Quote from: ludo8400 on January 27, 2017, 09:35:50 AM
I make on the Casino 100 units per session. Air Roulette
ludo8400

100 units per session?

Quite impressive.

Let us know what your following results will be.

as. 

I got an M Platinum card and I'm very familiar with the fake italian Como's lake casino so I'm pretty sure Bellagio has $20.000 max limits on every high limit table, besides the "reserved" tables where limits could go up to 100k or more.

For the rest what Al sayed is perfectly true.

as. 

Yeah, of couse Al!

It would be too easy to beat the game if P doubles, for example, regularly overcome the 3+ P streaks on "short" terms.

Say we want to share me and you a $100.000 bankroll trying to get a regular profit wagering toward the apperance of just a single B streak. Our standard unit is $500. That is we have 200 units to risk.

I can guarantee you by a 100% accuracy that we will be 99.99999999999% more likely to double up our bankroll than to entire lose it.

The same about P singles and many other statistical situations. (But we need a 200 unit bankroll to cover each of the presented outcomes, at least to get that 99.99999999999% probability to succeed)

There's almost no fkng way the casino will take all our money because we'll wait and wait and wait the favourable opportunities to bet.

as.

 

There's a general theorical problem when betting a "sleepers" oriented strategy: you'll never know whether the given results are real fluctuations or produced by a biased wheel.
In the doubt I'd prefer to either not to bet at all or to wager what happened instead of what it didn't happen so far.
Moreover, a sleeping numbers cluster could easily contain one or more number to sleep several hundreds of spins. And just for normal statistical reasons. So I'm betting maybe 16 or 17 numbers vs a larger pool than a 18/37 ratio dictates.
Of course a smaller numbers ratio could get an empirical slight higher probability to appear and it seems you have found such situations to be more probable than not. 

 
as. 

Hi Al!

Baccarat is a game of asymmetrical percentages and implying a very huge variance.

This very huge variance will happen as the difference between B and P is just the by product of an average 50.68%/49.32% ratio. A tiny asymmetrical ratio.

If I'm betting 10, 100, 1000, 10.000 or 10.000 hands, I know I'll get closer and closer to that expected ratio the more I'm playing.
For example, I'm 99.9999999999% sure I won't get ten consecutive 3+ P streaks in a row without a P double placed in between. And many other less deviated statistical situations.

Imo it's very important to wait the happening of certain more or less deviated situations where thereafter one side must show up more likely than not as mathematics will dictate so. I call it globally long run, it could be named intermediate run, relatively short run or whatever.

No one sane baccarat player in the world could think to get more B singles than B streaks or more 3+ P streaks than P doubles.
This doesn't mean to regularly bet to get those so called most likely outcomes.   

as.



 


 

     

Hi!

As you well know, the fact that 12 silent numbers can be sleeping for a lot more than normal dozens or columns do is just a reflex of the innumerable possible combinations forming clusters of 12 numbers.
The table layout has only six possible combinations of such possibilities.

I recordered a sleeping dozen created by 12 silent numbers that remained silent for 92 spins (I tried your same methodology several years ago taking a Marigny De Grilleau suggestion).

Don't know about 18 numbers, I think you can expect to get them silent for 50 or more spins.

More interesting is the study of the exact position of dozens or, better, lines (6 numbers) coming along the way in order to build a dynamic new even chance.
You'll have to wait the situations when the positions in the last three spins are different, then betting the remaining three positions. This is your trigger.
Since you won't bet when positions are repeating, you are excluding a large part of the random world and at the same time you'll be more confident that sooner or later at least one of the three remaining positions you bet will be filled.
In a word, you shift the problem from "what" (line) to "when" (position) and "how" (actual distribution).

Cheers
   
as.




   





   

If systems, progressions or mechanical methods cannot beat the game, then why are we  here wasting time and wondering how other "empirical" methods could have the best of it?

A player willing to cut streaks or patterns isn't more stup.id than a player trying to follow trends or whatever.

In the long run the final outcome for either player will be the same.

It's just the short term illusion that varies.

Progression players will get more short term winnings than "instinct" players and among the list a flat bettor will be the less apt to lose his/her entire stack.

If "instinct" would be a valuable tool to beat the game, baccarat tables would have disappeared a long time ago. And of course the same is about mechanical or progression systems. 

as. 













 




















 

Congratulations Al!

I always liked the tone you used to counter back members' different opinions.

Now stop to talk about trends value     Just teasing....

Happy New year!

as.

Happy New Year to everyone, hoping you'll get a lot of naturals when betting P side and a lot of asymmetrical hands when betting B hand!

as. 

Hi Rhamone!

Under almost every circumstance you can't win by flat betting, buy you are guaranteed to lose just the 1.06% of the total money wagered.
If casinos were to build their income about that 1% they would have closed their bac tables decades ago. (that is almost every player like to utilize bad timing progressions)

as.








 

Quote from: soxfan on December 13, 2016, 06:45:07 PM
What os the max bets to go along with the 5$ minimums bet, hey hey?

Hi soxfan! It's $5000.

Btw, at live tables I've seen quite of players using your aggressive style and getting goood results.

as. 

Hi Al!
Yes, you're totally right about the 500k investing policy! :-)

No, I have seen just EZ bac tables there.

Yes, LD casino offers baccarat stadium with a $5 minimum.
Actually many Vegas casinos have recently added Stadium baccarat, for example Bellagio and Rio with the same limits.

as.

Al, I think that it would be too easy to beat the game following the varieties of repetitive situations provided by the game.
Actually most part of asiatic players follow this scheme and we know the results.
But selecting at most the betting situations we'll never know.

OT.

I visited Lucky Dragon casino in Vegas the opening day and part of the following week.
The casino is very small considering the Vegas standards but I liked it, expecially when I took the first glance after the elevator doors from parking lot opened right in front of the casino (a real exception in Vegas).
Not surprisingly everything there is chinese oriented: decor, food, writings, language at the table, everything. 8 number abounded as well as red and golden colors and heads of lettuce were placed here and there (I didn't know they should bring good luck according to chinese culture).

Every baccarat table is EZ conceived: good news since the vig on BP hands is reduced. Unfortunately dealers tend to burn a fair amount of cards from the bottom of the deck so diminishing the value of card counting the Dragon and Panda bets.
I don't know if this was made on purpose for a sort of advertising but at the opening day one shoe produced seven (!) Dragon bets after 60 hands or so. Not a so probable occurence...

Every table sets a minimum limit of $10 or $15 with $5000 maximum but you are not allowed to peek at the cards (obviously).
I counted 18 baccarat regular tables and 6 high stakes tables still not sure about that.   

Differently to every other Vegas casino, electronic bac pits having a live dealer were filled almost every day.

Of course no craps, just some black jack tables, one roulette and slots.

The high stakes room was desolately almost empty every day and at least for now you were right on this Al.

The three restaurants there are the most strict chinese oriented restaurants I've ever seen in Vegas for years besides Ping Pang Pong at Gold Coast casino.
You'll have a better probability to get three Dragon bonus bets in a row than eating a hamburger in the casino. No way for the hamburger, sooner or later a positive outcome for the Dragons. 

I don't know if it was just an "opening attitude" but they gave me very huge comps in relation of what I bet on the tables.

Dealers are under the very heterogenous category: some were very obnoxious, prone to always chatting in chinese language with other players and staring at you like you were a perfect stranger. Others were really friendly and having a genuine welcome behaviour toward the players.
Floormen were always friendly though.

In conclusion, Lucky Dragon casino is one of the best Vegas casino to play baccarat considering the low limits, the number of tables, the EZ nature and the comps, but if you'll get hungry and you're not chinese you better go elsewhere...

as. 



   




       

 





 





   






 

I would add my opinion on that.

"Strong" or "weak" are recreational player terms.
For any "strong" sequence you'll get the same proportional inverse amount of counterparts and there's no way to guess this or that or how strong or how weak will be the actual shoe, the very next shoe or the future shoes.
For that matter there are no valuable balancements or RTM effects because it could take a lot of time to get those situations (Al is completely right about this).

Strong or weak is an evaluation made ex post and just made on almost every hand resolved.

That's why I preferred to limit the bac outcomes just in three categories: singles, doubles and triples.

Imo, it's not on how many or how strong or weak a situation appear to be, it's about HOW certain outcomes were produced.

Personally I use two types of registrations: the standard one and the shoe by shoe registration.

The shoe by shoe registration involves the precise classification of what happened for every column of any shoe depicted in the display (or in my chart).
Every column will get just one of the three outcomes: single, double or triple.
Then my strategy will be adapted accordingly to those results.

Why a shoe per shoe registration should be of some more help than the standard one?

Answer: variance.

Since we have to register various shoes and not only one, we are restricting the field of asymmetrical probabilities of a finite card game, thus an expected event will be more restrained in its apperance expecially taking into account the exact position of what happened in the past related to what should be more expected in theory.

In the short term anything could happen, maybe some final columns will never appear for 2-3 shoes (because the actual shoes are producing a lot of streaks) but in the intermediate and acceptable terms the 36-38 or so different columns playing for us will follow more precisely the probability to form sequences of expected lenght. Expecially if we take them as a whole bunch of fellows fictionally playing for us.

as.








 

   

 



   

To make less confusion it might be better to classify DS as letters: A (1-6), B (7-12), C(13-18) etc...

Stay well

as.