Selecting same spots patterns at a multiple shoes succession

Suppose we are registering A/S patterns by assigning a progressive number per every shoe played and arranging them into columns.

Here a brief example of 20 shoes:

A-A-A-A-S-A-A-A-A-A-S-S-A-A-A-A-A
A-A-S-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-S-S-A-A-S-A-S-S
A-A-A-A-A-A-A-S-A-A-A-A-A-A-S-A
A-A-A-A-S-A-A-A-A-S-A-A-A-A
S-A-A-A-A-A-A-S-S-A-S-A-A-S-A-A
A-S-A-A-A-A-S-S-S-S
S-A-A-A-S-S-A-A-S-S-A-S-A-A-A
A-S-S-A-S-S-A-A-A-S-A
S-S-A-A-A-S-A-S-S-A-A-A-A-S-A-A-A-A
A-A-A-A-S-A-A-A-A-A-S-A-A-A-A-A-A-S-A-S
A-S-A-A-A-A-A-A-S-A-A-A-A-S-A-A
A-S-A-S-A-S-A-A-S-A
A-A-A-A-A-S-A-A-S-A-A-S-S-A-A-A
A-S-A-S-A-A-A-A-A-A-S-S-S
A-A-A-A-A-A-S-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-S-A-A-A-A
S-A-A-S-A-A-A-S-A-A-A-A-A-A-S-S-A-A
A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-S-A-S-A-A-A-A
A-S-A-S-S-A-A-A-A-A-A-S-A-A-A-S-A-A-A-A-A
A-S-A-A-A-A-S-A-S-S-A-A-A-A-S-A-A-A
S-S-A-S-A-A-A-S-A-S-S-S-A-A-A-A-A-A-S

A= 233 and S=87 (x3=261)

Despite of being voluntarily taken by a kind of S innatural predominance (A:S gap=-28), we see that the above guidelines still stand even by a vertical registration.

For example column #1 (first pattern of every shoe) provides a A-A-A-A-S-A-S-A-S-A-A-A-A-A-A-S-A-A-A-S succession.

Column #2 a less appealing sequence as A-A-A-A-A-S-A-S-S-A-S-S-A-S-A-A-A-S-S-S

Column #3 A-S-A-A-A-A-A-S-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A

Column #4 A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-S-A-S-A-S-A

Column #5 S-A-A-S-A-A-S-S-A-S-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-S-A-A

And so on...

This simplified scheme (again...voluntarily taken from a moderate/strong negative standpoint) should get us some hints about approximating at best our action when we want to consider same spots at back-to-back shoes. Especially by assessing that bighornsh.i.t could happen for quite long (see the column #3 providing a cumulative -16 units loss before vig if we'd bet every pattern).
On the other end, A streaks longer than 3 must happen and of course they should be "chased" by selectively wagering and waiting that A patterns reach the 3 consecutive value (AAA).

Finally pretend to embody each column as a distinct player's destiny. There are no many columns getting "easy" A/S positive final returns, whereas more than one column experienced harsh times to endure.

Fortunately things will work way better than this example as in the real world the A/S ratio will be very close to the 3:1 expected ratio.
But being prepared to face negative variance is one of the best recipe to try to get the best of the game.

as.

And when I wrote, "The long-run strategy is mathematically doomed, while the short-run strategy at least gives you a fighting chance."  I tried to express my love and success with a hard pos-progression hit and run, short session positive experience.  Rather than playing a grinding shoe after shoe and attempting to feed into what the casino desires bac players to do.

If I understand what you are asking, that is, how to make and hold profit with a progression that is winning?

I would apply the 1/3rd, 1/3rd, 1/3rd I have written about and explained in detail many times.  I would also use a 2 step full parlay progression max and then just pull down the winnings and eventually apply that 1/3rd to. 

Good post/ I will quickly respond with some quick thoughts. Then respond/elaborate more at a later date.

For the most part many of the general statements above would be considered mostly accurate for the average(i.e., most typical) gambler. Meaning the gamer that wagers nearly all hands dealt, balls spun, dice tossed, every day, and continuously to perpetuity. This average gamer is the type that does not record data, doesn't study or try to improve ones skills, ...etc/ 20-30 years later is still at the skill level as year one. For this type of gamer I say most of the above assertions about ruin, h.e., ...etc are mostly accurate.

re: H.E. I agree with the above about how small H.E. add up. The same is true when the player has an edge. Even when a player does not always have a H.E. the player can still go on significantly long and massive winning streaks. Meaning prior to seeing the casinos' written-in edge start to show as (+) for them.

It is my opinion the player has many options and tools the casino does not possess. One main advantage for the player is the fact the casino must offer the game 24-7.

The player can play(or not play) as much or little as one desires.

The player can play very few (or many) hands.
Players can select only the hands more favorable to the player.
Players select how much to wager in each spot and the casinos' only option is to match it.
A player should think of the casino as a robot that's only allowed to match our move--this alone gives us many favorable options. If it wasn't for low table max bets a larger-funded player could bust the casino(especially if one knew how much liquid assets the casino could access quickly).


IMO one of the main advantages the casino has is the option to select(limit) the table max bet. If it wasn't for the casino limiting this(Tmax) I perceive we would see many of the poorly managed casinos go bust. Just like the players do that exhibit poor money management skills.

More later /have a good week.kfb

20 College Basketball Players Indicted in Federal Point-Shaving Case

Who could have seen this coming? Stay tuned to this story as more indictments are in the pipeline.

Key points to story: "...  U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on Thursday announced the indictments of 20 recent men's college basketball players from 17 schools for allegedly attempting to fix games via performance manipulation in the 2023–24 and '24–25 seasons. Officials say 39 players from 17 teams attempted to fix 29 games. The feds also filed charges against six other people associated with the scheme, including former NBA player and college standout Antonio Blakeney and individuals who worked as personal trainers or AAU coaches. ..."

20 College Basketball Players Indicted in Federal Point-Shaving Case

https://www.si.com/college-basketball/20-college-basketball-players-indicted-in-federal-point-shaving-case

hello.
any string of 10 results has the same probability of showing as 10 reds.
so if you play against it repeating is the same as betting 20 reds will not show.
the question is what money management and progression.
we play the progression.

Cheers

Now the indictments come.

From the comments section, to the point, factual and never ending:  "If money is involved people will always figure out a way to cheat."

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=v__1GlOXsNs

Any symmetrical (S) pattern needs two hands in a row to be equally distributed as the previous pattern.
If cards are really randomly distributed, it's a simple task to ascertain how many clustered S patterns will show up as isolated or (more unlikely) as clustered.

No one serious bac player can miss the profitable spots a real random distribution (random.org, for example) will provide up to the point that a multilayered betting plan will be able to destroy every possible distribution in the world.
This fact counterfeits the idea that every hand is totally independent from the previous ones, thus if our plan is based upon S isolated events, we'll be in very good shape to get more wins than losses, especially if we wait for some fictional losses to happen.

Actually let the house to hope that S clustered events will happen for long but they can't as whatever the cards are arranged a kind of asymmetry will take the lead over the counterpart.

Since just one hand will break a more likely asymmetrical distribution (so producing a less likely S pattern), we need to restrict our field of intervention so waiting for a S pattern to stop independently of its consecutiveness.

Therefore once a S-S pattern shows up at the shoe we're playing at and knowing that more often than not long successions of S isolated events are more probable to come out, we might infer that S clustered patterns will be slight more likely followed by another S cluster. Especially when shoes are unrandomly distributed (machine shufflers, for example).

On the other end, S clusters will slight make more probable A clusters so in the end the only successions we should fear are A-SS...-A-SS... sequences.
And such situations aren't going to come out so often and whenever they'll show up they'll constitute an astounding trigger to get our future bets affected by a huge EV+.

Suppose we have four distinct a-b-c-d fictional players betting for us:

a) player will bet toward A-A just one time;

b) player will bet toward A one time after any single S;

c) player will bet toward A-A after any S clustered event;

d) player will bet to get a A-A-A (or longer) situation.

Our long term data told us that in the vast majority of the times isolated A (so negating an A-A sequence) aren't coming out by a level suprassing the 3-level.
Therefore way more often than not negating a fourth A isolated appearance.

Isolated S patterns are affected by a very low volatility, meaning that isolated S events are more likely to show up clustered than followed by a S cluster.

Once a S clustered event happens (S-S or S-S-S and so on) it'll be slight more likely to face an A cluster.

Clusters of A getting the exact two value (S-A-A-S) aren't going to get many back to back sequences without getting a more natural superior A succession.

Overall we won't face many situations getting ALL four players to lose for long.
Actually it's very likely that at least one or two (or more) players will get the fair amount of positive situations they're entitled to get.
It's just a matter of time and actula deviations, way better to be resolved by a strong diluted bet selection.

as.

Everything 1 billion % true providing the outcomes are really randomly produced.

Differently than roulette where only biased wheels will provide unrandom results (modern wheels aren't supposed to be biased), at baccarat there's a lot to investigate about the real randomness of the production and anyway 416 cards cannot produce infinite patterns once we want to classify them by endless random walk successions.

as.

Taking a break the other night and talking with a few BAC friends at the casino, we wound up discussing new dealers placed on the BAC tables. And we simply do not prefer them in most any way over the regular dealers that we have built a rapport with.

There are just simply no connections, or understanding(s) and certainly no harmony between dealer/player with the new dealers. Most all regular dealers we know, there is a special kind of dealer/player camaraderie. I don't know about you guys but after years of playing BAC, that camaraderie has grown into a bond with players like myself and many others I know personally. In fact, it has helped us countless times with either leaving the table or continuing to great wins.

New dealers do not know what I prefer in chip denominations when I buy-in.  I have to explain it and at times I get a bit of resistance until the floor person is called over.  The regular dealers know and automatically cut it out.

When it's slow or one on one the small talk starts. The regular Dealers, pick up the conversations where they generally last left off and are heads and tails over the new dealers in every way. 

A lot of the new dealers have that fast losing chip sweep that absolutely sucks and so many people detest. Yes the money is going to go away, however that fast sweep is absolutely insulting and ultra negative in my opinion.

Regular dealers have that gentle losing hand chip sweep. Not much more to say about it, but they know how to handle losing hands a lot better than the new dealers do.

Tips.  At least myself, I have a certain strange rapport with all my regular dealers, whereupon my tips are paid and rather than the dealer quickly snatching them up, I stack them and slide them up to the dealer, kinda skirting then across the table somewhat.  The new dealers will quickly pay them and snatch them up without any class whatsoever, IMO.

When I buy-in the new dealers will repetitively ask for my players card when every regular dealer already knows the routine and will just say it is Glen's and point to me and nothing else is said. I have to explain to the new dealer I don't have a card in my pocket and the floor person already knows who I am and sometimes that new dealer even rolls their eyes. Again another uncomfortable feeling.

The ending, so important when a player loses. The new dealer will have that standardized, "thanks for playing, better luck next time". Yeah the regular dealers just don't say anything, they are quiet, give me a quick nod of their head, which means will see you next time and you'll get everything back, type of secret code talk, LOL. But personally I detest and so does everyone else that standardized, "thanks for playing and better luck next time" pure made up trash!

And one final one is a few of my hand gestures that I use throughout the game.  Either for a very brief waiting period before dealing the hand, or I'm not gonna play this hand, or I'm gonna get up and go use my phone and many other ones. The new dealers have no clue and I'm not gonna explain it to them, when the regular dealers make it so comfortable.