Absolutely fantastic subject! Human nature side, the effects and the superstitions.

Quote from: AsymBacGuy on July 29, 2018, 12:29:28 AM
Moreover, a quite low probability is supposed to show up either very rarely or in clusters (meaning by lower gaps than what expected probability dictates, frequently by very strict gaps)

Almost never a  rare event is supposed to show up by the perfect general probability pace.

Do not forget that a rare event must catch up a possible deficit by getting a higher frequency on single shoes or conversely diluting a high past frequency registered on multiple shoes.

The expected EV is always the same (-14%) still the ACTUAL variance is very very high for obvious reasons.
Sooner or later some mathematical situations promting ties will arise, and there's no way that a given event will come out more often than not without showing up at least once.   

as.

 

Absolutely spot-on and like I've been saying in some of my posts, when it happens it happens and when it does not it'll hurt you if you keep waiting for it and wagering for it to happen.

And when you got 6 or 7 or 8 or 10 Bankers in a row and you got three fortune 7s within that run and then you got a whole bunch of panda 8s and a whole bunch of players to follow, you can clean house.  But you got to know when it's coming and you got to feel it.   And if you keep wagering for it to happen and it doesn't happen in those sections, you going to go broke or give it all back! 

That's what I warn everyone not to keep doing, you just got to have the frame of mind and you got to have the gut and go with it when it's happening and it's a very hard to do.  But it can be done!

Replaced in General Discussion by request, Glen.

Quote from: Nickmsi on July 27, 2018, 07:12:39 PM
Hi Glen,

Once again I agree that if you can win with your Decisions and Reality then keep on winning.  Everything you said is based on your knowledge and experience and works for you.

However, please do not think that yours is the only way to win.

Cheers

Nick

Absolutely I don't think that.

And I think I said the other day in a post I'm sure you seen, that I said seven people at the table and every one of them can win or lose and in many different or various ways. Winning has a lot to do with lots of thought and lots of different style and beliefs, etc.

If I said something or insinuated mine was the only way, it was said  tongue and cheek and in a comical way.  I absolutely do not believe that mine is the only way.

Tina a Southeast Asian ladyboy, pretty fine looking comes into the Casino in her six inch heels with ultra mini skirt and her fake boobs that look better than 99% of the real boobs on the ladies around the casino.

She struts up to the baccarat table, getting about two dozen 'check her out looks' from the males at the numerous tables and their girlfriends slap the hands of a few of the male patrons, as if to say what the hell are you looking at that girl for? Tina lays down a stack of $10,000 in hundred dollar bills and says all black and give me $2,000 in pink please.

Waldo catches a glimpse of her, adjust his pants around his buldging waist line and he waddled on over to the table and introduced himself as the Pit Boss. He told her call him over if she needed anything, to please ask him and he would  make sure she got it and he,emphasized 100%! 

To be continued.........

Waldo is alive and fine at the casino, seen him the other day.

"You might have heard the expression that the way to win is to play a game within a game.  In other words don�t play the Casino�s game, play your own game within the Casino�s game."


The above was a quote from NICKMSI's post within his first few sentences on the previous page. 

Very strong and very real words you said in your post here!

I just wrote something with that in mind, called Fallacy & Belief in Brief, in General Discussion Room. 

Possibly read it and think about it. 

Fallacy & Belief in Brief

What is Fallacy and Belief?  In the casino and outside of it.  It is really basically the same, at least IMO.

Say a person goes to a restaurant and eats there.  He or she does not like it for whatever reasons.  Maybe the food was good but the experience was bad?  Maybe the food was not up to their expectations?  Maybe something happened alongside with the trip to the restaurant and no matter what 100 other people would factually think about the food, the person that just entered had other things going on within themselves that no matter what was served to them the opinion would be totally negative. 

Here is another example.  My son and I really like a certain mall.  It is a very popular mall and by no way, antiquated, secluded or off the beaten path, etc.  It is easy to park, lots of space, lots of other things around it, clean, a great play place for him that he really enjoys more than even the Mall of America with the huge and over the top, Nickelodeon Amusement Park in the middle of it.  A great Barnes & Noble store.  Countless food options, great restrooms, a huge movie theater with all the extras.  The list is long.  The wife does not like the place in her opinion and she has not really spent any time there.  She just does not prefer it for some reason as compared to other malls in the region.  Ask her, and she will say everything negative, too far, no good, I don't like the place and many other things except a real valid reason for not liking it or wanting to go there.  But if one was to really know her, she has little tendency to agree, cooperate, go along with, merge with others, or anything of the like.  She has a need to lead, retaliate, disagree with, set her own way, always make the discovery and not believe anything represented regardless of research, experience, warranty, etc.  At times nothing wrong with that attitude, especially in business to a certain extent.  But as an overall subscription and operating principal, I don't think that is the best way. 

Why do I say those things?  Because you just might be missing something, losing a great find, stepping on your tail and everything else along those lines.   You might very well be correct in every way, but then again, how would you really know for sure? 

Some people will draw their conclusions from just listening to others.  And IMO, that is subscribing to fallacy.  Yet, other people will not, they remain neutral wanting to experience whatever it is and basing their own advantages or disadvantages from that thing on their own.  They are not outright believing fallacy.

As far as gambling.  Let's set something straight please.  So many on this board and the ones that left the board going to another board, with their same redundant attacks and statements, accuse me of gambling fallacy.  I admit, one cannot beat the math.  But, that is my point!  I have always agreed about that.  But, we play to win.  The dealer is there for the long run, meaning 24/7, the dealers seat is always being played, the customers change for various reasons.  Running out of money, win and leave, being called away, etc.  Mostly running out of money, IMO. 

If you play 10 hands and you happened to win on 6 of them with great positive progressions and parlays, you should by all means, rethink everything going on.  I call that, resetting and refreshing.  Is it possible to win 6 or even 7 out of 10.  Sure!  Is it possible to repeat that every session within the exact time frame you choose on a regular basis?  No way!  Never ever will happen.  Even if it happens within a computer theory program you discovered. 

The math people will probably define it as Probability and Variance, or the house edge, etc.  Like I defined in my other postings, I don't really care about all that, seriously.  I focus on Decisions and Reality as well as the management of what I am engaged in and facing with the shoe presentments.  I do not attempt to beat the casino or the game; I do not attempt to outsmart the casino either.  I just shoot for that section of time where some type of opportunity is presenting itself and I try my best to match up my desires and reality with that.  The programming and the theories will side track you something awful, IMO.

So there is a bit about Fallacy and Belief.  We all have it, no matter what walk of life you come from or what your experience is at the casino.  When you sit down and actually play the game, you will be somewhat influenced by what you have been exposed to, what your knowledge, research, beliefs and desires are.  I cannot see any way around all that.  Maybe you can and maybe you subscribe to engaging in a scheduled wagering pattern according to something you saw on the internet or found on your computer.  But, I just cannot see how that will translate itself to the time frame with the shoes you are playing at the casino?  There is less than a 50% chance of you winning if you believe in the math and greater than a 50% chance of the casino winning your money.  There is no way around all that, including a set schedule of progressions. 

Unless, you work on certain presentments with some type of progression and/or parlays and then totally reset and refresh when you fall off the win section.  You have to give yourself a much larger chance with the accumulated wins to far outweigh your losses and the risk capital, rather than a +1 or a -1 or a +2 or a flat bet, etc.  That will only grind you down.  Reason being, you are attempting a mathematical revenge in reverse on the game to accumulate wins.  It will not work. 

Part 2 will have a brief synopsis of my thoughts and successful progressions and parlays.  To be continued..........

You know Mike when I wrote that I thought about you. Seriously I did. If you said anything else or something really complimentary I would probably forget about the Board sell it get rid of it, but I knew that wouldn't happen. 

You don't change.

Maybe it's just me and my imagination. But I have noticed that almost all of the people that are relatively new to the message boards and or gambling, they'll come on a message board and say how great they are doing. So many have one common denominator which is they can't reveal their whole wagering selection or system whatever you want label it.

They'll give you a few things and then say how great they're doing and how much they are making and people will press them for what it is. The more you press on the more conversation and posting back and forth.

Eventually the person that was doing so great, just fades away.  Again maybe it's my imagination?  Kind of comical, at least that's the way I find it.

Thank you!

My point being, the possible number of outcomes is far north/above billions.  That is huge, too huge to work with in reality. 

Without knowing the order that the shoe is set in, which you can never ever know, unless you counted down the entire shoe and you are within a couple hands of the very end, and you suddenly came up with 9 nines left or 12 face cards left, then your next two hands will be ties, ultra slim chance of that happening, but whatever.

What is left does not matter.  The order matters.  My point.  And with that number of possibilities, how can you tell or plan on what is coming up and in what order? 

That is why one shoe will produce only 1's and 2's and an occasional 3.  While other subsequent shoes will produce 9 to 14 streak bankers followed by strong player streaks as well. 

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. 

Quote from: Sputnik on July 23, 2018, 03:28:24 PM
We are different gamblers, for example, Gizmo talks about his global effect and I talk about my methodology.
You mention sides bets and parlays that is a different approach.



I read this several times and still don't get it.
Why and how does someone make side bets and play both sides at the same time?
If I understand you correctly and not misunderstand your way to play the game.

I mentioned side bets and parlays as an example to my choice/option of striking when I see the bias actually there.  To me there is a huge difference in wagering for it and wagering once it is there.  Either way it is the same risk, continues or cancels out. 

However, if it continues and gets stronger, I win and win huge.   If it cancels, I lost a flat bet or whatever I wagered on it to continue. 

I am a gambler, I am not a writer or a theorist, please understand that!

I attempt to put into words and explain, not easy most times.

Side Bets:  There are the side bets on the bac table such as Panda 8, Fortune 7, 3 card 8/9's, Bad Beat, natural 8 over 7's, etc.  I do wager on some of those as well as parlays or positive progressions on the Banker or Player side, etc.

I also have my (1 + 4 Side Parlay) wager, which I will always allocated the start of it from win money.  To me, that is a huge advantage and if I hit a couple out of say ten attempts, I will be far ahead.  I always reset and refresh, which so few players actually do practice.

The 1 + 4 Side Parlay wager I have, is always in addition to a flat bet or any other wager.  Not against or playing both sides as you might think.  I pay no attention to it and it does not effect my wagering.  It is a psych thing and works for myself.  I do not wager the 1 + 4 on the table side wagers, it is a side wager (but on top of my other wager) on the banker or player side. 

It strictly is a huge boast in winning that I do not have to have prevail to continue wagering, count on or rely on in anyway.  It is included in my striking wagering. 

Am I still unclear?

Out of a table of say 7 players, there might very well be 7 different/varying ways of wagering.

All might win the session, all might lose the session, maybe only 1 or 2 will win and most lose.

The session will determine which players were correct in their application of wagering. 

That is the way I see it after all these years.

I never say you are wrong.  Don't think that. 

I really do see the best profiting players using non-conventional wagering techniques these days for hitting the casino hard and actually winning, if they can control themselves that is. 

Can anyone figure this out as to how many possible outcomes exist?

You know, just the possibilities of what can happen in a bac shoe are in the multi billions, IMO. 

That is staggering if you really clear your head, sit down and think about it.

I could not even think of how to set up that math equation, maybe one of the math gurus here can??

8 decks of cards, remove the first 2 to 11 as the burn cards, cut off the last 15 or so.  416 cards minus, say 25 or so.  How many possibilities on a declining scale does a player actually face?  Huge amounts!  Especially when you are not looking to have optional draws like BJ, etc.

Striking

Okay, I have stopped the thoughts about planning when the time might come, or how to figure out when it is going to appear, etc.  That is usually the downfall or the path to losing more than you can win, or sets the player onto the path to recoup, instead of smacking the casino a bit. 

I call it striking, not so much riding the bias or taking advantage.  Plain and simple, striking.

What serves me well and avoids me from the, 'I was an unintelligent and simply did not wager' punishment!

Bias, to me is seeing it as it is happening, not wagering for it.  As it happens, just say I was flat betting a few hands.  It started.  I won 3 hands straight and I now see the bias, whatever it might be.  The correction, the abnormality, the curve, the rarity, whatever it is--does not matter one bit.  (That is where so many, most all, players go wrong.  They are trying to define and figure it out.) 

So I won the 3 hands flat betting.  Say I was at $150.00 a hand as an example.  I am up $450.00 for that section.  I will take the $450.00 and split it into 4 units of $110.00 each and use those 4 wagers of $110.00 for my (1 + 4 Side Parlay) wagering for the striking attempts.  One successful (1 + 4 Side Parlay) will get me $3,520.00 if I am not mistaking.  Yes, some of the wagers will have to be sacrificed, some flat bets and possibly one or more of the (1 + 4 Side Parlay) attempts.  Progression and a continuance (1 + 4 Side Parlay) is a lot to ask to come out of.  But when something is hitting, don't be scared, scared to win-scared to wager, IMO is the worst thing a player can subscribe to. 

But as far as a striking, that is something along the lines as to what I would do.  Rather than a planned attack.  Planned attacks to me are extremely difficult and usually do not work out.