This has worked for me. Still in the process.
Quote: Dealer314I Here's a good one, a guy last week on double deck spat on his cards and threw them on the ground then proceeded to spit on the table lol. (
A Blackjack dealer told me he once had a guy with a twisted sense of humor, pop out his glass eye and put it on the table as his insurance bet.
Quote: TankoA Blackjack dealer told me he once had a guy with a twisted sense of humor, pop out his glass eye and put it on the table as his insurance bet.
Technically if the dealer did have blackjack then he would have 4 eyes. Didn't anybody tell him that's a sucker bet?
Quote: AxelWolfI like the idea....when in doubt BAN/LOCK
Now, as I see it, this forum and it's moderators have one HUGE potential problem:-
A poster such as Dealer314 can come here, start a thread about what he claims is a winnining system. But then he can defy the forum by constantly posting about his ongoing success.
We all know the system to be total loblocks and the wise old 'Maths guys' will argue till they are blue in the face. We will start out polite and trusting, but be ever more frustrated by the jester..
Of course there is no reason to suspect for an instant that the claims will always be true.
So what will we end up with here?: A massive thread from some prankster who tells us how he started with peanuts and used a system to make $xx a day, then $xxx a day, then $xxxx a day, for weeks, months, years.
The claim need never be true or substantiated, but it would pollute this forum with the biggest, longest, and most discussed lie since the two dice puzzle.
Some moderator at some point MUST call out this BS because the OP is never going to come back and say 'Gee Wiz guys. You were right, and I was wrong'. The very best he may come back with is 'Dammit, I got greedy and strayed from my disciplined system and that's why I lost ( and had to start over)'. We already see the seeds of that in his switch from a 5 streak wait to a 2 streak wait.
Just watch it unfold. I'll take bets that this is what is happening.
Besides that, the disclaimers with respect to Betting Systems on Negative Expectation games are all over both sites. That's why I also specifically confront betting systems, on occasion, and offer mathematical proof as to why they will lose to the tune of the House Edge. It gets old sometimes, though. I don't even think Betting Systems get previously non-gamblers anymore, I think they just get anyone looking for a way to justify negative expectation gambling.
If you Google, "Gambling Systems," perhaps you'll get this as the first result:
https://wizardofodds.com/gambling/betting-systems/
Which is what I got as my first result. I think you will, too, because I am logged out of GMail at the moment, so Google is pretending not to know I like WizardofOdds.com
The point is that there is no longer any legitimate question as to whether or not Gambling Systems are complete and total garbage. They are not garbage, they work perfectly, in the long run you'll lose in keeping with the House Edge all the time.
Quote: beachbumbabsDealer,
We don't delete threads, but you'll be welcome to check back in and let us know how you're doing, whichever way it's going for you. I understand why you are looking for 5 in a row before betting. Truly I do. It just doesn't help you on that game (again in the long run) to do it. The mathematicians here did tell you the same thing I did, just in their own way.
And I don't think anybody thinks you're a gambling addict beyond one person who is trying out randomly advising other people; you might notice he got some flack for it from other members, since it came from nothing you actually said. Sorry about that.
If you only want to talk to people who agree with you about your system, you might in fact try googling John Patrick and go to his forum. Best wishes.
Okay, okay, I'll admit, I was just trying to be serious for a change when I made it look like he may be headed down a gambling addiction path and went a bit too far.
We keep responding even though we all know better.
I wonder what would happen if everyone agreed to not respond with anything other than a link to why betting system can't and don't work? Perhaps us members here need a weekly dose of "nicely telling people they are stupid.
Honestly I believe most of these guys are the same people concocting different stories because they are obsessed with baccarat and trolling.
Explain how someone who sits and deals baccarat all day for a living and then supposedly beats it daily actually misspells it? I may not have much room to talk in the spelling and grammar department, and I know baccarat is a hard one, but oy vey!
Quote: Dealer314They either get cracked with a high count because I get the AK or KJ or whatever because of chance. But who cares I've never been tipped by a card counter and I keep my own. If you do however have Q and A's for me I would be more then happy to share my experiences it's actually pretty fun.
OK, here's one.
You talk about knowing players whom you are dealing to at the time are card counters; are you not required to inform the floor or PB of this fact as part of your casino's game protection procedures?
Security carries tasers where you work? That's rare, it shouldn't be to hard to narrow down where you work.Quote: Dealer314I was sitting on dead spread sort of wanted to see him get tazed by security but it didn't happen :(.
you might be a bad man if you are quicker on the draw than security, And you brought a couple tasers with you....Quote: AxelWolfSecurity carries tasers where you work? That's rare, it shouldn't be to hard to narrow down where you work.
Ahhh dealers. It is cool when there is rapport but you really can't listen to their advice. They know the procedure but they don't know the dynamics and mechanics of the game they are dealing.
Quote: Dealer314To introduce myself I am new to this thread and would like to share this strategy that has worked for me and involves martingale betting. I work as a dealer and deal everything. Now I love to play baccarat as it has awesome odds with no commission. So I understand that the longer you play the odds of losing are greatly increased. So my theory works by getting you winnings and leaving and repeating the same thing the next time. Now dealing baccarat I rarely ever see a player or banker hit 8+ times in a row as it is very rare. Now these next steps are very important. I consider my playing chips as units. So I bought in with 300 all quarters. Next step is waiting for 5 bankers or players in a row to hit. After you bet 1 unit on the opposing outcome and win then you wait again for another streak to hit. What we want to achieve is winning 4 units ($100) then we color up and leave. If this does not happen then the martingale play comes in hand. The probability of seeing a run of 8+ as I mentioned is very rare. I've seen 10+ only 4 times in my 2 years of dealing. Now as I mentioned we want to win 4 units so this makes our chances of catching a bad run of 10+ even more slim. To add onto we can narrow down our chances even more by trying to win ONLY 2 hands. We want to achieve 1 unit per win but if we bet 2 units we cut our chances of hitting a bad run by half and the result is us winning 2 hands only for a total of 4 units but obviously our martingale goes to double. Now I've done this 3 times in a row and came up 300$. When I reach 1200$ of casino winnings I'm going to play but my units will be black so we will win 400 in a session. When I deal I play with fake money in my headwind use my strategy while dealing baccarat and it has yet to fail. Please tell me if I have missed anything. Reviews also will be great find a flaw for me. To add I dealt 20 shoes of 8 deck bacarrat at home and not once did a streak of more than 8 hit.
by maths and enough data, it doesn't work. after 8 streaks, the 9th one is half and half.
by reality, you can use it.
maybe you will never lose your bankroll in your life. maybe you will lose it the first time you try.
and knowing the bad points of the system will do good to u. and set a rigid limit on how many times to do the martingale. then it is the same as all other betting systems.
for more, if you have the patience, you may do the martingale by betting B after 10P, roughly in 4000 hands, there is a 10P. it is a lot for a table. but for all tables, if like macao, it is not a lot. and you best have bankroll to do martingale 8 times.
Mathematically he is right I have a similar system I have worked out on a 20-2750 max table. People saying why do you wait until 5 wins and saying it is the same as the 1st. I can tell you, it is not. You wait until 4 wins I mean and bet the 5th because of table limits. My system allows for 12 bets. So, mathematically speaking the odds of hitting 12 for bankers is .00014171. That Is 12/49000 or 1/5500ish — If you have different numbers it's because I changed it for the worse odds-wise, so I could get it to 1/????. For Player, it is 0.00010489 which is 1/9600ish. Statistically speaking, for the player, you should be able to win $400,000 for every bankroll killed of $5000ish if you won on the first hand. That is doubtful so say 1 for $1850. That is an average of martingale 5ish times. That is still 69k for every 5k lost. It is pretty hard to find a table that has a low($20) min bet and a high (&2750) max bet I have one but Idk about anywhere else but my gambling site. But if you do I have run the numbers. ( The numbers that have "ish" are just numbers I guessed but guessed to a point of it hurting the gambler because I didn't feel like doing the work at the moment. But it is actually better results if it says is because I rounded down big time on those)Quote: sisyphusAll runs end. Look it up.
How do you figure??? Did you use math? Because I did and his odds depending on the table limits are pretty impressive. I have worked this bet on many angles for years. For a 12 streak, if you start on a 20/275max dollar table— the best table i have found. The odds of busting your bankroll on 12 straight with either pick is averaged out to.00012. That comes to 3/25000. That means over 25000 hands if it takes 5 hands to reach your win every time (doubtful) you still crack $187,500 for every 3 bankrolls (3 x $5000=$15000) lost. (give or take 1k) Looks like a good bet to me.Quote: beachbumbabsI disagree about "letting him be", though I'm not encouraging hounding him. He's balled up a bunch of common misconceptions into a "system" that doesn't hold water. The whole point of this forum and the Wizard's work is to debunk those misconceptions using facts and math. So, no, two unequal ideas should not be allowed to stand as equally valid pending results.
So what would you say if I went up and bet 100 dollars on red and won? Then I walk away? I just won. That is why your statement is wrong. He is only talking about 3 bets and with the right table maximums it takes time to make your theory right and even if that is the case, it is not always the case if the casino gets cute with their table maximums.Quote: FranciscoThe discussion is getting interesting, and over 10 pages. I might as well put my 2 cents in .
Mr. Dealer134: you ask for advice, so every body is advising you that your system doesn't work. The reason being that you can not win against a negative expectation casino game,each as baccarat. 2+2 is always 4, will never become 5. Period !!
You are very lucky so far because you have not gotten the 4 in a raw losing streak. If you do, then you will lose 15 units. And if you are unlucky, lose more 4 in a raw , then you will be losing big time!
So, the key to your success is : Avoid losing 4 in a raw.
You did not find the sure way of " Avoid losing 4 in a raw" , so your system does not work.
Is my reasoning simple enough ? Or need improvement?
300 in one day is out of 30,000(guess) and 300 is out of 900,000 hands for the month, so the statistics are differentQuote: AxelWolfWhat's the difference in playing 300 hands in 1 day or 300 hands in 30 days?
Does something magic happen at midnight?
If you believe that there something to playing less hours yourself, why not just have 6 different people rotating while you coach them?
Quote: chickendindinStatistically speaking, you should be able to win $400,000 for every bankroll killed of $5000ish.
Now that is SO, ABSOLUTELY WRONG on every level. Revisit your Math.
https://wizardofvegas.com/member/oncedear/blog/5/#post1370
300 games played in one day is 300 games out of the 300 you chose to play. 300 in 30 days is 300 out of 300 you chose to play. The stat's are identical.Quote: chickendindin300 in one day is out of 30,000(guess) and 300 is out of 900,000 hands for the month, so the statistics are different
Again, check your mathematics. Clue. You are wrong at every level.Quote: chickendindinHow do you figure??? Did you use math? Because I did and his odds depending on the table limits are pretty impressive. I have worked this bet on many angles for years. For a 12 streak, if you start on a 20/275max dollar table— the best table i have found. The odds of busting your bankroll on 12 straight with either pick is averaged out to.00012. That comes to 3/25000. That means over 25000 hands if it takes 5 hands to reach your win every time (doubtful) you still crack $187,500 for every 3 bankrolls (3 x $5000=$15000) lost. (give or take 1k) Looks like a good bet to me.
Quote: OnceDear300 games played in one day is 300 games out of the 300 you chose to play. 300 in 30 days is 300 out of 300 you chose to play. The stats are identical.
Probability. The probability of a 12 streak is 3/25000 picking either side. You do the math starting after the 5th bet going to 12. Your first bet will be 39 and the max bet is around 2500. The starting bet of 39 is what I found to be a good point and got you to a number close to 120 per day betting 3 wins. I will go big saying it will take you 4 hands every time. So, on the 9th hand on average your win comes. That should be a fair assessment. 4 bets on top of the 5. Divide 25000/4 = 6250 winning hands of $39 which equals $234,375. Each bankroll loss will be $4496 and there are 3 of them 4496X3=14988 for every $234,375 divide that by 3. That is 78,125 for every $5000 lost. Where did I get is "SOOOO WRONG"
Where was I wrong? The numbers are the same but first, you have to find that table. most are 5/100, 25/1500, 100/2000, 100,2500, also you have to not piss them off and I have found a way that I am never noticed. Also, you need a way to see a ton of tables; I have figured out a way to view— all at once basically — 30 tables give or take a few. am telling you it works, I lose money but I have never lost on baccarat in over 2 years. I can show you over $700k in bets with losses on only slots never baccarat. I like gambling for entertainment and this is so freaking boring tho. I have ADHD; I get sidetracked so easily, so after winning at baccarat, I go pull that lever like a moran. I have a really hard time keeping my eye on the prize without making other bets while sitting there — horses, sports, keno, etc... Stupid doo doo dumb, but the probability of you winning $15 for every dollar you bet is what I came up with; there is also the winning personally as well — no, not personality, lol. I came here to be proven wrong because I am thinking about moving and taking this up a notch. By proving me wrong I want someone to show me where in my example, I went wrong?Quote: OnceDear300 games played in one day is 300 games out of the 300 you chose to play. 300 in 30 days is 300 out of 300 you chose to play. The stats are identical.
In any case 50% of the shoes I played yesterday had 11 or 12 bank or player runs in them.
Is someone saying it will be 349999 shoes before I see another 11 or 12 bank or player run because I see runs like these constantly, which is part of why I have no problem winning money at Baccarat.
Not analogous at all.Quote: chickendindinIf we're drawing for your life out of a basket with 300 "you die" tickets and you only had to pick 1 out of 30,000 tickets or 900000 tickets for a total, you're telling me you would choose the 30,000 just to get it over with?? Because it is the same right? I will do that and you do 30,000 and I will do 900,000. You go first tho and we go until someone for the sake of drama "dies"? I guarantee you are not choosing the small basket
No, I was saying the probability of hitting 12 is like .00012 for red green or blue. Here is a chart from 12-20Quote: MDawgI didn't read this thread closely whatsoever, but was someone saying the odds of a long run are something like 1/350000? Yesterday I played four shoes. The first was not very good at all, rather random, and I barely won 500 on it. Second shoe had a good chop that I followed perfectly and it made me money. Third shoe had an 11 Player run, Fourth and final shoe I played, 11 Bank run (it might have actually been a 12 bank run now that I recall). I cleared 10,400 for the day plus tipped out maybe two grand. I wasn't betting very heavy and I unfortunately let off on the gas half way through each run. But I was on both of those runs almost all the way through and they made me.
In any case 50% of the shoes I played yesterday had 11 or 12 bank or player runs in them.
Is someone saying it will be 349999 shoes before I see another 11 or 12 bank or player run because I see runs like these constantly, which is part of why I have no problem winning money at Baccarat.
Streak goes in order below, starting with 12 for 12 streak
Banker then the probability of banker hitting 12
Player then player
R/G/B.
12
.00014
.000105
.00012
13
.00007183
.000052
.000061
14
.000036
.000026
.000031
15
.00001845
.00001258
.0000153
16
.000009
.000006
.0000076
17
.0000047
.000003
.0000038
18
.0000024
.0000015
.0000019
19
.0000012
.00000075
.00000095
20+
.0000013
.00000072
.00000095
Total
1
1
I just have to ROFLMAO as MDawg of all people tries to point out the error of his ways to a system proponent.Quote: MDawgIn any case 50% of the shoes I played yesterday had 11 or 12 bank or player runs in them.
Is someone saying it will be 349999 shoes before I see another 11 or 12 bank or player run because I see runs like these constantly, which is part of why I have no problem winning money at Baccarat.
This thread is now officially a train wreck in progress. Standing back to watch. We have another 'Two Dice Puzzle' type thread.
$:o)
The analogy doesn't matter because it doesn't matter if you bust your bankroll because over time you are winning because of where you are starting, your martingale and the table limit make the game an entirely different thing, where you win over time because the probability if wining is more than the probability of busting your bankroll. If you can show me where I messed up in those numbers I will gladly eat my words. That is why I came here, I want to know why my numbers are adding up to profits and I am getting profits, but originally my logic says no. Is it because I am always looking for the 6 streaks so the variation makes me a winner? If the probability is 3/25000= 8333.333hands per loss/4 avg to win —which ends up showing a loss of 5k for every 78k. What is wrong?Quote: OnceDearNot analogous at all.
OK, CheickenDinDin, I'm going to humour you for a moment. BUT, I'm not going to read through this entire thread, so you have to help me out here....Quote: chickendindinThe analogy doesn't matter because it doesn't matter if you bust your bankroll because over time you are winning because of where you are starting, your martingale and the table limit make the game an entirely different thing, where you win over time because the probability if wining is more than the probability of busting your bankroll. If you can show me where I messed up in those numbers I will gladly eat my words. That is why I came here, I want to know why my numbers are adding up to profits and I am getting profits, but originally my logic says no. Is it because I am always looking for the 6 streaks so the variation makes me a winner? If the probability is 3/25000= 8333.333hands per loss/4 avg to win —which ends up showing a loss of 5k for every 78k. What is wrong?
What EXACT game variant does your maths apply to?
From whence did you derive...
And we'll dissect your incorrect analysis from there. Presumably HERE, Where Wizard has ignored Tie events.Quote: chickendindinSo, mathematically speaking the odds of hitting 12 for bankers is .00014171.
“The shoes I played yesterday had 11 or 12 streak player or banker runs?” Well, that's good for me because I win on all those streaks; I like streaks and I don't lose on 12. I need a streak to play my three 40 dollar bets. Okay, well, I will just keep winning playing baccarat, and you & MDAWG can just keep on jerking the circle. Who tf belittles some dude like dealer31??? He literally came here for feedback or to pass something they were trying along, maybe get some answers or help someone win. No, he just got a bunch of stupid fu**** comments that sounded like bar talk in a town in Alaska; you know, where there is 1 girl for every 50 dudes— oh, and they all know the best way to fix the only flannel-wearing fugly’s car, they just can't explain it. Still waiting on how my numbers are "SO So Wrong" and I am sure it will be a while considering I don’t lose. I mean I came here with a question also was trying to figure out how to ramp it up. It still hasn’t been answered and it won’t. Because it works and I have been using it for years. I made 47k just on baccarat last year and the year before 51ish. Been laying lettuce to these casinos and yet to bust a bankroll—prolly have like 5 in a row coming because it will all even out, right? Must be luck, I guess. I would show you but I probably would give something away and get jammed up. Do you know? By some little turd, who guaranteed be on the first phone call to my local casinos telling them some dumb crap like they care about 40k per year. There are wack people like that on these boards. Sometimes they even run themQuote: OnceDearI just have to ROFLMAO as MDawg of all people tries to point out the error of his ways to a system proponent.
This thread is now officially a train wreck in progress. Standing back to watch. We have another 'Two Dice Puzzle' type thread.
$:o)
Thanks Mdawg.Quote: MDawgIf you want to say that it is possible to win at Baccarat - I, also apparently EvenBob, among others, are proof of that yes - it is possible. But as I have said many times there is no mechanical "do this when that happens" system for winning at the game.
Your idea of 'proof' is 'proof' to you. But as related on this forum, it falls to the status of 'evidence', and as I see it, much of that evidence is disputed.
I might take the time to prove ChickenDinDin's math to be errant, but not today. Can't be bothered to prove -EV games are -EV. games
Quote: OnceDearI just have to ROFLMAO as MDawg of all people tries to point out the error of his ways to a system proponent.
This thread is now officially a train wreck in progress. Standing back to watch. We have another 'Two Dice Puzzle' type thread.
$:o)
Years ago, when I was cutting my teeth in the bouncer business, one of my coworkers stopped me from tossing an obviously drunk guy. He said the guy wasn't hurting anybody and just keep an eye on him.
Sure enough, the guy wandered over to a guy everyone considered a pain in the ass and tried to avoid. Wouldn't you know it, but the two got along great, had a good old time, and didn't bother anyone else for the rest of the night.
Quote: MDawgI before I see another 11 or 12 bank or player run because I see runs like these constantly, which is part of why I have no problem winning money at Baccarat.
as you can see from the linked probability calculator the chance of flipping heads 12 times in a row is .02% or one in 5,000 attempts on average
bacc is not a coin flip so a slightly greater chance for bank and slightly lesser chance for player but close enough
so maybe you would like to explain to the peanut gallery here why you see these runs "constantly"
attention peanut gallery:
play close attention - this is going to be really, really good
as he explains why his experience continually defies what mathematics indicates the true probability is
https://www.omnicalculator.com/statistics/coin-flip-probability
*
Or when a trend has established itself.Quote: billryanmathematical probability doesn't apply to high rollers.
Ask him yourself by PM. He logged in here in March and he wasn't reporting his success or failure.Quote: ChallengedMillySo did the OP end up becoming a millionaire after grinding out his strategy and stop posting?
Quote: OnceDearYour system is stupid. Play it big-time. Post your progress in a blog. Give us all a laugh.
You surprise me with the use of adjectives which, for me, are inappropriate given your intellect and humanity. The Brits have a great term, which they use often, to express disdain or contempt but is dignified: RUBBISH.
Some adjectives are a double edge sword and quite possibly are inferred insults. Your rebuttals, IMHO, need to be emotionless.
tuttigym
Quote: Dealer314I think I may have found a flaw. I absolute enjoy reading everything on the wizard of odds page but we're only human and we miss things. I'm sure we've all heard the saying of the house always wins. Why does that saying exist? Because it means in the end or long run the house will win. The house gains it's advantage from continuous play for a long period of time. I've come to realize a little flaw in the work done. So when it comes to martingale betting the wizard runs scenarios on thousands and thousands of hands until a point is reached where the player ends up hitting a bad run and losing everything. Here is the flaw, it's simple and right in front of our faces. When he runs these scenarios using martingale betting he plays it through as if the player played EVERY SINGLE HAND out of X amount of hands and that's where the house edge comes in. Let's say we use 100,000 hands of bacarrat for example. Let's assume out of all that the player went ahead and played 5,000 hands using martingale betting and these 5,000 hands must not be in one consecutive session but yet spread apart many sessions. Then what are the chances of seeing a bad loss. Could I be possibly right about this?
Yes you can. The "math" that all who seem to affirm is solely based on the impossibility of simulations done by computers which have been pre-programed with HA/HE statistics so they reflect the outcomes sought. In the real world of gambling, no one plays and documents 100,000 hands of anything nor will they play the same hand by hand or dice roll by dice roll on game simulators such as WinCraps or even the WoO game simulator using fake money. The FLAW you pointed out is accurate and further the FLAW includes identical play for every hand or dice roll or spin. The reality of personal play can change outcomes, sometimes positive other times negative.
If one were to try to imitate the "math" outcomes for real, that mirror would shatter too. The formulas and equations posted by the "math" advocates are unprovable simply because they include, within the body of such equations, E for Expected and P for Probability which are subjective in nature and vague in reality.
Fight on.
tuttigym
Quote: ThatDonGuyI ran the following trial 50 million times:
Wow! How real is that?
Quote: ThatDonGuyOf course, statistics work both ways; 1/6 of the time, I was never behind for about 6 months, and 1/16 of the time, I made it an entire year without being behind. In fact, 1/28 of the time, I made it two full years without being behind.
When we say "eventually everybody loses," keep in mind that "eventually" can be a very, very, very, veryveryvery, very, did I mention "very", very long time; one out of every 47,000 runs or so lasted for 100 years.
I cannot imagine the personal sacrifices made to accomplish these reaults.
tuttigym
Quote: OnceDearNo. It's complete loblocks!
Now I like that adjective. I never saw that one before. Does it mean "rubbish" and can I use it in future posts??
tuttigym
Completely 100% wrong. The house edge isn't programmed into the game, the program just picks random cards or roulette spins or whatever and the house edge is the RESULT of those random outcomes. Same as picking random cards or roulette spins in the casino. That's the point. Learn to code and you can program the simulation yourself. And until you know how to write a computer program, it's rather ridiculous of you to criticize the methodology of those *do* know how to code, based on your fantastic misunderstanding of how it's actually done.Quote: tuttigymThe "math" that all who seem to affirm is solely based on the impossibility of simulations done by computers which have been pre-programed with HA/HE statistics so they reflect the outcomes sought.
link to original post
Incidentally, your post ticks Box #13 on Characteristics of People Who Believe in Betting Systems.
