Flat bets on Baccarat
I love playing the game so I am there seven days a week for three or four hours a day. Now here's the thing, I spent about 15 years trying all sorts of
fancy betting progressions to try and show a profit to no avail, I would always come back to losing the dreaded table % on average.
Then I said to myself If you are going to beat this game you have to do it with flat bets, so I turned my attention to the flow of cards and slowly over a
period of 3 years developed a bet selection method that left me in front over most three hour sessions.
For the last 10 years playing almost every day for three 80 hand shoes and placing about 25 bets per shoe my results vary from minus 2 units
to plus 22 units per three shoe session for an average win of 12 units per session.
Now my problem is that this should not be possible mathematically based on what I have read on this site, so before I move from the main gaming
floor to the high rollers little spot, I would love for someone to calculate wether my extraordinary success can still fall within the bounds of lady luck
and the whole thing will fall apart when I start playing the $100 tables!!
I am interested to hear of anyone else having such a long run of success, or maybe the wizard can make a comment.
$25 * 12 = $300
$300 * 200 days lets say
$60,000 a year, simple and easy
if $100 tables will change your mojo you have maintained over 10 yrs...
just play 6 shoes a day and double your money!
Quote: TheProfessormy results vary from minus 2 units to plus 22 units per three shoe session for an average win of 12 units per session.
So you have played roughly 3000 sessions (10 years x 365 days), flat betting for 75 rounds per session ... and the worst session result is -2 units ? That is amazing, definitely not due to lady luck.
Can anyone in Perth go verify the claim. Just verify no session end up worse than -2 units after 75 flat bets. I think watching "TheProfessor" for 20 sessions would be sufficient prove.
Quote: TheProfessorHi, I am a seasoned gambler, I have been playing Baccarat at the Burswood Casino In Perth Western Australia since the place opened 30 odd years ago.
I love playing the game so I am there seven days a week for three or four hours a day. Now here's the thing, I spent about 15 years trying all sorts of
fancy betting progressions to try and show a profit to no avail, I would always come back to losing the dreaded table % on average.
Then I said to myself If you are going to beat this game you have to do it with flat bets, so I turned my attention to the flow of cards and slowly over a
period of 3 years developed a bet selection method that left me in front over most three hour sessions.
For the last 10 years playing almost every day for three 80 hand shoes and placing about 25 bets per shoe my results vary from minus 2 units
to plus 22 units per three shoe session for an average win of 12 units per session.
Now my problem is that this should not be possible mathematically based on what I have read on this site, so before I move from the main gaming
floor to the high rollers little spot, I would love for someone to calculate wether my extraordinary success can still fall within the bounds of lady luck
and the whole thing will fall apart when I start playing the $100 tables!!
I am interested to hear of anyone else having such a long run of success, or maybe the wizard can make a comment.
Personally, if you can win consistently flat betting? You have beaten the game. Don't ever use progressions. AND.....most importantly, test your method using a simulator. Over a long period of time. Make sure that you test your method over a big enough sample size. That is more important than anything!
Good job man!
Quote: TheProfessorHi, I am a seasoned gambler
A gambler calling himself a professor? Not a real professor, or one without math abilities?
Just asking, as an educated person should be able to determine if his results are beyond 3 standard deviations of random results.
PS: and not a sock puppet either?
Y'all know when it comes to mathematics its just useless for me but I doubt its a question of education or professors. And I don't know nothing about even one standard deviation, much less three of them things. All you have to do is "be on the lookout for bimbos". If they are all daubing a bit extra perfume before they go to his table and they are all edging their necklines down an inch or so, then you can be sure the three deviations have indeed been met.Quote: odiousgambitJust asking, as an educated person should be able to determine if his results are beyond 3 standard deviations of random results.
Quote: TheProfessorI turned my attention to the flow of cards and slowly over a period of 3 years developed a bet selection method that left me in front over most three hour sessions.
What is this "method" of which you speak?
Be specific, please.
Otherwise, you cannot be taken seriously.
Sounds like letswin made another account... I sim'd his theory in his other thread, as he suggested, and it was entirely inaccurate (as was figured by the majority).
I could not win on a 9 and lost constantly on 8, never seen anything like it, dented my confidence a bit but I will have another go today.
Quote: TheProfessorFunny thing, the next two sessions after my post were plus 20 and 22 then after that my last session was minus 11 my biggest loss in ten years.
I could not win on a 9 and lost constantly on 8, never seen anything like it, dented my confidence a bit but I will have another go today.
This is the problem with methods that have not been thoroughly tested properly. Like I said in my thread, the cards can be misleading for a long long time. But, tested up against a simulation? Your method will face all of the odds and all the possible combinations for each hand and the house edge much much sooner. Stop wasting money in the casino until you thoroughly test your method out with a simulation!
This was the way I played.
All decisions are determined by the Banker Total.
All flat bets.
If the Banker total was even (0, 2, 4, 6, 8) I would bet Banker.
If the Banker total was odd (1, 3, 5, 7, 9) I would bet Player.
The most I was down was 8 units but I recovered and quit when I was 5+ units ahead.
I am giving you the method for free. Remember, you get what you pay for.
Quote: TheProfessorI have not seen much of a correlation between my results and the "Asian Zen Flow" more to do with understanding that every action has an equal and opposite reaction. For example if a shoe becomes heavily biased in favour of alternating results it pays to target any run of repeats that start to form.
What you just said, is one of the most insanely idiot things I've ever heard. At no point, in your rambling, incoherent response, were you even close to anything that could be consider a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and my God have mercy on your soul.
Quote: TheProfessorFor example if a shoe becomes heavily biased in favour of alternating results it pays to target any run of repeats that start to form.
But you can't know that beforehand so what's
your point. Do you use a crystal ball?
Quote: TheProfessorYou don't need a crystal ball. The law of probabilities ensures that equal chances appear equally over time. If you know how to take advantage of that the way I have been for a very long time it is not difficult to overcome the house edge. I was hoping for some interaction with someone with a broader intellect and a bit more experience in actual casino play, not the silly comments I am seeing so far.
The law of probabilities = Gambler's Fallacy. I did not know that, thanks professor.
I think skimming this thread gave me AIDS.
Quote: TheProfessorYou don't need a crystal ball. The law of probabilities ensures that equal chances appear equally over time.
No it doesn't. If I flip a fair coin and get a hundred heads in a row it is not mysteriously going to balance out so that some time in the future I will have an equal number of heads as tails. If h=heads and t=tails you can say the limit of #h/#t approaches 1 but #h-#t does not equal 0 as a limit and there is no reason to believe it would.
Quote: SonuvabishDoes anyone think that letswin = theprofessor ?
they might as well be. every comment i have read from them is toxic. but hey, the casino is a toxic place. I hear this kind of BS every time I sit down at any table game.
events.
The best way to shut the naysayers up is to prove what you're saying. Even better, put your money where your mouth is. This forum is always looking for side bet action and challenges. There is legitimate challenge offer available.Quote: TheProfessorYou don't need a crystal ball. The law of probabilities ensures that equal chances appear equally over time. If you know how to take advantage of that the way I have been for a very long time it is not difficult to overcome the house edge. I was hoping for some interaction with someone with a broader intellect and a bit more experience in actual casino play, not the silly comments I am seeing so far.
The problem is most system players make excuses why they can't or won'd divulge their system. Generally they use the excuse, "the casinos will find out and end the cash cow." If someone could prove a legitimate method that defies the math consistently you will find themselves with more than enough money and notoriety than they can handle.
If system players don't want to share or prove what they are saying, why post about it in the first place? Just go build you fortune (then write a book).
If you get lonely or board in the meantime and you're bursting at the seems to tell someone how great your sure fire system is. Just Buy some friends (it seems system players don't have any) and show them how to get rich. Just take them on 5 or 6 sessions, as soon as they see the money rolling in they will be frothing at the mouth with dollar signs in their eyes. Why wast time here with so many wet blankets? Come rub it in after you get filthy rich.
A smart person would actually finance their friends and take a fair percentage.
Quote: RomesWhat you just said, is one of the most insanely idiot things I've ever heard. At no point, in your rambling, incoherent response, were you even close to anything that could be consider a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and my God have mercy on your soul.
oh, come on, we are deeply indepted to the Prof for the hint about "Asian Zen Flow"
Quote: TheProfessorYou don't need a crystal ball. The law of probabilities ensures that equal chances appear equally over time. If you know how to take advantage of that the way I have been for a very long time it is not difficult to overcome the house edge. I was hoping for some interaction with someone with a broader intellect and a bit more experience in actual casino play, not the silly comments I am seeing so far.
Incorrect. They appear relatively equal over time, not absolutely.
Quote: Buzzard" Funny thing, the next two sessions after my post were plus 20 and 22 then after that my last session was minus 11 my biggest loss in ten years. " and it happened immediately on being challenged that he never went below -2 in 10 years. What a surprising turn of
events.
Maybe he actually paid attention to what he was betting for the first time in a decade? Or better yet, maybe he wanted to sound credible on the board so made it up?
Quote: AxelWolfThe best way to shut the naysayers up is to prove what you're saying. Even better, put your money where your mouth is. This forum is always looking for side bet action and challenges. There is legitimate challenge offer available.
The problem is most system players make excuses why they can't or won'd divulge their system. Generally they use the excuse, "the casinos will find out and end the cash cow." If someone could prove a legitimate method that defies the math consistently you will find themselves with more than enough money and notoriety than they can handle.
If system players don't want to share or prove what they are saying, why post about it in the first place? Just go build you fortune (then write a book).
If you get lonely or board in the meantime and you're bursting at the seems to tell someone how great your sure fire system is. Just Buy some friends (it seems system players don't have any) and show them how to get rich. Just take them on 5 or 6 sessions, as soon as they see the money rolling in they will be frothing at the mouth with dollar signs in their eyes. Why wast time here with so many wet blankets? Come rub it in after you get filthy rich.
A smart person would actually finance their friends and take a fair percentage.
If I had an unbeatable system, Id be injecting porn stars with my tiger semen.
They tell me here that the law of probabilities is a gamblers fallacy, so I suppose the casino puts a zero on the roulette wheel then hopes it will miraculously appear every thirty six spins to give them their edge. All I can say is I have made an awful lot of money over my 30,000 hours of casino play based on a fallacy.
I must be the luckiest dude on the planet, it must just be a coincidence that when I place a flurry of bets on the outcomes needed to normalize the flow of play they seem to win more then they lose. Well at least now I know that my success is not based on anything real or scientific just good o'l lady luck.
But I tell you what, I'll just keep going til the luck runs out!!
Quote: TheProfessorThey tell me here that the law of probabilities is a gamblers fallacy, so I suppose the casino puts a zero on the roulette wheel then hopes it will miraculously appear every thirty six spins to give them their edge.
It "should" come up one time in 37 (well, 38, if there's a 00 as well). If it came up exactly 1 time in 37, then the strategy would be:
Step 1 - Wait until 0 comes up, then wait 36 more spins
Step 2 - Bet everything on 0
Step 3 - Profit!
Quote: TheProfessorI must be the luckiest dude on the planet, it must just be a coincidence that when I place a flurry of bets on the outcomes needed to normalize the flow of play they seem to win more then they lose. Well at least now I know that my success is not based on anything real or scientific just good o'l lady luck.
Either that, or you have some mysterious telekinetic or future-seeing ability none of us know about. Ever consider taking the James Randi challenge (assuming Randi isn't out hunting down Teller of Penn & Teller for exposing the milk can escape on The Simpsons)?
Quote: TheProfessorBut I tell you what, I'll just keep going til the luck runs out!!
You do that. As I recall, that's also how Martingale and D'Alembert both "work". (I didn't just claim that you used either one - that's why I said "also".)
Question: what's the typical hands per hour rate in baccarat? How about minibacc?
Quote: TheProfessorI'm not short of friends, money, or things to do, I posted here out of interest to see how many other people there were around doing OK at the Caz.
They tell me here that the law of probabilities is a gamblers fallacy, so I suppose the casino puts a zero on the roulette wheel then hopes it will miraculously appear every thirty six spins to give them their edge. All I can say is I have made an awful lot of money over my 30,000 hours of casino play based on a fallacy.
I must be the luckiest dude on the planet, it must just be a coincidence that when I place a flurry of bets on the outcomes needed to normalize the flow of play they seem to win more then they lose. Well at least now I know that my success is not based on anything real or scientific just good o'l lady luck.
But I tell you what, I'll just keep going til the luck runs out!!
I'm so jealous of you. Please, tell us more about randomly picking a side to flat bet on....and how the casino is so stupid to let you write down the amount of times each side has won.
Will a friggin mod check if they are the same account please?
Quote: TheProfessorI'm not short of friends, money, or things to do, I posted here out of interest to see how many other people there were around doing OK at the Caz.
They tell me here that the law of probabilities is a gamblers fallacy, so I suppose the casino puts a zero on the roulette wheel then hopes it will miraculously appear every thirty six spins to give them their edge. All I can say is I have made an awful lot of money over my 30,000 hours of casino play based on a fallacy.
I must be the luckiest dude on the planet, it must just be a coincidence that when I place a flurry of bets on the outcomes needed to normalize the flow of play they seem to win more then they lose. Well at least now I know that my success is not based on anything real or scientific just good o'l lady luck.
But I tell you what, I'll just keep going til the luck runs out!!
I thought id try and weigh in but first, can you tell me at what level you understand martingale theory? And no I don't mean the 'strategy' of doubling bets after losses. I'm talking about the stochastic processes definition.
Second, there is indeed a difference between the laws of probability and the gamblers fallacy. It is not clear to me that you understand the subtleties.
Sounds interesting.
More Details please.
links?
I found The Philip experiment very interesting.
I liked the movie Red Lights. mostly the debunking parts. Debunkers Rule(how fun would paranormal debunking be for a job?) Robert De Niro is in it so there's that.
I didn't know Houdini was a boss debunker until recently. Thats pretty cool in my book .
I welcome any suggestions on documentaries or movies dealing with that subject.
Are you jealous of people who have seen Bigfoot, leprechauns, tooth fairies and the chupacabra (Hey I just beat the odds and spelled chupacabra right) or just their drugs?Quote: SonuvabishI'm so jealous of you. Please, tell us more about randomly picking a side to flat bet on....and how the casino is so stupid to let you write down the amount of times each side has won.
Will a friggin mod check if they are the same account please?
With that claim you and what you seem to be suggesting If you're not a multimillionaire then you're not that savvy. Either you should be making millions at the games or should have found a way to turn your system into a successful marketing tool with websites, books videos, Appearances, seminars, Backers, classes and whatever. You need an agent and publicist.Quote: TheProfessorI'm not short of friends, money, or things to do, I posted here out of interest to see how many other people there were around doing OK at the Caz.
They tell me here that the law of probabilities is a gamblers fallacy, so I suppose the casino puts a zero on the roulette wheel then hopes it will miraculously appear every thirty six spins to give them their edge. All I can say is I have made an awful lot of money over my 30,000 of casino play based on a fallacy.
I must be the luckiest dude on the planet, it must just be a coincidence that when I place a flurry of bets on the outcomes needed to normalize the flow of play they seem to win more then they lose. Well at least now I know that my success is not based on anything real or scientific just good o'l lady luck.
But I tell you what, I'll just keep going til the luck runs out!!
But I call BS on 30k hours, if you claim thats spent playing games like Bac, craps and roulette and you are ahead without hitting any jackpot or extreme longshot.
especially since I have nothing to sell but good luck. I have had a great week two losing sessions totalling 8 units and four winning a total of 41 units
then yesterday was a cracker losing 3 bets out of 20, I'm off to try my luck right now, good luck folks!
The outcome of a single session of ~75 hands (call it 76 so my numbers are even) is binomially distributed, and I'll use a probability of winning of 0.495 (which is generous, your true p is a little less depending on your banker/player mix).
Odds of a single session finishing +12 or better is 6.8%. The odds of -2 or better is 54.6%. But the odds of doing -2 or better in 3000+ sessions (10 years, almost every day) is just ridiculous. I couldn't get Excel to display the value, it is so small. Even doing this for 1 year (365 sessions) the odds are 1 followed by 96 zeros to the 1. A freaking Googol to 1. For one year. And you said 10 years.
I have never seen such a small number in all the math I have ever done, for this site or anywhere. Ever.
This would be theoretically possible if you won about 2/3 of your hands. But you can't, so I must conclude that your story is not believable.
Quote: SonuvabishWill a friggin mod check if they are the same account please?
This does not appear to be a duplicate account situation.
Quote: AxelWolfAre you jealous of people who have seen Bigfoot, leprechauns, tooth fairies and the chupacabra (Hey I just beat the odds and spelled chupacabra right) or just their drugs?
Their drugs
Quote: TheProfessorI am a multimillionaire several times over.
In other words, you're a multi-multimillionaire? I would have went with "I am a millionaire many times over", but apparently you were skipping 6th period English to practice your ultimate bac strategy.
With his statement "I am a multimillionaire several times over." Does this indicate he has at least 6 million?Quote: SonuvabishIn other words, you're a multi-multimillionaire? I would have went with "I am a millionaire many times over", but apparently you were skipping 6th period English to practice your ultimate bac strategy.
Quote: AxelWolfWith his statement "I am a multimillionaire several times over." Does this indicate he has at least 6 million?
I think it indicates he's lying, and failed out of high school. The literal interpretation...yes, a minimum of 6.
Quote: SonuvabishI think it indicates he's lying, and failed out of high school. The literal interpretation...yes, a minimum of 6.
Perhaps he has lost and won millions several times over. Perhaps at the Bac tables.
This would qualify him to be a multi-millionaire several times over?
Are you sure when you're a multimillionaire the bank doesn't just put "Congregations you are a multimillionaire several times over" as your ending balance?Quote: SonuvabishI think it indicates he's lying, and failed out of high school. The literal interpretation...yes, a minimum of 6.
forums all time, yawn. Some guy claims
something ridiculous and they all discuss
it for days. Gets real old and real boring
real fast.
Quote: EvenBobThey have threads like this on real gambling
forums all time, yawn. Some guy claims
something ridiculous and they all discuss
it for days. Gets real old and real boring
real fast.
Not really. It's kind of like the horrible singers on American Idol. You know they are going to lambasted and the fun is watching.
In this case, we get to join in.
Quote: AxelWolfAre you sure when you're a multimillionaire the bank doesn't just put "Congregations you are a multimillionaire several times over" as your ending balance?
Ed McMahon may have sent him "multiple-multiple" notices; he may be basing his supposed wealth on that.
Quote: darkozYou know they are going to lambasted and the fun is watching.
.
Not if you've seen it 50 times and know
it will always end the same way. The prof
and letswin are carbon copies of every
other 'winner' on every other thread like
this, they even say the exact things. Move
on, nothing to see here..
Quote: EvenBobNot if you've seen it 50 times and know
it will always end the same way. The prof
and letswin are carbon copies of every
other 'winner' on every other thread like
this, they even say the exact things. Move
on, nothing to see here..
Freudenschade is always in season
