Hi KFB!!!

As you well know (probably better than us) there are several 50/50 propositions: The general factor working for all of them is the allegedly total independence of each trial, taken for granted that BEFORE every trial the real (not expected) probability is 50/50.

Coin flip successions were deeply studied by eminent experts and anyway they are not bettable at any casino. Yet they could be a fair theorical reference model.

Pass and don't pass lines at Craps constitute a slight world apart (and we've discussed some Craps concepts privately).

Probably the best practical example about both independence and virtual perfect 50/50 probability before every trial are represented by the EC distributions at roulette.

Of course baccarat is a 50/50 game only under the eyes of ignorant and clueless people.
Actually it's a strong asymmetrical game for two different reasons 1- B>P and 2- rank cards are unequally distributed along any single shoe dealt. And among ranks, key cards hold a decisive role upon the outcomes.

Do large data teach us that itlr everything will show up by an expected well verified probability correspondent to a kind of coin flip game or 50.68/49.32 proposition?

Yes, if we do not know what to really look for and one of the tool we should be interested at is the consecutiveness of certain results applied to selected patterns.

Actually after having dissected thousands and thousands of shoes, we reached the conclusion that the vast majority of bac results PER SHOE move around seemingly 50/50 propositions by low levels or even neutral levels of asymmetry, yet rank cards cannot be homogeneously distributed for long so giving room to way more detectable shifted situations.

Streaks lenght is just one factor to be studied, consecutiveness of a given pattern is another one. Merging such those two simple factors provide an astounding probability of success capable to  erase and invert the HE.

In fact and especially whether some random walks are in action, bac streaks are shorter than at a 50/50 game, nevertheless in any instance we do not want to try to stop streaks unless they belong to specific back to back patterns.

More later

as.

Important update : Pi network established ATM machines and cards to strengthen this digital currency. Don't miss this anymore.

BTC will stay and get stronger. Those predicting that it will not last should learn from BlackRock, Elon Musk and other big whales who are into it for a reason. BTC should get more peaks and troughs this year giving us opportunities to enter and exit many times. Eythereum is also very good choice apart from BTC.

"Gambling with cards or dice or stocks is all one thing. It's getting money without giving an equivalent for it."  – Henry Ward Beecher

Bitcoin at 62,900 today 3/22/24. By the time some of you on the other side of the globe read this it may be at 73k or 53k. As I've mentioned in past few weeks, I have been adding positions in BITI(Proshares SHORT Bitcoin Futures). So obviously it moves opposite BTC direction. That is if BTC goes up my BITI shares decrease, and vice versa.  Today I was able to unravel 20% (1 of 5 tier levels) of total shares @ an approx. +13.5% ROI.
My motto: "The trend must end".  Just like in gambling.

I'm still underwater on the initial tier purchases. I was optimistic in past couple weeks that I could add two additional tier levels if Bitcoin euphoria continued and BTC went to 85k levels. I actually hypothesized that once BTC went through 55k without much of a retracement that it could then move upward to 85k range before retracement <=30%.

*I saw a stat this week that new first-time BTC buyers in past six months had an avg entry price @ 54k. So, we may actually see a retracement to that level as a temporary basal level.

**I also saw several weeks ago when BTC was in 40k--50k range. It regressed -10--12k over a few days and that only 3% of BTC owners were responsible for the move.

__________________________________________________________

Poster above: "Those considering themselves smarter than Blackrock putting $3 Billions in it should introspect a bit more..."

    The U.S. Government agreeing to grant approval for BlackRock's ETF is confirmation the U.S. Gov is wanting to have some control over the BTC market. I'm still not clear on exactly what the USgov plans with BTC market. I suspect BlackRock has been quietly buying BTC at very low prices in past 6-8 years(with US Gov knowledge and support).

Blackrock is currently the largest manager of U.S. Gov pension/retirement. BR manages approx. 12 trillion of U.S. Gov retirement pensions. If one has worked for the U.S. Gov it is likely that Blackrock manages your retirement directly or indirectly. I like them relative to most financial managers as they only charge 0.76% management fee. Plus, they will continue managing after one retires. Many funds mgrs. do not allow(without addendum fees or penalties). Which is really good. This fee % is often overlooked.

They also offer one of the lowest management fees for their recent ETF Vs other ETFs such as Grayscale. I suspect these upfront fees is one of the main reasons we are now seeing all these recent ETF offerings from numerous investment companies.

Re:ETFs

In two consecutive days last week Grayscale saw 640 million /400+Million of outflowing funds from their ETFs as recent investors unloaded. In two days, Grayscale lost 40% of their total Bitcoin holdings they had accumulated in past decade. Over the past week they saw over 12 billion $ in outflow.

    *I'm starting to hear a few of the early and very large bitcoin advocates acknowledge that BTC is not suitable for a currency.




Best of luck to all bit coiners,

Hi Asym

In the post #1011 above you say:

"...There are a couple of principal reasons to explain such streaks (and other patterns) propensity:

a) the general factor causing baccarat streaks to be shorter than at a perfect 50/50 proposition;

b) the finiteness of long streaks distribution, especially after coming out by a consecutive fashion.
  ..."

On (a) do you mean relative to a coin flip or do you mean in comparison with "even chance ish" games like line bets in Craps?? Both?  Neither??

Thx in advance,kfb

Just can't trust anyone when filthy lucre is involved


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9S7nyS3O1oA

"If you want to win big, you have to be okay with losing it all".

"Sometimes you have to lose, just to win again ".


General Quotes

Baccarat can't be beaten mathematically but by exploiting results by a frequentist statistical approach.
And one of the possible tool to utilize is to set up a kind of "boundary" plan getting room to more likely patterns of different levels.
The 5/5+ streaks distribution is just an example (see later).

Thus we can't rely upon certainty but upon probabilities and such probabilities become so overwhelming  vs randomness (or supposedly randomness) to assure us an edge.
Providing to wait for given situations to show up as we have verified that after a given event the subsequent event or class of events won't be proportionally shaped differently to what general probability laws dictate.

More hands we want to 'guess' greater will be the probability to fall directly into the random unbeatable world as the strong negative deviations will cause us a way greater damage than the symmetrical marked positive situations for the general EV- impact.

Streaks lenght and distribution

We've seen that per every shoe dealt long streaks (in our example 5/5+ streaks) are not coming out around any corner, but surely they will sooner or later show up by deviated values at either side (ranging from 0 to 4 or more).
Naturally some rare shoes make room to such long streaks without (plenty of singles and no inferior streaks) or intertwined by few inferior streaks coming out isolated.

In the former scenario and for the 'clustering' factor we always should get the advantage from, we won't bet a dime and in the latter case the consecutiveness of such isolated inferior streaks patterns will make a huge role in determining our edge.

Therefore if we assume as C= clustered inferior streaks and as I=isolated inferior streaks we know that itlr C=I.

Things change whenever we'd consider more complex distributions where the simplest is the back to back I occurence per any shoe dealt.

So after C or I anything could happen and the same after C-C, yet after I-I the most probable situation to face is to get a C and not another I. Obviously everything always related to the actual probability of success.
That is another I showing up after I-I sequence will be less proportionally probable than facing a I-I-C sequence.

In poorer words, we need quite of time to wait for such situations (I-I), but whenever they'll come out we can get an indeniable sure edge.
BTW, a propensity working at other similar pattern situations.

There are a couple of principal reasons to explain such streaks (and other patterns) propensity:

a) the general factor causing baccarat streaks to be shorter than at a perfect 50/50 proposition;

b) the finiteness of long streaks distribution, especially after coming out by a consecutive fashion.

In some way a kind of "conditional probability" is supposed to work, meaning that the room to get inferior streaks clustered at least one time is somewhat amplified after two "failed" attempts (that is after two consecutive isolated inferior streak classes happening).

It doesn't matter if our betting class is composed by 2s and 3s or 3s and 4s or even 2s and 4s.
Itlr I-I-C > I-I-I by values greater than the 3:1 cutoff ratio.

See you next week

as.

The number of 5/5+ streaks list provided above wasn't presented 'randomly': those numbers come from the same shoe shuffled by a machine and by an exact back-to-back order.

There are infinite ways to dissect such numbers presentation, one of the simplest (from a practical way of thought) is the probability to get consecutive shoes NOT getting 0, 1 or 2 'long' streaks:
at this very small sample we got a five and a four consecutive 3/4 streaks number per shoe.
The average probability (at least for this sample and taking care of a precise random walk action) any shoe provides 3 or more long streaks is around 18.3%.

So it's like losing 5 or 4 preflop all-ins in a row having AA vs any inferior pocket pair at NL hold'em.

What I mean is that at baccarat a supposedly propensity must always be taken very cautiously, even if considered by entire shoes.
It's obvious that consecutive "above average long streaks number" shoes do not deny a possible advantage but surely will make relative harsh times to deal with.
Moreover we have strong reasons to think that machines do not produce perfect random outcomes working for a same already distributed shoe, especially whether a sophisticated random walk will be able to pick up some "bias".

More later

as.