JyBrd0403
JyBrd0403
Joined: Jan 25, 2010
  • Threads: 12
  • Posts: 548
April 7th, 2014 at 5:57:54 PM permalink
Betting Banker and playing the D'Alembert, the vig. is taken out for you. So, all you have to do is make sure the next bet will produce a profit over the previous loss. If you bet $100 and lose, betting $105 won't produce a profit because of the $5 vig. $105 pays $100. So instead of $105, bet $110. If you lose the $110 instead of betting $115, bet $120. The HE is Beat.

You know the game will come back down, because you have the 50.6% edge on wins/losses. So, you can put that in any simulation and see that betting systems actually do work. Just stop the simulation when you reach the 1 unit bet again. The 50.6% edge will bring the progression down to 1 unit, all you have to do is make sure that your bets cover the previous loss after taking out the vig., and you win automatically when the 50.6% edge brings the progression down to 1 unit again.

Unless you believe that 50.6% is going to shoot under 50% and therefore will never be able to get the betting down to 1 unit again. AKA Cheating. But, in a fair game, the longer you play the better your chances of returning to 1 unit, because of the winning edge.

So, for the mathematically impaired, betting systems really do work.

Everyone understand?

Should be fun watching some of these guys try to turn this into a loser. " x2-4n+73i-2p^4(7i)m = 2pi-n42+7rn(6p^3) This equation clearly shows how 50.6%=49.3% thus proving this betting system will not ever return to the 1 unit original bet, as 49.3% would push the betting higher and higher never to return to the 1 unit bet. And since we've shown with this equation that 50.6%=49.3% you can clearly see the system is a loser." LOL
AxiomOfChoice
AxiomOfChoice
Joined: Sep 12, 2012
  • Threads: 32
  • Posts: 5761
April 7th, 2014 at 5:59:28 PM permalink
I would claim that you were wrong if I had any idea what the hell you were talking about.
JyBrd0403
JyBrd0403
Joined: Jan 25, 2010
  • Threads: 12
  • Posts: 548
April 7th, 2014 at 6:07:17 PM permalink
Quote: AxiomOfChoice

I would claim that you were wrong if I had any idea what the hell you were talking about.



Exactly what I was talking about. LOL

What don't you understand? It's just a D'alembert, only exception is betting high enough to cover the previous loss.

Ex 85-90-95-100-110-120-130-140-150-160-170-180-190-200-215-230-245... etc.

If you lose at $100 your next bet has to be $110 to cover the vig. and make a profit over the $100 previous bet. This way every win produces a profit, just like a regular D'Alembert, and you're able to beat the HE as well.
Ibeatyouraces
Ibeatyouraces
Joined: Jan 12, 2010
  • Threads: 68
  • Posts: 11933
April 7th, 2014 at 6:07:56 PM permalink
deleted
DUHHIIIIIIIII HEARD THAT!
rdw4potus
rdw4potus
Joined: Mar 11, 2010
  • Threads: 80
  • Posts: 7236
April 7th, 2014 at 6:13:13 PM permalink
Quote: JyBrd0403

Betting Banker and playing the D'Alembert, the vig. is taken out for you. So, all you have to do is make sure the next bet will produce a profit over the previous loss. If you bet $100 and lose, betting $105 won't produce a profit because of the $5 vig. $105 pays $100. So instead of $105, bet $110. If you lose the $110 instead of betting $115, bet $120. The HE is Beat.




Are you really willing to risk thousands and thousands of dollars in order to win a couple bucks? What happens if your consecutive losses make you either run out of money or hit the table max?

Every individual bet in baccarat has a house edge. How have you managed to add those individual negative expectations and create a positive expectation? -1+-1=-2 is significantly simpler than x2-4n+73i-2p^4(7i)m = 2pi-n42+7rn(6p^3)...
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
AxiomOfChoice
AxiomOfChoice
Joined: Sep 12, 2012
  • Threads: 32
  • Posts: 5761
April 7th, 2014 at 6:19:59 PM permalink
Quote: JyBrd0403

Exactly what I was talking about. LOL

What don't you understand? It's just a D'alembert, only exception is betting high enough to cover the previous loss.

Ex 85-90-95-100-110-120-130-140-150-160-170-180-190-200-215-230-245... etc.

If you lose at $100 your next bet has to be $110 to cover the vig. and make a profit over the $100 previous bet. This way every win produces a profit, just like a regular D'Alembert, and you're able to beat the HE as well.



So why are you wasting your time and ours instead of playing baccarat right now? You could be making millions as we speak!

It's hard to understand how casinos are still in business, since they are so easily beaten by a betting system that has literally been being used for hundreds of years. But don't worry, I'm sure that you will be the one to actually beat them! In a couple of years you will be rich! Rich I tell you! And MGM will be out of business.
JyBrd0403
JyBrd0403
Joined: Jan 25, 2010
  • Threads: 12
  • Posts: 548
April 7th, 2014 at 6:26:01 PM permalink
Quote: rdw4potus

Are you really willing to risk thousands and thousands of dollars in order to win a couple bucks? What happens if your consecutive losses make you either run out of money or hit the table max?

Every individual bet in baccarat has a house edge. How have you managed to add those individual negative expectations and create a positive expectation? -1+-1=-2 is significantly simpler than x2-4n+73i-2p^4(7i)m = 2pi-n42+7rn(6p^3)...



The point is, the system wins. It does what is said to be impossible to do.

I don't know why you think you have to change the HE in order to win. You don't. You honestly believe that since the house has an edge that if I lose $100 and win $105 I somehow lost money there? And, remember Banker has a 50.6% advantage on wins and losses. That's positive I think.
AxiomOfChoice
AxiomOfChoice
Joined: Sep 12, 2012
  • Threads: 32
  • Posts: 5761
April 7th, 2014 at 6:27:26 PM permalink
Quote: JyBrd0403

The point is, the system wins. It does what is said to be impossible to do.

I don't know why you think you have to change the HE in order to win. You don't. You honestly believe that since the house has an edge that if I lose $100 and win $105 I somehow lost money there? And, remember Banker has a 50.6% advantage on wins and losses. That's positive I think.



Did you know that if you bet all the numbers but one in roulette, you win 37 times out of 38? And if you bet them all you win 100% of the time!
endermike
endermike
Joined: Dec 10, 2013
  • Threads: 7
  • Posts: 584
April 7th, 2014 at 6:28:10 PM permalink
Quote: JyBrd0403

The point is, the system wins. It does what is said to be impossible to do.

I don't know why you think you have to change the HE in order to win. You don't. You honestly believe that since the house has an edge that if I lose $100 and win $105 I somehow lost money there? And, remember Banker has a 50.6% advantage on wins and losses. That's positive I think.



JyBrd, will you subject your system to testing over 1 billion hands? If so I will accept you action.
JyBrd0403
JyBrd0403
Joined: Jan 25, 2010
  • Threads: 12
  • Posts: 548
April 7th, 2014 at 6:28:18 PM permalink
Quote: AxiomOfChoice

So why are you wasting your time and ours instead of playing baccarat right now? You could be making millions as we speak!

It's hard to understand how casinos are still in business, since they are so easily beaten by a betting system that has literally been being used for hundreds of years. But don't worry, I'm sure that you will be the one to actually beat them! In a couple of years you will be rich! Rich I tell you! And MGM will be out of business.



Casinos cheat, man. Pay attention.

  • Jump to: