Recent posts
#1
Wagering & Intricacies / Re: Tried-and-True Money Casin...
Last post by VLS - Yesterday at 06:34:48 AMThanks for the reminder!
Along with the no stop-win policy, it's worth remembering how much small wins can compound over time, too.
(Continued success stacks up when compounding)
Cheers! 🥂
Along with the no stop-win policy, it's worth remembering how much small wins can compound over time, too.
(Continued success stacks up when compounding)
Cheers! 🥂
#2
AsymBacGuy / Re: Why bac could be beatable ...
Last post by AsymBacGuy - January 28, 2026, 03:48:21 AMHere additional real shoes coming out from the same source (3s are only considered at B side):
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-X
3-3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
Total:
3-X = 114
3-3-X = 31
3-3-3-..= 10
We see that 3-X vs 3-3-.. sequences are still unfavorite to win (W=114, L= 41x3= 123) and 3-3-X vs 3-3-3.. events are almost equal (+1, 31 vs 30).
Nonetheless notice that 3-3-X sequences do not involve any vig as all bets are placed at P side.
Moreover, the 3-3-X/3-3-3-.. ratio is so balanced that we could even think of adopting a multilayered progressive plan without worrying about the vig.
Yes, the only substantial obstacle will be a permutation issue, so let's pretend to face an hypothetical unbelievable scenario to distribute all losing patterns consecutively or strongly clustered.
But when the "bad" is clustered and we know the proposition had demonstarted to be harshly balanced or shifted at one side, chances we'll cross a win or multiple wins are approaching the certainty.
Next week we'll see how to exploit at a maximum level the AS/S patterns feature.
as.
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-X
3-3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
Total:
3-X = 114
3-3-X = 31
3-3-3-..= 10
We see that 3-X vs 3-3-.. sequences are still unfavorite to win (W=114, L= 41x3= 123) and 3-3-X vs 3-3-3.. events are almost equal (+1, 31 vs 30).
Nonetheless notice that 3-3-X sequences do not involve any vig as all bets are placed at P side.
Moreover, the 3-3-X/3-3-3-.. ratio is so balanced that we could even think of adopting a multilayered progressive plan without worrying about the vig.
Yes, the only substantial obstacle will be a permutation issue, so let's pretend to face an hypothetical unbelievable scenario to distribute all losing patterns consecutively or strongly clustered.
But when the "bad" is clustered and we know the proposition had demonstarted to be harshly balanced or shifted at one side, chances we'll cross a win or multiple wins are approaching the certainty.
Next week we'll see how to exploit at a maximum level the AS/S patterns feature.
as.
#3
AsymBacGuy / Re: Why bac could be beatable ...
Last post by AsymBacGuy - January 28, 2026, 03:02:28 AMQuote from: Whatswhats on January 27, 2026, 11:55:51 PMOnline with 30 table, find pattern is faster
Probably it is, but maybe exploiting the derived roads distribution will make a similar job without internet issues, and we know there are plenty of them to overcome.
as.
#4
AsymBacGuy / Re: Why bac could be beatable ...
Last post by Whatswhats - January 27, 2026, 11:55:51 PMOnline with 30 table, find pattern is faster
#5
AsymBacGuy / Re: Why bac could be beatable ...
Last post by AsymBacGuy - January 27, 2026, 09:53:37 PM@Alrelax: lol, I haven't deleted a single reply in years let's figure out if I'd delete one of yours.. 
The purpose of presenting this trigger was to give the idea that running the same situation for many times could present some non linear probability values as cards are finite, rules are fixed and a kind of "average" distribution will work providing the outcomes are really randomly produced.
@whatswhats:
Overall we got:
3-X= 103 times;
3-3-X = 41 times;
3-3-3 (or longer successions) = 10 times.
Since X is any pattern different than 3 (so 1 or 2) it's obvious that we have to assess an average probability to get or not to get another consecutive 3 and this needs a two-step betting.
The general odds of any 3 vs (1-2) are 1:3, since itlr B>P we shoudn't be surprised that 3-X will lose money against 3-3-...
In my example and assuming a 3:1 unit W/L ratio (before vig), 3-X won 103 times and lost 51 times (51 x 3= 153).
Clearly by wagering toward another 3 after a 3 happened (now by an inverse positive 1-2 progression) will get the best of it even though long streaks of 3-X can naturally show up along the course of the shoes dealt (that's why Alrelax pointed out his legitimate doubts about these findings).
Then after a 3-3 succession came out things seem to change as betting toward 3-3-X got a kind of propensity to produce more 3-3-X patterns than 3-3-3-... patterns.
In fact 3-3-X patterns have shown up 41 times and 3-3-3-... patterns just 10 times (10x3=30).
Notice that I've presented the very first (or when applicable) the second or third B 3 streak happening per each shoe dealt, supposing those are more "randomly" placed results than others.
My conclusion is that a bac player should be interested about what happens most now AND itlr or, it's the same concept, that things could distribute by huge levels of volatility but always and invariably following more likely probability values.
And one of the best tools we should employ to get the best of the "actual" related to the "expected" is betting very few hands (for example think how's unlikely to wait for 3-3 to come out)
as.
The purpose of presenting this trigger was to give the idea that running the same situation for many times could present some non linear probability values as cards are finite, rules are fixed and a kind of "average" distribution will work providing the outcomes are really randomly produced.
@whatswhats:
Overall we got:
3-X= 103 times;
3-3-X = 41 times;
3-3-3 (or longer successions) = 10 times.
Since X is any pattern different than 3 (so 1 or 2) it's obvious that we have to assess an average probability to get or not to get another consecutive 3 and this needs a two-step betting.
The general odds of any 3 vs (1-2) are 1:3, since itlr B>P we shoudn't be surprised that 3-X will lose money against 3-3-...
In my example and assuming a 3:1 unit W/L ratio (before vig), 3-X won 103 times and lost 51 times (51 x 3= 153).
Clearly by wagering toward another 3 after a 3 happened (now by an inverse positive 1-2 progression) will get the best of it even though long streaks of 3-X can naturally show up along the course of the shoes dealt (that's why Alrelax pointed out his legitimate doubts about these findings).
Then after a 3-3 succession came out things seem to change as betting toward 3-3-X got a kind of propensity to produce more 3-3-X patterns than 3-3-3-... patterns.
In fact 3-3-X patterns have shown up 41 times and 3-3-3-... patterns just 10 times (10x3=30).
Notice that I've presented the very first (or when applicable) the second or third B 3 streak happening per each shoe dealt, supposing those are more "randomly" placed results than others.
My conclusion is that a bac player should be interested about what happens most now AND itlr or, it's the same concept, that things could distribute by huge levels of volatility but always and invariably following more likely probability values.
And one of the best tools we should employ to get the best of the "actual" related to the "expected" is betting very few hands (for example think how's unlikely to wait for 3-3 to come out)
as.
#6
AsymBacGuy / Re: Why bac could be beatable ...
Last post by alrelax - January 27, 2026, 01:25:26 PMI'm extremely sorry to interject here, but I have to. If Asym wants this post deleted, delete it it's okay.
Reference last few posts on both sides. I have found in over 40 years of actual brick and mortar bac play, that anything and everything has an equal chance to occur.
Test and stat all one enjoys and until you are confident with numbers, triggers, patterns over the long run.
However, and a huge giant HOWEVER; those triggers that occurred and came about in all one's tests, cannot be transposed into a live bac game of a few shoes and may never come about in that session made up of 1-2-3-4 shoes.
But, maybe I am off course?
Reference last few posts on both sides. I have found in over 40 years of actual brick and mortar bac play, that anything and everything has an equal chance to occur.
Test and stat all one enjoys and until you are confident with numbers, triggers, patterns over the long run.
However, and a huge giant HOWEVER; those triggers that occurred and came about in all one's tests, cannot be transposed into a live bac game of a few shoes and may never come about in that session made up of 1-2-3-4 shoes.
But, maybe I am off course?
#7
AsymBacGuy / Re: Why bac could be beatable ...
Last post by Whatswhats - January 27, 2026, 02:51:31 AMSo you tell that is better to bet one time after the second banker of
3 3 X
And not 3 X, but is false, explain if I miss something but seems not.
3 3 X
And not 3 X, but is false, explain if I miss something but seems not.
#8
AsymBacGuy / Re: Why bac could be beatable ...
Last post by Whatswhats - January 26, 2026, 03:52:00 PMQuote from: AsymBacGuy on January 26, 2026, 03:45:02 AMSince X=+1 and any back to back 3 is -3 (and no vig is acting here as ALL bets are placed at P side) it seems that best bets should be oriented to bet B after any SECOND B hand dealt following a previous B 3/3+ streak (no need to "chase" another B 3/3+ streak, just any kind of streak---any double---will be good), then after a 3/3+ back to back streak came out, the best bet should be a two-step P bet negating a third (or longer) 3/3+ B streaks succession.
Dear this is a fallacy, because theoretically and statistically is better the 3 (3) X then bet for the 3 (X)
between () where bet, but if you bet just ONE time after a second hand dealt B (after a 3+ streak) so
BBBB
PP
BB(NOW BET B)
we wil win in your case 41 times but lose 103 times,
because
3 X WILL HAPPEN 103 TIMES
3 3 X WILLC HAPPEN 41 TIMES
BUT WE BET WHEN THE SECOND "3" ISN'T COMPLETE SO IF WE LOSE THE BET EXAMPLE
BBB
PP
BB(WE BET AND GET A P)
WE WILL HAVE A
3 X PRATICALLY BECAUSE
BBB
PP
BB
P
So if you just bet one time after second banker hand it lose more then it win, then yes that we didn't calculate that 3 X can be also
BBB
PP
B
P
so in this case we didn't bet, but anyway you didn't calculate that in this post.
so have you said something wrong or I made some calculations mistake?
#9
Off-topic / Re: Dedicated to ADulay
Last post by alrelax - January 26, 2026, 08:06:04 AMYes, I knew it was coming in this one! And you know if a waffle house is closed, it is bad!
IT'S not often a 24/7 diner chain goes dark, but that's exactly what happened as a major winter system triggered a rare "Code Red" situation across parts of the South.
https://www.the-sun.com/money/15837424/waffle-house-shuts-down-weather-storm-fern-code-red/
IT'S not often a 24/7 diner chain goes dark, but that's exactly what happened as a major winter system triggered a rare "Code Red" situation across parts of the South.
https://www.the-sun.com/money/15837424/waffle-house-shuts-down-weather-storm-fern-code-red/
#10
AsymBacGuy / Re: Why bac could be beatable ...
Last post by AsymBacGuy - January 26, 2026, 03:45:02 AMSuppose our trigger is the very first B 3/3+ streak happening at every shoe dealt and we want to register what pattern happens at the second B hand dealt. We'll keep registering such 3/3+ streaks (so the third, fourth B pattern, etc) until a B single/double will show up.
For simplicity we name any B 3/3+ streak as a "3" and everything different than that (so any B single or B double) as "X".
Any line is corresponding to any shoe dealt at the same shuffling conditions.
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-3-3-X
3-3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X (1261)
Overall we got:
3-X= 103 times;
3-3-X = 41 times;
3-3-3 (or longer successions) = 10 times.
Since X=+1 and any back to back 3 is -3 (and no vig is acting here as ALL bets are placed at P side) it seems that best bets should be oriented to bet B after any SECOND B hand dealt following a previous B 3/3+ streak (no need to "chase" another B 3/3+ streak, just any kind of streak---any double---will be good), then after a 3/3+ back to back streak came out, the best bet should be a two-step P bet negating a third (or longer) 3/3+ B streaks succession.
Actually a P double-step wagering after any back to back 3/3+ B streak cannot lose any money itlr, or at least we're dealing with a way better B/P proposition the game mathematically provides in B/P winning probability terms.
Now let's consider the P side under the same shoe conditions.
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-X
3-3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-...
3-X
3-3-3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-X
Surprisingly now we don't get "shifted" situations proportionally favoring the more likely math advantaged B side for long for the simple reason that asymmetry will reign supreme over the outcomes.
as
For simplicity we name any B 3/3+ streak as a "3" and everything different than that (so any B single or B double) as "X".
Any line is corresponding to any shoe dealt at the same shuffling conditions.
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-3-3-X
3-3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X (1261)
Overall we got:
3-X= 103 times;
3-3-X = 41 times;
3-3-3 (or longer successions) = 10 times.
Since X=+1 and any back to back 3 is -3 (and no vig is acting here as ALL bets are placed at P side) it seems that best bets should be oriented to bet B after any SECOND B hand dealt following a previous B 3/3+ streak (no need to "chase" another B 3/3+ streak, just any kind of streak---any double---will be good), then after a 3/3+ back to back streak came out, the best bet should be a two-step P bet negating a third (or longer) 3/3+ B streaks succession.
Actually a P double-step wagering after any back to back 3/3+ B streak cannot lose any money itlr, or at least we're dealing with a way better B/P proposition the game mathematically provides in B/P winning probability terms.
Now let's consider the P side under the same shoe conditions.
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-X
3-3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-...
3-X
3-3-3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-X
3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-3-X
3-X
3-X
3-3-3-X
Surprisingly now we don't get "shifted" situations proportionally favoring the more likely math advantaged B side for long for the simple reason that asymmetry will reign supreme over the outcomes.
as