Among others things, the other night I cooked a dish of manicotti with homemade sauce for fellow baccarat players getting together for one of our regular discussions.

I snapped a picture when I took it out of the oven.

A possible strategy applied to shuffle machines allegedly using a RNG software:

1) Bet A after A one time and bet A after S-S one time.

2) Be careful when two or more derived roads will get plenty of S situations.
In fact and more often than not a real random model will deny simultaneous S clusters happening at more than one random walk.

3) Tie rich shoes should be treated with a lot of caution. The same about shoes resolving hands by utilizing 6 cards.

4) More S patterns had come out in the initial/intermediate portions of the shoe and lesser will be the probability to encounter LONG A events.

5) Register how many consecutive times you have lost (for real or fictionally) by chasing an A pattern.

6) Nothing wrong by gambling for long A clustered patterns (lower than standard unit), yet at RNG productions they are relatively rarer than at other form of shufflings.

7) A progressive multilayered plan betting toward A-A (one time) and toward A after crossing S-S cannot lose by any means.
I mean there's no natural negative variance capable to overcome such propensities, especially if we'll wait for a kind of negative deviation to happen.

It's possible that knowing this, the RNG is instructed to deal a lesser number of A clusters and a superior number of S isolated events. So mimicking a real random model.
In this instance, privilege the A event to be bet after one or two isolated A patterns happened.

9) To get a strong advantage we need to win more hands at the first betting attempt than at the second one. So meaning that what we're really looking for is a "first bet" winning cluster.
Therefore consecutive wins at the second betting attempts should be considered as a kind of "backup" plan

as.

The last passage of my previous post is:

...we can safely conclude that we're dealing with pseudorandomness rather than with supposedly "normal fluctuations" dictated by a pure randomness.

OoOoO

Knowing that long term data extracted by the same production will approach more and more to the B=50.68% and P=49.32% winning percentages doesn't necessarily mean that we're dealing with a perfect random world.
It's the common mistake almost every expert will conclude after being asked whether baccarat could be a beatable game.

Those conclusions are biased as:

A- They assume for certain that ALL bac productions are perfectly random;
B- They take for granted that every single spot coming out along the course of each shoe will present the same independent features.

Actually once we have approximated at best the real random or not random nature of the shoe we're playing at, bac productions will form huge or moderate "jumps" in winning probability even though  the majority of hands dealt are EV-.


#A point cannot be resolved by taking care of the final results, it needs more complicated issues to be evaluated as there are various "imperfect" form of shufflings employed to deal bac shoes.

#B point had found solid evidences (according to RVM and M.v.Smoluchoswki works) that various situations aren't so randomly placed, so making more probable the apparition of some patterns than others.

Both points rely upon the average probability of the S or A patterns distribution at the infinite random walks we can build from the original BP sequence.
Such probability could be estimated by "levels of apparition" (1, 2) in relationship of the actual production we're dealing with.
Since the shoe is a finite S/A proposition, we have plenty of opportunities to detect how much and foremost when things are more likely to change (OR NOT).


Professor Spiegelhalter wrote that "Most random number generators are entirely deterministic and contain no randomness at all".

So it could happen that at the casino you're playing at, a RNG software connected in the shuffling machine will distribute cards by NON RANDOM parameters.

Therefore treat every shoe dealt with a lot of caution, it's like betting a negative count shoe at black jack.

Good news is that at "no random" RNG productions, things tend to be more clustered than isolated, meaning that the "bad" tends to come out more clustered than average but giving more room to "good" clustered events.

When in doubt and whenever "unnatural" symmetrical patterns come out consecutively in quantity and especially in quantity, consider that shoe as unplayable.
Unfortunately at most RNG productions S>A, as cards are not clumped but distributed by a "number scheme" not fitting the random requisites.

Never ever change your betting scheme, play for A and never for S.
Itlr you'll make a lot of money.

as.

As professor emeritus of statistics at University of Cambridge D. Spiegelhalter stated in his book, random is often "clumpy", so lacking of "regularity".
 

Hence whenever things seem to be "too regular" for long (multiple shoes), we should raise our suspicions that the production isn't random.

Obviously we might think that a kind of "regular model" could be easily beaten but it's not the case at baccarat.

A coin flip study found that per every 20 tosses, there's a 78% probability of getting at least a 4 streak.
And the probability of getting streaks not superior than two (a double streak) is just 2%.

Now I'm figuring out what you are thinking about the last finding: "Hey, at baccarat there are a lot of sequences producing singles/doubles for many hands, we can't believe of that 2% percentage".
And actually bac hands are not coin flip successions.

Remember that among all patterns, at baccarat doubles are the most likely occurence, then there's always the "random" factor to be examined at both coin flip and bac productions.

Then "clumpy" could be interpreted as the dynamic propensity of getting things either more slight concentrated than diluted by an exact or near expected probability to appear.
And at baccarat doubles (for their high probability to appear) could be easily come out clustered (that is by a back-to-back fashion).

Therefore symmetry and asymmetry could be viable tools not to simply ascertain what's more probable to come out next, but to make an estimate about the effective randomness of the production.

As sayed numerous times here, paradoxically we are in better shape to guess "more due situations" when the production is supposed to be either perfectly random or affected by a huge unrandom bias then in the other miriad of intermediate possibilities.

Moreover at baccarat random clumpiness gets an average probability to appear in terms of quantity and frequency and when such values tend to be disregarded for long we can safely conclude that we're dealing with pseudorandomness othan with supposedly "normal fluctuations" dictated by a pure randomness.

More later

as.

Deadly shooting outside the Bellagio last night concerning online YouTube social media posting between two competitors.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_aDS6eJp_uM&pp=ygURQmVsbGlnaW8gc2hvdHRpbmc%3D

This next one will explain it all.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0QR49os0UNI&list=RDNSdS-Qm2Mof4I&index=5

For obvious reasons concepts examined here are quite simplified. 

Every soul knows that RNG provides pseudo random successions as they need an initial "starting seed" to properly work.
Real random RNG sequences are generated via atmospheric noise and frankly we can safely rule out their role at baccarat productions.

So whenever cards are arranged by a RNG software, we know that the subsequent card distribution will be pseudo random, so virtually presenting a kind of bias.
It's not an easy task to detect when and how a supposedly more likely situation should be entitled to come out, so we could start to study how different sub successions would perform on average at those pseudo RNG sequences.

In our opinion one of the tools that would help us most is the detectability to  spot "more likely" A or S patterns as key cards or math advantaged two-card situations cannot be symmetrically or asymmetrically distributed for long unless for short term variance issues.

Here a brief list of RNG shoes coming out from the same source (as always A=+1 and S= -3)

1) A=13, S=5

2) A=19, S=5

3) A=16, S=4

4) A=11, S=6

5) A=12, S=5

6) A=12, S=5

7) A=22, S=4

A=12, S=5

9) A=13, S=6

10) A=6, S=5

11) A=13, S=5

12) A=13, S=6

13) A=18, S=4

14) A=10, S=6

15) A=13, S=2

16) A=5, S=3

17) A=9, S=6

18) A=11, S=6

19) A=17, S=3

20) A=20, S=2

21) A=13, S=5

22) A=18, S=3

23) A=13, S=5

24) A=18, S=5

25) A=16, S=4

26) A=19, S=3

27) A=16, S=3

28) A=11, S=5

29) A=14, S=4

30) A=6, S=5

31) A=16, S=8

32) A=9, S=7

33) A=17, S=2

Total number of A= 451, S= 154 (x3= 462)

As sayed above, the S events will slightly overcome the A events counterpart, anyway the A/S model is well balanced (as expected).

Now let's see HOW those S patterns had shown up:

-75 times as isolated (singled)

-29 times as clustered (two or more times in a row)

About those 29 times S patterns came out:

20 times they came out double clustered and 7 times clustered by a more than two level (2 S patterns haven't limited for coming at the end of the shoe)

Now about the A patterns:

- 97 times as clustered

- 25 times as isolated.

Even though this sample is insignificantly small, we see that RNG software productions will differ from other form of shufflings where a kind of "clumping card factor" works more extensively, so privileging the A events.

Nonetheless, when we deal with pure numbers (no matter how random or unrandom placed) we're getting a very strong advantage, providing to carefully selecting the spots we'll we wager at.

RNG productions tend not to elicit any S isolated situation, maybe to make a multilayered progressive scheme at S-S vs S-S-S-...patterns that will be surprisingly balanced along the course of the shoes encountered.

On the other end and due to a kind of "unnatural" S clustering effect, RNG productions will make way more probable to cross A clustered patterns of any lenght, especially when one or two A isolated situations came out.

Even knowing this, there's no possibility to set up a RNG software capable to get rid of the A clustering effect happening at the infinite random walks we can build from the original BP succession.

Summarizing:

When finite RNG sequences are taken as a form of randomness, more probable situations are spottable along the way.
In fact, RNG successions are totally incapable to fit the RVM definition of randomness and without any effort to prove otherwise, RNG can't provide real random productions by definition.

Actually we can't give a lesser fk about complicated statistical/math formulas swearing that what we have to deal with is a constant perfect random model.

Perfect randomness doesn't exist and for that matter even the "probability" concept doesn't exist.

See you in a couple of days.

as.

In his must read post ("wagering smart"), Alrelax written this:

* Because you can only win a smaller amount of wagers in any session unless it is a rare session.

That's one more reason to consider every session as totally independent from the previous ones.
Or more precisely that the "very good" is quite rare to happen and of course that the most likely expectation we'll get is to lose (in absence of a carefully conceived plan).

We've seen one million of times that the "session" concept doesn't exist, unless for actual conditions we suspect to be "too random" or "not random".

In fact casinos' profits come out from:

-HE
-negative variance (NV) for the players

players profits could only comeout from:

-positive variance (PV)

Since NV=PV and the HE works only for the house, NV+HE > PV yesterday, now and in the future.

The only tool we could exploit at our advantage is to someway restrain the NV by taking care of the actual "random" conditions and this can't be done by stopping an attack after one or two losses or by modifying the betting amount but to  register and classify several results springing from the allegedly same production and to adhere at most at the actual situation we're dealing with.

More later about S/A ratios.

as.

To grind it in a bit for the serious students and those that desire to improve their play, I offer the following.

Bank Rolls Versus Buy In Amounts

I read and hear both terms all the time.  My buy-in and my bank-roll.  There goes my bank roll, I lost my buy in, I can increase my bank roll, etc., etc., and so on.

To me, Bank Roll and Buy In amounts/items are two entirely separate things with different functions. 

Bank Roll.  Bank Roll is your total funds you have for gambling. 

Buy In.  Buy In is the amount of money you bring to the casino for the session or trip you will engage in.

While we all have varying amounts and guidelines or desires for our gambling, I learned the following is paramount to the longevity of gambling. 

1)    Allocating a certain amount of my Bank Roll to be my Buy In depending on how long and how many sessions I am planning to engage in.  Also, playing local versus a trip out of state to a major gaming destiny, etc. 

2)    Local Play.  Approximately a Buy In amount of 5% to an absolute maximum of 10% of my Bank Roll for the session to be played.

3)    Out of State, Longer trips.  I would probably bring 50% of my Bank Roll, and then divide it up among the amount of session/days I was to play.

4)    I personally keep my Bank Roll at the same amount as I do not believe in a continual upping/increasing of play level according to one's Bank Roll.  Personally, I found that led to my own downfall numerous times as well as everyone I every talked with, that were long time players of baccarat.  (Winning can be handled with the instant win money for higher levels of play within a session).

5)  Replacing Lost Bank Roll Amounts.  I found it paramount above all else to replace any removed Bank Roll funds at the earliest time possible when funds are won during a session. 

Money Management Guidelines

I have previously mentioned what I feel is, that of a proper Money Management method that will boast the player's buy-in/bankroll and capitalize on sizable wins, cutting down large amounts of play time at the table. 

My Money Management method is made up of 6 areas. It works for myself with years of fine tuning:

1)    Capital Risk.  The buy in.  Partial bank roll, a fraction of it for a session.

2)    1-3-2-6 and/or 1-3-2-4 type of positive progressions.  Max of 2 negative progressions.

3)    1/3rd--1/3rd--1/3 Dividing up your wins every so often.

4)    1 + 4 Parlay for sideways wagers excluding my B or P wagering.

5)    Pull down and use their money for clear thought process. (Important.  If you cannot think clearly, you cannot win).

6)    Length of play time.

The above will govern how long I play and what happens to me.  I have no set win stop or loss stop.  However, I am governed by my buy in and subsequent losses. 

One thing is rock solid, going to happen, will never change, cannot change and will 100% of the time, be the ultimate outcome.  That is; turn of events, change of presentments, the failure of the player and countless other things that all equate to one thing.  And that is, you will lose what you win if your play continues.  That is why your Money Management Method must be allowed to make you more in quicker and larger denominations if you win, and you must walk away from the table with a portion of the win, if you begin to lose. 

Risk.  Pure speculative risk.  Complete open mind with extreme consciousness and awareness.  Stop loss/stop win does not exist in a sense where it is equated to a few units each way.

1/3rds.  If you do not win you have nothing to manage.  If you win, you must protect yourself and I have referred to and almost regularly allow the following to manage my win money.  1/3rd back to my buy in, in front of me.  1/3rd to my pocket and locked up, never to be used again.  1/3rd to a reserve pocket in case I do lose and still decide to play that same session.  If not, then 2/3rds to the locked-up section and totally off limits, etc.   

1 + 4 Side Parlay of wagering.  I use a very little part of my win money before splitting it up to 1/3rds as I mentioned for the allocation of 3 to 5 side wagers that I will attempt to parlay each one, up to 4 times.  Say I won $700.00.  I would put $500.00 aside for 5 attempts at my 1 + 4 Side Parlay wagers.  Each one I would attempt to build up to $3,200.00.  A $100.00 wager parlayed 4 times will equal $3,200.00.  I give myself 5 chances to do that.  Or perhaps I spilt up $1,000.00 for 5 chances at $200.00 each or greater numbers.  In the first example, then I put the other $200.00 to my win money, etc.  These wagers have nothing to do with my straight up B or P wagering, they would be on top of them without regards to my buy in stack, etc.

Pull down and use their money to positively progress with clear thought.  Self-explanatory.

Length of play.  It will turn.  The sole governing factor in my length of play, is how the wins versus the losses are occurring.  What I already won.  You cannot do anything except fall prey to the events waiting to come out.  That is what most do not realize in their management of their time at the table. 

These things combined is my Money Management Method.  It works for me, more times than it does not.  A few units here and few units there or a stop loss of 3 units, will not do anything for you after numerous times of playing except grind you down.  IMO.

NOTES/EXPERIENCE: I have made more larger wins using my 1/3rd-1/3rd-1/3rd and my 1+4 Side Parlay block of wagering, than anything else.

My 1 + 4 Side Parlay wagering thing, is not bets placed on F-7s, P-8s, Ties, or any other side bet, they are all placed on B or P along with a regular wager.  The 1 + 4 Side Parlay block of wagers, derived from win money might take me 20 or 30 or 40 hands to complete.  Varies.  Think of someone betting blacks or purples or stacks of greens, takes $200 and gets 2 stacks of red chips and occasionally throws a red chip or two on a F-7 or a 200 to 1 (3 card 8/9), etc.  Same type of wagering. 

This method allows me to use the casinos money as well as maintain a much clearer mind.  To me it is sideways money I call it.  Not even from my buy-in stack. 

It has worked and worked very nicely for me. 

Remember, Money Management Method is not (NOT) betting /wagering strategy or decision.  It gives you the largest and best advantage a players can possess.  I certainly wish I knew these things early in my playing. 

There are many parts to good solid MMM. Probably the most important Single aspect of one is the drawdown.  A drawdown is the amount of buy-in you will lose before you really start winning.

You and the results of your wagering have to do the management of your money. The Management of your Money is the Method. Money Management Method.

From what I have observed over the years, there is a large misconception of win money.  Most all players are under the belief that they must replenish their last lost buy-in to get 'EVEN' and then accumulate some kind of a unknown profit amount as well. 

You must reserve your buy-in after you have won, do not risk it any further. You must divide up your winnings when you do win. Towards Bankroll. Towards Pocket. Towards Continued Play.  Those three revert back to my 1/3rd, 1/3rd, 1/3rd, I have often wrote about.

All the testing you desire, will only add real confusion along with misrepresentation of what the game is actually about. Seriously be careful what you practice and attempt to figure out. Live it in real play and be serious.  RNG's and their results are not awfully similar to live baccarat.  RNG's in free play mode are much more predictable and use as a definite 'suck in' to whatever online game they are promoting you to be part of.  BE CAREFUL!

RISK CAPITAL.  I use the term 'Risk Capital' within my writing.  It is paramount in gambling MMM protocols.  Most will not recognize that.  But it is by far and large.  Please understand Risk Capital and the purpose of classifying your Bankroll and Buy-ins as strictly and solely Risk Capital.  Same as any other investment for a pathway to earn a profit.  You have to be willing to lose your Buy-in with little to no emotions and frustrations or you will suffer harm in many many ways that will be detrimental to your gaming pursuits. 

I have witnessed countless players in brick & mortar casinos, that maintain no Bankroll and their Buy-ins are what they consider their Bankroll.  If they lose the session, they have to wait until they have additional funds to gambling again.  Hence, their Buyin is their Bankroll.  And that my friends is completely wrong and extremely mind boggling when they gambling.  It creates pressure and emotional city to the max! 

It is generally a Catch-22 to gamble that way.  Lose and your falling into an emotional and frustrating pit.  Win and your mind is battling with building a Bankroll or larger and larger and longer play at the table, which will 99.99% of all times grind you right down. 

So, what is one to do!  What is a good player advantaged and solid Money Management Method? 

Bank Rolls, Buy-Ins, Money Management, Wagering, Believes, Etc.

Money Management Methods tailored for your style and profit goals, etc., is the way to fuel your $$$ into your pockets when you gamble!

Lack of it will make you unsuccessful, not your choice of wagers or most other things, but lack of a money management system will hurt you more than any other thing in gambling, period!

The whole picture is your Bank roll and what you risk when you play out of your bank roll.  Personally, when I am playing locally and not staying for a week, say in Las Vegas or another major gambling destination, I only take my buy-in which is a small percentage of my dedicated bank roll.  Personally, I do risk my buy-in for the session without a stop loss.  More times than not, meaning the majority of times I can profit.  The few times I do loss my buy-in, it is far outweighed by my wins, because I use a 1/3rd Money Management System that, I refined to allow myself to leave with win money and as well?replace my original buy-in without further risk to that either. 

Buy-Ins.  So, buy-ins are totally separate from the bank roll.  They have to be, there is no other way! My recommendation is a 5-10% buy-in at the most of the bank roll.  Personally, I cannot envision playing every day as many state they do or desire to do, unless it is for a small few units profit and the gambler has an extremely large drawdown Bankroll of sheer risk capital available.  The fallacy of winning every day or having large enough bank rolls to survive hundreds of units of down swings to make a few units, is still 'dreamsville' to me after playing for around 40 years, at least for aggressive play anyways.  Personally, once or twice a week is about it, at least on a regular basis, IMO and experience.  My other rock solid iron clad rule that I might break once every 100 trips, is never buying in a second time if the buy in was lost without being able to play on win money. 

Win Money.  Personally, I employ my 1/3rd-1/3rd-1/3rd money management system which cannot and will not fail me to replace my buy-in and always leave with win money.  Period. 

What so many baccarat players I have played alongside, observed and been associated with over the years, make a single mistake.  Which is, the continued buying in after they lose their initial buy-in.  They have no structure or self-control, none whatsoever.  They will drain themselves in the worst catch-22 situations they create and entrap themselves in.  If you lose, you lose.  That is it.  If you can't get past this, nothing can or will ever help you.  Nothing, zip.  I promise you from the bottom my heart.  Keep losing your units and keep flat betting or even negative progression and all you do is sink yourself worse and worse.

Win money causes more clouded vision and obnoxious behavior at the baccarat table.  Get over it.  Know what wins are and how they come or do not come in proportion to losses.  You will do yourself a huge justice by learning what I just said. 

Stop believing what you play on paper using a free game, such as the one on Wizard of Odds website or any of the other on-line casino websites where they offer practice shoes.  There are other factors within a casino that come into play that do not exist on the internet. 

If you have no plan or a haphazard notion, or you sometimes do this or that with your win money---you will risk it and lose it every single time.  Those that use their win money to fuel their positive session they start to encounter will eventually lose it all, because you will play until you get back all your losses, you will lose it all plus anything you have access to.  Happens over and over, each and every single day at the casinos.

Do not keep adding to your bank roll.  You will doom yourself.

Do not play larger because you won a few sessions.

1-2-3-4 or 2-4-6-12, etc., positive progression will kill you if you religiously do them over and over.  I talked about this numerous times in other posts I written.  It is easy to win one or two wagers, it is really hard beyond comprehension to continually win 4 or more in a row.  300 to 600 to 1,200 to 2,400 will happen rarely, your lost units will outweigh by huge amounts, your won units!  That is why I subscribe to 1-3-2-6 and other versions of that style.  If I win one or two, then I ride free to win larger.  Another story and like I said, I wrote and explained that in detailed before on the board.  I promise you that it is the only way to do good-okay or at least better in the long run. 

Concerning playing every day or say 5 to 6 times a week, your mind will not allow you to play level headed and repeatedly profit a set amount of profitable units and continually build you bank roll.  So many preach it, it is not realistic or doable for beginning or less experienced players IMO.  Sorry to harp on it, but I see it all the time.  It is not going to happen.  You will lose more than you win.  Again, looks great on paper and in theory, but you cannot and will not do it and religiously profit every week, week in and week out.

So much talk about 1's, 2's and 3's.  With it or against it.  The times you are correct you will eventually (seriously 100% of the time over say a period of sessions) give it all back by continually believing and wagering the way you just won.  That same shoe will produce just as many 1's, 2's and 3's and "cuts", the opposite way that you wager on, and if that one does not---the subsequent ones you will be playing that same day or the following days, will.  Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but it will happen the absolute highest majority of the times. 

The way you can be successful at something like that, is to be there when it happens with a certain wagering thought, but immediately after you profit from it, you have to religiously subscribe to 'refreshing and resetting' and forgetting about that.  Not particularly easy as the psychological effect will attempt to steer you to what just made you $$$ and made you delightful and feeling good all over.  Then as you attempt the replication of that same series of wagering, the shoe presentments went the opposite ways. 

Money Management Methods.  M.M.M. is much more than a negative or a positive progression.  Much more than a win-stop or a loss-stop.  That is where so many will fail as well.  They play all the time, every session as if attempting to repeat their best one or copy in real life as to what they learned on paper or the internet.  Real life is a bit different than Doctor Seuss books once you are older than say 10 years old, IMO.  Realize it.

There are coincidences and phenomena in baccarat, and that is what will cloud your vision and confuse you, more than anything else in this game!  Instilling a bad sense of knowledge you will (I promise you!) wager on.  Meaning, what you saw altered your good vision or your good sense of judgement and you believed the shoe will present the hands according to what you desire through wishful thinking or fallacy beliefs.  Once you figure all this out through experience and losses, you can become a very profitable baccarat player.  Real life analogy.  Think of what I just said in this paragraph as erotic foreplay you seen in a movie.  Translate that to yourself and your erotic desires.  How many times will you lay your eyes on a female, grasp each other, go buy the bottle of wine and strip each other's clothes off and find yourself on those silk and satin sheets with the wind blowing through the open window and the dove that, suddenly flew in and perched himself on the bedpost as you make love to the most beautiful girl you happened to meet in your life and you don't even know her name?

Playing wagers of -?-, -?- or -?- of the shoes or only wagering after ever 4th repeating banker or player for the '1s' or the 'cuts', does not matter.  As many times as you win those, you will lose when those do not happen.  Simple.  But those that go into dialogs, real convincing and real slick ones will probably convince you otherwise.  Counting, waiting and looking for an event will not work in the long run.  It might for the same day-one session and if you only play once or twice a year, but it will not if you play on a regular basis.  Playing that way will kill you, it will wipe you out, I promise you!

Aha!

Yellow sports cars you say?

When I first met my wife in the early 70's, this was her ride.

A blast to tool around with but you froze your butt off in the winter as the heater pretty much only kept the ice off the windshield and that was about it.

A really fun sports car though.

AD