Baccarat Pondering The "Randomness"

I would have had fun playing that shoe too. I saw one that had a nice little streak this morning that I caught. Sometimes the degenerate in me will throw a hundred down when I see bank go 7 or 8 in a row and I’ll just let it ride. (I don’t advocate this type of play though, unless you don’t care about throwing money into the wind). Watching your little bet grow and hit table max and just keep winning isn’t just a thrill, it feels like an achievement, unlocking some secret bonus type shit.

 

Reach out to Jae. He is a good guy and very helpful.

 

Yeah, I'm an anti-trend person so I don't do it all the time. I also try to anticipate it and start on the 3rd one. As long as you win that one, the worst that can happen is breaking even if you lose on the 4th one. Just so happens that one was long and if you noticed, there was a dragon bonus a the end. I had $15 on it, which pays out $600.

Correct, I would not try to aim for catching these streaks. Sometimes you see no more than 2 or 3 consecutive wins of banker or player. This is why I choose to go anti-trends. Of course, these streaks can doom people like myself so I limit myself to two bets against trends.

BTW, I was not the biggest winner on the table. Two person racked up 10-12K on that streak. That's including hitting max on the bonus dragon.

 

You should win at a 75% rate. In a near 50:50 game you would win 50% of the time 1st attempt (1. W) and would win 25% of the time on the 2nd (2. L W), losing 25% of the time on the third or greater (3. L L).

If it were not for the house edge you would break even on a 1-2 martingale. For example out of 100 attempts we would see 1. +50, 2. +25, 3. -75 for a breakeven.

 

If yer gonna buck up against the anti-streaks style then you need to make yer cake off the 1s,2s,3s,4s as they are 90%+ of all streaks outs-come. It make no sense logical to wait until you eye-ball 8, 10, 50 in row then try to be the hero and cool guy bettings against, hey hey!!!!

 

I was about to head to the casino but I'm too lazy now. I see where you get those numbers. In any event, you have a possibility of W and L; Hence 50% for W. Then you have 50% for LW and LL.

I am really surprised at the results because I would be super happy to see half of my wins on the W column instead of LW. Most of my wins are one the LW column, then W column and very few LL column. Chances are, you are probably right but below is the outcome from the video(which does not show the true outcome for long run but I just want to know if I messed up on the win rate calculation):



I took the number of wins divided by hands played. 6/9 is where I got the 67%. Base on what you're showing, since there were no LL, is it a 100% hit?

Thanks!


I don't have an explanation to why the bulk of the results in the 2nd column, then 1st. Maybe someone will figure this out.

 

I see you have not read one bit of what my approach is and why or understand any of it. If you're only looking for those, you're forgetting we're talking about random. You're back on the newbie mindset. Hey hey!!

 

Yer an imbecile and a typical loser baccarats player what wager on the sides bet and has "fun" trying to win on the super rare longs streak. I captured over 29,000 units gross profits bettin pure anti-streaks, and yer a lifes long loser at the propositions so go back to the bets selections forum with the other coconut, hey hey.

 

Yer an imbecile and a typical loser baccarats player what wager on the sides bet and has "fun" trying to win on the super rare longs streak. I captured over 29,000 units gross profits bettin pure anti-streaks, and yer a lifes long loser at the propositions so go back to the bets selections forum with the other coconut, hey hey.

 

Lol, if I didn't know how long you've been hanging around these forums, I would have guess that you were a 4 year-old. Geez, ant-trend against anything. Anyone could have thought about that while sitting on the toilet taking a crap.

 

Get the fuck out of my thread with yer incoherent dumb-fuckery, and stick to the presentment, bankruptcy and writing bad check. You have NOTHING of value to contribute to any baccarats talk, hey hey!!!!

 

Wow! writing bad checks? Bankcruptcy? You need help. No wonder you are so angry. That never crossed my mind. Hmmm ... Now you sound like a 3 year-old.

New, I didn't know I need a pass get on a thread. Gladly leave you alone. Calm down or you might get a stroke, lol. Hey hey!!!

 

Well, we are looking at two different measures. In your tiny sample above you did win 67% of your total bets (this will gradually drop to around 50% over time) but you also won 100% of your two attempt sequences (this will gradually drop to 75%).

Yes, with many more bets you will show 50% wins on Level #1 (W) and 25% wins on Level #2 (LW). Total loss (LL) will be 25% also.

 

Thanks @judge , I was reading old posts I thought @Jae is not playing no more!, I am happy he is still posting. @Jae first I want to say thank you for all your time and effort you put into this forum, I learned so much from your posts. Are you still playing? The same your OG method? And how was 2000unit performed so far? @soxfan sorry I am posting in this thread I know it’s not related to topic.

 

Legendary,

You have a good topic , in my opinion you should create a new thread dedicated to this subject you are posting about. I don’t necessarily agree with everything you have posted but I’m interested enough to read further. I would like to see further discussion from Jae etc as this is educational or rather potentially beneficial to newbie’s and maybe some of the crusty old farts that claim “ expert” status here on this forum.
Cheers

 

JAE had a good thread. My suggestion is to read the whole thread . If I rrcall he started using a 20 unit virtual loss before kicking in at 6 units or so. But then decided 100 and 500 virtual was more appropriate.

I did a small test cherry picking a few P dominant shoes to get a big virtual loss. Then proceeded to resolve the grind using recorded live shoes on order of entry. The bets got big but it did resolve. So my opinion is that it's a doable method.

One thing I recall and hopefully my recollection is correct is that he suggested using a "linear" shoe approach (IOW follow the same shoe)

J

 

Hahaha. You don't understand. Mr. BS Soxy thinks every new poster is Glen from BETSELECTION. He's a leftover hipster from the 70"s still wears a leisure suit!

 

Thanks @Jimske for the information. I read all the post and practice it a bit , then I tried it live with small bankroll (600 unit @5$) I resolved couple series and got busted in one series which resolved around 750. The biggest problem I faced was Dragon! Which didn’t pay the bet, specially once you are in deep grind 400+ it will eat all profit and more. If you put some money on dragon you have to put in all your bets till resolve the series, still that side bet money in 40-50 bet eat most of profit. I was planning to treat them as tie but not sure, haven’t tried it. I’m still exploring and testing. I am a Banker only bet fan so @Jae approach to game makes more sense to me and his story is very inspiring. I have no issue in finding tables with -20 trigger.

 

LOL - No, I guess not!

 

Everyone everywhere is discussing the same thing because they want to reassure themselves with the best winning percentage on a bet in the game. In the case of different roulettes - the odds without zero are always 50/50, without taking into account probability theory and the like. Each time a new cycle is started and the total does not depend on the previous value.