Limiting the field of operations is one of the key to try to beat this game.

Suppose you want to only consider doubles vs superior streaks so singles and 3+ streaks won't be included in our plan.

Is it a good move to hope that doubles or superior streaks simply considered will be distributed in such a controllable way that some unlikely successions won't knock out our plan sooner or later?

That's impossible.
We can't allow those natural (albeit unlikely) card distributions forming endless double or superior streaks successions capable to destroy our plan.
On the other end trying to stubbornly get the best of those unlikely univocal successions will make the casinos' fortune as they are too rare to be exploited.

Example.

Say we want to bet that the very first pattern of every shoe dealt will be a double OR a superior streak. It's not important the real nature of such streak, we want to check how many times a double or a superior streak will start the shoe distribution at any of the innumerable sub successions.
Since doubles=superior streaks and as math teaches us that no matter when we consider a 50/50 spot the probability remains the same, sooner or later we should encounter a 12-15 or greater homogeneous streaks distribution getting a 12/0, 15/0 or even 20/0 ratio.

Now let's consider what happens next after a starting double or a starting superior streak situation per every shoe dealt. That is we want to assess the very second streak nature limited within the "double/superior streak" category.
Our data suggest that the probability that the second streak will be completely independent from the previous one (so getting the common sd values applied to an independent 50/50 proposition) is not so unguessable as many experts keep stating.

More later

as.

On a side note here about The Wynn casino in Vegas.  I never had any problems whatsoever depositing and withdrawing of Front Money at the tables, except for The Wynn. 

I was in Vegas several years ago and a close California friend, that usually stays at The Wynn was there playing and I popped in.  I quickly gave Front Money, signed a CTR and got ID'd, etc., etc., at that one person VIP cash counter right there adjacent to their bac tables. 

At the table, I signed the slip of paper to withdraw half of my deposit and the pit manager looks on the computer, nothing.  He proceeds to call the lady at the counter that did my transaction and I also gave him my receipt.  Still nothing.

Now I am aggravated and frustrated.  My buddy told the guy, that knows him well to give me what I wanted, hold my receipt and let's get the shoe on the road.  He said he couldn't.  So my buddy gives me what I wanted in his chips and another floor manager came over and asked my friend not to do that. 

My buddy told them they are being ridiculous and we are going to play.  We did.  Of course I lost pretty quick.  Finally the pit said it's all figured out now and I can have withdrawals from my account. 

I told them forget it, I will go back to the Belligo and Caesars where they don't play games with Front Money deposits. 

Hopefully Wynn Casinos are not forced to sell a couple vehicles from their 11-car Rolls Royce fleet(Shown in the following 3minute link).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdDniZCIm5Q&t=8s

I liked the posts from the great Gizmo. Does anybody know what happened to him?? 
I never played with him but play with an elder Bac fellow that played roulette with him et als in Gizmos' circle of roulette aficionados.


This is one of Gizmos statements from the above or other thread:

Gizmotron: "... missing every one and still just grinding away with a few ups and downs. Everything adds up. You must take the gravy once in a while in order to be able to take the chances in the first place. Playing against randomness is all about winning in the aggregate.  ..."


Continued Success,

Thanks to the OP(albertojonas) for the post and others opinions too. This is an interesting hypothesis. I will have to think on it and will respond more later.




Continued Success To All,

The following is a quote from the article in the link at the bottom.

"...the scheme involved Benward somehow convincing casino crews that he placed bets on winning numbers after the numbers had already come in.

One thing that interests me is the borderline between cheaters and advantage players. One breaks the rules, the other looks for any possible edge without going over the line into straight cheating.

Benward was a cheater. He did a verbal equivalent of past posting. ..."


     I've "very very seldom" observed a Bac player cheating. The few times I've witnessed this is by the cheater moving their official bet back toward them and into the winning spot. Typically, as the dealer started paying out to the opposite end of the table. 



https://www.techopedia.com/gambling/blog/winners-losers-las-vegas-black-book

hi mate can you share the excel file? so I can test also by myself ?

let me add up that this is just one thing you can measure (Singles Vs Series).
There are many dimensions of the distribution you can measure.
Sputnik is the real person that has been teaching this in every forum, based on marigny de grilleau work.

So if you aggregate many dimensions with many EC, betting opportunities present themselves much more often.

It is really hard to code, and that i know off it has never been done before, despite the attempts.

i am sorry. How could i write this post without revealing what is all about...

r
r
r
B
B
r
B
r
B
B
r
B
r
B
r
r
B
B
r
B
r
B
r
B
r
B
r
B
B
B - stops growing
B
B
B
r
B
r
r
B
r
r
B
r
B
B
r
r
r - starts to return
B
r
r
r
B
r
r
r
r
r
B
r
r
B
B
r
r
r
B
B
B
B
B
B
r
r
B
B
B
r
r
B
r
r
B


so here you have a string of red and black results, (they are real).
if you observe singles Vs series you will find an imbalace.
there are many more singles than series in a window of 20 events.
this singles run stops with the presence of a series.
after it stops it might continue.
or another series will follow and it starts correction.
at this precise point you have a tendency for correction to manifest itself.
so in a window of the same size of events you can expect (gamble) that more series will start to show up.
In my experience, more often than not they really do.

There is one negative aspect of this type of strategy. It takes a long time to find a perfect window. this situation does happen once or twice per EC at every 1000 spins.
My workaround has been to measure more EC groups at the same time, like 6 streets vs 6 streets or kimo lee stars or any other grouping you fancy. You also can and should apply it to strings of losses and wins of pre-designated bets as ftl or obl etc...

There are many details to be explained. but this is it in a nutsheel.
i would be glad to answer any questions.

Cheers

i believe i now understand that is beneficial to wait for the 3rd state to happen after restarting.