Here is a thread taken from Gamblerglen, posted back in 2008, as relevant now, as it was then.

Quote
The brilliantly conceived STAR and its many derivatives.
In a nut-shell is a delayed Fibonacci.

First off, this is my understanding of Star, or more importantly the
way I implemented it at the tables.

Flat bet five times, then when you have lost these five units,
bet five times this amount using a Fibonacci progression once you hit
the progression stage..

Therefore it would run something like this,

$25-$25-$25-$25-$25- then $125 - $200 - $325 etc

Or

$10-$10-$10-$10-$10- then $50 then either $100 if using $50 units, or
$75 if using $25 units. Starting at level 1 and level 2 of the
Fibonacci. Consisting of a pre-progression and progression stage.


So what are our options to stretch this a little, squeezing a little
more leeway where making wrong decisions is not costing a great deal.
A stress free approach to playing when in the pre-stage.

Rather than trying to recoup the five lost bets in one bet, work the
units backs.

Starting with a base bet of $10 (for US and Australian playing
conditions), the table min in Auckland NZ is $15.

$10-$10-$10-$10-$10-$10-$10 = $70 now you change to playing $25 units
with a goal target of three, once cleared will produce a $5 profit,
less commissions, any half price payouts (punto 2000) are ignored.

The same approach can be taken for the $25 min tables as they are in Canada.

$25-$25-$25-$25-$25-$25 then 3 units @ $50
or
$25-$25-$25-$25-$25-$25-$25-$25 then 4units at @ $50 or 2 units @ $10
0

Now lets consider UK playing conditions, most tables are ?5 min,
fantastic for adding depth to STAR.

?5-?5-?5-?5-?5-?5-?5 for a total of ?70, you have many ways to play your progression stage depending on your comfort zone.

Switch to ?10 units, the goal target would be 4
Switch to $25 units, the goal target would be 3

However you can expand all options further.

Let?s take the UK tables.

?5-?5-?5-?5-?5-?5-?5-?5-?5-?5 = 10 step pre-progression stage = ?50

?5-?5-?5-?5-?5-?5-?5-?5-?5-?5-?5-?5-?5-?5-?5-?5-?5-?5-?5-?5 = 20 step
pre-progression stage = ?100

There is no need to go from playing ?5 units to ?100 units.
You simply can set a goal of 4 x ?25 or 2 x ?50.

It all depends on the players bankroll, what they feel comfortable betting.
If you can?t see yourself betting 5 x ?50, then don?t play ?50 units.

The same applies to the $10 minimum tables.

$10-$10-$10-$10-$10-$10-$10-$10-$10-$10 = $100 you can cut this off
anywhere you like, you can even construct it so the progression stage
shows a little profit to compensate for the 5% Banker commission penalty.

You have the option of switching to $25, $50 or $100 units.

It doesn?t take a rocket scientist to see how it would be possible to construct a 40 step pre-progression stage if you wanted to.
Obviously this is easier on the 5 minimum tables, the progression stage doesn?t not have to cost the earth.


In case you are wondering, no I haven?t forgotten the option of switching to a Labouchere for the back end. This would ease some of the pressure playing the bigger unit size, is more manipulative but comes with a higher win ratio.

Lets say $25 minimum tables, and you have decided to use an 8 stage pre-progression stage for a total cost of $200, and you have decided to use $50 unit value for the progression stage, as you don?t fancy betting stacks of blacks.

You eventually lose those 8 green chips. Using a normal Fibonacci
you would be expect to make a first recovery bet of $50, then $100 then $150, $250, $400, $650 etc.
Good job you decided to use $50 units, as betting blacks the bets could get quite high.

Rather than do all this, you are going to take the Labby approach.
You need to recoup $200 so you construct a string consisting of;

1-1-1-1 (each 1 = $50), ok if you are thinking, I need to bet $100 th
en $150, $200 given a series of losses. Well not really, you can
build a bit of cushion into it.

Let?s bet $50, if you win the string will go.

1-1-1

If you lose the string goes;

1-1-1-1-1

You decide when you have stretched your progression stage enough,
then commence to play as you would like a normal Labby.

The same principals apply to the lower value amounts.

$10-$10-$10-$10-$10-$10-$10-$10-$10-$10 then construct a Labby
string of 1-1-1-1 (1=$25)

Engage your Labby tactics as you please.

Suffice to say, I do use STAR today if I am forced for whatever reason, into betting every hand and need to keep the shoe moving.  Shame about virus warning on GG, one of the last bastions of gambling sites that is still around. Once I bust 7 units, i simply write 2-2-2-2-2 and then set about resolving that.

I have dabbled with Parleys, I found them utterly frustrating, to win a bet then give back that profit due to losing the next bet. Ditto part parleys, or reverse Martingale, Contra D'Alembert (the latter two I have never used).   

I've used deep negative progressions, which are not for everybody, depends on your personality and risk aversion.

After many years of playing this game, you have to break it down to the basics, especially after being wiped out!!

Identify the issue, you lost your bankroll because of what?  Because you chose the wrong side to bet? What can you do about that? In reality NOTHING, the game is what it is...

So what happens when you lose 4 or more, win a single bet, lose 4 or 5, win a single bet, and lose another 4 or 5.  It happens, if you played another way, it fixes that shoe, but breaks another.  This what the game is.

All negative progressions that you find on the internet have the player betting too much in these or similar situations. For example, the Fibonacci, The D'Alembert, Z-method, Labouchere, 31 system, 2-5 system, Martingale and the list goes on and on.   

When you accept that there is little you can do about avoiding more losses than winners, you need IMO to design a betting option that can withstand such runs. There are two ways to handle these, one I will share, the other is propriety.

One which should be commonly know is STAR, basically a series of flat bets, followed by a Fibonacci, however it could be followed by a Labouchere, also the pre-progression stage could be extended to whatever you like.  You can read all about STAR and it's variations on the GamblersGlen site (this site has malware, which doesn't bother me, I scan my PC afterwards). In the Baccarat section there is a thread called "The Sequel to Elongated Star, the mildest progression you will ever need".

I will post the contents, in another post.

I decided after reading everything there is about progressions, that some late century mathematician shouldn't be telling me what to do with my money, that after X losses I need to x amount.

So I designed my own, based loosely on a series of Labouchere's which IMO is the most manipulable betting option, I'm sure VLS will agree, as he once said the exact same thing.  Quote, Don't let a single losing run consume your bankroll. How I do things, is personal, yes it is a grind, but generally safe.



Just returning to this STAR option. Here is a consideration for the board.

Grab a bunch of the most choppy shoes you have.   

Take a stack of 10 low value chips (table minimum!) say $5 or $10, play the shoes out betting FLD (follow the last), anytime your 10U chip stack goes beyond 10u, place any excess into your other pile of chips.

Because you chose "choppy" shoes, you should lose all of your 10 stack ($50 or $100).

Now you switch to betting either, $25, $50 or $100 per hand to recoup plus add in a profit, and see w hard it is to bust your bankroll.

You have two options to recoup, a Fibonacci or a Labouchere (Labby)

So if you bet $5 initially, you could write 1-1-1 and use a Labby valued at $25, or write 1-1-1-1.

$10, write 1-1-1-1-1-1, or simply use a Fibonacci with a goal target of winning 6 units, or even 3 units if you switch to betting $50 per hand, or 1 unit of you switch to betting $100 chips.  I deliberately said chose choppy shoes, because choppy shoes don't stay choppy.

You have lots of options, Labby v's Fibo, $25, $50, $100, but do include profit. BTW, as you initial 10 chip stack goes up and down, you'll die of boredom, maybe.  But it's better than losing, no need to think about, "what side do I bet next", just plough straight though the shoe, not all shoes be like this, so you will make money.  The same could be applied to the bet selection DBL. When it comes to YOUR money at the table, you want options, not blindly following some paper you read on the internet..





 

Indeed things to consider.

If I may, this post would have said so much more, had you posted examples.

Quote from: alrelax on April 18, 2019, 01:56:51 AM
1)   There is a tendency to confuse the unfamiliar with the improbable.  And that my friend is a huge block for many bac players.  The contingency that we have chosen not to, or refuse to, seriously looks strange to us.  And, what looks strange to us, we will generally classify as improbable.  Then subconsciously you will figure, what is an improbable needs not to be considered seriously.

Unusual repeating patterns, will not continue, why when cards have no prior knowledge or are not influenced by previous hands, I don't know. Few weeks ago, I encountered this.

BB
PPPP
BB
PPPP
BB
PPPP   already you have a symmetrical pattern consisting of 18 hands, which is not going to continue to 24 hands.  Why? I can't give a definitive answer, other than it just won't given my table experience.

Yet most players become super confident and bet big on the Bank for the next hand, which did win, Bank did win the next hand, but did not repeat. IMO it is like Barstows theory, the longer it exists, the less likely it's continuance.

Random seems to have limits, an oxymoron it may seem, but again based on 15 years and well over 20,000 shoes played, it is based on hindsight. Over a decade ago, I played a shoe which I'll never forget for a few reasons.  Not only have I never seen any like it since, but I also lost my composure and bankroll to the sequence.

B
PPPP
B
PPPP
B
PPPP
B
PPPP 
B
PPPP

After the forth set of 4 players and a perfect repeating pattern of 20 hands, I deviated and started betting against its continuance, bigger and bigger bets, ended up getting cleaned out. 99 times out of 100, when you make a move like this, you will be successful.  I guess karma just wasn't with me that night.

It is worth pointing out a couple of things here. My golden rule nowadays is, if you are not losing doing what you are currently doing, THEN DON'T CHANGE.  For example, if one of your strategies is to bet against a streak of 4, but for some reason you won against a streak of 4, in other words you were on it, then don't jump off it.  Nobody knows if it will become a dragon,  have already won "say" 3 bets, why deviate just to win a single bet, you have already won 3.

Secondly, with both examples, there is a lot to be said for "the basics", as in "OLD, DBL and FTL".  The last two would bring home the bacon given both scenarios. 

Quote from: alrelax on April 18, 2019, 01:56:51 AM
3)   A known or an Unknown?  But there are also unknown unknowns-there are things we do not know we do not know.

Which is why MM is paramount. Because we don't know, don't risk your entire BR on something and if the abnormal does happen, apply the brakes.  Another example, hammering a double Bank after 10 single banks, or hammering a double Bank after a long run of single banks which as just ended. Still prone to do it, for a factor of reasons, time at the table, whittling down your composure. 

Quote from: alrelax on April 18, 2019, 01:56:51 AM
4)   Few things fall squarely into the categories of totally predictable or totally unpredictable in baccarat.  Even if you do not know to predict something with 100% certainty, you might be able to come up with an estimate or a forecast of type

Nothing is ever a dead cert, all we have is likelihood.  Unfortunately it is not 'probability', because every hand remains a 50-50 proposition.

Quote from: alrelax on April 18, 2019, 01:56:51 AM
5)   Be careful against giving yourself, or allowing yourself to remain with a mental block.  The problem of the mental block will develop out of frustration that your knowledge of baccarat is imperfect and/or weak, thus failing to make any forecast or give yourself an edge.  And what is worse yet, after you repeatedly lose playing baccarat, you justify the continuance without any sort of rationalization into a forecast by telling yourself that there is no way to forecast anything because nothing exists to forecast.

If it was possible to forecast just a single wiinner, then you would "go all in", of course this is not possible, which is why we don't risk it.

My belief and approach to the game is that we cannot forecast anything, therefore, don't even go there, don't think about, don't even consider it, remove such notions, ideals out of your gameplay. The basic bet selections handle everything a shoe can produce, are you using the correct one for the current state of play, that is the gotcha.  Avoiding getting caught in making a switch!!!

Then you can take it to another level, by using Templates, which then remove, "is the shoe choppy, streaky, what is it doing now", totally from your game. A complete waste of mental energy, as shoes can change in a instant. 

It really doesn't matter what kind of shoe it is, you will win against it the majority of the time. Yet a nemesis still has to exist, due to basic Maths. So you are left with MM which is the be all and end all.  we don't venture to a casino to win or guess right, we go with the aim to leave with more money than we arrrived with.  Make your nemesis as unlikely as you possibly can, as well as it being a minority occurrence.  Then you can solely focus on your priority which is, to use the money that you have got, to accumulate more.   

This thread from 6 years ago, is worth resurrecting, given the number of self proclaimed "anti-negative progression, Professional Players" which are supposedly abundant on another forum.

One such player had the misfortune to make such a bold claim on the respected WoV site.  A site which is has an abundance of renowned math-wizzes. 

Besides being ridiculed, this response debunks such nonsense.

QuoteI'll do some quick math. But you won't like my conclusions.

The outcome of a single session of ~75 hands (call it 76 so my numbers are even) is binomially distributed, and I'll use a probability of winning of 0.495 (which is generous, your true p is a little less depending on your banker/player mix).

Odds of a single session finishing +12 or better is 6.8%. The odds of -2 or better is 54.6%. But the odds of doing -2 or better in 3000+ sessions (10 years, almost every day) is just ridiculous. I couldn't get Excel to display the value, it is so small. Even doing this for 1 year (365 sessions) the odds are 1 followed by 96 zeros to the 1. A freaking Google to 1. For one year. And you said 10 years.

I have never seen such a small number in all the math I have ever done, for this site or anywhere. Ever.

This would be theoretically possible if you won about 2/3 of your hands. But you can't, so I must conclude that your story is not believable.

.

As somebody who has studied this game in-depth for over 15+ years, I learnt very early in the piece, Baccarat is indeed more about MM, than bet selection. Therefore have studied negative, positive and flat betting.  The latter was and always be, a complete non-starter. 

To suggest otherwise is a complete fallacy and it makes me question the intent of anybody making such a bold claim. 

Quote from: CT70 on April 16, 2019, 09:28:43 PM
Lugi, I don't know why you are ranting to me about BTC. You're barking up the wrong tree. I pretty much agree with everything you said about Keith and his forum. For the last 2 years though, there were a group of successful players including myself, teaching a lot of great things to baccarat enthusiasts. Unfortunately, Keith himself couldn't learn what we were teaching so he chose to take another route with his forum. He took the high negative progressions route, where he advocates starting with 1000 unit bank rolls, to win only ONE unit.  That's when all the successful players walked away, since we frown on high negative progressions.

I don't need to validate what I say to you, but as a courtesy and just so you know, I will. I don't use or endorse any of the systems you mentioned, 40, 40A, NOR, OTBL, TBL and 87%
I have my own way of playing. However, with your response to my post(s), it's evident that you don't believe a word I say or are even interested. In that respect, you are just like Keith, because he couldn't do what we do, therefore he thought it was impossible. Moreover, you are like 99% of the players I meet in the casino, in that have been playing 10s of years, you know it all and that there's is nothing that you could possibly learn from anyone else.
After 30 years of owning a forum, Keith is still playing $5 units. That being said, if you were the successful player that you say you are you would be playing full time, and would not be content with 5K a week over a hundred shoes. I did the math, you make $50 a shoe.
You don't need to respond to this or any of my future posts. My posts are for everyone else who enjoys the experience I have to offer.

You were defending BTC a few posts back, what is one to presume, I took you for a shill?  I watched a YouTube video today and one of your shoes was mentioned, CT70. I have come to the conclusion, Keith of more of the sales guy than a player.

I assure you, I am far from 99% of the players you've shared a table with.  Sometimes I don't even make $50 per shoe, but it was good of you to take two separate posts from two separate threads and make assumptions, occasionally it ends negative, I am an extremely cautious player, even with a negative progression.

Glad we agree about those systems you mention, all scams invented by the old bugger. The 87.5% understanding does have value though, depends how you apply that knowledge.

Welcome to the board, trust you won't mind if I comment IF I should happen to disagree with any future posts you decide to make, it is what debate is all about.  I'm not knocking you personally, rather the silliness and sham of paying money to chat Baccarat over at BTC.

Thanks Alex, wasn't sure what kind of reception it would get.

Their YouTube channel tells anybody possessing just a smidgen sense, all they need to know.  It is not a case of BTC withholding the pertinent information and saving it for the board, nope, rather what have publicly published is just invented hog-wash, it is irrelevant fairy tales 

OTBL? (An Ellis creation) All it wins against is a series of 2's, call it for what it is, "follow repeating two's, because TBL in other words DBL 'Decision Before Last', is taking you to the cleaners.    Yet they have the audacity to charge to attend a seminar to be told this stuff.  Gone are the days when you could read all this on the web, some good forums have bitten the dust. 

It was really laughable watching them dissect shoes, "oh OTBL lost 5 in a row there, but TBL was ok, but lost 3 in a row here, System 40, did this and System 40A / NOR did that, conclusion, nothing, other than placing emphasis on prior hands, when IT DOESN'T EXIST.   Seriously, what is the point, the next shoe is going to be completely different and that shoe being discussed you will never play again in your life-time.

Keith the programmer and former protege of Ellis, learnt a lot from one of the biggest internet snake oil salesmen, Clifton Davies 80 years old who tried to re-write BJ basic strategy and tell scholar they were wrong. Scammed hundreds if not thousands of players for many decades. Tells you all you need to know. Keith following in Ellis's footsteps, making a living promoting and inventing mumbo-jumbo about Baccarat.

I have just watched about a dozen BTC videos on YouTube, I feel compelled to comment, nice for all of them to have a meet up in Macau, I'll give them that.

I strongly suggest that membership fees are keeping Keith afloat, not his Baccarat prowess.  The videos are a utter load of mumbo-jumbo, smoke and mirrors.  Shoe trends! If a side is ahead by 3, then bet that side until 3u ahead. Maybe he hasn't seen many shoes start with a streak then chop for 6 hands, then the other side streaks, nothing but fairy tales.

Expectations of 18 singles, 9 doubles, 4 or 5 triples in a shoe, top 3 lines consist of 87% of all hands, all count for NOTHING, other than to make the person making those comments appear smart. Published and discussed at length on GG and other defunct Baccarat forums.

None of this info is of any help at the tables, not in the slightest.  I am well aware all of these stats, they mean diddly squat as shoe unfolds, they predict nothing, they do not help other than to look back in amazement at the end of a shoe, Then it is 'couldva, wouldva, shouldav'.

So what the top 3 lines consist of 87% of all hands over time, basically some old fella is trying to appear clever, basic maths 101 stuff. maybe he knows about the bet selection OLD, so what happens when a shoe produces a 4 by 4 streak, or worst, nope that part wasn't addressed.

System 40, 40A, NOR, OTBL, TBL, side count, shoe bias, discussed at length, doesn't help you one bit when the shoe has finished, all taken straight out of Ellis books of fairy tales.  It is nothing but mumbo-jumbo that is being promoted. While shoe analysis may help if you have had your behind handed to you on plate, But they offer nothing in term of the next shoe you are playing, It is so easy to play shoes after the event, pure nonsense, aimed at the clueless. One wonders if Keith even plays, there was one instance in a video, he said the Banker goes down to 4, he couldn?t even count properly, as it went down to 3, my Lord.

What is really alarming is one particular YouTube video regarding clumping, Keith doesn't even know what the most significant cards are in a Baccarat shoe.  It has been mathematically proven in several places the 4 and 6 are the most significant cards, not that this info will help you in the slightest, so to try and add credence to the spouted nonsense he attempts to introduce BlackJack theories into the game of Baccarat, drear me..

Big cards left, good for the Bank and vice-versa, again, having your head filled with such info will not help while you are at the table. However if you are not aware of this stuff, it makes for a fantastic sales pitch. Let's face it, Baccarat tables the world over are not only occupied by players who have zero methodology, but are also desperate, an endless stream of mugs, willing to fork out anything in the hope they might turn around their predicament. Good grief the YouTube videos must sound like music to their ears. The YouTube comments provide insight to what is the true reality. It is not surprising why one of BTC prominent members is branching out in some vain attempt to entice gullible players to financing Keith?s exploits.   

I really do hope that behind closed doors of that forum is more substantial than the reflection of what is portrayed on that channel, otherwise members (a few I am acquainted with) are being taken for a ride.

My impression is that BTC is simply rehashing is what was discussed to death on GamblersGlen circa 2005, they are promoting myths for a fee. Unfortunately the GG site has a virus, if your Anti-virus is robust, you can ignore the warning and scan your PC afterwards, or even better if you run a virtual VMware machine, you can read and digest it all for free, saving yourself the $99 entry fee..

If you are a newbie to gambling forums, then this is heaven, people will believe what they want  to believe, what they NEED to believe, promising so much, delivering so little, like a well oiled machine, snake oil that it. Information that you may have never heard before, you're going to be rich, become a ProPlayer, sorry to burst your bubble, it is far from the truth, rather just a bunch of players paying for the privilege to discuss the same load of nonsense ECD was renowned for. Same song different organ grinder, a superior salesperson who learnt the ropes from one of the biggest deluded system seller crooks Ellis Clifton Davies.

Excuse the rant, but the YouTube channel is a load of waffle, the seminars are a load of waffle, aimed at those whom know no better, of which there are many. Win, win situation, unfortunately and SAD.
 
Go and check out their YT channel, then ask yourself, how gullible am I.

Quote from: CT70 on April 16, 2019, 06:12:15 PM
Lugi, 4 to 7 unit stop loss is pretty steep. Why not start with half units until you get to plus 1 or +1.5 before you make your first full unit bet? Set your stop loss at -2.5 to -3. That gives you 5 to 6 chances to get it right.  If you get positive before going below -3, then stay in the shoe, if you don't start winning and you hit your -3, then you probably shouldn't be in THAT shoe anyway.

I do not need, nor did I request your advice regarding MM or what to do with MY MONEY.  -3, walk away, both laughable and ludicrous. 

Quote from: CT70 on April 16, 2019, 03:42:20 PM
Luigi, you are correct in that in Baccarat, the overall (PA)player advantage over millions of hands is close to 50%. I will give you that. However, with all due respect, that statistic is not valid for the shoe that?s in front of you now. The shoe in front of you is unique. You will not beat it using the historical statistics of the game.
Baccarat is all about ?determining the length of events and their frequency of occurrence, thru use of statistics?. Once you can do that WITHOUT using a progression (meaning by flat betting only) you can become a consistent winner. That takes years to accomplish. Studying thousands of screenshots etc. The dedication required is no less than what an Olympic medalist would have to go thru to win a medal. Only a hand full of people can do it and most people would put what?s required in the ?too hard? basket. Most would rather just play with an outrageous negative progression to compensate for their inferior hit rate (HR), while hoping that their wins outnumber their losses.
I know you probably think I?m full of stuff because you?ve never witnessed or met a consistent player that can do what I just said. That?s ok, I?m not offended.
All I?m saying is that it is doable. The question is how many of you will put in the hard yards to get there? How many even have the time? All the ones I know are over age 60. It seems that?s when they have the time to really study the game.

That is utter codswallop, it's like a sales pitch. Is Keith in need of more BR, one wonders.

I average approx 100 shoes per week. I know darn well statistics count for nothing as a shoe unfolds.  So please bear me the BS.

Yet you contradict yourself in the next paragraph. Baccarat is all about statistics, for any given session it is not. I've also studied this game for well over a decade and then some. Negative progressions do not need to be outrageous, I use them all the time and rarely bet more than 10 units. You are talking to somebody who has done it, 34 consecutive winning sessions, turning $1k into over $40k.

I'm well acquainted with the 87%, something that was done to death on GG over a decade ago, age has nothing to do with the ability to study  game.

I did construct a response having watched over a Doz of BTC youtube videos in the last 24 hours, which I did not post, but shall edit accordingly and post shortly. 

Quote from: CT70 on September 22, 2018, 04:51:10 PM
Glen,for your information, BTC does not sell or endorse systems. It is just a forum where players can chat about baccarat. Novices have access to professional players who enjoy helping new players. Like any business, the owner Keith is entitled to charge a fee for membership. He must be doing something right if 42% of his members are paying members.
There are several professional players there that play for a living.
I think it's time your members stop bashing BTC and call it what it really is, "a great Baccarat forum where you can learn from professional players".

I've played this game professionally, I've financed world trips frequenting VIP rooms. Last I heard, BTC were still promoting NOR or some derivative.

Let's not mask the fact, it is still a negative expectant game, therefore some form of MM is required, there is simply no way around that.   Also any, all systems when run against a set of truth tables, resolve to 50% without exception, nothing else can possibly exist.   The only thing at can be defined is the losing pattern, for what that is worth.  All that remains, is the defining what you are prepared to lose against and money management options.

So please, do share what the 42% are paying for, what are they getting?  A chance to chat Baccarat? 

Not specifically bashing BTC, but those of us whom play Baccarat, should never pay for anything, never pay for any system, not a single one, mathematically everything resolves to a 50/50 state, it is impossible for it to be otherwise.   Don't pay for money management strategies, because they are "have been" on the web at one stage or other, including risk of ruin aimed primarily at BJ players.

Interesting post CT70

Having read it, one thing sticks out, how is the player betting, FLAT, Positive?

I do not subscribe to anybody getting the better of this game flat betting, not ever, in the long term, Parlays and part Parlays will leave you just as frustrated as a blown negative progression.  Been there, tried that.

So to suggest a stop loss of 4 or 7 units in a shoe is a viable way to play, is fanciful to say the least.

It is a negative expectant game, with thousands of dollars bankroll at my disposal I'm looking for the cheapest tables, because I would have plenty of backup should the need arise. I can bet the bigger units later, after I've blown the  we're units if the need arises. I may not win $5000 in any given session, but would be $5k up at the end of the week.

Quote from: CT70 on April 15, 2019, 05:26:18 AM

#2. Players are always betting against a run. Whether it's a straight line run coming down or a zigzag run. You don't know when a run will end/stop, and therefore you should never bet against it. It's best to wait until it's over and concentrate on your next bet.

Absolutely nothing wrong in betting against a run, so long as you include rules.  I made quite a bit of money many years ago playing this way for months on end. No word of a lie, one particular session I'll never forget, as I turned a single $500 chip into $16000. After making 15 units, I became nervy, so dropped down to $100 chips for the last 10 units. Otherwise it would have been 500 into 20k.  Bust a Fibonacci once and your toast, including all prior profit, hell of a risk

Basically wait for determined streak length and apply, you must apply the breaks after x amount of losses, in my case it was after 3 losses.  After 3 losses never attempt to jump on the streak, rather wait for the next betting opportunity.

You also need very deep pockets and big balls (young and stup1d with access to a lot of cash), there are less stressful ways to play, as we discover when we age.  But the strategy it-self is rock solid the more often than not, in conjunction with a Fibonacci while standing \ monitoring multiple tables, even better if you are able to play more than one table at once, as then you can hedge.

Quote from: Jimske on April 08, 2019, 01:24:04 AM
Agreed.  It's  about  betting.  Keeping it simple with proper staking plan - knowing when and how to recoup  if losing and. walking with winnings.

Betting the 3rd line only a good  idea.  Leave the singles.  Don't  need them.  Consider playing side independent with this strategy.

I didn't state betting the 3rd line only, rather TRIGGER off the 3rd line.  IOW, use the 3rd line to determine whether to switch from opposite to same as last.  Example, 3rd line hits, make no change from opposite if that is what your doing at the time.  If 3rd line hits consecutively, consider switching to same as last. 

Baccarat can be a real simple game for those betting most hands in a given shoe.  No need to complicate the game with irreverential info.

In the end you the player are either betting the same as the last hand, betting the repeat, or you are betting the opposite of the last hand. So it is either FLD or OLD.

It is worth noting, that series of 2's behaves the exact same if you the player were betting FLD or OLD. (LW or WL).

Therefore to simplify your decision making, it may be prudent to trigger off the 3rd line.  For all your rationale, it basically comes down to bet the opposite or bet the same. While trying to avoid getting done by any switch.  To give yourself a bit of leeway of being hit by a switch, you need depth in your staking plan.

Any delayed progressions will give you the player cushion.  IMO this game is and always will be more of a staking game than any attempt to guess wrong or right.  Have a decent staking plan and it doesn't matter losing 3, 4 or 5 on the bounce.   

You guys need to have my problems trying to get a game.

Unable to get access to my local casino (no viable reason given, other than they don't like how I played perhaps), another local casino have removed the game al together.  So have to travel to the formers sister casino (Gentings) 30 miles away. I take the train which don't run 24 hours, so either have to rush to catch the last train before midnight or stay until 5:30am, no matter if I've hit my goal target.  I dislike like playing after getting what I went for, because the longer you play the more difficult self control becomes, besides who wants to risk turning a profit into a loss 

I have not had to re-buy at all this year and am making 100%minimum of my buyin, usually 8 ~ 12 shoes per session, it is a slog, but safe, the ultimate grind. 

Decided to re-activate my Grosvenor online account today, live table from Victoria London, why not play at home when I'm too buggered to travel, for some extra extra tax free cash.

Played first shoe no drama's, won 13 bets lost 5. 

Second shoe, I placed a bet 4 bloody times and was logged out of the site, EACH TIME THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN WINNING BETS.  B@stards, I finished the second shoe winning 7 and losing 1 bet, should ve been W11 L1.  Complained like hell to their support people, they will investigate, meanwhile, in total disgust I withdrew my deposit and winning.

Wasn't playing big, very small in fact, maybe it was nothing, maybe they didn't like the win ratio and the fact I sit out a lot of hands.

All based on Mathematics, couldn't care less what pattern(s) "random binary decisions" are producing, as they are IMO meaningless.

Anyway, if sputnik reads this post, I have a question for you (or anybody who fancies it).

What is the ecart (SD) of a 128/1 outcome occurring 2 times and 3 times within 8 trials?  I'm curious!!!

In a perfect scenario a 128/1 trial would occur twice per 129 trials, however with random outcomes, nothing is perfect, anything can occur, as in multiple occurrences of 128/1 trials within a small sample of 7/8 attempts.  I was interested in the actual SD.   

Trust that makes sense and wasn't too confusing, back to the train station tomorrow.