Say it ain't so, AsymBacGuy....please enunciate your true intentions.  I am always leery of members that delete their own posts, and so I'd prefer to read some clarification from you.

Quote from: Tomla on April 03, 2015, 09:14:34 PM
FTL is too streaky, zigzag the same, my guess would be that TBL would be most compressed?

Correct, Tomla, good job.

Singles and threes...the filet mignon of TBL...played correctly...let me repeat that...played CORRECTLY...and that means patient and disciplined triggers only...is absolutely GOLDEN.

The loss gaps, or losing streaks, or even the variance downturns, are at once both manageable and, even more importantly, readily recoverable.

You see, my friends, it's all in the "how you approach and, ultimately, manage" your preferred bet selection process.....that will serve as the ultimate solution to all of your Baccarat puzzles.

Jimske, you are a good man, and a smart one as well....heck, I'd venture as far to say that you're an adept Baccarat player, as well.  So let's "cut to the chase" here, if you will:

You are spot-on in your BP evaluation index of effectively "reducing the LIAR".  That, my friend, is the name of the game.  For the "secret sauce", if you will, of this game lies in the player's ability to both familiarize and then workaround the all-so-inevitable losing streaks/losses of their preferred BP method.

So it then becomes the player's responsibility to do whatever it is in their power, whatever it is in their control, to LIMIT LOSSES.

Then, there's but one question left:

Which BP process might serve that solitary goal best?

As I stated at the outset of this post, Jimske, you're a smart man and an astute player; hence, the answer should be clear.  (Sidenote:  Fact is, I think you already know it.)

Stay well.

All good questions, Jimske.

And they're all questions that every serious player has tackled, some multiple times.

The bottom line, IMHO, Jimske, is that all bet placements will perform relatively similarly.  Same W/L patterns and/or streaks and/or strike rates; so if one is looking for the "magic formula" bet placement, one will find only frustration.

BUUUTTT, let's not "throw the baby out with the bath water", shall we?  Just because all bet placements, OVER THE LONG RUN, will perform the same, does not preclude one from using their preferred bet placement strategy to their own advantage.

Look, everyone here (me, you, Soxster, Horus, Adulay, even Johno...EVERYONE) has their preferred bet placement strategy.  Why?  Because that's their own personal comfort zone, where they are MOST FAMILIAR with their BP's actions, both good and bad.  And then, given that familiarity, they build their own personal entry and exit strategies (read: to either bet or "no-bet") and their own personal MM strategy; all built around their familiarity with their preferred BP's and preferred attacks (read: playing) on same.

That, in a nutshell, is how this game is to be beaten, especially long-term wise.  By learning to master their own personal play, those characteristics, those necessities, will serve to overcome the house edge in the long run.  Not any one of them alone....no, it will take it all; the BP, the MM, the "bet vs no-bet", the entry/exit strategies, the LONG TERM VISION....it'll take it all, collectively, to put you over the top in this game.

Quote from: horus on April 02, 2015, 08:54:46 AM
One thing I have noticed which is a bit strange and I have seen other posters on different forums comment on it before as well is how the last portion of the shoe can often just completely go against everything previous. I have noticed that testing from several different sources. Obviously there is an easy answer....just don't play the last portion, lol. But it's strange none the less.....My success seems to come in short spells in both formats.

This is true.  It is inherent into the very nature of the game, just as in any EC game. 

It's what I like to refer to as the "unravel". 

And make no mistake of it, Horus, the very recognition of it is essential to the serious Bac player.  And to stay in step with the subject of this thread, it appears that Adulay is of similar mind, as he is consistently monitoring his "exit strategy" while he is playing his preferred trend, forever vigilant of its ominous "unravel" (good job, A).

Look, I realize that my bet selection process will do absolutely nothing to eradicate that daunted house edge.  I get it, and I've long ago comes to terms with it.

So I need a strategy, much like Adulay's, that'll see me get my money and then plan my exit.  Take advantage of my "10 minutes of good", maximize on those better portions of the shoe, and then back off, awaiting my next betting opportunity.  All planned and done in the name of minimizing the potentially-damaging...yet inevitable..."unravel".

Now we can begin conversation regarding the house edge.  Now, armed with solid entry and exit strategies, a consistent bet selection process, and, last but most certainly not least, a solid money-management plan (a shoe progression is considered as solid as they come, IMHO), and now the serious player can talk about overcoming that house edge; by utilization of their "collective" Player's Edges.

Stay well.

Quote from: AsymBacGuy on March 24, 2015, 09:27:34 PM
Naturally you'll run into "bad" portions where such tendency won't be sufficient to get a line to follow. How do you manage them?

I lose.  But those losses are, at once: quick, short, and controlled.  And in such times where those "bad" portions are a bit more prevalent than normal, I'll utilize my "no-bet" option.  My preferred trends are "popular" enough to make them appear sooner rather than later; if not this shoe, than next.

Quote from: AsymBacGuy on March 24, 2015, 09:27:34 PM
How many hands do you bet on average per any single shoe?

That depends on how this shoe may be performing for me.  As a general answer, however, I'll usually play (read: bet) roughly half the hands, sometimes less, rarely more, all dependent upon how the shoe is unfolding and faring for me and my preferred trend plays.

Quote from: AsymBacGuy on March 24, 2015, 06:46:03 PM
Hi gr8player!

Can you give us an example of the "anticipation" value you were talking about?

as.

Sure, AsymBacGuy, no problem:

In my "domination" trend play, I measure the gaps between respective appearances.  For instance:

P BB P B

While most trenders aren't seeing the Banker's side as "dominating" as yet, I prefer to begin my play AGAINST that weaker P-side that has had only single gaps within the repeating B-side.

It is these single gaps(and sometimes even double gaps) that'll trigger me immediately onto any impending "domination".

And here's the beauty of my early identification:

I'm on those B's at the "top line", as opposed to getting on them after their 2nd or even 3rd (or even 4th) appearance.  I am maximizing even on those relatively minor "doms" like B PP B PP and the like, where I'd be winning 4 out of 5 bets on this example, losing only on that 2nd single B, while winning all P's.

Looking for minor "gap measures" is a great way to "foresee" trends BEFORE they become mostly after-thoughts.

And I have at my disposal another 3 such "pre-trend" triggers, all based upon my "anticipation" of the impending direction of this particular portion of the shoe.

The frustration that most trenders feel is the absolute futility of attempting to out-guess every single decision and/or trend....can't be done.  Why?  Because that player leaves themselves no "breathing room", no time to step back and re-measure/re-evaluate each portion of the shoe.

They'd rather gamble their money.  I much prefer pre-calculated risks, where my risk of ruin is as miniscule as I can pare it down to.

Ah, well....to each his own.

Stay well, my friend.

Quote from: WorldBaccaratKing on March 24, 2015, 03:09:32 AM
How does one "find the right shoe"? Seriously? When you play live and you see chops, you bet and it starts to double up, you bet for it to "streak", and it chops on you, now what? Back to the chop, will it double up, who knows!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I love it when people say this, find the right shoe. It's incredible, sure, after 50 hands you can look back and say I would of did this there and this over there, etc. Hindsight won't work when you're playing live.....

I have also played many shoes where it never goes past 3IAR. I have seen it all just like most have.

You say the trick to find the right shoe that fits your method? Well GOODLUCK with that!! Aren't we all doing that when we sit down?

NOR= neutral, opposite, repeat. he uses a count to tell you what the shoe is doing. WTF do you need to do that for, look at your scorecard. Do what the shoe is doing!!!! If it's chopping, bet it will chop, if it's doubling or streaking (4 or more in a row), then bet that!!!! You can't force your method on the table, that is simply ludicrous!

Wow, it's the same old song and dance.............

Hello, WorldBaccaratKing, I trust all is well with you.

There is no doubt of it, trending certainly does present some "issues" to be faced with, to be encountered, and, most importantly, to be answered.

A trender's life at the Baccarat tables is not an easy one, not by any measure.  Frustration...yes, the same frustration that permeates your post I've just quoted...is the order of the day, and must be dealt with and, ultimately, avoided and/or eliminated.

But let's take a moment to look at the source of those frustrations, shall we?

Firstly, let's tackle this "count" business.  IMHO, utterly useless.  Why?  Because, usually, by the time your "count" triggers you in, it's simply too late into the trending process and/or recognition thereof.

And, secondly, the lesson in futility that comes with attempting to bet every hand, all in the hopes that your plays will somehow "conform" to each and every trending happenstance that the shoe can put forth.  Again, IMHO, it'll prove to be nothing more than a lesson in futility.

So what's the answer?  What is the serious trender to do in the face of the multitude of these twists and turns and the inevitable frustrations that accompany each of them?

One word:  Anticipation.

Any serious trender worth their salt can aptly "anticipate" the majority of the trending twist and turns AS THEY UNFOLD, not, as so often happens, AFTER THEY'VE EXHAUSTED.

You see, my friends, as it relates to your ever-so-important "strike rates", THE SOONER, THE BETTER is the name of the game when it comes to recognizing and betting for trends.

The serious, experienced trender has in their arsenal the ability to ANTICIPATE where the next trending opportunity lies in this shoe (or portion thereof), and adjusts their play accordingly.

Sometimes, that adjustment leads to "no-betting"...sitting out the "mumble-jumble" portions of the shoe to await the more defined trending opportunities.  And never, ever forget, my friends, that THE ABILITY TO AWAIT THE BETTER BETTING OPPORTUNITIES ARE, IN THE END, ALL THAT SEPARATES THE AMATUERS FROM THE PROFESSIONALS.  Patience and Discipline are the order of the day, every day.

So recognition should not be taken as an excuse to bet every hand.

No, the serious trender utilizes recognition as the ability to maximize their profits on those trends for which they are ever-aware of and ever-honed into on.

Simply stated, WorldBaccaratKing, I, myself, have a real trending and MM answer to both a relatively choppy portion of the shoe and/or a one-sided "dominant" portion of the shoe.

Now, that said, are there times when it's MUCH TOO DIFFICULT to ascertain either?  Sure there are.  That, my friends, is where my "no-betting" option proves my best choice.

But, just let either one of those preferred trending happenstances come as "anticipated" by me, and I'm all over it like white on rice, as I seek to take full advantage.  Well worth waiting for, IMHO.

So, WorldBaccaratKing, I "hear you", my friend.  I hear the frustration.  You need an answer for it, my friend.  A viable and, ultimately, playable/profitable answer.

As always, I wish it for all of you.

Correct, Bayes.

The serious player has little concern over each individual outcome, preferring to focus their energy and mode of play around a series of outcomes that might run from a portion of a particular shoe or the entire shoe or even the next shoe or entire session.

In that way, their success and/or failure is measured as a whole, as an entirety, as opposed to any individual bet, and thereby releases any pressure or tension or anxiety over proceeding with their preferred plays/bets.   In short, a quiet confidence envelopes such a consistent, patient, disciplined and calculating player.

As to your "John" commentary, I, too, have my doubts regarding his veracity; I am rather certain that I needn't remind you that one should be rather suspect over exactly whom they put their trust into, most especially within the realm of the faceless and nameless world of internet gambling-related forums.  One needs to learn, IMHO, to "read between the lines" of any forum members posts and their "actions" or "verbiage"within those lines and/or posts, and utilize their common sense of perception before committing their faith unwittingly.

Stay well.

Quote from: Jimske on February 28, 2015, 08:53:04 PM
Yup.  This is the problem of being inconsistent and allowing - I say ALLOWING- the game to mess your head.  When it does, red flag - time to take a break! 

J

This is the bane, the downfall, of many a would-be trender.  And it is the very reason that you must have the following answers within your own style of play:

1.)  Bet

You're triggered into your preferred plays, and so you put your chips into the designated circle.  From there, there's simply no room for any second-guessing yourself or whining about the outcome; again, when triggered, you put your money into the designated circle.

2.)  No-bet, part one

You're facing your preferred method's nemesis, and so you're not triggered in, and so you sit patiently as you allow some (hopefully) "virtual losses" go by. 

3.)  No-bet, part two

You're triggered into your preferred plays, but, for the most part, your chips are winding up in the dealer's tray.  THIS is, obviously, the most difficult of the circumstances.  And it is, quite frankly, where THE TRUTH of you and your play will be unearthed.  For me, it boils down to:  1.) await at least a "virtual win" before recommencing real bets; and 2.)  awaiting next shoe, where my preferred plays (hopefully) should perform better (combined with a shoe prog...but remember, at recoup, it's back to base bet).

You simply cannot allow the game to "get into your head" at the tables, for that's not the place to decide with any real rationale.  Best to know your answers beforehand.

Quote from: Rolex-Watch on February 28, 2015, 06:38:23 PM
Oh dear. 

Fair to assume we can now put to bed the fantasy of a 54% hit rate.....

Oh, Johno, you surprise me, my friend....I would have expected you, of all people, to be familiar with their binary tables and the inherent imbalance between TBL vs OTBL.

Then, it's but a short hop, skip, and a jump to figure out the very best part, the filet mignon, if you will, of the TBL bet selection....singles and threes.

C'mon, Johno, I'm leading you to the gold mine....THINK.

Quote from: Bayes on February 28, 2015, 05:37:04 PM
Actually, there are just as many streaks (> 1) as there are singles, so you could structure your selections around streaks and your results should be the same. 

Hello, Bayes, I trust all is well with you.

Of course, I am very well aware that there are as many "streaks" events as there are "singles" events.

But, my friend, the way I track and play for the "singles", that point becomes rather moot.

You see, I am a firm believer of the "ying" vs the "yang".  (And why wouldn't I be, as I am a "statistic" freak.)

Because the streaks vs singles are equal, I believe that the longer streaks beget more singles.  The ying vs yang theory, if you will.

I've become rather astute at spotting those times where, there at least APPEARS, a chance at more "singles" events than their "streak" counterparts.

Look, Bayes, if we were to debate the inherent qualities of playing an EC game, of making any EC bet, we'd only wind up wasting our collective time, as ALL events are, indeed, a 50/50 proposition (less house edge).  I get it, and I know that you do, too.

BUUUTTT, we must, as serious players, get our games BEYOND THAT, or, alas, we have NOTHING OF VALUE.

And make no mistake of it, my friends, the day that I find nothing of value to this game is the day that I will cease playing it.

Stay well.

Quote from: Tomla on February 27, 2015, 08:57:02 PM
What does the average Distribution mean to most baccarat players? And can we gain betting power knowing the average distribution and its nemesis .....

Short answer:  Yes.

How?

By structuring one's play around its "nemesis" (read: what their preferred play "loses to").

Think about it for a minute.....One might not want to structure their preferred play where the "singles" are their nemesis, or what they would lose units on, simply because there are, statistically-speaking, more "singles" events one would encounter.

Now, on the other hand, if one were to incorporate into their play a way of taking advantage of those singles......

Well, as you guys know of me already, I am of the belief that if one has a way, a mode of playing, where they're harnessing the statistics of the first three lines in their horizontal scorecards (read: the 1's, 2's and 3's), then they're on the way to getting the better of this game.

My play sees me taking advantage of both the singles (1's) and the threes (3's).  That's where my preferred plays are concentrated most.  I look for small "gap allowances" (best, of course, singles) and runs to the "3-hole".  That's it.  Rinse and repeat.

Lose a shoe?  No prob.  I utilize a shoe progression, and, in those rare necessities, a session prog as well.

Those singles and threes will pop, just a matter of time.  Those that know of me know of my devotion to Patience and Discipline.....again, just a matter of time and sensible bet-sizing.

Lastly, why oh why, one might ask, why the singles and threes concentration?

TBL, my friends, TBL. Time Before Last, or Decision Before Last, if you prefer.  It's nemesis is most easily definable:  the twos (2's).  Yeah...those "terrible twos", as they're often referred to.

Not so "terrible" for me, however, as I do very well to "side-step" them.  How?  By utilization of my "no-bet" option....in other words, I sit out those times when the 2's are besting the 1's and/or the 3's.

So I know my nemesis, I recognize my nemesis, and I react to my nemesis by "standing down".

The remainder is mine.

Now, all of that said, are there difficult patches?  Heck, yes.  That 2-hole is popular enough that there has to be rough patches to deal with, constantly.  But that's what the rest of my game is there for....my P & D & calculated MM.

This total package all works well for me, and, as always, my friends, I wish it for all of you as well.

Quote from: RouletteKEY on February 13, 2015, 01:02:58 PM
for me that whole attack is not limited to a series of say two, three or four bets...even if that's all I play at that time.  If I hit a stop-loss and haven't achieved the victory the overall attack is geared to accept that and continue on the next attack...and so on and so forth

Take heed, my friends, for that quote right there is absolutely GOLDEN.  Good job, RouletteKey.

OK, I'll raise my hand.

I play Baccarat with real money.

Yes, it's true....there isn't much happening in the way of any real discourse regarding this game, WorldBaccaratKing, so I certainly empathize with your obvious frustration.

I don't know, but I think that, as a member of various Bac forums for the last 6 -7 years, that the discourse simply become repetitive and, frankly, predictable.  I truly believe that some seasoned members know pretty much what they're going to read as soon as they see a thread and/or post from "gr8player".  I've been espousing the same philosophies/methodologies regarding this game for years now. 

And I'm not the only one in that boat.  There's just so much rehashing of the "same old, same old" that anyone could care to accept.

By now, anyone that cares to know anything "gr8player" has found out all they need to know.   My play has become as steady and as consistent as I could ever have wished for.  I track a few separate and distinct trend plays...plays in which I am very familiar with all the pertinent "stats" on...and bet either for or against their occurrences dependent upon those very stats.  All wrapped in a custom-built MM plan for each of those trends.  Plain and simple, and in a nutshell, right there is all one really needs to know of me and my approach to this game.

Take care and stay well.