Baccarat Flat Bet Only Thread

Here's a chance for Soxfan and some others to have their own thread. Soxfan wants to troll every thread and turn it into "all about me and my style." But flat bet is a worthwhile endeavor. I know he's not the only one who feels that this is the way to go. I know Punkcity flat bets - not always but mostly I think.

I think about it myself a lot. I was never "raised" that way so it is very difficult for me to transition. I'm real comfortable with a negative progression with a max bet of about $500.00. For a long time I kept track of my Win % and posted them to these groups. Some of you may remember. But I don't keep track any more so I got no idea what my overall strike rate is. Then I get shoes like today and wonder maybe I should. If I KNEW I had a positive expectation of 53% I would go for it. But I don't know it so I don't do it.

LLLL WW LL W LLL WW LL WW L W QUIT
WW LL WWWW LLL WWWWW L W L WW QUIT
WW L WWWWW L W L WWWWWW L QUIT
WWW LL W LLL WW LLL WWWW LL WWWWW L W L W LL W L W QUIT

So Win 55 L 38 or 59% win rate. The first shoe (above) which I already posted actually broke even with my progression at a 40% strike rate. It's the reason I use a progression.

Winning is easy it's the losing that's hard.

GL

 

I’ve not found a method that gives me a strike rate like that. I think I have it close to 50% but that’s probably the best of it. Therefore I rely on progressions to get some money out of the casino.

 

Who do you believe? Some very experienced players and authors say you can't win flat betting. You can't easily dismiss someone like Junket King with loads of table time or a shrewd guy like Stetson Baily who both claimed to win regular using progressions. Then on the other hand, you have a guy like Dave (I'mspirit) telling you any progression will fail in the long run and that any progression is simply a set of many different levels of flat bets.

Actually, my advice is to believe none of them! (or even me for that matter) Go on your own evidence and research.

You could have won 9 units flat betting FTL using Jimske's W/L Registry (+1, +4, +3 and +1) but that won't hold up long term.
The first shoe had 12 L vs 8 W and yet playing my style, I captured WWWWW L W L WWWWWWW. That's how I know personally, if I wanted to and was so inclined, I could win flat betting because it doesn't matter what get's thrown up in whatever order, as long as the process works, you can win and therefore if flat betting is your thing, then have at it.

 

Yup. I have a good friend who's a full time player. He always says give me fifty percent chance of winning and I will beat this game. He does.

 

Good points. Bailey said you have to be the driver. But it takes structure and experience and patience.

I've had many conversations with Dave. He took my data and ran it againstant Ellis's systems. Found what you mentioned. Personally I don't believe there's a method that can be used without some subjectivity.

Some of my stuff has been coated with limited amount of data. But nothing ever came better than fifty one plus percent. Nothing reached fifty two percent, which is about what you need for a mechanical system if you have the patience to play it.

Yeah Johno very knowledgeable player. He knows his shit!

J

 

Good thread.
Subjectivity is a key statement, mechanical method maybe should be re labeled “quasi mechanical” as I had discussed with you previously I’m now inclined towards using the term “quasi” as it’s a guideline of a mechanical approach but applied subjectively.
Everything works at some stage until it doesn’t, knowing when “it’s” working or not is one of the keys.
Looking forward to this thread gaining traction. Cheers

 

I reckon SpunkSocksfan is probably lubbing himself up using a grandmarty 5 progression on the old permutations. Having played thousands of shoes if I had a way of playing banker only (after banker shows) or (after player shows) or (after 4 players show) or FTL (B) or (P) etc etc etc I'd be a fuc*ing billionaire.
Soxfan, how about instead of inviting everyone to see how you play, you post your shit, otherwise, grow the fu*k up and stop telling the old hands how your shit smells like fabreeze.

 

Uh yes, you most certainly can and should dismiss the john-O and his absurd, made-up bulls-shits impossibilities, talls-tale, foolishness! %The imsprint is not an honest individual so don't put much credence into stuff what he has to say. It is possible to win, longs-term usin the progression but bettin flat is ideal, hey hey!

 

Go fuck yerself you dumb, loser piece of shit! Dumb, loser cunts like you would fuck up a winnings style if it was given to you on a silver platter. Go scam some cats outta some more cake. Go declare bankedruptcy for the 10th time and go write some more bad cheque, you dumb fuck, hey hey!!!!

 

Like I said, if it smells like sh&t, it's probably not Fabreeze. CYa, big weekend coming...ie real play. All the best

 

So we either are playing a positive EV or a negative EV game. If we have a bet(s) that has a pos EV then sure, just flat bet and you have a guaranteed win. No need for stop loss/wins. Get as much $ on the table as your bankroll and variance will allow. If a neg EV game then there must be subjectivity. This subjectivity will likely include stop win/loss and placements based on patterns, etc.

Yesterday's wagers. W 31 L 19
WWWWW L W I entered the shoe late so ...
W L WW LL WWW L W L WWWW L
W L WW LL W LL WWWWW LL W L W LL W LL WW

So combined with above that's 60% strike rate for 143 wagers. Because I test I know (or think I know) that none of these bets are positive EV bets! At least not enough to overcome the vig on Banker. Therefore I assume that continuing on with my selections will inevitably bring about the Expected Value (not that it matters to me because I use pos/neg progression).

J

 

The progressions used in the proper way CAN help you overcome the house edge. But that also has to be controlled so that it doesn’t get out of control. Jimske I believe has that under control from the many times that we’ve spoken. But anytime the cards come out, it’s a negative EV. No matter what you believe is coming. Even if let’s say you have BBPBP and the past 16 times the result for the sixth hand is B, that 17th time can be P. Because of the randomness of the game you just don’t know. Throw in external factors such as shuffle arrangement that a lot of people talk about, clumping, etc, anything can and will happen. Sure B is supposed to be a better play. But why are there so many P-heavy shoes?

Bet selection is a key. And if you have one that YOU believe in, psychologically that can go a long way. But money management is the key to your success to counter bad luck and to me, a progression is the way to do that, used carefully.

Nice work as always, Jimske!

 

So IF I was flat betting then what would I do? I would do what I do now except bet flat. First, it's known that I play the derived roads. Second, I've had my selections tested using the live data available to me and it has NOT shown a positive expectation. But like most players my selections are highly structured. I enter and exit the game based on two factors. 1) Dominance and 2) W/L registry. When and if what I choose as dominance goes too far south I stop. When the W/L registry goes too far south I stop. Look, there are plenty of "good" shoes.

I'll post my W/L registry next time out. No, I won't flat bet.

J

 

Yup. Heck, I'll write him a check for 10k. Who wouldn't? I know a couple of Asian "cats" who'd be happy to join me. These guys already playing 30-40 hours a week; but they don't flat bet.

 

According to one of my favourite authors, it's because of what he likes to call ''The Law of Disproportionate Occurrence''

The Law of Disproportionate Occurrence.

Though the dice, the roulette wheel, and the cards ''have no memory'', what they do have is a conscience, and this conscience is called a PROBABILITY MODEL. As most of you probably already know, there exists what are known as probability models for each of the games, and the various bets which make up the games. Where infinity (the long-run) is concerned, these probability models provide that there will be ''x'' number of ''apples'' to ''x'' number of ''oranges''. In general, 50 ''heads'' for every 50 ''tails''. With each game and each probability model, the most common occurrence of any particular event is the first one, or one. The next most common is the second, or two, the third or three, and so on.

However a glaring misconception occurs when considering the short-run in the same manner! Reality unquestionably evidences the existence of a second ''bi-polar'' law, or what is probably more accurately identified as a ''counter-polar'' law that governs the short-run. This phenomenon is witnessed by what we commonly describe as ''things don't happen like they're supposed to''!
For if the law governing the long-run were truly duplicated in the short-run, casino table games would have been extinct long ago. The challenge would be simple because of obviously already knowing for example, that with every 100 spins of the roulette wheel, that there must be exactly 50 red numbers to the 50 black numbers within those specific 100 spins. Well it doesn't quite work that way now does it?

Not only do we know that ''it doesn't work that way'', we can also accurately state that the law of the long-run isn't dictated to prevail in the short-run, and it is in fact extremely rare that it does duplicate itself perfectly in the short-run. Hence, through actual observation of the short-run, the fact is established that the law governing the long-run IS NOT duplicated in the short-run. Therefore, the challenge of the games present this unique paradox: the short-run is inequitable to the long-run!
So when it comes to gaming relationships and probabilities, though the whole is still equal to the sum of its parts, the parts themselves are not simply abbreviated versions of that whole.

Though the Law of Disproportionate Occurrence doesn't need to be academically justified or philosophically rationalized, it commands acknowledgement. There is nothing we can do to fight it or eliminate it. And why should we anyway? If we learn to exploit it instead of challenge it, the results will be greatly to our advantage! Furthermore, this is the same exact law that the casinos now worship to enjoy a ''take'' of 15 to 20 percent plus, instead of just the miniscule 2+/- percent that the ''commission'' would offer by itself. Therefore, once you acknowledge that the casino is nothing more than the host for the games, then and only then, will you be able to accept that the Law of Disproportionate Occurrence is absolutely the ''phenomenon'' which will aid you in taking the casino's money, while they are left void of a defense!


I read this around 8 years ago and it kind of shaped my thoughts because it made sense to me at least. Things can work great for a heck of a long time and then boom, all of a sudden they don't work so well anymore. We have probably all seen plenty of charts over the years with something going sky high and then tanking to the bottom and it's not just the house edge causing the correction as we all know.

Call it whatever you like, sections, variance, drift but it is happening in one form or another quite a lot of the time. That 15-20% Greiner talks about is when the player can't or won't adjust to what's happening in the shoe. If we can use this phenomenon to our advantage, then there is nothing to stop us winning flat betting although again, that might not necessarily be the optimum way to play it but if it suits your tolerance level, then why not?

 

@baccarou . So the question now becomes what strategies to use to exploit. (Yes, Nathan I said strategy)

One common strategy is to use regression to the mean (RTM). So wait for some imbalance and bet things will return to EV.

 

OTH flat bet no subjectivity requires all placements to be unchanged. And every unique placement should have a positive EV. Each placement can be evaluated.

It may be that some placements produce better results than others. And some even maybe losers. In that case, one should disregard the losing placements and perhaps increase the amount of bet on the ones that have a greater expectation of profitability.

It shouldn't be too difficult to get a really good feel as to what the placement should be even though you may not have enough data to produce an exact %.

J

 

My personal strategy is to use something similar to the derived roads. The way I see it is the more information which pinpoints what's currently happening, the better decisions I can make and so I run 2 streams which take into account different factors.

A lot of players think it boils down to FTL or OLD but that only takes you so far. I think you can get more intricate than that. Originally, I was just looking for something dominant where one side was just pushing out singles. That made sense considering the waiting times for HT or TH are 4 and the waiting times for HH and TT are 6.

So the following is great....

B
B
P
B
P
B
B
B

but what about when you get the 2's ?

B
B
P
P
B
B

OTBL ('opposite time before last' handle these nicely of course)

A problem I had as well was always ending with 2 losses playing the dominant side.
My W/L registry would have too much LL in it. I needed to find a way to cut those LL down to perhaps just a single L here and there which meant looking for how I could fuse together a lot of the different elements that can happen in a shoe. So I looked at all the waiting time scenarios in more detail. 'Twoup' talked about it in a bit more detail than what I ever did but he has gone AWOL now.

A player needs a process which is dynamic/fluid, You can't afford to be lagging behind the decisions by going against what's happening in the here and now. This is one of the reasons why I never spent much time with the derived roads because they look more like independent streams rather than a symbiotic relationship. Maybe I am wrong there though.

Anyway, that's a brief outline of what I do. I would need to give it more thought to give it clarity and meaning and make it easier to understand. Sometimes things are easier to put into action than put in words on paper or on a screen.

 

'Waiting time'? It sounds very familiar to me.

as.

 

First column is follow the two. I will start with b at the beginning of the shoe when p then gets two in a row switch to p and back to b at two. This will hit the dominant side and miss several in a row when odbl hits. Second column is odbl,
This would put you also on a lot of guess work. Remember sos or oso. Of course this is also fcf or cfc. Track two columns of three both marked for cff,fcf,ffc all the way down.

I know this sounds complicated but it really is easier than it sounds. Using blank squares for follow and a small mark for chop and it can be set up in a few seconds. No set up for the f2 col and the odbl col.

Now as you record decisions you mark down the p and b and if it hits f2 or odbl. Then the next set of 3 is for f2 and the second set is for odbl. If a hit follows a hit it is a follow and if a miss follows a miss it also is a follow.

You are going to see alot of back to backs. ALOT! in the two sets of three. You will also see dominants or long runs. Lots of people hate the term trending but playing for just back to backs looking at this grid is simple. Paying attention and stop betting when you don't see it and you can win with this flat betting. Yess there it is FLAT BETTING..

I'm not even trying to explain why this works. If you've studied the initial bet selection I think you will get it.....

If you've never hit ten or more in a row or it's been a while the two sets of three will deliver those quite regularly.

If you step in this good luck and best wishes.......