Baccarat can be beaten
Quote: letswinNo, I don't mean to be negative or close minded about your findings. That wasn't my point in my response. If that's how it came off, however, I apologize.
I was simply stating, that why did you and few other members, decide to argue with me whether or not random.org was true randomness or not? When it clearly states, verbatim, on the first page of the website, that it is as close as humans are going to get so far in our evolution. In the known world. So that was pretty much a pointless side discussion. My point was, all the energy being put towards silly side discussions, when we can just stay focused on the topic.
Also, you aren't having the same results as I would, if it was my method, because you are missing a link.
lol so how are we supposed to test your theory if we don't have all of the links to test it? Because apparently you stated earlier that anyone can come up with a winning method "close" to yours by going off your theory. I did exactly that and even one upped your theory in the level of randomness used, and yet I saw completely negative results.
Quote: Romeslol so how are we supposed to test your theory if we don't have all of the links to test it? Because apparently you stated earlier that anyone can come up with a winning method "close" to yours by going off your theory. I did exactly that and even one upped your theory in the level of randomness used, and yet I saw completely negative results.
If you applied the theory properly you would have positive results. You had negative results instead, meaning, you did not properly implement the theory.
Quote: letswinIf you applied the theory properly you would have positive results. You had negative results instead, meaning, you did not properly implement the theory.
That is a completely non-scientific/logical "catch all" that you can just simply lie about. You gave the theory, I applied it. My getting negative results doesn't mean I didn't apply it correctly. It means either you didn't explain it correctly, or it is fundamentally flawed.
Why tell anyone to "test" it then? What's the point of testing anything in the world if you just ignore negative results?
Quote: RomesThat is a completely non-scientific/logical "catch all" that you can just simply lie about. You gave the theory, I applied it. My getting negative results doesn't mean I didn't apply it correctly. It means either you didn't explain it correctly, or it is fundamentally flawed.
Why tell anyone to "test" it then? What's the point of testing anything in the world if you just ignore negative results?
Well obviously, one shouldn't expect to get the same results if not doing the same thing I am doing or something very similar.
Quote: letswinWell obviously, one shouldn't expect to get the same results if not doing the same thing I am doing or something very similar.
Unless your "link" that I'm missing drastically changes things, I did something very similar which by your own posts you indicated I should see "different" results. Different as in maybe even break even, or positive. I saw nearly the precise expected value for the given house edge. If your link DOES drastically change things then you lied in mentioning we could test your theory because we don't have all of the variables. If it does not drastically change things I should have seen some difference. So which is it?
But that's all besides the point. Assume if you actually had a truly random generator, how exactly does being "truly random" beat baccarat?
In fact, how does "random" beat ANYTHING?
If you believe in math, then you will stop there and know the answer. If you don't, nobody in the world can convince you otherwise.
Quote: KickassThere is no need to do any simulations or define a truly random generator because the random variable is already in the expected value equation:
Random in, random out. Move on..
Are you related to someone who went by the name G8player here?
I wish you the best of it my friend,
Slack
The claim is that this system can/does beat every shoe. So, if that is true, in the limit, it will not matter what the shoe is, correct? I think we should have our altruistic expert run his random system and post a series of bets (because, remember, they can have nothing to do with previous shoe results, so there is no need to play the game yet... this system will give a set of banker/player bets that is independent of the game/shoe being played.
From there we will be able to simulate any number of randomly shuffled shoes and play the pre-determined set of player/banker choices against it. Since betting is flat, the results should be relatively easy to calculate.
With enough computing power we can simulate a large number of different configurations for the shoe, and a simple loop can tell us how many of the shoes this betting system beats. A system that beats all shoes will beat any shoe. The resulting distribution of results should have 100% of its mass strictly greater than zero. We all know that's nonsense, but that is the claim and it is objectively provable one way or another.
Clearly, any result greater than 49% or so of shoes beaten would be impressive. 55% would be amazing...60% a goldmine, 100% a theoretical measure zero event.
If you now claim that this testing methodology will not work for some reason, I would like to know why. (Honestly, I just enjoy watching excuses being made).
Just to be extra clear:
You claim you have a random system. I don't need to know what that system is. Because it is random, it cannot be conditionally dependent on anything, much less the results of a given hand of Bac. So, please enumerate a series of choices that are the outcome of whatever process you so desire. Your claims imply that they will always win. So we will test them against a series of shoes... and see just what % of those they beat. Whether you realize it or not, your claim is that it will beat 100% of them.
And this is where I just can't help myself. I feel a need to explain to you that this is not possible for the following reason:
You are constructing a random variable, say one that takes either a value P or B, the probability of each being dependent upon any number of other variables. Skipping over the detail of what a true random outcome of a draw from a distribution with a small, finite number of outcomes says about the probability distribution, I think we can agree one exists.
Now, there is a finite number of possible outcomes for each hand/play, right? What I mean is... regardless of how the realizations are arrived at, if we play only 2 hands of Bach, your system will have given you one of the following sequences:
P, B
P, P
B, B
B, P
B, T
T, B
B, P
P, B
T, T
Right?
However random the input, assuming you flat bet all hands, your system will tell you to do ONE of these things. I'm picking 2 hands for brevity, but it should be clear that this extends immediately to larger sequences, each of which can be enumerated. This is your outcome space, and it is of as many dimensions as there are hands being played.
The statistical (and philosophical) rub here is that your system claims to be able to win every time, but you have no way of knowing which one of the finite (however large) sequences of decisions it will spit out.
So, and stay with me here, what you are saying is that no matter what your random system does (I/e, no matter which sequence above it tells you play), you claim it will win. This is critical to understand, because it's impossible. I hope it's trivial to explain why, but I'll do it anyway. Imagine we have a coin flip sequence, and your system can pick any of the first 4 possibilities above. You can't know which one it will pick, but you can know with certainty that WHATEVER the outcome of the coinflip sequence, ONE of your possible betting sequences will win every bet. But, unfortunately, the outcome space is closed under complements, by which I mean the opposite sequence (I/e the one that LOSES every flip) is also an element of the outcome space. More specifically: there is a strictly positive probability that your randomly generated strategy will instruct you to pick every coin flip incorrectly.
NOW, you might be thinking that I'm cheating you by telling you that there is always a losing sequence of bets for a constant shoe. So let's hold constant whichever sequence of bets you randomly "decide" to place, and vary the large number of possible sequences of cards/shoes. I fully admit that for every shoe, there are (many, many) sequences of bets that will be a winner, some big wins, some small. But I think everyone, even you, can admit that for every shoe, there are also many many possible series of bets that will be losers (some large, some small). But since it is IMPOSSIBLE for you to control your random choice of sequence, you CANNOT say with certainty that you will choose a winner. For every shoe there will be some 48-49% of possible sequences that will be winners. You will randomly choose from the full 100% of options.
Please restore my faith in humanity and tell me you understand now.
Quote: letswinWell obviously, one shouldn't expect to get the same results if not doing the same thing I am doing or something very similar.
This is the stupidest thread I've read in a long time. Not to say you're stupid, because that would be a personal insult. Obviously, it's other people's fault this thread is stupid.
Random beats nothing. Your claim doesn't even make sense. I don't know why no one even bothered to say so, until finally Neutrino did on page 14 or so. You're not up any money. Everyone knows it. If you're system was truly remarkable, you wouldn't waste your time here. You'd be playing right now, on your way to becoming the richest person on earth in a matter of days.
Maybe you're a spammer here to advertise something. Maybe you're semi-delusional, and want to pretend you have power and are an ace gambler and can only do so with the aid of anonymity. But my guess is youre a baccarat addict, and you're here to try and inspire ideas from others on how to beat the game, so that you can adopt them as your own. I'd think this nonsensical topic has become trolling by now. You just keep repeating the same vague nonsense and outrageous claims over and over. "You should test my system...I can not reveal my system...my system is completely random...if you tested it and the results are negative, you didn't follow my method...I'm up 5 bajillion dollars since I began guessing...I got a 36 on my ACTs when I picked C for every answer which is how I was first introduced to the art of guessing...i have a wife."
Quote: SonuvabishThis is the stupidest thread I've read in a long time. Not to say you're stupid, because that would be a personal insult. Obviously, it's other people's fault this thread is stupid.
Random beats nothing. Your claim doesn't even make sense. I don't know why no one even bothered to say so, until finally Neutrino did on page 14 or so. You're not up any money. Everyone knows it. If you're system was truly remarkable, you wouldn't waste your time here. You'd be playing right now, on your way to becoming the richest person on earth in a matter of days.
Maybe you're a spammer here to advertise something. Maybe you're semi-delusional, and want to pretend you have power and are an ace gambler and can only do so with the aid of anonymity. But my guess is youre a baccarat addict, and you're here to try and inspire ideas from others on how to beat the game, so that you can adopt them as your own. I'd think this nonsensical topic has become trolling by now. You just keep repeating the same vague nonsense and outrageous claims over and over. "You should test my system...I can not reveal my system...my system is completely random...if you tested it and the results are negative, you didn't follow my method...I'm up 5 bajillion dollars since I began guessing...I got a 36 on my ACTs when I picked C for every answer which is how I was first introduced to the art of guessing...i have a wife."
I am no longer going to argue with any of you. You guys believe that I would post here simply because I want to gain some sort of online fame and to advertise something. Which clearly, neither of them are true. If you guys fully believe there is no way to beat baccarat, regardless of some of the ideas and theories I've shared with you?
What am I to do? Keep posting here arguing with you guys? It doesn't make sense. So, you say I'm a troll, spammer, marketing affiliate, scammer, etc. etc. I lied about any money I made cuz I spent a few days out of my life posting on here? -_- You see, there are people in this world who have had a lot of money before and there are those who haven't. Those of us who are used to having a lot of money and earning a lot of money? Don't react like they just found the fountain of youth every time they create something new and start making big money. There are a lot of creative people in this world who are used to creating things. Who are used to making a lot of money. It's nothing new. To people who are so brain dead they can't be creative if their life depended on it, and never had more than $5000 to their name? Of course, soon as they find a way to make money, that is working consistently, they kill themselves to keep doing it. And they go crazy, like they just invented the thing of the century. Inventions and creations are a dime a dozen for creative people who are in wealthy circles. And making money is not any thing serious to people in these circles. If I find a way to make a million dollars a month? I'm not going to dedicate every second of my life to doing it. What kind of life is that? That's how DEGENERATES react to new things. More than likely? Cuz they have no life other than that discovery. No relationships with friends and family. When you have good relationships with friends and family and are used to having and making money and are used to creating things. Then family and friends ALWAYS come first. And your obligation to being a HUMAN always comes first as well. But to DEGENERATES, who can't see past their five fingers, and have never had anything worth any value in their life or every created anything worth any value? They would burn bridges with ANYONE to get from $0 to $1million. Terrible people.
Anyway, ......I'll step away. Good luck with everything everyone.
Quote: letswinYou guys believe that I would post here simply because I want to gain some sort of online fame
Uh, no...the conjecture was that you may be delusional and wanted to PRETEND you were powerful, not GAIN fame. This is merely a reiteration of a past conjecture, dear mods.
Quote: letswinSo, you say I'm a troll, spammer, marketing affiliate, scammer, etc. etc.
You forgot baccarat addict (addicts tend to be degenerates, see below).
Quote: letswinBut to DEGENERATES, who can't see past their five fingers, and have never had anything worth any value in their life or every created anything worth any value? They would burn bridges with ANYONE to get from $0 to $1million.
Degenerates are millionaires? And you're not a millionaire because you're not a degenerate? So if I work hard at being a degenerate, will I become a millionaire? If so, sign me up, that sounds easy, even if we are being a bit flexible with definitions.
Why you instead attack (very easy way) didnt ask some question and didnt try take some advise and test.
Id like say many thanks Letswin for giving hope for beat that game.
Appreciate you Letswin!!!
Quote: donikHello all!
Why you instead attack (very easy way) didnt ask some question and didnt try take some advise and test.
Id like say many thanks Letswin for giving hope for beat that game.
Appreciate you Letswin!!!
donik,
He didn't get "attacked"; he got some questions he didn't answer, he got a lot of skepticism in light of his base assertions, and there was nothing to test.
His "system" was to play random because the game is random and to flat-bet, at least as far as he "explained" it (nothing to explain, nothing to analyze, nothing to test in this thread).
And, if "hope" is the only bullet in your baccarat-beating gun, you might as well point it at your bankroll. Letswin has done you no favors and has demonstrated no winning, repeatable strategy.
Quote: donik
Id like say many thanks Letswin for giving hope for beat that game.
You join a forum and your first post
is to praise and defend letswin,
a guy who has nothing for a system
except hot air.
Really?
Best regards!
The baccarat forums that exist out there are no better so it is one big hamster wheel.
Quote: donikI have read before like guest but missed this thread . He gived some new approach hints and asked at start oof thread " if you have question fell free I will answer" . I think we all looking for some solid method. And nobody who has really proven method don't give whole details, but if he giving some hints that already gift. Need only test and make conclusion.
Best regards!
Did that, have made one.
Quote: donikHe gived some new approach hints
Flat bet randomly is neither new or a
hint. Flat bet randomly is what most
players do already. It's guaranteed to
let the casino win, that's why they
encourage you to do it.
Quote: tomlaOh how I long for the days when spike claimed to be able to guess roulette even chance bets with a 72% success rate, which took many years of practising reading random, should'nt you be a millionaire already?
tomla,
Two of your 3 posts so far have been trolls of EvenBob. Any further posts in that direction on your part will not be tolerated. Thank you.
Agreed.Quote: EvenBobFlat bet randomly is neither new or a hint.
Agreed.Quote:Flat bet randomly is what most players do already.
No. Its merely likely that the casino will win. 5.26 per cent is a fairly high edge. Croupiers rarely say anything about amounts bet as long as it meets the inside/outside minimums.Quote:It's guaranteed to let the casino win,
I don't know about encouragement. Casinos provide annunciators to show the recent results but make no claims about it being somehow effective in depicting some sort of trend. From what I've observed players pick a few numbers and that's it.Quote:that's why they encourage you to do it.
If I had to guess you're not really foreign.Quote: donikI have read before like guest but missed this thread . He gived some new approach hints and asked at start oof thread " if you have question fell free I will answer" . I think we all looking for some solid method. And nobody who has really proven method don't give whole details, but if he giving some hints that already gift. Need only test and make conclusion.
Best regards!
This post reeks of a horrible sockpuppet attempt from someone who knows they couldn't use their normal style of writing without detection.
it like you purposely uses bad grammars and misspell to be hide from detected.
Can I take a shot? ☺Quote: beachbumbabstomla,
Two of your 3 posts so far have been trolls of EvenBob. Any further posts in that direction on your part will not be tolerated. Thank you.
Quote: AxelWolfIf I had to guess you're not really foreign.
This post reeks of a horrible sockpuppet attempt from someone who knows they couldn't use their normal style of writing without detection.
it like you purposely uses bad grammars and misspell to be hide from detected.
I came in USA 6 years ago from Russian ...that my second language....:)
I know quite a few Russian poker players and their all nice guys (animals at poker). Surprisingly they usually have a good sense of humor and are fun to be around.
Maybe on difference single, doubles and 3+ streaks on player side.
Greetings.
Quote: donikWe looking for some solid method...can somebody suggest solid direction.
Maybe on difference single, doubles and 3+ streaks on player side.
Greetings.
Wrong board for that. You will not find it here at the WoV.
It's called selling systems to suckers. Try nor baccarat strategy.Quote: donikWe looking for some solid method...can somebody suggest solid direction.
Maybe on difference single, doubles and 3+ streaks on player side.
Greetings.
Quote: donikWe looking for some solid method...can somebody suggest solid direction.
Maybe on difference single, doubles and 3+ streaks on player side.
Greetings.
You may want to contact an old member here "Varmenti", he was a bac player extraordinaire. If you go through old threads on bac, you may figure out how to hook up with him. He seemed like a fun guy and played guitar as well. I forget what town he hailed from, just above New York somewhere? Good luck on your way to obscene wealth extracted from casinos.
Quote: Dicenor33The strategy is simple. Find a good bac player and do exactly the same. Good players are at high limit tables.
That's it!!!! The high rollers are winning zillions!!!
Quote: donikWe looking for some solid method...can somebody suggest solid direction.
.
Flat bet randomly is what I do. It's very
solid I hear.
Quote: Dicenor33The strategy is simple. Find a good bac player and do exactly the same. Good players are at high limit tables.
Yes, good players are at high limit tables, also bad players and also average players. HighLImit tables get RICH players, not good ones.
Casino Managers get a morning tally of how the Bacc tables did the night before. Its not because of "those good players" its because of those Big Bets.
The dangers of dubbing anyone a good player is that his halo can disappear the minute people start betting on him.
Yes. Here is the system for winning at baccarat. Buy a baccarat table. Put it in a place with lots of decorations. Invite people to come in and play. Hire almost naked women to bring them "free" drinks while they are playing it and give them back part of what they lose as a "gift" wrapped in a pretty package so they feel special and important and loved, to encourage them to keep doing it as long as they still have some money left.Quote: donikWe looking for some solid method...can somebody suggest solid direction.
You're welcome.
That's silly all the "good" baccarat players will come rape your game.Quote: DrawingDeadYes. Here is the system for winning at baccarat. Buy a baccarat table. Put it in a place with lots of decorations. Invite people to come in and play. Hire almost naked women to bring them "free" drinks while they are playing it and give them back part of what they lose as a "gift" wrapped in a pretty package so they feel special and important and loved, to encourage them to keep doing it as long as they still have some money left.
You're welcome.
Quote: donikWe looking for some solid method...can somebody suggest solid direction.
Maybe on difference single, doubles and 3+ streaks on player side.
Greetings.
You can look up Phil Ivey and his approach to Baccarat.It should speak volumes that the guy known as one of the best poker players ever is looking for an angle when playing this game. If it was possible to beat the game with a streak based system isn't it logical that the savvy players like Ivey would've destroyed casinos,causing'em to stop offering it?
Yes, that is quite logical. Moreover, a poker player is used to remembering so many cards that Baccarat would be simple for him so on pure knowledge of the deck without overt cheating he might have a slim edge. Yet Ivey had to resort to overt cheating by deceiving an ignorant dealer with some sort of "lucky" to turn the 8s and 9s edges around.Quote: rawtuffYou can look up Phil Ivey and his approach to Baccarat.It should speak volumes that the guy known as one of the best poker players ever is looking for an angle when playing this game. If it was possible to beat the game with a streak based system isn't it logical that the savvy players like Ivey would've destroyed casinos,causing'em to stop offering it?
AllegedlyQuote: FleaStiffYes, that is quite logical. Moreover, a poker player is used to remembering so many cards that Baccarat would be simple for him so on pure knowledge of the deck without overt cheating he might have a slim edge. Yet Ivey had to resort to overt cheating by deceiving an ignorant dealer with some sort of "lucky" to turn the 8s and 9s edges around.
And If you find a leprechaun you might get some gold.Quote: Dicenor33The game resembles Forex rather than Poker. It can definitely improve your trading skills. Gr8 made a good point, shoes have a tendency to stay the same for a while, choppy or streaky, if you can figure out a trend you might come out a winner.
when i was at rivers in pittsburgh i saw 5 ties in a row. dealer said its the most hes ever seen
Quote: Dicenor 33The game resembles Forex rather than Poker. It can definitely improve your trading skills. Gr8 made a good point, shoes have a tendency to stay the same for a while, choppy or streaky, if you can figure out a trend you might come out a winner.
Looking for choppy or streaky shoes is like looking for patterns in the clouds. Trend practicing in bac. may improve your astrology and spoon bending skills, but it's not going to help you win in the long run. And regarding Forex..., well, maybe take another look towards psychics and astrology. lol
-Keyser
