Refresher.

I would like to say I do not allow posting of links or advertising selling of anything unless you are a paid sponsor. Of course, I've had a few paid sponsors in the past, however their accounting was very poor and they were not reputable businesses so they were taking off the forum.

Unless you are a regular and well-known member, I do not allow links for any purpose especially from those that just sign up and are new to the forum because of all of the attacks and problem people have had by clicking on links.

As far as all of those Click On Banner casinos and games with bonuses requiring deposits that are also on other forums, I've had those as well and they were nothing but liars and cheaters. Reason being, they did not fulfill their end of our business contract. So I also took them off the forum because I cannot see them being honest with my members deposits and payouts.

Just wanted to post this to refresh peoples memories as well as those readers that sign up and immediately post links to casinos, systems, books, etc., and all kinds of other things. I cannot keep my forum clean if I accept all of those links from non-well-known members.

Here is a perfect example which happened last night.

Hand 61 produced 42 P and 19 B

There was 8 Panda 8s up to Hand 45.

There was 4, 3 card 9s

The was 2 Two card 7-7 ties for Blazen 777s.

Below is one snapshot I snuck in after the 6th Panda 8.  Gotta love that back-to-back Pandas! First one player has blackjack and bankers have a 3.  Players flop a 7 and bankers flop another 7.  Players win, Panda 8 wins and dragon bonus wins with the 8-0 as well.  Second one players have a 3 and bankers have 2 face cards.  Players flop a 5 and bankers flop a 10.  Players win, Panda 8 and dragon bonus wins again with another 8-0.

As always, most were on bankers and those that were on players would wager one or two wagers, win and then run scared by wagering extremely small bets on players or not wagering at all.

Of course after hand 30 or so, the verbal out-lashing was that the bankers would make their come back, etc. 

Like I say, be totally conscious of the presentments and what is happening.  Statistics over a million shoes produce shoes like these that are easy peasy money!  Doesn't matter how out of the norm it seems at the time, wins are wins no matter what. 

By the way, at least 5 of those first 6 Panda 8s were players first 2 cards had blackjack and the bankers first 2 were either totaling 6 or 7.

Also the players would have one greater point at least 25 times out of the 60 hands.  Such as natural 9 players and natural 8 bankers, or 4 players and 6 bankers with the players 3rd card being a 7 and the bankers third card a 4.  Numerous reductions to win for the players with a 5 and bankers with a 5 and then the players flop a 6 and bankers flop a 5.  Not a few times, but configurations repetitively like those.

There was a second table going on and the players side totally dominated that table as well.  Not as many Panda 8s, but other side bets were plentiful in prevailing.

Well, how can I disagree with what you have written...

as.

Okay, here is a new one for you guys!

Cruise passenger charged after jumping overboard to allegedly dodge $16,000 in gambling debts

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/cruise-passenger-charged-jumping-overboard-allegedly-dodge-16000-gambl-rcna230332

Here is a more detailed link.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/cruise-ship-passenger-jumps-overboard-225200865.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAABP3dso0XxuV0dZRaaUXb8awAQV3m20MMa1STxBulodZN0SEWI0jwj0IPbMWmY5Of-w5UF5C-fLb72lDC_Mftl4TdjRQEWVlQB-3l4qoliIG-YXtMwYLcd-3YFF6zNq4ztiWGjWq-yGeotOS15mxLdEcjg1PrIbzBEYSf1SkYNZP

5 people I know all put sizable amounts on the Eagles -7.5 and well, although they won if you bet on them you lost. 

Well it's that time of the year again.  The National Felons League is on TV and that gives me a reason to get out of the office and make some friendly wagers online and with friends.

As the first week of the season is always a pain to bet on, I went with a tried and true favorite to give me a win.

I took the Bungles giving points to the Brownies.   The Browns never let me down.  They NEVER cover in Week 1.

Uh, wrong.   They covered the spread this week.  This never happens!

Oh well, luckily for me my online book also has a live casino available so I took the loss over to the casino and got that money back on the roulette and baccarat tables.

So, going into the 2nd week of the season, my bankroll is back where it belongs and knowing that I can take the loss from Sunday and pick it up on Monday is nice!

AD

As you said: "That's why we advocate a basic flat betting procedure where W/L streaks and W/L spots aren't equally balanced within short frames.

So when you'd think to raise your bet consider the worst scenario (losing a lot more) than the hopeful situation capable to erase some losses by a lesser number of wins.
It's true that no matter what are the betting amounts we will place, once we play with an edge everything will come at our favor.

Yes, but we cannot be 100% sure about the current conditions making profitable our plan devised at different environments."

And therefore; That proverbial -EV comes and goes without any statistical mechanical guarantee whatsoever.  So in my book, I do not discount what is happening no matter how out of the norm, weird, off-the-wall, jaw dropping, etc., it might be. 

Wins are wins.  Money from the rack to my stack are great.  Doesn't matter how or why it occurred!  Just do it and smile and feel good. 

And an advantaged player will not (NOT) carry those reasons he just won XYZ into the next Section, Shoe or Session.  I call it be careful of the upcoming SSS.

If we'd think to play with an edge, two big enemies must be overcome in order to properly exploit it.

1) Betting few hands, that is selecting at most our betting options.

2) Being totally insensitive of the actual session's bankroll status, knowing that any edge needs time to get its full power.   

No surprises that by disregarding the point #2 even the point #1 will be invariably affected, meaning that when we're losing we'll try to find reasons to unnecessarily bet too many hands with the effort of breaking even.

That's why we advocate a basic flat betting procedure where W/L streaks and W/L spots aren't equally balanced within short frames.

So when you'd think to raise your bet consider the worst scenario (losing a lot more) than the hopeful situation capable to erase some losses by a lesser number of wins.
It's true that no matter what are the betting amounts we will place, once we play with an edge everything will come at our favor.
Yes, but we cannot be 100% sure about the current conditions making profitable our plan devised at different environments.

Then the house and besides the HE has at its disposal way more money than us, so serenely willing to accept a passive mood vs our wagers oriented to get an advantage by mere statistical reasons.

Probably the most wanted action any casino in the world would like to face is getting players betting every hand and raising their wagers with a kind of "sky's the limit" attitude.
So, in some way and generally speaking, our best action would be to play very few hands and always betting the same amount.

Next topic is so complicated I prefer to present it the next week.
Sorry.

as. 

Here is a great piece on what is actually kind of normal these days regarding forums and the internet.

The effects of self-selection.

Comments, forums, and chatrooms all usually require that you register or take the time to type out your thoughts. As a result, the only people who tend to bother doing such a thing are people who feel particularly positive or negative about something. All of the people who feel neutral or only slightly lean one way or another get lost because sharing their opinion is not worth the investment of time and effort for them.

In this way, internet discourse self-selects for the most extreme viewpoints. And unfortunately, only being presented with the extreme viewpoints in any situation causes our views to diverge even further. The debate becomes defined by the extreme minorities at both polls while the silent majority in the middle either checks out entirely or gets sucked into one extreme viewpoint or the other.

Of course I am bias.  But when I look at reading our forum from the viewpoints of a new member, a member that never posts, a regular reader that reads but never gets involved in discussions or sharing their viewpoints, etc., etc., etc., I think I am understanding more about the discourse of self-selects and the values that can be so easily shared and learned by the masses.

It sure would be great (beyond great really) if many other people would become involved within the forum with their thoughts, experiences, research, results and knowledge.  Seriously. 

I'm glad a real expert on this subject as KFB agreed on this point!

Of course I'm not advertising random.org site, just taking it as the best probable source to get real random card successions worthwhile to be compared with what you're facing in the real world.

When deep money is involved we've learnt not to trust anyone or anything even though it's very likely that most people on the "other side" are unaware of the randomness topic (let alone the players...), so relying on formulas and/or math laws, etc.

In our opinion collecting large samples of real random successions is the best way to get an idea about how things develop in the terms depicted above.
It's, again, quite probable that unless a software instructs the cards to be distributed by a perfect random source, what we played so far in a way or another are just unrandom shoes where Alrelax posted many valuable thoughts for them.

In any instance, we keep thinking that random production or not, different patterns move around more likely ranges where a large part of situations are completely worthless to be wagered, remember that at baccarat we're constantly going uphill for the HE.

Setting up a strategy about 'ranges' means to approximate at best of our human possibilities the various patterns apparition and lenght with the old rule of thumb that what happened so far could be easily considered as not existent (especially at unrandom shuffled shoes), yet many valuable and relatively more frequent spots will incorporate a higher edge as 416 cards tend to be distributed by quite detectable levels of clumping.

More later

as.