Posting/Engagement on BetSelection & Some Other Things

Regarding the posting and engagement within threads here on BetSelection, I will offer the following.  This is not a complete and definitive list by any means.

More or less, guidelines and an expression of my vision, thoughts, what I believe the correct aura and reflection should be for the board here. 

Engage, but engage in a gentlemanly and proper engagement.  This is not the easiest thing to put into words or protocol.  But, I have to put something in as a start and here goes.    I ask you to engage in the proper way, not a '1-line' sketchy, redundant, universal-fit all, 'never really answering/defining a point' but just reinforcing a generic stance of mostly others, etc.  But do not confuse what I just said with that of a proper, short and concise 'defense' whereupon you choose not to go into great detail for sake of not repeating yourself in the defensive efforts of something you posted, etc. 

IMO and that of countless others, things are not explained many times on message boards and many readers interpret those '1-Liners', especially the seemingly negative and strong ones that are extremely repetitive, redundant and thrown out there time and time again with a few other members ganging up and 'bullying' those that actually do desire to engage past the level of sidewalk-yelling and street sparring. 

State your case and if that happens to be a line of total stuff, theory, reasoning, weird or out-of-left field things, great.  So be it.  If it is based all on mathematical, statistical, educational, classroom, long proven theories, textbook knowledge, whatever, great also.  So be it.  Both sides and anything else is totally acceptable.  But explain, engage and defend with gentlemen like tones and over views, summations, monologues and closures, etc., etc., and so on.  Stop the attack mode, the strutting up and pushing an OP's/Members shoulders and provoking, because that is wrong, dead on wrong. 

We are a gambling board with a bit more technical, professional and experience than the recreational gambler consumerish type of message board out there with a few sections/rooms on certain types of table games and slots.  Anything and everything in proportion to gambling, casinos on-line, etc., is allowed--unlike what some think or attempt to enforce or embarrass others into believing it also, where they only desire pure wagering related threads and discussions.  If you don't like it, if you don't like the author, enjoy the author, find the author interesting or useful, if you do not think you can learn anything form the author or member, if you cannot turn what the author or member did wrong into a positive path or finding, etc., etc., just skip the author/member's postings and threads.  Do not engage, stop the conflict and the holding down of anyone for anything.  Move on, the exact same as you do in a book store or a supermarket, no different, none whatsoever. 

Please act and post/answer in a sportsmanship like conduct, that is all I ask and desire.  Because when you do post, you are setting the tone and aura for this board, our board, your board, your base, other people's/member's bases, it is all one place, period.   

As far as the on-going debate and stance of gambling, casino playing, and 'Us' players and members of the board.  The bottom line with the current arguments and stances on this board is really derived from the 3-Ways of wagering while gambling, with whatever style of gambling you might subscribe to.  The way I define and see it, are the following.  Style A)  Mathematical, statistical, following the published and historical beliefs by the already deemed 'greats' of the various industries and past, long run adherence, pre-scheduled protocols and everything else along those lines;  Style B) Employing experience, reality recognition, complete clear vision, in tune with psych----emotional and self-guidance that you believe provides yourself the best path to profits and everything else along those lines;  Style C) Anything and everything else anyone finds, believes in, attempts, gambles with or by or because of and anything else along those lines. 

So are the numbers and results of one style going to outdo and outperform with certainty, protocol and that long-term continued profit, etc., against the others?  Is your way the only way?  So, since others came on here to write about,'their way' because they have found whatever it is they have realized or think they do, so wrong?  Will they eventually go broke or give back what they claim they profited by the employment of their style, so wrong?  Will they eventually get rich employing their style?  Will they eventually find their 'way' turns negative, etc., etc., and so on?  Maybe, maybe not, possibly, yes, no, could be, never.  I don't know and you don't definitely know either, in most cases anyways. 

That is why we have this message board and discussions.  Use it as such.  But do it with the proper engagement and sportsmanship like conduct, which is what I ask.  Unlike Vic, I gamble and I gamble very actively, I post and I have hard-core feelings and beliefs.  Those have nothing to do with the Admin side of the transition we are going through.  However, I might be a bit more involved on the baccarat and B&M casino table game side than the other sides as far as the content and my own personal results and endeavors, etc.  But the personal side will not and does not control the Admin side of what I have to do.  And, if it does I am sure one of the other Mods will point it out to me and I will be adjusted.   

Everyone here, IMO that has any experience on other message boards, gambling or otherwise (Admit it or not) knows you cannot go on those other boards and express a certain steadfast type of stern, strong, apparently your own fixed protocol, fashioned under the premise of being extremely educated, no room for neutralizing, not (NOT) believing someone else has something that can help another, 'open a path' let everyone speak, etc., except I will dominate and attempt control because I am right and there are no other legit ways no matter what anyone is really doing in reality, type of aura.  It does not fly. 

You can post anything you want in regards to gambling, don't get me wrong and don't twist what I am saying.  Just post it, explain it, defend it and don't push it upon everyone and everything and then reduce yourself to one sentence definitive and repetitive lines which tosses that proverbial monkey wrench into the arena, stopping community involvement because most members do not desire to dance and attempt to appease that drunk in the middle of a busy intersection.

Simply, if you don't agree, don't like the OP/member or his/her personality, messages, content, results, etc., just skip over it after you state your initial case.  This is not a sparring contest.  And do not misinterpret what I just laid out as being restrictive and weird?Because it is not.  Also, if 2 or more members want to actually spar in a thread---that is okay, but keep it to those member's threads that actually desire that, NOT universally across the board with most every thread.

Finally, if you do not agree or find the means to live with I outlined, you can simply find a suitable base elsewhere.  Oh yeah, while I am on the subject, I bought the board here from Vic because I have a certain vision and purpose.  Including adding practice and live tables for various reasons, instruction, competition, etc.  Producing podcasts, live studio type of programming, interviews and industry related material and activities, etc.  I did not purchase the board to rule it 'have it all my way' censor or anything else of the nature a few other members came up with.  Vic lost interest and is assuming other avenues rather than the message board and platform venue we have here.

I want the board to be everyone's board but I want a friendly, neutral, read what you want and engage with whom you have interests with and find purpose and reason for being here.  Use it as a base or not, but don't provoke, spar and chase those around the board that have a different purpose or pursuits you might not fully agree with. 

I hope that explains my vision and what I am doing with some of the reasons why.

I attempted to discuss with Xander the aura and the nature of some/quite a bit of his posting on the board and he became aggressive, defensive and 1 sided-1 way to the max.  I really did desire to be neutral with him and kind of "wipe the slate clean" such as I did with "GreenGuy", bringing him back and active from full-ban status, etc. 

I asked Xander, plainly to be a bit more respectful, some other stuff and mostly to stop the "one-liners" and "one liner hits", because they are offensive types of innuendoes the majority of the time and with his repetitiveness he demonstrates, he does become dominate with that very type of posting.  Problem being, not the content, but the aura of it and it attacks many others that are part and make up this community.  I have had numerous complaints about him and a handful of others that do what he does to a much lesser point.  My analogy to it is a drunk person walking down the sidewalk minding his own business or sitting on the bus bench not bothering anyone, generally doesn't get brought to the attention of the police.  But, the drunk person jumping up and down and causes havoc by dancing in the middle of the intersection will get immediate confrontation, handcuffing usually following a scuffle and then jail. 

Anyway, I really tried the past 48 hours or so to talk with Xander, I wasn?t getting anywhere except attacked.  All fine.  I stated my case to him and I told him, we don?t have to be friends on here, just exists and be respectful to everyone, in so many words.  Once you disagree, move on, stop the constant and repetitive 'chasing' with the one-liners.  Engage the proper way or move on, in so many words. 

Xander, re-contacted me after that very late the other night and wanted to engage in industry related talk/discussion and so on.  I simply answered him, 'Why are you still contacting me', etc.  He stopped at that point.  Last night, I sent him about 3 PM messages and stated my case one more time and to cease and desist the disrespect, the repetitiveness of the one-liners, when others go to great trouble, detail and explanation of their sides and he persists with the one-liners and just adds a derogatory and negative aura that turns so many off and actually does stop others from posting or they cut back at posting.  In other words, he desires to spar but fails to engage in the proper way with a decent amount of 'anything' except what I mentioned.  This is not an isolated one-time thing with myself or another. 

Xander is a master of 'twisting and turning' of other's statements/beliefs and posts.  He picks a word or two from a sentence, or a sentence from a paragraph, or a paragraph from a longer more detailed posting and then uses the twisted and turned, isolated words/words, against the OP/member.

That is wrong-dead on wrong-unless it is done in complete friendship, fun and humor with longtime friendship type of situations.  And that is NOT what Xander and a few others do. 

Another issue that I will not get into here is a more serious one with copy and pasting of research, technical and report type of work without the proper citation and/or written permission as stated within those copy and pasted works.  We are not referring to YouTube, News Articles, Websites links, etc.  Xander clearly violated them with aggressive and defensive and negative actions towards BetSelection and myself in regards to that area.

I am personally tired of it and will not have that type of aura and behavior on this board.  It does not happen on most other boards, especially those with more of a technical, factual, and professional aura rather than the consumerish, "he said-she said", type of boards. 

For the gist of it and in summation, those are the reasons I placed Xander into 'pre-moderation' last night and then he decided to name call, demean and say certain things we don't need to go into here.  Another official of the board up'd the moderation level after mine.  I hope this explains or enlightens the action, it fits along with the other 2 areas I am in the process of posting today; Rules of BetSelction; and Posting/Engagement Guidleines and Aura. 

I do wholeheartedly believe that we have a much more lenient moderation and tolerance policy/aura than the other boards out there.  However, I will not have a 'free for all'.  No way--shape--or form. 

There Are No Laws of Physics. There's Only the Landscape.


https://www.quantamagazine.org/there-are-no-laws-of-physics-there's-only-the-landscape-20180604/

Quote from: owenslv on June 08, 2018, 03:07:36 AM
Hi Mike;

"Trends are meaningless in a random game, and can only be identified after the event. "

But as I have written about, it has extremely helped me profit at the game of Baccarat with what has yet to happen, might happen, usually does happen quite often, happens and yes sometimes does not.  But I have profited very well as I have shown the last couple of months in my writings on this board with exactly what you started your post off with. Thinking sideways, coming back into the game with complete open Vision will help you tremendously, I believe.

Why??  Because simply  the game and the presentments does not stay idle, neutral and the same simply .  All it takes is experience to realize what is probably going to happen. Thank you.

The last time I bend to the membership regarding Admin function of this board.

But for the record, I am forwarding a copy of the email I received, as I type this to Vic. 

As well, I just completed a series of communications with Xandar, and I mean completed. 

Unfortunately, like a handful of others, I see as distractions because  of their twisting and turning without their own desire to read and grasp the whole author's position and meaning of his posts/threads.  I still say, if you don't like, enjoy, find interesting, learn or appreciate an author or book, why waste your time on it in the first place?

Thanks, Glen.

Vic has the email copy I received last night that started this episode today.  Vic can confirm this and let it take its course or not say anything.  But for the record I would appreciate Vic to confirm the receipt of my email and confirm what I wrote as accurate within this thread.  But if not, I am sorry--it is just what it is.

I only did this extra measure for the sake of the transition here.  Maybe if you do not like or approve of my way of Admin, you will feel more comfortable at one of the other boards where their Admin functions are not as easy and result in suspensions and punishments, etc.  Or perhaps you might feel more conformable with a certain exclusive website/message board as a base, that are strictly professionals in the most elite circle of multi million dollar earners in gambling?  But either way, I did what I thought was best. 

No more actions will ever be brought public like this because  it does not work out easily or should I say with less headache and pain. 

Thanks.

Vic, Care to comment, confirm??

(Whatever you believe is best for the board to say on your behalf to this situation, Thanks)

Quote from: Jimske on June 07, 2018, 12:26:41 PM
Agreed.  But I'm just curious.  When you say you "fielded a phone call" what exactly does that mean?  UNLV phoned you up or what exactly?

I received an email last night, I responded with my contact info--rather than going back and forth.  I then received a phone call contact from an associate that was responsible for the area that was addressed. 

FYI and everyone else's at this point, most  us have quoted a 'UNLV' article or report at one time or another.  They put a lot of hard work into them and those reports and articles are the 100% property of the author's and co-owned intellect rights by UNLV.  The authors are mostly industry related or a straight up teacher/professor at the UNLV or another university, etc.  Most of them, at least the highest majority have no problem to give permission to use their works, just they want to know and have it a but more formal.  It is clearly posted on every work they have that I have seen on the internet or their site.

I was told, they don't desire their works to be put up and used in 'less than desirable' situations and purposes, for sake of cutting a long conversation, short.

When you see this on the UNLV's articles, usually at the end, I must have a copy of your permission letter, etc., or I will be forced to delete it.  It reads as follows:  "Note: This summary is the intellectual property of the author and the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Do not use or reproduce without proper citation and permission."

Thanks, Glen.

Quote from: Xander on June 06, 2018, 05:16:32 PM
Gizmo,

In short, roulette players like other gambler's aren't content winning just $50 or $100.  If their initial investment is $100, then they're often times not going to quit until they've either won $1000 or until they've lost $100 or more.  There's usually no middle ground.  They keep cycling their bankroll until it's gone.   The players still lose at the house edge.  Understand?

"Since players rewager their bankroll more than one time, win / drop is greater than win / handle. Casinos typically can't get total handle for table games so they use drop instead. What the roulette numbers tell you is that on average, players played through their buyins three times." -Math Extremist



Really what you need to study in order to comprehend it better is "probability of ruin" and the random walk."  I doubt that you've ever studied either of them.

Like many people you're confused by the house edge verses the casino win at various games.   To help you understand the difference, read the following that describes the math in detail.

[Parts apparently copied and pasted from a UNLV report on the internet.  I was informed proper permission was not awarded to Xander to copy and paste this which is disclaimed very clearly on their website following this report and almost everything they publish as well. 

Please follow their requirements to copy and paste or use parts thereof, thank you, BetSelection Admin.]


[/i]

Quote from: Mike on June 07, 2018, 08:33:28 AM
Glen,

It's evident from your post that you don't really understand variance and what it means (look up "standard deviation"). Nobody is saying that an individual player's results will conform precisely to the predicted HA in a playing session, but you are right in that statistics only tell you something about the collective, not the individual. However, you appear to have it backwards; it's not that the HA is somehow derived from the stats; the HA is built into the game and the stats are just a reflection of it, so EVERY player has to contend with the house edge, even if they have a favourable edge themselves.

Of course an individual has control over his actions, but the issue is, does controlling yourself make any difference to the outcomes in an essentially random game? Sure you need self-control, but it's useless without an edge, and you can only find one if the game is not entirely random.

Again, you're just demonstrating lack of understanding of probability. Blackjack is not a game of independent trials. Technically, Baccarat isn't either, but Thorpe also investigated the possibility of getting an edge in Bacc and found there was none, and of course Roulette IS a game of independent trials, so counting past outcomes is pointless (but you MAY be able to get an edge using physics).

I don't believe I said anything in that quote about Thorpe and you make it appear that I did and you've just lambasted me for misunderstanding the content you have outlined in that quote I believe that's from another member on the board? Please clarify thank you

Quote from: Xander on June 06, 2018, 05:16:32 PM
Gizmo,

In short, roulette players like other gambler's aren't content winning just $50 or $100.  If their initial investment is $100, then they're often times not going to quit until they've either won $1000 or until they've lost $100 or more.  There's usually no middle ground.  They keep cycling their bankroll until it's gone.   The players still lose at the house edge.  Understand?

"Since players rewager their bankroll more than one time, win / drop is greater than win / handle. Casinos typically can't get total handle for table games so they use drop instead. What the roulette numbers tell you is that on average, players played through their buyins three times." -Math Extremist



Really what you need to study in order to comprehend it better is "probability of ruin" and the random walk."  I doubt that you've ever studied either of them.

Like many people you're confused by the house edge verses the casino win at various games.   To help you understand the difference, read the following that describes the math in detail.


[/i]

Although you did cite you copied and pasted the article you published on this board from the UNLV website your citation was incomplete as well at this time my information is you did not have a letter of authorization and permission from the author and UNLV. I fielded  a phone call a couple of hours ago in regards to this and it will have to be deleted it until you obtain such permission. All future copy and paste or cited information from UNLV, such as you just did will have to be the correct and legal way that they disclaim on their website. I'm sorry it's not my decision you have to follow those rules.  Everyone does.  Thanks for understanding.  Alrelax.

Quote from: Gizmotron on June 06, 2018, 06:17:55 PM
I did read it. What you are suggesting as being a display of reality is only a fallacy. It's a good bit of sophistry too. It's the greatest lie since casinos ever opened their doors.


The casinos have drop boxes all over the table game areas that must balance against all chips removed and given to players during the days play. Some people that stay for days and take their chips up to their rooms also must be factored in. So a balance of taken in money and paid out money, confirmed by the cashier's desk, must result in a hard number of earnings. If a Blackjack player walks up to a Roulette table with a pocket full of $25 chips and starts playing that pile of chips then the simple balance at the table is thrown off. But the entire table game area is still in balance because only the table games have cash drop boxes and casino chips that need to be cashed in.


Your example of how much a casino takes in is theoretical mambo jumbo. There is a real count. If the average activity of the table game area results in a house edge of say 4% advantage to the house for example. Then over a years time the amount of money actually wagered should result in a 4% take as earnings from the activity of gambling in the table game area. You could say that out of a discovered number of bets placed, at an actual average value of each bet for the entire table playing area, a 4% return on those wagers was realized. That would be a hard and factual number. So where is the book keeping for that? If I were an IRS agent investigating or auditing these enterprises I would want to know the hard real numbers. If the casino was a publicly traded corporation then those real numbers would be published to see. Are you right? Do you know what the casino earns from the table gaming area of a casino?


I don't think it's just the house edge. I believe it is way more, do to human nature and greed. But, I will give you a chance to prove what I believe to be a ridiculous conclusion. I think that the single spin result rate for the Roulette table alone is exactly as expected by the probability numbers. But that the casino takes in far more from a gambler's session because of ignorance on the player's part.

You inspired me to write the following this afternoon, and I tried my best from my experiences, knoweldge and talking with industry people to write something, rather than cutting and pasting from the UNLV or other published sources, etc., et al:

#1) What you said.

#2) Checks and Balances.  For casino and regulatory purposes.  However, IMO, magazines, websites and industry journals have offered the various statistical figures in the wrong context to the general public and writers/authors have latched onto them for whatever reason to enhanced their stories/points/topics for credibility and official 'back up' of sorts to their content, etc.

#3) Numerous people inflict their reasoning and purposes for interpretation of what the industry makes use of for other accounting and governing reasons.

#4) But at each casino in comparison to another, there can be vast differences of generated revenue from player's losses or player's wins. 

For example:  Casino '1' with players 'A-H' could lose $1.5 Million dollars on baccarat one month and lose for several continuing months as well.

While Casino '2' with players 'I-P' could win $6.5 Million dollars on baccarat for the same month and continuing such win from the players for several months as well. 

While both of the examples will reflect the 'hold' of the table games section of each casino, neither one will reflect the figures each realizes upon the other or the industry for sake of statistical wins or losses.  Unless it is within and through a research paper that addresses that subject only for the point of what a game makes or losses in a certain geographical area or a period of times, etc.  But once again, will have no effect on what a player is compelled to do or does.

#5) I give an unknown/uncertain amount of my win chips or buy-in chis to another player, which wins or loses those at the same table or another table, etc.  Numerous other scenarios similar to that will always restrict the casino figures from staying internal for accounting procedures regarding their chips inventory and the cash player drop, etc., rather than a detailed and accurate accounting of what each player does or does not do, as far as wins and losses.  Casinos do have a much handle on the high-rollers/or CTR'd type of players 'wins and losses' with pretty close accuracy concerning those players wins and losses as compared to non CTR'd type of players, but once again, those figures are not filters back into the industry and available to be input to the large masses of table game players in order to label each one as to what they will or can do, etc.

#6)  If what Xander and a few other members claim is 100% gospel and accurate with the reported numbers, that means I would always in the long run score the set and published, 'loss' or '-HA' amount no matter what.  Which will not happen in reality.  In fallacy and theory you can say it will, but pretty much it will not. 

#7) HA's and everything else associated with those are not totally accurate because there most certainly are much larger losses and wins in relationship to the statistical '-HAs' published and set accordingly to various industry sources, conclusions and experts, etc., etc. 

#8) Statistical results over millions or billions of testing results do not change, agreed.  However, wins and losses are a total different and separate picture.  So many writers, people, message board authors, etc., grab a number that a test result yields for whatever reason and then claim, that same percentage is what a player will realize over the proverbial long-run. 
For example.  Casino '3' might have one player for 5 days and that player brings $20 Million dollars and losses it all.   Likewise casino '4', might have the same player or even different players for a period of time and that/those players win $20 Million dollars from that casino in contrast as to the other one.  This events do happen and will never reflect within the industry 'HAs' for the game in question. 

Bottom line is, if 1 billion shoes were dealt and the results produce a certain amount of bankers and players and ties, which the percentage will still remain the same no matter what 100 billion casino players won or lost at baccarat.  If you believe that a casino player will be governed to a certain definitive extent because of what the test results have proven, that is not correct. 


#9) Now, the one casino's good fortune that they earned has nothing at all to do with the other casino's lost revenues or drop, they paid out.  Although both will and do, in complete accuracy report to their state casino regulatory reporting regulations, the 'HA' does not and will not change no matter what it is.  Possibly their 'hold' on the players 'drop' will change but once again, that has nothing to do with what a player might or might not win or lose or have a chance of winning, etc.  It is merely for accounting and regulatory purposes.  Like I said, too many authors and researchers grad figures attempting to base something off of and give themselves justification for their content, etc.

Even if all casinos win or lose to their players, the '-HA' will still be there, be published, not change and stand as being valid and negative no matter what the players might have accomplished or not at their tables. 

#10) Same as a bicycle journal talking about children learning how to ride a bike.  Whereupon 15 kids out of every 20, based upon research and study of millions of kids, will fall a certain amount of times and out of the remaining 5, 3 of them will fall a certain amount and the other 2, will fall another amount.  As well, out of the 15, 3 and 2 kids out of every 20, a total of yet another amount will be injured seriously requiring an emergency room visit and yet a certain amount of the kids will wind up with a cast on a broken arm or leg form the results of those falls. 

However, while that applies to the test group of kids with extreme accuracy, it does not mean that out of every single equivalent group of kids, that the same amount will produce the same results.  Sure, out of billions and billions and billion, 'XYZ' amount was injured in various ways.  However, the consistency and the regularity for those injured really had no rhyme or reason when grouped together. 

The same with gambling and players at the casinos.

#11) Smaller casinos generally do not offer baccarat and high limit games because of the exposure and the fluctuations they cause.  Meaning, possible and large wins.  If it was a guaranteed for the casino property to hold '-HA' without any risk whatsoever and definitively, every casino would venture into the true high limit realms and also offer baccarat, etc. 

And, while exposure and fluctuation can hurt a player enormously, it can also help a player enormously.  Granted, most all players, at least the highest and greatest amount of them, will always give back win money amounts as well as go negatively with their buy-in/bank rolls, because all they do is attempt bigger, larger, greater and harder wins and win amounts.  That is where the '-HA' start to set in and take effect on the players.  But that percentage from those '-HA' are still not a governing tool that can precisely be implemented universally by the casino, it is still up to the player to miscalculate, misjudge, misalign himself and everything else along those lines with the downfalls that exists within each game. 

However, there are those players on the other hand, that learned and realized the real opportunities and advantages that will fuel his winning over his losses with some kind of systematic protocol involving most things I have talked about and detailed out, other than sheer and lonesome bet-placement and continued wagering. 

In all actuality, the players wins and losses will be far greater than those industry statistics regarding the 'HAs' no matter what they are set at. 

I.E.:  He might win far in excess than numerous other players and actually cash out, hold and not re-surrender that money to any casino.  On the other hand—he very well might and give back far in excess of what other players are actually recorded as losing. 

#12)  Now, for sake of simplicity, say there are 8 players at a bac table consistently for one month at one casino property.  Each bac player buys in with $1,000.00 and each bac player cashes out $980.00 at the end of each and every session for the entire month, each and every single day.  The casino can say they had a +2% Hold/Win off their bac table, in other words a '-2% HA' to the player. 

However, another period might have that very same casino seeing those very same players' cash out $1,020.00 at the end of every single session as well within the same period of time.  Then, the casino would be recording a -2% Loss/Payout off their bac table they would generally just reduce from their drop, whatever that was.  Whereas, the players all realized a +2% win rate.  But no matter which way it goes with varying amounts of wins and losses by the players, the statistical results have to stay the very same for the game.  That cannot change.  What individual players actually do and realize, has no bearing (NO BEARING WHATSOEVER) on the statistical 'HAs' of the game. 

Which can easily be checked if you take a state regulatory authorities win/loss rate off the bac tables, divide the number of players, know what their real buy-in was, as well as what they actually finished with and then totaling it all out with additions and divisions.  Which really can never be done in reality.  However, you can obtain the win/hold figures for a casinos bac tables, as well as the drop and it will be greater than that of the statistical results of the game proven by certain tests that are taking as industry correct standards. 

To myself, all the published numbers mean, is that all the total amount of money dropped into the casinos tables and an approximate deduction of chip inventory that was tracked to cashing out against that drop in general, equals that amount of money realized by the casino collectively from its players.  It has nothing to do with individual players doing an above average management of their own protocols and events they experienced.  As far as the industry statistics resulting from people or groups of researchers figuring out what certain games produce, in the way of '-HAs', I don't dispute those figures, just don't see any real use for them at the bac table or any other table by an individual in gauging his play, strategy, or attempting to respond to an opportunity that might be presenting itself or to a situation that would harm him.  Events, opportunities, advantages that are positive or even negative, cannot be gauged and are not regulated by the statistical outcomes of the games to correlate to the percentages produced by tests and histories.

#13) The bottom line is, you will lose or win what you are smart enough to realize is happening—as it is happening.  How to hold and continue to play or what you are unintelligent enough to fall prey to and continue believing in whatever it is, that propels yourself to whatever it is you are thinking and believing you will get to. 

Likewise, the bottom line is a kid will fall and possibly become injured dependent upon his training and instruction along with his supervision which may allow him to avoid falling and injuries as compared to other kids that received the same, lesser or even a greater amount of instruction, training and supervision.  Most will just say it was good luck or bad luck that the kid had.  But in most of the cases that is not true.  It really was dependent upon the kid's application, understanding and continued activity he was able to control or not control his actions within his pursuit of learning how to ride the bicycle that made the ultimate determination as to what would happen or not happen with the kid.  Therefore, the research groups that wrote up and reported all the falling and injuries broken down to every group of 20 kids, might or might not apply to your kid, not that they are wrong or inaccurate by any means.

If a game has approximately a '-1.25%' '-HA', that does not mean I will lose 1.25% of the hands I play or sit at every so many shoes, say 100 shoes or 1,000 shoes, etc.  Likewise, it does not mean I will win a total of 98.75 hands either.  Change the 100 to 10,000 or even 100,000 or 500,000 which is probably the long run for most everyone.  Unless I wager the exact same amount for the exact same 'even chance' wagers for the amount of hands that the '-HA' percentage was pulled from.  If it was a large enough test section of shoes/hands and pretty much no one does that anyway in their gambling pursuits.  IMO and pretty much that of most any rational person that actually does understand what those figures are all about, how they came about and their purposes. 

Thank You, Glen.

P.S.: [Written 6/6/2018 Copyright Glen/Alrelax. Cut & Paste file # 14532AN-BS-2-XAN]

Thank you for your time, great input, sharing and experience.  Defined, honest and available to those that are searching for advantages as well as disadvantages to gauge from.  I will vouch for Mark and the content of the 100% realism and possibilities of what he just wrote.

Thanks, Glen.

Quote from: Jimske on June 04, 2018, 03:01:08 PM
I guess I should have paid more attention.  Now it is confirmed that our very own  "Braggart-in-Chief" owns .cc.  Am I being negative? OR am I just stating a fact with a little sarcasm?  You decide.

Let's see if our new leader uses his vast "hard knocks" "25,000 shoes"+ (ahem) experience to promote real further understanding of the Baccarat game.

I can only offer my congratulations, Glen.  You're now the big fish in our little pond!

No Jimske, I am not.  You guys are all the big fish in our pond.  'Ours' in my definition means, yours and mine and others too.  Just I might be the lifeguard is all.  I do know how to swim. 

You know Mark, I have done a lot of varied things in my 40 years as an adult, or so.  You read lots of my writings, here and elsewhere, I would only assume.  Reading what you just wrote, over a cup of fresh coffee---my buddy from New York City is here with me right now as well.  The one I occasional gamble with, whom is a 30 year +retired Vet of law enforcement.  We were both young Metro Dade Police Officers in the early Miami Vice days in South Florida.  We both went to the police academy together and we were both high school friends.  Both of us resigned from Metro-Dade the sign day and we both moved to New York City from there.  He stayed into law enforcement with the NYPD and I went off into other things.

He was ultimately the Arnold Schwarzenegger of the NYPD along with a handful of others, no doubt.  But being on Truck 1 in Manhattan, ESU (Emergency Service Unit, SWAT and more) he retired with a chest full of medals, in fact he has so many--there is no way could wear them all on his full dress blues at one time, seriously.  I admire him in many ways, but when we both wound up in a rural part of the Midwest within 30 miles of each other a few years ago, without any communication or knowledge of each other's relocation to the present locale we are residing in, it blew our minds.  He told me a while back, about his transformation, realization and love of having a 10+ acres hobby horse farm, ATV's, motorcycles, dune buggies, horses and the ability to ride down a dirt road, no helmet, no cars, a beer in hand, doing twice the speed limit posted somewhere, and if he just happens to spot one of the 5 Sheriif's on patrol in the county, he waves to them and they salute him.  This is a guy that loved to propel off buildings, cut through traffic in Manhattan, side swipe a vehicle while proceeding to a '10-13' (officer shot or down or hostage situation, etc.) and work 48 hours without going home or sleeping, etc., etc.  A guy that would grab a soda and a slice of pizza on a busy intersection corner, telling his dispatcher he is caught in traffic before proceeding to the next call because he was having stomach cramps from not eating for 15 hours or so.  Playing baccarat with him is another experience and experience beyond the 14 player tables I played on in Atlantic City for decades.

Like wise, I done many things of varied nature since leaving partnership with him at Metro-Dade back in the extreme late 70's and early 80's.  At times I do kind of wish I did not do some of them and other times, I love everything I did, experienced and was involved in.  When I actually do deduce down and really give thought to it, I do not actually regret anything I did or did not do (to the point of resentment and dwelling or throwing up road blocks, etc.)--because  I simply do not think my life could have been more exciting, valuable or memorable than what I actually lived and experienced.   I am whom I am and I usually do not get involved with what most say, "I wish I never did that", or "My life sucked and I wish I could have had the chance to do 'so and so' or 'such and such' or something along those lines", etc. 

The 'human factor'......................Yes Sir, not just gambling, but in everything.  Like that little 5 year old carbon copy of myself in the posting I wrote the other day, my little boy.  How I channel the tangibles to him and giving him every single thing I never ever had or was not available when I/we were kids.  Seeing that smile, getting that hug, having him wrap those arms around me and say, "Daddy, you are the greatest and I am not just kidding you", stuff like that is a terrific way to continue in my upcoming 60's.  Especially after that little kid saying a couple of months ago, "Daddy, no more birthdays for you"!  I asked him why?  He says, "Because with every birthday you get older and then one day in 20 or 30 years you have to die and I never want you to do that, Okay--so no more birthdays for you from now on".  That's myself right there and my fuel for most everything I do, playing baccarat or otherwise. 

The 'failures'....................Yeah, we all had them, just some of us (a whole lot) will not say what they were or recognize them or in fact, use them for their own benefit.  Because, I do something and profit from it in whatever way, shape or form, does not mean it is worthless, senseless, does not really exist, etc., or exclusive or mine only.  But for others to come in and say, 'That does not exist, wrong or you are lying' usually means, jealousy, failure, etc., of their own mind and protocols/believes, or just plain resentment of someone doing something 'successfully or profitably' that they tried and failed at for whatever real reasoning.  Such as, someone that tried what I am successful at or enjoy and they are not and hate or causes them grief.  I do the same thing but with refinement to make it work for myself, that they fail to notice, see, observe or explore, touch and witness for themselves before making their statements, that they declare facts back up by 'such and such', etc.  Gambling related and/or otherwise. 

Quote from: Gizmotron on June 04, 2018, 12:50:47 PM
"I know you are but what am I." -- that's it? Yikes. Are you enjoying the implication of the other thread? They completely impeach decades of accepted thought in that discussion. Your edge argument just dried up and died on the vine. It's fun to see a good logical argument refute past dogma. You can no longer demagogue your saintly position. Your tower is crumbling. nanner nanner nanner 

I remember several downfalls and negative "such and such's" someone named Mark admitted and faced and it was on this board, no?  Which to me, for whatever it is worth to anyone else, awards huge credibility, credence and experience(s) of great value from the Yale or Harvard equivalent of the 'University of Hard Knocks & Value'.  Double period.

Quote from: AsymBacGuy on June 03, 2018, 08:39:09 PM


Casinos advantages:

- math edge
- infinite bankroll vs limite players' bankrolls
- betting limits
- no emotions involved as they know the final positive outcome

Possible players advantages:

- selecting at most the situations to bet
- adapting a proper MM knowing that losing sessions or losing weeks are inevitable as a strategic plan can only get the best of it in a very diluted fashion. The same is true for casinos which may stay losers for long.

We can't alter the casinos advantages, just working on our possible advantages.

as.

Asym,

Spot on in summation.  There are numerous other Psych/Emotional/Vision/Desires, 'cons' or 'pros' that prey and hamper or pat a positive player on the back and encourage them.  Problem is, and a huge one--is almost all players have no clue or idea what those are and when they do set in--the player is usually defensive and resistant to the max--thus, falling prey or just plain being greedy/stupid, or whatever to the casino that is neutral and has that unlimited bankroll and cash for what they need to do, etc.

Problem is, IMO and after decades of playing, experience, family members of management in casinos admissions, etc., etc., is that the players will attack just those things you talked about with probably (unofficial and IMO) upwards of 90% of the time---the very first thing you mentioned:  "math edge" and work something out on their computer, paper, test programs, etc., and then attack for years and years knowing inside of them---"This has to work and it will work" therefore, missing what actually will work.  Maybe not on paper and maybe not with an elaborate arithmetical and scientific detailed proof statements, analysis and theory---etc., etc., but certainly does work 100% of the approx. 70-80% of the time.  The problem is, and maybe it is a quagmire---when we find ourselves in that ugly 20-30% of the time/space/section--we lose all decent and productive thought/goals/knoweldge and the ability to use of our experience, etc.  100% of the 'XYZ' time?  No, not double talk--my way of explaining you find what does win--because there is certainly a whole lot of winning going on at the bac tables, just almost everyone gives it back and then drains themselves for countless reasons and excuses as I pretty much wrote about on the board.  The entire 'key trigger/trick' is that player hold/realization/consciousness/decision making process outside of your body/and total conscious manipulation of your buy-in and win money without regard to goals, desires and what is sitting in front of you and your eyes in the dealer's rack, etc., etc., etc.  Longer and much more elaborately involved as some of us realize and are aware of. 

I remain.  Thank you for your great experiences you attempt to explain or bring-out here.