alrelax above:

"...1s and 2s to me are very dangerous, IMO.  However, and NOT double talking, I do well on doubles.  But repetitive and IAR doubles, not sporadic 1s/2s. ..."

I agree on getting in sync with 2x2s vs 1x2s on continuous outcomes. I tend to see that as well.

*Side story regarding 2x2s:

One casino I play has for over 5years(My keeping records) produced more of these continues 2x2 steaks(by # and length) vs expectation. By length I mean it starts with 2x2(e.g., ppbb, or vice versa).  I haven't compared it with (1x2s) or anything besides the number/length of 2x2s expected per shoe.

I just know this phenomenon continues to present(along with two other players) that have monitored/noticed as well after I showed them my data. I do not know why and though I've only played approximately 5K shoes here(so small sample) this coincidence continues to hold. Maybe its due in part to us "watching" for the 2x2 series and so maybe getting on earlier. I do not know.
 
Other possible explanations we considered was that maybe the "profile" for this particular casino is that maybe they buy the exact same pre-shuffled cards/ then do a very precise inhouse shuffle each time,..etc. I do not know. I acknowledge it is only an approx 5k sample size so maybe just coincidence. Maybe in time it will decrease back toward expectation.

Hopefully it continues. This is the main reason I play here as I favor all of my other casinos over this one(Poor ventilation, clothes always spell like smoke, older building, poor lighting,...etc).
However, until this 2x2 coincidence decreases I will continue to play /watch with anticipation for the dos y dos.


Continued Success,

Thx Asym for your prompt reply to my Q above.

re:Your addendum comment in same post above:

 "...You could argue that a BBB sequence should be even more shifted toward an A, so enticing to prolong the A betting at the same pattern.
Our data do not suggest to keep betting and for practical reasons waiting the BBB trigger to show up before wagering is a waste of time...."

Q--What does your data suggest for a BBBB_ sequence ??
 
For example
PBBBB_ or
PPBBBB_ or
PPPBBBB_ or
PPPPBBBB_ 

? all the same or do u treat them differently?


Thank You,

Hi Asym.Good points.

On the following:
"...d) betting toward A after a couple of BB is a strong EV+ move...."

Do u mean after every BB bet for "A".

"OR"

Do u mean after a couple or more BB setups fail to go "A", THEN you wager the next BB to go "A"  ??


Thx in advance,

alrelax in post#3 above:

"...Something else I have discovered with physical visualization after years of play.  Flat betting and negative progressions will lead you to loss of bank rolls.  PERIOD. ..."

    I am in agreement re: Flat betting and negative progressions.

I play with a couple players that win with negative progressions. However, they must rely on a 10K risk per day/it takes many winning sessions to approach the 10K risk. They seldom win more than 3-5units net and frequently jeopardize their buyin.

I do not notice any daily players winning consistently with Flat betting. Though, I don't watch everyone and don't ask them if they are net+ or net-,....etc. So possible I guess.

I do see some winning more days than not with Flat betting. They appear to risk a small amount for a 1-2 unit win. For example, one player risks 13 units($1300) per day/ his goal is >=1-2units. It is my opinion the main attribute of his method is the limited risk(i.e., 13units). He is very experienced and doesn't feel a need to bet very often. So I do think it can be done but my perception is that if one can put together >=3iar win streaks one will be more profitable Net+ by utilizing a reasonable PosProgression.
To each their own I guess.


An quick example of why I prefer a pos progression almost 100% of the time. Yesterday(Sat) I went to the casino as I had some free play and gifts that were (use it or lose it).

I keep meticulous records and my hit rate for the first session across two shoes: 13W,10L. My net win was 7.2units.
Another session across two shoes was 8W, 10L. My net win was 4.7 units. Neither session was eventful really. No long win streaks for me. Mostly just routine shoes with typical swaying back/forth.
My buyin was never in jeopardy. My point is that if I had FLAT bet my overall net win would have been (+1unit).

My advocacy for a reasonable positive progression is that in average shoes one can still pickup a net+ and if one gets on any kind of a WinIAR(In-A-Row) streak of >=4-5 hits in a row (same or not-same events) on a pospro one can win >=40-60% of buyin.



Continued Success To All,

?Should Baccarat Be An Olympic Sport?

     I will make a proposal to the IOC(International Olympic Committee).

For a variety of reasons I have not watched the paris olympics. Partly due to the (6 hrs) time difference. Partly due to not understanding some of the "sports".

However, I have watched some youtube et al channels replays for some of the highlights.
Cole Hocker winning the 1500M was impressive. Sydney McLaughlin-Levrone was impressive and she seems like a class act. Femke Bol has been impressive(Her slogan could be: "If your not Dutch your not much"). The Cuban wrestler (M. Lopez) winning 5 consec olympic Gold medals /then retiring by leaving his shoes on the mat was great. I think he is 41 or so. Impressive for an old guy.

As I skimmed through the channels trying to find certain highlights from the previous days results I ran across some sports being shown I've never seen(or heard of until now).


Womens Breaking ??
I don't know what this is. Not sure on how one would qualify. Im guessing not all countries offer this sport.

Boulder and Lead??
I don't know what this is. I didn't see this sport but saw the event name and pondered what this entails. Maybe players seeing who can heave a rock-boulder or ball of lead the farthest??

Syncronized Drowning??
Im not 100% sure on the objective here. I scanned through the channels and paused a second at this event being shown. I saw two feet sticking up out of the water.(All one could see were toes, feet, ankles, and calves). Im guessing the athlete was upside down. It appeared the toes and feet were moving to music. My highschool and college didn't offer this sport.

Several other "sports" that I didn't see. However, based on the name alone Im not sure how a score was determined and how we would decide the winner or loser.


?Should Baccarat Be An Olympic Sport?
     So obviously my proposal for Bac to be offered as an olympic sport is not too far fetched.
My initial thoughts would be to do it "Midi" style. This way it could be shown like the hours of WSOP on TV is now. The cameras could show us bending the edge of the card corner. The cameras could show our chip totals/ maybe first card for each side,...etc. Maybe show the players anticipation awaiting our 3rd card draw. They could show each players height and weight and favorite food,...etc. Im just brain storming at this point.

My only concern is that if the IOC does indeed accept my proposal for Bac. Then, this would leave it open for other sports such as Spelling Bees.
I think ESPN already shows this sport on all their sports channels. I could just see some 5th grade girl from India making it to the finals against me/ talking smack. I would demand the IOC make her first word: Bakaratte.



Continued Success,

Re: Gizmotron
I don't know him /never played with him. He has alot of fine posts, IMO.

I've reviewed many of his posts. However, since I have never focused as much time on roulette (vs Bac) I didn't take the time to discuss with him.
He is vague on some of his approach (Maybe on purpose as many + players choose not to embellish 100% of the recipe to their "secret sauce"). However, he offers enough that one can still glean some of his approach. Just my opinion.

I play Bac(and a little roulette) with an octogenarion that is probably the only person I know that has successfully made a living playing roulette. He knows Gizmo and communicated with him in the past. He has played with him and knows one of his family members. He has said "gizmo knows some stuff" about roulette and considers his writings helpful.

Personally, I am not 100% clear on exactly how Gizmo plays but find his posts worthy of further study.


Continued Success,

Hi AsymBacGuy. re: post#1128 above:

"...Thus if we bet toward + after a first + appearance or toward + after a single -, only a sequence as +-- or --+- will get us losers two times in a row; and of course longer than this successions will prolong such losing streak as +--+- or --+--...."

    As a side note: I think its also advantageous to only make "two swipes" against an events' continuance. IMO it is a SBS(Superior Bac Strategy) for one to limit how many times we chase something. We obviously want the "two swipes" to have the laws of probability on our side(at least theoretically).

I prefer a trigger-to-stop(TTS) be set at two steps. My preference is to make the two attempts slightly different(e.g., $240,250; or in other words X, X._") as I don't see any benefit to wagering the exact same $ on any two consecutive wagers.
Regardless if pospro or negpro or winning or losing. A slight difference can help offset the H.E.(or enhance ours), yet won't significantly add to ones buyin volatility.

and:


"...Given the shortness of derived patterns, it's obvious that a single pair of - signs happening in a shoe means that the shoe won't be a final winning shoe.
Since winning shoes are more frequent than losing ones, in some sense is like that the actual card distribution must be particularly full of + signs at the very start of it to get an advantage. .."

    I like the BOLD above,

Continued Success

It looks like AC Brick/Mortar cas win in June 2024 was up 1 percent compared with June 2023.

??Could AC be making a comeback??? LOL.

Unfortunately for most of AC they are simply doing the TunicaTwoStep. Both gambling locations have an uphill battle IMO.

Re: AC, too much competition from the NY et al east coast casinos. Historically poor management/ not protecting market share.

Re: Tunica, similar problems with competition from Indian casinos in Oklahoma and recent legislation permitting cas in nearby Arkansas.

Just my opinions and I wish them well as I dislike seeing any business go under. Even when it is partially self induced.
_____________________________________________________________
AC June, 2024

Table and slot win:

Bally's up 9 pct compared to 6/23
Borgata up 6.2 pct compared to 6/23
Caesars down 11.1 pct compared to 6/23
GN up 5.9 pct compared to 6/23
Hard Rock up 11.8 pct compared to 6/23
Harrah's down 15.5 pct compared to 6/23
Ocean down 4 pct compared to 6/23
Resorts down 2 pct compared to 6/23
Trop down 4 pct compared to 6/23

Ranked in order of table/slot revenue, June 2024, millions: Borg (64.3), HR (48.4), Ocean (33.5), Trop (20.2), Caesars (19), Harrah's (17.7), Resorts (14.9), Bally's (13.5), GN (12.5)

Internet gaming revenue: 6/24 (186.8 mill), 6/23 (149.3 mill)
NJ sports betting revenue: 6/24 (60.1 mill), 6/23 (66.3 mill)




Continued Success To All,

Hi AsymBacGuy

Asym above in post#1126:

"...My guess is that by introducing those side bets, casinos have transformed a kind of coin flip low edge game into a more appealing constant chase right on those "unlikely" bets that could guarantee huge returns.
Especially when players are losing, so mathematically aggravating the losses.

It's not a coincidence that Vegas HS rooms do not offer EZ tables where the vast majority of bets is payed 1:1, probably knowing that it'll be very unlikely that tourists are willing to bet the F-7 wager as being too rare to happen.
In any instance at EZ tables the HE is 1.01%/1.24% and 7.6%, whereas at Tiger/Lucky 6 tables (very common at HS rooms) HE is 1.46%/1.24% and 14% plus...."



]by introducing those side bets, casinos have transformed a kind of coin flip low edge game into a more appealing constant chase right on those "unlikely" bets that could guarantee huge returns.
[/b]
    Its my opinion the casinos' main MO is to induce hedging(Not just in Bac). In most all games this is detrimental to the players success. At least I am not aware of any "long-term" advantage from hedging(Maybe short-term buyin preservation I guess). Yet I see players every day at the Bac tables doing so on most of their bets.

Other than sports betting(Arbitrage potential) any type of hedging or partial hedging is not recommended. But even in sports betting if one can consistently pick an EV+ wager to utilize with the arbitrage. Then one would be better off to simply wager on that EV+ bet.




Continued Success,

Caesar's announced a few days ago that they have reached an agreement to sell the WSOP brand to NSUS group owners of GG Poker for $500 million. Caesar's retains the right to host the WSOP for 20 years at their casinos.

Any thoughts??

https://newsroom.caesars.com/press-releases/press-release-details/2024/Caesars-Entertainment-Agrees-to-Sell-World-Series-of-Poker-Brand-to-NSUS-Group-for-US500-million/default.aspx?utm_source=awin&utm_medium=affiliate&utm_campaign=AM_brand&utm_term=771467-Shoreline+Design&sv1=affiliate&sv_campaign_id=771467&awc=6145_1722650946_2835d31d7ccc3424160fb12022d65c40&utm_content=publisherLink

Hi AsymBacGuy
Asyms statement in post#1113 above:

"..The main problem of EZ tables is that a diluted hyper selective strategy cannot afford to get a "push" on F-7 Banker winning spots, thus enticing us to bet the F-7 side bet burdened by a bad 7.6% HE (even though such bet covering the main bet should be 1/40).  ..."

I could not have stated it better.
Many years ago shen I first started my Bac journey I wrote down all the drawing rules for bac "line-by-line". Then I wrote down all the bonus bets( line-by-line) and what formations were needed to form said winning wagers. I wondered how the inventor came up with these new bonus bets for this new layout. I wondered if some formations were more complex than others. Also, how did the inventor convince the casinos this was a superior layout for THEM(I think most know how they(Cas) were convinced).

How did the "more probable" events affect the now "less probable" events. Also, vice versa,...etc.
Then I unraveled each bonus bet and asked myself: Why would the casino offer such bets.
More importantly I pondered: When these bonus bets were MORE probable what exactly MUST be less probable??Also, vice versa.
?Did the probability of the aforementioned bonus bets have any effect on the traditionally offered wagers(B or P or T) probabilities.?
? Did the probability of all events remain static throughout a shoe or did certain events temporarily alter probability for seemingly unrelated events.

I know the above exercise may seem overly simplistic and elementary. However, it offered some insight as to when certain events (&wagers) were to be put on sabbatical(At least temporarily).

Good luck to all,

Asym above:

"...3- Most of the times third(s) card favors the already higher point, here the ideal points would be when the third(s) card always make a ZERO impact over the final outcome or to repeatedly help the same underdog side.
Whenever the card distribution seems to be so polarized to help consecutively the underdog side, we'd better forget the 2 factor.
Conversely, more emphasis must be given to the side not being sensibly affected for long by the third card impact...."


The part in bold is a good item to monitor.

alrelax:
"...My friend is there right now, he wagered $1,500 on first, full parlay on second, full parlay on third and then pulled down 6 times $6,000 wagers.  Lost the last one to the Natural 9 players win.  So he won $36k...."

    I like your friends full parlays early in the W streak. Its my belief if one chooses to do a pospro one must press early /often. The compounding on say hits number 4th,5th,6th,..10th,....etc is a direct function of what was compounded between wager#1 and wager#2.

??What was your friends buyin for the $1500 base unit??

Hi Asym
In post #1103 above you say(and I agree) :

"...Note: 2CIP must be intended as the "higher" 2CIP falling at one side (H2CIP), obviuosly this is a symmetrical (but slight dependent) probability.

But clustered or isolated H2CIP situations are more affected by the actual card distribution, subtly privileging the opposite side which won the last hand...."

    Q wouldn't this favor P as P would prefer NOT to draw a third card since then B may be allowed to exercise its option(i.e., to draw or not to draw). E.G. lets say there are more 8/9 cards remaining and we see BPB_ , wager P??.

Thoughts?

   

   

Thx Asym for answering my questions up above.


Also, Asym in post #1095 above:

"...I mean that a 2-3-xxxx-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2 sequence remains a strong unlikely ratio shifted towards isolated patterns and not towards clustered patterns. Is=1 and Cl=1.
Therefore after this sequence we'll expect more 2s clustered than isolated 2s, even though the current 2/3 ratio is 9/1.
Of course we can't know about the precise lenght of those clustered events, just about that they must catch up a "quality" factor.
The same tool applies to the isolated events whenever the Is/Cl ratio is strongly or moderately shifted towards the right clustered side. (Meaning that now we'll expect more isolated events than clustered events)...."

    I agree 100% as most any event(simple or complex) that is heavily clumped will soon appear with longer gaps in between. Vice versa as well.

I also think we can assert the same claim for many other types of events: (e.g., Events occurring in-a-row will seldom continue and we should anticipate something different). 
What I mean is that we should not expect an 8-Deck shoe to present a certain event from beginning to end.
Its my opinion that at least part of the reason is the constant shifting between 4-5-6 cards per hand. Coupled with the fact cards are removed after only one use. So there is competition between other events wanting to show based on their own respective probability as well.



Cheers,