Thanks ADulay for the feedback/opinion.

I play a lot in a state with many Indian casinos. I'm currently trying to get one tribe to install Stadium Bac(live dealer /broadcast to their other cas).

I have acquaintances that perceive Bovada offers a fair game. I have no opinion as I can't set up an online account in my state. Though I can travel a few minutes across state lines and immediately start receiving email/ texts for setting up an account from online gambling sites including MGM,Caesars,..etc)LOL

*The indian casinos/horse racing industries lobby the state to not allow any form of online gambling(for obvious reasons) as they want you to play at their casino or racino.
One tribe even offers an online site(cayman islands or costa rica I believe,...etc), yet won't allow their own tribal members to gamble on that site.


Continued Success,

 

Thx for your thoughts Albalaha.

I'm also monitoring BITI(Proshares Short Bitcoin ETF) and have already bought a stake in this.

I'm in anticipatory mode waiting to see what the U.S. government decides on the Blackrock ETF application. I believe a leverage opportunity may present if one can jump on the Blackrock ETF immediately after its offering (if it does indeed get approved).

My opinion is that it will as the U.S. Gov wants to control the whole crypto game. This is important when a country wants to prop up its currency (and the U.S. Gov) most certainly does. It's also important to watch gold prices and how Gold is involved in countries' manipulation of their respective currencies.


Continued Success,

Thx JeremyNord. Do you have preferred sites that you trust?

My main reservation is that online cas are not required to win or lose against two or more players. In other words, its my understanding they could play against you and I at same time with two separate RNGs.

Meaning they could easily manipulate the results and still present overall results that appear random and within +- SD of whatever their governing body requires(if they even have a governing body). I do not know as I have never played online cas. So maybe I am just misinformed.

What is your opinion?



Thx in advance.

Bally6354--Thx for posting outcomes. I probably would not have been in anticipation for that 11-Streak B run. Especially that early in shoe with nothing beforehand. The predetermined B-only bettors doing a pospro likely did well. Though they may have given it back in latter part of shoe as I would guess P tried to make a comeback /closed the gap before the shoe was finished.
------------------------------------------------------------------


I agree 8OR9:
"...if the runs are mostly 3 or less, it is very difficult to bet them since you can get numerous possibilities such as  BBB or PPP or BBP or PPB  BBPP or PPBB  or PBBB or BPPP  or junk such as  PPBBB PPPBB PBPP  BBPPP  BBBPP  etc etc etc etc..."

    I like to see both sides (P and B) holding at threes or twos, versus only one side holding. That is, when I look immediately to the most recent outcomes on tote I prefer to see a consensus shelf.
If both sides are holding at the same shelf, I perceive that as being a little stronger vs just one side holding. My logic is that early in the shoe (when most all cards are still available) this consistent holding for both sides suggest the ordering of the cards are not showing favoritism. Especially if we have also observed a cyclical rotation of number of cards in each hand(i.e., 4,5,6 cards per hand) as this sometimes gives me an extra nudge to bet against this shelf. Typically, I only make two swipes at it: For example if both sides have just stopped at 3 and then I see (e.g.,BBB) again for the second time: I may try two attempts with P/P wagers. If it has now gone BBB BB I will cease/watch for another shelf or trigger.


Continued Success,

Thx 8OR9. Interesting.
Another crypto story today (11/2/23) with link posted below. Sam BankmansFried was convicted today and faces up to 110 years total. My prediction is that he won't even receive 1/2 of the total time. He will likely get pardoned in a few years by an outgoing president.

Sam bankmans fried


Continued Success,

Alrelax in the initial post on this thread:

"...Sit down and seriously measure yourself against your wins, losses and the decisions you made with the reasons you did. Interpretation of your experience is what will clearly give you real advantage with your decision making process in the game of baccarat.  ..."

    I think our brain is constantly /effortlessly calculating risk. Same as when we our wagering Bac as when we are driving a car. Our brain is constantly assessing other drivers perceived skill (or lack of), road conditions, speed,...etc.

The great thing about our risk calculation at Bac is that we also have the Laws of Probability hovering above each shoe to help guide us as well as history of that shoe, card removal,..etc.

Personally, I find my risk calculation at the bac table is more accurate when I drive a little slower/I wait for a junction in the highway where the Laws of Probability are also intersecting with shoe history, current trends, knowledge of what game wants to produce, what THIS shoe is producing,...etc.
I find it safer to not speed too much for too long.

More later and have a great day. Im getting on the road /headed to the office(cas).

Cheers,

I agree albalaha in that cryptos may be a positive investment going forward. However, I think many of the current cryptos will cease to exist ten years from now (if not sooner). I am monitoring a few and continue to like what I see from one you mentioned awhile back: XNO (Nano). In part due to its "relatively" low volatility in recent months.

I'm continuing to monitor the Blackrock application for a Bitcoin ETF as I think investing in it at the very beginning (immediately after its approval). Mainly to give one an opportunity to Short has some potential leveraging options going forward.

Bitcoin gives up gains after BlackRock denies ETF approval report


Continued Success,

Hi all,

I really like AsymBacGuys' post #901 above. Alot of nuggets/worthy of repeated views from time to time.

In Ayms post #904 above:

"...On the other end, severely clustered enemies might be a sign of those "deviated" shoes giving us some or a lot of trouble and normally such shoes will more probably belong to the "unrandom category".
For example, when sharp enemy clusters happen at the start of the shoe or in the first 1/3 of the shoe, we might think that the E/F final ratio will be surpassed beyond the normal values.  ..."


    I concur with my own play. I find really easy Net+ win shoes often start positive and have only minimal, if any drawdowns. Also, my really bad shoes where I finish Net- often start with subpar hit rate (Even if I recover or partially recover) and often my hit rate doesn't improve much in that shoe.

One thing that I perceive helps me survive the shoes starting out as net- shoes is to not feel a need for 100% recovery in that one shoe. So as an example if I drawdown -800 on a 2000 buyin, then recover so that Im only Net: -200 after 60--70% of shoe. I feel blessed/fortunate as often this is where players dig a very deep hole, IMO. Though I could indeed see favorable environments in latter part of that shoe and recover after that first brief uptick and recovery. However, after that one partial recovery I seldom see another recovery spot. I sometimes find it optimum to simply stand still and monitor while I wait for the beginning of a new shoe. Just me personally.


Asyms' post #909:
"...Trying to be more right than wrong per every hand dealt is impossible and we're pretty certain that it's impossible either when betting half hands of a shoe.
For that matter we have tried to operate our algos by a betting frequency close to 1/3 of total hands dealt and itlr results were a disaster.

To stay put in the vast majority of the times is the key to have success itlr as just a single or a couple of hands that went wrong mathematically could transform a wonderful sequence into a horrible one.  ..."


    I agree that fewer hands are often optimum vs. more hands. Especially if one is wagering a static bet at a predetermined spot (Which I do not). Your 33% may be accurate but I actually think for myself its actually less than 33%. I keep meticulous records and have noted (one wager) as my fewest ever wagered in one full shoe. My "most wagers" per shoe sometimes will approach 15-25 but only occasionally/ only in a shoe with several strong continuous events showing, which is rare. My typical number of wagers per 6-deck shoe is in the range of 8-12 placed bets.


Continued Success to All,

ash190 in #16 above: I like that one.
---------------------------------------------------------------




"THE RACE IS NOT ALWAYS TO THE SWIFT, NOR THE BATTLE TO THE STRONG, BUT THAT'S THE WAY TO BET." — DAMON RUNYON

Hi Albalaha

"...I played latest three instead of two and had better results. Played a few dozen sessions. Mostly easy win. Anyone else tried this?..."

I have not tested enough to form an opinion yet(using your bet-selection criteria above).

Most all individual-bet selection criteria I've tested for Roulette tend to suggest between 3.0 and 4.0 Indvidual numerals seems to perform best. That is, when my wagering objective is to balance win potential with buyin survival.


Continued Success,

Hi AsymBacGuy

In your post a couple days ago:
"...Algos work because they try to estimate the relationship between the actual card distribution and the "average card distribution".

Players "guessing" doesn't work because it tends to get rid of the "average" privileging the "actual".

On the contrary, "triggers" players do not win either as they put too much emphasis about the "expected" instead of assigning a proper value on the "actual"...."

There was once a Bac App on youtube a group was selling that one could use to make a decision on P vs B. I also see players at Stadium Bac in Biloxi,Mississippi, USA  et al casinos utilizing an app on their phone. They would enter each and every card extracted. The casinos didn't seem to care as they walked by and didn't ask questions or say anything.


* I do not know if the app was analyzing patterns and then utilizing an algorithm to project a winner based on the previous patterns or simply assessing the cards removed (& remaining) and projecting a winner based on that alone(The edge would only be minimal on the latter and still may not neutralize 100% of house edge, IMO).


Any thoughts?

I typically don't play Bac on Sunday. However, a bac comrade asked I travel with him to check out a new Bac Version: 3 Dice Bac by Galaxy Gaming. The design and rules are as follows:

Three dice are placed in a cup for each side Player and Banker.
Each cup has a clear lid. The dealer shakes each cup and flips the cup upside down in front of the players and raises the cup upward from the lid exposing the three dice with the top of each die(3) totaling the respective scores.
The totals are calculated like cards(e.g., 3 Die total of 12 would result in that sides' score being 2)

*Commission Free
     *Push on a win with totals = 3-0( for both sides).
*No drawing rules
*Several bonus wagers such as any 3-0 win, with payout of 35-0. So players could hedge on the above push if one desires.
*My research indicates that some casinos will allow the players to shake the cup. Though the casino I played did not allow players to shake the cup.
 
My Questions:
Anybody played this version?
What is the house edge for the 3-0 Push?
Addendum thoughts and suggestions?


Thanks in advance,kfb

From Billy Walters, the world's greatest and most successful sports gambler.

A great read with several applications to other types of gambling. Thanks to forum alum AsymBacGuy for recommending this book. I purchased a couple weeks after its release and concur with Asym's opinion.

Gambler Secrets from a Life at Risk(Billy Walters,2023)



Continued Success,

Delayed decision re: Bitcoin ETF application by Black Rock.

https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/etf/bitcoin-etf-spot-sec-ark-21-shares-crypto-market-2023-9

Five class-action lawsuits filed against Vegas casinos for neglecting to protect personal ID records

https://www.reviewjournal.com/business/casinos-gaming/mgm-caesars-face-class-action-lawsuits-over-cyberattacks-2910637/#:~:text=Five%20class%20action%20lawsuits%20filed%20in%20Nevada%20District,compromised%20during%20separate%20attacks%20made%20public%20this%20month.