Thx alrelax for posts and bump of older posts.

re: alrelax statement "...You want to know something, years ago prior to 2000 or so, the casinos had no score boards and they had larger 14 player/3 dealer tables where the players would actually deal the cards.  But the casinos repeatedly got hurt so they changed the way the game was played, dealt and wagered on. .."

This was about the time I started playing I believe. I don't recall ever playing without at least a basic toteboard--score board,  in my early years. As best I recall , and it seems the toteboards around this time were very basic (or at least not as much detail/events) as the current toteboards. I may be mistaken but don't recall seeing as many bonus wagers then either, again, maybe mistaken as I didn't wager bonus or ties so maybe I just didn't pay attention.

Q1: Prior to late 90s how and what did players track as Im sure players tracked something(e.g., cards, hi-lo, even -odds, p/b,...etc) using /writing on their trusty Chief tablet or portable abacus  , or did majority of players just bet opp or same, only for or only against current dealer??? Other??? 

Thx in advance,

https://lasvegassun.com/news/2022/may/05/player-wins-14-million-at-casino-in-downtown-las-v/



Continued Success To All,

Thx AsymBacGuy for your responses to my reply#570 above.
Apologies for delay as I just returned from a multi-night bac trip.

ABG said: It's true that B or P 3s eventually belong to a more likely 3s/1-2s ratio, nonetheless itlr we'll face a slight greater number of shoes poorer of 3s than richer of 3s.

     I agree 100%. The main issue is we never know how many(3iar+) in that specific shoe, though we do know as each 3iar+ presents there is now one-less 3iar+ in the shoe. IOW the finiteness of Bac does present us with a limiting-type profile on most patterns. Just my thoughts/opinion.

ABG reponded: Another example is considering doubles vs 3+s streaks at byb and/or sr.

     You might clarify as Im not sure exactly what youre suggesting.


I stated in my reply570 the following when giving a hypothesis re: guessing 3iar correct(or incorrect) within 42 wagers in one shoe:

*My hypothesis is they would find almost identical results if I proposed the same exercise for them to try and guess 3iar CORRECT.

ABG said in response to the 42attempts: With that large number of bets I'd agree.

     Aahhh -very astute on your part as that was a key part of my hypothesis and one of the main points I wanted to make.
Meaning--We need to design our wagering regime to be insync with not only our buyin/win goals but also our own personal success rate for hitting X (# in a row wins) or in my proposal NOT being able to avoid 3iar wins(or loss)  streak.

     *I recently presented the scenario above (42 attempts to NOT guess 3iar correct OR incorrect) to three bac comrades that I share tables with approx 4x per week. They mostly do mild-to-steep negpro wagering regimes.
All three players are quite a bit older than me, and though experienced gamers likely haven't played as many hands of bac, in their 70s,  and have gamed at least 20-30+ years i would guess. All retired and I would assume have some mathematical knowledge and or education exposing them to general probabilities. Especially the CPA .
One owned a heating/air business, a dentist, and a CPA. I found it interesting as soon as I presented the criteria the CPA immediately said I would take that bet if you reduce the attempts to 21 vs the 42(meaning he only had to wager 21 attempts in his effort to avoid hitting 3iar). Of course I declined as that was part of my thesis because with the 42-attempt requirement they could not wait/stand on the sideline waiting for "best" opportunities* .
*Which is what we should do--IOW view each shoe as good,better, or best shoes (or sections) for our specific wagering regime/recognize that regardless of ones chosen wagering regime : Not all shoes are "best" and we may want to walk softly around the shoes that start out and are perceived as only "good or better" thus far.


I think most of us will agree:
When our wagering regime needs a certain number IAR(in-a-row) correct (like mine and most pospro) for success it is critical we give ourselves a reasonable number of attempts. Reasonable(i.e., optimum) number of attempts is best if we know our avg success rate (somewhat similar to levels & plateaus) as too many attempts then our profit is too small as a function of our buyin. If #attempts allotted is too few (vs our avg success rate) , then obviously we don't have enough bullets to survive long enough to get that steak. 

This is also a function of our press(or regress) regime as the more aggressive we are the fewer attempts(easier to bust out).
     IMO most players error by wagering  too small as a % of their advantage, house edge,  as well as a f(x) of their wagering strategy. Of course I don't know what their goal is(Im assuming it is to make more than they lose). Though some may simply be trying to get comps or play as long as possible,...etc(to each their own I guess).

Bottomline: We will have more long-term success if we design our whole regime(every single facet and detail) to match our own personal win goals and avg success rate for that specific wagering regime.


Continued Success To All,

https://www.casino.org/news/american-gaming-association-state-states-highlights-igaming/

Thx XXVV--appreciate the informative post above/ u offering opinions and knowledge  on cryptos. It appears Meta1(M1) is holding tough in past week(i think it was around the $360ish USD range the last i checked few days ago). A very good sign imo as you know all markets are down in past few days(even my gold/plat/silver are hitting some small bumps).

I've spent more time in past year researching and studying (due mostly to your posts and links) then in my previous nine years or so since Bitc arrived. I still consider myself naive and uneducated on all things cryptos.

The most concerning part of this learning curve has been the discovery of and abundance of false information by many experts, media, economists, crypto mgr , ...etc pumping cryptos.  Even if my assertion is in error my deduction is that "they all can't be correct" as there also seems to also be very little consensus in the crypto world. It seems many crptos constantly propagate: Invest in my crypto because its special and all the other cryptos are junk,...etc. It makes me wonder which of the few will still be standing five years from now. Just my opinion of course.

I've been researching not only M1 but other cryptos as well. Alot of shaking out of the weak links starting to happen. This should help the larger, the  more efficiently managed, and  the more established( and even the smaller ones that present as seemingly based on a more solid foundation) survive the shake out.

I see Bitcoin last week was in the 36-42k range. I will likely buy a larger stake in Bitcoin in the 20-23k range as my research and analytics a yr or so  ago suggested that as a potentially worthy buy price range. It was in the high 50K range at that time. I may never see that price as I've been waiting for a yr or two. I made a tiny equal-amount purchase of BitC and six other cryptos a few months back as I took approx $7k from Bac winnings and spread evenly across seven cryptos that I had been following/researching (All--100% of them are significantly underwater, and some I could say in the toilet they are so far underwater, lol). So my opinion and price range projecton may or may not have much validity. We shall see.

I like that M1 is tied to a gold standard(although I can't find on their site (and can't ever get a chat response on their site--maybe due to time zone differences) as to whom the 3rd party is that would hold the gold bullion and how is this verified). Maybe its on the site and I simply missed it.

*Noted this week that ceo of MCC(Mining Capital Coin) was indicted in $62 million crypt fraud scheme. I expect we will see more story lines like this in the near future. Probably see an increase in more stories of crptos being hacked too-- As a % it may or may not be much different from other investment vehicles.


Thx again/good investing to all,

Thx AsymBacGuy--i like  your reply567 above/ as always I like how you also think outside the box.

Your proposal :
"For once pretend your goal is to lose faster than you can.
Besides wildly wagering side bets getting a very distant probability to happen, which moves would you take to accomplish this task?"

If I may interject a thought into  your fine thread.

This reminds me of an exercise I often propose to some of my daily bac comrades when we are in deep discussion about the game/ I'm trying to emphasize that although the laws of probability are always hovering I also want to point out how difficult it is to find a whole shoe with (0) 3 iar(in-a-row) win streaks from both P or  B. Meaning its atypical that we will not see a PPP and not see a BBB for a whole shoe.

So I tell them we will wager a $100USD bill  on each shoe(infinite # of shoes or until one of us run out of $100 Bills)  that u will not go the whole shoe failing to guess 3 iar INCORRECT (Meaning they are trying to guess wrong 3 iar) . E.G., So if they think the next outcome is probable to be P, then they would wager B.

My point being its extremely difficult to go one whole shoe and NOT guessing 3iar wrong (just as it is to NOT guess 3iar correct). They obviously will win some of the per shoe $100 wagers, however, I would eventually win more of their Benjamins.

I suggest since we have ~~84 total hands in an 8-deck shoe(they nod in agreement), I say "ok--im giving u 42 chips and the rules are:

A) you must wager all 42 individual chips on separate wagers B or P placement only(no ties or bonus wagers)

B) you must get these 42 wagers decisioned before the end of the shoe(one can't wait too long as one must get 42 wager completed from 82 hands  -tie hands, as the 42 must get decisioned).

C) They can place them any where they want within streak or not.

D) If they go the whole shoe without guessing 3iar wrong they win, if they do guess 3iar wrong then I win their $100 bill.


*My hypothesis is they would find almost identical results if I proposed the same exercise for them to try and guess 3iar CORRECT.

Any thoughts?  Any flaws  or loopholes to be exploited? Will I win more $100 bills than I lose? What if I made it about 2iar or 4iar??


Continued Success To All,

LOL, that's funny. Vegas vacations w chevy chase is an oldie /certainly worth seeing (once anyway as it is certainly slapstick humor).

I play at mostly small casinos in the Midwest,USA and upon entering a couple of the smaller joints with a carnival-type atmosphere, I often think of a specific scene in the above movie:  (Chevy/his country cousin "Ed i think") are trying to get their money back at games such as Rock paper scissors, big wheel, or similar nonsensical "Carnival" type games--of course losing every single wager until they bust.

Im always amazed at some of the carnival games casinos offer and yet will often have the largest crowd gathered around hopelessly or helplessly trying to get rich(Think Big Wheel or 000 Roulette,...etc). 

Very funny,

Continued Success To All,

Thx AsymBacGuy,

"...Since a perfect 'balanced' patterns world happening at each section of the shoe is out of question, we should investigate when a given pattern will take the transitory 'lead' over the counterpart in either W or L way..."
     
Q:How do you prefer to do this task?


Thanks in advance,

Hi all
AsymBacGuy I find your above essay (cluster destiny) interesting. I agree for the most part, however, Im not sure how applicable in real time(i.e., before the streak or non streak have started presenting). That is, to catch ALL of the shorter-length clusters such as WW or WWW wouldn't we need to wager almost every hand?

re your sentence: "...The important thing to remember is that itlr WL patterns vs WW or LL patterns are slight less likely to show up in way or another.   ..."
     Q1 Do you feel the same for patterns such as WLL as  pbb or bpp  are slight less likely to show  VS  a WWW or LLL as ppp or bbb ? What about a 4iar series in the same comparison?

ASymBacGuy: "Probability that a given losing player will get prompt consecutive wins is very low, if such player experienced quite long losing clusters, winning clusters counterpart move more likely about low or moderate clustered patterns at best...."

     Can you elaborate a little more on this as Im not clear? Thx

Continued Success,

Hi XXVV
I hope this finds you doing well.

Any updated opinions re: meta1.io ??
Opinions on other cryptos?

Thanks in advance,kfb

Alrelax in reply 556 above:
"...Reference "beat the game by betting many bets per shoe".  What so so many just never learn or realize, it is much better to bet larger, harder and more serious while limiting the sections we engage in BY FAR!  But not always easy to do.  Seriously.

The bias level will come and go, shoe by shoe, trip by trip.  P >bias, P <bias, B >bias and B <bias.  TRUE, but the 'trick' is to get the spot the other side attempts the instant comeback without being biased by YOUR OWN THOUGHTS, IDEAS, AGENDAS and EXPERIENCES, ETC.   Again no so easy to do.  Think about it. ..."


Perfectly worded/I agree 100%. 

All the best,kfb

Excellent points. I agree with the response from chopchop in reply#34 response to alrelax post:

in part: "...Even the few that are up lifetime will lose close to half of there sessions statistically speaking.
Which got me to thinking about your style of play.  Yes you can lose your buyin just like anyone else, but your pounce on it mentality you describe allows you to really hit some big ones once in awhile. And a loss is a loss, doesn't matter if its death by a thousand cuts or 8 or 9 shots..."

My opinion is we must detach ourselves from our risk money in a way that allows us to "take this risk" when guesses are going well for us(winning more than we are losing or winning several in a row).

A)One method is to wager such a small amount & number of wagers to where losses do not affect our emotions to a higher degree than our fear to lose( greed vs fear ratio comes into play). The problem is that we then need far too many wins as a function of our buyin-to-wager size to where we find favor and hit 5-7 in a row and may only stack 20-40% of buyin (too many wins are needed and like chopchop mentions above: we will get as many losses as wins over enough trials). I think there is a more efficient path(Option B below).

B)Smack them when the smacking is good(meaning we are receiving favor from our bet selection or simply we are in sync with shoe outcomes). In other words bet larger bets either by parlaying our wins early so the casino has more money vested in the current wager than we do(more likely we can detach ourselves from that pressed up wager), --OR--start with a larger wager to begin with and don't spread our losses across a thousand cuts.

I find favor by making  my wager #1 or #2 contain the largest % from MY buyin as in my opinion that is our best chance for benefitting from compounding when we are fortunate enough to win >=4-5 in a row. Many players prefer to do the opposite: press/press/press for their largest wager(& largest % from buyin) on wager 7-8 (fine, yet not optimum in my opinion). We want the casino to have the largest % in that final wager when they do finally pull it into their stack.

All the best and may u all smack the casino hard on your next outing, kfb

https://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2022/03/23/couple-cheats-at-roulette-rivers-casino/




Hopefully the consequences will be rendered promptly and with severity.

Good post AsymBacGuy
I look forward to the next one.


Thanks,
kfb

Hi AsymBacGuy. Thx for your posts.

In reply#529 above you state the following:


"... To set up a long term winning strategy no need to take care of all those factors, maybe you have to do that whether flat betting maximum limits.
Actually a fair edge comes out whenever an isolated/clustered scenario converging into the same spot must take place at some points of most part of the shoes, as an already asymmetrical math proposition will be enforced by the important asymmetrical card distribution. Happening at unrandom shuffled shoes.  ..."

AS--Please clarify or maybe give a specific example for the sentences in bold as I want to make sure Im understanding you 100%.

Thank you,kfb