I can't wrap my arms around those hours.  But, hey I understand most of your logic and thinking.  Not all, most. 

I used to play those hours, but not everyday, weekends and 2 or 3 day mid week trips.  However,  those were at the big 2-sided 14 player seats, 3 dealers and 2 floor people on each end of the table, type of games.  Almost non existent today. 

I had a day this week where I only played one looonnnnggg session across 4+shoes(Approx 6hrs).

Typically I call it a session when all of my wagers have been decisioned(I always do a pos progression). Generally all wagers are decisioned in the same or very next shoe and its called a  session(Net - or +). Though, I may sometimes carry a pressed up wager into the next shoe or session or day. I never kill a pressed up wager as it continues until it dies.

Generally I play 7-9 hours per day. However, on this day I was exhausted after about 6hours. I was talking with a bac mentor that day re: these type of sessions and how they sometimes seem to occur without predictability or a precursor. I guess most of us have experienced such sessions.

Ok, on with the horrible shoe(s) story.

This was one of those sessions I simply could not get in sync with the results(several shoes and several different biases). It did not matter as I zigged when it zagged.

W33 L41 and that was after a late hit-rate surge in the last shoe.

At one point my record was W24 L37. I was down approx (-2600) at this stage. I generally do a pos progression/optimally go after >=four presses(5 hits 4 compounds). Seldom do I go for consecutive-event wins IAR(In a row), such as ppppp or bbbbb or pbpbp,..etc. I prefer to grab a win or two from the meat of patterns, set it aside/reenter into another meat-part of a pattern,...etc. In these shoe(s) I couldnt seem to find 3iar or I would lose all of my highest wagers so the stage (@ w24 L37) was even worse than indicated.

Late in this last shoe I knew it was a sign for me to depart the casino:

     P had recently been on a significiant streak such as pp b ppp b pppp b pppp and had won 13/16 or so outcomes in this recent bias. I had grabbed several Ws from the P bias. After that last (pppp) I had noted that nothing in the whole entire shoe had gone past 4iar(No opps, P, or B, or any other pattern). So my intention was to go with what had happened thus far and wager $775 for B after the PPPP. However, I erroneously put my wager on P for $755 and $20 on the Fortune7. Of course I immediately realized (too late as cards were coming out). I immediately thought "oh sheet". Lucky for me P won again with a 3c7. I was @ net+$850 at that stage (only the second time I was ahead for the whole day).

It was about 5pm and though I had planned on playing until approx 8pm. I had to simply acknowledge it wasn't a favorable day(especially after the last error). Some days we win when our bet selection doesn't warrant it. Ill gladly take it.


Continued Success,

Im beginning to think some of his claims are not entirely accurate.
I think his greatest skillset is in marketing.


https://www.tiktok.com/@unrealgambling/video/7302468896060230955

Thx albertojonas for the intel/thx to others comments as well.

I like the idea of watching three streams of info simultaneously. I think most of us will agree a shoe is always presenting at least one(>=1) bias.



Continued Success To All,

more testing
Strings            
            
O/E String            
11133111311332 21111113 11312 133311112 111112122223 111313
wwllwwwwlwwwlwlwll-lwwwwwwll-wlwll-llwlwlwwwwwll-wwwwlwlwlwlwlwll-wwlwlw             
Odd String            
1311132 11131113112 112223 133
lwwwlwll-wwlwwwlwwwll-wllwlwll-llw            
Even String            
11313132 111132 331111112 2111            
wlwlwwlwll-wwwlll-wlwwwwwll-lww            
L/H String            
3112 2113 1223 312 22213 2112213 321223 2113 2111123 132
lwll-lwll-llwll-lll-wwlll-lwlwlwwll-wllwlwll-lwll-lwwwlwll-lll            
Low String            
312 1123 2212123 22313112 12
lll-wlll-wllwwlwll-wwllwwwll-            
High String            
1213 2312 2312 1312 212113 3            
lwll-wlll-wlll-lwll-llwwwll-            
R/B String            
1131332 312 231133111311311312 1111132 32112223 11
 wlwlwlwll-lll-lwlwlwlwwwwlwwwlwwwlwwll-wwwwlll-wlwlwlwlwll         
Red String            
1332 1213 1113111112 2123 1
llwll-lwwll-wwlwwwwwll-llwll-            
Black String            
11332 313131132 113312 21            
wllwlwll-llwwlwwwlwll-wllwwll-            

Not intended in anyway for any type of drama. 

As you said,  Begin: "b) In the short/intermediate term, the asymmetrical nature of the deck will make more probable (at least at some spots) some one sided results.
And as Alrelax correctly pointed out, there are no privileged patterns to rely upon, yet we have to consider some pattern ranges in order to set up our plan."  End.

But, we only play in the absolute "Short Term".

Unless you have extremely huge bankrolls and are playing some type of multiple on-line 24/7 programmed wagering business, etc. 

Short Term, anything and everything happens consistently, IMO.  Grab it while it's happening, etc.

Baccarat is made by infinite "same fighting situations" where two different forces will dictate the final results:

a) Itlr every "battle" will end up "equally" or almost equally (no strong propensities will happen);

b) In the short/intermediate term, the asymmetrical nature of the deck will make more probable (at least at some spots) some one sided results.
And as Alrelax correctly pointed out, there are no privileged patterns to rely upon, yet we have to consider some pattern ranges in order to set up our plan.

Then there are no progressions capable to overcome a negative edge, yet KFB presented valuable ideas to maximize profits based upon the concept that asymmetrical successions must stop or prolong with a level of probability different than 50/50.

Moreover and I'm assuming a full responsability of what I'm saying, baccarat is a game where the past will influence the future.

Since we can't rely upon a math edge, at baccarat we are compelled to approximate at best the possible distributions.
And in fact the vast majority of shoes roam around "average" distributions, shoes where most of the time casinos will get the best of it as bac players tend to play toward "extremes".
Obviously there's nothing wrong to play toward extremes, alas extremes cannot overcome every other situation happening at a baccarat table.

More simply, "extremes" become interesting just whenever they'll surpass the 3 value: we need a consecutive same pattern to think that an extreme (2) might come out, then we'll win the next deviations step (3). From this point on we need a further winning step (4) to profit because if we lose the fourth step we'll break even (before vig).

Let's transfer the concept on chopping sequences, B/P streaks or BP consecutive streaks and you'll see how's difficult to surpass the 3 value.

It's true that sequences reaching the 3 value could be played up to that point, so not risking more money in order to get superior winning successions.
A wise move by any means.

Why?

Assuming we chase an univocal pattern to prolong after it came out twice (say we consider a double apparition as a trigger) we'll get: (Y=another apparition and N= pattern stops).
For simplicity we ignore the vig.

(YY)N = -1 unit

(YY)YN = break even

(YY)YYN = +1 unit

(YY)YYYN = +2 unit

(YY)YYYYN = +3 unit

(YY)YYYYYN = +4 unit

(YY)YYYYYYN = +5 unit

and so on...

To summarize we need at least a four long consecutive homogeneous pattern to get a tiny +1 profit, situations not happening around any corner.
By lowering the homogeneous pattern expectations, we might get a +1 profit just at the more likely YYYN successions and even in this case we're not entitled to get many situations of such kind.

On the other end, starting to bet toward a univocal long sequence after a single Y makes things worse as it'll negate the M.V. Smoluchowksi (and other authors) ideas  our plans are based about.

Now if it's difficult to get many profitable situations of such a kind per any shoe dealt, are there more affordable ways to get the best of bac successions intended as patterns?   

I have to thank you for your interest in reading this thread, reaching 300k views is a very good accomplishment.

If you remotely think that baccarat could be beatable, well you are in the right site.

Next time I'll present you the basics about how our algos move at the worst profitable sequences the game provides: BP successions.

as.

testing today's randomization
25/09

Strings            
            
O/E String            
321 121223 231 22331 213 31131131112 11213 1213 212213 3            
Odd String            
21122123 231 311112 3231 23            
Even String            
312 233231 1311312 11112213            
            
L/H String            
211121113 123 122123 312 21213 2113 31112 31112 111111332 313112            
Low String            
1111132 1312 231 311312 1113331            
High String            
21213 21223 11213 12111113 2112            
            
R/B String            
31112 1211211211223 331312 2123 1132 311131312 321 112123            
Red String            
111121123 3321 312 111131113            
Black String            
312 2112123 112213 31332 2122

Non Bias = 6
Bias = 49            
            

Hi KFB!
Yep, I'll present some examples later.

By now I wish to introduce the "betting again the same side after losing the first one (BASS)" concept.
The BASS concept has nothing to share with common BP patterns (doubles, streaks, etc) or other strategies based upon mechanical triggers, it's just an additional tool we should take care of whenever we decide to selectively betting a random walk suggesting a side that lost at the first attempt.

It's a registration of how many times we were wrong in choosing a given side and more importantly about how much the "backup" second bet have won or lost.

From a strict BP patterns point of view, there are no specific B/P lines to fear or to chase as the random walk (think about derived roads) most of the times is insensitive to that.
Technically and after having selected our betting spot, we're challenging the actual distribution to provide our chosen side losing two times in a row.

Not surprisingly, if we'd think to bet with a kind of advantage we need the first bet to win at least 51.3% of the times while wagering Banker and 50.1% while wagering Player.

Nonetheless, even the second bet and the second bet series (range) could be assessed by more likely terms getting us an additional advantage.

As long as we would consider a shoe just by 12-15 or 18 situations, the BASS line will get slight more probable lines so getting rid of the common "everything is 50/50" untrue statement.

Anyway, this factor cannot be the main tool to rely upon but for sure helping us to lose a lot less in the unfortunate situations we are destined to face. After all it's an additional random walk to take care about.

More later

as.

Testing...
01-09-2014

O/E String           
33312 - 1312 - 1211213 - 111333111133111112 - 312 - 1312 - 112113 - 11           
Odd String           
3111112 - 3133113112 - 1111211           
Even String           
3323221 - 111311311132 - 321 - 131           
           
L/H String           
1312 - 1113112 - 213 - 1123 - 113112 - 11223 - 33231 - 3112 - 113132 - 2123 - 1           
Low String           
321 - 312 - 313112 - 123 - 211211213           
High String           
11111211213 - 1123 - 33311332 - 21           
           
R/B String           
13113312 - 21213 - 313312 - 1112113 - 231 - 1213 - 123 - 12123 - 11           
Red String           
3132 - 113311113311132 - 21           
Black String           
11312 - 231 - 321 - 212123 - 2113 - 1 

************

bias 43
non-bias 4