Baccarat Has anyone tried blending “Ching a Ling” with PBPPBB?

For baccarat. Martingale PBPPBB seems to work really well for me at beginning of shoes and I try not to go past level 5 and stop using it after I generate a few positive units. But Ching A Ling is a more conservative betting strategy . Thoughts?

 

Good lord is there no end to peoples stupidity? I for one am also guilty of being this stupid many many years ago but thankfully I was as able to work through my utter ignorance AND work through my stupidity without advertising how moronic a person can be by sorting out my own shit BEFORE declaring to the interverse what a dumbfuck looks like for time immortal on a cunternet forum.
Lord I’m truly grateful.

 

I truly dislike the use of the martingale strategy because it becomes a habit that makes you easily lose composure and control when facing losses. I prefer sticking to a basic unit size when experiencing losses and adhere to the principle of never chasing losses.

By the way, I also have a question for everyone.

If you have a long-term 50/50 game, what effective capital management strategy would you recommend? Since we cannot control the outcome, it makes sense to focus on capital management instead.

 

It really doesn't!!

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.

 

The baccarats is NOT the 50-50 proposition, hey hey.

 

Thank you for ur advise.