How many of you go for a trigger to start bet? Do you think it useful/helpful?
In my humble opinion and observation, it doesn't change probability further but it could be utilized to ward off the worst possible
probabilities and if we take multiple triggers together and their net total impact, I found it helpful logically and probability wise too. We should not expect any in built advantage with any trigger or flat bet win with it.

       Let me illustrate as to how I perceive it can be used.
Say, I m looking for a trigger of 1SD or worse to cool off and then I bet for the same length, expecting better.
LLLLLLLLLLWLLLLWLW , 15 LOSSES AND ONLY 3 WINS.
If I bet upto 18 more decisions hereafter, I might get a similar stretch ahead but very few times. Mostly, I will get something like 9:9 or 7:11 or 8:10 win:loss ratio. Getting LLLLLLLLLLWLLLLWLWLLLLLLLLLLWLLLLWLW is not impossible but definitely rare.

Such triggers might not be good for playing for +1 but excellent for my millionaire's plan where I want to play for 80-90% winning sessions, with 50-100 units' gain or loss.

What do you say on this?

There are many challenges in accomplishing this. My core programmer is sick, so manual testing are being relied upon. Stop loss, stop win and max bet are other crucial issues to be decided and finalized.
     A fully programmed and configurable tracker makes it super easy to analyze the real impact in the long run but I can't compromise the method with a stranger.
Keep in touch. Best of luck to all for your future sessions.

Both are important for me but I focused always on method 1 as it was considered impossible by so called math geniuses. The premises behind their belief of casino games being unbeatable are the house edge and a silly belief that player will bet 1 unit or any fix/flat bet permanently.
     After somewhat accomplishing the first method, now I m focused on the other and very close to finishing it.

I have a query for fellow members:
          Which one is better?

1. A method that always gets +1 in the long run and earns averagely in average sessions; or

2. A method that either wins 50 units minimum or loses 100 units maximum with 90% probability to finish with a win.

It is more or less successful. The basic premise behind this method is Regression towards mean which is a statistical reality. However, we can not guess the length of a session when it finally reaches near equilibrium situation. I am ready with a way to play where chance of winning 50 units or chance to lose max 100 units with 90% certainty to win a session and after finalization won't look back to play anything else. Still fine tuning on extreme variance management and stop loss. One good aspect of this method is play for the day and do not drag your sessions whether you win or lose.

My main goal in this project is to win at least 100 units per session with a risk of like amount of loss and probability to get a losing session should not be more than 20%. Once accomplished, nothing will be left for me but to play, play and keep playing fearlessly.
             It is a hybrid type MM (positive aided with negative progression) and could be trigger based. Playing with trigger will ensure this 80:20 win: loss sessions. On it for a few days. See enough light.

Hey friends,
             I am very excited to start my dream project which I named: "millionaire's plan"
It will be a betting plan to earn huge when game finally stops. The game could take 10 hands to upto 1000 hands/trials to conclude but it will not be to win only 1 unit but the maximum possible. Playing for the long run doesn't mean playing days and nights at a stretch.

To do this perfectly, I need a table limit of 1-1000 to be safest and surest but I would try to finalize it in a table limit of 1-100 too.
        I have broad outlines of the system ready. Let's see if it finally concludes as I desire.
Please wish me all the best.
Regards.

P.S.: anybody ever tried to earn as huge with any realistic plan? I got excited to read the book, "13 at the bank" but that was based on unrealistic premises which could be tested to be a failure easily via simulations.

?1)Since your preference is to wager P in Bac--Do you try to wager in shoe sections that may have a tendency to indeed provide optimum opportunities for a P win?
Ans: I wager P for the sake of convenience of calculating net losses and wins. It is as random as B and one can choose either of them or any EC bet for that matter.

?2) Do you have a predetermined # of wagers per shoe that you will attempt (Wins and or L), and abandon the shoe because you lost X# of initial wagers( Or won X# of initial wagers)?

Ans: Shoe or deck or any block of attempts do not matter. Every bet is independent and can be tried.

     For Example: Lets say you won your first 12 wagers on P and P is also now ahead by 12. Obviously, if we had to make a one time wager I think the majority of us would guess the final tally is more likely to have a difference of 2 vs 22.
??Or do you would you just view as its all random /one big shoe and continue playing that shoe wagering on P to continue its domination?

Ans: I already answered it. Do not try to predict in a random game by seeing earlier results as they are totally unrelated.

Come out of fallacies as they only help casinos and keep you confused eternally.

Q1: Do you indeed mostly focus on Bac?
Answer: My main focus is on EC betting and how to handle variance and HE together.
Q2: Was it the lower H.E. vs say Roulette et al? or the overall outcomes profile for Bac that seemed a better fit for your research?  Other?
Answer: Baccarat is faster than roulette and offers lesser house edge is preferable. I do prefer to bet Player than Banker.
Q3: In earlier years did u also pursue other EC games while hunting for the HG?[/quote]
Answer: I did try many things from sports to stock and a few other games with EC type betting. Actually being an EC bet is not a prerequisite but the payout should be fixed one. I can configure my strategy for playing a single number of roulette as well.

Most of the active forums have abusive, uncontrolled mess. I m missing programmers and math wizards here. They helped me a lot in the past.

I am indeed happy to be here in a compact yet disciplined and well behaved forum. I wish we get more of serious debaters and contributors here.
       Learning is an ongoing process and innovation needs out of box approach as well as deep knowledge.

The core of my strategy for an HG is to work out a long run progression that doesn't require too many chips ever and could sustain worst of the worst too, apart from doing well in little below average cases. Do not expect compensatory number of wins even after the worst.

Quote from: KungFuBac on March 05, 2021, 07:17:20 AM
Hi Albalaha

Thx for your time/reply to my inquiry. I will email u by the weekend as I play bac most days mon-fri. and don't return home til early a.m. ,....etc.

"...You might be new to forum world(or might be there with some other name).."

     This is only bac forum ever joined. I started reading this forum about 8 months ago. I've briefly skimmed through a few in past 10-15 years.
"While reading through some of your posts here I recently realized I had actually read some of your writings (under the Albalaha name) from about 2012--not sure when/where I had copied them from."
You were doing similar studies back then 


All the best,

In 2012, I was neither naïve nor an expert but in between. Although by then I had good access to programmers, some of my writings could be fallacious. Still whatever I wrote had my experience and logic. I did a hell lot of manual and formula based testing on excel sheets apart from doing them on bots/trackers of Ophis, Victor and Stef. Gradually, I had more resources to work out and test more strategies.

Kungfubac,
You might be new to forum world(or might be there with some other name) but are a sensible looking person. Increasing or decreasing bet alone is not a way to win. Increase and decrease should be logical and able to sustain variance till its virtual limits. Every known progression lacks in that side and becomes useless.
       To make a difference, we need to be innovative and keep all fallacies aside.
      You might approach me via email discussing the weaknesses and strengths of your strategy, only if you feel like. I might be of some help.
More later.

Holy Grail of Gambling: Essentials, Part 2:

#8. Play in cycles. One cycle completes when you get a Win. Remember, it might not be a net win though. For example, LLLLLW, here a W after 5 successive losses ends the cycle.

#9. In any cycle, first three bets are the most crucial. You may either pause your bets for the cycle to end with a W or bet minimum possible there.

#10. Do not ever try to push your bets to recover losses due to one or more successive bad cycles like LLLLLLLLLLLW or LLLLWLLLLWLLLLLLW . Play ahead as if nothing of this sort happened to you.

# 11. Free up your self from all the fallacies like after a very bad run, you will get a compensatory set of wins.

#12. There is nothing like patterns that you can exploit. Gizmotron preached this fallacy for long. Every pattern that you see running so far, could reverse while you start to bet in favour of it or could carry further if you go against that. Both are randomly equally likely.

More later.....