My gaming partners and myself adopted these:

* Black is Black.

* Nothing from Nothing Leaves Nothing.

* You Can't Change What is Going to Happen.

Quote from: KungFuBac on April 06, 2026, 04:22:28 AMHi Asym and thx.
Can you elaborate a little more on the following:

"...Yet, "long" isolated W situations are way more probable to be intertwined by isolated Ls, so in essence the only real losing sequence is anything like as WLLWLL...

Notice that by falsifying the best randomness definition ever made in the history of probability field (RVM) and according to MvS studies, bac successions are affected by a kind of unrandomness (or instrinsic defects of a finite dependent bac card distributions) capable to get a full value of what is more likely to happen (W clusters and/or L isolated situations) as opposed to what could virtually happen at a 0.5068/0.4932 dynamically proposition...."

Thx in advance,

Hi KFB!
I'll try to make my point.

A shoe is formed by 416 cards making innumerable card combinations but in essence the vast majority of pattern successions belong to restrict classes where something must happen within limited terms.
Practically randomness is less "chaotic" than what could appear.

We don't want to be so precise in our guesses, just considering the game as "probability ranges" where something that happened may come out as clustered or as isolated, there are no other options.
Of course the word "clustered" means that the opposite pattern was absent for a given amount of time (minimum gap=1) and "isolated" means that both opposite patterns happened in two consecutive trials (that's not the number of hands because this depends on the probability of success we wanted to use).

Since we can build infinite random walks from the original irreplaceable BP sequence, sub successions will take the same shape and a correspondent relationship among them even if a same (negative) shoe will be dealt infinitely.
This fact is capable to overcome the permutations issue where strong negative back-to-back shoes will destroy every strategy in the world. Or, even worse, when strong positive consecutive shoes will give the players the illusion of having found out a valid system.

Once we implement the "quality" factor and not the "quantity" one, baccarat successions will get similar features so it's not about "how" but about "when".

Naturally since we can't exploit a math advantage in the strict sense, all this process belongs to "approximate" at best what is going to happen with what should (must) happen. And lesser situations we'll try to approximate better will be our control of the game.

Therefore W clusters and L isolated events must happen and generally speaking the most worrisome pattern is when an isolated W will be followed by a clustered L (WLL..WLL..)

In reality we've seen that our plan is a bit too oriented to avoid losses than trying to ride the winning streaks for the reason that we flat bet and we hate to get (temporary) losing sessions.
We're working on that.

as.

Quote from: KungFuBac on April 06, 2026, 05:22:51 AMThanks for elaborate explanation for how you play.


?Did I understand you correctly that you also wager for "BOTH" P and B on each hand as well?

Thx in advance.

Reference your last inquiry.  I only wager one base bet (main wager NOT SIDE), meaning base wager of bankers or players.  But all or most of the side bets for P and B. 

I have done extremely well with the shoes I play. 

Here is another shoe from last week, large amounts of winning side bets as well.

Many winning side bets including a beautiful 3 card 7-7 with $50.00 on it for 200:1 payout.  4 Panda 8s and another 3 Fortune 7s.  Numerous others.

Once again, love that equalization in the last quarter, my huge advantage very few believe in or play.

What Are the Side Bets in Baccarat:
41+ Side Bet Options Explained.

I found this interesting as some of these I've never seen on a layout. Most of my layouts only have 4-6 bonus bets.

https://baccarattraining.com/how-to-play/side-bets

Thanks for elaborate explanation for how you play.



alrelax:

"... side bets wagered, but both sides (P and B side bets) and pretty much consistently.

The following sides the shoe produced:

4th hand was a beautiful 3 card 9-9 Tie for Heavenly 9s, 75:1

4 Panda 8s
3 Fortune 7s
8 3 card 9s for Heavenly 9s
1 3 card 9-9 tie Heavenly 9 75:1
4 3 card 9-0 dragon bonuses 30:1
2 fortune 7 back-to-back
2 panda 8s back-to-back

At least 10 wins by 7 points for dragon bonuses
At least 8 wins by 8 points for dragon bonuses
   ..."


Great shoe indeed.
42 Wins on Bonus Bets alone. I would think that is a bit of an outlier. Of course one would have to be betting for them on every hand (to catch all of them). Im guessing you caught all of them.

?Did I understand you correctly that you also wager for "BOTH" P and B on each hand as well?

Thx in advance.

Hi Asym and thx.
Can you elaborate a little more on the following:

"...Yet, "long" isolated W situations are way more probable to be intertwined by isolated Ls, so in essence the only real losing sequence is anything like as WLLWLL...

Notice that by falsifying the best randomness definition ever made in the history of probability field (RVM) and according to MvS studies, bac successions are affected by a kind of unrandomness (or instrinsic defects of a finite dependent bac card distributions) capable to get a full value of what is more likely to happen (W clusters and/or L isolated situations) as opposed to what could virtually happen at a 0.5068/0.4932 dynamically proposition...."


Thx in advance,

That's interesting, Al!

Since we're dealing with an astounding amount of uncertainty, the "frustration" part could bring us to be disjointed from what actually happens compared with what "should" happen and the last part belongs to "patience".

Patterns are there to be somewhat balanced, so the "right or wrong bettor" concept is related about how good or how bad a given strategy performs at the actual distribution.
Betting too many hands is the sure recipe for disaster as it tends to deny the "patience" impact so leading more to the frustration field where we are totally confused to know what to do.

It's reasonable to think that recreational players like to build a "sky's the limit" strategy by hoping that many univocal deviations will last for long and sometimes they succeed in their efforts. But not by long term values capable to erase and invert the HE, otherwise the game wouldn't exist.

After all is not the HE making players to lose a lot of money but the amount of "wrong" decisions aggravated by the standard bet increase right in the "frustration" fields that invariably happen along the way.
Conversely, most players are shy to wager (or possibly press the wagers) when things seem to be more oriented to go in their favor, a thing symmetrically shaped (before vig) with the frustration field where it seems we can't guess a single hand or a couple of hands for long periods.

Examples.

In the vast majority of the times S patterns are showing up as isolated or two clustered, obviously itlr S clustered patterns can come out up to 4 or 5 or more times in a row. And we don't want such rare situations to wipe out our previous profits albeit the fear of facing them is legitimate.
Obviously the most probable situation to encounter is S isolated events being clustered and technically this is one of the most reliable tool to rely upon especially after having faced S isolated events being intertwined by S clusters.
Notice that S clustered clusters (SS.../SS...) are not making any harm on us as we're not wanting to chase a more probable situation (S isolated events coming out as clustered) when things seem to dictate otherwise.

On the other end, A patterns are supposed to mathematically produce more A clusters (A-A-...) than A isolated events (A-S) and in the vast majority of the times A isolated patterns coming out in a row for "long" ranges come out when S isolated patterns show up as clustered. (SASASAS...)

Now if S events are naturally capable to get shorter than expected 1:3 situations, we know that A events being favored by a 3:1 probability to come out will get, sooner or later (patience factor), patterns longer than 3 and this constitutes a big edge over the house that cannot "control" infinite random walks producing exact A patterns 3 long for extended periods.

Same considerations could be made for other simpler pattern classifications and taken by other various angles.

Is this a new example of the innumerable forms of the gambler's fallacy?

No fkng way.

As long as cards aren't symmetrically distributed and results can be arranged into different random walks, the "uncertainty world" is not belonging to winning players.

as.

Quote from: AsymBacGuy on April 05, 2026, 08:57:08 PMThe above considerations might suggest what we name as "The right/wrong bettors strategy" knowing that baccarat is formed by an half part of frustration and an half part of patience. Obviously both factors being not perfectly balanced along any shoe we're destined to face.

More later.

as. 

Oh absolutely!  Just this morning I was discussing this very same topic with my regular playing peers!!!

So very very true. But for most players it is much larger than 'half' part frustration.  It really is.

The above considerations might suggest what we name as "The right/wrong bettors strategy" knowing that baccarat is formed by an half part of frustration and an half part of patience. Obviously both factors being not perfectly balanced along any shoe we're destined to face.

More later.

as. 

Like my man Ron White says, "you cannot fix stupid!". This guy has to be the ultra stupidity of all idiotic F***ing people.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xe-bQ2qwjsM


And like my man says:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UQv7Tr8HbGE&pp=ygUecm9uIHdoaXRlIHlvdSBjYW4ndCBmaXggc3R1cGlk