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

Hi AsymBacGuy
I liked your sidebar on TigerBet up above.

re: Your following statement...
"...Our EV is in direct relationship about how many times we got 'more likely' clustered events than 'isolated' events, knowing that itlr this value is slight more oriented toward the clustered side. In a way or another, but always depending about the general probability we want to classify.

Take the last classification I've illustrated above.

Itlr, consecutive successions of univocal patterns (singles or streaks) are more likely to come out by precise numbers, for example if you'd progressively wager toward not getting any 3-3 sequence (for example) you'll get a sure statistical advantage no matter how the fkng math will dictate.   ..."


     Q: For clarification--You are suggesting wagering for NOT getting a precise (exact)3-3 and you do not mean the second leg could equal a  3-3+  with your example of a 3-3 being pppbbb ?
Thanks


Continued Success,

Thanks Everyone.
HAPPY NEW YEARS. 2022 will be our best year ever.
May the sun always find you even on the coldest of days.


KungFuBac

that's a good read and interesting development.
I think China government will figure out a way to regulate (not total control) this behavior(online gambling) of their citizens. IMO they won't be able to totally eradicate online sites in other countries.
However, they could possibly dole out monetary consequences to countries /online sites. That revenue will then help mitigate the loss of revenue from Macau casinos. Just my 2c  and will be interested in seeing how this plays out.
Im betting on Xi Jinping . The odds are in my favor. 

AsymBacGuy: ..."...Finally, yes, some shoes are unplayable as they do not give the proper room to get a fair amount of pattern situations. Among the worst shoes to play our strategies at there are those producing a lot of ties, so when we suspect the actual shoe will be 'tie' rich we'll simply stand up or starting to bet them.    ..."

     LIKE BUTTON 

Hi/ thx XXVV. I appreciate your comments/thoughts re: Crypto (& roulette too).

XXVV in reply #28: "...So in a few boom cases on some short cycles of a few days or so, such as GALA or Avalanche or CRV or Shiba Inu can rise massively in hours, buy also fall dramatically. It is like surfing - all about timing and balance when to get on or off.

Last night, even though working with a modest Risk Bank I made about 30% overall return on the RB and cashed out, returning coins to Bitcoin and then selling or holding some profit long term. .."

     I think this is crucial when playing the crypto volatility to then move into a more stable investment vehicle(in your case Bitcoin). Same as in gambling too, or most any market IMO. Plus once the crypto field becomes more regulated and shakes out the weak link(s) we may only have the more stable cryptos around. Which will likely be a good thing. I do not foresee exchanges accepting all cryptos for payment. Thus the crypto markets will eventually become a "survivor of the fittest" game. 

Your posts have inspired me to spend a significant amount of time in self-study research on cryptos for past 12 months. Historically I'm not one to go on Baccarat sites to solicit investment expertise. However, much of what you say and references to other sources have proven beneficial. I've also learned in the past 2-3 decades to not go on investment sites in solicitation of investment expertise.

Until recently I did not own any (absolute 0) cryptos. Mainly due to distrust and or naivety. Historically I viewed cryptos as (there is no intrinsic value, or when Bitcoin drops to XYZ price I will buy(it never did) and I watched it soar like many others on the sideline.

Re: Meta1--I've been to their website and researched alot . I like what I see thus far with the main appeal being that part of its value is tied to precious metals. I have several decades of experince trading/investing in precious metals so I may be a little biased. Overall I like most everything I see about Meta1.


My great great great Uncle Confucius once told me:
"Grasshopper--Gold is the only real currency, everything else is just credit."



Continued Success,

Excellent post alrelax. Thanks for detailing your thoughts so readers may pick up a nugget or two. I appreciate u taking the time to post pics of tote.

I like that you write with a style of "plain speak" . In other words you speak from experience and write about the process we all go through (regarding the financial, emotional, and cognitive processing) in real-time gaming with real money at a live table.

alrelax:
"...Just two things most don't possess playing the game.

1)  Self control and the willingness to get up a winner and walk away.

2)  A proper M.M.M. USING 1/3rds as the key guideline. ..."

     #2 is extremely important / the whole ball game IMO. I think it is critical we do NOT regamble 100% of our winnings back through (IOW don't force ourselves to rewin 100% of wins we already won).
The casino only has to win our wager one time. The casino doesn't give us a second chance after raking our chips into their rack: "Ok Kung Fu, lets go double or nothing and only then will you have to pay us on your loss. "


Thx for all the great comments everyone.


Continued success,

Good Job on reply #474 above AsymBacGuy. A lot of solid thoughts/examples. We may have to nominate it for Post-Of-The-Year.
I will comment(and ask a couple Q) in a day or so as it is a lot to digest.

as:

"...It's a sure fact that casinos will make tons of money from baccarat tables as players cannot realize how many bets are placed into the 'negative territory' (almost always by improperly increasing the wagers) and how many bets are placed into the 'positive territory' by low or too low amounts.

The math edge is just a 'booster' for casinos and not the main cause for they are collecting millions from baccarat..."


alrelax:

"...Which a whole lot and I do mean a whole lot of casino patrons have no real clue as to what the real odds or house advantages are at any given table at the time they buy in and begin their play.

"... A second also is, those numbers come from (if done correctly) millions of hands.  Not 25 or 100 or 200 and so on.

So if I sit down and lose my buy in within 20 hands, I did not lose 1.06% on the Banker or whatever's being claimed these days, I lost 100%.  As well, if I lost  I never had a 99% chance to win.  I had a 100% chance to lose.  There, fuel for the math nuts to talk how stupid we are here.
  .."


     Well stated/ I agree 100%.  Variance will always be our number one nemesis (not H.E.)


     Continued Success,

https://news.worldcasinodirectory.com/l-a-s-bicycle-hotel-casino-fined-500000-for-failure-to-alert-officials-of-100m-bettor-97955

I found this interesting from at least two perspectives:

1)Like they didn't know what the $100Million Dollar Man was doing.
2) 100Million Dollar Man should have been banking the games instead of just playing/ exchanging currency.
Its my understanding in CA individuals can still Bank card games.

Anyone have thoughts or opinions.
                     

Thanks AsymBacGuy . I appreciate your reply to my Q above.

"... yet we should remember that bac results are coming out from a finite asymmetrical card distribution acting at an already asymmetrical proposition dictated from the rules..."
     Perfectly stated and its the word finite that we should always remember when at the Bac tables.

     That in my opinion is one of the main differences between Bac and many comparable games  that instead utilize dice vs cards(primarily games such as craps). Yet gaming authors and casino employees incessantly blather on "its just a fitty-fitty coin flip game", suggesting that it doesn't matter how we wager/ "no advantage to be found here".

One of several reasons there is a difference "when comparing games" : (i.e., In Bac obviously the marbles are not placed back into the jar after each drawing of balls(i mean cards).  However, if we only look at the outcomes profile of results when comparing Bac to Craps--they will indeed look similar and will indeed converge toward expectation. Yet IMO two completely different games.  Again, just my personal thoughts.


Continued Success ,

Thx/Good essay AsymBacGuy

"...Math edge cannot do anything about a 'biased' production even though each bet is somewhat taxed.  ..."

     Well said/ IMO this "biased production" is also displayed in most even-chance wager games(e.g., Roul, craps line et al games). Though I do agree Bac is optimum and offers the best opportunities for exploitation(not just because of low H.E.)



"... Casinos want us to 'guess' every hand dealt but the asymmetrical feature takes its full power only after a classification made by a diluted pace (sections)..."

     Q: Do you mean after the event has "underperformed" in a prior section of that shoe?? Can you talk a little more about this diluted pace(sections)? Thank you.


Continued Success,