On the whole the bettors decision of when and where to place a bet must be calculated. This will give him the maximum chance of success. He should not bet on every hand. He might be following a streak of Bankers and/or Players, but what will he do when the terrible 2's come in to play? If he tried to follow in the long run he will be beat by the game. If he switches to follow the 2's they will change and then he will lose further and be back to square one. By the time he sits there trying to decide where to bet next he will be confused and losing money.

In Baccarat you might think that there is a choice of two, Banker or Player but if you really study the pattern past results make you'll find that merely following or going against the last result will not stand you in a good chance to win. Look at what can occur, (examples, not including ties)

1. Banker run (three or more)
2. Player run (three or more)
3. zigzag run (three or more)
4. Zizag run to Player run
5. Zigzag run to Banker run
6. Banker run to a zig zag run
7. Player run to zig zag run
8. The terrible 2's run
9. The skip between terrible 2's to single zig or zag
10. The skip between terrible 2's to a double zig and zag

These are examples of the choices you need to make. As you can see it's a mine field. Only structured betting, structured decision making can help you stand a chance of winning at the game of baccarat. If you do not a successful battle plan, you'll end up losing. Using Martingale will wipe you out because bettors tend to stick to one mode of play, i.e. if they are trying to break a run they will stick to this paranoid that if they go with the run it will break. So they continue to try and break the run a the run goes 8,9,10 they are wiped out by maybe 5,6,7 depending on their bankroll and bet limits. This as an example. Martingale for more than 4 attempts is madness because the amount you need to layout just to win a fraction of what you are risking is a massive risk that is doomed to fail. You might win a few but the long run that will get you will get you and you stand therefore to lose a lot re than you had won. It's like taking 10 forward steps and then being set back 500 steps or even more.

When you consider the combinations that can occur within a shoe you stared to see the game different, not just Player or Banker but you see that probability calculations are vital to the game. The point of this post is that you cannot have a structure, a mode of play that jumps around all over the place. That is like trying to get dressed, brush your teeth, eat your breakfast, put on your shoes and socks, write an essay, and drive your car all at the same time!

People don't win at baccarat because people over complicate the way they decide what to bet on and end up making the wrong decisions time and time again. No one is forcing you to play every hand. To win at baccarat a person must accept that there are very few ways that can combat and beat the many combinations of how the game changes every few hands. 

If I

Quote from: alrelax on June 17, 2017, 01:48:58 PM
If I may add, along the same lines, I think:

"Many players also are under the impression that they can influence the game/shoe.  They cannot.  Simply guessing right numerous times is your enemy, realize that.  You can't influence, can't change any present or upcoming hand.  You have to have the ability and knowledge to read and understand the shoe, how it is presenting itself.  You have to have the wherewithal to wager along with it.  And that is probably the single biggest win-lose factor of the game of baccarat.

Most players are not focused on the results as they are presenting themselves.  They are focused on their attempt to predict and have the results conform to their expectations, which is really regressing away from the mean and influential observations misinterpreted.  This is what the casino, the hosts, the management of the properties count on.  The player can't stay away from bad bets.  That is the exact and only reason the pens, the scorecards, the multi-thousand dollar scoreboards are bought and installed by the casino for your eyes.  They influence and they control you, once you learn that and use it to your advantage, you will become a more profitable player."

FROM:  http://betselection.cc/alrelax's-blog/knowledge-power-you-baccarat/

Thank you for adding to the debate.


You wrote: "Many players also are under the impression that they can influence the game/shoe."

I'm not saying a bettor can 'influence" the shoe. What I'm saying is the PAST informs the FUTURE to a certain extent. In that, for example, you would agree that there are zig zag dominated shoes and run dominated shoes and a mix of both?

You wrote: "They cannot.  Simply guessing right numerous times"

And I am not saying that you have to GUESS  Since I agree with you up to a certain point, that is when we place a bet we are making a decision and this decision is based on a loose form of guessing, though for the most point the point of my post refers to 'Calculated Decisions'. As the title informs, in order to place a bet, we have to THINK about what side we will go, Player/Banker, and our thoughts should be ordered. In order to follow orderly thought you need to follow a structure and that structure must be established in the first place. Not following an ordered mode of play will lead to failure. The score board / pen score cards in this respect are you friends. (though dealers often make mistakes on the score board as you should know therefore it is wise to note the correct score on your score card and refer only to that and not to the board)

You wrote: "ability and knowledge to read and understand the shoe, how it is presenting itself."

I agree with this

You wrote: "You have to have the wherewithal to wager along with it."

I'm not sure I understand what you are saying here. If you are saying follow a run or zig zag or try to work out how the shoe is going during the shoes, I do not agree because this "trying to work out" things is what causes bettors to lose.   

You wrote: "And that is probably the single biggest win-lose factor of the game of baccarat."

For me the biggest win/lose factor is addressing how the bettor is informing himself how and where he will bet. If it is inanimate, if he tried to guess based on a feeling or is just thus trying to predict, in the end he will fail.

you wrote: "Most players are not focused on the results as they are presenting themselves.  They are focused on their attempt to predict and have the results conform to their expectations"

I agree that this is what most bettor do do. Which is why they lose.

You wrote: "They influence and they control you,"

I do not agree that the score cards, and/or the board is there to cause a bettor to lose. It is up to each and every bettor to make his own decisions. What I want to know is why most bettors do not follow a structured was of playing rather than a loose guess / feel mode of play. In my mind the latter is not a pro bettor, he does not really want to win over the long term.

I'd like to know what other people think on this topic?

You

Quote from: alrelax on June 17, 2017, 05:23:07 PM
You have to understand, survive and be able to interpret what is happening.  Not trying to change the winning results to the system you were made to believe in.  You need a clear mind until the time presents itself that you can excel.

There will be good days and days.  With the proper knowledge, you will be able to stop in your bad days and also be ahead of the game.  Not self-destructing and depleting your bank roll.

without a good system, no one can win in the long run. money management yes i agree, some bad shoes then stop yes i agree. but to win it all boils down to having a good system others there is no point.

What i am missing is the debate about using states or waves and not patterns as they come by them self.
I am missing the debate about the "most common" & "least common" events.

For example if i have one single and follow them to strike and lose, then i have a serie of two that can become anything from two in a row to many more.
In this situation some one should hold his bet and wait and observe what happens next before making conclusion about what the next bet should be.

Assume you get singles and a serie of two, then does two event are "most common" and recent present events so you might follow does and assume that series of three or higher has fall into sleep.
This way you can strike two events for 20 to 30 times in a row, a real bias.
But most common is short term bias where two events hit three to four times in a row in any given combination.

Now using waves or states you can make other conclusion then using your common patterns and this happen when two waves or states overlap.
Then one out of two events from the past bias state will be part of the further state.

For example assume you get singles and series of two hitting five times and you now get a serie of three or higher, then next you will have series of three or higher with singles or series of two that was part of the past wave state. This make decision making fun and you make probability calculation in your favour.
This kind of debate about decision making and using waves or state of events to strike with short, medium, large bias is missing.

Patterns get a new function and a new probability when you use waves or states when you deal with random bits.
For example one option can be to use 1 in 3 probability if you use the "most common" & "least common" methodology that i mention above.
And it works with different layers of clustering when betting.

This kind of material of information is not discussed in the public.
That is one reason i join Beat The Casino to read about NOR among other things.
They use both count systems when charting to see how the waves or states unfold into different direction to make decision based upon that charting methodology.
That is also one thing you don't see in public discussion.

Majority of waves has a short or medium bias during one shoe and one shoe can be dominated with only two event during 30% of one particular shoe.
My opinion is that is what we have to look into and stop talking about betting with or against a pattern of three in a row as isolated event that is part of the hole and one particular state or wave.

Cheers

Quote from: Sputnik on June 17, 2017, 05:42:49 PM
What i am missing is the debate about using states or waves and not patterns as they come by them self.
I am missing the debate about the "most common" & "least common" events.

For example if i have one single and follow them to strike and lose, then i have a serie of two that can become anything from two in a row to many more.
In this situation some one should hold his bet and wait and observe what happens next before making conclusion about what the next bet should be.

Assume you get singles and a serie of two, then does two event are "most common" and recent present events so you might follow does and assume that series of three or higher has fall into sleep.
This way you can strike two events for 20 to 30 times in a row, a real bias.
But most common is short term bias where two events hit three to four times in a row in any given combination.

Now using waves or states you can make other conclusion then using your common patterns and this happen when two waves or states overlap.
Then one out of two events from the past bias state will be part of the further state.

For example assume you get singles and series of two hitting five times and you now get a serie of three or higher, then next you will have series of three or higher with singles or series of two that was part of the past wave state. This make decision making fun and you make probability calculation in your favour.
This kind of debate about decision making and using waves or state of events to strike with short, medium, large bias is missing.

Patterns get a new function and a new probability when you use waves or states when you deal with random bits.
For example one option can be to use 1 in 3 probability if you use the "most common" & "least common" methodology that i mention above.
And it works with different layers of clustering when betting.

This kind of material of information is not discussed in the public.
That is one reason i join Beat The Casino to read about NOR among other things.
They use both count systems when charting to see how the waves or states unfold into different direction to make decision based upon that charting methodology.
That is also one thing you don't see in public discussion.

Majority of waves has a short or medium bias during one shoe and one shoe can be dominated with only two event during 30% of one particular shoe.
My opinion is that is what we have to look into and stop talking about betting with or against a pattern of three in a row as isolated event that is part of the hole and one particular state or wave.

Cheers

I have studied NOR a lot, it does not work for the long run and it involves doubling up (for the first bet following loss then adding) it can become complex and places a lot of stress on the bettor.

no pattern is guaranteed to arrive at any given point. Therefore to win, a bettor must narrow his play and only bet at certain times.  When a lion or big cat goes hunting it targets that which it knows it is likely to win. It does not waste time and energy going for everything and then doubles its efforts (i.e. doubles up) it know what it wants and it goes for it. The German football team play in a similar way, they wait for the opportunity to present (they know what to look/wait for) and they then go for it. This is why they are successful. Unlike the English who are pretty much useless when it comes to big tournaments.

I agree to some point but not all.
For example the majority of states are bias when observing any given shoe.
Then some one can skip medium and large waves and only ride short term bias.
But the issue here is the Entering points not the Exit points.
Assume you hit one bias state alternating like 123 then you lose three bets flat betting.
Then it take three short bias state to break even and more to gain positive results.
I reckon that is the issue all face to get the gain to overcome the attempts or let me put it like this - winning two session or more out of three where the gain of two sessions equal or overcome the losing session.

I am not saying NOR is a working solution - i am saying that is the direction and perspective we should look into when developing a flat betting strategy.

Cheers

people must do what works for them, what they can understand and what they believe in. The NOR works only up til a point then it goes wrong because there are a number of errors within it. If this was not so you would not have the adding of bets when losses come. It is trying to ride out the waves but problem with NOR is that once shoe results start and you get involved before you can work out what kind of shoe you are in you are involved! NOR looks at shoe results after the event and teaches people, but it has less focus on what goes during the event, save that it picks patterns that suits its purpose to teach people. I have looked at NOR very carefully and found it lacking. If it was any good I'd be using it but I am not, which is why I out ruled it.

Stephen Tabone everything has to lose to something and i got a big surprise when i join BTC because i had develop the same method as NOR but based upon different principals.
I am no longer member and stay for a short time, but i think to join again as the speak the same languish i do when it comes to 50/50 decision making.

I look forward for you 3th edition.

Cheers

Correct, NOR is always looking at the past so Ellis then combined using S40 and S40A which I think Andy mentioned your method a lot like S40 but without the OTR (On the Run).  Sputnik is incorporating the LC and MC but don't forget that these are "weighted" proportionate to their average frequency.  Soxfan recently posted a more accurate event average for consideration.  The hope is to get a more accurate picture of the bias.  But that still leaves one with a choice.  Bet for the bias to continue or against it to not!

This is all fun becasue we like patterns and games and order but it's all nonsense becasue there is no leading indicator.  The best thing I can say about it is any plan is better than no plan.  With some experience it is just as easy to determine the bias by looking at the shoe as it develops.  LC, MC; Player/Banker shoe; Dom of 1's; and even looking at P and B independently.  In this manner we can determine the present strengths and weakness.  No we don't have to bet every hand (I do).  Rather look at a certain strength and bet into some groups hoping the bias we choose will continue for a short bit.

Maybe someone will send me Stephen Tabones rules and I'll play a few shoes for the group.  Then we can see how it plays.

I wonder how much he paid Ellis for NOR?  LOL

Quote from: Sputnik on June 17, 2017, 07:17:16 PM
Stephen Tabone everything has to lose to something and i got a big surprise when i join BTC because i had develop the same method as NOR but based upon different principals.
I am no longer member and stay for a short time, but i think to join again as the speak the same languish i do when it comes to 50/50 decision making.

I look forward for you 3th edition.

Cheers

whatever works for you stick to it

Quote from: Jimske on June 17, 2017, 07:24:55 PM
Correct, NOR is always looking at the past so Ellis then combined using S40 and S40A which I think Andy mentioned your method a lot like S40 but without the OTR (On the Run).  Sputnik is incorporating the LC and MC but don't forget that these are "weighted" proportionate to their average frequency.  Soxfan recently posted a more accurate event average for consideration.  The hope is to get a more accurate picture of the bias.  But that still leaves one with a choice.  Bet for the bias to continue or against it to not!

Jimske can you provide a link to the Soxfan recently post you mention.
Many Thanks

Cheers

Quote from: Jimske on June 17, 2017, 07:24:55 PM
Correct, NOR is always looking at the past so Ellis then combined using S40 and S40A which I think Andy mentioned your method a lot like S40 but without the OTR (On the Run).  Sputnik is incorporating the LC and MC but don't forget that these are "weighted" proportionate to their average frequency.  Soxfan recently posted a more accurate event average for consideration.  The hope is to get a more accurate picture of the bias.  But that still leaves one with a choice.  Bet for the bias to continue or against it to not!

This is all fun becasue we like patterns and games and order but it's all nonsense becasue there is no leading indicator.  The best thing I can say about it is any plan is better than no plan.  With some experience it is just as easy to determine the bias by looking at the shoe as it develops.  LC, MC; Player/Banker shoe; Dom of 1's; and even looking at P and B independently.  In this manner we can determine the present strengths and weakness.  No we don't have to bet every hand (I do).  Rather look at a certain strength and bet into some groups hoping the bias we choose will continue for a short bit.

Maybe someone will send me Stephen Tabones rules and I'll play a few shoes for the group.  Then we can see how it plays.

I wonder how much he paid Ellis for NOR?  LOL

you can always get a copy from amazon, link in my signature, it's on offer now through amazon as i understand. Lot cheaper than NOR and all that too! Keep it in the family   

Wow - I didn't realize NOR was on Amazon - how much did you pay for it?