Saturdays sheets

[MitchS]

Hi ya'll,

Been real busy working on some incredible breakthroughs with my Baccarat methodology that far out profits anything I accomplish with the horses. Some my laugh in disbelief but its a fact, and I've proved it.

I'm going to be putting up the sheets of about 5 tracks or so a day. Below is one of them.

Have a great weekend,

Mitch



Track RN CL DF SF Horse PN EP MP LP SR BST BSR TC ML BEV C2 EC TR ES HS AP DLR
Ap 1 1 5 D Salsa Dancer 5 65 61 71 59 0 71 95 3.5 2 0 71 98 0 S 88 22
Ap 1 1 5 D Lusk 7 68 64 65 52 0 64 89 8 3 3 70 88 0 NA 77 15
Ap 1 1 5 D Sweet Baby Ray 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 6 7 0 0 0 0 NA 17 0
Ap 1 1 5 D Pass The Pipe 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 48 3 9 0 0 0 0 NA 17 0
Ap 1 1 5 D Pocket Change 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 48 10 9 0 0 0 0 NA 17 0
Ap 1 1 5 D Sevengoldnmissiles 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 48 2 11 0 0 0 0 NA 17 0
Ap 1 1 5 D Two Turn Brody 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 47 8 12 0 0 0 0 NA 17 0
Ap 2 2 6 D Dealinwithinsanity 6 78 78 64 66 79 87 101 3.5 4 1 69 93 8 E 95 29
Ap 2 2 6 D Stop The Race 2 73 78 70 68 0 87 101 2.5 5 0 69 99 8 E 94 42
Ap 2 2 6 D Pico D J Alex 4 73 74 64 59 80 80 99 10 6 3 69 99 0 EP 85 17
Ap 2 2 6 D Grand Council 5 74 77 55 55 87 87 98 5 7 3 68 91 3 EP 83 10
Ap 2 2 6 D King Cielo 1 73 71 69 64 98 85 97 4.5 7 3 70 97 3 EP 95 36
Ap 2 2 6 D Silver Award 3 66 63 70 63 77 78 97 4 8 2 69 90 1 P 93 13
Ap 2 2 6 D Rapadash 7 64 65 64 57 84 77 92 8 10 5 72 88 2 P 84 199
Ap 3 0 7 D Camptown Prince 8 67 64 54 47 59 59 89 4.5 4 4 124 75 3 P 87 20
Ap 3 0 7 D Knight Dragon 5 59 54 65 49 66 66 88 3 5 9 72 87 0 S 82 16
Ap 3 0 7 D Rubi's Legacy 6 65 60 53 46 60 62 87 6 6 6 71 79 0 P 82 16
Ap 3 0 7 D Tall Paul 4 57 53 52 47 56 61 87 4 7 4 72 81 1 S 90 16
Ap 3 0 7 D Pyramid Ghost 3 54 50 62 54 54 74 86 3.5 8 1 74 79 1 P 95 41
Ap 3 0 7 D Noah's Cat 2 71 65 50 40 54 61 86 10 9 5 70 76 3 E 77 22
Ap 3 0 7 D Cart's Twin Sox 7 74 64 33 27 65 53 83 20 11 5 70 58 5 E 65 22
Ap 3 0 7 D Mayor Michael O 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 47 8 27 0 0 0 0 NA 34 0
Ap 4 2 6 D Point Won 5 73 74 66 63 79 81 104 1.8 3 0 68 101 6 E 91 17
Ap 4 2 6 D Miss Dignified 4 67 62 66 55 76 78 98 4 5 5 70 95 5 E 75 276
Ap 4 2 6 D Thirdwind 6 66 63 66 55 71 74 97 4.5 6 5 71 86 1 S 82 14
Ap 4 2 6 D Flo's Wild Rose 2 70 70 68 58 0 76 96 5 7 0 69 86 7 EP 83 65
Ap 4 2 6 D Xena Peach 3 69 69 64 59 75 77 95 8 7 3 68 95 2 EP 86 28
Ap 4 2 6 D Chocolate Rose 7 70 70 60 57 75 75 95 5 8 2 69 88 5 EP 87 53
Ap 4 2 6 D Dawnsdarlingorphan 1 67 61 61 51 63 72 91 12 10 3 71 93 5 EP 68 42
Ap 5 5 8 T Jambalaya Joy 3 53 53 75 61 66 79 102 3.5 5 3 72 110 3 P 87 40
Ap 5 5 8 T Lampoon 5 71 72 76 68 0 83 101 3 7 5 70 98 3 P 100 17
Ap 5 5 8 T Political Hostage 8 56 54 69 62 75 81 99 4 8 2 124 99 6 EP 91 29
Ap 5 5 8 T Rojo Sol 1 58 61 69 64 78 79 98 2.5 10 5 73 103 2 P 96 231
Ap 5 5 8 T Flama Del Sol 1A 74 74 66 61 0 78 98 2.5 10 0 68 94 8 E 87 14
Ap 5 5 8 T The Last Spy 2 67 71 59 62 72 83 97 5 12 6 70 91 2 P 93 17
Ap 5 5 8 T Hello My Friend 9 54 62 71 58 70 76 94 8 14 14 72 83 0 P 88 17
Ap 5 5 8 T Daisy Mountain 6 71 74 49 55 73 78 93 15 20 2 69 82 7 E 83 17
Ap 5 5 8 T Tough Song 4 73 73 51 54 62 77 92 20 23 0 69 58 8 E 76 17
Ap 5 5 8 T Scarlet Reflection 7 65 53 62 45 56 77 87 30 28 13 73 77 2 EP 67 25
Ap 6 2 9 D Barber College 9 59 58 77 65 80 80 102 4.5 5 7 124 103 0 S 95 15
Ap 6 2 9 D Lord Of The Cats 7 71 72 67 65 79 88 101 2.5 6 0 68 98 8 EP 95 10
Ap 6 2 9 D Bien Blushing 6 63 63 78 66 77 82 99 6 8 5 126 100 3 P 94 28
Ap 6 2 9 D Te Quiero Viejo 5 65 72 65 66 82 82 99 3.5 9 2 70 99 4 EP 95 16
Ap 6 2 9 D He'sachicmagnet 8 58 68 73 66 76 83 98 10 9 8 76 102 1 P 93 17
Ap 6 2 9 D Sr. Razem 3 54 66 70 65 86 81 98 6 11 5 125 99 0 P 92 15
Ap 6 2 9 D City's Honey 4 72 71 55 61 86 80 96 10 12 3 68 91 5 E 84 16
Ap 6 2 9 D Li'lbito'fudge 2 62 61 72 65 80 83 96 12 18 4 124 101 2 S 93 15
Ap 6 2 9 D Buzzle Ways 1 61 62 66 60 73 83 93 20 21 7 74 92 2 S 90 37
Ap 7 5 5 T It's Handsome I Am 3 70 69 68 67 84 84 105 2.5 5 0 70 101 2 P 84 260
Ap 7 5 5 T Carson's Castle 7 76 77 73 71 0 88 101 8 7 0 68 97 8 E 90 30
Ap 7 5 5 T Happy Birthday 4 76 77 69 69 0 86 100 3.5 8 4 67 107 5 EP 88 22
Ap 7 5 5 T Heaven's Hope 2 71 74 67 67 0 87 98 10 10 7 69 100 0 P 85 16
Ap 7 5 5 T M Lee 8 69 68 67 63 0 80 97 20 11 2 69 83 5 EP 79 279
Ap 7 5 5 T The Word Is Out 10 74 74 66 62 0 77 97 15 12 0 70 99 4 EP 81 27
Ap 7 5 5 T Maneke 9 75 74 64 63 0 80 96 5 14 2 67 93 7 E 78 14
Ap 7 5 5 T Three D's Song 5 73 75 60 58 0 78 96 15 20 5 69 89 2 S 77 9
Ap 7 5 5 T Tale Of The Hawk 1 71 77 61 62 0 85 95 10 23 1 69 95 5 EP 84 55
Ap 7 5 5 T Cherokee Way 6 72 71 65 61 0 78 94 10 26 0 76 96 4 EP 81 85
Ap 8 6 7 T High Adventure 2 78 82 73 71 0 92 107 5 4 3 70 106 5 P 97 49
Ap 8 6 7 T El Nino 3 79 86 80 78 0 97 105 3.5 5 1 66 99 7 E 105 14
Ap 8 6 7 T Four Boy Sham 8 65 65 79 70 86 86 105 15 7 2 127 109 4 P 97 28
Ap 8 6 7 T Equal Opportunity 1 80 84 71 75 0 94 104 2.5 8 0 73 111 7 E 101 35
Ap 8 6 7 T In A Flash 7 79 73 73 66 0 89 101 5 8 2 123 112 6 E 94 44
Ap 8 6 7 T Icy Ridge 5 77 84 77 75 0 94 101 8 10 3 68 106 2 P 101 17
Ap 8 6 7 T Devilofarush 6 70 75 68 71 0 91 99 4.5 11 5 69 106 2 EP 94 16
Ap 8 6 7 T Three Cities 4 60 62 81 65 0 83 96 15 17 5 123 101 3 E 92 20
Ap 9 1 7 D Lucyswordsoflove 7 78 76 58 58 74 74 98 3 3 0 69 93 6 E 88 22
Ap 9 1 7 D Holy Starlite 4 67 65 72 59 74 74 96 6 4 9 71 96 0 S 89 22
Ap 9 1 7 D Distant City 5 71 70 62 62 0 77 93 3.5 5 0 69 97 2 E 94 13
Ap 9 1 7 D Delaplaine Falls 3 73 70 55 51 63 63 90 12 7 2 70 82 5 E 83 24
Ap 9 1 7 D Silken Alice 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 49 6 13 0 0 0 0 NA 23 0
Ap 9 1 7 D Cash Mama 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 48 10 16 0 0 0 0 NA 23 0
Ap 9 1 7 D Gentle Lana 1A 0 0 0 0 0 0 48 10 16 0 0 0 0 NA 23 0
Ap 9 1 7 D Meryl's Spirit 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 47 5 26 0 0 0 0 NA 23 0
Ap 9 1 7 D Atlantic Nymph 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 46 4.5 30 0 0 0 0 NA 23 0

[timtam]

Explain explain all I see are numbers and letters and things oh my

[MitchS]

Sorry.. The format on this message board does not allow me to post this information correctly. Go to www.ultimateprecisiongaming.com

Mitch

[traynor]

That is the funny little game with the 8s and 9s? I think I played that a couple of times. I am curious what makes you think baccarat is beatable. (I am not debating whether or not it is beatable, just curious what makes you think it is beatable.) And I assume we are talking about the real world, and not a computer simulation?
Good Luck!

[traynor]

Nice website. By "mild progression" I assume you are talking about a Labouchere or "cancellation" system. They work nicely when they work nicely, but can go seriously awry. In ANY type of progression system, in which wagers are "mildly progressed" after losses, the problem is in what most baccarat fans call a "see-saw" or "choppy shoe." Running through a couple of hundred shoes does not a system make. I wish you the best of luck, and look forward to a more detailed explanation of how your method works.
Good Luck!

[MitchS]

My method wins flat betting. If a method cannot win flat betting than no betting progression in the world will help it and your doomed to a miserable death. However if you have a method than wins flat betting you can apply a mild progression to help excellerate your hourly rate. I myself flat bet and win consistently. It's important to have at least what I call a one to one win to loss ratio. Meaning that the losing shoes are not more than -6 by my stop loss, but my good winning shoes are in the +6 to +12 plus range. Flat betting is winning at a clip of over 4 units per shoe. The progression I sometimes use is a very mild 1-1-3 or a 1-2-4 for three series of bets. If that loses then thats it for that series of bets and it starts over again. I personally just flat bet and my method has been tested on over 2000 shoes.

Mitch

[formula_2002]

Hi ya'll,

Been real busy working on some incredible breakthroughs with my Baccarat methodology that far out profits anything I accomplish with the horses. Some my laugh in disbelief but its a fact, and I've proved it.



Mitch, I'd like to read the proof. You dont have to display the sytem, just the proof if possible.

Thanks
Joe M

[traynor]

Now you have me curious. Your references to plus and minus are apparently the result (profit or loss) of each shoe? Because it is unlikely you are counting cards (a particularly unrewarding approach to baccarat), the next reasonable assumption is that you are using a schema dependent on results. Something along the line of Renzoni's "follow the shoe" approach? In short, a method that uses the result of the last hand to determine what to do on the next hand.

It is a fascinating topic, and one I am really interested in. I assume you are familiar with Lyle Stuart's approach?
Good Luck!

[traynor]

MitchS wrote: <The progression I sometimes use is a very mild 1-1-3 or a 1-2-4 for three series of bets.>

Both are Labouchere spinoffs, variants on the "original" of 1-2-3, bet the two outside digits, if win, cross off, if lose add the amount as the last digit and repeat. Theory is that each "completed series" puts you six units ahead.

We ran a LONG simulation on this and spinoffs, using both Monte Carlo (random sampling without replacement) and bootstrap (random sampling with replacement. The bottom line is that your results could well be anomalous, rather than a system.

There are a whole lot more serious bettors trying to beat baccarat than the average person would believe. It is one of those things that you can do well at for a few hours--if you happen to be an aggressive bettor--and pretty well retire to Maui or the Costa del Sol afterwards.
Good Luck!

[Dave Schwartz]

Actually, a "count strategy" for Baccarat is a strong possibility. Back in the late '70s, after I couldn't play Blackjack any more and before I chose horse racing as what turned out to be my life's endeavor, my former playing partner pushed me to work on Baccarat.

Using my first computer (an Apple IIe), we actually devised a strategy that worked in just a few months. The downside was that you needed a $50k bankroll to make $20 per hour.

My old partner and I found each other about 3 years ago. He was still perfecting the system and asked if I'd write him some more software to test his stuff.

In the ensuing 29 years I have developed somewhat more programming skill than I had in 1977. But, alas, along with that skill has come a draw on my time. I just could not do it.

BTW, this friend has made his living since the early '90s playing slots, video poker and video blackjack for a living. He actually lives on the "points earned" from playing. Not a very good living by most standards (about $18 per hour net he told me).

He always has a houseful of DVRs and big screens to sell, never pays for a meal or buys gas for his car, and basically flies under the radar. In other words, he has worked very hard at not working.


Anyway, I have no idea if Mitch's system is viable or not but IMHO, it is certainly possible.


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[traynor]

Dave Schwartz wrote: <Actually, a "count strategy" for Baccarat is a strong possibility.>

There have been a number of very dedicated (a euphemism for "obsessed") baccarat players who have tried to work out counting systems. To the best of my knowledge, none has succeeded, or even come close. That does not mean that it doesn't exist.

The problem is that, unlike blackjack, there are no strategy decisions (except how much to bet on which hand) to manipulate. Unfortunately, a relative preponderance or defiency in one or more card values does not benefit either punto o banco--they stay the same. It is an interesting problem that has caused endless speculation, and little in the way of long run profit. Or even significant short run profit.

The seventies were hard on a lot of blackjack professionals. Many decided the Curzon group in London was more hospitable, and never came back.
Good Luck!

[MitchS]

Thats funny, I posted a messege in this thread yesterday but its not here. I must not have pressed send ofter review, oh well.

Joe; I really have no proof but my word that the results I speak of on my website are the truth and that they are. Over 5 years ago I created this method for myself with no intention of selling a system. I tested about 1500 shoe BY HAND before I started playing for real money. When I was in my real playing mode back then , I was playing a lot and traveling a lot. The Casinos are not close to me. I really got burned out after awhile and started to not enjoy the grind of a 1.5 net profit in units per shoe FLAT BETTING. Even though I was winning and my worst drawdowns were in the -30 unit range (drawdown means total units down over a period of time. I employ a -6 unit per session or per shoe stop loss) but there would be long peroids of tough grind it out, not much happening, and it gets gets trying at times. I got burned out and and stopped enjoying the game for awhile. I thought why not sell it to others interested in Baccarat and I'll teach them my success with the method. Ultimate Precision Gaming website created.

After a little hiatis, I'm back playing and I must say very excited and extremely happy to be playing again. The new incorporation has skyrocketed the net profit per shoe, which works in conjunction with my older concepts.
What possible proof could I display that anyone would believe, there is none. I don't concider myself a system seller, even though I sell a system, I'm a player just like everybody else and I use this exact method as I've written out. It works.


Taynor; I'm familiar with the authors you mention. As a matter of fact I probably have every system know to man about Baccarat and other games. Just like I mentioned before, if you can't win flat betting like my method can, no progression on god's green earth will help you.

My method is not just some simple follow the last decision stagnet one dimentional thinking. Your right card counting with baccarat does not work. My method has 8 betting modes which I call the "foundation" and you need to think of it like your blackjack basic stretegy. Its not something your going to sit down and read and in 30 minutes your ready to play. You'll need to study it and maybe in a few days with practice you will have it down pat and be playing it 100% mechanical without much thought process. Its principles are mathematical in nature with Baccarat streak analysis and stock market trading principles.

The new add-on to the foundation which I call UPB Supercharged is what has me really excited. There are 3 additional modes that incorporates into the foundation which all work together as one. I employ a 36 unit lifetime bankroll
since my largest drawdown was -30 units and a -6 units session loss limit. To give you an example of the last 3 and a half days I'm up 33 units with only 22 half shoes or 11 full shoes which included a -16 drawdawn that I'm just recovering from here in the last few hours.

Mitch

[MitchS]

Dave is right. A count strategy for Baccarat is viable, but the cards have to be dealt down to the last card and your advantage is so miniscule its hardly worth it. Any advantage bets or series of bets would not even present themselves until at the end of the shoe. Thats not how to beat the game.

Its also important to have money management skills. I can't help a person thats up +8 units at decision 50 with 30 decisions left in the shoe and he continues to play and give all his profit back and then some if some of the bets start to go south. A person that gives all of that profit back and ends up the shoe at -3 units can't be helped. I on the other in that situation would of called it a shoe +5 at the very least.

In my mind it not only takes a sound playing methodology but sound money management principles to beat a negitive expectency game like Baccarat in the long run.

Mitch

[formula_2002]

Mitch, thanks for your reply.

[traynor]

MitchS wrote: <Its also important to have money management skills. I can't help a person thats up +8 units at decision 50 with 30 decisions left in the shoe and he continues to play and give all his profit back and then some if some of the bets start to go south. A person that gives all of that profit back and ends up the shoe at -3 units can't be helped. I on the other in that situation would of called it a shoe +5 at the very least.>

I don't know if that could be called "money management." Whether an individual bettor is up or down at any given moment has no effect whatsoever on whether the next hand, or the next 30 hands, are wins or losses. It seems you are saying that if you stop playing when you are X units ahead or behind, reality will change to accomodate your decision.

For every situation in which the next 30 decisions would erode the profit, there is another in which the profits are enhanced. Think of it like the silly "due column" method for horses; bet until you are X amount ahead or behind, then quit for the day. The outcome of the next race, just like the outcome of the next coup, is not affected one whit by your decision to bet or not.

For those who may be wondering what on earth we are talking about, the "follow the shoe" principle means "bet on bank if bank won last." Conversely, anti-shoe means the opposite; if there is a "choppy shoe," going from bank to player to bank to player, anti-shoe bettors can rack up a lot of wins in a fairly short period.

If you have the chance to play baccarat (or mini-baccarat), a neat "system" is simply to let wins ride an extra hand. If you win, the next bet is double, then if you lose, you lose, if you win, you are up three. Again, there is no guarantee of winning, but you may be able to have a lot of fun playing for an extended period with very little out-of-pocket expense.

MitchS. I apologize for being such a skeptic, and I wish you all the luck in the world. It is just that when I read things implying that the odds are somehow influenced by whether a particular bettor is ahead or behind at some arbitrary point, and that stopping one session to resume another at a later time is somehow related to winning or losing, I have a really hard time taking it seriously. The odds of baccarat are not changed by your decisions.

As long as you are playing in a negative expectation situation of exponential decay, you are going to lose. Period. That is not "negative thinking." It is freshman math.
Good Luck!

[MitchS]

Spoken like a true mathematician. I remember when I was actively counting cards playing Blackjack. Were going back a few years now. There were not many BJ books on the market at that time but from the few pioneers of the game. The mathematical mind set was... YOU HAVE AN ADVANTAGE, say 2%, just sit down and play and in the long run you will come out ahead, I mean what else is there to think about. Play X amount of hours at X amount of stakes and you'll profit X amount of dollars. This is all very general of course but you know what I mean without getting to technical in this thread. My mind set was a litttle different back them, and I profited from BJ with a small bankroll consistently. I didn't have a large bankroll so I needed to think a little outside of the box. I'm not a mathematician so I can believe in table trends, biasis and the like, that a mathematical mind would have trouble dealing with. Its funny, Jerry Patterson came out with his book and the, I believe he called it the Target blackjack course some years later. When I read it, I thought it was interesting because I had been thinking along those lines from the beginining. True mathematicians have a hard time dealing with that but I assure you table trends, biasis and the like are very real and can be taken advantage of in the short term. I'll end by saying.. what your mind can conceive and believe, you can achieve. Yes, I believe in table trends, biasis and the like and I've been beating a negitive expectency game like Baccarat for some time. Until the mathematical mind set has been freed and released you'll be unable to have success with a negitive expectency game because your mind will not allow you to have success. Its the old salesman story... I won't bore you.

WOW, did i get carried away or what? My Baccarat system is 100% mechanical, but I'd be a fool and an idiot if I said I have an actual long term advantage over the game, mathematically speaking of course. That would make history. Until such time as I can program and run a simulation of my method, no such claims will be made. There is a program comming out in the future by uxsoftware.com which has a very nice programable roulette software program that is going to focus there attention on a Baccarat programable program and then I'll be able to actually test all my principles. Its funny though because when that day does come and I do a million shoe simulation and if it comes back a long term loser over those shoes, that will be the day my 5+ year Baccarat winning streak ends.

Mitch

[traynor]

MitchS wrote: <True mathematicians have a hard time dealing with that but I assure you table trends, biasis and the like are very real and can be taken advantage of in the short term. I'll end by saying.. what your mind can conceive and believe, you can achieve. Yes, I believe in table trends, biasis and the like and I've been beating a negitive expectency game like Baccarat for some time. Until the mathematical mind set has been freed and released you'll be unable to have success with a negitive expectency game because your mind will not allow you to have success. Its the old salesman story... I won't bore you.>

Actually, it is what the DSM-IV defines as "magical thinking," a symptom of schizophreniform personality disorder. Essentially, the mistaken belief that mental state affects physical matter reality. As for the "mathematical mindset" being "freed and released," a more appropriate phrase might be, "Until you are willing to blindly accept absolute drivel without a shred of proof, evidence, or verification."

I do not dispute at all that you may have been beating a negative expectation game with "positive thinking." It is a simple little quirk of humanity that Festinger called "cognitive dissonance." In plain English, that means you will literally ignore any conflicting evidence to support your false notions. Your "memory" or "records" are support for your beliefs, and your "interpretations" of past events that support or disagree with your beliefs are similarly biased.

The thing that makes it funny is that I went down that road and found it was a complete dead end. Not just for me, but a dead end in general. You may affect your own subjective view of reality, your own subjective perceptions, but you will not affect the outcome of the next hand of baccarat in the least by how you think about it, whether you are up or down for the "session," or whatever other criteria you choose to use.

My reason for asking about Lyle Stuart was simple; he explored the notion of causality and mental state at length. His belief was that his mental state affected his decision making--an entirely different issue. You are apparently claiming that your "mechanical system" is dependent on mental state; it will only work if you "truly believe." The bottom line is that if mental state is the key factor, why is a "system" necessary?

Go outside your front door and look back. Then stand on the Strip and take a good long look at Bellagio's. One is a demonstration of "positive thinking and believing." The other is the result of leveraging the advantage of positive expectation situations of exponential growth--otherwise called the "house advantage." I will leave you to sort out which is which.
Good Luck

[MitchS]

Well Taynor; This thread has gotton way out of context so We'll just leave it at that. My Baccarat method which is 100% mechanical works on mathematical properties having to do with streak analysis and imbalances.

M

[traynor]

MitchS
No disrespect is intended. I am fascinated with the topic, as you obviously are as well. I have worked through a LOT of theories, most of which revolved around perceived anomalies in random variable events. The bottom line is that the perception is what causes the belief of "trends" and "streaks" and "hot dice" and "cold shoes" and all the other things that otherwise reasonable people want so desperately to believe in, not the reality observed. In any event, I wish you continued success applying your method, whether it is reasonable or not.
Good Luck!

[Suff]

MitchS
No disrespect is intended. I am fascinated with the topic, as you obviously !.

I'm interested in the topic as well. Talk on, if your so inclined.

I'm only interested from a curious point of view. I have no dog in the fight.

I bet pretty colors and horse's whose name sound like Women I've slept with.

I do find this an interesting and worthy read though.:ThmbUp:

[cj]

.
I bet ... horse's whose name sound like Women I've slept with.


You must be a very patient bettor.

[Suff]

You must be a very patient bettor.

Your a funny guy....lol.

I used to bet more often when a horse ran at NYRA named "Paid Professional";)

[formula_2002]

MitchS
The bottom line is that the perception is what causes the belief of "trends" and "streaks" and "hot dice" and "cold shoes" and all the other things that otherwise reasonable people want so desperately to believe in, not the reality observed. Good Luck!

Well said, and I would add, although many people wish it were otherwise, the laws of probability in a Newtonian world are quite dependable and should be consulted every so often. ;)

[Pace Cap'n]

Actually, it is what the DSM-IV defines as "magical thinking," a symptom of schizophreniform personality disorder.


Originally posted by Traynor

MitchS
No disrespect is intended.


Nope, no disrepect there...

[traynor]

MitchS wrote:<Its the old salesman story... I won't bore you.>

I responded with a more specific definition:<Actually, it is what the DSM-IV defines as "magical thinking," a symptom of schizophreniform personality disorder.>

What is your point?

[Suff]

How can one be so perspicacious while devoid of adroitness?

[traynor]

By being sinister, of course.
Good Luck!

[MitchS]

lol... Boy this is getting fun. Sorry to disappoint, but SHORT TERM trends , biasis and imbalances do exist, and I've been capitalizing on these principles with sound mathematical and multidimensional thinking for years, lol. Its true though, with games like Blackjack where you have an advantage and craps and Baccarat were the house edge isn't more than 1.2%.

"Explain me this", futureboy.... sorry, I was watching reruns late last night. I used to know professonal craps players back in the day when I was playing blackjack counting cards. I wasn't much in to craps back then but I used to what these guys on a daily basis grind it out day after day for years making a living at the craps table. Yes, mathematically its not possible, and yet these fellows consistently defied the odds. If you were to take there systems and run them through a simulation I assure you they would fall apart and yet there were bonified consistent winners.

Yes my friends, SHORT TREM trends, biasis and imbalance do exist and they live happily across everyday Casinos worldwide.

My Baccarat method has nothing to do with the above as these principle are incorporated in a mechanical fashion. I truly could care less if anyone ever again buys my method. I and my students continue to profit and thats all the really matters. I do however get a real thrill out of teaching people my method and thats why I post it around from time to time because if anyone is truly into the game of Baccarat(or craps and single zero roulette for that matter, of course its only been tested on baccarat) they would be doing themselves an injustice for not buying my method and tapping into my knowledge base.

I'll pose one question to you mathematicians? Now realise that this has nothing to do with my baccarat method, but I'm very interested in your response and thought processes.

Question- This question is totally hypotethical and no such person exists, but just for fun let say they did. This person has the uncanny power of knowing the exact moment in time when he is going to start losing. He only places FLAT BETS on even 50/50 proposition games and when he is winning and sees the EXACT MOMENT IN TIME when he is going to start losing, he quits that table.Would this person have a mathematical percentage advantage over the house playing in that style? Think about this now.



M

[traynor]

MitchS wrote:<Question- This question is totally hypotethical and no such person exists, but just for fun let say they did. This person has the uncanny power of knowing the exact moment in time when he is going to start losing. He only places FLAT BETS on even 50/50 proposition games and when he is winning and sees the EXACT MOMENT IN TIME when he is going to start losing, he quits that table.Would this person have a mathematical percentage advantage over the house playing in that style? Think about this now.>

Let's not.
Good Luck!

[formula_2002]

Mitch S, I have a problem with this trend stuff.
Buy low, sell high etc.
My problem will be solved once things start to fall up!!. :cool:


Joe M