Is it possible to lower variance between wins and losses in roulette or baccarat?
April 16th, 2013 at 1:43:34 AM
permalink
This may be a stupid question but is there ways of choosing outside bets in roulette or player/ banker in baccarat that will lower variance between wins and losses?
I have heard people with bet selection strategies that they claim lower variance in wins/ losses- is this possible? And if so what strategies would you reccomend?
I have heard people with bet selection strategies that they claim lower variance in wins/ losses- is this possible? And if so what strategies would you reccomend?
Time will tell
April 16th, 2013 at 1:52:28 AM
permalink
Any ideas?
Time will tell
April 16th, 2013 at 10:08:44 AM
permalink
A little impatient don't ya think? I mean, a follow up after only nine minutes! Plus some people sleep at that hour...
Yeah, you lower variance in roulette rather simply: Spread the bets around. You win more often but don't win as much. Unless I'm completely off my rocker, that's the very definition of lowering variance.
Yeah, you lower variance in roulette rather simply: Spread the bets around. You win more often but don't win as much. Unless I'm completely off my rocker, that's the very definition of lowering variance.
I invented a few casino games. Info:
http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ —————————————————————————————————————
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
April 16th, 2013 at 10:34:30 AM
permalink
In negative expectation, when you lower the variance, the casino likes it.
Go ahead and bet more numbers. As you bet more and more, you progress towards the condition of betting all 38 numbers. In that case you would hand the casino 38 units and they hand you back 35. Complete elimination of variance.
Go ahead and bet more numbers. As you bet more and more, you progress towards the condition of betting all 38 numbers. In that case you would hand the casino 38 units and they hand you back 35. Complete elimination of variance.
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
April 16th, 2013 at 11:14:12 AM
permalink
Quote: Walkinshaw30tThis may be a stupid question but is there ways of choosing outside bets in roulette or player/ banker in baccarat that will lower variance between wins and losses?
Sure, bet on opposing events simultaneously. Bet Red and Black, or Odd and Even, at the same time. Unless you hit the zero, you will always push - variance will be minimized.
Minimizing variance on a negative EV game is a pretty bad idea from the players point of view. The house will love you, but that is not the answer you are looking for, right ?
April 16th, 2013 at 11:22:52 AM
permalink
Quote: odiousgambitIn negative expectation, when you lower the variance, the casino likes it.
Go ahead and bet more numbers. As you bet more and more, you progress towards the condition of betting all 38 numbers. In that case you would hand the casino 38 units and they hand you back 35. Complete elimination of variance.
Hate to be accuracy police, but you'd be handing them 37. Or they're handing you 36. However you want to phrase it.
April 16th, 2013 at 11:25:20 AM
permalink
Quote: FinsRuleHate to be accuracy police, but you'd be handing them 37. Or they're handing you 36. However you want to phrase it.
you may be right, I don't play, but doesn't it depend on whether the table is zero or double zero? Since you can put it on zero & d-zero [right?] that makes up to 38?
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
April 16th, 2013 at 11:28:57 AM
permalink
To lower the variance in roulette, spread the bet around and the house edge will eat away a little at a time. You won't get any big wins. The opposite is to bet the entire bankroll on one number only and if you hit, you win big but only 2.6% chance to hit it.
As for baccarat, you can lower the variance by not playing the side bets. Also, since they don't make you bet everytime you can bet only when you "feel" you know which side is going to come up. Since all casino games are negative expectation game, don't play trying to win, have some fun and leave it at that.
As for baccarat, you can lower the variance by not playing the side bets. Also, since they don't make you bet everytime you can bet only when you "feel" you know which side is going to come up. Since all casino games are negative expectation game, don't play trying to win, have some fun and leave it at that.
Edward Snowden is not the criminal, the government is for violating the constitution!
April 16th, 2013 at 11:40:20 AM
permalink
Quote: Walkinshaw30tThis may be a stupid question but is there ways of choosing outside bets in roulette or player/ banker in baccarat that will lower variance between wins and losses?
I have heard people with bet selection strategies that they claim lower variance in wins/ losses- is this possible? And if so what strategies would you reccomend?
Hello, Walkinshaw30t. Good question, my friend.
I'm not so sure about "lowering" one's variance, especially at an "even chance" game such as Baccarat, but I do happen to believe in the "harnessing" of variance statistics.
Variance happens. It is a very natural "cause and effect" within the boundaries that are the Banker and Player selections at Baccarat. Reduction of variance? Difficult, at best.
So I utilize a form of variance "tracking" in my play:
I have 4 "preferred trending plays" that I utilize exclusively.
I have calculated, for each one of those plays, their inherent "variance statistics".
To define "statistics":
a.) Strike rates (w/l %) on each play.
b.) Distance between (read: variance) their median (read: avg) range that each play will/can stray.
c.) Longest win and loss streaks on each play.
That's it. There's my variance "formula". Does that, alone, put me ahead of their house edge? Nope. Nor will any singular approach.
But, combined with my other "Player's Edges", it surely does.
Variance exists. We all, as serious players, must come to terms with it as best we can. That is the very nature of the formula I just laid out herein.
I wish you all the very best of it.
April 16th, 2013 at 1:10:13 PM
permalink
Quote: DJTeddyBear
Yeah, you lower variance in roulette rather simply: Spread the bets around. You win more often but don't win as much. Unless I'm completely off my rocker, that's the very definition of lowering variance.
Exactly what I would have said. Sure you can lower
your variance in roulette, bet on all 100+ spaces
except a few and you'll win every time, except
for the few when you don't. It will change nothing,
the house edge will take just as much of your money
in the long run.
People make way too much out of variance. The house
always gets your money, good variance just means it
does it slower. In the end, which is all that counts, whats
the difference.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
April 16th, 2013 at 2:27:09 PM
permalink
Quote: EvenBobIn the end, which is all that counts, whats
the difference.
Hello, EvenBob.
Here is, as I see it, the "difference":
One can, if they are sufficiently "familiar" with their variances (both personal- and bet selection-wise), adjust their betting accordingly:
If I find myself in the midst of some "negative variance", I will either a.) no-bet or b.) minimize my bet size.
If I find myself in the midst of a "positive variance", I will either a.) increase my unit size or b.) utilize my parlay option.
If I find myself in any sort of variance "correction", I will act expediently towards the correct move (read: bet option) based upon that "correction".
It all comes with familiarity of your own variance statistics.
It is not, however, an exact science. I have been right and I have been wrong, BUUUTTT, in the long run, I am a better player for it. My variances are charted by me on both a shoe-by-shoe and session-to-session basis. I attempt to "ride with" my variances, regardless up- or down-wards. Again, not an exact science. Just a good guage of where my preferred trends MAY be moving. And, then, betting (or no-betting) accordingly.
Just think about it for a moment, EvenBob......
......imagine if you had an estimate, a good idea, heck, even an "inkling" of whether or not you may win a majority of your next few bets on your preferred bet selection process (with me it's certain trends). Or, for that matter, that you might lose the majority of those bets. Either way, EvenBob, might it present you with a bit of an "edge", armed with those proven statistics?
Just think about it for a moment......
April 16th, 2013 at 3:17:11 PM
permalink
Quote: gr8playermight it present you with a bit of an "edge", armed with those proven statistics?
..
I don't know what a 'bit' of an edge means. Either
you have a provable edge or you don't. A woman
is pregnant or she's not.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
April 16th, 2013 at 4:48:54 PM
permalink
Quote: gr8playerIf I find myself in the midst of some "negative variance", I will either a.) no-bet or b.) minimize my bet size.
If I find myself in the midst of a "positive variance", I will either a.) increase my unit size or b.) utilize my parlay option.
If I find myself in any sort of variance "correction", I will act expediently towards the correct move (read: bet option) based upon that "correction".
It all comes with familiarity of your own variance statistics.
This would work, if following results where "correlated". Then you would increase your bets when winning, and decrease your bets when losing - and this would give you a (very strong indeed) player advantage. (i.e. imagine a "magic" roulette wheel where all numbers come up twice in a row. One of the many winning strategy would be to heavily replay and increase each bet once you hit something).
However, it is very hard to imagine a possible correlation mechanism on roulette. In fact, a significant correlation (which could be constantly monitored, since all results are recorded) would be a strong reason to close the table.
April 16th, 2013 at 7:24:21 PM
permalink
Thanks for replys.
More so what im interested in is betting on a single even money bet (no hedging etc) is there a strategy that when betting on a single even money bet per hand/ spin that will show close to the expected result within say 20 spins (eg9-10 reds and 10-11 black) consistantly?
More so what im interested in is betting on a single even money bet (no hedging etc) is there a strategy that when betting on a single even money bet per hand/ spin that will show close to the expected result within say 20 spins (eg9-10 reds and 10-11 black) consistantly?
Time will tell
April 16th, 2013 at 7:35:11 PM
permalink
Quote: EvenBobI don't know what a 'bit' of an edge means. Either
you have a provable edge or you don't. A woman
is pregnant or she's not.
Yeah, he was telling me the same
Fighting BS one post at a time!
April 17th, 2013 at 12:12:43 AM
permalink
Quote: Walkinshaw30tis there a strategy that when betting on a single even money bet per hand/ spin that will show close to the expected result within say 20 spins
May I ask again why you would desire this in a negative expectation game?
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
April 17th, 2013 at 12:39:03 PM
permalink
Quote: Walkinshaw30tThanks for replys.
More so what im interested in is betting on a single even money bet (no hedging etc) is there a strategy that when betting on a single even money bet per hand/ spin that will show close to the expected result within say 20 spins (eg9-10 reds and 10-11 black) consistantly?
You're not getting it, man. I suggest you stay away from casinos.
If you restrict yourself to JUST even-money bets (red/black, banker/player, etc.), within 20 spins your results could be nearly ANYTHING from -20 units to +20 units. The average result will be about -1 unit if you're playing roulette, and as you go further from that average, that result becomes less probable.
Look, you don't WANT to reduce variance. Variance is your ONLY CHANCE TO WIN in a -EV game.
As has been mentioned, if you want to reduce variance, just cover all the numbers, straight-up, at a roulette table. With a 00 wheel, you'll lose 37 units and win 35 on every spin, there's your low variance.
"So drink gamble eat f***, because one day you will be dust." -ontariodealer
April 17th, 2013 at 2:47:33 PM
permalink
Aces and Eights I get it just fine - I spend more time at the casino than most. Im just interested to hear if there is any strategies to lower variance without out hedging bets as I have heard people discuss subject in other forums (but I do not see being possible)
From the sounds of the replies ive recieved so far i think they agree too
From the sounds of the replies ive recieved so far i think they agree too
Time will tell
April 17th, 2013 at 3:54:12 PM
permalink
Where is the difference between a hedge and a bet that would reduce variance ? I thought the latter was the definition for a hedge.
April 17th, 2013 at 5:48:26 PM
permalink
Maybe fluctuation is a better word
Time will tell
April 17th, 2013 at 6:32:12 PM
permalink
Quote: Walkinshaw30tAces and Eights I get it just fine - I spend more time at the casino than most. Im just interested to hear if there is any strategies to lower variance without out hedging bets as I have heard people discuss subject in other forums (but I do not see being possible)
From the sounds of the replies ive recieved so far i think they agree too
How could this possibly work? If you're not hedging, and the game is random, what possible method could there be to lower variance??
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
April 17th, 2013 at 8:41:06 PM
permalink
Dunno mate thats why I asked the question.
I have heard people discuss the subject before claiming they could though was probably just the usual internet forum rabble from people behind there computers who think they know it all.
I have heard people discuss the subject before claiming they could though was probably just the usual internet forum rabble from people behind there computers who think they know it all.
Time will tell
April 18th, 2013 at 12:42:18 AM
permalink
Quote: Walkinshaw30tMaybe fluctuation is a better word
Sorry, that doesn't make any sense. Fluctuations are random, and can be characterized by variance.
Each bet creates fluctuations, because the outcome is unknown. Under normal conditions (i.e. uncorrelated or correlated bets), this bet also increases the variance. Hedges are bets that are anti-correlated bet, and will *decrease* variance.
If you bet red on roulette, you can hedge it with a bet on black. You get rid most of the variance. Of course this means you have less chance of coming out positive - because it even the hedge is still a negative EV bet.
April 18th, 2013 at 5:02:50 AM
permalink
Ok cool no worries
Time will tell
April 18th, 2013 at 7:40:01 AM
permalink
Quote: EvenBobI don't know what a 'bit' of an edge means. Either
you have a provable edge or you don't. A woman
is pregnant or she's not.
Hello, EvenBob.
A "provable edge", eh? So, as we are all reminded, pretty much on a daily basis right here in this very forum, only the APs (advantage players) "have it" over the casino. Everyone else is simply wasting their time, or, worse, their money. Can't win unless you're a proven AP with a "provable edge"....is that the mantra that we're all supposed to chant in harmony?
I take nothing away from all the AP's 'round here. Nothing at all. I wish them all continued successes.
But does that preclude me from both believing in and trusting in my "player's edges" as I see them and utilize them? Are my edges minimized or, worse, nuetralized simply because I choose not to "put a number" on them? I cannot prove them, mathematically, to anyone but myself. Does that solitary statement relegate me to the "back of the line" 'round here?
To do so would be a disservice to this forum members/posters/lurkers, IMHO.
Look, let me be very clear here: I play Baccarat, a closed-end, shoe game, AS AN AP. Can you understand my true meaning regarding that statement? I believe that I, too, play an AP game. I believe that my play puts me at the advantage, sufficient enough to overcome, and surpass, the house's edge.
How? I play THE SHOE. I play THE TABLE.
I have no "system" (again, I detest that word). I have only my experience, my patience, my discipline, my bet selection process (read: preferred trends), my money management, and my conservative win/loss goals/limits....all, ALL OF IT....made adaptable, by me, toward THIS PARTICULAR shoe/table's pre-disposed results.
Can you appreciate my meaning here? Raise your hand if you can even begin to understand where I'm coming from.......
Witness:
Yesterday. (Yes, a very rare Wednesday off.)
Mohegan Sun.
Shoe is hitting the "2- and 3-hole" nicely.
I'm picking up parlays on both the B and P sides.
I hit my win goal midway through, and was about to color up, BUUUTTT:
No singles. Much too few singles (should be 18...maybe 20, in most shoes).
So I set aside two units to sniff out some "chops".
Yes. How's a straight chop for 7 in-a-row, then a "double P", then 3 more straight chops?
Plus 16 units (for me and my sort of rather conservative style of play...a "windfall") after all comm and tips.
Experience. Patience. Discipline. Bet Selection Process. Money-Management. Conservative Win/Loss Goals/Limits. All Adaptable By Me As Each Particular Shoe/Session Unfolds.
Yes, my friends, I, too, am an AP. Make no mistake of it......
And, yet again, I wish it for all of you.
April 18th, 2013 at 7:50:56 AM
permalink
I see nothing in your style of play which would warrant you being titled an AP.
Money mgt?
Trends?
All well and good, but not the stuff of a true AP.
Perhaps I do not understand: what objectively gives you an edge?
If you cannot quantify it, then by default it must be ... luck.
Money mgt?
Trends?
All well and good, but not the stuff of a true AP.
Perhaps I do not understand: what objectively gives you an edge?
If you cannot quantify it, then by default it must be ... luck.
"What, me worry?"
April 18th, 2013 at 8:43:36 AM
permalink
Quote: MrV
If you cannot quantify it, then by default it must be ... luck.
Whaaat? No, dude. It's totally magic;-)
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
April 18th, 2013 at 9:28:24 AM
permalink
MrV: >....what objectively gives you an edge?<
Hello, MrV.
Objectively?
Anything wrong with subjectively? Anything wrong with using your brain vs the felt table? Anything wrong with ME?
What stops me from providing myself the "edge"? Are only an "objective" edge or quantifiable edge the only edges that matter?
Lastly, if I cannot, somehow, multiply my bet/bankroll by, say, 1.06%, successfully, than that reduces my play down to "luck"?
Shheeesshh, man.......an AP suffers through their ups and downs, as well. Their edge guarantees them nothing, because losses, when they begin to mount, make people do the craziest of things, sometimes. AP or no AP; no one is immune to the variance and the stress and strain created by it. Then where does their AP edge carry them?
IMHO, and I'm sure I'm in the minority 'round here, there is more than strictly the mathematics that matter. I think that one cannot discount the value of subjectivity at this game.
I know mathematics don't lie. I get that. I know that when you multiply our bet x the house edge that it comes up a negative number. I get that, too.
So it all boils down to getting the better of those negative odds. What can we do, as players, to get the better of those negative odds?
I hear alot of "nothing"s being whispered 'round here. "The math is the math, the odds are the odds." Again, a recurring theme.
So be it.
We're all adults, free to believe in, well, whatever it is that we wish to believe in.
Me? I choose to believe in me, and my edges, over the "math of the felt table". But that, apparently, is just me......
Hello, MrV.
Objectively?
Anything wrong with subjectively? Anything wrong with using your brain vs the felt table? Anything wrong with ME?
What stops me from providing myself the "edge"? Are only an "objective" edge or quantifiable edge the only edges that matter?
Lastly, if I cannot, somehow, multiply my bet/bankroll by, say, 1.06%, successfully, than that reduces my play down to "luck"?
Shheeesshh, man.......an AP suffers through their ups and downs, as well. Their edge guarantees them nothing, because losses, when they begin to mount, make people do the craziest of things, sometimes. AP or no AP; no one is immune to the variance and the stress and strain created by it. Then where does their AP edge carry them?
IMHO, and I'm sure I'm in the minority 'round here, there is more than strictly the mathematics that matter. I think that one cannot discount the value of subjectivity at this game.
I know mathematics don't lie. I get that. I know that when you multiply our bet x the house edge that it comes up a negative number. I get that, too.
So it all boils down to getting the better of those negative odds. What can we do, as players, to get the better of those negative odds?
I hear alot of "nothing"s being whispered 'round here. "The math is the math, the odds are the odds." Again, a recurring theme.
So be it.
We're all adults, free to believe in, well, whatever it is that we wish to believe in.
Me? I choose to believe in me, and my edges, over the "math of the felt table". But that, apparently, is just me......
April 18th, 2013 at 2:07:38 PM
permalink
Quote: gr8player
A "provable edge", eh? .
Yup, like it or don't. If you can't prove it, then
its only in your head and it doesn't exist. You
have to be able, on paper, to show it wins in
the long term, just like the casino can show their
edge on paper.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
April 18th, 2013 at 2:40:51 PM
permalink
Quote: EvenBobYup, like it or don't. If you can't prove it, then
its only in your head and it doesn't exist. You
have to be able, on paper, to show it wins in
the long term.
How do poker player decide when they are skillful enough to play ?
April 18th, 2013 at 2:54:16 PM
permalink
Quote: MangoJHow do poker player decide when they are skillful enough to play ?
Poker is a game of skill, you play against other players,
not the house. In bac the house has the edge and you need
a provable edge to beat it.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
April 18th, 2013 at 4:05:19 PM
permalink
Then again, how do you make the decision to play poker ? If it is a skill game, then you would at least be able to break even if it where not for the rake. But actually you don't care if you lose to the house or to your opponents. You would need to *quantify* if your level of play, how much it is better than that your average opponent. You might observe certain plays of others which you find inferior to your strategy, and might even calculate an edge for this - but how to recognize superior strategies, not so say how would you quantify your losses ?
In the end you could judge yourself by past performance only. Nothing wrong with judging your efficiency on past performance in poker or in bacc as an approach if you have no other means. The only problem is (and this makes this thread so ridiculous), for bacc the (trivial) optimum strategy is long known and still negative - which simply proves there is no winning strategy. Ignoring that well known fact is, well, ignorant.
In the end you could judge yourself by past performance only. Nothing wrong with judging your efficiency on past performance in poker or in bacc as an approach if you have no other means. The only problem is (and this makes this thread so ridiculous), for bacc the (trivial) optimum strategy is long known and still negative - which simply proves there is no winning strategy. Ignoring that well known fact is, well, ignorant.
April 18th, 2013 at 6:01:19 PM
permalink
An edge doesn't have to be provable, but it can't exist where it's possible to prove it doesn't, as in baccarat. There are compositions where you could have an edge, but these are demonstrably very rare, to the extent that any strategy that could have an edge would have to have a massive spread, not just a few parlays (and even then, I'm not sure it's even theoretically possible without the tie bet - and that's theoretical strategies, i.e., perfect memory and a computer mind, before factoring in what a human can actually do). Or, of course, you could have an edge if you know the ordering of the cards beforehand.
Basically, gr8player, you're insisting that the word "edge" means something other than what it means, something you're not defining, and your posts read as gibberish. It's certainly possible to win when the math is against you, even over a fairly long time, but when people say "edge," what they usually mean is the edge, not just how well you happen to do.
Basically, gr8player, you're insisting that the word "edge" means something other than what it means, something you're not defining, and your posts read as gibberish. It's certainly possible to win when the math is against you, even over a fairly long time, but when people say "edge," what they usually mean is the edge, not just how well you happen to do.
The trick to poker is learning not to beat yourself up for your mistakes too much, and certainly not too little, but just the right amount.
April 18th, 2013 at 6:15:01 PM
permalink
Quote: 24Bingowhen people say "edge," what they usually mean is the edge, not just how well you happen to do.
Well said. And edge is an edge, its not an opinion
or a feeling. Its repeatable and its constant. Its why
banks make those big loans to casinos, they have
a provable edge.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
April 19th, 2013 at 12:13:07 AM
permalink
Quote: MrVI see nothing in your style of play which would warrant you being titled an AP.
Money mgt?
Trends?
All well and good, but not the stuff of a true AP.
Perhaps I do not understand: what objectively gives you an edge?
If you cannot quantify it, then by default it must be ... luck.
He plays the trends. Unless he has future knowledge of the cards (cheating), he is exposed to the house edge as anyone else and is definitely NOT an AP. Any lifetime winnings are the result of positive variance (see: myself at craps.)
Sorry dude, math reigns on this forum.
"So drink gamble eat f***, because one day you will be dust." -ontariodealer
April 19th, 2013 at 7:49:48 AM
permalink
MangoJ: >Ignoring that well known fact is, well, ignorant.<
24Bingo: >....and your posts read as gibberish.<
Please know that I respectfully disagree with your assessments, gentlemen. And you should know as well that I am far from "ignorant" and am rather coherent.
Pardon my indulgence as I ask: How does it feel to fall so neatly into line with the casino's long-held beliefs? As an outsider looking in, I can only imagine the inherent comfort of having the casino's math on your side of each and every gaming debate. Just know, as well, armed only with the "company line", there's no escaping the inside of that box you've put yourselves into.
AcesAndEights: >Sorry dude, math reigns on this forum.<
Apparently so, Ace....oh, and for what it's worth, I'm sorry too.
24Bingo: >....and your posts read as gibberish.<
Please know that I respectfully disagree with your assessments, gentlemen. And you should know as well that I am far from "ignorant" and am rather coherent.
Pardon my indulgence as I ask: How does it feel to fall so neatly into line with the casino's long-held beliefs? As an outsider looking in, I can only imagine the inherent comfort of having the casino's math on your side of each and every gaming debate. Just know, as well, armed only with the "company line", there's no escaping the inside of that box you've put yourselves into.
AcesAndEights: >Sorry dude, math reigns on this forum.<
Apparently so, Ace....oh, and for what it's worth, I'm sorry too.
April 19th, 2013 at 8:23:41 AM
permalink
I feel like I'm watching the Caterpillar talk to Alice.
Wisdom is the quality that keeps you out of situations where you would otherwise need it
April 19th, 2013 at 12:18:41 PM
permalink
Quote: gr8playerPardon my indulgence as I ask: How does it feel to fall so neatly into line with the casino's long-held beliefs? As an outsider looking in, I can only imagine the inherent comfort of having the casino's math on your side of each and every gaming debate. Just know, as well, armed only with the "company line", there's no escaping the inside of that box you've put yourselves into.
And yet, those long-held beliefs are keeping the casino up and running, and the probabilistic math that underlies them keeps this universe running smoothly. How does it feel to fall so far out of line with such manifest facts of the world around you?
The trick to poker is learning not to beat yourself up for your mistakes too much, and certainly not too little, but just the right amount.
April 19th, 2013 at 12:48:26 PM
permalink
Quote: 24BingoHow does it feel to fall so far out of line with such manifest facts of the world around you?
It feels wonderful, thank you for asking. Exhilarating, actually.
Look, 24Bingo, I am well aware of the math, the true odds. But, obviously unlike you and many others here in this forum, I believe that odds are there to be beaten. Believe it or not, we all do so, in some form or another, every day of our lives.
And that, frankly, is the real impetus for me. Dollars? I make, Thank Goodness, a rather nice living. But, the opportunity to beat the odds, to get the better of the casino at their own game........priceless.
And so I've developed my Bac game around that. Winning some, losing less. Coming out ahead. It doesn't have to be by much, and it'll never amass to "life changing" money. More than likely, that happens to be one of the main reasons for my success.....I am void of the "greed factor", which I happen to believe is worth 20x as much to the casinos than their miniscule house edge.
But just knowing that I'm able to do something that all you bean counters 'round here deem an impossibility......pardon me as I use that word yet again......priceless.
April 19th, 2013 at 12:57:18 PM
permalink
Quote: gr8playerIt feels wonderful, thank you for asking. .
No it isn't. If it was, you wouldn't be haunting gambling
forums for years trying to get validation for your odd
bac ideas. I know who you are, join Johno's forum, he
always has a lot to say to you.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
April 19th, 2013 at 1:20:26 PM
permalink
Wow......how long were you lying in wait for your chance to pounce with that gem of information, EvenBob?
FYI, what you choose to classify as my "haunting gambling forums for years"; you should know, I've assisted countless players with their Bac games over the years. Anyone that has any doubts of that need only to perform a search under "gr8player" at either the GG or BF forums.
You state, Evenbob, that you "know who I am".....if you truly do, you know me as a better person and a better Bac player than the lowlife you're attempting to portray herein.
FYI, what you choose to classify as my "haunting gambling forums for years"; you should know, I've assisted countless players with their Bac games over the years. Anyone that has any doubts of that need only to perform a search under "gr8player" at either the GG or BF forums.
You state, Evenbob, that you "know who I am".....if you truly do, you know me as a better person and a better Bac player than the lowlife you're attempting to portray herein.
April 20th, 2013 at 2:39:33 AM
permalink
Quote: gr8playerLook, 24Bingo, I am well aware of the math, the true odds. But, obviously unlike you and many others here in this forum, I believe that odds are there to be beaten. Believe it or not, we all do so, in some form or another, every day of our lives.
Sure we do, but in a given day we obey the odds many more times than that. Go ahead and try to beat the odds if you like, but don't call it an edge that you've gotten lucky playing their game. Also note that every semiconductor junction in the computer in front of you relies on the same principle that keeps the casino humming.
Quote: gr8playerAnd that, frankly, is the real impetus for me. Dollars? I make, Thank Goodness, a rather nice living. But, the opportunity to beat the odds, to get the better of the casino at their own game........priceless.
You're not getting the better of them, though. You're playing their game, pocketing the money of some other patron while the casino laughs its way to the bank.
Quote: gr8playerAnd so I've developed my Bac game around that. Winning some, losing less. Coming out ahead. It doesn't have to be by much, and it'll never amass to "life changing" money. More than likely, that happens to be one of the main reasons for my success.....I am void of the "greed factor", which I happen to believe is worth 20x as much to the casinos than their miniscule house edge.
If and only if it gets you playing through twenty times the money. That "minuscule house edge" is exactly what their games are worth to them; it doesn't magically change depending on whether the player is "greedy."
Quote: gr8playerBut just knowing that I'm able to do something that all you bean counters 'round here deem an impossibility......pardon me as I use that word yet again......priceless.
No one ever said it was impossible to be ahead in baccarat. It gets steadily more improbable the more you play, but never impossible. The game's designed for a few people to win. Don't act like you've beaten the casino for it, or worse yet, somehow beaten mathematics itself, slandering the reason that keeps you warm and fed.
The trick to poker is learning not to beat yourself up for your mistakes too much, and certainly not too little, but just the right amount.
April 20th, 2013 at 8:45:40 AM
permalink
Fair enough, 24Bingo, fair enough.
I like you. You're a breath of fresh air as an internet forum member, for you can present a cogent argument without getting, well, argumentative.
And, frankly, you've enlightened me to something with your: >That miniscule house edge is exactly what their games are worth to them; it doesn't magically change depending on whether the player is greedy.<
So it appears that with this statement you are saying that the casinos make their "house edge" number, and that's it. I must admit, I always thought that it was the casino's "true hold" at their games that lined their coffers. I thank you for the enlightenment.
Lastly, 24Bingo, while it may not resonate very clearly throughout my posts, I remain a humble man, especially as it pertains to my Baccarat play. I am very well aware of what I can, and, frankly, what I cannot, shall I say, "get away with". I am but a small crumb in their vast bakery. And that serves me rather well, both in amassing my relatively-small wins and in remaining under their radar.
Nice conversing with you, 24Bingo. Stay well, my friend.
I like you. You're a breath of fresh air as an internet forum member, for you can present a cogent argument without getting, well, argumentative.
And, frankly, you've enlightened me to something with your: >That miniscule house edge is exactly what their games are worth to them; it doesn't magically change depending on whether the player is greedy.<
So it appears that with this statement you are saying that the casinos make their "house edge" number, and that's it. I must admit, I always thought that it was the casino's "true hold" at their games that lined their coffers. I thank you for the enlightenment.
Lastly, 24Bingo, while it may not resonate very clearly throughout my posts, I remain a humble man, especially as it pertains to my Baccarat play. I am very well aware of what I can, and, frankly, what I cannot, shall I say, "get away with". I am but a small crumb in their vast bakery. And that serves me rather well, both in amassing my relatively-small wins and in remaining under their radar.
Nice conversing with you, 24Bingo. Stay well, my friend.
April 21st, 2013 at 3:40:46 PM
permalink
Quote: gr8playerAnd, frankly, you've enlightened me to something with your: >That miniscule house edge is exactly what their games are worth to them; it doesn't magically change depending on whether the player is greedy.<
So it appears that with this statement you are saying that the casinos make their "house edge" number, and that's it. I must admit, I always thought that it was the casino's "true hold" at their games that lined their coffers. I thank you for the enlightenment.
This is actually a common source of confusion. People hear how high the hold percentage is in relation to the edge and think it's some "secret true edge," but the reason it's so much higher is simple: people bet much more than they bring to the table, especially at even-money games, which typically have the lowest edge. Players win money, and bet it. That is a bit like the "greed factor," but with the caveat that one's reasons for making or not making a bet are irrelevant, or even when these bets are made (i.e., quitting ahead and coming back another day is no different from staying, except that you have more money in the interim), only how many. In the long run, the hold will be approximately the house edge by the total amount bet.
The trick to poker is learning not to beat yourself up for your mistakes too much, and certainly not too little, but just the right amount.
June 23rd, 2013 at 7:03:07 AM
permalink
Would betting on black, odd and high in roulette reduce the variance or increase it?
Time will tell
June 23rd, 2013 at 7:03:47 AM
permalink
(all 3 at the same time)
Time will tell
June 23rd, 2013 at 10:30:04 AM
permalink
This reminds me, there exists some rather skilled croupiers, mainly in Sky City Auckland. When I was naive and still wet behind the ears, I played a four step martingale on 3 x EC's at the same time. I didn't win a single spin (go figure those odds and the available numbers which to lose against), the dealer didn't even put the ball on zero or throw a double spin to clean me out.Quote: Walkinshaw30tWould betting on black, odd and high in roulette reduce the variance or increase it?
What got me, was the blatant remark he made to the pit boss who was grinning while looking on, "maybe I was being too hard on him". One of many tales while playing in that joint. One of the reasons why I switched to playing baccarat, no dealer influence on the next outcome, your fate is at the mercy of how the cards fall.
June 23rd, 2013 at 10:33:34 AM
permalink
Quote: Walkinshaw30tWould betting on black, odd and high in roulette reduce the variance or increase it?
Reduce. Along with exposing more of your money to the house edge.
June 23rd, 2013 at 10:39:24 AM
permalink
Quote: egaliteWhat got me, was the blatant remark he made to the pit boss who was grinning while looking on, "maybe I was being to hard on him". One of many tales while playing in that joint.
I wouldn't put too much stock in it. Many dealers make remarks like that when they have no influence at all on the outcome. You have to understand, dealers get blamed all day long for outcomes over which they had no influence, so acting as if they did is a natural consequence.
Quote: egalite
One of the reasons why I switched to playing baccarat, no dealer influence on the next outcome.
Keep this in mind the next time you're playing and another player says "C'mon <dealer's name> give me a <card that would create a winning hand>, for which ever side he's picked. Take extra note of how irritated they can become with the dealer when they don't get what they wished for.
June 23rd, 2013 at 6:05:40 PM
permalink
Would you know how I could calculate the standard deviation for this?
For a coin flip of 20 flips would it be something like (50/100)^3 x 20 = 2.5. Sqrt x 2.5= 1.58 ??
For a coin flip of 20 flips would it be something like (50/100)^3 x 20 = 2.5. Sqrt x 2.5= 1.58 ??
Time will tell
