Discussion in 'Baccarat Forum' started by fathead, Oct 18, 2021.
Hang on, I just read the comments by Jane and Rina's regarding 600 units...
Sorry Jae and Rinad, my autocorrect function adjusted the spelling above
Whatever base unit you choose. If you decided to use $10 as your base then you would need $10,000 for the Grand Martingale and would have made $19,482.00 over the course of the test.
No, I did not try any other types of recovery progressions. 600 times your base bet for regular martingale, and 1000 times base bet for grand martingale.
Have you tried also incorporating the inverse? Meaning the first two of 6 to be opposite, then trying to catch one of the next 4 to match. I'm curious if the occurrences on its own would be of similar results, worse, or better. If similar, as I'd expect, would it help recover and increase the unit profit a bit or just sink the ship? How many sets of 6 total opposites in your results?
It won’t make a difference. Betting any permutation to appear, or not appear, has been done to death, tested infinity, and does not work. They all produce similar losing charts to what fathead has posted.
If you want to keep it simple, you’re better off playing as soxfan or craps does, or playing fathead’s banker after PPPP method.
Yes, I tried that. It lost pretty badly. The sequence that I posted is the only one that does well. They system made about 46,000 bets or about 11 bets per shoe.
The two charts that I posted for this method were actually winning ones (see page #1). I find this interesting since this system is at least a few years old. The developer did not have access to most of my data and could not have optimized to my data.
Sorry, I meant Gregory’s permutation method from the other thread.
Fathead, how do you manage to bet 11 bets per shoe? As you mentioned on page 1...I have briefly done about 2 shoes with my records, and I can only get to 3 or 4 bets with the set conditions in place!
Do you back-track to locate triggers? Considering the short amount of time allowed to place bets, something doesn't quite add up.
However, unless I need to track more shoes to get a larger sample size? What is your take on it?
Yes, after you win one unit or lose 15 units, look immediately at the last 8 decisions to see if there is a new trigger. In the example below, the first 8 decision trigger is bold uppercase. The second 8 decision trigger happens immediately after the 15 unit loss and is bold lowercase.
P P P P p p P P P P p p P P P B
The 11 bets includes each step of the martingale. In the above example if you bet 1, 2, 4, 8 and lost 15 units then bet 1, 2, 4, 8 and won 1 unit on the fourth bet you have made a total of 8 bets.
People finally catching onto this style of play.
I've used something similar to the sequence posted. But instead of a rolling sequence throughout. I used a fixed sequences throughout the shoe and mix them up going into a new shoe.
Say you waited the first 8 outcomes for shoe #1. Next shoe I would apply a shift of say 2 and wait for the next 10.
Also tried fixed templates based on previous shoe results. Versus applying a shift. No matter how you dice it. The goal is the same minimize or attempt to minimize the losses in a row.
Its incredibly difficult for a shoe to keep mirroring in on itself. Which is the work of diminishing probabilities anyway.
CarloDarlo what type of bankroll do you see fit playing that way and do you find it helpful playing higher progressions during recovery ?
Separate names with a comma.