BetSelection.cc

Please login or register.

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.

Messages - AsymBacGuy

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 46 Next
1
AsymBacGuy / Re: Baccarat unbeatable plan #1
« on: January 18, 2019, 01:15:24 am »
Very soon a strict mechanical method which should help us to define when, how much and how long to bet.

as. 

 

2
Baccarat Forum / Re: I simply love these posts on other forums
« on: January 18, 2019, 12:11:59 am »
There's a strong evidence that "foolproof bac winning system" sellers or claimers won't take this deal:
"I'll buy your system up to $50.000, but if it doesn't work we will kill you"

I'm still waiting someone who wants to make this deal.

as.

 

3
Baccarat Forum / Re: Further Explanation of 'Sections & Turning Points'
« on: January 07, 2019, 11:48:10 pm »
Thanks Al!

as.

4
Baccarat Forum / Re: To clear something up about Martingale System
« on: December 25, 2018, 12:51:27 am »
Mmmhhh yes and no. It's just a matter of time and number of bets and not about money wagered. And of course about bet selection.

Put it mathematically.

People wagering $50,100,200,400,800,1600,3200 are risking $6350 to win $50 each time they wager. They have just 1/128 probability to fail. Thus they are more likely to be ahead after say 40-50 bets for a $2500 total.
People not using this martingale are a lot less likely to be ahead of $2500 (admitting a $50 basic unit) or even anything after 40-50 bets.

Positive progressions work in the same way. True, when you start losing you lose just 1 unit, but when you lose after a win you still lose and so on. That is positive progressions transform all WL situations into mere losing events.

Of course in order to win without a martingale we need to cross positive homogeneous patterns of different lenght depending upon the strategy.
Thus the problem remains the same seen by an opposite angle.
Martingale lovers need to skip a rare homogeneous losing pattern, others try to be ahead by crossing a rare homogeneous positive pattern or rare clustered short positive patterns.
At the end the only thing that changes is the frequency of wins and losses. And of course the probability to be ahead or not after x number of bets.

Actually a strong evidence about the power of some progressions is when we find a so diluted bet selection capable to restrict the variance impact.
This should be considered as a limited random walk movement.

Say we have found a process of W/L situations that just moves from -5 to +5.


----------------------------0--------------------------------
-5    -4    -3    -2    -1       +1    +2    +3    +4    +5

If we are betting after the +5 level had been reached at some point, we know that we could cross an unlikely but possible losing sequence bringing us to -4 or -5 level, meaning we lose 9 or 10 hands in a row.
Notice that the opposite action is still very unlikely and therefore it shouldn't be attempted.

Thus, the best opportunities to put progressive bets in such heaven plan come when the WL ratio is at zero or very close to zero, as we need only 5 progressive bets to cover the most unlikely occurences.
And naturally when the W/L ratio jumps on the extreme left side (-4 or -5) we are virtually certain to win.

As Jimskie correctly pointed out, what counts for a method are WIAR and LIAR values, a thing slightly different than a pure W/L ratio assessment.

In my -5/+5 random walk scheme, the only way I can lose BY MARTINGALING 7 hands in a row (for example) comes when W/L ratio is at +2 or more.
Every other situation is covered.
On the other hand, starting to bet when W/L ratio stays on negative field guarantees me winnings 100% of the times without using progressions deeper than 5 steps.

IMO, there's no way we can guess which direction will take the deviations, we only play probabilities.

Now the problem is to find out which patterns/situations should form a -5/+5 random walk; actually it's not that difficult as we're working to restrict the variance to a -3/+3 random walk, meaning that every trigger will be good no matter how is actually placed.

It's Christmas, be positive!

as.

5
Baccarat Forum / Re: Further Explanation of 'Sections & Turning Points'
« on: December 24, 2018, 11:24:16 pm »
An exhaustive explanation, thanks Al!

Besides part #3, it would be interesting if you want to illustrate how are formed derived roads (bead plate, etc)

Thanks!

as. 

 

6
Merry Christmas to everyone!!!  ^-^

as.

7
AsymBacGuy / Re: Baccarat unbeatable plan #1
« on: December 24, 2018, 10:47:22 pm »
Thanks LungYeh,

Merry Christmas!!!

as.

8
Vic's Ideas / Re: BetOnly.club => Non-betting discussion banned! (New site)
« on: December 19, 2018, 12:06:13 am »
Good job!  :thumbsup:

But softwares can't teach us about the actual conditions we're playing in.

If roulettes worldwide were adhering to the random.org site production I'd be the most wealthy guy in the universe.

as. 

9
AsymBacGuy / Re: Baccarat unbeatable plan #1
« on: December 18, 2018, 11:59:58 pm »
After years of studying baccarat I've come to the conclusion that the only way to win at this game is by properly assessing the number and distribution of BP shifts per each shoe.

Each shoe features an average probability to get this or that, first we should restrict the number of such this and that.

We cannot care less about long streaks, they are the best way amateurs try to get a profit by.
Long streaks or homogeneous patterns or predominance factors are just post hoc findings.
They will come at the right time or not.
As players we are compelled to restrict the "right time" within "now" or "very shortly" terms. A thing that the random world is laughing at.

Baccarat shifts move more from P to B than from B to P but itlr (and intermediate terms too) the number of BP shifts is equal, actually is slightly oriented to get more shifts than a perfect 50/50 proposition dictates.
Such conclusion came from testing millions of shoes.

We know that in a 50/50 perfect proposition itlr the number of singles and doubles will be very close to 75%.
Of course B singles and B doubles itlr will get a lesser amount than 75% compensated by the P outcomes.

Really?

No way.

A large sample study about sd values calculated on 3+ or 4+ streaks formed on both sides tell us that the number of shoes featuring a low than average number of such streaks will outbalance the number of shoes featuring a higher than average number of those streaks.

Of course along any shoe the probability to get an higher than average number of such streaks will come out more often than not whether those streaks had come out by a higher pace than expected.

Why?
Because actual card distribution which produced such "unexpected" long streaks has consumed space to get the more likely shifthing mood.
And the same is true regarding more likely situations.

The effect is working on every shoe dealt in the universe but it's more likely to happen when we have reasons to think that the distribution won't be perfectly random.

And in the actual bac world we're not betting against pc distributions.

as.

10
Baccarat Forum / Re: Beating Baccarat
« on: December 10, 2018, 09:51:21 pm »
Yes sh.it could happen and that's why a strategy very close to flat betting is the best by any means.
First, progressions deny the real advantage we have at this game, that is getting time and space to assess what we are really looking for.
Secondly, it's impossible to win without properly selecting the possible advantaged situations bac provides: steady states and "due" states.

Not every shoe will produce easy detectable steady states or due states, more often than not is a complex mix of the two.
Yet, steady states can be interpreted in several ways (for one or both sides: few streaks, few singles, few doubles, strong dominance, etc) and mostly are classified by our mind and actual conditions.
Due states are always objective findings, the number and distribution of singles, doubles, streaks, etc.

When the two factors seem to collide, well we should get a real advantage.

BTW, the "turning points" topic Al is stressing about is really important.

as.   
   

11
Baccarat Forum / Re: Beating Baccarat
« on: December 09, 2018, 02:55:34 am »
Here a fresh example on how baccarat could be cruel despite having chosen the right side every time. All six hands were played within two shoes, meaning an average of two bets per shoe. All bets were lost in a row. 

Hand #1

Bet is on player, 8-paint the point, banker turns a paint-9
It happens.

Hand #2

Again a bet on the player, 8-ten the point, 7-2 to the banker.
It could happen.

Hand #3

Bet is on banker, player gets 4 and banker gets 6.
Third card is a 7 for player, banker has to draw and catches a 4.

Hand #4

Player bet. Another natural 8 for player (8- paint), this time banker makes a fkn 8-A.

Now we're getting nervous.

Hand #5

Banker bet. Player gets 3, banker has a meek 1. Ok, this time we didn't chose the right side as any superior initial point is favorite to win by a fair edge.
Third card: 8 for the player, banker catches a super hyper fkng 9.   

Summarizing so far: we've lost five consecutive bets over selecting the spots to wager into.
Besides hand #5 we've always selected good favorite situations.

Hand #6

Bet is on banker.
Player gets 1 (ace and a queen), banker gets 7 (7-paint).
I would have bet all I have on my name that some shi.t was going to happen again.
And I was fkn right as dealer extracted a crappy 7 from the deck.
A girl next to me shouted as she won the Panda side bet.

To say that wholly considered in those such six hands (but one) we were astoundingly favorite to win is an understatement.
Yet we've lost any of them and frankly and after years of playing we didn't recollect the specular situation. Not even close.

The general probability to lose six hands in a row (no matter when we decide to bet) is 1.5625%
The actual probability to lose when you get three natural 8s, an asymmetrical 6 vs 4 hand, a 1 vs a 3 catching an 8 as third card and a 7 vs 1 is a lot lower.
But it happened.

Be prepared to expect the worst.
Yet itlr we cannot be wrong.

as.   


 

 

 

 
 

 



 

 

12
Baccarat Forum / Re: Beating Baccarat
« on: December 08, 2018, 12:25:26 am »
I rarely lose a session anymore.  But when I do it's a small loss.  This is because when losing I reduce my bet size to avoid going too deep in the hole.  It's also because I am willing to quit loser!  We should all know what dollar amount that is.  Getting back to even or an acceptable loss is good enough.  But whatever we do to reduce losses also has a negative effect on our winning side. 


J

That's the point: not to lose a session and, just in case, to quit as a small loser.

Since the game, whatever the strategy employed will be always an infinite line like ++-+---+----+-+-++---+--+--+++----------+--++-++-+-----+++-+++++++++++------....having  long term zero sum,
we must find situations where + waves should be more likely and the worst opportunities to find them is betting when minus signs are coming out clustered.

@alrelax: ok with your comments and btw you are totally correct about not falling into the "comps trap" (prolonging sessions just to get comps)

as.




 

13
Baccarat Forum / Re: Beating Baccarat
« on: December 06, 2018, 11:37:13 pm »
Nice post.

I'll comment about "Essential 8".

Plan

Yes, we need a plan to play any game of the universe, but it must be adapted to the actual situations. Even if I'm the second best poker player in the world, I do not want to play Phil Ivey being the only customer there. Or the other 10 or 20 best poker players.
Therefore a preordered plan may not find the proper circumstances and very often efforts made to get the best of it simply don't work.

Willpower-patience

Willpower is everything. Quitting home knowing what could happen and what must happen at the casino is of primary importance. We are not there to hit jackpots, just playing probabilities.
Realizing that most of the collegues at the table will quit as losers could help us. We are long term winners, right?
Most players lose as they are not patient, meaning they love to force probabilities.

Recognize your plateau/levels

Professionals try to win little but steadily per ranges of opportunities.
Profitable opportunities are not around the corner every time.
For a $100 bettor, it's a lot more likely to win $300, $300 and $300 within three different sessions than trying to get $900 in one single session. Especially when we are on the losing side.

Money management

The less the money we bring in at the table, the better should be the efforts to defend it.
   

Progressions

The only way to win at EV- games is setting up a method capable to get more winning hands than losing hands, period.
Progressions just accelerate a possible advantage OR a sure disadvantage.


Totally forget comps and perks

It depends.
If comps are so high or certain deals are made with the casino, we have two ways of winning: winning and just breaking even.
Nobody is going to play with the aim to break even. Sometimes he/she should.

Enjoy and be content with what you get or happens

The best section of the 8.

An experienced player knows that every kind of shoe could happen right there. If we are losing small after a "terrible" shoe was dealt we should be happy. If we win we should be happy no matter how much we are winning. Same about breaking even as we are entitled to lose.
Being happy help us to put aside the dangerous world of betting when angry.
I do not know a single player quitting the table as winner when playing angrily.
It's a scientifically proven fact that angriness leads to worse decisions.

Don't force to be outside your zone

If our plan dictates to bet from $20 to $60 and we've found out we're wagering $100 in the effort to recoup or to win more, we are just gambling.
It's true that a $100 winning bet will balance in just one shot five previous $20 losing wagers, yet we should wonder why we had lost such five bets, meaning we must win five bets back. And naturally we should think that a $100 losing bet will double in one shot our previous diluted losses. Now what are we going to bet next hand?

as. 

14
AsymBacGuy / Re: Baccarat unbeatable plan #1
« on: December 06, 2018, 03:52:39 am »
That's nice Al! :-)

Every bac player should think about this.

An almost 50/50 slight dependent distribution will form certain unidirectional results for some time.
Not every shoe will be so polarized but most part of shoes will present such feature.

Of course B/P gaps or other too variance affected outcomes won't give us many of hint.

Say we have won (or lost) 5-6 flat betting units so far (half or more of the actual shoe).

Now, are we going to bet toward the deviations happened so far or to get a kind of balancement situations?

Mathematicians will say it doesn't matter which kind of direction we'll take.
But they are wrong.

Since we cannot guess hands, the more we'll play the higher will be the probability to get opposite results already gotten, thus taking an unidrectional strategy sooner or later (I'm speaking about 4-5 shoes not more) will surely fail.

After 5 shoes played, the probability to be ahead is just 20% or so.
Thus, after 5 shoes, the probability to get some opposite results is very high at some point.

Guess what?

Balancements are going to appear when deviation situations will cross a 2 or 3 cutoff point.
Nobody wants to play a 2 or 3 or higher negative proposition hoping to get a single positive outcome, therefore a smart player would know when things are going to change.

I mean that it's not wrong to follow a positive pattern providing to have secured a profit, but it's highely recommended to stop the betting toward positive deviations whenever a 2 or 3 negative step is going to show up.

More on that tomorrow

as.
 



   



 





 





15
AsymBacGuy / Re: Baccarat unbeatable plan #1
« on: December 05, 2018, 10:28:10 pm »
There's an interesting line of thought suggesting that the first half or 2/3 results of a shoe will slightly affect the probability of the remaining outcomes.

More later.

as.

 



 


   



 

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 46 Next