Thread Rating:

EvenBob
EvenBob
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
  • Threads: 423
  • Posts: 24014
September 4th, 2013 at 2:28:44 PM permalink
Quote: gr8player

Hello, MathExtremist. Good post....you present yourself and your opinions well. Nice job.

.



Congrats ME, you get a free copy of GR8's newsletter every month.
"It's not enough to succeed, your friends must fail." Gore Vidal
MathExtremist
MathExtremist
Joined: Aug 31, 2010
  • Threads: 88
  • Posts: 6526
September 4th, 2013 at 3:13:27 PM permalink
Quote: gr8player

I'm that hunter waiting in the woods until my prey appears as vulnerable. I'll wait it out. My "math" will kick in, as sure as yours does, just mine might take a bit longer, that's all.


Well, no, that's why it's a fallacy. First, there is no attribution needed for mathematics: math doesn't belong to me any more than it belongs to you or Blaise Pascal. It simply is. Whether you choose to learn and understand it is up to you (and not me or Pascal).

But the point is that you are basing your next plays on the incorrect assumption that what you observed in the past is relevant, and specifically that your past observations of Player and Banker can give you a hint as to whether the next outcome is more likely to be Player or Banker. That has conclusively been proven not to be the case. There is lots of literature on why that is so, and should you be interested in educating yourself, the members here (myself included) can point you toward the right materials.

In the absence of said interest, carry on believing what you will. The house will be happy to book your bets regardless of whether you think you have an edge.
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice." -- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
AxelWolf
AxelWolf
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
  • Threads: 139
  • Posts: 18001
September 4th, 2013 at 4:58:01 PM permalink
Quote: gr8player

Hello, MathExtremist.

Good post....you present yourself and your opinions well. Nice job.

I "get" it. I'm not purporting any particular "skill", especially as it pertains to "picking winners".

Alternatively, I prefer to utilize certain statistics to assist me in "picking my winners" (read: bet selections). C'mon, your very moniker says it all..."MathExtremist"...you must believe in certain statistics, as well.

And I play those stats and selections consistantly, with a "sliding scale" money management adjusted according to the most current strike rate(s) of same.

Lastly, MathExtremist, I also "get" the fact that I'm in the minority in this forum. I fully understand that "your math" trumps "my math". I respect that. After all, your math is both readily at hand and discernible....my math is a bit more nebulous, to say the least.

But it's still mine; my play, my bet, and my math. For me, and to me, it's as valuable and valid as your math.

"Past performance is no guarantee of future results"....c'mon, man, we all know what the only "guarantees" are in this world.

Some trends last, some don't. Doesn't really matter on a decision-to-decision basis; not to me, anyhow. Because I'll "no-bet". I'm that hunter waiting in the woods until my prey appears as vulnerable. I'll wait it out. My "math" will kick in, as sure as yours does, just mine might take a bit longer, that's all.

I wish you all the very best of it, MathExtremist, and stay well, my friend.

Unfortunately your hunting Bigfoot with a .22. Do you believe in Bigfoot as well?
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
gr8player
gr8player
Joined: Mar 2, 2013
  • Threads: 8
  • Posts: 606
September 5th, 2013 at 9:26:50 AM permalink
Quote: MathExtremist

The house will be happy to book your bets regardless of whether you think you have an edge.



Sure, MathExtremist, I totally understand and agree. Oh.....and grateful.
gr8player
gr8player
Joined: Mar 2, 2013
  • Threads: 8
  • Posts: 606
September 5th, 2013 at 9:35:02 AM permalink
Quote: AxelWolf

Unfortunately your hunting Bigfoot with a .22. Do you believe in Bigfoot as well?



Nope.

But I do believe that is possible to pare down the house edge with intelligently measured play.

Ergo, I do happen to believe that I'm smarter than Bigfoot.
Buzzard
Buzzard
Joined: Oct 28, 2012
  • Threads: 90
  • Posts: 6814
September 5th, 2013 at 11:06:20 AM permalink
" Ergo, I do happen to believe that I'm smarter than Bigfoot. " That belief is not shared by everyone !
Shed not for her the bitter tear Nor give the heart to vain regret Tis but the casket that lies here, The gem that filled it Sparkles yet
7craps
7craps
Joined: Jan 23, 2010
  • Threads: 18
  • Posts: 1977
September 5th, 2013 at 11:56:14 AM permalink
Quote: MathExtremist

But the point is that you are basing your next plays on the incorrect assumption that what you observed in the past is relevant,

"your next plays"
seems to be the driving force in the OP bet selection over his next plays. Banker, Player or No bet.
Info from the past distribution pointing to the next distribution

Quote: MathExtremist

and specifically that your past observations
of Player and Banker
can give you a hint as to whether the
next outcome is more likely to be Player or Banker.

Did the OP ever hint he plays for only the very next outcome?
I do not read all of his posts, too difficult for this old man.

One of his examples was he was 2/3 into an 8 deck shoe and saw, why then I ask,
the # of runs of length 1 was only 3.
Any knowledgeable Baccarat player knows the probability of any shoe ending with 3 or less of those is very close to 0
my million shoe sim shows none happened
(114 times for 4 times in one shoe was the lowest)

I am way more disappointed in the OP after reading that post where
he claims to have scored a what 6 unit win ($10 - $25 a unit?)
after being the only one to witness this distribution unfolding!
This is absolutely a pathetic result IMHO.

such a rare event requires more to be wagered over the remaining distribution.
only 6 units?
and he is happy about that.
They better have been $1 million dollars units
Should have been able to retire from gambling after that shoe
when will the next 2/3 shoe show only 3 of length 1?

this makes me so ill, I go jump into the pool
winsome johnny (not Win some johnny)
egalite
egalite
Joined: Dec 30, 2011
  • Threads: 9
  • Posts: 164
September 5th, 2013 at 12:30:55 PM permalink
Quote: 7craps

"your next plays"
seems to be the driving force in the OP bet selection over his next plays. Banker, Player or No bet.
Info from the past distribution pointing to the next distribution

Did the OP ever hint he plays for only the very next outcome?
I do not read all of his posts, too difficult for this old man.

One of his examples was he was 2/3 into an 8 deck shoe and saw, why then I ask,
the # of runs of length 1 was only 3.
Any knowledgeable Baccarat player knows the probability of any shoe ending with 3 or less of those is very close to 0
my million shoe sim shows none happened
(114 times for 4 times in one shoe was the lowest)

To be fair, things are getting lost in translation, Hint? Did he actually say that, or was he passing 'hints' to readers? I think the OP was stating what he bets for based on what has occurred previously (his trigger point). Not so much as getting a hint regarding which side will win, rather, "this is my move", while appreciating the final outcome could go either way.

Regarding shoes with a lack of singles (chopless), I've played a fair few that have consisted of three or less singles, a rare event perhaps. At the end of the day, the little pieces of plastic have no awareness what they are producing, how the punter is interpreting what they are doing, nor do they care. Anthropomorphizing (term borrowed from WOO poster) the game is fraught with dangers and ranks right up as gamblers fallacy.
gr8player
gr8player
Joined: Mar 2, 2013
  • Threads: 8
  • Posts: 606
September 5th, 2013 at 12:31:20 PM permalink
Quote: 7craps

"your next plays"
seems to be the driving force in the OP bet selection over his next plays. Banker, Player or No bet.
Info from the past distribution pointing to the next distribution

Did the OP ever hint he plays for only the very next outcome?
One of his examples was he was 2/3 into an 8 deck shoe and saw, why then I ask,
the # of runs of length 1 was only 3.
Any knowledgeable Baccarat player knows the probability of any shoe ending with 3 or less of those is very close to 0
my million shoe sim shows none happened
(114 times for 4 times in one shoe was the lowest)

I am way more disappointed in the OP after reading that post where
he claims to have scored a what 6 unit win ($10 - $25 a unit?)
after being the only one to witness this distribution unfolding!
This is absolutely a pathetic result IMHO.

such a rare event requires more to be wagered over the remaining distribution.
only 6 units?
and he is happy about that.
They better have been $1 million dollars units
Should have been able to retire from gambling after that shoe
when will the next 2/3 shoe show only 3 of length 1?



Finally!

Someone that actually GETS IT!

Bravo, Mr. 7craps, bravo!

Staistical distribution of the Laws of Series in a closed-end Baccarat shoe......
.......sure beats that measly HE, don't it?

Letting an event come to you rather than chasing for an event.......
.......sure beats that measly HE, don't it?

Adjusting your unit sizes based upon the most recent results of said statictics......
.......sure beats that measly HE, don't it?

Imagine that... sure could teach these boys a thing or two about how REAL baccarat is played, if only I were so inclined to do so in this particularly "friendly" forum...

Oh, and thanks again for the "go", 7craps. Stay well, my friend.
egalite
egalite
Joined: Dec 30, 2011
  • Threads: 9
  • Posts: 164
September 5th, 2013 at 12:45:40 PM permalink
Quote: gr8player

Staistical distribution of the Laws of Series in a closed-end Baccarat shoe......
.......sure beats that measly HE, don't it?

If this so called "Law of Series, is actually a measurable law that really exists, then it should also apply equally to six deck games, except that it doesn't, doesn't even come close. It must rank as one of the biggest misunderstandings you have ever posted. To state that over the course of 70, 80 hands that adherence to some statistical fantasy law and that is enough to overcome the HE, belongs in the utmost regions of gamblers fallacies.

  • Jump to: