Good topic.

"...Second. You have to decide and be very comfortable with what your bank roll will be, as well as what each session's buy-in risk capital will be...."
   
    In my opinion its critical for each player to design their own system by "fitting" it to their advantage % "greater than H.E." , then fit that to betsize-to-buyin-to-bankroll. Then fit that to ones own MMM.


"...Third. You must understand as well as be somewhat comfortable with unavoidable drawdowns. Drawdown of the players buy-in will happen the majority of the times...."

    The dreaded "drawdown" is what causes many to go on tilt. You can see it in the players eyes and can sense they are starting to "chase". Its certainly not enjoyable as I drawdown in many sessions prior to getting the W. We should just accept it as part of the game(same as when we get an "uptick" first).


"...Ref Martingale betting.  It is ultimately unsustainable and carries the highest risk of significant losses.

Ref Flat betting.  It is a very risky and slow way to make anything higher than a few units. .."


    I see the majority of players doing more Negpro vs Flat or Pospro.

I like to remind myself that we will get the same number of wins IAR(in-a-row) regardless of what we call our wager. Meaning, the event one is wagering on does not know if we just increased or decreased from the previous wager size/ does not know if we just won or lost,...etc.

*My advocacy for a pospro is because one can win by A)guessing more correct, and B)guessing fewer correct but putting together 2-4 wins IAR.

    I track many things at the table and one is my hit rate. Most shoes I probably average 8--16 wagers per shoe. Nearly every shoe ends up within 2-3  W/L. For example W8 L6, W6 L8, W9 L8,..etc. Occasionally I may have W10 L5k, which would be a very good hit rate for me. Usually due to getting an uptick just prior to coloring up or ending that session(Meaning I won 4-5 IAR at the end so instead of being at W5 L5, I finished the shoe at say W10 L5.
    *I had a session last week across four+ shoes and approx six hours where I had an approx 38% hit rate(rough session from the word go). I was never ahead until the end. I finally put together several wins IAR and finished +4 or so units. I was saved by the pospro. My hit rate was dismal and would have busted a Negpro of any kind and a Flat approach wouldn't have busted. However, it may have taken several shoes or days to climb back to even.


"...Say I bought it in for $2,400. I wager a $100 base unit with a plan to positive parlay wins three times. 1-2-4, $100 wins 3 times, will net me $700.  Naturally it will take some kind of drawdown to get there most of the time. But not all and maybe I could do it a few consecutive times in a row. ..."

    Very doable. The great part of such a wagering regime is that you may do it(hit your thrice parlay Coup)  on the first (or early) attempts. Then you now have 24 +7 attempts(31).
    *Every time one hits a coup I would use that as a trigger to apply ones MMM for any +gains >2400 initial buyin. It doesn't matter if your only ahead $150 or 550 or whatever. Then reset and keep playing with the initial 2400 buyin risk. If one draws down first (prior to a win) I wouldn't reduce base unit from $100 down to say $80 as a way of extending the buyin( I see this from many players).

Good thread alrelax


More later,kfb















   

Hi AsymBacGuy.

In the above post u say: "...If the results would be decided by the first two initial cards without the intervention of the third card(s), well the game wouldn't exist at all. (Obviously I admit a kind of vig on each winning bet)...."

re: third card.
    Do you try to hypothesize if the next hand will include a third-card draw? Meaning the next hand will potentially have a total of 5 or 6 cards dealt(and then use that"3rd card potential", in your decision making for deciding which side u will wager??)

Thx

It is not easy. There is absolutely no, "one plan for all" as most think there is or should be.

First of all, I would like to give a comparison. Attorneys and trying a case in the courtroom. There is a huge difference between paper law and actual trial law. With that in mind read on.

Now. First you have to have somewhat of a game plan with a rock solid adherence to a Money Management Method that will give you advantages.

Second. You have to decide and be very comfortable with what your bank roll will be, as well as what each session's buy-in risk capital will be.

Third. You must understand as well as be somewhat comfortable with unavoidable drawdowns. Drawdown of the players buy-in will happen the majority of the times. When it does not, be conscious of it and play as though you are drawing down on your buy-in, rather than risking your wins all too quick, which will usually result in that "giving it right back syndrome" which happens all the time.

A good drawdown understanding will be established when a player stabilizes his wager with a base unit all in proportion to his buy-in. As well, he must also have a plan as to what he will do with wins and losses of his base unit. Those base units and understandings will be within his Money Management Method.

Why are base units so important?  Because your base units are your chances to go forward with advantages.  If you just want to always "go for it" all you really need to do is, just take your base unit and multiply it by how many attempts you have the funds to engage the casino with.  For example, a negative martingale $100-$200-$400-$800-$1,600-$3,200, etc., depending on the max table limit at your casino. So if you believe in and want to have a negative Martingale plan as part of your MMM and are willing to wager a $100 base unit, and you desire to wager five negative progressions, you will have to have $6,300 buy-in ready to risk. 

Taking the above into consideration, say you do desire your MMM to allow you 20 times to profit off your session buy-in risk capital, in my opinion your MMM bank roll should be $126,000. Your MMM would allow you 5% buyins, therefore allowing you 20 chances before busting out your bankroll. Yes bankrolls and buy-ins are different for most all of us.  But the 5% buy-ins of a bankroll I do believe most experienced players will tell you, are to your advantage and pretty much reasonable with the way bankrolls should be the governing factor of session buy-ins, etc.  All of which would come into play with the player's drawdown.

As far as flat betting, you can use the same scenarios, $100 base unit and figure out how many wins you would keep or possibly parlay up, then at what point would you stop due to too many losses or even a positive win amount.

Ref Martingale betting.  It is ultimately unsustainable and carries the highest risk of significant losses.

Ref Flat betting.  It is a very risky and slow way to make anything higher than a few units.  However, if one has several hands that lost in flat betting, the make up of the drawdown is totally in favor of the casino and the player will be subjecting himself to a textbook grinding-down situation he normally can not come out of.

Personally I do not endorse negative Martingales or flat betting as a game plan. In my experience there is just way too much risk with compounding wins to make winning anything sizable. Negative Martingales and flat betting will not be to a players advantage outside of employing them occasionally for a few hands.

I do engage with and have written about it extensively 1-3-2-6 or some variation of it. As well as 1-2-4-8 or 1-2-4. Full and consecutive parlays of a base unit also known as consecutive positive progressions. With these or some variations of these in mind, I would take my base unit, let's say $100 and multiply how many chances I desire my game plan to be established with. Say I do desire 24 chances.  By the way, which I really do like 24 chances, I would need $2,400 for my buy-in risk capital. That $2,400 should be coming from a bank roll of $48,000. Thus my bank roll affords me 20 sessions with not a single winning session to replace my buy-in back to its original bank roll and pocket what's left over of the wins. 

That way you are accepting and expecting drawdowns and playing within reasonable expectations to excel.  You cannot play believing the game of Baccarat will have its published coin flip 50/50 fallacy and its the easiest game to win at.  Here is a tip for you.  Baccarat is the easiest game to win, however it is also the easiest game to lose. 

Again, drawdowns must be comfortable to the player because they eventually will afford advantages to the player with changes, longevity and profitability during the session. It must also be considered as vital and risk capital taken in consideration drawdowns are inevitable during most all sessions at some point. Kind of like membership dues, an amount to get in and the results may or may not follow or be to the members advantage. 

One final thing. Part of a rock solid MMM but also part of your drawdown that hopefully turns successful during each session. And that is, governing your wins. My biggest advantage I believe that I have engaged in and became reliant on, is my 1/3rd 1/3rd 1/3rd incorporated into my MMM with my winning sessions. 

Say I bought it in for $2,400. I wager a $100 base unit with a plan to positive parlay wins three times. 1-2-4, $100 wins 3 times, will net me $700.  Naturally it will take some kind of drawdown to get there most of the time. But not all and maybe I could do it a few consecutive times in a row. Next thought would be to have a 1-2-4-8. Again a $100 win four times, nets me $1,500. Depending on table limits, those base units might be $200-$500 or even $1,000 depending on what your casino allows, what your buy-in in bankroll allows and what you were comfortable with. 

Upon profitability at some point I would engage in my 1/3rd, 1/3rd, 1/3rd. For those of you oblivious to what that is, it is 1/3rd of the sizable winnings remaining in my buy-in stack in front of me, 1/3rd in my pocket locked up and the remaining 1/3rd of the win for reserve. The reserve might be a second chance if the session goes horribly bad or it might just end up as locked up or pre-destined for something outside of gaming related, etc. Your choice of the above would apply any way you like. But part of your plan and when things fall to your advantage, you will automatically take them and keep them while always remembering you were subject to drawdown when you were not winning. Or the point you get to be able to win.

Although the above is heavenly an MMM item, it has to be also consciously incorporated into your current play and coming out of a drawdown and into a winning mode.

Play smart!  Play safe!

Let's consider this real shoe at the common original and derived roads (BR, Byb, SR and CR); "arw" is our main random walk. All patterns are considered under the lens of A/S patterns.

BR: S, A, A, A, A, A, A, S, A, A, S, A, A, A, A, A, A, A, A, S, A, S
ByB:A, A, A, A, S, A, S, A, A, A, A, A, A, A, A
SR: A, A, A, S, A, S, A, S, A, A, A, A, A
CR: A, A, S, S, A, A, S, A, A, A, A, A, A
acr:A, A, A, A, A, S, A, S, A, S, A, A, S, A, A

There are 78 spots to look for, 17 of them are S, the remaining are A.
Even by choosing randomly a betting spot at any line, we'll get 61 profitable spots and 17 losing situations (17 x 3 = 51). 

Another real shoe.

BR: S, S, S, A, A, S, A, S, S, S, A, A, A
ByB:A, A, A, S, A, S, A, A, S, A, A, S, A, S, A, S, A
SR: A, S, A, A, A, A, S, A, A, S, A, S
CR: A, A, A, A, A, A, A, A, S, A, A, S, S
asr:A, A, A, S, S, A, A, A, A, A, A, A, A

There are 68 bettable spots, 22 of them are S (22x3=66) the rest is A.
Despite of the unlikely 21/6 S/A deviated scenario happening at BR, A events still predominate (a bit) over S events.

See you next week

as.

Most bac players try to spot symmetrical situations whereas itlr asymmetrical spots will slight overwhelm them in terms of quantity.

If the results would be decided by the first two initial cards without the intervention of the third card(s), well the game wouldn't exist at all. (Obviously I admit a kind of vig on each winning bet).

The reason is because the CFS more often than not will take not homogeneous sequences, getting the room to more likely successions.
This theory could be better ascertained whenever we run multiple sub successions derived by the BR: most lines take an asymmetrical way to distribute the A/B outcomes, in the sense that the symmetry represent a kind of incident.

Obviously a symmetrical world in relationship of its general expected probability to appear must "catch up" sooner or later and this thing can only be accomplished by coming out heavily clustered or strongly intertwined by few asymmetrical spots.
But such natural situations are not entitled to happen simultaneously at two or more sub sequences and when this unlikely scenario shows up, we've got to accept it and wait for the next spot.

More later

as.

Merry Christmas to the BetSelection.cc community!

Wishing you a holiday season filled with cheer, family fun, and winning bets!

May you and your loved ones create lasting memories, share delicious food, and experience an abundance of love.

You guys absolutely ROCK!  Thanks for being a part of our friendly space here. We appreciate your continued support and wish you all the best in the coming year.
🤗
Vic

A very Merry Christmas to all with a following Happy New Year and of course, large amounts of success in all you tackle and take on!

Thanks KFB, thanks!

After all, imo, we have to rely upon the "average card distribution" with its limits (and deviations) and not a general slight math propensity happening just 8.6% of the times.

9s, 8s, 7s and 6s as first or third cards will get the same symmetrical probability to show up as second or fourth cards.
The same about naturals (34.2% of total hands), hands that almost always will win right and then.
Yet at both scenarios the payment is way different.

Back to the A/S topic.

I'll present some real shoes by two different A/S successions, first is the common Big Road and the second one is our main random walk. A= 1, S= 3

A-A-A-A-A-A-S-A-S-A-A-A-A-A-S-S-S-A-A-A-A-A-A  (A/S = 18/15)
A-A-S-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-S-A-A-S-A-A-A-A-A-A (A/S = 17/9)

That's an easy shoe, quantities shifted toward the A side will make things easy.

A-S-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-S-S-S  (A/S = 12/12)
A-A-A-S-A-A-A-A-A-A-S-A-A-A-A-A  (A/S = 14/6)

Same as above.

A-A-A-A-A-S-A-A-S-A-A-S-A-S-S-A-S-S-S-A-A (A/S = 13/24)
A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-S-A-A-A-A-S  (A/S = 14/6)

This shoe is more intricate as the first line is heavily shifted toward the S side, yet the second line remains deviated at the A side. 

A-A-S-A-A-S-S-A-A-A-A-A-S-S-S (A/S = 9/18)
A-S-A-S-S-A-S-A-A-A (A/S = 6/12)

Ouch, symmetry (whatever intended) happens...both lines are strongly deviated toward the S side.

A-A-A-S-S-A-A-A-A-A-A-S-A-A-S-A-A-A (A/S = 14/12)
S-A-A-A-S-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-S-A-A-A-A-A-S-S-A-S (A/S = 17/18)

Another shoe where the asymmetry seems to hide, not a too harmful shoe though.

S-A-A-A-S-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-S-A-A-A-A-A (A/S = 16/9)
A-A-A-S-A-S-A-A-A-A-A-S (A/S = 9/9)

In this shoe the global asymmetry, even by showing up just at the first line, returns to be predominant.

A-A-S-A-A-A-A-S-A-S-A-A-S-A-A-S (A/S = 11/15)
A-A-A-S-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A (A/S = 17/3)

Again here the asymmetry seems to be cumulatively inferior to the symmetry.

A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-S-A-A-A-S-A-A-A-A-A-A-S-A (A/S = 19/9)
A-A-A-A-A-A-S-S-A-A-A-A-A-A-S-S-A-A-A (A/S = 15/12)

Fkng good again. Let's continue to try to catch sometimes really "bad".

A-A-A-S-A-S-A-A-A-A-A-S-S-S (A/S = 9/15)
A-A-S-A-S-S-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A (A/S = 16/9)

At the first line the proportional symmetry surely overwhelmed the counterpart, but the second line filled the gap.

S-S-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-S-A-A-A (A/S = 14/9)
A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-S-S-A-S-A-A-A-A-S-S (A/S = 13/15)

Same scenario as the previous shoe, but now the A/S ratio was able to get a profit.

S-A-A-S-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-S (A/S = 13/9)
A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-S-S-A-A-S (A/S = 10/9)

No bad shoe, both lines converged toward the asymmetry.

A-A-A-A-A-S-S-A-A-A-A-A-S-A-S-S-A-A (A/S = 13/15)
S-S-A-A-A-S-A-A-A-A-A-S-S-A (A/S = 9/15)

Finally, sigh, another two-sided symmetry oriented shoe.

A-S-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-S (A/S = 12/6)
A-A-A-A-A-A-S-A-A-A-A-S-S-S (A/S = 10/12)

Here overall the asymmetry overwhelms the counterpart by 4 (before vig) steps.

S-A-A-A-A-S-A-A-A-A-A-A-S-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A (A/S = 18/9)
A-A-A-S-A-A-A-S-A-A-S-A-A-A-A-A-S (A/S = 13/12)

Results speak for themselves.

A-A-A-A-S-A-A-A-A-S-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-S (A/S = 17/9)
A-A-S-A-A-S-A-A-S-A-A-S-S (A/S = 8/15)

A kind of "balanced" shoe where one line will balance the other one.

A-S-A-A-S-A-A-A-S-A-A-A-A-S-A-A-A-A-S (A/S = 14/15)
A-S-A-S-A-A-S-A-S-S-A-A-A-S-A-A (A/S = 10/18)

A classic shoe where we can't do almost anything but accept the negative outcomes.

S-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-S-A-A-A (A/S = 14/6)
A-A-A-S-A-S-A-S-A-A-S-S (A/S = 7/15)

A perfect "balanced" shoe, so a slight negative shoe (for the vig).

A-S-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-S-A-A-A-A (A/S = 14/6)
A-A-S-A-S-A-S-A-A-A-A-S-A-A-S (A/S = 10/15)

Asymmetry is shifted here by 3 steps (before vig)

A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-A-S-S-A-S-S (A/S = 14/12)
A-A-A-A-S-A-S-S-S-A (6/12)

An opposite situation as now the symmetry is 4 step ahead than asymmetry.

Overall in this small sample the raw asymmetry was 27 step ahead over the raw symmetry (before vig), but there are additional statistical tools to exploit this propensity in order to get the minimum vig impact.

as.

Link at the bottom.


Poker and Holdem type gamers are really skilled at this. Even in cash games they know how to lay low and look/act like the locals, move around to other casinos. In other words they know its in their best interest to not make a big entrance(if well known on WSOP circuit) and travel around to different markets vs camping out in one 3-4 casinos market. I play Bac with several BJ,poker-type,Holdem players and some of their "incognito" strategies are really creative(and funny).

IMO many advantage-play camouflage strategies are common sense.
Such as frequently pocketing a few chips(i.e., showing a loss or a lesser win,..etc).

Announcing to everyone for several days when you lose a buyin or have a rough session.

Avoid boasting to casino dealers and or pit mgrs.

don't wear out your welcome by pounding the same casino several days in a row.

Present as a loyal, pleasant, and friendly patron(e.g., don't scold or curse at a dealer mistake after a dealer error,..etc), as it most likely wasn't intentional.
Always optimal to look at the bigger picture.


https://www.888casino.com/blog/advatage-players-not-kicked-out

You know Foxwoods and Mohegan put a huge dent into AC when they both opened.  For Northern Jersey and NYC crowd it was just about as far either to Eastern Connecticut or South Jersey.

But both Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun took super great care of their regular and mid-level to higher rollers than AC by far. 

Then of course Eastern Pennsylvania and Massachusetts casinos came along which also took lots of those away that traveled to AC from those densely populated areas.