# System for the casino??? (baccarat)



## N1Spec (9 July 2009)

ok can someone pick this pathetic system apart, if you can even call it a system.

One of my mates think you can beat the house at the casino in Baccarat whereby you keep doubling up your losses until the pendulum swings your way and you win a hand.

Basically.... the banker (house) charges you 5% for everytime you double-up.

For example.

- You bet $100
- You lose, so you have the option to lose the $100 or lose nothing and double it to $200.... you keep doubling until eventually you win.!!! yipee!

give me something smart to say so i can go tell my mate he's got rocks in his head  I did tell him if you were to do this with stocks you'll be called stupid!!, the probablility of him winning a hand is so random that he can go for 10 games without a win!! , the drawdown on his account or should i say chips will be ridiculous!


----------



## Timmy (9 July 2009)

Someone on this forum has a signature line that goes something like:
There are things you learn from carrying a cat by the tail that you cannot learn any other way.

Something like that, Mark Twain said it apparently.

Tell him to go for it.  

When he is finished he can look up martingale and anti-martingale systems on Google, should explain it all.


----------



## beerwm (9 July 2009)

problems-

-casino has limits
-need alot of capital
-Probability - you will eventually have a string of losses.

in the long run - negative expectancy..

.. the house always wins


----------



## Mr J (9 July 2009)

Yeah, it's called a betting limit. Tell your mate that he is far from the first clown to think of this. It's called Martingale, and has been around for a couple hundred years. Typical limits generally allow for 6-8 double-ups before hitting the limit, and most people seem to think that 6-8 losses in a row is so unlikely that the system will be profitable. This is not true. 

I don't expect him to believe, so you may as well just let him lose his money. He will probably have initial success, as it brings many small wins and occasional large losses, but over the longrun he can only rely on luck to stay ahead. He'd actually be better off by betting it all right now on one hand, as his theoretical loss will be far lesser.


----------



## beerwm (9 July 2009)

also-

i could see some merit with martingale systems in markets-

eg, if the prob( win ) increased with each loss [dependant] events, then increasing risk could work quite well,

but with casino games - events are independent - P( 0.5 or less )


----------



## Mr J (9 July 2009)

beerwm said:


> .. the house always wins




The house can be making -ev bets themselves .

Edit, beer, it still shouldn't be used. This is the same sort of thing as averaging down.


----------



## beerwm (9 July 2009)

Mr J said:


> Edit, beer, it still shouldn't be used. This is the same sort of thing as averaging down.




well,

think of it this way,

you enter on a P( 0.6 ) chance of $100 gain/ P( 0.4 ) $100 loss.
=expectancy = $20

but- if trade fails- [maybe its a reversal system]

next trade P( 0.8 ) chance of $100 gain/ P( 0.2 ) $100 loss
=expectancy = $60

trade 2 in run under a different system than trade 1 -its win is 80% / compared to 60%;
so its maxDrawdown is different ---> allowing for a higher risk system.

^
all theoretical - am not saying double your system per loss [true-martingale]

but maybe something like
- 1% - 1.5% - 1.75% - 2% -2%cap. [ if events are dependent ]

although im abit sleep deprived so pick apart my analysis


----------



## Mr J (9 July 2009)

I know what you mean. It's a progressive system, like martingale. Both add to the position simply because it is moving against you, and that surely at some point things will rebound. I'm sure some thought that during Sept/Oct last year, and the world never heard of them again.


----------



## treeman (9 July 2009)

There is 3 main problems with any system that relies on doubling up:

1. Table limits 
2. The bank never runs out of money (in theory)
3. Your odds decrease the longer you play

This means,  short term the system might work in your favour when the trend turns your way. After 4 or 5 unsuccessfull tallies you hit a successfull tally and are still in the game, but in the end the tallies very and the time will come when you are faced with 20 unsuccessfull tallies and give up the nights profits in a matter of minutes. This means you will get caught out by the table limits and your budget will get demolished. Even if you survive to make your money back you will have to be in the game pretty long to be break even again and the longer you play the more chance you have of hitting a bad streak of unsuccessfull tallies again.

Perfect example is a friend of mine who after a 8 hour binge 1 night walked out of crown 4k richer after playing baccarat (successfull tallies). He couldn't help himself and came back the next day and walked out 6k down (unsuccessfull tallies) - both times he played the same strategy.

How many times can he repeat this? Not as many as crown thats for sure...

Excuse the grammar its after 3 am lol


----------



## johnnyg (9 July 2009)

Does the roulette table have limits as well?


----------



## cuttlefish (9 July 2009)

N1Spec said:


> One of my mates think you can beat the house at the casino in Baccarat whereby you keep doubling up your losses until the pendulum swings your way and you win a hand.




Your mate didn't work on investment strategy for Storm financial group by any chance did he?


----------



## skyQuake (9 July 2009)

beerwm said:


> well,
> 
> think of it this way,
> 
> ...




As in trade 2 has a higher expectancy than trade 1 due to being a different system ? Otherwise why does the next trade have a higher probability of winning?


----------



## shiftyphil (9 July 2009)

You can not win at the casino.

If you do find a way to win, they'll call you a cheater and walk you out the door.


----------



## BurntToast (9 July 2009)

It all comes down to one simple fact - each hand of Baccarat, each spin of Roulette are independent events... doesn't matter if it's the first hand/spin or the tenth, your chances of winning THAT hand/spin is exactly the same as any other.

When the odds you're receiving are less than the probability of the event occurring, you're going to lose over the long term - no way to avoid it.

You can test it all out yourself quite quickly and easily with coin tosses. see how many times heads (or tails) come up in a row... or if that seems like too much work, generate a stack of numbers from a random number generator (e.g. enter value limits of 0 and 1).


----------



## Ageo (9 July 2009)

shiftyphil said:


> You can not win at the casino.
> 
> If you do find a way to win, they'll call you a cheater and walk you out the door.




Yep my cousin got escorted from star city from playing blackjack. (With a partner of course).

A casino is basically a place to take millions of dollars from suckers everyday.


----------



## beamstas (9 July 2009)

Why can people accept mean reversion systems in trading 

and

Not accept mean reversion systems in gambling

They feel they can control trading more than a coin toss
They can't


Even though you may get a streak, as the coin is only 2 sided it will always revert to the mean. But 50/50 over time is always expected

1 single event means nothing. Never has never will

But the coin is always going to try and revert back to the 50/50 mean.

1 coin toss is independant. But is 10/20/100?
If you toss a coin 10 times are you more likely to get 5 heads than if you toss it 5 times? Even though the coin can't remember it's previous tosses you are more likely to.


----------



## julius (9 July 2009)

beamstas said:


> Why can people accept mean reversion systems in trading
> 
> and
> 
> ...




There is no tendency for mean reversion with a coin flip. No amount of previous heads effects the conditional expectation for future outcomes - the 50% expectation only applies to future outcomes from that point forward.

Martingale doesn't work regardless of betting limits, because no matter how small you bet, you will eventually experience a string of losses which will wipe you out. Thus you will go broke with certainty as the number of bets played increases.


----------



## Mr J (9 July 2009)

johnnyg said:


> Does the roulette table have limits as well?




All games do.



			
				Ageo said:
			
		

> Yep my cousin got escorted from *star city* from playing blackjack. (With a partner of course).




Not the best card counting environment. Rules aren't great, and the penetration from what I remember could often be quite poor. They had a lot of auto shuffling machines going.



> Why can people accept mean reversion systems in trading




Because markets do have a mean reversion charateristic within them, while casino games do not.



> Martingale doesn't work regardless of betting limits, because no matter how small you bet, you will eventually experience a string of losses which will wipe you out. Thus you will go broke with certainty as the number of bets played increases.




Not true. If one's capital is large enough, it is possible to play for a very long time without experiencing the string of losses. Example, Bill Gates sits down at the $10 table, and the casino allows him to double up on each loss. It's extremely unlikely he'll experience enough losses in a row to bust him. Of course, this is an extreme example, as anyone with enough money to have a high probability of surviving longterm martingale will have no need to do it, as it will be peanuts to them.


----------



## johnnyg (9 July 2009)

Mr J said:


> All games do.




Why couldn't you simply get up from the table, walk over to another, and start your bets where you left off?


----------



## Mr J (9 July 2009)

johnnyg said:


> Why couldn't you simply get up from the table, walk over to another, and start your bets where you left off?




You could do that, but it doesn't really change anything. Instead of 6-7 losses in a row, you can survive a few more, but you'll need far more capital. I can't actually remember the table limits, but I don't think it's that high.

Martingale starting at $10 will take 7 losses before we're forced to bet $2560. I'm not sure what the $100 table goes up to, but that may be pushing it. No more than 8, maybe 9 losses at the public tables.


----------



## treeman (9 July 2009)

Say a table has $1000 limit. 

You go in with $50 

1 50
2 100
3 200
4 400
5 800 
6 - hit the limit

For not a very big win "profit of 50" you only get 5 turns and risk a relatively large sum compared to your profit. 

Now that you are 800 down you either start from 50 again or you keep betting table max 1000. With each 1000 loss the gap between your loses and maximum stakes keeps increasing rapidly, your profits are now in negative even if you win at table max.

If you chose to start from scratch you already are down 800 and keep increasing the odds of hitting a unlucky streak of 5 or 6 loses in a row.


----------



## drsmith (9 July 2009)

shiftyphil said:


> You can not win at the casino.
> 
> If you do find a way to win, they'll call you a cheater and walk you out the door.



Hopefully it's the door out the front of the Casino and not the one out the back.


----------



## drsmith (9 July 2009)

The odds of hitting an unlicky streak of 6 losses in a row are low but when you do you lose the lot. With the Casino taking it's margin the house will ultimately win.

It's simple math.


----------



## Mr J (9 July 2009)

> With the Casino taking it's margin the house will ultimately win.




Likely, but not certain.



> It's simple math.




It may be simple to some, but most don't seem to be able to understand probability and expectation.


----------



## beamstas (9 July 2009)

julius said:


> There is no tendency for mean reversion with a coin flip. No amount of previous heads effects the conditional expectation for future outcomes - the 50% expectation only applies to future outcomes from that point forward.




I said nothing about past results changing future expectations.

Experiment: We have just tossed 90 heads out of 100 coin tosses. 90% heads.

We are doing a test of 200 coin tosses

Do you expect the 90% heads to try and revert back towards 50% or stay at 90% for the remaining 100 tosses?

It will revert back to the mean of 50%,* therefore a coin-flip is mean reverting.* The more times you toss a coin, the closer it's going to get to the mean of 50%, it will never move away from 50% for a sustained period.


----------



## Mr J (9 July 2009)

> It will revert back to the mean of 50%, therefore a coin-flip is mean reverting. The more times you toss a coin, the closer it's going to get to the mean of 50%, it will never move away from 50% for a sustained period.




You're a little unclear, at least to me. The coinflip itself is not mean-reverting, it's just that the probabilities over an ever-increasing sample will make it appear that way. It certainly can move from 50% over a sustained period.


----------



## beamstas (9 July 2009)

Mr J said:


> You're a little unclear, at least to me. The coinflip itself is not mean-reverting, it's just that the probabilities over an ever-increasing sample will make it appear that way. It certainly can move from 50% over a sustained period.




It will tend to revert to 50%

500flips
% of heads recorded
51
48.2
49.4
51.8
51.2
48.4
49
50.8
50
53.4

Avg for 10 runs: 50.32% heads

3000 flips
% of heads recorded
50.53
51.33
49.73
49.77
49.87
51
49.37
50.23
49.6
48.63

Avg for 10 runs = 50.006% heads

This is a tiny sample but as you can see it will over time, revert to 50/50 with a larger sample.

This doesn't help with the casino at all 

I wouldn't advise betting on a tail if there has just been 9 heads, though.


----------



## Mr J (9 July 2009)

> This is a tiny sample but as you can see it will over time, revert to 50/50 with a larger sample




It won't necessarily revert to 50% due to variance. The sample may actually get further and further from 50%, although this is obviously not likely. I'm sure I know what you mean, I just don't agree with the way of how you are saying it. The distribution as a percentage is very likely to revert to 50% as the sample grows, but the coinflips themselves don't revert to the mean, and I assume that is why you said you don't recommend betting tails just because there have been 9 heads.

I specify that it is the distribution, not the sample, that has a high probability of reverting to the mean.


----------



## beerwm (9 July 2009)

skyQuake said:


> As in trade 2 has a higher expectancy than trade 1 due to being a different system ? Otherwise why does the next trade have a higher probability of winning?




trade 2 is only available is trade 1 fails/losses.

I made the probabilities up - just making the point that future trades may have dependancy on previous trade outcomes.


----------



## beamstas (9 July 2009)

Mr J said:


> It won't necessarily revert to 50% due to variance. The sample may actually get further and further from 50%, although this is obviously not likely. I'm sure I know what you mean, I just don't agree with the way of how you are saying it. The distribution as a percentage is very likely to revert to 50% as the sample grows, but the coinflips themselves don't revert to the mean, and I assume that is why you said you don't recommend betting tails just because there have been 9 heads.
> 
> I specify that it is the distribution, not the sample, that has a high probability of reverting to the mean.




Exactly what i mean


----------



## Cartman (9 July 2009)

beamstas said:


> *500flips
> 
> 
> 3000 flips*





Beamers boss walks in --- 

"Hey brad, hows work going?" --- 

"Really good boss --- I've turned over some serious coin today!"

"Good lad. Keep that up and I might give u a raise!"

(Beamer smiles as he places the 20 cent piece back in his desk drawer and continues pretending to look busy ! ---- lol -----) 

We wont tell him what ya been doing all day Brad !!


----------



## BurntToast (9 July 2009)

drsmith said:


> The odds of hitting an unlicky streak of 6 losses in a row are low but when you do you lose the lot. With the Casino taking it's margin the house will ultimately win. It's simple math.




Odds of hitting 6 losses in a row isn't that low, 1 in 64... you'll hit that during most sessions at the table.

Runs of 10+ are not uncommon, spend an hour in a casino looking at the roulette displays and I'm sure you'll see at least one.


----------



## drsmith (9 July 2009)

Mr J said:


> Likely, but not certain.



A finite number of bets may yield a winning result for the punter (if their lucky) but certainty is mathematically assured for the casino as the number of bets increases to infinity.



Mr J said:


> It may be simple to some, but most don't seem to be able to understand probability and expectation.



Very true.


----------



## drsmith (9 July 2009)

BurntToast said:


> Odds of hitting 6 losses in a row isn't that low, 1 in 64... you'll hit that during most sessions at the table.
> 
> Runs of 10+ are not uncommon, spend an hour in a casino looking at the roulette displays and I'm sure you'll see at least one.



I once saw the same number come up 6 times in a row in roulette. The odds of that are 37 to the power of 5 or about one in 69 million.


----------



## skc (9 July 2009)

There is only one game in the casino where you can win money consistently and over sustained period... anyone care to guess?


----------



## beamstas (9 July 2009)

Odds of x number of wins/losses in a row at 50% probability

1	 - 	50.00000%
2	 - 	25.00000%
3	 - 	12.50000%
4	 - 	6.25000%
5	 - 	3.12500%
6	 - 	1.56250%
7	 - 	0.78125%
8	 - 	0.39063%
9	 - 	0.19531%
10	 - 	0.09766%
11	 - 	0.04883%
12	 - 	0.02441%
13	 - 	0.01221%
14	 - 	0.00610%
15	 - 	0.00305%
16	 - 	0.00153%
17	 - 	0.00076%
18	 - 	0.00038%
19	 - 	0.00019%
20	 - 	0.00010%


----------



## beamstas (9 July 2009)

skc said:


> There is only one game in the casino where you can win money consistently and over sustained period... anyone care to guess?




poker


----------



## skc (9 July 2009)

beamstas said:


> Odds of x number of wins/losses in a row at 50% probability
> 
> 1	 - 	50.00000%
> 2	 - 	25.00000%
> ...




The most difficult concept for people to grasp is that these odds apply to the *string of results*. 

If I start tossing a coin now, the chance of getting 20 heads in a row is 0.0001%. If I have tossed a coin 19 times and got 19 heads, the chance of getting a 20th head is 50%.

The 20th toss has no memory of what happened in the first 19. Only the tosser does (and hence they become losers).

The thing about martingale system, even without any table limit, is that the payoff isn't actually that good. What you win on say the 20th head is only 1 unit more than what you've bet in the first 19 rounds. And that's only if the odds are truely 50-50 (which they aren't).


----------



## skc (9 July 2009)

beamstas said:


> poker




Well done young brad. The only game that doesn't require you betting against the house.

Although I would accept free member parking as an answer.


----------



## beamstas (9 July 2009)

skc said:


> The most difficult concept for people to grasp is that these odds apply to the *string of results*.
> 
> If I start tossing a coin now, the chance of getting 20 heads in a row is 0.0001%. If I have tossed a coin 19 times and got 19 heads, the chance of getting a 20th head is 50%.
> 
> ...




House always wins on poker because of rake.
But poker isn't about cards, its all about betting,
So you can actually be skilled at a game that at first glance looks like it is luck based.

You are right, i should have labelled it
*"The chance of the next x throws being heads or tails"*

Brad


----------



## Mr J (9 July 2009)

I'm with Beamstas. You have the rake to overcome. If you're going to suggest that is still a game at which one can consistently profit, then I'll throw in card counting, roulette prediction, video poker basic strategy, and sharpshooting for craps. Most games can be beaten, providing the rules are reasonable.


----------



## So_Cynical (9 July 2009)

shiftyphil said:


> You can not win at the casino.
> 
> If you do find a way to win, they'll call you a cheater and walk you out the door.




Of course u can win at the casino...done so many many times, u just cant do it all 
the time and with any predictability...after all its gambling.



treeman said:


> Say a table has $1000 limit.
> 
> You go in with $50
> 
> ...




Ive seen 14 heads in a row on a 2up table, great if your betting with the run.


----------



## treeman (10 July 2009)

If you walk around for a while and look at roulette table scores it is not uncommon at all to see nearly the whole scoreboard filled with 1 color. Once I saw a table where the whole scoreboard was red and everybody was doubling tripling quadripling and so on on black and they all busted except 1 or 2 that went with the trend and kept betting small but consistantly on red. When black finally came the table was almost empty lol


----------



## beamstas (10 July 2009)

treeman said:


> If you walk around for a while and look at roulette table scores it is not uncommon at all to see nearly the whole scoreboard filled with 1 color. Once I saw a table where the whole scoreboard was red and everybody was doubling tripling quadripling and so on on black and they all busted except 1 or 2 that went with the trend and kept betting small but consistantly on red. When black finally came the table was almost empty lol




Coin tosses don't "trend"


----------



## nomore4s (10 July 2009)

beamstas said:


> Coin tosses don't "trend"




If you were to chart the coin tosses I bet you would find trends that are able to be 'traded' like stock trends.

Just because it's random doesn't mean there won't be trends. I did see some info & charts on this some time ago but I will have no hope of finding it now.


----------



## Trembling Hand (10 July 2009)

nomore4s said:


> If you were to chart the coin tosses I bet you would find trends that are able to be 'traded' like stock trends.
> 
> Just because it's random doesn't mean there won't be trends. I did see some info & charts on this some time ago but I will have no hope of finding it now.




Yep have a look at this random generator to create charts. Will put all the deluded Technical analysis fools back a step or two. (or not a religion is hard to argue against  )

Random coin toss excel chart generator

here are two chart from coin tosses,


----------



## beamstas (10 July 2009)

That made my day TH


----------



## Ageo (10 July 2009)

skc said:


> There is only one game in the casino where you can win money consistently and over sustained period... anyone care to guess?




poker....... and thats because your not playing against the house.

But all games "against" the casino will put a stop to that.


----------



## skc (10 July 2009)

Technical analysis of coin toss can still make you money... EW rules


----------



## Mr J (10 July 2009)

Ageo said:


> poker....... and thats because your not playing against the house.
> 
> But all games "against" the casino will put a stop to that.




This has already been said, but you still pay the rake, and you're typical casino punter is no more likely to profit at this game than any other.



			
				TH said:
			
		

> Yep have a look at this random generator to create charts. Will put all the deluded Technical analysis fools back a step or two. (or not a religion is hard to argue against




TH, there's a difference between the results of a coinflip, and how the market will treat those results. The results may be random, but markets are not.


----------



## Cartman (10 July 2009)

Mr J said:


> and you're *typical casino punter* is no more likely to profit at this game than any other.




yep --- the more punters at the table the higher probability of losing






Mr J said:


> TH, there's a difference between the results of a coinflip, and how the market will treat those results. The results may be random, but markets are not.




yep again --- i assume TH was licking the icing off the wooden spoon and his tongue was caught a little in his cheek  -- a 150 sample on a coin toss is about the equivalent of 20 minutes of tick data on the eur/usd -- during a lunch break !!

if ya joined about a thousand of those 150 tosses in a row and put the range in perspective the chart would probably resemble Bondi beach during a black nor-easter


----------



## Trembling Hand (10 July 2009)

Mr J said:


> TH, there's a difference between the results of a coinflip, and how the market will treat those results. The results may be random, but markets are not.










interesting though that whether or not you accept that market moves are random you can still see that rather than "guess" right what you need is the ability to ride your luck or you correct guess.


----------



## Mr J (10 July 2009)

> interesting though that whether or not you accept that market moves are random you can still see that rather than "guess" right what you need is the ability to ride your luck or you correct guess.




I don't think so. If I believed the moves were random, I would also believe that there is no edge to be gained and that timing won't do many any good. If it's random, then it is unpredictable. However, if I thought it wasn't random, I would believe that "guessing" right and timing are critical. 

I don't know how anyone could suggest that moves are random, as every trade is made with a reason. The fact that we may not know the reason doesn't make it any more random. Surely those who believe the market is random don't believe it is random in the longterm. To those people I would say the longterm is a product of many connected shorterms, and therefore if the longterm is not random, the shorterm cannot be random either.


----------



## Trembling Hand (10 July 2009)

Mr J said:


> I don't think so.
> 
> I don't know how anyone could suggest that moves are random,




Jesus!!


The trouble with being contrary is that you end up jumping at shadows just to argue.


see Cartmans post for full explanation


----------



## Mr J (10 July 2009)

I'm not saying you think market moves are random, and I know your chart was just for interest. Random moves were brought up, so I thought I'd discuss it.


----------



## beamstas (10 July 2009)

I don't know if the market is random or not

There is simply too much information being processed with each move of the market that it appears random

One person simply can't take in that much data, so to me, it may as well be random 

Not that being random or not makes any difference at all to trading profitably. If it was somehow proved or disproved that it is random/not random right now you profitabilty wouldn't change


----------



## explod (10 July 2009)

beamstas said:


> I don't know if the market is random or not
> 
> There is simply too much information being processed with each move of the market that it appears random
> 
> ...




Markets are about the sentiment of all the players (psychological) and momentum.   One lead sheep goes through the gate the others follow.

Gambling is about luck, I do play roulette with some success because I chart the dealers and look for a wheel bias.   Been at it for many years and it is a tough one because time and patience is required, may as well work for it in a job.   But I like it as a sport and have my set limits.

If you really want to look at all the fancy systems there is a US website called Gamblers Glen.  But beware it too is out to catch the mugs and many new systems come from the industry , works for awhile sucks you in then it turns on you.

To play as I do there is a lot of work and best done by two, one charting the other making the plays.   My partner is now in the Navy so looking for someone that may be interested once a fortnight.  If anyone lives in Melbourne and is interested we could meet over a coffee sometime and discuss the idea.  I do not take it too serious, onl;y gopt into it cause the missus just loves those flamin pockies.

Cheers explod


----------



## So_Cynical (10 July 2009)

beamstas said:


> Coin tosses don't "trend"




Yes they do...seen it many, many times...that's where patience can pay.

heads tails heads tails heads tails etc etc is a trend too.


----------



## beamstas (10 July 2009)

So_Cynical said:


> Yes they do...seen it many, many times...that's where patience can pay.
> 
> heads tails heads tails heads tails etc etc is a trend too.




Yes you've seen it
Curve fitted in your mind


----------



## sam76 (10 July 2009)

Do any of you guys have girlfriends or do you get you kicks from talking about which way a flipped coin will land all day   LOL


----------



## Timmy (10 July 2009)

sam76 said:


> Do any of you guys have girlfriends or do you get you kicks from talking about which way a flipped coin will land all day   LOL




Have nominations for ASF "Post of the Year, 2009" opened yet?
LOL


----------



## skc (10 July 2009)

explod said:


> Markets are about the sentiment of all the players (psychological) and momentum.   One lead sheep goes through the gate the others follow.
> 
> Gambling is about luck, I do play roulette with some success because I chart the dealers and look for a wheel bias.   Been at it for many years and it is a tough one because time and patience is required, may as well work for it in a job.   But I like it as a sport and have my set limits.
> 
> ...




Just picturing a scenario in my head...

I had coffee with some guy on an internet forum, and decided to go gambling with him. He suggested that we should start small, and that he would just gamble his own money while I learn the ropes. The first few times, I charted while he played the roulette. We did quite well and he shared the winnings with me everytime. A month later, he said we should gamble larger amounts since we are doing so well. I agreed, and drawn down my home loan to go for a big night out. I handed him the money when we met the casino and started the usual routine. I went to the table and started charting while he went and change for chips... That was the last I saw of him.

Note - just thought I would share my imagination only. It has nothing to do with whether explod's suggestion is genuine.


----------



## skc (10 July 2009)

sam76 said:


> Do any of you guys have girlfriends or do you get you kicks from talking about which way a flipped coin will land all day   LOL




Suppose some of us have wives. That might partially explain it.


----------



## Mr J (11 July 2009)

sam76 said:


> Do any of you guys have girlfriends or do you get you kicks from talking about which way a flipped coin will land all day   LOL




The fact that we can waste time on this is something to boast about :. Girls don't get home until 6-7pm, we've got to do something with our day.


----------



## Trembling Hand (11 July 2009)

explod said:


> Gambling is about luck, *I do play roulette with some success because I chart the dealers and look for a wheel bias.*   Been at it for many years and it is a tough one because time and patience is required, may as well work for it in a job.   But I like it as a sport and have my set limits.




No comments anyone.


----------



## Naked shorts (11 July 2009)

explod said:


> Gambling is about luck, I do play roulette with some success because I chart the dealers and look for a wheel bias.   Been at it for many years and it is a tough one because time and patience is required, may as well work for it in a job.   But I like it as a sport and have my set limits.



If a roulette wheel gave a sufficient bias to be profitable, it wouldn't be on the floor for very long. Do you think the casino is just going to let some dude clean them out? The casino knows the house edge of their games and if it significantly deviates from what they expect, they are going to investigate, and make it right again.

You are being fooled by randomness.


----------



## explod (11 July 2009)

Naked shorts said:


> If a roulette wheel gave a sufficient bias to be profitable, it wouldn't be on the floor for very long. Do you think the casino is just going to let some dude clean them out? The casino knows the house edge of their games and if it significantly deviates from what they expect, they are going to investigate, and make it right again.
> 
> You are being fooled by randomness.




What an ignorant comment.  I have been around roulette tables for 20 years and on top of that was tutored by a family member who was a croupier in Europe for 40 years.   I did not let on a great deal about my playing and do not intend to.  If you know anything about physics, mechanical wheels and dealer bias then perhaps you may understand that randomness has nothing to do with professional play.  

There are many pros., keeping a low profile who do very well.   However it is a hard game requiring huge patience and skill to the point of boredom and when you do well the house is quick to change things, but in between you can make money.

Tell me your philosophy/ie. qualifiy you statement on randomness and I may listen to your version.


----------



## Naked shorts (11 July 2009)

May I suggest you take up study on chaos theory to understand that the idea of dealer bias is a dead end. It asserts that the initial conditions of a particular system greatly affect the final outcome (imagine placing a pencil on its end, a nanometer difference in orientation at the start, causes a big difference to what happens to the pencil).

A very slight difference in the way the croupier turns the wheel or rolls the ball makes a huge difference to the outcome.

Any dealer bias went out the window when they introduced low profile roulette wheels.




explod said:


> What an ignorant comment.  I have been around roulette tables for 20 years and on top of that was tutored by a family member who was a croupier in Europe for 40 years.



I object to your suggestion that my comment is ignorant. You, with all your experience, supported my argument with this line.


explod said:


> and when you do well the house is quick to change things



Isn't that the same thing I said with this comment?


> if _(the house edge)_ significantly deviates from what they expect, they are going to investigate, and make it right again.



The same comment you called ignorant, you are agreeing with?!


What I mean by randomness... try this little experiment. Flip a coin 1000times. It will almost *definitely *land on one side more often. Does this mean that the coin is bias to that side? No. Its just randomness. 

But if you believe that "luck" is a factor, by all means go for it....after all, a casino couldn't run without a misinformed public feeding it.


----------



## beamstas (11 July 2009)

Poker is -ev atm
Just lost half my b/r

Both times Flopping 2 pair with Ace+King and Ace+10
Both times someone comes over me with p7's & '5's hitting their set on the flop and shoving over my raise on the flop

Im so tilted right now.


----------



## beamstas (11 July 2009)

Then to top it off just walked pocket aces in the big blind
Could my day get any worse?


----------



## Wagyu (12 July 2009)

N1Spec said:


> ok can someone pick this pathetic system apart, if you can even call it a system.
> 
> One of my mates think you can beat the house at the casino in Baccarat whereby you keep doubling up your losses until the pendulum swings your way and you win a hand.
> 
> ...






SPEC,

there is 1 system I recommend for beginners to casinos in regards to baccarat,
find a winning player and bet with him, or find a losing player and bet against him. 
If you find a run of player or banker get on it, don't bet the other way just because you think its time for a loss. There is nothing better than riding a run of banker all the way down the scorecard, pressing by a unit at each hand.

Furthermore never double up a loss, you will be guaranteed a short stay at the casino if you do.

Also never bet the table minimum every hand, you will lose regardless of the outcome of the hand due to house edge. You must vary your betting to "feel of the game" if a table is hot. 

Remember a loss is a loss, take your medicine, suck it up you are after all gambling.


----------



## explod (12 July 2009)

Naked shorts said:


> May I suggest you take up study on chaos theory to understand that the idea of dealer bias is a dead end. It asserts that the initial conditions of a particular system greatly affect the final outcome (imagine placing a pencil on its end, a nanometer difference in orientation at the start, causes a big difference to what happens to the pencil).
> 
> A very slight difference in the way the croupier turns the wheel or rolls the ball makes a huge difference to the outcome.
> 
> ...




My comment was out of order and I apologise.  

However roulette is anything but random, to explain it properly requires more space than on this thread.   I will check the old threads or create one specifically for roulette this evening where I will address the isssues raised properly and start specifically with your post herein.   I feel there will be many others interested.

explod


----------



## roysolder (12 July 2009)

well i,ll look forward to learning about roulette exxplod so hope you do post tonight or some stage.kml doing nicely btw


----------



## jersey10 (12 July 2009)

beamstas said:


> Poker is -ev atm
> Just lost half my b/r
> 
> Both times Flopping 2 pair with Ace+King and Ace+10
> ...




I would be staying on this table - easy money for you... eventually


----------



## Mr J (13 July 2009)

beamstas said:


> Could my day get any worse?




Yes .



Wagyu said:


> SPEC,
> 
> there is 1 system I recommend for beginners to casinos in regards to baccarat,
> find a winning player and bet with him, or find a losing player and bet against him.
> ...




Find a punter on a hot run . Hot or not, he would be throwing his money away. Doubling up will certainly not guarantee a short stay, as variance can be wild. Doubling up only increases the EV spent per hand, but in practise variance will render it insignificant.

As for gambling, we are all doing that anyway. Buying a house, trading, investing etc all fall under the proper definition of gambling, and it could be argued that everything we do is a gamble.


----------



## jersey10 (13 July 2009)

Mr J

I would be interested in where you think professional poker players get their edge. I noticed you said somewhere else you played online poker for a time.  Is it realistic to believe you can achieve a sufficient edge to play poker for a living?  I believe that the real edge in poker comes from an ability to read other people - something that is more difficult (yet definitely still possible) online.


----------



## beamstas (13 July 2009)

jersey10 said:


> Mr J
> 
> I would be interested in where you think professional poker players get their edge. I noticed you said somewhere else you played online poker for a time.  Is it realistic to believe you can achieve a sufficient edge to play poker for a living?  I believe that the real edge in poker comes from an ability to read other people - something that is more difficult (yet definitely still possible) online.




My cousin plays poker for a living
It's possible and there are many ways to gain an edge

Also many tells online, ie; time it takes someone to make a decision, how many chips they buy in to a table with, 

Poker isn't about cards at all. If it was there wouldn't be an edge


----------



## Wagyu (14 July 2009)

beamstas said:


> My cousin plays poker for a living
> It's possible and there are many ways to gain an edge
> 
> Also many tells online, ie; time it takes someone to make a decision, how many chips they buy in to a table with,
> ...




Beamstas, I have heard that online poker houses skew their cards to generous hands and therefore can take a larger "rake" due to the fact that you have many players betting large on strong hands. I am not a poker player at all but it is just what I have heard. Thought I might share. (I might be stating the bleedin' obvious?)


----------



## Mr J (14 July 2009)

jersey10 said:


> Mr J
> 
> I would be interested in where you think professional poker players get their edge. I noticed you said somewhere else you played online poker for a time.  Is it realistic to believe you can achieve a sufficient edge to play poker for a living?  I believe that the real edge in poker comes from an ability to read other people - something that is more difficult (yet definitely still possible) online.




Edges will vary from player to player, and from game to game. For example, someone who 10 tables low limit games will play robotically and just rely on putting people on general ranges, and playing good hands decently. Someone who plays 1-2 heads up matches at a time will require much more attention to the opponent and will aim to out-think the opponent. It all comes down to mathematics though, getting a good price for your own actions and making the opponent pay for theirs.



> Also many tells online, ie; time it takes someone to make a decision, how many chips they buy in to a table with,




Those can be tells, but most will be gained from analysing betting patterns. And yes, poker is not about the cards, it's about the people.



> Beamstas, I have heard that online poker houses skew their cards to generous hands and therefore can take a larger "rake" due to the fact that you have many players betting large on strong hands.




It didn't have any merit when I was playing, and was a typical statement from the fish (what poker players call the typical punter). I've seen unbelievable things between blackjack, poker and sportsbetting, but nothing that can't be attributed to variance. Most people just have no concept of it (variance).


----------



## jersey10 (14 July 2009)

Mr J said:


> Those can be tells, but most will be gained from analysing betting patterns. And yes, poker is not about the cards, it's about the people.




Very true.

Do you still play online or live games?


----------



## Mr J (14 July 2009)

Only home games. Online lacks interaction, and live poker often has the wrong type of social interaction (idiots, losers and sweaty, smelly gamblers). Good game with a decent bunch of people though.


----------



## beamstas (14 July 2009)

Well known poker sites don't skew cards.
I don't know about others.

Lots of people blame rigging, but it's not rigged.

Lots of these idiots play 9 handed.. Lets have an example..
9 handed
Hole Cards: AA
8 other people have 2 random cards each.

You are only 35% to win. That means 65% of the time you will lose with this hand. People expect to win with AA much higher percent of the time, but it's just not going to happen.

Im sure if these people who claim rigging study probability at a high enough level (like i have) they would understand the claims they make are ridiculous and can be attributed to something as simple as probabilties. 

Brad


----------



## Mr J (15 July 2009)

The public is hopeless when it comes to probability, which is why these kinds of activities can be lucrative. 

Also note how many of those that lose with pocket aces lose _after_ the flop, often with the money going in after they're behind. They'll cry their aces didn't win, and that the other guy lucky etc etc. Used to have great fun winding these people up, some of them would absolutely lose it. You know you're playing well when you have some loony follow you around from table to table . I played SNGs most of the time, and the fish back then were far too passive, so decent players were typically labeled as maniacs due to the required aggression.


----------



## Value Collector (24 August 2017)

Not sure where to put this video, But I found it super interesting.


----------



## ghoool (3 December 2020)

casino has limits - very bad


----------

