I heard about bitcoin while it was hardly a year old and had miniscule value. Once I was offered 5000 bitcoins in return of one of my system that I denied because I had no means to put in any casino back then nor could I get it cashed in India, that time. Then I heard of it, 5-6 years thereafter while it reached $1,000. I thought oh, had I taken 5,000 bitcoins back then and kept as investment I would have had $5 millions. Anyways, I had a misconception that I can't buy bitcoin in fractions and I thought it has already saturated too. By the time bitcoin reached $50k, I bought ripple for about $3. It started sinking then and bitcoin started crashing daily too. I thought it is over now. I sold ripples at little loss correctly as it went as bad as few cents too.
            Now for a year or so, it again going great. I have bitcoin, ripple, doe, cardano, shiba inu, etc, eth and a few more and I can see good growth too. Shiba Inu, in particular has outdone bitcoin too. Any of you are into crypto? Any predictions?

QuoteLink of FMoDR

It was on earlier forum of Victor which went to scammer jailbird Steve who could not face my popularity and removed my entire expert section. FMoDR was based upon my initial observation of what frustrates people in casino. I found that hot numbers could be rewarding as people usually chase slow hitting numbers considering them due. I made an analysis of all 37 numbers of European Roulette through a basic tracker and found that 1 to 5 numbers do great in the span of 5 cycles that is 185 spins and they may occur upto twice its expectancy easily. I created a basic safe MM for that and it was one of the my all time favorite bet. Although varying sizes of bets causes trouble in adjusting my bet on each number and was a big challenge to adjust. Variance was still there. I earned a lot with that but that wasn't conclusive either. Then I focused on money management side and found the real treasure there. Hot numbers shown there potential always but they are not the perfect way either. With a correct MM, even the worst could be beaten in the long run.

QuoteCompounding

Compounding looks theoretically very promising. Lose least and earn Max but in real situations, guessing when you will get an opportunity to ride on your wins, is unrealistic. House edge ensures that either we get lesser wins than losses or they take away some portion of our wins or we are paid lesser than mathematical probability. Dreaming of 1 unit becoming 1000 with a dream compounding like reverse martingale etc. does not realistically work and even if they do, you will still be at loss. Further, the biggest evil of the game is variance that could goes as far as 15x from the break even point of any bet.

Any seasoned player would agree on them.
More later.

Dear KungFuBac,
              It is doable to win till max limits but still a strategy that could get you there is not easy. It was pretty exciting to do so on a single number of roulette in a long haul play of about 10 hours with the assistance of a friend. I used to play with a friend in real casinos for inside bets with my favorite method FMoDR ( It meant the finest method to defeat roulette, my own innovation, lol)wherein I used to bet the best doing numbers in a cycle of 185 spins. I mesmerized my friends and entire casino with huge winnings and it was pretty exciting too. The casino Palms Goa where I was playing, I was only one to get 16 withdrawals in 3 days of play.
          A well designed hybrid progression with safeguards for worst times (if they creep in) could achieve that many times.

I had a compilation of all books, mostly soft and scanned copies about gambling in general and roulette and baccarat in particular. I got opportunity to talk, email, chat etc to many known authors. I must say, 99% were telling same story and 1% had some innovation worth reading and learning. If you want to have fun with gambling stories etc, you can read it like a novel. It won't offer much. You will get much more discussions, debates, ideas and techniques on these forums than 100s of gambling books combined.

Why play Tie or any outside bet? You can earn with any bet but it is one of the worst choices. I have played Ties enough. Nothing beats EC bets. It may excite you momentarily but will require bigger bankroll and even bigger patience to extract money from playing "Tie". Could go very frustrating at times. Even with 9 to 1 payout, it has 4.85% house edge instead of 14.40% in 8 to 1 payout but still it is far worse than Banker and Player bets. Playing tie could be compared to a "corner bet" of roulette.
      You will find a few online casinos paying 9-1 on Tie by a simple search.

QuoteQ1: Does your method win proportionally more for surviving additional SDs of - Variance? e.g., Would your net earnings for surviving a -5SD shoe vs a -3SD shoe be 5:3 ?  or other ratio?   

Answer:It could be either way. It all depends upon the stretch of the ugly phase as well as its shape.

    Q2: Another way of viewing it since you do a negpro: Im obviously guessing one needs a proportionality of more chips to survive a -5SD shoe vs lets say a -3SD shoe (e.g., Chips needed for -5sd=50 and chips needed for -3sd=30,...etc or whatever ___________) ?
     So my question: Is this(#chips required) somewhat proportional and a f(x) of the number of -SD one chooses to survive. If yes give an example.

Answer: Definitely. Chips required to survive 5 SD has to be more than that is required to handle 3 SD. What kind of question is this? Fuel required to go 100Kms has to be more than that for going 10Kms but again as in the case of car moving on a busy street and on a highway things vary.

Mathematicians could not succeed to beat baccarat due to inability to think rationally apart from thinking straight mathematically. No amount of mathematical progression be it arithmetic or geometric could beat the billions of probability baccarat or any other game of chance could offer in terms of Wins and losses. One size fits all type things could not work. I read an interview of Prof Thorpe who did beat blackjack. He said even if you have a billion chips you can not guarantee win. He wasn't wrong or Einstein wasn't wrong in their conclusions. Simple math has nothing to offer in beating a game of chance without having infinite chips. Martingale or Fibonacci or Labouchere can beat any session mathematically but the amount of chips they might seek in the most adverse periods make them impractical to be used. However, there are number of ways this problem could be solved. I have created a few money management that can survive even 5 SD below mean without seeking thousands of chips and win thereafter in average times, without seeking clumping wins. Anybody can achieve that thinking logically too, apart from thinking mathematically.   

It has been almost done. A method that can handle the worst gracefully and win a net profit in average session thereafter. I just tested a session with horrible beginning and average hits thereafter. 98 wins vs 126 losses. Max bet=9 units, Net profit=32 units. Worst drawdown=-63 units.
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W

QuoteBaccarat is not a game of math results, baccarat is a game of card distributions favoring this or that.

This is like a revelation !
           I thought it is a totally random game based upon mathematical calculations and house edge and payouts slightly favoring casinos. I never knew that it was meant to do card distributions. How about roulette? That is meant to teach how a ball moves over a rim and gets into 37/38 pockets? Might be to educate people about laws of motion.

Hmm. So this topic is nearing conclusion finally:

QuoteHence imo the Big Road is one of the worst successions to look for to get hints before betting.
In fact our data say that the probability to be long term ahead by betting even selectively B and P hands is zero.
I'm not rot ruling out the possibility that some very experienced players can be ahead even by betting BP hands but I guess it's a very remote probability.

Then what should make baccarat as a beatable game?[/b][/color]

Only way is a sensible money management that is dynamic enough to handle the worst with least damage(if it loses everything that it won in good or average times, it is not a money management at all)and win thereafter without seeking clumping or compensatory wins. All the rest approaches are like chasing a mirage. It will always appear very close to reach while it is nowhere actually.
      No betselection will win by itself betting flat or with positive progressions.

It passed through the worst thousand of zumma baccarat i.e. 442/1000 and finally won a nice net profit. I think it is working as intended. Does anybody have a worse data?

If we play both sides , we still need to take care of each side wager, stoploss, triggers etc etc. Not practically possible my way. Further when a side has more hits and other side pushes to balance, we keep losing overall. Managing both sides together is not easy. Remember one most vital rule of betselection: You can not choose a bet(be it playing both sides or anything else on the planet in a random game) that can give you advantage by itself. One can play all 37 roulette numbers too simultaneously with your logic but still problems do not short a bit.

I am coding it on excel to feel it better. Might need to tweak it a bit. Let us see. I will keep updating of its progress.

It is for all EC wagers. Let me see how far it goes..

It is my most inner desire to beat the game mathematically in a manner which does not seek millions chips and which could handle the hugest variance. It would be a very aggressive approach unlike my last project, "millionaire's plan" which was a cold headed slow earner. Millionaire's plan has too many rules to take care of too which this method won't have. I have started my initial tests and it looks promising but whether it would end the uncertainty is a matter yet to be evaluated. I m pretty excited with my preliminary tests. Wish me luck.