I clearly see larger losses than win amounts, both in the per hand and per session.  It is physically evident.

When the highest majority of players do win, the problem is, they are on an all out mission with visions of redeeming themselves and regaining any lost funds, current and/or past.

As well, most players do not, or they simply get too wound up to implement proper MMM with adherence  to their levels and plateaus which would govern their wagers and time played, etc.  The smart way allowing yourself an advantage to hold and govern win money the proper way.

I want to state a basic example of Positive Progression Wagering.  IMO, I believe the 1-3-2-6 is the most lucrative and easiest to capture, while protecting the gambler of ruin, due to losing his realization of around the corner losses upcoming.

Remember, there are many variations, with denominations galore in Positive Progression Wagering. 

1-3-2-6. (Exampled using $100.00 unit):

Wagers:

First bet:  $100.00
Second bet:  $300.00
Third bet:  $200.00
Fourth bet:  $600.00

Reasonings:

First bet is a portion of your risk capital buy-in.  If you lose, you lost 1 unit of your risk capital.  If you win, parlay and move on to the second bet.

Second bet is parlaying your win and 1 additional unit from your risk capital buy-in for a $300.00 wager.  If you lost, you return to 1 unit wagering and you are down 2 units.

Third bet means you won your second wager.  Now you are in great position!  You return $200.00 to your buy-in stack, you set-aside $200.00 and you wager the remaining $200.00 from your $600.00 end of 2nd bet, on your third wager.  If you lose this wager, you are still $200.00 ahead for additional  wagering attempts at $100.00 each.  If you win this third bet you move to the fourth wager.

Fourth bet will progress to $600.00.  You will parlay the third bet win and add the $200.00 you had set-aside with a win from the second bet.  You have zero risk capital out there and a total wager of $600.00 looking for a $1,200.00 win.  If you lose, sure it sucks, but you didn't lose a penny of risk capital. 

If you win the fourth bet, you must go back to one unit wagering and right there is exactly where almost all players go down the wrong path and will greatly increase their wagering amounts with doom waiting. I would personally go back to the same amount or possibly 1.5 times, or a max of double.  Example.  If I was wagering the above $100.00 unit, I would start again with $100.00 or possibly $200.00. 

Just thought I would throw this out there.  Because there are highly debated continual topics regarding gambling with mathematics and/or statistical results versus the reality and instant 'what is happening', etc.

Everything worth anything in most things is presentment and what it actually is, not perceived, not history, not dreamsville, not what someone else says it should be or is going to be, not what another person makes up and so on. Presentment--Reality--Actual Events Happening.  IMO better and far superior in countless ways than the results of mathematicians/statisticians and systems experts. 

As you said in Post 706:

" The only way casinos are losing serious money is whenever strong univocal situations happen (and it doesn't happen so often), thus the only way we players might win serious money is by wagering the opposite more likely counterpart or to bet the univocal situations up to a point. Or, better yet, not to bet at all."

And..............when it's there..............whatever it might be............you pounce on it——-HARD.  To a point as I say ( and as you said as well, spot on, then back to one's Level and Plateau. 

A couple places I play at any side three-card 8/9 is a 200:1 payout.  $25.00 quarter is a $5,000.00 pay!

Also both sides, anyway naturals 8/9 (one side 8 and one side 9) is a payout of 50:1.

Okay everyone, here is a golden classic, The Vesper Martini. 

What is it?  Well it's a Martini that was introduced by Vesper Lynd, a fictional character from the James Bond author, Ian Fleming in the original 1953 Casino Royale movie. 

Here is a link to Vesper Lynd's bio.  Now bear in mind the catchphrase, "Shaken, Not Stirred", which was immortalized in Bond films.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vesper_Lynd

3 oz Gin
1 oz Vodka
1/2 oz Lillet aperitif
Lemon twist

However, a bit of a twist with the same ingredients.

Equal parts of the 3 alcohol products.

Gin
Vodka
Lillet aperitif
Lemon twist

Shaken extremely well with 1 ice cube, rub the inside of the lemon twist on the rim of the glass all the way around it and drop it in the glass.

Enjoy!

Yes Sir!  Absolute openness, fairness and expression is available here without the drama queens ganging up with their mission to destroy.  As well, we fight spamming and all those one time link posters to all kinds of unrelated sites as well as the renegade system sellers, etc. 

Our platform is here and will stay.  Period.

Good Bless All.  Stay Safe.

Administrator and Forum Owner,
Alrelax

One of the best in the entertainment world. 


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=X3nr1xqbsbA&t=156s

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=t3SPY13b64M

Thanks for a good link. 

QuoteThanks VLS        AWESOME

Great!

It is truly random, BUT.........The Key Lies in the Following:

.........."So, if it is impossible to predict randomness, what can we do to predict winning hands? I would strongly say, that we should expect some sequences to be perfectly parallel as well as, those that look non-random or simply lopsided. Do not limit yourself to the consistency or the inconsistency as the indication of what to wager. Rather, be alert to the sequences producing parallel or lopsided outcomes and siding with those."

Stats for most all states concerning sports betting revealing the following:

Handle: Amount wagered over the time period.

Revenue: Amount of money kept by sportsbooks out of the amount wagered.

Hold %: How much revenue sportsbooks keep as a function of handle.

Taxes/state revenue: Taxes collected by state and local jurisdictions; or state share of proceeds in revenue-sharing markets.

The numbers reflect all reported numbers starting in June 2018 to date.


https://www.legalsportsreport.com/sports-betting/revenue/

And as we talked the other day about this in particular, a player that does just the opposite of following, plays the exact opposite as to what the largest people betting are doing, especially when everyone is wagering one side.  And he does exactly that at his own admission, because the casino will not consistently pay-out the largest bettors hand after hand.  As well, those losing will lose more hands than they win.  And he does fairly well (all in proportion of course) wagering small money against everyone and playing for short periods.

As you said, "Baccarat is a game of clusters getting different levels of appearance. Each level follows a general probability to happen that must be compared to the actual probability."

Which can happen at any time, 'due' or not.  As well, might and very well be extremely large at times bringing about words describing such clusters as 'rare' and 'unbelievable'. 

And, what sends me ROMAL with real tears from my eyes  caused by laughing so hard, are all the forum bac/gambling mathematicians, when they carry over their stats shoe after shoe after shoe, stating how their numbers are correct because they run continuously and cannot be limited to each shoe, etc.

#1. "That people tend to seek information that aligns with their views."

#2.  Quote from another post of mine.........."Gamblers have a stronger misconception of randomness and are so willingly to bet on it".  Please understand the words, Misconception, Understanding, Interpretation, Inaccurate and Inadequate, they are specifically different and very relative to gamble, but in the attempt to keep this from being way too long, I am saying, Misconception.  I have termed it, probability matching, and that is a side effect all humans are subjected to at the gaming table.  Especially when they are winning large or losing large.  It was instilled in our pre-human ancestors when they were out hunting and searching for food."