Baccarat Betting Flat: Quest for an Holy Grail?

Anyway, this thread is now close as far as I'm concern. I mean the mohegans sun retard is so fucking stooooooooooooooooooooooooopid that he actually thought a sequence like bpbpbpbp would be detrimental to my style. I'll leave it him to provide baccarats talks of substance. I'm sure he can tell cats how to "guess" better. He can explain to cats how to capture 53%+ strikes rate while making retarded wager on the players side of the equation. He can tell you how to set win goal and quit while yer ahead. And best off all he can tell cats how via the "experience" they can develop the esp and precognitons to know for certain when the dreaded nemesis patter/rough patch are coming so you can avoid them, hey hey.

 

Hahaha I thought you had the guaranteed 53% strike rate. You've been stringing people along since you graduated from your "Sure Win" suicide 250 unit loser. You're lucky all the newbies don't bother to read your history prior to covid. Pffff. Quarter Million a year for ten years. There's a BWAHAHAHA for you.

Cheers

 

I'll be happy to step up and accept the challenge but you tuck tails between yer legs and run away like the little bitch; just like yer fellow bulls-shits-artist, the spike and the limey, hey hey!!!!!

 

Yup, the mohegans sun sailor imbecile is correct, cuz I was mean, the great john-O no longer posts on here. I was too mean to come over the top to challenge the limey claim to capture 1000 units profits in a coupla hour usin a fib style ata saw-dust joint down-under. I was too mean to come over the top and challenge the john_o claim to win well and regular by making lots of wager on the tie as a hedge for all them bet he made on players. And yes, Zeus knows I was too mean to come over the top and challenge the limey claim to capture the 77% strikes rate by mirror the wager of the oriental cat with the app in a naps-sack who knew what he was doin. Yup, I had the temerity to actually question the claim and as the result there are now some "serious" cat what no longer post here, hey hey!!!!

 

You're a phony. Hahaha. Where's the beef? You already produced a few shoes that are impossible to win using a fixed selection. Ridiculous.

Cheers

 

I said it again and I'll say it before, cats like you would fuck up a winnings style if it was given to ya on a silver platter and you would fuck it up fast!!!!

 

This comment is not directed at Jimske...

But Sox has given enough clues to build a winning selection based on his bet bank only. If you can not figure out a selection then you haven't worked hard enough. But even then it is very difficult to grind and implement the flat bet selectively banker only method. I am almost at 50 live shoes playing a SoxFun copycat style and and am barely making anything. I'll type up totals thru 46 shoes later....

Wanted to quit a few times but kept pushing .. hopefully I'll.continue to push through at least 100 shoes.. But just imagine sox has.played close to 3000.shoes.... That is a grind commitment... And it takes a special type.of Grinder to play this way... I just finished 10 straight shoes a few hours ago ..took about 6 hours and I had two -6 shoes back to back that's -$1200+. Which is within the norm.... I kept grinding and found two +9 shoes towards the end that helped.me turn this session into a positive....

Below was.the 10 game.text for closeout last night... my unit is 5000 (about $100 usd) so I ended this session at +11.5 units and the Rolling was 465000 which netted me an additional 1.34 unit Cake back commission (1.45%.. on losing bets)

So +12.8 units.
Approximately+$1300

__________________
[XXX VIP CLUB]Game Closed
Account:XXXX
Game No:8X0X
Location: Skiptopia Kitchen Casino
Currency:Kangaroo Dollars
Total Capital:150,000
WinLose:57,500
Total Rolling:465,000
Time:2023-02-12 06:37:20
Remark: I'm Not AlRelax lol
__________________

 

Jim,

Which shoes are you specifically referring to?

 

You mean one hand at a time or the whole shoe at once? I have 46 shoes recorded, the last 10 I asked for manual shuffle which I didn't know was offered at $100 limit here. Before it was $1000 limit for handshuffled.

I believe your playing at hand shuffled online casino that is why you are getting the nicer results.

What's your overall results through 2800 shoes? Tnx

 

Close topic is the best
No have any strategy to discuss and all lies and no have any information out them telling.
Are we stupid when we belive in they said?
Fukking out crow

 

@JacobBlaze you haven't been around long enough to realize he's playing a "heads I win tails you lose" game.

All he's got to do is define the bet selection. It doesn't matter if someone codes it against live, hand shuffle, RNG, pre-wash Shuffle Master, online whatever. If he disagrees with the results he's going to say the study is illegitimate. He's already made the claim before the fact so it's impossible to challenge. How convenient!

Hello!!!! So what difference does it make? Why not come clean with the selection? Okay, his shoes win, yours don't. End of story? No! Because he's making the claim that anyone will win using his selection. Can't have it both ways but everyone else is a fool? How does that compute?

Furthermore, using his samples one cannot duplicate his results using the flat bet parameters he set. NOT even close! That makes him a liar.

Oh he's deliberately lying to hide the secret sauce! How gullible can you be? It shows your inexperience. It's really not that hard. You can either zig or zag at a certain occurrence. Sure, you can win a lot of shoes. That’s no biggie. The strike rate got to be 52% to get 1.4. That's a fact.

He is an insecure and emotionally stunted angry at the world a h o l e.

 

The jacob-blaze seem to cotton on to my style to large extent but then, unlike you he ain't a retard. You never tire of making yer-self look stupid. Yer too stooooooopid to understand anything, yer too lazy to test anything and you, along with the al-relax, and the limey, the other two stooges you would fuck up a winning style in short order if it were handed to you on a silver platter. Anyway, louds-mouth, the challenge I issued to you before, still stands. Of course you will decline the challenge, tuck tail between yer legs and run away like a little bitch, just as the spike and limey did cuz you don't want to be exposed as a bulls-shits artist and chickens-shit, scared loser recreational player that you are, hey hey.

 

"Furthermore, using his samples one cannot duplicate his results using the flat bet parameters he set. NOT even close! (False Statement) That makes him a liar."

Jimbo,

Can you link to the shoes you are talking about? I see close to 100% similarity on what he responds too.

An it's a Shame that I am.so.inexperienced and you are so full of.knowledge yet you can't figure out his simple bet selection. Lol

Just stop attacking and study the shoes he responded too and you too with all your knowledge can figure it out. Don't get angry because he doesn't spoon feed you his bet selection. If he does feed it.to.you it will be negative in your backtests anyway, so why bother?

I am forward.testing a selection method that doesn't test as well in RNG and live shoe back tests as Soxy claims and will probably lose in the long term, but im dedicating between 50 to 100 unit bank loss before I quit the live kitchen test. (Or if I get bored)

If his claims are false and he just trolls for attention who cares..he has given some good ideas that can be used.

I believe his results though, but like I said before it would be hard to play this way "Grind" or to find a live casino that would let you play this way ...

.. I have live played a similar bet selection close to 50 shoes now in the last two weeks (live BRicks and Morty Casino) and it's a grind And the grind is not worth it to me at $100 level . Maybe at $300 to $500 unit it will be worth it, but then it's a great bankroll risk etc....

Anyway good luck and thanks for your forum contributions.

 

@JacobBlaze

I read your entire comment.

Sorry I offended you. Not my intention. It’s just that some of your beliefs regarding the game strike me as naïve. A lot of this stuff has been hashed out 20 years ago. How long have you been playing Bacc? How many shoes? I don’t consider myself a guru of Baccarat but I’ve studied this game for many years and have played thousands and thousands of shoes. Lots of others have as well and NONE have come up with a fixed flat bet method to produce 52%+. He hasn’t either.

And I’m not really angry. Sure, I’m pissed off at soxfan. The jerkoff spends time insulating me while hiding behind a computer screen. Let’s get one thing straight. I never attack him. I debate his claims. I give credit where credit is due. What he is trying to achieve is a worthy goal. But the onus is ALWAYS on the claimer to prove the claims. He's giving a lot of people bad information.

But this whole thread is just an interesting and fun puzzle to me. IF – and that’s a big IF – there existed a flat bet fixed bet with a strike rate of 52%+ I wouldn’t play it anyway! Why? Apparently, it loses 50% of shoes! I’m only playing 3 – 5 hours a day a few times a week anymore. I don’t want to lose 50% of shoes. I do way better than that. So other than an interesting exercise and fun puzzle it doesn’t really matter to me.

That’s great that winning $150/hr not worth your time. I’m not that wealthy but I got better things to do than spend a lot of time at the Casino. I used to. Not that you or anyone else shouldn’t. Go for it and good luck.

Of course I can replay his sample games and not only come close but I can do a whole lot better but so what? That doesn’t make my results a long term winner. So guys posting a few shoes and their results is irrelevant. His samples can’t be duplicated. This means he’snot playing the same way from one shoe to the next. Yet he claims otherwise! That’s the whole argument.

He claims to produce a fixed bet placement that can achieve a 52%+ strike rate over a significant number of trials. It’s fun to try. He mentioned a challenge. There’s plenty of money around to challenge his assertion! Ridiculous! Very funny! He’s already said if he loses//// then the shoes aren’t “legit.” Convenient, huh? Very “Trumpy.” Never admit to the bull shit!

Truth . .. facts. . . proof! A little critical thinking always comes in handy.

J

 

Firstly, anything I post online, I will say to yer face in a heart-beat, you dumb lying, lazy little bitch! AQnd you open yer face to say that I give bad information? Seriously, yer the buffoon what claim to have super-powers that enable you to know for certain when the nemesis pattern will occur! You claim it's possible to out-guess the baccarats proposition, one shoe at the time even though there are billions of combination'permutati0n for a single shoe of baccarats. And you dare accuse me of giving bad information. I pegged you correct long ago as beings a chickens-shit, scared loser player, utterly CLUELESS and a lazy, dumb lying piece of shit as well, hey hey!!!!

 

You're pretty good at smack talk and obfuscation but when it comes to delivering the facts you are sorely lacking. A bully tactic to avoid the facts. Yrah yeah. I know you're a tough guy. You got your AR-15. Knock yourself out.

Every mechanical selection has its nemesis or pattern it loses to. So what you need to do is to show that the Nemesis pattern can be avoided or doesn't occur often enough to thwart the selection. It's not that complicated.

Furthermore, you misrepresent what constitutes effective play by mitigating everything to "guessing" as if there is no structure for approaching the game. No point in elaborating. I think everybody understands that part.

It's obvious that your selection is not uniform from your samples. Look what's the big deal by not showing the selection? Obviously it only works on party poker and when it doesn't work it's because the shoes are not legitimate. How can you lose? You know I will run a Sim on it against live shoes and show that it loses. But so what? You just say those shoes are not legitimate and move on.

Variance is a funny thing. It's possible that after tweaking your method your live play is showing winning over a substantial number of shoes. I can show you a hundred shoes that were recorded consecutively that have a player advantage. Go figure. Many times I look at shoes at the casino and think these shoes are sure streaky all of a sudden. Then you got people thinking the casino is orchestrating the shoes to make you lose. LOL selective memory.

Cheers

 

@soxfan and @Jimske...you two have been MF ing each other for a couple of years now and I don't believe either of you are going to change each others mind. With that said and I'm sure I speak for others who joined this forum to learn, why not try this. Each of you post your method of play to where others can understand and let us be the judge and jury. Sox, you say you only flat bet B but never tell when. Jimske, you keep your bet selection and MM private but yet you criticize others way of playing.

I guess since neither of you are willing to share your way of playing, you don't have to deal with failure and can keep posting about your winnings. I don't expect either of you to post how you play so at least come up with some new insults.

We all remember @Jae from a few years ago who told us exactly how he played and his MM. He gave us the opportunity to be judge and jury of his way of playing. Some said they loved it and others didn't. But at least he let us see what he was doing.

If the old saying "put up or shut" is in order then I guess we won't be hearing from either of you.

 

I like your post but it’s not a black and white topic we are reading/dealing with on this thread. Both soxfan and jimske have valid points re the game , re method, re interpersonal interactions and re everyone’s interpretation of flat betting banker only method .
With reference to Jae in highlighting the “grind” aspect of the game, my own personal previous posts also highlighting of the “grind” aspect of my selection criteria for flat betting it is noteworthy that the “Non Glamorous” road to profit is the “Grind” .

The “grind” is the single most common reason that people will not succeed in baccarat, they just can’t do it, all the reasons have been explained already various threads by myself, soxfan, Jae, etc etc
I will offer this quote From soxfan

Im an advocate of “sufficient testing” as opposed to “junky sim testing forever and ever and ever, never get to play” as some folks are just theoretical, that’s fine by me . But I’m inclined to shut them down ( the sim testing junky) when they espouse their crap from a “pure” theoretical standpoint without ANY real world skin in the fucking game experience.

The aspect of the quote is the
“ 200 unit bankroll”.
In testing he noted a -85 unit drawdown. He has tested and determined for HIS free styling drop the microphone method of play that -85 units flat betting was the worst black swan event in the “sufficient testing” zone he encountered. He set out to “Grind” his 200 unit bankroll for however long it was going to take to garner a profit.

If he has or hasn’t fully disclosed his method, his subtle variations, if he bails out on a shoe at hand 65 or actually plays more often than not to the very last hand is actually not the point as far as I can tell.

To me

The point is over a few thousand hands played he’s been “Grinding” a profit.

That is the name of the game folks.

The “average” is 1 to 2 units a shoe/session

Average is the keyword, most people would love an average of 1:5 units a shoes/session BUT they cannot achieve that because they don’t have the patience to “GRIND”

Soxfan claims 18 shoes/session a day ( full , half, 3 quarters whatever) that’s a “grindathon” , elsewhere this thread he’s posted big drawdown then posted recovery posts to bring the average back to 1-2 units per shoe.

That’s a tradesman, a machine at work.
Full respect from me.
99:9% of readers here ARE unable to “grind” like that.

I’m unable to locate from this thread the $ value he’s claiming as profit from his initial $20 000 bankroll start up. It’s here somewhere.
Is he correct?
Is he lying?
Is he misrepresenting what can be accomplished?
Is he exaggerating?

Personally , I can relate to the achievement claimed by soxfan as I have achieved similar results , by a dissimilar method but although I incrementally increased the unit size as the bankroll increases and I level off at the 5 unit base bet, being a comfort and practical aspect of the brickyard casinoverse. My comfort level.

18 shoes/session a day , I would say 400 hands bet to achieve the 51+% strike rate. Doable

Most would not want to try, most would not last the day criteria of 18 sessions, be it lack of discipline , mental health issues, bankroll issues, if those that do last for day one, very few would back up and tackle day 2 or 3 and of the odd few that last a week only 1 or 2 would be there a year later.
Most people can’t handle having a loser of a day. Most people can’t trust in their process to succeed.
I’m a fan soxfan. Cheers.

The grey of the black and white of this thread.

The truth of a flat bet minimum is probably the most questionable aspect of soxfan flat bet thread.

Soxfan has mentioned on various threads the advantages of martbation, grand (two hand I assume) martybation etc as a unit recoveries etc.
My personal opinion soxfan on occasion at certain points/triggers either presses the wins or uses a regulated under the tablecloth matybation to accelerate the unit recovery BECAUSE he has absolute faith from experience in HIS process.

I have posted previously various threads about my take on bet pressing when I perceive I’m on a winning streak, my preferred method of flat betting starting with a 2 unit initial bet, dropping to a 1 unit bet if first bet wins etc. if it loses continue at 2 units flat betting etc. The pressing of winning bets is because I know from experience my criteria gives me 3,4,5,6,7+ wins in a row often. For a pure safety aspect I can and do just flat bet the 2 units if I’ve had a truly bad day irrespective of the potential, actual string of wins in a row. Some days the 3+ wins just don’t materialise. Fact.

I initially started a thread here at Covid lockdown, I showed how to increase a flat bet bankroll by a grind method. I didn’t show how to start at a 2 unit flat bet , plus the pressing of units on a perceived win streak as trying to explain the end of month totals would become exhausting, it was tiresome explaining the flat bet totals etc lol etc.
So the grey is the bet sizing.
I would understand if soxfan didn’t fully explain the true bet sizing as per reasons I’ve noted above.
cheers.

 

As always Punkcity, I enjoy your post.

 

I've always said that Baccarat is a betting and guessing game. But the quest for the holy grail of Baccarat is a worthwhile goal. It’s conceivable that it could be attained by using some sort of rule based betting style using a progression OR flat bet. However, in this thread we are dealing with “Flat Bet Banker Style.” It must be as @soxfan correctly states teachable and/or duplicated without any element of subjectivity or, using another term, without any guessing. So, yes, @Punkcity it IS black and white. Either we follow a set of rules or we don’t. As soon as we implement @Punkcity subtle variations it becomes the bullshits guessing game as @soxfan likes to say. I am in agreement.

A grind? Sure, if the rules are fairly complicated like in BJ then fatigue may cause mistakes. But following rules to either zig or zag and flat bet in an EC game is child’s play. Whether or not we play 18 shoes a day or 18 shoes a week is just a matter of time and does not change the average. Now @judge enter @Jae Oscar Grind, @Johno E-Star and @soxfan Flat Banker. The two formers are more difficult to quantify because deep progressions tend to require many more trials than a flat bet method. But none require mathematical absolutism for our purposes here. We need not simulate or use live billion shoes. It would be sufficed to calculate a Standard Deviation that pointed toward a risk of ruin of, say, 5%. Meaning if 100 people followed the exact rules over a significant number of trials only 5 of them would lose their required bankroll. That would be good enough for most. I’ll guess that a significant number could be as small as 150,000 trials. Kitchen table testing is fine. Again, we don’t need a simulation, we could use live shoes. @soxfan says average wagers per shoe is about 20 so that’s about 8,000 shoes? Maybe someone like @Assymbac would like to opine on that number.

Including myself a lot of people claim to be winning. I never really concern myself with whether or not that is true, false, embellished or whatever. I don’t doubt or call anyone a liar and I am not saying one cannot win even Flat Bet Banker. We are not required or even expected to reveal our all important BET SELECTION. There are a few reasons why we may not but the main reason is we cannot because we don’t know! Some of our bets are subjective and determined by @Nathan Detroit common sense and logic. I had this conversation the other day with some real long time successful players. One said it’s funny that the more skill you have the more luck you have. Skill? But that’s not what is being touted by @soxfan on this thread.

The bet selection is not explicit but it is implicit. The flat bet Banker, never change your bet size, play the same way over all shoes IS explicit. The rubber meets the road when implying a fixed bet selection in a handful of shoes showed the outcome. I posted two of the samples to see if anyone could reverse engineer the method to come up with the bet selection. No one did and that’s no surprise because it can’t be done! I guess that is because he is just grinding away, changing bets and placements on the fly using logic and common sense? Or, maybe it’s on purpose throwing us losers off the scent, right @JacoBlaze? But either way why not just be honest? Say here’s my bet selection, I win, run your sims and screw you? Why not? Because he’s an a h o l e! LOL.

Cheers