08﻿ Show Posts - AsymBacGuy

### Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

### Messages - AsymBacGuy

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 54 Next
1
##### Wagering & Intricacies / Re: Great Bac Shoe, Players Cleaned out the Dealers Rack!
« on: January 21, 2020, 11:58:30 pm »
It's quite interesting to notice the splitting shoe division made by Al.

as.

2
##### AsymBacGuy / Re: Why bac could be beatable itlr
« on: January 21, 2020, 11:57:12 pm »
There are different approaches to play baccarat, surely people writing here is loaded with experience and guided through the help of very long term observations.

The masters of a so called situational strategy are Alrelax and Lungyeh, me and Sputnik preferring a more objective approach. Then comes Albalaha that loves to take a strict math method capable to overcome the most unfavourable situations every nearly 50/50 proposition will form along the way.

Collecting all those different thinking lines, we could assume that baccarat is an infinite production of steady or mixed events happening at various degrees.
The common denominator is we do not want to force probabilities unless we have reasons to think that at some point/s A>B.

By adopting several different place selection collections, we suddendly notice that the so called undetectable random model isn't so undetectable as expected.

And the more we are waiting for a given event, higher will be the probability to get a searched event, even knowing that the winning probability won't never be 1.

A thing possible only as shoes are not randomly shuffled.

as.

3
##### Wagering & Intricacies / Re: Great Bac Shoe, Players Cleaned out the Dealers Rack!
« on: January 21, 2020, 09:51:51 pm »
Good points!

as.

4
##### AsymBacGuy / Re: Why bac could be beatable itlr
« on: January 16, 2020, 09:42:17 pm »
Thank You!

The challenge is that the bias will not be there for very long usually -:)

Exactly.
The same about baccarat and this is the very point I'm trying to make over the years.

At baccarat it's quite easy to confuse strong "easy to detect" patterns (as long streaks, long B or P single/double successions, etc) with a statistical bias that must provide unrandom successions ascertained by tools as place selection and probabiliity after events, for example. Successions not happening around the corner, of course.

as.

5
##### AsymBacGuy / Re: Asymbac method: key triggers at baccarat
« on: January 15, 2020, 08:34:11 pm »
Thanks Al, the same from my part (along with a couple of hs players I'm used to play with).

It would be a great idea to meet us with Sputnik and Lungyeh too, providing they want to make a visit in US.

as.

6
##### Albalaha's Exclusive / Re: My concluding post
« on: January 15, 2020, 08:26:33 pm »
I hope you'll keep posting, you are one of the best gambling researchers I know.
And for that matter I'm sure you have devised a plan capable to overcome 5 sigma negative deviations, the problem remains about the practical aspects of it.

as.

7
##### AsymBacGuy / Re: Why bac could be beatable itlr
« on: January 10, 2020, 10:46:16 pm »
Since I can't touch the SM machines topic, let's compare baccarat with roulette.

At roulette every spin will provide symmetrical probabilities, since the probability of each number or groups of numbers remains the same (1/37, 2/37, etc).
Say the whole model we are playing into is symmetrical by any means.

At baccarat every BP hand will be formed by two distinct and very different probabilities: 50%/50% and 57.93%/42.07%. Those different probabilities alone makes baccarat an asymmetrical game.

Of course every fkng shoe dealt will present different values of such asymmetricity, either in terms of numbers and, more importantly, in term of distributions.

Everybody reading my pages (btw, thanks to you) knows that the asymmetrical 57.93/42.07% value should come out on average 8.4% of the total hands dealt.
A probability value very similar to betting 3 numbers at a single zero roulette (8.1%).

Every player having a decent familiarity of both roulette and baccarat would expect that a similar probability (3 numbers vs asym hand) will produce similar dispersion values taken on the same 75 hands sample.

It seems this is not the case.

Easy to argue that a shoe formed by a finite number of cards burnt hand after hand is quite different from a so called perfect symmetrical world happening at roulette.

More importantly is to notice that when a 3 numbers group hit at roulette the winning probability is 100%, whereas at baccarat we are still fighting with a well lower 15.86% edge.
On the other hand, every other spin not hitting our 3 numbers provides a 100% losing event whereas at baccarat we still get a "fair" 50% (taxed) probability to win.

Itlr, a perfect math plan should be oriented either to bet P trying to escape the 42.07% unfavourable winning probability or, it's way better, to catch the 57.93% winning probability when betting B.

In truth a wonderful virtual player capable to always bet P without crossing one time a single asym hand will get very tiny profits (p=50%, yet certain card distributions happening on symmetrical situations help the Player side thus enlarging a bit the P probability). But there's a more excellent player, that is whoever is capable to bet B as he/she assessed that an asym hand will come out more likely within a more restricted range than what math dictates.

Some very experienced players (Alrelax and Sputnik surely belong to this list) have raised the ability to catch or abandon the situations where B or P winning probability ranges are more or less restricted than what the old 50.68/49.32 ratio dictates.

But the common denominator we have to put in first place is that shoes are not randomly shuffled (say it's physically impossible to arrange cards by so called perfect random models).

There are many ways to detect this, I prefer to choose a strict objective betting placement following the best "randomness" definition ever made by some statistics experts.

as.

8
##### AsymBacGuy / Re: Why bac could be beatable itlr
« on: January 08, 2020, 10:04:55 pm »
Imo there are no other ways to beat the game unless we have proved that bac is working by more or less unrandom standards.

Of course we can't rule out the possibility that an "usual" unrandom world sometimes could take the resemblance of an unbeatable random model, that's why we prefer to discard shoes not fitting our plan at the start instead of trying to get a kind of "more likely world" in the subsequent portions of the shoe.

More on that later.

as.

9
##### Baccarat Forum / Re: After too many years
« on: January 02, 2020, 10:36:20 pm »
Casinos know very well that baccarat is vulnerable but they aren't bothered at all as long as they make huge profits from it.
For every one acute player there are at least 1000 losing players, so what's the problem?

If a game cannot be beaten scientifically how could be beaten by other approaches?

as.

10
##### AsymBacGuy / Re: Why bac could be beatable itlr
« on: January 02, 2020, 10:27:49 pm »
Baccarat is one of the purest form of gambling, no wonder it has acquired an increasing popularity over the years.
After all players must guess a pre-ordered succession of events and getting the luxury to choose what, when and how much to bet.
No one other gambling game provide such features.

But to be consistent winners we must assess by the greatest possible precision what's our real probability to win or lose.
Since a baccarat shoe is composed by a finite number of cards where many of them are "key cards" we should estimate what are the real probabilities to get an event or the opposite.

We all know that B probability to win on each spot is either 50% or 57.93%, whereas P probability to win remains at 50% (actually some card distributions favor P side more than that).
Itlr, that is after having mixed several outcomes (maybe springing form different sources) the average BP probability comes closer and closer to the 50.68/49.32 ratio.

A total different issue regards the probability of success (POS), that is the probability to win after a given succession of bets.

Whereas the probability to win or lose on each side remains constant and mostly unguessable, shoes present a variety of POS that equals to 1, that is the certainty that at least one searched event will appear.
Of course the possible unfortunate counterpart is zero, that is that the event searched won't appear at least one time in our shoe or after a short sequences of consecutive shoes.

Easy examples where POS=1 (probability equals to certainty) are:

- shoes producing at least three streaks

- shoes producing at least one P or B double (unless long streaks happened on either side)

- shoes producing at least one asymmetrical formation along the way

and so on

Of course such strong features generally won't be of practical use without the use of an impossible progression, unless being mildly moderated and multilayered conceived (Albalaha could instruct us about this).

Forgetting the single shoe probability which could be easily affected by a kind of so called "randomness", POS may be endorsed by waiting the appearance of huge unlikely situations.
The more we wait for the "unlikely" events, greater will be our POS.
A thing that cannot work at other independent models as roulette, for example.

Say we are putting outcomes vertically in a grid made of columns of 10 spots each (a 10-hand bead plate not considering ties). Now we want to form a new registration of I and O results regarding the left position of the new outcome.
At the eyes of the experienced player it will appear very soon that such new random walk isn't affected by a an indipendent and unguessable model, as a place selection procedure will demonstrate that most shoes won't follow a 50.68/49.32 ratio by any means.

Some spots are slight more likely than others, some ranges of apparition are more likely than others.

as.

11
##### Baccarat Forum / Re: After too many years
« on: January 01, 2020, 05:37:18 pm »
You need to have as much patience to win as casinos have or even more. Remember, casino expects 100 bets of a player to yield 1 unit for casino even with built in house edge it has.

100% true.

Anyway , winning by a flat betting strategy is 1 billion % possible.
Of course very few situations offer such possibility.

as.

12
##### Baccarat Forum / Re: Baccarat is a non-tractable mathematical structure
« on: December 29, 2019, 10:23:19 pm »
As a generalization in the context of systems, methods and mechanical wagering and attempting to fit those into sitting down at a shoe of Baccarat.

However, some will generally follow others but still, when they do or do not, will be random.  IMO and experiences.

If you refer to those mechanical systems or methods promising wonderful profits per each shoe dealt many scammers try to sell or what some internet clowns keep stating, you are completely right.

as.

13
##### Baccarat Forum / Re: The Misuse of Testing Results in Baccarat
« on: December 29, 2019, 10:17:10 pm »
*  Theories or models based on statistical data, computer testing of RG or Live Shoes will never give out the results to predict events which are previously produced in a different order than what is set-up in the shoe about to be wagered upon and almost every time the results will have a tremendous negative impact to the player simply because the variances and errors cannot be known.

That's why a solid method should be built from a strict dispersion point of view.

as.

14
##### Wagering & Intricacies / Re: The Illusion of Control in Baccarat and How It Hurts You
« on: December 29, 2019, 10:04:50 pm »
I completely agree and those suggestions are the reason why casinos will make a lot of more money than expected by math.

as.

15
##### Baccarat Forum / Re: Baccarat is a non-tractable mathematical structure
« on: December 29, 2019, 09:58:42 pm »
Good post but you take for grant that all bac processes are random...

Because randomness cannot be modeled into a definitive process to happen, in the unplayed shoe of Baccarat cards waiting to be presented, systematic and random errors will never have the exact or similar result in every shoe yet to be played.

It's not the case at least regarding my concept of probability.

as.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 54 Next