Our members are dedicated to PASSION and PURPOSE without drama!

Menu

Show posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Show posts Menu

Messages - HunchBacShrimp

#1
Baccarat Forum / Rare Tie Sleeper
July 09, 2016, 10:09:54 PM
Played three shoes the other night. Not my normal game. This particular table only had one shoe, and was a hand shuffle game. I don't often play a hand shuffled game.

First shoe in progress when I arrive at hand 34. No tie yet. Wow, ok, that's not too common but 34 hands isn't much of a stretch. It was another 23 decisions before the first and only tie of an 8 deck shoe. There were 24 more hands dealt before that shoe ended.

Same deck of 8 hand shuffled. Some recognize and are comfortable with continuous shoes being a fair representation of random, others feel each shoe is a separate entity of random. Either way is fine but the second shoe went to hand 31 before it tied for the first time. (Ended up being 5 more ties in that shoe.) Put them together and you have 1 tie in shoe one at hand 57, and then another 55 decisions until you reach hand 31 in the second shoe for a total of 2 ties in 112 decisions.

Then in shoe three Tie didn't show until hand 54.

Food for thought for anyone that considers running a progression on the tie bet.

I'm willing to type the shoes out later if anyone is interested. Presently I'm headed to the casino.

I'll be back later, I've certainly got more to say.

HBS
#2
Baccarat Forum / Alrelax deleting posts
July 07, 2016, 07:59:08 PM
Good job Al,

Maybe a little bit of censorship will mask your ignorance and ineptitude. Though, that mask won't last long.

Deleting my posts is proof you are only willing, and interested in dishing out offensive, intentionally belittling remarks, but unwilling or incapable of receiving any.

You are an emotional child.

Oh, and a complete and utterly desperate fool. Evidenced by placing a 1k wager on Wewinn222's underdog Mariners pick. This was after you posted a link showing all of the baseball approved statistics that pointed to the Astros winning.  You bet against the trend! The exact opposite of what you keep saying to do!

You bet for the cut!
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAH

You are the most ignorant hypocrite I've ever witnessed.
Lookie there, you came in first in something.
A real winner.

HBS
#3
Baccarat Forum / Re: Jumping the Shark
July 04, 2016, 12:55:42 PM
Just another sales pitch from the charlatan Ellis. Heavy on the conspiracy theory this time.

Let's see........

30 years to develop the ONLY system with a MATHEMATICAL ADVANTAGE. Proof of which would bring more fame and fortune than peddling a tutoring service.
Your chance to discover it yourself ever in your entire lifetime? ZERO. Perhaps the only truthful statement, but narcissistic and insulting none the less.

A system that pre-identifies a shoe's least common event so you can tailor your bet selection to lose only to the that least common event. She it, that's the Holy Grail right there.

I'd like to know how someone can recognize the difference between The casino's orchestrations of shoe's that are High 1's and 2's, or 3+, just 1's, just 2's , or low 2's, opposite or repeat from RANDOM's natural production of those same events.

How do you tell the difference between random random, and the casino's version of random?

Not that it matters I guess, He can teach you how to beat random all the time. Well, virtually anyway.

HBS

PS Pure random is NOT a balance in the distribution of events.
#4
Baccarat Forum / Re: The Van Kellen Test!
June 30, 2016, 02:18:36 AM
So a 1000 spins or decisions is not a large enough sample size. Just exactly what is the standard deviation of all three tests?


I've run several different kinds of bet selections through thousands of real craps and baccarat decisions and I don't recall any of them coming close to +100 in any 1,000 decision block.



HBS
#5
Baccarat Forum / Re: Playing shoes in under 20 mins
June 30, 2016, 01:42:00 AM
I've started and finished 8 deck shoes in well under 20 minutes. About 3 years ago I had the habit of playing in the early afternoon in the middle of the work day. Sometimes I'd be solo and manage to burn through 4 shoes in an hour and get back to work.

flat bet every hand with an easy bet selection.

HBS
#6
FLD has served me well in the past. Always seemed to be a long streak or large block of short streaks to either put me over the top or pull me out of a draw down. So much so that I can't bring myself to bet OLD, even though I want to to increase my unit size and reduce my action by 50%.

Presently, I'm capturing patterns. Not exactly to the nth degree, but I'm on all the single chops, doubles, sleepers, any repeating pattern between B and P and I'm on it. 'Course I encounter plenty of consecutive losses when nothin develops. I've come out 20u ahead flat betting 40 bets in a shoe and I've fell behind 20 units flat betting 40 bets in a shoe.

It all seems the same to me. It's all about

how you handle your losses.

HBS
#7
One of the reasons it may be true that it's harder to double, triple, or more a small bankroll vs a larger sum is because there is more room for play, and you forget to stick strictly to your unit size.

When you are playing nickels or quarters it's not to tough to double your unit size and strictly adhere to whole unit bets. However, when your unit size is 4 red chips or 3 green chips or any combination of higher denominations then there becomes a great deal of room to make partial unit bets. And you end up diluting your gains with less than full unit bets.

HBS
#8
I'm not loaning any gambler anything more than a white chip to tip the server as he throws a chip to the dealer to make change.

Other than that I've made money outside the casino loaning. And twice I've borrowed money for someone else.

It's just like gambling. You are taking a chance.  Risk vs Reward.  Some loan bets are good, some not so much.

HBS
#9
Baccarat Forum / Re: eating your nuts
June 29, 2016, 04:16:22 PM
Alrelax,

Just exactly what is your beef with Soxfan?

He's been honest and transparent about his play. He's not selling anything. He's not forcing his point of view. He never changes his story or makes unrealistic bold claims.


HBS
#10
Baccarat Forum / Re: Cause of Losing
January 19, 2016, 04:54:12 AM
Mentality I chose. Composure, is the word I choose to use for it's description.

Part of it is physical: fatigue, hunger, thirst, small pressure against my bladder, headache, backache etc.

Though, it could be considered a mental decision to continue on under those conditions.

Sometimes it's the BR, it is not designed to overcome all losses, but to gather up a surplus of units greater than sum of itself. Like Soxfan's parlay. He knows it's going to bust, but it adds more units to his life time BR than it subtracts after a bust.. so that may not really be a loss at all.

HBS
#11
Didn't want to continue off topic in the other thread. And was compelled to make some input regarding streak as I am predominantly an FLD bettor.

I accept there is no (substantial) statistical difference in the occurrences of simple streaks (BBBBBBBBB) and convoluted streaks (BBPBBPBBP). However, I do feel there is a significant difference between the two. The standard streak of 9 B is not only more easily recognizable, but consists of only one decision repeating itself. The repeating 2-1 pattern of BBPBBPBBP is much less recognized as a streak of 9 than it is recognized as B doubling three times in a row, and P singling three times in a row and really consists of 3 decisions repeating themselves as opposed to one.

When I see BBBBBB, I don't see two three streaks of B, nor do I see one repeated event of BBB. I see a streak of six.

I'm not going to say what you really have here in BBPBBPBBP are two separate types of streaks each of a length of three. But I am going to say they are very nearly always recognized and considered as such. You stretch this out to BBPBBPBBPBBPBBPBBP and it should be universally recognized as a streak of BBP. Still most likely considered a streak of 6 and not 18. Obviously BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB is without a doubt never interpreted as anything except a streak with a length of 18.

I only need one repeated event BB, to signify that I might be on a streak. It could be argued that BB is also only one repeated event that signifies I might be on a streak of BBP. BUT, I don't need a third decision to prove it. The BBP bettor does. My streak may never go past the 2hole, yet it is still a streak. The BBP streak never developed, and in essence, never really was a streak, not even a streak of 2.

Now we can dramatically extrapolate this perspective and say that not just any, but every combination of B and P is a streak of whatever length you desire.

BBBPBPPPBPBPBPBPPBBBPBPBPPPBPBPBBPBPBPBPBPPPPPBPBPPPPBBBBPPPB is a streak of remarkable length, how did everyone miss it? The obvious answer is because it is too convoluted, you could have patterns inside your pattern.

The 'frequency of occurrence' of any and every combination of 9 decisions is (very nearly) exactly the same.

I am confident Lung Yeh's remark that a streak of 17 should be an unmissed opportunity to take the casino to the cleaners was based upon 1. His style of play and 2. The blatant display of an easily recognizable trend even the most novice of gamblers should recognize, and more importantly, take a single chance on. Pick a number and get on it. My number is 7.

I will take a stong position and say only an absolute fool would continue to bet against a streak and lose 17 times, and a bigger fool would start at 11 or 12 and relentlessly bet against its continuation until it ruined them. I will say picking a number, even 7, and betting against it a small number of times is acceptable. Not very fruitful as only a single won bet, and certainly will NEVER allow them to easily make bets that yield them a very large amount of wins in a row. After only 3 of which you are free to press and parlay with an unconflicted conscience until your bets are bucking up against the table max.

Now betting against the streak wasn't part of the original conversation I was responding too. I got a little side tracked there, back on topic.....

Streaks of great lengths are not a myth. And streaks of the same single repeated event are the easiest to notice and the easiest to bet on. What has a 1 in 130,000 chance of occurring WILL occur. And Murphy says if you continue to boldly bet against it, you will see it in less than 130,000 chances. You can only lose one bet taking a single chance that this might be the Monster Dragon. And if you find yourself sitting there watching 17 repeated events go by and you haven't made a single bet with it, well, you can pat yourself on the back for having extreme discipline, but you might as well go ahead and do it on your way out of the casino never to return again.

If you cannot or will not capitalize on the easiest streak possible, you will never be able to capitalize on any streak of even the slightest less recognizable pattern. Such as the BPBPBPBPBPBPBPBPB. I will state one exception, and one exception only. And that is if you are specifically looking for a particular streak, as in if you are an OLD bettor, or constantly on the hunt for 2x2's etc. Though, I will still fault you for not taking a chance on the most recognizable streak possible.

HBS

#12
Baccarat Forum / Re: Which one better?
January 17, 2016, 06:41:27 AM
Quote from: Garfield on January 17, 2016, 06:17:31 AM
No way man. I respect all the constructive reply. Should we start the thread you mentioned above?

Yeah, that'd be great. I'll be back on sometime tomorrow. It's late here now, I'm about to head to bed.

HBS
#13
Baccarat Forum / Re: Which one better?
January 17, 2016, 06:00:18 AM
Quote from: Garfield on January 17, 2016, 03:24:10 AM
Bet selection based on what had happened in the past. Some will said that it's misleading.

IMO MM also based on the same condition. And as the past is misleading to the future result in BS, so will it be in MM.

I should've put the 3rd option / factor which is timing. Jimske will state that this is also useless for it isn't going to change everything.

But IMO, the same BS or MM, applied in different time will bring different output. I meant the result if we played it on hand#xx, will be different with the result on hand#yy.

But the bottom line, everything is 50/50 actually. Our BS / MM might work in some time, migh not work in other time.

And all the bacc do is sitting there, just with one question to solve. Will the next be opposite, or repeat?  :))
Quote from: Garfield on January 16, 2016, 07:56:53 PM
One more thought of mine,

As many stated that any "mechanical" BS will eventually lost itlr, wouldn't be fair to say that any "mechanical" MM will suffer the same too?

The quest for the holy grail often reffered to BS method, could it be found in MM method? Is there a holy grail for MM?

IMO, I don't think so.

In BS,the factor that affect the most is to have a BS that win more than it lose. Maybe that how we could measure our BS performance in the particular shoe.

For MM, what is the factor to measure? Do we measure our MM by observe how many LIAR it could handle?

Some very interesting points you've brought up here. Some worth of their own threads. I've spent a little time dwelling on the difference or similarity between a mechanical BS and a mechanical MM. Also, many trenders are belittled for making gut decisions, but I can fathom no difference in making gut decisions with an MM. What prompts a non mechanical parlay recoup? What prompts a non mechanical 'stop bet'? What prompts a non mechanical defensive measure in a lab? It's either mechanical, and therefore programmable, or it's randomly based on instinct.

Now I don't know if you are laughing at me, or laughing at the simplicity of it all. But yeah, strip it all down and see it for what is is. It is either a single event, or a repeated event. KISS comes to mind. I just heard a quote " If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough" (Einstein) That can be changed a bit to " if you can't see the simplicity of it, you cannot understand the whole of it". Trees and forests and whatnot. Fruitless to expend so much energy creating complicated ways to chose either B or P. You will eventually meet your nemesis, and he will have packed a nice lunch of three standard deviations for you to eat.

Measuring MM is also worth of its own thread. How many liar can it handle? Maybe. But I think how many surplus units will it produce before a failure is a better yard stick, irregardless of the number of liar overcome.

HBS

#14
Baccarat Forum / Re: Which one better?
January 17, 2016, 05:17:25 AM
Quote from: 21 Aces on January 16, 2016, 06:32:34 PM
This  whole argument depends on how effective you are at each.
The true magic of gambling is the force that prevents us from guessing more than 50% of our bets correctly. The "Yang" of this is the same force also prevents us from guessing more than 50% of our bets incorrectly. There is no argument about how 'effective' anyone is at making a bet selection. WE ARE ALL EQUALLY ADEPT AT IT. It is the one constant all bettors can be measured against for determining how effective you are at utilizing MONEY MANAGEMENT.

Quote from: 21 Aces on January 16, 2016, 06:32:34 PM
Someone that states money management isn't assuming they are to be a 1-3 on a scale of 1-10 in bet selection and vice versa.
We are ALL a FIVE (5) on a scale of 1-10 for bet selection.

HBS

#15
Baccarat Forum / Re: Which one better?
January 17, 2016, 04:46:35 AM
Well, Jimske, I got to give it to you there. Those are some excellently constructed posts.


GR8, you surprise me with choosing BS. Until I have reason to believe otherwise I can only believe that you are mistaken here. Aside from benign repetition of the importance of composure, you also stress the importance of a strict MM inside ones own comfort zone, and knowing when to take a win, and/or walk a loser (before losing it all). You may have mentioned choosing a bet selection and sticking with it, avoiding the pitfalls of second guessing yourself, but you have never insisted one find a bet selection that wins more often than it loses.

How could you? It doesn't exist. Even with your 54% win rate, it still doesn't exist. In a complimentary tone, it is your trending of a small handful of bet selections that produces your above average win rate. Phenomenal to say the least, especially considering the amount of time you've been successful with it. You've been pressed before, to provide the mechanical method of your winning. Yes, yes even if you had one it would be absurd to publicize. But you don't have one, you never have, nobody does.

OTBL doesn't hold a positive expectation, neither does a sleeper, or a dominate side regardless of your win rate betting in these conditions. It's your successful trending, or more accurately 'guessing'. It's a guess like Jimske said, nobody knows with certainty. Tracking your variance is smart play, from it you have expectations in the long run, or should we say the medium run. And you still employ a MM scheme. A seven bet mini series.

If bet selection was so important, there would be no MM. We would all flat bet, or bet random amounts, it wouldn't matter, with a positive BS we would eventually win more of an equal distribution of our small, medium, and large bets given enough action. And no, that secret BS would never remain a secret.

Jimske, what you said about theoretically betting a blind BS working an MM off of a W/L registry is exactly correct. Barring Soxfan's input of recognizably different W/L configurations inside the confines of a 50/50 proposition for certain bet selections, it may not be theory at all. I've colored up the same time another punter has colored up with profit and we certainly did not bet the same. Every day people win money at the same game, they aren't all choosing the exact same selection. So it is certain they experienced different W/L string configurations, but were still able to wrest a profit from it. Only MM can be responsible for this.

HBS