Hi AsymBacGuy

I hope to have explained better the issue.

Yes, perfect, & as always thanks for elaboration.

Cheers,

Hi Albalaha/thx for post /comments above. I can tell you have been working diligently on this latest project.

Q: So to clarify u are suggesting as an example: P wins only <=6 of 20, then you see PP or PBP, and the trigger is triggered, so you are confident (@ 90%) that expectation is that P will win >=8 of immediate next 20 decisions. ??

Thx in advance,

"...What luck is vs. what your skill is.
Anyone can win
Anyone can lose,..."

I agree. I also think the first one(luck vs skill) is often difficult to discern (For beginners as well as veterans).

Mainly because its difficult to determine if we just stumbled onto a streaky shoe and went with the flow--or-- did we use skill to make our  various-pattern selections/ that happened to also be in sync with the outcomes--or-- a person always wagered for one pattern and Variance raised up and smiled & granted favor for that one pattern in a 74-hand stint...etc.

     The above scenarios are often confusing and misinterpreted. IMO that misguided confusion is what often makes it difficult to see in the Luck vs. Skill dilemma because Luck and Skill are often blended and not clear.

*I recall very early on in my bac play I was wagering for P streaks and stumbled onto a P-Dom shoe that produced 9,8,6,6,5  Pstreaks. Im not sure why i was only betting for P streaks(prob read it in a book, saw a big bettor win big with P streaks,....etc or similar nonsensical thinking).

If I remember correctly I was doing a 1,2,4,8,8, then continuing with a cumulative 20% add on each compound to the end. I won almost 300% of buyin and felt really smart. I had noted two other neg-pro players bust in the shoe(so Im sure their perception of P streaks,variance, luck, skill,..etc  was different than mine)

Guess what I wagered  for in my next shoe, next shoe, next shoe: P streaks. I didn't feel so intelligent after a few more similar-wagered shoes.

In hindsight Im quite sure it didn't have anything to do with my superlative Bac skillset. Was it luck or skill?
Probably just luck, or we could say it was simply Variance and I was fortunate to be in sync.


Continued Success,

Alrelax: Low Ties=Presentment Consistency.
I have found this tip to hold water in many shoes. I had read this in an older alrelax post some time ago/started monitoring.

Im not fond of wagering for Ties, however, I do like to utilize them as a trigger and or indicator as mentioned above.

Does anyone utilize Tie Wagering as a major part of their betting regime??


Continued Success To All,

Hi Alrelax /Thx

Perfect list/ excellent ranking as that would be a difficult task. It makes one desire to return to the simple life of the 70s/80s.

*I did comb through this list twice and realized you accidentally left one off (Eagles,Take it the limit one more time, w Randy Meisner). Im guessing you simply didn't have any more room at 1A .   

Thx Albalaha
"...I tried my hands on over 200 online casinos..."

Alb do you have a TopTen list or lets say 3 best/3worst?  Why?
Thx in advance.

Though I haven't considered online(mainly paranoia ),  plus the fact Im fortunate to  have 100+ casinos 4min--4hours driving within a 3-state area.

However, I can see some may like the 24/7 idea, no driving, no smoke, no inebriated players...etc. I do agree the casino environment can indeed seem taxing at times.
On the flip side I think most also enjoy being catered to with free play, free food, free toasters, blenders, TVs, ....etc, as well. At least I do. Plus they make great "regifting" ideas in late December.



Continued Success To All,

Good Morning  Asym/thx

"...Only a team could approach the 7-tier system in the original aggressive version having a "leader" instructing when to bet and sharing an enormous bankroll..."

Yes, we might could get a 3-member team to agree on the benefits of diluting the effects of variance across our wagers/buyin.  However, that same 3-member team may not be as enthused when it came time to split the profits (33/33/33%). :)
Anyway, i get your point.

Asym: "...Obviously when considering an odd number of patterns, most winning situations come out after knowing the very first W or L result nature as there are more winning patterns starting with a W than the opposite situation..."

     *Im not sure what you mean by this phrase.


Continued Success,

Hi Albalaha Thx for updates.

What type of bet spread do you anticipate needing(as a minimum?) for this latest system?

How many shoes do you consider a session?

thx,
kfb

Hi Albalaha

"..Since my current way of playing is looking for only one session a day, I can wait for 1.5SD below mean or worse to start from..."



Thank you

kfb

I agree AS.

A very good post/thread.



Continued Success To All,

Hi AsymBacGuy

Thx for clarifying RickK inquiry as I also had questions re:  the levels above that 2nd tier if one is losing after the first tier.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree with your concluding comments on the 7-tier method:

AsymBacGuy

Math aspects

Even though we could be the worst bac guessers in the universe, per every 7-hand cycle bet our winning probability will be 72.66% as among the possible 128 WL patterns, 93 of them will be winners and just 35 losers (as we'd stop the betting after getting a W amount overcoming Ls).

Notice that differently to a common martingale, those bets are less susceptible to the negative variance and table limits, as they are assessed by 7-hand same amount steps.

This system is so powerful and math wise that just 2 or 3 people playing as a team will get enormous profits, after all itlr a 72.66% probability cannot be wrong for long.

Anyway most players like to play on their own and it's easy to assume that this system could get the bets so high to make in jeopardy everyone's bankroll and peace of mind.

Therefore we want to introduce the "scale reduction" factor, an important strategic tool capable to control the variance and at the same time keeping the benefit of a math advantage.

_________________________________________________________

I guess it goes back to: What Is Ones Objective.

In other words how do we want to slice our buyin, how often can we tolerate losing buyin, how much do we want to earn as a f(x) of buyin, as a f(x) of bankroll,...etc.

Anyway most players like to play on their own and it's easy to assume that this system could get the bets so high to make in jeopardy everyone's bankroll and peace of mind.


I think we can expect a majority of  Negpro methods will eventually escalate bets too high (reach Tmax, bust buyin,...etc) --its just that this particular method seems to escalate immediately. However, at first glance I do agree it will handle most shoes by the 2nd or 3rd stage. So the abrupt increase in wager size will in all likelihood be less damaging to buyin than we would initially guess. My main reservation would be not knowing if that really bad (-3.5SD) shoe was the very first one.

I like the beginning stages and the idea of 1/7ths at the initial level. However, it abruptly shifts from a low/slow curve to the trajectory of a rocket.

I've never played this method  so just a quick thoughts/opinion. If I was required to do a similar Negpro my personal preference would be to add a few more tiers to that 7-wager Level 1, and  prior to the recoup-or-throw the towel in  stage(s) .

How many Tiers? Levels? This is where it gets back to my initial sentence:

What Is Ones Objective.

Asym, do you play a similar approach. Do you have any data from others that have played it? ROI?

How would you improve it?

Many Thanks,



Its not how fast you win, its how well you win fast

Hi Albalaha
Thx as always for offering your opinions.

re:your previous statements:

"...That is why -1.5 SD or worse could work as a valid and helpful trigger my way. .."

"...In a normal EC session, I do not expect more than -1.5SD though..."


Was there a particular reason why u chose : (-1.5 SD) for your trigger, instead of let say (-1.0 SD or say -0.5 SD)?
thx

Hi Albalaha

Alb:
That is why -1.5 SD or worse could work as a valid and helpful trigger my way.

     Agreed. Potentially it could help as a trigger. Though I think u will agree it would also depend on where in the shoe the deficit(-1.5sd) was triggered. For example, lets say at hand 20 vs  hand 60. The deficit side may indeed start accelerating in its attempt to catch up. However, regardless of how fast it is closing the gap, may simply run out of time(too little remaining distance to make up the deficit completely),...etc, in that same shoe.

     Alrelax also speaks of this often in his writings as it is his opinion re: side deficit. (re: sides: often desire to do a correction "snap back" once they reach a deficit of 10ish or the seldom 20ish, total score deficit). I agree and do indeed watch for this when I see a side creep ahead by a >=8 count (especially if it wasn't due  to single long runs of say 6-8 streak). Plus, as mentioned above it could have different implications if it occurred in first 10-15 decisions vs at say hand 60-70.

     I think these larger SD side deficits often sneak up on players. I know I've been guilty of suddenly looking back at my card and surprised to realize one side just increased its lead to 12(though it occurred gradually with 4-2,3-1,..etc type surges).

Alb:
Getting only 16 hits in 80 trials is over -5.2 SD and as rare as next to impossible.


     Indeed, and one of the reasons I like a pospro--it automatically omits(i.e., limits wager# or $) the extended long streaks of incorrect bet placement.

Alb:
Any other trigger one might suggest?
     I like your triggers above as a f(x) of Variance/think they are reasonable for the profile of Bac. However, I also think one should predetermine how long we want to  chase. IOW , do we enter the battle til victory or death--OR-- do we consider retreat as an option at some future stage.

Continued Success,

     

Thx Albalaha

Your answer (-6SD), would certainly deplete a few players' buyin.

In a normal EC session, I do not expect more than -1.5SD though.
     I agree -1.5--2SD isn't that uncommon (within a shoe). I find that most of my multi-day trips are often required to endure the worst (-SD) stint in two consec shoes. I most often do a pospro so either abandon(and wait for easier battle), or abandon that shoe out of neccessity(busted buyin).


thx

Hi Albalaha
As always thx for your timely replies.

I know you have spent years studying live bac data. My questions:

A) Per lets say a <=10,000 decision random sample  what is largest extreme (-) variance u have seen with live table outcomes (e.g., -5.2SD, -4.8, -5.9,..etc)? Choose either side P or B for our discussion.

B) ""   "" (+)Variance u have seen (e.g., +5.2sd,...etc)?

C) Do you typically see both extremes within the same sample approach similar levels(e.g., one side lets say reaches an apex of  -5.0sd and the other side  lets say had a maximum spread +4.9sd )?

     "OR"  do you more often see one side take off in the lead and the other never really draw even after the first couple thousand decisions?
   



Many Thanks,