Incomprehensible!

I would expect Bet Selection to be the number one choice among NON gamblers. Without knowing any better, non gamblers just like beginning gamblers first thought is to a bet that wins more often than it loses. But as soon as the beginning gambler learns, and more importantly, understands what the HE and negative expectation is, then it should dawn on them that it is all about MM.

There is no negative expectation mathematically woven into sports play. Let's skip horse racing and the way sports books are set up. So, ABSOLUTELY NOT, are they both equally important.

To reiterate. All bet selections resolve to a 50/50 state minus the house edge. B or P only, TBL, OTBL, FLD, OLD, column methods, flipping a coin, color the last card, score of winning hand all produce identical W/L registries. In the long run, and in the short run. They will all perform wonderfully and tank just as badly today, and ten weeks from now.

Even if you found the holy grail of bet selections with a predictable W/L registry. You would still be playing a negative expectation game and NEED to employ the proper MM to overcome the HE.

There really is no argument for BS.

What's a bad bet selection? Which BS produces only 1% less wins than its expectation? What BS under performs against its opposite? None of them. ( skip telling me B, commission must be considered, or DP in craps, there is a push)

I've tried to think of one myself. I figured the worst BS for Baccarat is to bet for all B's to be single, forcing me to bet P. And for all P's to at least double. Again forcing me to bet P. Sounds like an awful BS. Knowing that B will double more often than singling, and that P will single more often than doubling. So, consider the opposite, betting that all B's double, that all P's single. Forcing all bets on Banker. Equally unattractive imo. I've got B&M Baccarat cards showing both selections not just tanking horribly, but tanking exactly the same way any other BS can and will tank.

BS can offer no advantage. MM is all that is left.

HBS

PS. I cannot engage in an argument with the roulette people. Law of the Third, hot numbers, cold numbers, cycles withing cycles....this is all outside my area of experience. However, I cannot be faulted for trusting in the math of the game without personally having played it.

HBS

Pretty tricky doubling your buy in every time. I understand the idea. Seems senseless to risk 10k to with 2k, a 20% return. However, with the mindset that you have to double your buy in, you are a saying..." I am able to win 20 units without encountering a draw down of the same size. I admit, I've pulled in 20u or more in a session with barely more than a 10u draw down, but those instances are rare.

Seems an unrealistic goal for me personally, but maybe not someone else. For me, its just the amount of time necessary to pull that off every single time. Fatigue and impatience can burn through your bankroll more efficiently than just losing a handful more bets than you won.

If it is possible to pull in 20% of your buy in, with draw downs three times that amount, on five different occasions then its the same thing as doubling your BR. It's just that the session has been stretched out over several days.

I have in the past went home with a partial loss, and bought in the next session with the remainder of my original Buy in instead of topping it off, and won myself either back to even, closer to even, or into a small profit. 

Whenever I bust out my buy in, I always consider how much money that made me. For instance, 80u buy in wins 10 to 20 units over ten successful sessions. An average of about 150 units. Then the 80u bust. It's a net gain of 50u. And time to hit it again next time with 80u.

Convert this into dollars and think of it like this..... I just turned 800 bucks into 1300 bucks. Now,it's time to see how much I can turn the next 800 bucks into. Hopefully not less.

Personally, I never consider a busted bank roll money I lost that I'm desperate to get back. As long as I'm in profit, I take a break, clear my head, and hit again with another session BR.

As for losses..... Sucks to turn 800 bucks into 400 bucks for a 400 dollar loss. But it isn't a complete loss. Take a break, and hit again with a new session BR.

It's busting out that session BR on the very first session that truly sucks. It just feels like you gave your money away. But it happens, on a larger scale, one should expect some session BR draw downs, no different than unit draw downs when you are at the table.

To me, stressing over doubling my buy in for every session, would cause me to try and force it, which would lead to disaster. Same as coming back the next day with double your buy in trying to instantly recoup the most immediate losses. It is a session BR marty. Not a good idea at any unit level.

So, as long as your are coming ahead in the long run, it doesn't matter what is happening in the short run.

HBS

HBS.

My original BR from several years ago was 600u. I figured that was an adequate amount to keep me going for some time, and allow me a fair amount of BR depth to attempt to recovery prior losses. The first year started off pretty smooth, 20u buy ins, betting every hand, using a parlay here and there and winning 10 to 20u. I got up nearly 100u, and then the casino taught me few lessons I'm glad to have learned at the $5 level.

Eventually, found myself down about 100u. And determined that if ever I got behind 500u, I likely had no chance to recover with the final 100u. Didn't want to be the fool that gradually lost 500u and thought that 100u more would do the trick. I should recognize the steady downward trend and do the smart thing and not donate another 100u. Or worse allow my self to fall victim to the addiction of hope, and hit it again with another 600u. (or more)

Over time, I've increased my buy in, but kept that same win goal. Psychologically, it didn't bother me to drop a couple hundred bucks in a rare bust out. I often make that much with a single days work, not all the time, but enough that the amount didn't affect me. Unknowingly, this was a crutch. I did find myself much deeper than an overall 100u draw down but still less than 500u.

Now my buy in is approaching several days work, which tend not to be consecutive, so I'm looking at a weeks pay at times, other times only half a week, and rarely two weeks. This is where the crutch has hurt me, the buy in against my overall career BR is negligible. And that is the perspective I should have. But I've been bit before.

So there is some fear here, not in the money itself, losing it has zero impact on my finances. It's the units. I don't want to give back what I've so painstakingly accumulated. Certainly not more, even if I still manage to limit my career draw down to less than 500u. I don't think I'll have the mental fortitude to once again wage this war from a deficit. There is some entertainment value, but not much.

I think you are telling me to find confidence in my career BR. And Gizmotron is telling me to have confidence in my MM (as long as I execute one with competence.)

This is good advice. I appreciate both of you sharing your experiences with me. I will work on changing my perspective to concentrate on my overall career BR, and just pick one bet to use an inflated betting unit on so as not to instantly double the stress on my career BR or session buy in.

Comforting to know you recovered from a 27u draw down at the purple chip level.

Thanks,

HBS

My apologies Soxfan for getting way off topic.


I've read this before, and it is a very interesting read. It does appear to be (to me anyway) some sort of marty. I think it resembles the Great Grandfather of Martys.

Trying to play off of your W/L string. I never understood the reason to keep betting one unit until a single win, and then put down a massive bet. Better to just wait for a single virtual win and then place the wager. Which would be much smaller cause the draw down was limited.
I know some people think that virtual losses don't matter unless you actually put money down. Maybe he adheres to that school of thought. I'm surprised it wasn't a revised version, to cut down on the necessary spread. 1-2500? That's just ridiculously massive.

I'm unaware of any advantage in trying to capitalize on the Double Win. Yeah, it's pretty common. But the same method could have been set up against a single loss, which is more common than a double win. In a casino environment, with less than 50/50 odds, one could argue that the single win is more common than any other occurrence. This, in my opinion, would be a better target, or perhaps the double loss?

HBS

I'm having a hard time with this

Quote from: sqzbox on January 08, 2016, 12:48:50 PM
There's no HE in baccarat. It is a completely fair game - one or the other will win and you are paid 1:1. But there is a commission built in to pay the house and it just so happens that it is paid on the banker 6. It used to be paid at 5% on all banker wins. This is a commission - or vigorish.  This is completely different to roulette where the odds are not fair odds - that is, you do not get paid according to the chances.

and this

Quote from: sqzbox on January 08, 2016, 10:16:54 AM
The question regarding whether it is better to play Banker only or Player only is complex - it isn't as simple as just looking at the so-called odds. First of all let's take the Tie out of the equation - they are not what we are talking about here and so are, for all intents and purposes, simply non-existent. So, Player probability is -1.24% - true, and true for all value bets no matter what size. So betting player only is a losing proposition according to the probabilities. Can't argue with that really can we?

No, I won't argue Player having a negative expectation. But apparently you are prepared to make that argument. I'm interested in hearing it......


Again with the half pay on Banker6. If you flat bet it 9 times and get the Banker 6 on the tenth bet then the HE on Banker is exactly the same. So, 1 in 10 works out perfectly. If the actual odds are anything less than say 10 in 95. Then the HE on Banker side starts to climb.
Certainly, if you play Banker only and vary your bet sizes then when Banker 6 hits (assuming a perfect 1 in 10 chance) then you have effectively just paid the HE for 9 winning bets of that same bet value. And if you don't routinely place bets of that value, then yes, you are going to lose a larger percentage of your lower average wager.

In the long run it will work itself out. But in the short run, you will either play a game with positive expectation and never get hit with a Banker 6. Or you will get hammered with several Banker 6's on the majority of your larger bets. Evil machinations of the casino? Maybe. But craps has a similar positive expectation on the Don't, but using a PUSH on the come out 12 to maintain a 1.4 HE. Nobody is up in arms about this.  Soxfan grinds away on the Don'ts using a very deep progression. You can ask him if he feels like he is going up against a HE larger than 1.4.

As for mixing your bets up on Player and Banker and avoiding a Banker6 payout because you are on Player. Keep in mind two things. 1. You were on Player and lost 100% of your wager. 2. You will be making a Banker wager again, just cause you caught a B6 on a player bet doesn't mean you are going to get a free ride for 18 commissionless  banker bets before you get caught by a B6.

Perhaps in the short run, the casino can bust out some players with limited bank roll. But, it isn't that bad of a deal, you still get paid. Better than a push, and far far better than forfeiting half your wager on a Zero in French Roulette.

Presently, the profit casinos make on Baccarat far exceeds expectations. Punters do it to themselves with 100 times the efficiency. The Banker 6 isn't going to make a large impact if any.

HBS

The problem with the Banker bet is it not an even money bet. Or an EC using some roulette terminology. It's a lay bet. The HE doesn't change for increasing the amount you have on Banker. It's just that it hasn't been increased enough.

You have to bet more than what you need to win. And if you are employing any sort of progression, you have to keep laying more and more. It gets out of hand quickly, and starts to resemble a grand marty as opposed to a regular marty.

As for getting half pay on a Banker 6. You're looking for a win, pile some chips on your bet placement and Push or Half pay. Now that's a problem. You just took a gamble and WON, now you have to win 2 in a row. Odds are against you, even tho the chances are the same. I don't like it.

Similar problem with parlaying winning Banker bets. You lose that last bet, and you still owe commission on all your previous wins even though you netted zero dollars.

HBS

Quote from: Gizmotron on January 08, 2016, 02:32:34 AM
I have, and can relate to your expression of a comfort zone. I acquired my comfort zone from starting from $200 @ $5 flat betting rates. I went from staunch flat betting to two levels of flat betting, where $5 was the table minimum bet and $15 was the higher bet when things were doing good. That's when I began to play better too. So my bankroll of comfort increased to $500 per session to give me enough room to maneuver with those higher bets.

That's when I began to analyze what it was that made me comfortable. I didn't mind descending a few hundred dollars while waiting for win streaks. I knew from experience that I would rapidly rise above a steady grind downward soon enough before reaching bottom. I almost always rise above my starting point this way, especially when using the higher bets during win streaks.

So I've spent the last few years perfecting a method to keep me from descending too far. It has resulted in a narrower comfort zone, a smaller bankroll. Given that that latest playing style is achievable, I would recommend working on being comfortable while not descending too deeply as a way to first narrow your comfort zone then to take that and then increase your range of bets.

Does that make sense?

yeah, but its not very nice 

I have to pick up a method you spent a few years perfecting to reduce my draw downs so I can increase my unit size but not my buy in and still be inside my present comfort zone? 

I like what you said about a 20% increase in your buy in so you could maneuver with some larger bets. I may separate a particular bet selection for a larger bet and keep the other selection(s) at their present levels. I can maintain my present buy in or increase it by 1/3.

As much as I like win streaks, I don't always, can't really, count on them. Even though I'm a streak bettor, I use a parlay as a decent recovery tool. This also helps in keeping my required buy in down. As long as it works of course.

HBS

Odd, I know. It struck me the other day during a short conversation about playing poker.

It really is not complicated.

Poker is a game of skill....and luck. No guarantee, even long term, of breaking even minus the house edge times 3-5 standard deviations of your action.

I don't want to say you can flat bet 1u for 400 bets in 5hrs and expect to keep 90% of your buy in, or even half, anything can happen. But you can, it happens, sometimes be ahead even, it's tough to lose 100u in 400 bets in baccarat 1u at a time. It is not that difficult to dump 100u in 400 hands of poker.

I choose to take my chances against a single opponent who only has a slight 1.24% advantage......

HBS

Alright, why don't you go ahead and tell me where this casino is that brings out the cards pre shuffled in a specially wrapped box. Where the players don't get to cut and the dealer starts the shoe immediately.

Because it is no longer a game of chance. It's not me vs random. It's me vs another human. This is now a skill based game. Like Poker. Unlike Poker. It can only be Banker of Player. All I got to do is guess what he guesses I'm going to guess next and guess the opposite.

As long they are trying to rig 80 hands at a time in advance.....piece of cake.

What's not to like about this scenario?

HBS

First, I consider myself a five dollar player. I'd like to increase my base unit size but I've run into a problem quarter bettors and high rollers don't have. My very first increase in unit size is DOUBLE. And when you are at the bottom, double is quite a bit. Now at the quarter level, you could do a 20% increase for a $30 bet. And pretty much not make much of an adjustment at all to stay in your comfort zone. But for me, and any five dollar bettor, the first step is a 100% increase. Tough to wrap my head around so I can stay comfortable.


Second, I talk of units. And a 20u win goal. This is somewhat misleading. Something I've been aware of but hadn't fully caught my attention until I tried to raise my unit size. Typically, I open with a 3u bet, and no longer make 1u wagers, even if I'm on a $5 table. I still try and win 20u. But in reality, it is closer to 7u. 7 x my 3u base bet.

When I considered doubling my BR and unit size I'm looking at opening with a $30 bet. That's 6 of what I consider my units. Not the 2u bet I was thinking about, that I obviously wasn't thinking about too closely. So apparently, I have already inadvertently increased my unit size without increasing my buy in. My buy in has shrunk from 80u to about 27u without me realizing it.

I'd like to increase my win goal to 40 base units, but it appears my comfort zone is holding me back. I've reverse engineered my buy in for twenty seven $25 units. Open with a 5 base unit bet and follow up with a 3 instead of the 3/2 I've been playing. Adjust my win goal to about 30 or so base units. This is my present strategy to prepare my psyche to build a comfort zone of larger units.

Has anyone else had difficulty doubling there unit size? And if so, what methods do you use to overcome this mental barricade?


HBS

Quote from: Wewin2222 on December 21, 2015, 04:16:26 AM
Baccarat will do 1 of 4 things that can not be debated or denied. I consider a run to be 4 or more so with that said.

Baccarat Can:

1) Run
2) Chop
3) Sequence of Two's
4) Three & Break

This I DENY. And you (wewin222) can not debate it.

Baccarat can only do TWO (2) things. That's it.

1.) It can Single   x-o-x-o-x-o

2.) It can repeat xx-ooo-xxxx-ooooo-xxxxxx-oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

That's it.

Sequence of 2's? is nothing more than consecutive repeating events. If you are going to include repeating 2's, then by definition you can't leave out the 2-1-2-1-2-1-2-1 pattern, or the 3by3 pattern or any pattern of any combination of events. Strip it all down to the basics and there are only TWO possibilites. Will this decision single? or will this decision repeat?

Three and break? wth is that? it's a streak of three. A repeated event. No different than a streak of 9 or 19. Or excuse me, it's no different than a four and break, or a nine and break, or a nineteen and break.

HBS

Quote from: Wewin2222 on January 04, 2016, 08:40:27 PM
All is fair in love and war.....if it wasn't for the doubters life would just be boring. I do have a 100% bet-selection and until it loses it will remain 100%. Does it happen every shoe, no but when the right shoe comes out it happens all the time. I hit and run with this and play the win off as unintelligent luck.

Wewin2222

You ain't "playing"

HBS

Quote from: Mars Rocks on October 05, 2015, 11:21:05 PM
HunchBackShrimp doesn't agree that you should wait 80 years before betting.  That's all I can say, he didn't give me any more.

Not exactly, I didn't agree with Mars Rocks' remark about "..waiting 80 years...". I felt it was inappropriate without the benefit of any real advice.


You should continue to play online for fun until your bet selection becomes a reflex, no mistakes.

With a conservative approach, you should consider practicing until you experience a very strong failure in your preferred bet selection.

With a more assertive approach, you could consider going to a casino with the lowest table limits, and flat betting the minimum with a 20u buy in until you feel more comfortable.

HBS

Quote from: Mars Rocks on October 05, 2015, 11:19:40 PM
HunchBackShrimp also says that my OP is an arrogant piece of ignorance.

I sure did. I'll write it in bold, or flashing neon script if you like.

You climbed up on your high horse and started spewing nonsense about basic money management specifically aimed at baccarat.

it is what it is

an arrogant piece of ignorance.

HBS

Quote from: Mars Rocks on October 05, 2015, 11:00:52 PM
Money management is making you bankroll last as long as you want it to.

Incorrect.

Quote from: Mars Rocks on October 05, 2015, 11:00:52 PM
I'm pretty sure I said that somewhere in my post.  If you actually read my post you will see it's about sizing your bets to make your roll last.

Yeah, I read it. It's a calculator of ruin, and a poor one at that. What are the chances of doubling that BR instead of busting it? What are the chances of ending up even? what are the chances that BR busts in 5 months, 3 months, 1 month? What's the point in calculating the house edge against your unit size to determine how long it will take your action to bust your BR given a perfectly even distribution of  expected wins and losses?

Quote from: Mars Rocks on July 26, 1974, 03:54:12 PM
 
I've given mine.

So far, you've given nothing.

Quote from: Mars Rocks on July 26, 1974, 03:54:12 PM
You need to now perhaps show yours if you have anything worthwhile posting.

Mine? I've made it no mystery I favor the regression and parlay. But I don't expect you to understand this as you don't have a grasp on what money management is.

Quote from: Mars Rocks on July 26, 1974, 03:54:12 PM
I'm sure they didn't bet their whole roll on any hand, and therefore they must have some sort of money management.  Their system looks at the back of cards and not the history charts.  Did you read that?

I'm sure they didn't bet their entire BR on one decision either. Therefore I'm sure they had some sort of money management that didn't involve imminent ruin. Possibly something like the Kelly criterion. Look it up.

Of course I read it.
Their 'system' was an exploit. The morality or legality of which is a moot point. It is a bet selection process, not money management scheme.
You need to read it and re read it until you understand the difference.

HBS