Thx AsymBacGuy

Can you please clarify this last sentence in BOLD:

"...In addition, most of the times  long profitable spots cannot come out clustered for long, unless those 'incidental' spots that are supposed to break a flow tend to prolong a trend.

Say that three hands went 'normally' at B side, meaning that math propensity acting at those 2-card initial points went as expected (for simplicity we consider both sym and asym hands).
Now the fourth hand was as:

B (3-2)
P (7-J)

Banker draws and wins by catching a 3.

Is this hand forecasting a possible long Banker streak?

No way.

The 'flow' was interrupted by a more likely math advantaged hand, thus we should interpret this hand as a kind of new 0-point 'trigger' even though it seemed to prolong a given univocal pattern...."


Thx in advance,

Hi AsymBacGuy

Im finding this thread informative /helpful.


ASB:

"...More generally speaking, any single baccarat shoe will present one or more 'jackpots' spots at various degrees, meaning that univocal patterns are going to show up for 'long' or at least one more time than the opposite situation.
So we must split a shoe into 'confusing' sections mixed by a fkng easy detectable world.  ..."

     This whole paragraph is worded very well.  I really like the following:
any single baccarat shoe will present one or more 'jackpots' spots at various degrees, meaning that univocal patterns are going to show up for 'long' or at least one more time than the opposite situation.
     
     I especially like  that thought  if the "jackpot event" and the likelihood that it (JE) presents one more time--

Im also of the opinion if the JE  presented for  the first time in the earlier stages (or early part of that particular subsection of the shoe),  versus latter stages , then the propensity to reappear is slightly greater.
Just an opinion as i haven't verified that across millions of shoes or sims. Although it seems we often see that previously observed formation or pattern beginning to show again and it simply runs out of time(or the shoe finishes with alot of ties,...etc.).


Continued Success To All,

Good thoughts klw/i like your analogies above.

Great exchange of thoughts /ideas with AsymBacGuy.


AsymBacguy above:

"...Mathematically speaking, B1<B2 but B2<B3, overall the 1-3 vs 2 probability is very close to the expecte..."

    Well said/I agree AsB as that is where our overall shoe success is decided(i.e., our decisions at the critical junction of B2), and I personally also view the jct at B3 as almost as critical, though we can "see the light" a little better once at B3, at least in my opinion.
Furthermore, to add to our confusion at these two junctions is the fact that Player has a slightly different personality profile and desires at its respective P1 and P2 junctions. 

     Although you(AsB ) et al have shed some light on the above junctions with discussions regarding related topics such as sym/asym hands and how they affect trends continuing or ending. I am still needing improvement on my response time so that I can apply (sym/asym hands  trends & prob) in real time and not after the fact.



AsymBacGuy:
"...Now we have the tools to set up a 'bringing down the house' strategy by adopting a careful multilayered progressive plan that makes baccarat as the best game to take casinos' money.
See you in a couple of days...."

     Hopefully that doesn't mean you are planning on rolling out the Smoluschowski Zillionaire System  for the general public to see---as casinos shall cease and be no more.    
Just kidding as although one of my hobbies is studying great mathematicians from a few centuries ago. I actually had not heard of Marian Von Smouluschowski until u mentioned his name a year or so back on this thread.


Looking forward to your next post-- thx AsymBacGuy and continued success.kfb

Well stated my friend.

AsymBacGuy in a couple posts above:

"..Easiest way to get multiple wins in a row is about lowering the first losing attempt. We can't put much pressure about the second bet, I mean. We must proportionally share the same 'probability' weight on both bets.
Actually and after studying long statistical samples, each 'two-step' bet has shown to get a larger overall impact over that 75.7% winning ratio than what the second bet can do.
Contrary to common belief it's like that being right at the start of those two bets will be more profitable than trying to win the second bet after a first loss.
  ..."




Continued Success To All,

Thx XXVV.
Very impressive/ I am certainly intrigued.

Please provide your thoughts, opinions, and updates as you can.




Continued Success,

Good thoughts/questions klw.
I like your replies AsymBacGuy /thx for taking the time to elaborate. I always find your ideas informative and helpful as I know you are a serious/frequent player. I'm sure many other guest viewers /forum members are appreciative too.


I highlighted a couple specific sentences from your more recent replies:

"...Itlr' and 'on average' are the worst player's words when talking about gambling.
On the contrary those two words are the best casinos' allies in order to make a lot of money...."


     I agree 100%. Often I cringe when reading  or hearing  a supposed expert gaming author, dealer, player,..etc  say things
     such as "just bet B every hand", or its "just a fity-fity coin flip",...etc. 



"...Jackpots happen and we should try to be there when they happen.

Imo almost every shoe presents one or more spots where a range of hands is more probable than the counterpart and we know there are infinite ways to dissect the outcomes.   .."

     re: Your response above to the strong P-bias shoe alrelax presented as an example.
     *One of the things I try to do at the very beginning of a shoe(after the cut), is to wait until the shoe has produced at least one winner for each side and returned to the first-hand winner before wagering(e.g., p bb p). Only occasionally I might see a significant trigger then I would go ahead and make one attempt to catch an early W.
Otherwise I'm waiting/constantly asking my self Qs such as A)Where is the bias? , all the while realizing that some times there simply is NOT a strong bias right now----just be patient and wait for it.

One area Im always striving to improve is recognizing there is nearly always a little bias showing. Just hold up awhile as most shoes will have at least one or two  groups of 9-12 outcomes where a significant  biased opportunity is available. Readily available for a huge cash extraction. 





Continued Success ,

   Now that is one perfectly stated sentence.


"...The theorists have a field day with what is supposed to happen but they fall short virtually every time because of what happens overrules the should happen theory. ..."

8OR9--Your comments in reply#7/9 were stated perfectly.


Your analogy is great:

"....Rooting for a pro team is like rooting for US Steel or General Motors to have a profitable year so the CEO can get a         
$ 5,000,000 bonus at the end of the year.   No Thanks! ..."



I concur 100%.




Continued Success,

Thx AsymBacGuy
These last couple essays are two of your finest.

This is an area of my game Im trying to improve. In other words how to recognize a streak(or pattern) earlier so that I don't have to be as concerned about the length of said pattern.(*I think alrelax or gr8, maybe asymbac stated something to this effect years ago in a post).



In my efforts to improve early detection skills I often find myself combining a decision-making tree based on a probability model, combined within a biased-outcome model. All the while trying to also wager on a simple model of just betting on what the shoe is producing right now.  Sometime we may even win the decision yet not know definitively which model (if any) led us to the correct guess(at least for me).

For example, lets say a shoe presents an early string of (B PP B PP B PP). Each player at the table may be guessing right (or wrong), with all guessing in unison or maybe equally divided at 50-50. However, each player may be thinking or deducing or guessing using totally different logic, or maybe just haphazardly guessing .

*It would be interesting if each player at that table had the thoughts bubble circles floating above their heads for all to see.
Maybe we could look into each players head(Like the Mel Gibson movie: What women want where he can hear what women are thinking).


(B PP B PP B PP)

Player #1: "every B is holding at one so every time I see a B I shall bet P once and wait til i see another B"--damn Im smart and likely the worlds greatest bac player"

Player #2: "every PP is holding at two so everytime I see a PP I shall bet B once and wait til I see another PP"--damn Im smart and likely the worlds greatest bac player"

Player #3: "every B is turning and every PP is turning to a single B so I shall bet every hand by wagering B, followed by PP, then bet the same pattern to continue"--damn Im smart and likely the worlds greatest bac player"

Player #4: "I shall always bet opposite of B single, I see a B so I shall P, P, I'm 1-0 and up a unit and there is no way this pattern can continue, color up--damn Im smart and likely the worlds greatest bac player."

Player #5: "this dealer is smoking hot and I think she likes me, and since she is a perfect 10, and since all outcomes are always random I shall wager $10 on the F7,f7, --damn Im smart and likely the worlds greatest bac player." ....
......but I digress



What Im getting at is sometimes I look back on a multi-wager consecutive winning streak and realize much of my winnings came from simply identifying or some how getting on the streak early. Though Im not 100% sure if it was due to solid logic, lucid thinking, discernment, years of experience,  or did I just get lucky and right place at right time.


Continued Success,

Hi AsymBacGuy

Thx/ many good points in above post.

re:
"...Propensities are the natural way of arranging things

Anytime a 6 or 8-deck shoe is shuffled and ready to be played, we know for sure that rank cards are not proportionally distributed.
Some portions of the actual shoe will be poor or rich of key cards, cards that most of the times affect the results..."


     Q1. What is your preferred method for tracking events on your scorecard. E.G., Do you track every card, just key cards such as 789, only side outcome total by hand,...etc, none of the above, other?



Thx/continued success,

Hi Alb

re:"...FMoDR ( It meant the finest method to defeat roulette..."

Do you have a link to this FMoDR on the forum??

Your hitting of Tlimits above is impressive.

I think roulette does indeed lend itself to (lightening in a bottle) type hit because of the greater than even payouts (especially the 35-1, e.g., 1x35x35).

Though IMO tagging an even-chance wager say seven times spread across several different streaks  may prove more probable and doable. Just my quick thoughts as I haven't spent much time and research on this type of betting regime. 

If i did pursue this type of approach I would be in favor of starting a compound with the largest compound for the first leg. Then place a bet on depreciating compound % type wagers so the higher wagers and latter legs are approaching and on and  even-chance bet. For example, lets say a person placed a 1unit wager on the "hottest" number so far, lets say "0" in roulette and after 25 attempts it hits, so we now a have 10-1 compound on the first leg (35-24), keep 1, then   1000% compound or $10unit on the next leg, then wager on maybe a 2-1odds wager, and the final legs at 1-1,...etc.
Though we do see repeating numbers hit three times consec quite frequently(1x35x35).

Another approach is to utilize an even-chance wager to "feed" the higher payout wagers attempts continuously, so we are not depleting our Buyin on the higher-edge risky wagers. I do this sometimes in Bac.

I don't typically play like the above examples and not advocating such, just pondering the potential.

*I once saw a friend at a craps table wager a green on boxcars(12), it hits and he parlays(30-1), then parlays again($25x30, goes to 775, x30=23250), and all down.  The stickman realized after the second parlay they were well above table max allowed for bonus bet payouts and questioned if they should go ahead and payout. Boxman asks did he hear player say full press, stick man and several players said yes, boxman calls upstairs, and in about 15 seconds turns around and says "pay the man". This player mostly plays texas holdem ,seldom ever played craps, and probably didn't even know all the rules--just right place right time.


Continued Success To All,

Good thoughts Alb

Yes, I always have my eye on the table limits, or Tmax. IMO one of main reasons cas(most) have such low tmax is to prevent a pospro player from scalping them, and potentially get scalped several times in close proximity.  No limit on the upside could be dangerous to the casino, unlikely, though still a small probability.
Especially the smaller family-owned casinos that are content to net 2-5 mil per annum.

I think pospro players should always design their progression to hit exactly @ tmax, or at least have that potential.
Then start reducing (never stand still), or even regress to base unit. Im not suggesting to never take profit--just suggesting we should be prepared should that rare streak present.

I do not believe casinos design tmax mainly in fear of the aggressive negpro(steep marty) player. Because the steep-marty negpro player is mostly receiving their own money back on that win. 

Continued success to all,

AsymBacGuy--

I like how you worded this.

My difficulty is how to apply this "clustering and limiting affect" most efficiently, that is, during its earliest occurrence and not ex post facto .


"...- there's a dependency between back to back outcomes, privileging a clustering effect as key cards cannot be distributed proportionally along any shoe unless voluntarily placed.
That is most of the outcomes considered by different random walks are sensitive to what happened in the same shoe, getting limiting values of relative frequency more restricted than what a pure random world dictates. ..."


Continued Success,

Excellent and spot on.

I agree 8OR9, George C was my favorite. He would be even more potent in todays environment.

continued success,

Thx alrelax

Great list--I agree with most.

Some of the most important IMO:

     6)  You have to Lose to Win.

          Same as in life: we often learn more from the strikeouts then we do the home runs.

     
     17)   Employing a Stop Loss and a Stop Win, without a complete money management method that will only frustrate,
     confuse and make most all players go down the wrong roads.

          Yes indeed---To me personally controlling (limiting) the the loss is most important. Im against limiting the
          upside(however,  thou shall not be greedy). 


Continued Success To All,