Thx --excellent post/ glad u provided examples.

From ABG reply above:

"....my samples considered the 3/1-2/3 attack and each W spot is +1 (minus vig when applicable) and L= -1
1-2 trigger is any single or double happening after a 3+ streak.

Almost impossible to get a multilayered progression to lose as it's virtually impossible that any card distribution won't get at least one 'strong' shifted situation to happen very shortly.

There are 96 'key cards' to fall here or there along with 128 zero-value cards. The remaining card combinations are just flowing without 'strong' math reasons to produce a winning hand at either side, itlr such part of outcomes will equal.
Imo we must spot such 'key cards imbalances' and not trying to win at the way more likely 'remaining' whimsical situations.

And btw, the lesser the amount of decks utilized to form a shoe greater will be the probability to catch those 'imbalances' by a proper 'key card' propensity assessment.
That's why in Vegas and in Asian casinos 8 decks are utilized instead of the EU 6 decks. ..."

Q1: (In blue above):
"impossible that any card distribution won't get at least one 'strong' shifted situation to happen very shortly."

     Do you mean in any one full shoe, or say within 3 spots,  5 spots? 8 spots? Other?
I do agree with your thesis above. Im just wondering what has been your experience with the upper end extreme u typically observe. In your opinion what are the merits for: Choosing to do a slow negpro or steep negpro til u catch a W, or no negpro=Flat, or Pospro, when pursuing this keyhole spot for the W?


Q2:(From In Red above) . 
"And btw, the lesser the amount of decks utilized to form a shoe greater will be the probability to catch those 'imbalances' by a proper 'key card' propensity assessment.
That's why in Vegas and in Asian casinos 8 decks are utilized instead of the EU 6 decks...."

I play at mostly Indian casinos in the (Midwest,USA) and it seems many utilize a 6-deck shoe  vs 8-deck shoe. I've asked WHY and no one can give a reason. Often, the reply is "I don't know that's just how we get them,...etc, OR that's what we are told to use,...etc." 
Regardless if factory shuffled or in-house shuffle.

Besides your above reasoning are there other reasons u perceive casinos would choose a 6-deck shoe vs 8-deck??
re: Streaks (same side, chop, other). What's  your opinion on :How does a 6-D vs 8-D shoe affect length of streaks?


Thx Again,kfb

Hi all,

AsymBacGuy:

Another samples

LLW
LLL
WWWWL
LWW
WLL
WWWL
LWWLW
WLLLL
WWW
LL

W= 18 L=18



C'MON MAN!

"We will need the expertise of forum veteran Albalaha just to interpret that data."     

Thx ABG

"...The difference is that asymbacguy, albeit being entitled to get more winning streaks than losing streaks, must bet two times to be right whereas asymbacgirl can wait to get 'key' spots to wager, that is she'll be 50% wrong or 50% right. ..."


"...Notice that both scenarios are mutually exclusive, meaning that whenever asymbacguy will get ALL winnings asymbacgirl won't get any win but at the same time she could get a lower amount of losing hands (as singles coming out after a 3+ streak won't entioce any action for her)...."

"...It's like that for once girls are somewhat more likely to win as it's more unlikely to get back-to-back ALL asymbacguy winnings for a couple of shoes dealt than getting two consecutive shoes not forming at least one spot to get asymbacgirl to win and with a way lower effort...."
__________________________________________________________________________________

Well stated and I think the concepts in blue are often overlooked as to how important it is to get a win with as little effort(funds) as possible being spent. Obviously it is optimum when we get that W on the first wager(attempt).

IOW, how can we get a Net Win with the greatest efficiency. Meaning : Fewest wagers or the least monies risked.

I really like your examples above/thx.


Cheers,

Thanks 8OR9--Excellent read.

"...Recent troubles at crypto lender Celsius Network were exacerbated by arbitragers as well. The price of stETh token that Celsius has a large position in started trading at a large discount from Ether, to which it's tied.

"As stETH goes down, arbitragers buy stETH and short ETH against it, sending ETH lower, which again lowers collateral values across DeFi," effectively worsening Celsius's position, according to a recent Arca note...."


I was suspicious of this type behavior though hadn't considered individual traders preying on each other. I thought it would most likely be from a hedge fund or billionaire that preyed on the smaller crypto investor or smaller exchange. Much like we see stock market Shorts stacked against a company when others sense blood in the water.





Continued Success,

Hi all,

Condolences to any Bac comrades still exposed to the crypto bloodbath. It does appear the bloodletting may be slowing some or at least taking a brief pause.

I can relate somewhat as I endured the dot.com blood bath a couple decades back.
I mentioned a few weeks back that I had invested in seven cryptos with $7k in bac winnings. Update: > 50% has disappeared from the ledger.

My objective was twofold:

A) It wasn't that I perceived they had much or significant intrinsic value, or produced a durable, or consumable good. I hoped to utilize the volatility and when my bitcoin had increased from my buy price/ a recent spike, I could then use that to purchase a less-volatile commodity (mainly precious metals), in USD(which like the precious metals was still at the same price or only up or down (maybe 1/2 % either way), vs Bitcoin and cryptos which were going mostly upward with daily volatility (5%-12%).

B) Like most investors I hoped that after I utilized the volatility , it would also be on a trajectory to the moon and I could sell my crypto to moon-seekers for alot more than my entry price(or just keep holding and go way past the moon:greed). In last few days Im seeing that referred to as The Greater Fool Theory.
     *Which imo is why most everybody that purchased cryptos touted cryptos because one had to sell it to someone else at a higher price(until no higher buyers could be found).

Meaning IMO that was all many cryptos offered as an investment vehicle as they did not produce anything, were not verifiably tied(pegged)  to anything with intrinsic value: i.e., Gold,silver, USD,Yuan, Oil futures, Lumber futures,..etc), could not send us a check (dividends,...etc), the investors money wasn't used to make widgets and sell for profit, ...etc.   Nada.) 

Example of my Plan-A)

For example, several of the larger international precious metals dealers about 6m-12 mo ago started accepting payment in the form of 5 or so of the more notable cryptos: Mainly BTC, BCH, ETH, WBTC, DOGE, LTC, and five others USD-pegged stable coins.
     *They didn't care as they instantaneously converted to USD so no risk(they could have just as easily said we accept contracts on oil futures, cattle futures, corn futures,..etc)

The price of a 1oz Gold coin today cost me exactly  $2002 this morning at 7a.m. (This is the cheapest I could find it along with free shipping /insurance.
As we all know Precious metals vendors(like other venders selling other goods) charge customers an extra fee based on how one chooses to pay. The cheapest method listed in order from best to worst:

$2002.00  Paper check, echeck, ACH, Wire(+my banks wire fee)

$2024.00  Crypto(Only BTC, BCH, ETH, WBTC, DOGE, LTC )

$2087.00  Major credit card/Paypal


Now back to my plan A above.

My thinking/objective was that I was buying volatility** and would observe when bitcoin was above my initial buy price, + coupled with a volatile day of say +7%, and gold or silver prices had not fluctuated(and hopefully down 1/2--1%). Well, my plan worked perfectly for two transactions, ....until it didn't. We obviously see that as cryptos have tanked recently my Plan A is no longer feasible in the current state of all things cryptos(volatile but in a downward freefall.
     **Just as in gambling it(Volatility) helps us  win: we either need to wager a volatile bet or induce volatility into a non-volatile bet. Just my thoughts/theory.

Going forward I see it as a rough journey for most cryptos. Furthermore the todays' cryptos have made the path even more difficult for the more solid crypto and crypto-related companies.  The few that may have actually been on solid ground with sound management practices/ not leaving their investors nakedly exposed to huge market volatility/nothing else.

My view is that some of these companies actually profited greatly and in many cases actually shorted the recent downturn and or started pulling  the investors' money months ago. IOW the money had to go somewhere as its not like they were buying materials to produce something, investing in real estate for offices,....etc.

Just my quick/random opinions of course.


Crpto and crypto-related companies Im still tracking  and or invested in(no particular order)


BTC, META1, BCH, ETH, WBTC, DOGE, LTC, RIOT, WBTC.PA, ADA-USD, DOT1-USD, SHIB-USD.

Unfortunately all except META1 are down over past 30 days.
Hopefully the tides will turn after this cleansing of weaker and or bad companies, and the market will be stronger going forward. 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Probably the best market investment advice I've ever received was from my Greeaattt Uncle Confucius:

"Grasshopper, when the tides go out we get to see who's swimming naked."


More later,

Hi AsymBacGuy

I used your methodology above  yesterday(3 shoes). I will preface the results by saying I did not wait for the setup to fail once & then implement, as I "think" you have suggested  or at least insinuated in this or similar regimes.

I implemented as they presented. Results: Shoe #1: 2/3 winners, shoe #2:  0/1 winners, shoe #3: 1/1 winners.

Shoes #2 and #3 only presented the setup once. I didn't play shoe#3 to the end.

All wagers were on B. 

All of the shoes had established a shelf at mostly toward four iar for same-side streaks as well as Opps. Meaning things of 3 were going to 4 slightly more than not.
I also perceived that type of profile lending itself to this type of keyhole-spot wagering. Meaning the shoe had already displayed a desire to go >=3+ , thus far.
So far so good. 

Now this leads to my follow-up questions I should have asked you a few days ago but simply had not considered the following setup would be encountered. 

Q1: What are your thoughts when we get the desired set up (e.g., BBB PP BBT  )?
When we get that T do you abandon this setup and wait for the next setup down shoe? Do you wager one more try after the T? Would you be more inclined to wager after that  T if the first leg was 4iar vs 3iar, example  >=BBBB?

Q2: Similar example to above and lets say we won on our initial try, the next column continued with a PP, and turned and now the third B column in this 5-column setup has now presented BB? . Do you also wager again for this 3rd B column for B2 to also go B3? Example BBB PP BBB PP BB?    OR   is the 3rd B column NA in this regime?


Thx in advance,

Thx 8OR9 and alrelax--good read.

Personally, I feel the investment in its use(utility to move money without banks) will be here forever. That technology is the part of Bitcoin that is here to stay and will always have investors. However, investing in bitcoin as a commodity (a coin with physical intrinsic value) is the part that has been pumped/that perceived value is what we are seeing plummet. IMO it should be viewed as a tech company and NOT a commodity. There will likely be only a select few remaining from the cleansing that do indeed serve a utility/purpose that warrants an investment. My personal opinion.


I really liked the following response  to an investment funds Mgr / explanation of her company's  exposure to bitcoin. This is an example of public belief or disbelief in all things crypto. It seems there are two groups of people: One all in for crypto and the other says it's a fallacy. The commentors reply to this lady's interview is a classic.

Just as in gambling it seems the more extreme ones belief the more tightly one clings to that belief.


I posted the commentors response to this lady trying to explain her and her companies theory/ exposure to Bitcoin/cryptos, and the recent Bitcoin plummet from 60K through 29K (Previously pegged as the floor), now at 23k , as "just a blip". 
This is spin city and would make any system seller or politician proud.
___________________________________________________

"..."That zone has twofold importance. A lot of people will remember the $19,500 level as being a former peak. And because the market's memory acts this way, if Bitcoin gets back there, you may see people say: 'I would love to get back in at that level.' Just think about the market psychology. That's what creates the phenomenon of resistance becoming support," she explained..."

"...What we're trying to do with these indicators is to make sure that we're on the right side of the prevailing trend...."

"..."Any risk asset that you look at is in a downtrend. This is why we have to contextualize the short-term rallies as being counter-trend," she noted. "When you see oversold conditions sustained, that means that you're in a downtrend."..."

"...going forward is that this downtrend in Bitcoin will hold until there is a meaningful momentum to change the narrative. But even when that occurs, the shift will be slow and dominated by extensive sideways trading.

"I suspect that that will occur not in a dramatic fashion but rather after a basing phase. A decline of this strength and magnitude doesn't tend to end quickly or easily. It usually is a process. And that process is characterized by an initial support discovery, but then often a series of re-tests of that support, which overall may end up looking more like a sideways trading range before Bitcoin and others can advance from that posture," she described...."

"..."However, Bitcoin could expand its risk-off characteristics as it matures and gains more institutional exposure. "As it matures more from a fundamental perspective, that's when you could expect that it takes on its own characteristics in a way that I feel it hasn't done. I think that with its maturity, you'll see more institutional adoption of Bitcoin," Xxxxxx said...."




     "..I would like to know what color the sky is on the planet these people live on?   The iceberg has just sliced through the Titanic, the ship is heading to the bottom, people are manning every lifeboat there is. And yet,  there ARE STILL people saying "Don't worry folks....we're just picking up a little ice for the bar tenders!".   OMG!   





Continued Success,

Hi ABG--good post/thoughts below.
______________________________________

Playing the 'short gapped' 3+ predominant streaks

This strategic plan is very powerful, especially when you have reasons to think that shoes are poorly shuffled.
Everything is based upon the verified probability that along the vast majority of shoes, there will be spots where key cards will be somewhat 'concentrated' to get a predominance of one side within a limited amount of hands.
Actually almost every bac player will be enticed to bet this propensity, yet there are some caveats to add.

There are just two 'triggers to follow:

a) BBB...PBB then betting B or PPP...BPP then betting P  (one time) and

b) BBB...PPBB then betting B or PPP...BBPP then betting P (one time)

Comments

1) This plan does get a strong advantage in terms of variance, meaning that it's quite difficult not to cross this situation for long. So a 'virtual losing strategy' along with any kind of progression will get the best of it by a wonderful positive probability.

Q1: Do you continue your pursuit of a win across shoes? e.g., Lets say our wager in this keyhole spot fails twice in a shoe and we don't get our desired setup again. Do you continue with your negpro into the next shoe(3rd attempt) or do you start your negpro again?

Thx again,

Hi XXVV --hope u are doing well.
Hopefully Meta1 is progressing as expected. Any thoughts or updates for public consumption is welcomed.
I also miss your opinions/thoughts all things Roulette.


Im still watching/researching many for potential long-term investments down the road. I view the blockchain technology and other similar tech that has or will be developed as the value, and not necessarily what the current crypto co seems to be advertising. At this point it seems they can literally make any claim they desire. 

For the most part my time is spent trying to sort ones I think will still be around through 2024-25 and ones that will fall by the wayside.
In an unregulated world re:all things crypto, the survival-of-the-fittest system will address the weakest of the weak. Which will be a good thing until they either regulate themselves and or government regulates.

Hopefully they(cryptos) will choose to govern or at least offer some type of regulatory body(Maybe they are already trying/im not aware). We all know what happens when government lends their expertise to anything/decides to manage or regulate something. 

My personal thoughts are: The shakeout of cryptos and other weak investment vehicles has already begun. Due in part to the above as well as government-induced inflation.

Just my opinion of course.  Im not advocating the potential investment value of the group called cryptos. Nor am I refuting the potential for this large group called cryptos. Im a novice crypto investor that is working diligently to increase my knowledge base. I welcome others thoughts, ideas, and counter opinions.

------------------------------------------------------------

Recent data re: crypto and related companies:
Info in part sourced from CoinMarketCap and  investing.com  et al.

How Many Cryptocurrencies Are There In 2022?
As of March 2022, there are 18,465 cryptocurrencies in existence.

However, not all cryptocurrencies are active or valuable. Discounting many "dead" cryptos leaves only around 10,363 active cryptocurrencies.

There are upwards of 300 million cryptocurrency users across the globe. And approximately 18,000 businesses now accept a form of crypto as payment.


Crypto Space Statistics (Top Picks)

There are 18,465 total cryptocurrencies
The total market cap of all cryptocurrencies is $2.023 trillion
The trading volume of all cryptocurrencies per 24 hours is currently $75 billion
Bitcoin has the highest current market cap at over $700 billion - more than double its closest rival Etherum
four of the top 20 cryptocurrencies are directly pegged to USD value - Tether, USD Coin, Binance USD, Terra USD.
Approximately 8% of the US population trades cryptocurrency
As a continent, Asia has over 4x more cryptocurrency users than any other continent
95% of crypto holders/crypto-curious people are aware of Bitcoin


Here is a full breakdown of the top 20 cryptocurrencies by market cap-- approx 3/22:

Rank   Currency   Abbr.   Price
1   Bitcoin   BTC   $44,860   
2   Ethereum   ETH   $3,180   
3   Tether   USDT   $1.00   
4   BNB   BNB   $420.1   $69.4
5   USD Coin   USDC   $1.00
6   XRP   XRP   $135.72   
7   Cardano   CAR   $1.13   
8   Terra   LUNA   $94.1   
9   Solana   SOL   $103.88   
10   Avalanche   AVAX   $86.65   
11   Polkadot   DOT   $86.63   
12   Dogecoin   DOGE   $0.14   
13   Binance USD   BUSD   $1   
14   TerraUSD   UST   $1   
15   SHIBA INU   SHIB   $0.00003   
16   Polygon   MATIC   $1.65   
17   Wrapped Bitcoin   WBTC   $44,966   
18   Cronos   CRO   $0.46   
19   Dai   DAI   $1   
20   Litecoin   LTC   $126.5   
All figures accurate as of Mar 25, 2022.

Source: CoinMarketCap

Key Statistics on the top 20 cryptos right now (approx. 3/22)

Bitcoin has the highest current market cap at over $850 billion - more than double its closest rival Etherum
Together, Bitcoin and Ethereum have a market cap of almost 3x the size of the rest of the top 20 cryptocurrencies combined
The top five cryptocurrencies each have a market cap of over $50 billion
Only three of the top 20 cryptocurrencies have a per-token price higher than $1,000 - Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Wrapped Bitcoin
Almost half (10) of the top 20 cryptocurrencies by market cap are priced at under $5
Four of the top 20 cryptocurrencies are directly pegged to USD value - Tether, USD Coin, Binance USD, and Terra USD



Continued Success To All,

Hi all,

ABG in his reply above:
"...Hence, for example, it's way more probable to get a shoe showing up to four or five 3+ streaks (-5.5 and -4.5) than a shoe forming the same symmetrical fourteen or fifteen  3+ streaks counterpart (+4.5 and +5.5)...."

     that's a good example and perfect way to illustrate the limiting profile of Bac for this and other similar-length patterns.

*Of course as we all will agree most shoes could still have that one long same-bet  or same-pattern repeating streak and many players will latch on to that in their minds eye and let that /only that dominate their decision making(especially if in front of shoe and a same-side streak).

Side Bar:
I find it interesting when a long same-side streak presents in the first couple of columns and all of a sudden other players from nearby shoes come running over salivating for that streak "just one more time" . Though if the same length streak of say tres presents: pppbbbppp, not as much hoopla.  If the same-side streak is really long such as 10-11 in a row even other players from other games will often come by, gawk, and point,  and make statements like: "I would have made about $400K" or "I would own the casino IF i had been here",...etc. Oh well, at least they are optimistic.


Continued Success,

Hi All,

I responded in reply577:

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 responded in reply 580:


Good points.
I'll give you the strategy of a couple of bac pros I know, maybe it could help:

They selectively bet that a double or a given series of doubles won't make or will do make a 3+ streak and vice versa for 3+s streaks.
Naturally they give more emphasis when the searched outcome will be a Banker wager.
And they bet huge. Really huge.

Either a double or a 3+ streak will make a cluster or not, but if everything would follow a kind of 'sky's the limit' clustering effect baccarat wouldn't exist at all.

It's like we're taking the casinos' part: we hope 'following patterns' players  sooner or later will be wrong and as players we do bet that in selected circumstances the 'wrong' works in our favor.

Hi ABG--Thx for your responses and addendum ideas. IMO Your bac pro comrades likely win more $ than they lose by "selectively bet that a double or a given series of doubles won't make or will do make a 3+ streak and vice versa for 3+s streaks.[/b]".

My thoughts:
Likely lucrative for them especially if they  select other simultaneous criteria to enhance their position, which Im confident they do. For example, in their case where they are wagering for current outcomes will change, I would think observing the beginning of said pattern near the end of a section (so their keyhole wager is entered when that section is also ending, could prove beneficial vs lets say at the very beginning of the first section.

I would also prefer low ties vs many ties, & even more important if Ties show up at the very exact keyhole spot.  Personally I find ties weaken my confidence when they show at that keyhole wager spot/decision spot. E.G., (BBPPBB T) or even more when we see (BBPPBB T T T) , then I would likely just think: abort abort abort , and wait for another perceived hotspot.

Personally,  in the example with  your bac pro friends,  I would prefer a two-layer wagering regime vs a single wager and would do some type of simple negpro (e.g., 1.0 U, if lost then 2.75U,...so wager  $100 the event won't continue & if lost then immediately wager $275 on the very next decision won't continue,...etc.). STOP, and accept the result,  so IOW don't chase it.

I don't seek out keyhole spots as u mention above though i do see the merits of pursuing a very select few spots(not necessarily just this spot).

I like to refer to these type of cluster groups (i.e., 2s & 3s as u mention above or whatever this shoe is showing as a cluster group), as shelves --meaning we look at board and there is a shelf and all we see is a shelf with everything turning at or near the same level.
I do frequently try to snipe a single win  as part of a pos progression(though wagering the right-now current event will continue so if cutting wager for cutting/ if continuing wager for continuance. Which in this case meaning this cluster-group will turn at 2 or 3 one more time, so in my case I would want to snipe one out of the middle and not wait for it to approach expiration).

I like these "shelves" even more if both sides are reaching this shelf and turning as well as other same-length events are turning too. Its really tempting to think I can grab several, though experience has shown I do better to snipe one win, set my wager aside,  and wait for a fresh shelf for this or other cluster group, and then re enter that pressed-up wager.



Continued Success To ALL,

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/