The Samonte System
"The secret to winning big is giving oneself the chance to win big,
and that chance is only in taking advantage of winning streaks."
this part is great!
http://www.samontesystem.com/
“100,000 US Dollar Challenge”
Here’s my bold proposition. I’ll pay 100,000 US Dollars cash to
anybody who can prove that the Samonte System is not the
correct methodical winning play ever devised.
I specifically challenge the so-called math experts and gambling gurus who
advise other gamblers not to use a gambling system.
Now that is a fair challenge.
"The only correct winning play ever known - for
only $14.95?"
"Why am I making this crazy offer?
… because I want to save you from eventual ruin. I want to empower you with the
right strategy so you will be able to fight back against greedy casinos. So even if you chose to get
your money back, I would still be happy knowing that I had let you known the only correct winning
play ever. If this is a scam, then I am the one that gets scammed."
I bet $1
Al "The Gambling Professor" Kaufman is watching
Some of the dates on the articles written where in 2010 so apparently this isn't a brand new system.
If anyone has any more information about this system I'd love to hear it.
Quote: 7craps
"The secret to winning big is giving oneself the chance to win big,
and that chance is only in taking advantage of winning streaks."
GR8, is that you?
Now that sounds like a fun collection. I remember someone posting up some old advertisement pamphlets of loaded dice or something.Quote: treetopbuddyI want to buy this system so bad to add to my collection of worthless systems. I'm trying to stay strong. Just say no.
At least he is not asking several hundreds or thousands of dollars for another worthless system. I am thinking along the same lines you are. It might be worth 14.95 for the comic relief lol.
Quote: EvenBobGR8, is that you?
No, of course not. I would never accept payment for my advice, just as I would never pay for anyone else's.
That said, this part of his quote...."taking advantage of winning streaks"....happens to be spot-on.
When you get past the built-in house edge, you'll find you're left with variance. The swings, the hits and the misses, the ups and the downs....they're all so very much a part of everyone's play, yet so very few of us know exactly how to handle them.
My advice, free as it is.....learn how to handle them. Get familiar with your variances...both bet selection- and personal-wise...for only then can you develop a solid plan of response, be it up or be it down.
As always, I wish it for all of you.
Quote: IbeatyouracesSuch utter bill$h!t.
Hello, Ibeatyouraces. You appear rather quick at jumping at the chance to refute "anything gr8player", one must wonder the cause of your knee-jerk negative reactions.
Think for a minute, if you will...
You're a card counter, right? (If I've assumed wrongly, please accept my apology in advance.)
When the "count is right", you increase your bet, correct?
And you do so in anticipation of a win, or, at the very least a cluster of wins among a few interspersed losing hands. Correct?
So, in effect, you're "TAKING ADVANTAGE OF WINNING STREAKS". Correct!
When the cards are falling in our favor, we'd best make it count as best we can for us.
Counting, Bank dom, straight zz, 3-hole consistently filling (or not)......all preclude potential winning streaks, Ibeatyouraces.
And stop this incessant ranting behind my posts, will you? I don't knock your game, no need to be so quick to attempt to knock mine.
Have a better day....
Quote: gr8playerAs always, I wish it for all of you.
Teacher, what exactly do you wish for all of us anyway??
P.S.-I trust all is well with you, my esteemed teacher!
Quote: IbeatyouracesThey may keep raising bets while on losing steaks!
Hmmm.....let me see if I've got this right:
The count is in their favor, but the better cards still seem to be falling into the dealer's lap. And, subsequently, their chips into the dealer's tray.
Yet they persist in raising the stakes, losing jag be damned.
I just lost a whole lotta respect for the "counting community".
I'm a variance player.
When I'm in the midst of a negative variance....trust me, I can readily recognize negative variance....the very last thing that I would do is raise my bet stakes into it.
Positive count? No excuses.
I much prefer positive variance.
Quote: IbeatyouracesAnd one more thing gr8. In no way am I saying that playing your way is dumb or stupid. It's no better or worse than any other way.
It's all good....
Quote: IbeatyouracesWhat does the casino prefer to have? The edge or the "positive variance"? I'd be willing to bet it's not the latter.
Hold onto your money, Ibeatyouraces.
I'm of the opinion that the casinos make the bulk of their money from their patrons' negative variances. Just look at all of the steep negative progressions and "tilting" that accompanies those losing jags.....
Players such as those make that 1% look like chump change.
Quote: IbeatyouracesThat's why your "opinion" and the facts are totally opposite. You have no clue as to how casinos operate and make they're money.
You forget, gr8player can predict the future. His crystal ball tells him when winning/losing streaks are coming. :D
+250,000!Quote: IbeatyouracesYep and that's why he's 6 figures in the hole!
Quote: 7crapsanother hit and run streak method
"The secret to winning big is giving oneself the chance to win big,
and that chance is only in taking advantage of winning streaks."
this part is great!
http://www.samontesystem.com/
“100,000 US Dollar Challenge”
Here’s my bold proposition. I’ll pay 100,000 US Dollars cash to
anybody who can prove that the Samonte System is not the
correct methodical winning play ever devised.
I specifically challenge the so-called math experts and gambling gurus who
advise other gamblers not to use a gambling system.
Now that is a fair challenge.
"The only correct winning play ever known - for
only $14.95?"
"Why am I making this crazy offer?
… because I want to save you from eventual ruin. I want to empower you with the
right strategy so you will be able to fight back against greedy casinos. So even if you chose to get
your money back, I would still be happy knowing that I had let you known the only correct winning
play ever. If this is a scam, then I am the one that gets scammed."
I bet $1
Al "The Gambling Professor" Kaufman is watching
The only problem is, you can look back and see a streak. You can't look ahead and see one.
Quote: gr8playerHello, Ibeatyouraces. You appear rather quick at jumping at the chance to refute "anything gr8player", one must wonder the cause of your knee-jerk negative reactions.
Think for a minute, if you will...
You're a card counter, right? (If I've assumed wrongly, please accept my apology in advance.)
When the "count is right", you increase your bet, correct?
And you do so in anticipation of a win, or, at the very least a cluster of wins among a few interspersed losing hands. Correct?
So, in effect, you're "TAKING ADVANTAGE OF WINNING STREAKS". Correct!
When the cards are falling in our favor, we'd best make it count as best we can for us.
Counting, Bank dom, straight zz, 3-hole consistently filling (or not)......all preclude potential winning streaks, Ibeatyouraces.
And stop this incessant ranting behind my posts, will you? I don't knock your game, no need to be so quick to attempt to knock mine.
Have a better day....
Uhh..wrong. You don't "anticipate a win". You know that mathematically you are more likely to win the next hand than to lose it so you raise your bet. And blackjack isn't a series of independent trials like other games are. The likelihood of either winning the next hand or losing in blackjack is dependent on the cards remaining to be dealt and the player's knowledge of blackjack strategy.
Quote: gr8player
The count is in their favor, but the better cards still seem to be falling into the dealer's lap. And, subsequently, their chips into the dealer's tray.
Yet they persist in raising the stakes, losing jag be damned.
I just lost a whole lotta respect for the "counting community".
I'm a variance player.
Positive count? No excuses.
I much prefer positive variance.
Gr8Player,
With all due respect, this is the most fundamentally ignorant, ill-informed and pathetic post of yours that I have ever read. I say that with all due respect, because when you are talking your Baccarat trends, at least you are talking about a situation in which you don't make the HE any worse.
Now, if you get dealt a Pat-20 in a positive count, and the dealer goes 4-5-3-4-5 for 21, of course you are going to RAISE your bet on the next hand, especially heads-up, if counting. You'd be out of your G****** mind not to, the running count just improved +3 prior to you playing the hand. Only way you wouldn't raise the bet is if there were so many cards left in the shoe that the +3 running count had no meaningful effect on the true count, and I should imagine (if you had a positive count to begin with) that is a very rare situation.
Guess what else, Mr. Variance player? The counter doesn't WANT Variance during a positive count. Variance is the friend of the negative expectation bettor, such as those who play Baccarat, when you have the advantage, you really want to experience as little Variance as possible.
Of course, it is quite possible that you don't know what the word, 'Variance,' means, so let me give you an example.
Let's say that you are playing the Don't Pass at Craps, were there no Variance (and the amount bet didn't actually matter) then instead of making a $10 Don't Pass bet, you'd have play chips, and every time the CO roll was anything other than a twelve, you would just GIVE the house $0.14. You could play under the same rules, just the chips have no value, you always pay (i.e. lose) $0.14.
Variance is the reason that the DP bettor does not always lose $0.14 on a $10 bet and often wins the bet. It's also the reason why a counter could have the totality of his bets be at +ER over the course of a blackjack shoe, yet have a losing shoe. If the totality of his bets in a +ER shoe was paid based on that with no Variance, then the house would be paying him directly for the pleasure of dealing the game to him.
In short, Variance is why someone at a disadvantage CAN win in a limited set and why a player/casino CAN lose in a limited set.
"Positive count, no excuses," there's no excuse for SOMETHING in this thread, but it sure as shit isn't increasing the bet as a BJ count improves.
I'm going to go take some Ibuprofen now...
Quote: Mission146Of course, it is quite possible that you don't know what the word, 'Variance,' means, so let me give you an example.
Quoted for Truth.
Quote: Beethoven9thTeacher, what exactly do you wish for all of us anyway??
P.S.-I trust all is well with you, my esteemed teacher!
Very good, Grasshopper, you are learning!!
Variance is non-negative because the squares are positive or zero.
\operatorname{Var}(X)\ge 0.
The variance of a constant random variable is zero, and if the variance of a variable in a data set is 0, then all the entries have the same value.
P(X=a) = 1\Leftrightarrow \operatorname{Var}(X)= 0.
Variance is invariant with respect to changes in a location parameter. That is, if a constant is added to all values of the variable, the variance is unchanged.
\operatorname{Var}(X+a)=\operatorname{Var}(X).
If all values are scaled by a constant, the variance is scaled by the square of that constant.
\operatorname{Var}(aX)=a^2\operatorname{Var}(X).
The variance of a sum of two random variables is given by:
\operatorname{Var}(aX+bY)=a^2\operatorname{Var}(X)+b^2\operatorname{Var}(Y)+2ab\, \operatorname{Cov}(X,Y),
\operatorname{Var}(X-Y)=\operatorname{Var}(X)+\operatorname{Var}(Y)-2\, \operatorname{Cov}(X,Y),
where Cov(., .) is the covariance. In general we have for the sum of N random variables \{X_1,\dots,X_N\}:
\operatorname{Var}\left(\sum_{i=1}^N X_i\right)=\sum_{i,j=1}^N\operatorname{Cov}(X_i,X_j)=\sum_{i=1}^N\operatorname{Var}(X_i)+\sum_{i\ne j}\operatorname{Cov}(X_i,X_j).
These results lead to the variance of a linear combination as:
\begin{align} \operatorname{Var}\left( \sum_{i=1}^{N} a_iX_i\right) &=\sum_{i,j=1}^{N} a_ia_j\operatorname{Cov}(X_i,X_j) \\ &=\sum_{i=1}^{N}a_i^2\operatorname{Var}(X_i)+\sum_{i\not=j}a_ia_j\operatorname{Cov}(X_i,X_j)\\ & =\sum_{i=1}^{N}a_i^2\operatorname{Var}(X_i)+2\sum_{1\le i<j\le N}a_ia_j\operatorname{Cov}(X_i,X_j). \end{align}
If the random variables X_1,\dots,X_N are such that
\operatorname{Cov}(X_i,X_j)=0\ ,\ \forall\ (i\ne j) ,
they are said to be uncorrelated. It follows immediately from the expression given earlier that if the random variables X_1,\dots,X_N are uncorrelated, then the variance of their sum is equal to the sum of their variances, or, expressed symbolically:
\operatorname{Var}\left(\sum_{i=1}^N X_i\right)=\sum_{i=1}^N\operatorname{Var}(X_i).
Since independent random variables are always uncorrelated, the equation above holds in particular when the random variables X_1,\dots,X_n are independent. Thus independence is sufficient but not necessary for the variance of the sum to equal the sum of the variances.
Quote: Mission146Gr8Player,
With all due respect, this is the most fundamentally ignorant, ill-informed and pathetic post of yours that I have ever read. I say that with all due respect, because when you are talking your Baccarat trends, at least you are talking about a situation in which you don't make the HE any worse.
Now, if you get dealt a Pat-20 in a positive count, and the dealer goes 4-5-3-4-5 for 21, of course you are going to RAISE your bet on the next hand, especially heads-up, if counting. You'd be out of your G****** mind not to, the running count just improved +3 prior to you playing the hand. Only way you wouldn't raise the bet is if there were so many cards left in the shoe that the +3 running count had no meaningful effect on the true count, and I should imagine (if you had a positive count to begin with) that is a very rare situation.
Guess what else, Mr. Variance player? The counter doesn't WANT Variance during a positive count. Variance is the friend of the negative expectation bettor, such as those who play Baccarat, when you have the advantage, you really want to experience as little Variance as possible.
Of course, it is quite possible that you don't know what the word, 'Variance,' means, so let me give you an example.
Let's say that you are playing the Don't Pass at Craps, were there no Variance (and the amount bet didn't actually matter) then instead of making a $10 Don't Pass bet, you'd have play chips, and every time the CO roll was anything other than a twelve, you would just GIVE the house $0.14. You could play under the same rules, just the chips have no value, you always pay (i.e. lose) $0.14.
Variance is the reason that the DP bettor does not always lose $0.14 on a $10 bet and often wins the bet. It's also the reason why a counter could have the totality of his bets be at +ER over the course of a blackjack shoe, yet have a losing shoe. If the totality of his bets in a +ER shoe was paid based on that with no Variance, then the house would be paying him directly for the pleasure of dealing the game to him.
In short, Variance is why someone at a disadvantage CAN win in a limited set and why a player/casino CAN lose in a limited set.
"Positive count, no excuses," there's no excuse for SOMETHING in this thread, but it sure as shit isn't increasing the bet as a BJ count improves.
I'm going to go take some Ibuprofen now...
"I SAID 'WITH ALL DUE RESPECT'!" - Ricky Bobby, Taledega Nights. LOL
Quote: gr8playerYou're a card counter, right? (If I've assumed wrongly, please accept my apology in advance.)
When the "count is right", you increase your bet, correct?
And you do so in anticipation of a win, or, at the very least a cluster of wins among a few interspersed losing hands. Correct?
So, in effect, you're "TAKING ADVANTAGE OF WINNING STREAKS". Correct!
What... the hell? You do know that even when "the count is right" you lose more times than you win right?
There is no "anticipating or taking advantage of winning streaks" because there are none...
Card Counting takes advantage of a higher frequency of Naturals, Double Down, and Split situations. You still lose more hands than you win... No streak hunting at all.
EDIT- If I remember correctly the highest win/loss ratio comes at neutral counts, when there is no advantage. TC ~0
Quote: gr8playerI'm a variance player.
When I'm in the midst of a negative variance....trust me, I can readily recognize negative variance....the very last thing that I would do is raise my bet stakes into it.
I much prefer positive variance.
Variance is always positive (or zero), never negative. Whatever you might mean by "variance" is not what variance actually means:
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Variance.html
Quote: Mission146Gr8Player,
Of course, it is quite possible that you don't know what the word, 'Variance,' means, so let me give you an example.
'Schooled'
Exceptional post.
I'm sure they are heart broken.Quote: gr8player
I just lost a whole lotta respect for the "counting community".
.
Quote:Mikey75
However I have found absolutely nothing out about the Samonte system anywhere. The guy claims he will give any math guy 100,000 if he proves his system doesn't work. Has anyone purchased his system or know anything about it? I'm sure he wouldn't actually pay anyone 100,000 or he would already be broke.
They all work the same way. There is a sucker born every few minutes, and the guys that come up with them that are selling them, knows there will be someone that will buy anything that the suckers think can make them money.
Systems always have some type of guarantee, the problem is collecting on those guarantees. But I’m sure that someone from this very board will buy this system, because they are always those that are looking for that magic bullet.
It might even be a math guy trying to prove it won't work, gee I wonder if he'll ever collect on that guarantee!
Quote: superrick
Quote:Mikey75
However I have found absolutely nothing out about the Samonte system anywhere. The guy claims he will give any math guy 100,000 if he proves his system doesn't work. Has anyone purchased his system or know anything about it? I'm sure he wouldn't actually pay anyone 100,000 or he would already be broke.
They all work the same way. There is a sucker born every few minutes, and the guys that come up with them that are selling them, knows there will be someone that will buy anything that the suckers think can make them money.
Systems always have some type of guarantee, the problem is collecting on those guarantees. But I’m sure that someone from this very board will buy this system, because they are always those that are looking for that magic bullet.
It might even be a math guy trying to prove it won't work, gee I wonder if he'll ever collect on that guarantee!
Is there a book out there that debunks all these systems. If there isn't, it seems like a good idea.
I don't know if it would sell well, but it's still good idea, who would buy a book telling people they were probably going to get clobbered?
Maybe gambling for dummies or something like that?
Quote: petroglyphQuote: superrick
Quote:Mikey75
However I have found absolutely nothing out about the Samonte system anywhere. The guy claims he will give any math guy 100,000 if he proves his system doesn't work. Has anyone purchased his system or know anything about it? I'm sure he wouldn't actually pay anyone 100,000 or he would already be broke.
They all work the same way. There is a sucker born every few minutes, and the guys that come up with them that are selling them, knows there will be someone that will buy anything that the suckers think can make them money.
Systems always have some type of guarantee, the problem is collecting on those guarantees. But I’m sure that someone from this very board will buy this system, because they are always those that are looking for that magic bullet.
It might even be a math guy trying to prove it won't work, gee I wonder if he'll ever collect on that guarantee!
Is there a book out there that debunks all these systems. If there isn't, it seems like a good idea.
I don't know if it would sell well, but it's still good idea, who would buy a book telling people they were probably going to get clobbered?
Maybe gambling for dummies or something like that? How can you debunk a system? OHH... you mean with math? You cant use math to debunk a system that uses ESP, Trending, money management, gut feelings, and the good old " I WIN EVERYDAY"
Quote:AxelWolf
How can you debunk a system? OHH... you mean with math? You cant use math to debunk a system that uses ESP, Trending, money management, gut feelings, and the good old " I WIN EVERYDA Y"
One of the main things system sellers know they have working for themselves is the knowledge that there aren’t too many guys that well say I’ve been taking, after they spent $3000.00 for a system that is based on nothing but superstations or trending.
They may win some of the time, but not all of the time, just like anybody else does on a craps table with a few brains.
I once spent 3 hours talking with one of these guys that is still selling his system, I told him up front that I would not buy into whatever he was selling, but because he thought he could change my mind I had the meeting with him.
He knew that I help run a board for craps, and thought he had an easy sell if he could only convince me that what he had worked. I’m not going to tell everybody what system it was, because it doesn’t work, oh sure you may win some of the time but you won’t win all of the time.
He even say he would go to the tables with me to show me that it worked, well he did, and it did work on the first table we played on, but not the second one, oh well his mistake!
He had colored-up and wanted to leave as fast as he could, but I got him on one more table and he gave it all back. You can’t base anything on if you see a hard 10 the shooter is going to seven-out or any of the other stupid superstations he had in his system, I even told him that his system was based on nothing but superstations. Needless to say he didn’t get my vote of approval!
Quote: Mission146Gr8Player,
With all due respect, this is the most fundamentally ignorant, ill-informed and pathetic post of yours that I have ever read. I say that with all due respect, because when you are talking your Baccarat trends, at least you are talking about a situation in which you don't make the HE any worse.
Guess what else, Mr. Variance player? The counter doesn't WANT Variance during a positive count. Variance is the friend of the negative expectation bettor, such as those who play Baccarat, when you have the advantage, you really want to experience as little Variance as possible.
Of course, it is quite possible that you don't know what the word, 'Variance,' means, so let me give you an example.
Let's say that you are playing the Don't Pass at Craps, were there no Variance (and the amount bet didn't actually matter) then instead of making a $10 Don't Pass bet, you'd have play chips, and every time the CO roll was anything other than a twelve, you would just GIVE the house $0.14. You could play under the same rules, just the chips have no value, you always pay (i.e. lose) $0.14.
Variance is the reason that the DP bettor does not always lose $0.14 on a $10 bet and often wins the bet. It's also the reason why a counter could have the totality of his bets be at +ER over the course of a blackjack shoe, yet have a losing shoe. If the totality of his bets in a +ER shoe was paid based on that with no Variance, then the house would be paying him directly for the pleasure of dealing the game to him.
In short, Variance is why someone at a disadvantage CAN win in a limited set and why a player/casino CAN lose in a limited set.
"Positive count, no excuses," there's no excuse for SOMETHING in this thread, but it sure as shit isn't increasing the bet as a BJ count improves.
I'm going to go take some Ibuprofen now...
There isn't enough Ibuprofen in the world to lessen the effects of this nonsensical post quoted just above. Please tell me that you're kidding with me in your feeble attempts at "explaining variance" to me. I have more familiarity and knowledge of variance in my pinky toe than you've got in your entire body.
Variance consideration is part and parcel of every bet I make. I am a confirmed variance player.
And you've got the unmitigated gall to label my post as "ignorant, "ill-informed", and "pathetic". Well, at least you added your "with all due respect".....BALONEY! There can exist no respect when you've chosen those sorts of adjectives to describe someone's post. So put your "all due respect" where the sun don't shine, if you please. Save it for when your really mean it.
What did you prove with your rant-filled, feeble attempt at teaching me about variance, anyhow? That "actual results" can and will vary from the built-in house edge statistics? That's your interpretation of variance?
Please tell me that you're a much more savvy player than that.....
Quote: skrbornevrymin"I SAID 'WITH ALL DUE RESPECT'!" - Ricky Bobby, Taledega Nights. LOL
Yeah, right, skrbornevrymin......unbelievable, right?
Quote: anonimussBTW, this is someone who most likely has never been in a casino and just enjoys internet attention.
Another rocket scientist to be heard from....
....Yeah, you got me.
I take the few precious minutes of my free time to post here in this forum just for my own personal enjoyment.
"never been in a casino".....yep, you're definitely a man of insight.
Geez, I hope you gamble better than you "assume".....
I trust all is well with you. I wish it all for you, my esteemed teacher.
Quote: Tanko'Schooled'
"Schooled", Tanko. Really? I think not. Or, maybe kindergarten logic appeals to you....
Variance, as I track it, see it, and PLAY IT (yes, play it with real money), bears rather little semblance to Mr. Mission's explanation of same.
(Sidenote: Oh, and I state "Mr. Mission" with ALL DUE RESPECT......)
Quote: Beethoven9thTeacher, please control yourself! Your anger management issues are appearing again! Please calm down. You've already been suspended multiple times, and I don't want to see you suspended for good. There's no need to throw a fit just because the members here proved your math wrong.
I trust all is well with you. I wish it all for you, my esteemed teacher.
I am calm.
But it's rather upsetting to see a post of mine labeled as "ignorant" or "ill-informed" or "pathetic", and I find no reason for such dramatics.
You don't agree with my (or any) post; fine, feel free to state your case. No need, however, for such belittlement while doing so.....
Quote: gr8playerBut it's rather upsetting to see a post of mine labeled as "ignorant" or "ill-informed" or "pathetic", and I find no reason for such dramatics.
It sounds like you are ready to prove the whole board wrong, teacher! And I support you 100%. Let's tackle the challenge and make everyone look foolish!
