Asym,
          While I can argue on many aspects but am sure about one thing. To lose with Player or even Banker bet (banker bet is not destined to get a net win either), in the long term house presupposes three things:
1. Flat betting will be done, which is bound to lose as you can not find any logic to get more wins than losses in Player, in the long run or way to offset house fees if you choose Banker.
2. Crazy progressions will lose even more and faster
      and I firmly believe that both are set in stone. Only difference one can make is doing either of these two:
1. Somehow manage more wins than losses in number to offset the house edge and house fees and win flat bet;or
2. Somehow win more money and lose less despite more losses than wins(in numbers) and that too without any order.

                      I spent thousands of hours in trying both and personally experienced that I should strive in latter. If you can do something to better both or even in one, it is heavenly. Everything else is empty futile attempt. We can define and code and simulate all sane ideas whereby we can play manually and there is no room for guessing whether what we are thinking should work or not.

LOOKING FOR 2 MORE PROFESSIONAL PLAYERS TO TRAIN with my latest approach, "Millionaire's plan". I will not only share my methodology but keep updated of any betterment I could inculcate further. Email me with your experience, bankroll, whether can play online or land based or both, table limits etc. I will charge a one time fees and a negligible monthly sum thereafter, so long one wants the mentoring to continue. It is a slow earning method and requires bearable bankroll per session and lifetime both. Those who have been addicted to the game and lost a fortune in gambling can learn to maximize their chances to win and lose least also even in the worst stretches. It is based upon math and logic using principals of statistics and probability and my experience. Those who learnt from me in past can better their skills as well.

I have made two variations of my Millionaire's plan. One is meant for being played calmly by one person to one side, i.e. Player or banker.
Another is super aggressive one. That too wins in below average cases. So if I play both sides with the aggressive approach, I will win for sure. If one side is doing well, it will win higher betting that and at the same time loser one will lose lesser. I think it is a dream come true. Wong, your hint of playing both sides could win great here. Thanks for the brainstorming. I will come back with my tests soon.

I am onto something that has never been done so far. To the best of my knowledge only Martingale, Labouchere and Fibonacci can beat any session sooner or later. Unfortunately, to do so, they might need millions of chips starting from 1 unit and yet not capable to win huge. I have devised a purely mathematical way to beat the game which might seek only a few thousands chips, in the worst of the worst possible sessions.
             So far, I have tested all the real data I had of roulette and baccarat for EC betting and could beat them all finally. Can any of you help me getting the worst 1000 spins/hands EC real data? I would be obliged if I get the source from where the data was taken. I want to fully utilize my free timing during the pandemic to do the not doable thing and I believe I m close.

No way baccarat is beatable by thinking that results are made by independent sym situations or, even worse,  that one side should be constantly more probable than the other one no matter what.

Banker is always more probable(very marginally though) due to drawing rules. Do you doubt that?

If one had discovered a way to beat baccarat by always wagering B side, well it means he'll be able to get the same counterpart positive results by always wagering P side by a worse -0.18% long term profit.

I m not sure if I could understand your statement in red in the last statement of yours. How will one wager P side by a worse 0.18% long term profit? It seems you could not properly word your feelings here. We can't bet a loser bet and still win. Whatever we need to do is in the winner bet itself. Wagering B side is not advantageous enough as the edge it has over Player is negated by the house fees. Say one gets 51 wins on Banker in 100 trials(Ties ignored), he will still lose 0.55 chips, while Player will be at -2. If house fees is removed from Banker with the same drawing rules, playing Banker would be a sure shot way to win in the long run.
I mean that anyone claiming to beat baccarat by always wagering B side, should get the same positive results by always wagering the P side, now decurted by a 0.18% lesser edge.

Do not tell us that -1.06% vs -1.24% becomes a decisive factor about how to get long term wins, as the huge factor to be overcome is -1%.

Here I absolutely agree with you. There could be way to dodge the house edge on both Banker as well as Player alongwith momentary variance against us but that is where most of the Players get silenced.

I personally prefer betting Player and not at all concerned with the so called 0.18% disadvantage as in progressive betting, betting Banker has its own set of drawbacks.

AND THIS ONE:

Quote53 losses vs 37 wins: (how does such sessions go with your MM)?

I win 13 units net profit betting 4 units max.[/size]

With my current Millionaire's plan, I can beat this 600 hands/spins challenge with 22 units bet max. Net win=246 units.
[attachimg=1]

   Sequential probability is the probability of happening or non happening of a sequence/series of result. Probability of getting an  LL and an LLLLLLL can not be same. However, it should not be confused with gamblers' fallacy. If we bet only after LLLLL, we still can get LLLLLLL as easily as anybody can get LL but still probability to have a series of LLLLLLL will be roughly 1/128 and an LLLLLLL can not compete with LL in numbers of occurrence.

               How can we use it in gambling WITHOUT BEING FALLACIOUS?
There can be many ways including two techniques that I use:

1)IF WE TARGET EVERY LLL TO NOT TO BECOME LLL LL IN AN EC BET.
     For example, if we see BBB in baccarat, we can try Player upto two times to get a win, we are most likely to get good number of wins; or

2) we can use it in inverse form betting only first two attempts and not in subsequent losses.

Both ways will help us in Extreme Variance management. Both carry their drawbacks too but if we see the probable horror sessions, this can help a lot.

Remember: No way of picking way will get you an edge in a random game. You can't win flat with it.

More later..........

It is to be understood that no method can beat all types of cases. It is just not possible. Had it been possible, I would have become Richie rich overnight. People send me sessions to beat with all sorts of variance. Even after all my skills and safeguards like my extreme variance management and my money management, I will have to surrender to 5-10% of sessions with -100 but 90-95% of sessions that I will win with +50 each will give me an edge in the long run. It is even possible to get 4-5 or even more initial losses in a row still. That is the might of randomness. So no daydreaming, only strive to get the lion's share, in the long run with all the patience.

In the times of COVID, I am free and not moving around usually. IF any fellow member who knows me wants my help to improve his skills and chances to come home winner from most of their casino visits/online sessions, feel free writing me on my email. Here in this forum too, I will be glad to assist to the best of my capacity. I can explain as to why their choice of method or betselection can not yield long term gains and how can they better. I wonder there are not much curiosity left with players. This resulted into lesser brainstorming ideas and discussions, not only on this forum but everywhere else.
          Those who are themselves playing for long with considerable bankroll on a very regular basis, I can offer a personalized mentoring for a fee. I am not here to promote gambling. I know it is a risky venture even if done with all the skills so those having money for their groceries or bills just enjoy gambling in "Fun mode" only and satiate their desires of gambling with that only. There could be not just one but many successful approaches to win or to be ahead in profit. Even after developing various approaches, I keep on working daily 2-3 hours in bettering my chances by studying, testing, tweaking new brainstorming ideas. I can promise to better your skills, your knowledge unless you have a better knowledge and skills than me.
Be healthier, be wealthier.

Quotetry

ice789,
                Your given session got two -100s stop losses unfortunately.

Wong,
         Labby is good to be played on paper only. My ratio of 90 wins: 10 losses will not work as +50/-100 in labby. One single failure in labby can cost you even 100s of wins. I hope you understand this and do not ask what labby can do or not again. If you are happy with theoretical aspects, I said numerous times that labby, marty, fibo will beat any session at last but once you fail on them due to table limit or your bankroll, you will wet your pants and will never try them ever in your life Please try to understand that the power of marty or laby or fibo lies in their big bets compensating many of the losses at once but not doable practically, in any form possible. You have asked about labby and HP johnson so many times and I m tired of answering them. Better forget them or play them on paper only.

QuoteI think, of in20000 trials,
9300 is certain, .
Thus 10700 losses will closed by 9300hit 9300 certain hit will close the

thus 10700 long of "one" labby will closed before 9300th win hit.

Labby, marty and fibonacci are not feasible ways to play. I wasted years fine tuning them but while failing they give us such huge losses that suck all the wins, so far. They are mathematically winner but practically not. HP Johnson is the worst form of labby. Accepting losses in extremes are always wiser than dragging them. Mark my word today.

Quote from: PatternAnalys on May 13, 2021, 05:18:34 AM
Sir,
You advocate that, 'extreme variance management', and "a special mm", the real way to beat casino.
I eager to know, by your experience with data, say, bet "player" only,what the ratio, of "within expectations vs extreme"?
If the ratios dependable, then we can fearlessly bet with "expected losses vs expected profit"...

  95% is within expectation winning sessions while 5% will be extremes that rush us to stop loss or close. With +50/-100 or +25/-50, if we get even 80% wins and 20% loser sessions, we will still be up, in the long run. That is what is my plan exactly. Earlier I was focused on getting +1.

+25 or -50 will change the win loss ratio slightly but will be practically doable easier too.