I can't see why I would pay to join as I already have many systems.  None of which I play. 

Looks like we got three different regular players with three distinct methods of play.

Me: Bets many hands; uses structured placements; neg. prog.

Alrelax: Bets moderate # hands; uses follow the shoe placements; uses both neg and pos. progression.

Assymbac: Bets few hands; uses trigger; flat bets.

*********************************

Quote from: alrelax on December 10, 2018, 11:20:42 PM
What Asym wrote:

"BTW, the "turning points" topic Al is stressing about is really important."

Sections and Turing Points are a visual to allow yourself to see what is happening, kind of an elimination of events.  Things happen and things happen repeatedly in baccarat.  The order is the problem.  But they do happen. 

* Usually sticks around  50-50 for a rough count, at the end of the shoe or other various points;
* Seldom above 10 + or - and less consistently gets greater than + or - 20.  It does, but not on a consistent and regular basis, meaning shoe after shoe after shoe.  Use the + & - as guidelines, not sole wagering factor alone, etc;
* Long sections of anything mean that/those events have been used, not depleted or forbidden from coming out and being presented once again in the same shoe;
* Nothing has to last, nothing has to happen;
* Shoe presentments like to catch up to the opposite side to equal out at various times within a shoe, some shoes will stay within 3 to 6 hands of each other or even less once caught up, yet other shoes will have one side taking off and outperforming the other side by as much as +20;
* Rarely do shoes finish with + or - 20 for one side.  Occasionally possible, but not a consistent event;
* Shoes do finish with a consistent + or - 10 or less as compared to the finishing with + or - 20;
* The highest majority of shoes will somehow finish within + or - 5 of each other.

Quote from: alrelax on December 10, 2018, 11:20:42 PM
What Asym wrote:

"BTW, the "turning points" topic Al is stressing about is really important."

Sections and Turing Points are a visual to allow yourself to see what is happening, kind of an elimination of events.  Things happen and things happen repeatedly in baccarat.  The order is the problem.  But they do happen. 

* Usually sticks around  50-50 for a rough count, at the end of the shoe or other various points;
* Seldom above 10 + or - and less consistently gets greater than + or - 20.  It does, but not on a consistent and regular basis, meaning shoe after shoe after shoe.  Use the + & - as guidelines, not sole wagering factor alone, etc;
* Long sections of anything mean that/those events have been used, not depleted or forbidden from coming out and being presented once again in the same shoe;
* Nothing has to last, nothing has to happen;
* Shoe presentments like to catch up to the opposite side to equal out at various times within a shoe, some shoes will stay within 3 to 6 hands of each other or even less once caught up, yet other shoes will have one side taking off and outperforming the other side by as much as +20;
* Rarely do shoes finish with + or - 20 for one side.  Occasionally possible, but not a consistent event;
* Shoes do finish with a consistent + or - 10 or less as compared to the finishing with + or - 20;
* The highest majority of shoes will somehow finish within + or - 5 of each other.

Agreed on all above.  So unless you have a known edge to wait for a certain "trigger" that has a high enough % win to make the wait worthwhile we are stuck with guessing the turning points.

If you hacve a structured bet placement that will overcome most shoes you can avoid shoes that have a "signature" which doesn't work.  Case in point.  Yesterday a shoe came out without events close to 50-50 and proceeded to go P shoe.  After several losses I got recognize this isn't going to work unless things even out.  Stop or switch betting is the only solution.  Wait for a different shoe.  Enter Follow the Shoe (FTS) and win 15 of 18.  Point I'm making is we need some criteria to tell us what to do and if it doesn't work stop.

But a good selection and bet procedure should be able to overcome a short turning point not going in your favor.  Your example shoe posted here is a good example.  After being +8 uts flat at hand 50 I go down to +4 if not quit.

Not much to disagree with.

I will add a comment about MM and progressions.  I rarely lose a session anymore.  But when I do it's a small loss.  This is because when losing I reduce my bet size to avoid going too deep in the hole.  It's also because I am willing to quit loser!  We should all know what dollar amount that is.  Getting back to even or an acceptable loss is good enough.  But whatever we do to reduce losses also has a negative effect on our winning side. 

Last time out W56 L35.  Upon reviewing the games later I see I could have won way more than I did due to some MM reductions during early play IF I had escalated without MM.  Can't have it both ways.   

J

Waves!

Quote from: Sputnik on November 29, 2018, 09:21:14 AM
Jimske you have to understand that I have not developed or made a weighted count system, I only show examples of regression.
I want to explore this territory and see if I can create a weighted count system and share it.
But nothing is complete or under construction.

Cheers

I know.  Just using that as an example.  In BJ we can identify SD by keeping track of cards to get upwards of a 2% advantage.  And depending on the rules we only get a pos EV something like 8 hands per 100.  Assymbac has suggested we can get a positive EV based on certain card depletion which will cause a third card draw and give us an advantage.  If so I'm guessing that the advantage will be far less than in BJ.

OTH, looking at patterns or series seems like a good way to identify future outcomes through SD.  But it seems to me getting an advantage within one shoe an impossible task.

I've always wondered if an individual shoe bias can be correlated with the texture of the cards.  So, for instance instead of individual P and B outcomes we may find greater abundance on one side based on card depletion.  ??

J

sidebar:  looks like I'm prohibited from posting on the other site.  Can't even contact admin.  Says:
"(You have insufficient privileges to reply here.)"  Anybody else having same problem?

Quote from: AsymBacGuy on November 28, 2018, 02:31:46 AM
For example, we know for sure that somewhere banker will produce a streak or a given amount of streaks. There's no way that a given shoe will produce just one B streak, but we surely know that very rare given shoes won't produce a P single.
The answer is easy: streaks consume a well more room than singles but B side is more prone to produce streaks as it's more likely to happen.

Right, very rare.  But lesser productions of P single not so rare and is why I use the 1's as a key to help determine the bias.  We can use a bet placement that exploits this.  Any positive expectation (weighted count, regression to mean, etc.) has escaped me.  Enter the "educated" guess.

QuoteSay we want to bet a very complicated and hyper selected strategic plan oriented to lose only when a shoe won't present a P single AND at least two B streaks.
We won't lose by 1 billion accuracy.

Assuming you or anyone has identified such it no doubt requires a potential long wait.  Waiting even for Sputnik's Ecart still produces the problem with variance due to the low odds.  We'd have to be in the neighborhood of 75%+ prediction to make it practical.

Do you disagree?

Quote from: alrelax on November 12, 2018, 04:55:13 PM
Thanks for the broken down responses/answers.

It is clear.

Yes, I do agree with you regarding the two 'areas' as you defined.

From my aspect of Member, B&M Casino Player and Moderator here at BetSelection.

The way I understand the new "systems" site you're not going to have much input into it Alrelax.

Quote from: alrelax on November 23, 2018, 10:05:08 PM
Probably another post is better to discuss pros and cons of your comment, but yes, there are two different types of play in baccarat.

Camaraderie and the original big table or even Midi/Macau style can produce larger, well coordinated wins, especially for those that gamble for that style.  Then there is most certainly the grind or the relaxed or slot machine style loner play with the newer stadium the past few years.

Stadium at MoSun are regular live shoes.  Bet $5-$15,000.00

One thing about stadium at MoSun you can sit there with your IPAD and watch a movie on Netflix and just bet 5 bucks or nothing until your stuff comes up. LOL  And you can watch two games at a time!  No smoking, no yelling, no waiting for somebody to squeeze the stupid cards!  hahahaha

Quote from: alrelax on November 21, 2018, 03:52:47 PM
Asym,

It all boils down to, how many times the 'event' (whatever it might be) happens and the players catches it, sees it, or capitalizes on it.

Many will attempt to turn all that around and convert it all into math, stats, patterns and trends, etc.  Which cannot be accurately done.

Non of them will consistently reoccur within any set parameters, no matter how a person tries to run the theory. 

Better understanding of that and the game is experience.  The problem for most is the lack of funds to their continual depleting of what they believe is the ideal bank roll or buy-in, etc.

Personally I can make huge amounts of profit on a 7 or 10 or 14 chop-chop streak or a 12 repeating P or B streak in a row, as well 8 times (16 hands) doubles or anyone of countless other events.  The problem lies in between those events and profitable times as to each of our 'cooling off' periods and how we each handle those.  Almost all the time, people cannot cool off or stop playing and thus the disaster will strike.  Probably 99.98 to 99.99.9% of the times players win.  IMO and Experience.

Again, problem being, player observation, awareness, beliefs and betting decision to coincide with events that are happening.

I don't want to change the theme of this thread but I'll comment anyway.  So one could say just flat bet or no bet until such a time when a "possibility" or pattern or streak exists than bet and if win first one or two bets keep bumping up hoping for those "infrequents" to continue.  Say double up or UAYW Fibonacci as example.

Seems plausible but those "in betweens" may very well out number the big wins.

Quote from: AsymBacGuy on November 21, 2018, 09:09:21 AM
That's interesting.
Do you want to say something more on that?

as.

Singles rule the shoe.  Are the singles consistent? 

If no singles OR if all singles chop at least once OR if all singles stay solitary then bet every hand and easy to win every shoe.     But above seldom happens.  But can happen for sections of the shoe.

If we can guess or predict what happens when a singleton occurs we can win easily.  The repeats?  Go for long runs - or not.  Bet them "longest gone" or "longer still"  (where's the Gr8 one?) or not.

Don't want to bet a lot of hands?  Bet for follow or chop one time all shoe long.  Let the rest go.

Proper betting, MM, discipline, patience.  Variance goes both ways. 

Happy Thanksgiving to all!

Quote from: AsymBacGuy on November 21, 2018, 09:09:21 AM
That's interesting.
Do you want to say something more on that?

as.

No because I am digesting.    And I got to go.  Later.

 I agree what you say above.  I'll look forward to next post.  Just a footnote now. Yes I guess BUT I "key" off the chops.  The chops tend to crowd out the streaks as you say.  I use the 1's only.  If they have been average by the quarter shoe I don't expect much long streaks - until the second half when card composition often changes due to certain denomination depletion.

I've always considered the problem being the order.  We may have a good idea of the composition  but the order makes the difference.