Imo to win at baccarat itlr, our plan must be considered in cycles adhering at most by taking into account just two steps:
1- winning the first hand wagered is of outmost importance;
2- winning the second hand whether the first was lost.
This simple two step wagers plan considered by cycles must have each a higher 75% of success.
When it happens to be wrong at both opportunities, we need to be very careful to place more bets as strong negative variance is going to come out more often than we think.
Thus waiting to get a fictional positive outcome is not sufficient to restart the betting.
The reason is that baccarat is very similar to a coin flip endless proposition, therefore WW, WL, LW and LL sequences are presenting whimsically but itlr they'll be equal.
We cannot guess the lenght of the streaks, therefore we should simplify the problem by considering columns as singled or streaky (any streak).
It doesn't matter what strategy we like to adopt, what really counts is whether how many times we'll win the first or the second hand (really or fictionally), then classifying the results.
Since any bac shoe is a finite limited model, we know that more often than not a losing series won't be balanced by a perfect counterpart and the same is true taken in the opposite direction.
I mean that some shoes cannot be played at all as we do not want to find us in the position to guess the opposite of what our plan is dictating.
In a word, we'll be in a far better shape not playing certain shoes not fitting our plan at the start than trying to follow the actual shoe or, even worse, trying to hope to get balanced outcomes that have no room to show up.
Professional players like to bet a lot on very few spots and they never want to chase previous losses and it's not a coincidence that they'll stop the betting after two consecutive losses.
as.
1- winning the first hand wagered is of outmost importance;
2- winning the second hand whether the first was lost.
This simple two step wagers plan considered by cycles must have each a higher 75% of success.
When it happens to be wrong at both opportunities, we need to be very careful to place more bets as strong negative variance is going to come out more often than we think.
Thus waiting to get a fictional positive outcome is not sufficient to restart the betting.
The reason is that baccarat is very similar to a coin flip endless proposition, therefore WW, WL, LW and LL sequences are presenting whimsically but itlr they'll be equal.
We cannot guess the lenght of the streaks, therefore we should simplify the problem by considering columns as singled or streaky (any streak).
It doesn't matter what strategy we like to adopt, what really counts is whether how many times we'll win the first or the second hand (really or fictionally), then classifying the results.
Since any bac shoe is a finite limited model, we know that more often than not a losing series won't be balanced by a perfect counterpart and the same is true taken in the opposite direction.
I mean that some shoes cannot be played at all as we do not want to find us in the position to guess the opposite of what our plan is dictating.
In a word, we'll be in a far better shape not playing certain shoes not fitting our plan at the start than trying to follow the actual shoe or, even worse, trying to hope to get balanced outcomes that have no room to show up.
Professional players like to bet a lot on very few spots and they never want to chase previous losses and it's not a coincidence that they'll stop the betting after two consecutive losses.
as.