Discussion in 'Baccarat Forum' started by Jae, Jun 16, 2018.
fathead, are you getting a +EV overall? If so, where do you think it's coming from?
I saw this thread about Oscar;s Grind so I thought I'd show a comparison of various progressions. Keep in mind that progressions won't help much if you can'twin more hands than lose. So I picked a bunch of shoes which were played consecutively and had a few unusually high flat bet loss. The method has a positive flat bet win of about 3 net units and only 7% of losses are 10+ units. So yes a couple of real bad shoes. Variance happens. First Col flat bet than a cancellation prog, with two modified D'Alembert to keep escalations low in order to compete with the last column using Oscar's Grind.
You have probably read Stetson Bailey's book Jimske. Anyway, he has a few interesting variations on the D'Alembert. Personally speaking, I prefer to flat bet as much as possible. Something Johno said years ago makes perfect sense to me and that was ''It's better to pay the price of time than the price of your bankroll''. Now I suppose in theory at least, anyone with a solid enough strategy should be able to recoup from one or two heavy hits, but then again, why would anybody even need or want to if they can gain a few high denomination chips every other session. If someone is going to use progressions, my gut feeling is that they would be better to go the 'Renzoni' route and use a type of positive progression when things are going well.
Good points. Yes, the "MOD D" is Baileys +1,-1 FLAT and all have a cut back to make them more equitable with typical OG escalations - trying to compare apples to apples.
Agreed, makes sense to flat bet as much as possible and for the exact reason you quote. Probably why Johno used Labby so much. The Gr8 one espoused cancellation betting to 7 places. The one I used above just went 3 (111222333 for those who don't know what I'm referring to). As I think Assym pointed out we can get the best of it if we can access many shoes looking for spots. The problem with waiting one shoe at a time can be frustrating. That's why $ per hour is an important aspect and is often overlooked.
Up As You Win (UAYW) like Charles Guetting or 1326 (Glen likes that?) can go nowhere quick and can be difficult to "guess" when. Same holds true for the D'Alembert. In order to reduce escalation got to basically guess when to cut back or pump up. Not so easy.
At any rate as regards negative progressions we still need a positive expectation to guarantee a win. Math suggests our negative prog will be the same as flat betting the average bet size. So if we got enough bankroll we should be able to weather all down turns.
LOL Pick your poison.
That's exactly right, but it doesn't just apply to negative progressions:
No, flat betting every hand in every shoe it lost at the greater than -1.0% rate that you would expect both on 5% commission baccarat and EZ Bac. Also, Oscar's kept busting out no matter what I did so one recommendation I made to Jae was to switch to a different progression. I am guessing he did not since he was having so much success with Oscar's.
I have not heard from Jae so maybe things did not go as planned? Not sure.
Lemonade, do you have a bet-selection strategy that generates that strong positive drift in your graph (or is that the result of a bug in the spreadsheet ;^)?
I just randomly generated two outcomes where there was a slight advantage to the second outcome. This was just to compare progressions. As Jimskie said, if your BS doesn't have a positive expectation then you'll lose in the long run, no matter what progression you use.
As you can see, adding a progression to a winning system only adds volatility. It's better to just increase your flat bet unit size.
Your graph comparing the two MMs was expected. It was the unusual positive drift which caught my eye. ^^
At baccarat who lose less are very high stakes players even if they are historically considered "the whales".
They really are because per each $10.000 bet the house profits $106 or $124. But the house is getting an edge very close to the expected as they rarely use a huge betting spread. Not mentioning the luxury comps they are entitled to get or cuts on losses offered by the casino.
And of course such players will get a lot of "free hands" without betting.
I agree with the above comments, we can only win if our bets win by flat betting or by almost flat betting.
That should imply that only a proper bet selection may invert the HE, no way progressions can get the best of it in either way (positive or negative).
And I confirm what Jimskie sayed about one of my ideas.
Every shoe is just a sequence of cards that bac rules assign to two opposite hands. We shouldn't think in terms of B/P hands but instead in terms of situations.
Situations may come out whimsically how much we want but itlr (fortunately not too long) things change and, more importantly, will adhere OR NOT at various degrees to the expected values.
We need some time to get things changed otherwise we'll sink into the random ocean.
can you explain your CANCEL, MOD D and ECD progressions or where i can read up on them. after a few c'ose calls I have settled in to these progression 63 units if lose (progression was posted by GLC or GR8). i still have higher bets then i like so I am looking for new progressions to test out
1 Repeat, Parlay
2 Repeat, Parlay
5 Repeat, Parlay
13 Repeat, Parlay
IMO best way to get + results with progression is to learn how to de-escalate because if continue they will all hit the wall eventually and wipe us out. Pick a ceiling. When hit it stop and look at the loss and make a determination best way to recoup that loss by re-starting the prog at lower level. Might have to do this more than once within the same progression. Maybe just try to get to an acceptable loss.
CANCEL - I used 111222333 etc. up 1 when lose, down 1 or stay when win; You can use any odd number string length.
MOD D was Baileys +1,-1 FLAT; So D'Alembert but when W 2nd bet stay same size flat until lose.
ECD - is E. Clfton Davis favorite which I guess he sort of invented if not just popularized. Up 1 after a 1 unit win' Up 1 after a loss, Down 1 after a win, Down 2 after a 4 unit win. (U1D2Md)
None of them work with a negative expectation. But they all can be extended or adjusted as you see fit. To prevent escalation got to cut back. Otherwise we go very deep in the hole.
McVince raised a good point about playing your method for enough shoes to know what the limits are. So you get a feel for when to back off.
so what exactly is the trigger jae?
did someone contacted jae about the trigger `?
Hi Jae, thank you for the advice. I'm basically a neophyte at this time, I'm an ex Wall street man, (binary options trader) for 20+ years, introduced to baccarat about 2 years ago... read a few books which were more of an autobiographical nature, as opposed to getting into what you were kind enough to share... at this point I know what doesn't work- I need to know what works..! Please keep me posted. Respectively, Jake.
What Phil Ivey did works. Everything else is worthless save for some side bets.
What you say and how you say it, is the same as me saying, only Martin Luther King is a smart individual and knew everything and nobody else knows anything.
Separate names with a comma.