Paradox and also some of Dr. Tom's stuff, which like some others, attempts to break down the B and P outcomes from a whole different perspective.  One such one from my old friend and partner was Ultimate Baccarat where he interpreted the B and P as OTBL ("O's") and TBL ("S's").  When one gets into permutations of sets there is a math based outcome that can be exploited with appropriate MM.

J
Birthday Paradox is one of the optional addons, I like it because it is based on maths. I#ve played BP by itself, which is not so great.  I'm aware of Ultimate Baccarat, you sent it to me back in 2016 :-)  I bet using Sterling, not Dollars, different hemisphere. 
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Bally6354 on November 12, 2018, 02:47:09 pm
Nice one, what was the closest repeat gap between the 11 occurrences?


Shoes 6, 7, 8, 14, 26, 27, 28, 55, 65, 83 and 91 all produced one sequence only of BBBBPPPPP. Running a few tests shows the average for a 9 hand sequence hovers around 11-12 with it going as low as 7 and as high as 15. I like to crunch the stats because things tend to come out fairly uniform over 100 shoes. For example...The BBB came out 857 times in my example above. This 850 average give or take a few is also consistent over 100 shoes for any 3 hand combination (excluding the ties) Can any of this help? I don't really know! I think Jimske and yourself have already alluded to the grail in an attempt to cut down on the LIAR. That's where the real gold lies.
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Bally6354 on November 12, 2018, 03:03:11 pm
Just touching on the LIAR.

Here is a shoe.... P121311221121113111134121211114.

Here are my bets in sections.

Section 1.
W
W* no bet
L no bet

Section 2.
W
L no bet

Section 3.
W
W* no bet
W* no bet
W* no bet

Section 4.
L no bet

Section 5.
W
W* no bet
W* no bet
W* no bet
L no bet

If I bet everything, I am +6. By just taking one bite at the cherry, I am +4. Is there really that much difference when I can flat-bet and still win. Well, not in my opinion.  Because what about the day when you don't get those runs of 3/4. On saying that, this shoe was pretty smooth. You can develop framework for when shoes shoot all over the place and bet accordingly but the key IMO is keeping those LIAR down to as low a figure as you can and also not forgetting that less is more in relation to how many bets you actually place.

cheers
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: alrelax on November 12, 2018, 11:09:28 pm

"Negative Progressions and Negative Frame-of-Mind (2 of 10 in a Series)
                                                 
I am putting down my thoughts here based on reading the past couple of days.  I truly feel players going in a casino with the attitude/belief, "I can always get whatever I lose back by negative progression", is truly harmful.  Unless and only unless you are at a $10.00 min table and you are only wager the $10.00 or $20.00 and you have a reserved buy-in and you are ready, willing and 100% able with risking the sums of $5,100.00 and $10,200.00 respectively, to attempt 8 progressions to recoup your $10.00 or $20.00 lost. I say 8 attempts is what needs to be planned to prevail on a negative progression, not 6 or 7. 

But to me, that energy, that feeling, that risk is absurd!  And it will play on almost everyone's mind, almost.  That buy-in bankroll can and should be used for other things and reserving it for positive events rather than the negativity and related effects losing has on most all players.  Those that believe in it and those that do it, I think the, "can't retract", or the "stick to your guns", and those types of overpowering and controlling thoughts set in. 

While positive progressions are a very vital part of making profit while winning, any kind of negative progression to break even or obtain a small profit is extremely dangerous. 

So, personally I forget about the smaller losses of $100--$250--$500, etc., and concentrate on the winning progressions which will far and beyond, make-up for the losses I had, if I win.  If I lose I will also lose with the negative progression.    To me, no rocket science.  What am I missing?  How do I win with a negative progression and cannot win with a positive progression?? 

My analogy to this is a vehicle repair garage with numerous employees.  There is one guy, say in a group of 20 that is always inciting worker's rights and how to do everything his way, not the owner's way, etc.  Fire the guy, point blank get rid of him or put him on landscaping and washing vehicles until he quits.  I would take the firing route even with repercussions of penalties and taxed surcharges for firing some states have.  I would just eat it and be done with him.  Costs me more in others non confirmatory and loss profits, etc.  I would look to make it up on positive ways without the guy, not keeping him and dealing with negativity, losses and the such.  Kind of the same at gambling where you have to win so many to make up a loss and the frame of mind it gets most everyone into.  Moral=Take the loss, make it up later, don't shoot for the absolute immediate to become whole for the past negatives.

I say the above, not to dispel, discredit, insult or challenge of any of you in anyway.   

I say that from experience.  From my 35 + or so years of playing, progressions only reflect the 'outcome', 'good luck', 'bad luck', 'once in a lifetime win', 'worst game ever played', whatever each of us cares to label their results, etc., and progressions pertaining to positive or negative in fact.  Progressions bring you up a level of everything in wagering and gambling, it plays on your psych. And, I am saying that for the negative as well as the positive ones.     

Although the one place I play at in the Midwest, it has a current $10.00 to $2,000.00 tables.  Most places, do have $25.00 or $50.00 min's and the majority of the numerous high limit rooms, especially in Vegas, New Jersey, Florida, Connecticut and California do have a $100.00 minimum up to $300 min's.  The negative progression numbers would be exceeding the table limits on 6 and 7 place progressions pretty easily even with the lower table min's.  And reality is, most all players do not bring $25k or $50k to the casino to wager $50 and $200 a time.  I do not care what the experts and gaming info writers recommend for 100 or 250 times your average wager for a buy-in or bank roll, sorry it is not reality.  Not here to discuss what your buy-in should be.  Most all players will not weather losing 30 or 50 wagers until they break even or profit 5 or 10 units, 100 to 200 wagers down the casino shoes played in a setting.  That is reality.

Someone wagering $250.00 would be on an $8,000.00 wager on his 6th wager with a buy-in of $15,750.00 at risk.  Someone with a $400.00 wager would be at a $12,800.00 wager on his 6th wager, with a $25,200.00 buy-in at risk if he lost the 6th one. Like I said not practicable and will only happen with an occasional player that will risk huge money to break even.  Might be good gossip and drama to talk about here, but in the casino it is extremely dangerous. 

Although everyone's financial picture is exclusive to themselves and not others, most of the experienced players will not engage in negative progressions much more than once or twice as a general non-written protocol.  This is because they have seen 7, 8, 9, 10, or 12 losing hands or something called the 'non-believable' from actually happening right then and there.  Happens all the time.  Not every time, a player normally wins numerous times before he actually experiences what I said, probably because his losses were overridden by wins or just his plain ignorance of the losing times.  When I said 'experience' it refers to time and years at the table, nothing to do with winning-losing-or even interpreting the game.

I said all that to bring the reader to a point.  And that point is, what negative progressions can and usually do to most players, not all, most.  Frame of mind is altered or effected.  And by that, I mean the following. 

Can you or anyone prevail with a dedicated 5 step. 6 step, 7 step Marty 'negative progression' to prevail for 1 unit or so?  Absolutely.  That is not the question.  The question is, how many will you lose before all the wins and money risked are long gone?  Some say something along the lines of, "If you lose 7 or 8 straight in a casino than what are you doing there"?  All players, even the winning most players will lose 7 or 9 or 12 straight at times.  And we cannot regulate when those times come along or how much we are playing with when those times set in, until it is too late.  Every one of us (I sure the hell hope so anyway) are saying positive and motivating things even if we are going down.  And if you were (and it happens--I seen it numerous times) going down say wagering $500 bets and then you started to lose with a negative progression before you can play it all out to the 5th or 6th spot, as you would be over the table max on the 7th and 8th hands, and they cut down to $100 or $200.  You just fall deeper in and get your frame-of-mind damaged and clouded even worse.  Then when you do win a couple, you are so far away from even, it is really sad. 

So let's assume me and you are gambling at a casino.  We are wagering $20.00 and we lose, lose again and once more-lose.  Then we say let's go negative progression to recoup that $60.00.  So I place $60.00 out there.  Then $120.00, then $240.00 then $480.00.  Sure hope I hit by the time I got on that 4th bet.  I had an additional $900.00 counting on the recovery of the $60.00 that I/We lost.  And, if that did not prevail, then we have to pony up $960.00 for the next wager to get back the neg progression attempt and the original $60.00 we were hell bent on getting back.  I will stop there at the 4th/5th attempt and not even go into the 6th/7th attempt possibilities.  If you don't think they are real-possible or can happen to you---think again, I promise form the bottom of my heart it happens frequently.  But it is the nature of the players---when things like this happen, the player's frame-of-mind is affected.  They somehow get hell-bent on the negative progression hope and convince themselves they will prevail.  Yes, they can and yes they do, but not every time.  And the down side to that is the possibility those winning time with neg progression instilled into your frame-of-mind.  It is not that hard to recoup a few hundred compared to a few thousand or a few thousand compared to a tens of thousands or a tens of thousands as compared to hundreds of thousands.   

No one here goes in to play one time and calls it quits.  They play year after year and will continue to do so. So I know the effects of neg progression and their effects are much greater negativity than most anything in live gaming.  A negative progression to me, is the same as a volume of combustible liquid with some escaping fumes, improperly contained inside a heated warehouse without ventilation and ignition sources sporadically present.

As far as 1 win and 7 losses.  I have repeatedly seen great players that usually prevail and have lifetime positive wins, lose in excess of 7 times consecutively.  If you have a casino that the average player cannot lose more than 5 or 6 consecutive times, I will sell everything I have and borrow hundreds of thousands of dollars and be there tomorrow, maybe the next day.  But I know that is impossible, does not exist and will never exist.

But, maybe I am totally wrong here and my way of thinking???".............................................
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Johno-Egalite on November 13, 2018, 01:09:56 pm
I'm astounded, I've no idea what you have seen, observed, witnessed, learnt in your many decades of gambling!!

I regularly buyin for 60 base units, and make 60 unit PLUS, profit utilising a negative progression, A short, shallow or grand Martingale has no place on the gaming table, I occasionally use Fibonacci without requiring the amounts you mention.  I'm astonished, literally, have you never learnt studied anything in regards to negative progressions?  How about STAR, how about many negative progressions Victor has posted over the decades on various boards??? 

I realize you are the global mod, however it needs to be said, your post above is a prime example why I do not read your posts, I read the first paragraph of your post above and skipped the rest, because it is wrong on so many accounts.  Casinos love players like you.  the level of Narcissism knows no bounds and is off the Richter scale,
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: alrelax on November 13, 2018, 01:29:19 pm
I'm astounded, I've no idea what you have seen, observed, witnessed, learnt in your many decades of gambling!!

I regularly buyin for 60 base units, and make 60 unit PLUS, profit utilising a negative progression, A short, shallow or grand Martingale has no place on the gaming table, I occasionally use Fibonacci without requiring the amounts you mention.  I'm astonished, literally, have you never learnt studied anything in regards to negative progressions?  How about STAR, how about many negative progressions Victor has posted over the decades on various boards??? 

I realize you are the global mod, however it needs to be said, your post above is a prime example why I do not read your posts, I read the first paragraph of your post above and skipped the rest, because it is wrong on so many accounts.  Casinos love players like you.  the level of Narcissism knows no bounds and is off the Richter scale,

That is my opinion as a player and a regular player that has never lost his bankroll in many years and has replenished it when realizing a few losses and I remove all other wins and buy things with them and do not increase the levels of the bankroll, etc.

I will tell you one thing and publicly state it.  You said what you wanted, it is time to stop and cease your attempt at humiliation and chastising.  Move on, start your own thread and communicate with others regarding your beliefs and desires and experiences.

I would tell the above to yourself even if you did not direct it to me.  This is not a board to constantly bash or demean others as you are obviously doing. 

Again, you said it and now it is time for yourself to move on and continue your beliefs elsewhere.  Skip my writings, very last warning.

Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: alrelax on November 13, 2018, 02:39:15 pm
For the sake of other board members that are interested in what I have to say, my experience, my play and my thinking, I will highlight words that I believe are vital to real learning, research and the ability to use something someone else has written about. 

IMO and IMO only, please stop attempting to beat the casino, to win and win every time, it is the total wrong frame of mind.  If there was any way to actually win a set amount every time or the highest majority of the times, it would be patented, it would be sold and the casinos all over the world would pull the games, without one doubt. 

Please scan and re-read the following and realize the words that are highlighted:
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
(Original Post):
                                         
I am putting down my thoughts here based on reading the past couple of days.  I truly feel players going in a casino with the attitude/belief, "I can always get whatever I lose back by negative progression", is truly harmful.  Unless and only unless you are at a $10.00 min table and you are only wager the $10.00 or $20.00 and you have a reserved buy-in and you are ready, willing and 100% able with risking the sums of $5,100.00 and $10,200.00 respectively, to attempt 8 progressions to recoup your $10.00 or $20.00 lost. I say 8 attempts is what needs to be planned to prevail on a negative progression, not 6 or 7. 

But to me, that energy, that feeling, that risk is absurd!  And it will play on almost everyone's mind, almost.  That buy-in bankroll can and should be used for other things and reserving it for positive events rather than the negativity and related effects losing has on most all players.  Those that believe in it and those that do it, I think the, "can't retract", or the "stick to your guns", and those types of overpowering and controlling thoughts set in. 

While positive progressions are a very vital part of making profit while winning, any kind of negative progression to break even or obtain a small profit is extremely dangerous

So, personally I forget about the smaller losses of $100--$250--$500, etc., and concentrate on the winning progressions which will far and beyond, make-up for the losses I had, if I win.  If I lose I will also lose with the negative progression.    To me, no rocket science.  What am I missing?  How do I win with a negative progression and cannot win with a positive progression?? 

My analogy to this is a vehicle repair garage with numerous employees.  There is one guy, say in a group of 20 that is always inciting worker's rights and how to do everything his way, not the owner's way, etc.  Fire the guy, point blank get rid of him or put him on landscaping and washing vehicles until he quits.  I would take the firing route even with repercussions of penalties and taxed surcharges for firing some states have.  I would just eat it and be done with him.  Costs me more in others non confirmatory and loss profits, etc.  I would look to make it up on positive ways without the guy, not keeping him and dealing with negativity, losses and the such.  Kind of the same at gambling where you have to win so many to make up a loss and the frame of mind it gets most everyone into.  Moral=Take the loss, make it up later, don't shoot for the absolute immediate to become whole for the past negatives.

I say the above, not to dispel, discredit, insult or challenge of any of you in anyway.   

I say that from experience.
  From my 35 + or so years of playing, progressions only reflect the 'outcome', 'good luck', 'bad luck', 'once in a lifetime win', 'worst game ever played', whatever each of us cares to label their results, etc., and progressions pertaining to positive or negative in fact.  Progressions bring you up a level of everything in wagering and gambling, it plays on your psych. And, I am saying that for the negative as well as the positive ones.     

Although the one place I play at in the Midwest, it has a current $10.00 to $2,000.00 tables.  Most places, do have $25.00 or $50.00 min's and the majority of the numerous high limit rooms, especially in Vegas, New Jersey, Florida, Connecticut and California do have a $100.00 minimum up to $300 min's.  The negative progression numbers would be exceeding the table limits on 6 and 7 place progressions pretty easily even with the lower table min's.  And reality is, most all players do not bring $25k or $50k to the casino to wager $50 and $200 a time.  I do not care what the experts and gaming info writers recommend for 100 or 250 times your average wager for a buy-in or bank roll, sorry it is not reality.  Not here to discuss what your buy-in should be.  Most all players will not weather losing 30 or 50 wagers until they break even or profit 5 or 10 units, 100 to 200 wagers down the casino shoes played in a setting.  That is reality.

Someone wagering $250.00 would be on an $8,000.00 wager on his 6th wager with a buy-in of $15,750.00 at risk.  Someone with a $400.00 wager would be at a $12,800.00 wager on his 6th wager, with a $25,200.00 buy-in at risk if he lost the 6th one. Like I said not practicable and will only happen with an occasional player that will risk huge money to break even.  Might be good gossip and drama to talk about here, but in the casino it is extremely dangerous. 

Although everyone's financial picture is exclusive to themselves and not others, most of the experienced players will not engage in negative progressions much more than once or twice as a general non-written protocol.  This is because they have seen 7, 8, 9, 10, or 12 losing hands or something called the 'non-believable' from actually happening right then and there.  Happens all the time.  Not every time, a player normally wins numerous times before he actually experiences what I said, probably because his losses were overridden by wins or just his plain ignorance of the losing times. When I said 'experience' it refers to time and years at the table, nothing to do with winning-losing-or even interpreting the game.

I said all that to bring the reader to a point. And that point is, what negative progressions can and usually do to most players, not all, most.  Frame of mind is altered or effected.  And by that, I mean the following. 

Can you or anyone prevail
with a dedicated 5 step. 6 step, 7 step Marty 'negative progression' to prevail for 1 unit or so?  Absolutely. That is not the question.  The question is, how many will you lose before all the wins and money risked are long gone? Some say something along the lines of, "If you lose 7 or 8 straight in a casino than what are you doing there"? All players, even the winning most players will lose 7 or 9 or 12 straight at times.  And we cannot regulate when those times come along or how much we are playing with when those times set in, until it is too late.  Every one of us (I sure the hell hope so anyway) are saying positive and motivating things even if we are going down.  And if you were (and it happens--I seen it numerous times) going down say wagering $500 bets and then you started to lose with a negative progression before you can play it all out to the 5th or 6th spot, as you would be over the table max on the 7th and 8th hands, and they cut down to $100 or $200.  You just fall deeper in and get your frame-of-mind damaged and clouded even worse.  Then when you do win a couple, you are so far away from even, it is really sad. 

So let's assume me and you are gambling at a casino.  We are wagering $20.00 and we lose, lose again and once more-lose.  Then we say let's go negative progression to recoup that $60.00.  So I place $60.00 out there.  Then $120.00, then $240.00 then $480.00.  Sure hope I hit by the time I got on that 4th bet.  I had an additional $900.00 counting on the recovery of the $60.00 that I/We lost.  And, if that did not prevail, then we have to pony up $960.00 for the next wager to get back the neg progression attempt and the original $60.00 we were hell bent on getting back.  I will stop there at the 4th/5th attempt and not even go into the 6th/7th attempt possibilities.  If you don't think they are real-possible or can happen to you---think again, I promise form the bottom of my heart it happens frequently.  But it is the nature of the players---when things like this happen, the player's frame-of-mind is affected.  They somehow get hell-bent on the negative progression hope and convince themselves they will prevail.  Yes, they can and yes they do, but not every time.  And the down side to that is the possibility those winning time with neg progression instilled into your frame-of-mind.  It is not that hard to recoup a few hundred compared to a few thousand or a few thousand compared to a tens of thousands or a tens of thousands as compared to hundreds of thousands.   

No one here goes in to play one time and calls it quits.  They play year after year and will continue to do so. So I know the effects of neg progression and their effects are much greater negativity than most anything in live gaming. A negative progression to me, is the same as a volume of combustible liquid with some escaping fumes, improperly contained inside a heated warehouse without ventilation and ignition sources sporadically present.

As far as 1 win and 7 losses.  I have repeatedly seen great players that usually prevail and have lifetime positive wins, lose in excess of 7 times consecutively.  If you have a casino that the average player cannot lose more than 5 or 6 consecutive times, I will sell everything I have and borrow hundreds of thousands of dollars and be there tomorrow, maybe the next day.  But I know that is impossible, does not exist and will never exist.

But, maybe I am totally wrong here and my way of thinking???".............................................
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

To me, in my opinion, what I think, what I have seen, what I experience, what many friends and casino associates I regularly play with also realize.  The list goes on........................................I try not to say definitely, or has to be, or will be every time, etc. 

If you play with $10.00 min's wagers and buy in with $600.00 for 60 times the amount, all fine.  Almost no one does that where I play in the Midwest, east coast and Vegas, etc.  Almost all tables are $25.00 on the min.  In fact two weeks ago my regular casino went from $10.00 to $2,000.00 to $25.00 to $5,000.00.  At $50.00 starting (almost no one plays with that small amount on a regular wager around here anyway, but say they do) and you lose.  A quick 6 additional losses and you are already at table max on a neg progression.  And you risked and lost another $6,300.00 plus the original $50.00.  Down $6,350.00.  Then you have to start all over again. 

If you never say a baccarat player with great playing skills, great experience, absolutely perfect mind set and knowledge of all the names of all the European money management systems lose 6 or 7 baccarat wagers in a row, you have not played very long.

The key to a good bac play is risking a small amount of buy in from a partial bank roll and capitalizing on what may be presented and knowing when to stop and how to replace the losses of your bank roll before it is depleted, as well as maintaining a certain level and plateau without being falsely influenced by fallacy at the bac table, IMO

Once again, I write and try to say things such as 'to me', 'personally' and things along those lines rather than saying my play--my way or no way, or you are wrong and off the Richter scale as you are out of your mind because of so and so and I win constantly and every time by doubling my money simply by following one of the negative progression because math says, it has to win, etc.  To me, the latter is the downfall of almost every player I seen that has went broke.  Certainly it works at times, but like I have detailed out, it will catch you and bite you hard and not let go.  Ted009, Luengyeh, etc., guys, can you help me out here?

When I said 'experience' it refers to time and years at the table, nothing to do with winning-losing-or even interpreting the game.

Not seeing it, or not realizing it; Is the failure for everyone that fails!

Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Jimske on November 13, 2018, 04:02:37 pm
Just touching on the LIAR.

Here is a shoe.... P121311221121113111134121211114.

Here are my bets in sections.

Section 1.
W
W* no bet
L no bet

Section 2.
W
L no bet

Section 3.
W
W* no bet
W* no bet
W* no bet

Section 4.
L no bet

Section 5.
W
W* no bet
W* no bet
W* no bet
L no bet

If I bet everything, I am +6. By just taking one bite at the cherry, I am +4. Is there really that much difference when I can flat-bet and still win. Well, not in my opinion.  Because what about the day when you don't get those runs of 3/4. On saying that, this shoe was pretty smooth. You can develop framework for when shoes shoot all over the place and bet accordingly but the key IMO is keeping those LIAR down to as low a figure as you can and also not forgetting that less is more in relation to how many bets you actually place.

cheers
I can't follow this cause I don't know what your sections are.  I thought you were waiting for 3 B's but nope.
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: Jimske on November 13, 2018, 04:18:29 pm
"Negative Progressions and Negative Frame-of-Mind (2 of 10 in a Series)
                                                 
I am putting down my thoughts . . .

My analogy to this is a vehicle repair garage with numerous employees.  There is one guy, say in a group of 20 that is always inciting worker's rights and how to do everything his way, not the owner's way, etc.  Fire the guy, point blank get rid of him or put him on landscaping and washing vehicles until he quits.  I would take the firing route even with repercussions of penalties and taxed surcharges for firing some states have.  I would just eat it and be done with him.  Costs me more in others non confirmatory and loss profits, etc.  I would look to make it up on positive ways without the guy, not keeping him and dealing with negativity, losses and the such.  Kind of the same at gambling where you have to win so many to make up a loss and the frame of mind it gets most everyone into.  Moral=Take the loss, make it up later, don't shoot for the absolute immediate to become whole for the past negatives.

But, maybe I am totally wrong here and my way of thinking???".............................................
Ya maybe that guy gonna stick around and organize the workers and get them to join the Teamsters; go on strike and break the back of the exploiters?
**********************
RE:progressions.  Maybe a difficulty you have is to understand that progressions don't have to be static; in a straight line from 1 -  . . .  Reducing escalation to limit losses even if not recouping all losses as your moral suggests.  Most good progressions incorporate such.
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: alrelax on November 13, 2018, 04:24:04 pm
Ya maybe that guy gonna stick around and organize the workers and get them to join the Teamsters; go on strike and break the back of the exploiters?
**********************
RE:progressions.  Maybe a difficulty you have is to understand that progressions don't have to be static; in a straight line from 1 -  . . .  Reducing escalation to limit losses even if not recouping all losses as your moral suggests.  Most good progressions incorporate such.

1)  Extremely rural where I am currently at, not like NYC or the entire Northeast merged together, etc.;

2)  Progressions, yes I do play them and yes I have done extremely well with them, mostly on the positive side.  And no, I do not play them static or the way you think I do. I am NOT against them as a wholeI am against the negative progression wagering to recoup or get that one unit back or even on a win streak.  I have found that the (side wagers) and the progression or parlay and then just pull down the winnings until the one loss is more effective in a static position of wagering. 
Title: Re: Why You Can Never Have a Successful Math System to Beat Bac
Post by: alrelax on November 13, 2018, 04:27:48 pm
What's funny is I play similar to you - I guess too.  The difference may be that I will start with a regimen and if winning will stay with it until it breaks down.  When it does I will either quit winner OR guess FTS to recoup if it din't pan out from the get go . . .like that.

Maybe you'll ban me again . . .fine . . . but the arrogance of that statement which I quoted above is just too much for me to ignore.  Very "trumpian."  Glen, there is absolutely no evidence that "everybody" is of the same opinion.  Yet in one sentence you have relegated anyone who might disagree to insignificance.

My fault, I should have chosen words like, "IMO the majority" or "IMO, myself and countless others I have witnessed and know", or "From what I have seen as a norm on a regular basis".

But then again, I could sit at a bac table for 50 hours in 4 days and see XYZ and you could sit at MS or FW for 100 hours and not see the same. 

So, you are exactly correct and I was literally wrong in attempting to express myself, " Glen, there is absolutely no evidence that "everybody" is of the same opinion."