Quote from: PatternAnalys on May 13, 2021, 05:18:34 AM
Sir,
You advocate that, 'extreme variance management', and "a special mm", the real way to beat casino.
I eager to know, by your experience with data, say, bet "player" only,what the ratio, of "within expectations vs extreme"?
If the ratios dependable, then we can fearlessly bet with "expected losses vs expected profit"...

  95% is within expectation winning sessions while 5% will be extremes that rush us to stop loss or close. With +50/-100 or +25/-50, if we get even 80% wins and 20% loser sessions, we will still be up, in the long run. That is what is my plan exactly. Earlier I was focused on getting +1.

+25 or -50 will change the win loss ratio slightly but will be practically doable easier too.

Quote from: PatternAnalys on May 13, 2021, 06:44:37 AM
Sir,
If your mm can +50, and -100,
then, there no law say you can't bet both side.
Say, have two person ,
bet with your mm,
if next 100bet produce within math, then both will win +50.
if extreme hit, then
1 person will -100, and the other +50, the end only lose -50.
what you think?

Betting both sides have no advantage. First, it will be difficult to compute together and bet in a real casino. Secondly, it will appear weird and will draw the attention of the casino. Since extreme will hit rarely(only in 5% cases, my way) it is not intriguing. I agree that while I will lose -100, I should win +50 easily too but not necessarily. I will evaluate those cases playing both sides to answer you.

Wong,
          I m tired of answering your single query in hundreds of way. We do not need to beat the extreme, we just need to surpass that with least harm possible. Whatever way we can play, randomness can beat that momentarily. It is always better to be prepared for that instead of dreaming of beating that too. Extreme cases are rare too and if they do not take away too much money, why keep bothering about them? Such silly thinking give birth to martingale type ideas that kills us finally. Next time if you asked how to beat the extreme, you will be in my ignore list. Just think of beating the long run consequences with a pre planned strategy.

Session #5

         I played this session today online. It ran across 3 shoes and took 174 hands to conclude with a +50 net. It went to +42 in the middle but lots of bad stretches thereafter. Atlast I got my target. This makes me think that instead of trying +50 or -100, I should try for +25 or -50. Pretty tired. Have a look.
   Max bet=5, wins 86 vs loss 88, max DD= -20.

L
W
W
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
W
L
L
W
W
W
L
W
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
W
W
L
L
L
L
L
W
W
L
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
W
W
W
W
W
W
L
W
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
W
L
L
L
L
W
W
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
W

QuoteThat's now that so called math experts must put their knowledge in their a.sses, even though they can easily opine that no matter what, our bets are getting a money return lower than 1.

           I DO NOT KNOW WHICH BOOK OF MATH SAYS SO. UNLESS WE ARE DESTINED TO LOSE EVERY HAND A PARTICULAR SUM OR WE KEEP BETTING FLAT 1 UNIT ALWAYS, HOUSE EDGE CAN NOT BEAT US DECISIVELY. When I simulated over 10 millions spins of roulette with Ophis with a progression based betting and beat that too, I understood the hollowness of such pseudo math claims.
          Take the case of martingale and any played session in the world. It will beat each. Did martingale change math? No. Same goes with labby and fibbo. There is no answer of this with any so called math genius. Math can beat the randomness and house advantage both but table limit or bankroll will stop it this way (but math is math). I went ahead and did it mathematically (with a dash of logic) within playable bankroll and table spread. I will surely win, in the long run, even if I get 6SD negative variance, meanwhile.

Session #4:
             Bad start of session and throughout it remains below average. Yet earned 56 UNITS. MAX DD= -31, MAX BET UNIT=6
                57 WINS VS 66 LOSSES

L
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W

QuoteHi Albalaha--I see youre still in the laboratory.

     It is my forte. I am into something everyone shies away to even discuss. A logical and mathematical way to earn from casinos.

QuoteGood thinking--To help with that worry and to "lay low" or "fly under the radar",...etc, you could maybe consider playing under an alias (e.g., Kung Fubac ).

Well, it is not so easy. I need a team to play my way all over. It is tough to find even one reliable person. I m playing myself online these days and haven't seen any losing session so far. Let's see how it goes further.

Session #3:
             47 wins vs 61 losses, Finished with +53, worst DD=-17, max bet=8 units

L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W

Quote This is interesting. I would hypothesize u should see this often enough at front end of shoes to make your wait time tolerable.
     Q: Am I correct you allow these triggers to present across two shoes??

Shoes doesn't matter buddy. It is only a sequence of wins and losses for me. Say it is coin flipping and if they change coin, should it change any probability? I do not understand why guys like you who has considerable knowledge of math and experience ask such questions.

Quote What is bet spread for most of your online casinos? Can u actually see the cut and dealers dispersing cards for each individual hand??

Online, it is 10 to 50k on most tables and 25 to 5k-10k on others. I hate restrained bet limits. Although my current methodology seldom requires bet of more than 15 units.

QuoteNext News Story: "ALBALAHA COMING TO AMERICA"

   Maybe some day. I do not want to feature in the black book of casinos. Thanks for the best wishes

#2 Throughout below average session won too with +50
          72 Wins vs 83 losses, Max DD=-25, max bet= 7 units

L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W

I was doing final tests of my latest methodology to see whether I get +50 or -100 first in some below average annoying sessions.
Got +53 in this session of 48 wins vs 64 losses, max DD= -16, max bet= 8 units.


L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W

It appears to be finalized.
             I will play with alert, trigger and pause-resume and a stop loss (collectively, I call them extreme variance management).

An alert of my choice would be any of them:
30 consecutive trials with 9 or lesser wins; or
8 or more consecutive losses before a W hits; or
10 or more losses, in the last two wins like LLLLLLWLLLLW
These will be a 2 SD (below mean) case

Any WLW or WW after an alert will "trigger" or start my attack

Pause-resume will be my secret recipe. I have a very basic strategy to use it where it is not practically possible to pause your betting in a real casino. I will still use its efficacy.
My money mgt is my innovation whose potential has been shown in this topic:
https://betselection.cc/index.php?topic=11314.0

Plus, I will keep a target of +50 and stop loss of -100

I believe that due to sequential probability, I have got at least 90% chances to win a session and combining all these forces would make it 95%. However, certain sessions might not yield 50 units. Afterall, I have very wild randomness to fight with.

Only downside of this strategy is to wait for a valid alert but even if I have access to 4-5 tables with marquee, it is easy to get 3-5 alerts in 5-8 hours in a real casino, in baccarat. I have got access to 50+ tables of live baccarat online 24x7x365 so easy for me to get even more everyday.

I TRIED ONE SUCH TRIGGER AND GOT 30 WINS VS 35 LOSSES IN THE SESSION AFTER TRIGGER. IT FINISHED WITH +15 UNITS. Max bet=5 units and the Worst DD=-19.
        Here is the Session:
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
W

AsymBacGuy,
                       I have no experience of craps and bets, probabilities and payouts associated with it. I worked on an MM for long run since long as short run is full of uncertainties. Merely wishing a good session or fooling ourselves with, "I won't get this many losses, I will rather play inverse" etc are meant for newbies. In reality, it is negative variance that kills a session otherwise even basic players would come up smiling from a casino using basic silly progressions. Indeed, the same silly progressions kick him out of casino faster, empty handed.
             Expecting flat bet wins in the long run is the silliest of all. Although it harms you the least, so the best choice for those frustrated minds who are addicted to gambling and understand that loss is the fate.
             Understanding flaws of any MM and its capability to withstand hugest variance alongwith additional capacity of winning in lesser wins than losses, in a pre determined manner, without seeking compensatory or clumping wins is the HG.
             Ironically and unfortunately, In my two decades of reading hundreds of books and sites, dozens of forums with thousands of topics, I barely could find 3-4 ideas trying for an MM for long run. Self proclaimed Advantage players insist that their way is the only way. They get advantage in their betselection, get more wins than losses and thus win for sure.
           I am working on the side that was presumed to be impossible. Getting a definitive edge with Money management and Extreme Variance Management techniques. I think I am pretty successful. I saw no session so far that can beat me down, including the worst recorded ones. I always win in the long run with my latest way. Still testing and tweaking to make it better, if possible.
                 Any person who has understanding of the logic behind making an MM and goals as I mentioned ut supra , can create a long runner winner. There are hundreds of way, it could be achieved.