February 19th, 2018 at 12:50:24 AM
permalink

Okay, to start, I know all betting stems are garbage.

I'm dying to find out how to prove this one wrong.

I've done a few thousands hands online and I didn't prove it wrong and my fingers hurt.

It's a modified Martingale

Here it goes

- Baccarat bet on banker every time

- Ignore ties, focus on resolved hands.

- Table limit goes from 15 - 15,000, 8 Decks

- Bankroll 26,875

-After a win revert back to Bet 1

- After a loss go to the next Bet 1,2,3 ect..

- EXCEPT for Bet 9. When Bet 9 loses use winnings to restart at Bet 1 and follow the process again. When Bet 9 wins STILL restart at Bet 1.

- 5% Com.

TOTAL LOSS AMOUNT

Bet 1 $15 ----- 15

Bet 2 $35 ----- 50

Bet 3 $100 ----- 150

Bet 4 $225 ----- 375

Bet 5 $500 ----- 875

Bet 6 $1200 ----- 2075

Bet 7 $2800 ----- 4875

Bet 8 $7000 ----- 11875

Bet 9 $15000 ----- 26875

TOTAL WIN AMOUNTS BY HAND AFTER COM. and PRIOR LOSES

Bet 1 $15 ----- 14.25

Bet 2 $35 ----- 18.25

Bet 3 $100 ----- 45

Bet 4 $225 ----- 63.75

Bet 5 $500 ----- 100

Bet 6 $1200 ----- 265

Bet 7 $2800 ----- 585

Bet 8 $7000 ----- 1775

Bet 9 $15000 -----2375

Is this strategy simply too complicated to prove wrong?

In my super small and proves nothing couple thousand hands the winnings earned outweighed the losses when Bet 9 loses.

Does the wizard provide access to his software anywhere where he tests a billion-ish hands?

HOW DO I PROVE THIS DOESN'T WORK!! ? It's killing me :(

I'm dying to find out how to prove this one wrong.

I've done a few thousands hands online and I didn't prove it wrong and my fingers hurt.

It's a modified Martingale

Here it goes

- Baccarat bet on banker every time

- Ignore ties, focus on resolved hands.

- Table limit goes from 15 - 15,000, 8 Decks

- Bankroll 26,875

-After a win revert back to Bet 1

- After a loss go to the next Bet 1,2,3 ect..

- EXCEPT for Bet 9. When Bet 9 loses use winnings to restart at Bet 1 and follow the process again. When Bet 9 wins STILL restart at Bet 1.

- 5% Com.

TOTAL LOSS AMOUNT

Bet 1 $15 ----- 15

Bet 2 $35 ----- 50

Bet 3 $100 ----- 150

Bet 4 $225 ----- 375

Bet 5 $500 ----- 875

Bet 6 $1200 ----- 2075

Bet 7 $2800 ----- 4875

Bet 8 $7000 ----- 11875

Bet 9 $15000 ----- 26875

TOTAL WIN AMOUNTS BY HAND AFTER COM. and PRIOR LOSES

Bet 1 $15 ----- 14.25

Bet 2 $35 ----- 18.25

Bet 3 $100 ----- 45

Bet 4 $225 ----- 63.75

Bet 5 $500 ----- 100

Bet 6 $1200 ----- 265

Bet 7 $2800 ----- 585

Bet 8 $7000 ----- 1775

Bet 9 $15000 -----2375

Is this strategy simply too complicated to prove wrong?

In my super small and proves nothing couple thousand hands the winnings earned outweighed the losses when Bet 9 loses.

Does the wizard provide access to his software anywhere where he tests a billion-ish hands?

HOW DO I PROVE THIS DOESN'T WORK!! ? It's killing me :(

February 19th, 2018 at 1:04:07 AM
permalink

Besides playing it, you mean?

If you know all systems are garbage, then isn't it a given that this one is?

This one looks like it will work okay as long as you don't lose nine or ten in a row.

Forewarned is forearmed.

If you know all systems are garbage, then isn't it a given that this one is?

This one looks like it will work okay as long as you don't lose nine or ten in a row.

Forewarned is forearmed.

The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction is supposed to make sense.

February 19th, 2018 at 3:33:43 AM
permalink

the chances of losing ten in a row are not so far out there as you seem to think. At least it looks to me that your system here is no more complicated than that.

if it was flipping a coin, there's one chance in 1024 you'd get, say, heads. The chances of 10 bankers would not be as likely only somewhat and I don't care to look it up.

If you were testing this out, you'd reach a thousand bets soon enough. A rule of thumb is if you reach such a denominator the chances that it has occurred are at least as good as 50-50

if it was flipping a coin, there's one chance in 1024 you'd get, say, heads. The chances of 10 bankers would not be as likely only somewhat and I don't care to look it up.

If you were testing this out, you'd reach a thousand bets soon enough. A rule of thumb is if you reach such a denominator the chances that it has occurred are at least as good as 50-50

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

February 19th, 2018 at 5:51:09 AM
permalink

1. Simply put, when you play a game at a disadvantage, you are expecting to lose. If some game has a 4% HE, you can expect to lose 4% on every bet. You can't add up a bunch of negative numbers and somehow get a positive number. To make a more simple comparison, imagine playing a coin flip game where you are paid $99 per $100 you bet. If it's heads, you win $99. If it's tails, you lose $100. On average, you lose $0.50. You can't add up a bunch of $0.50 losses and somehow get a net winner.

2. https://wizardofodds.com/games/baccarat/1000-baccarat-shoes-8-deck.txt

Run your system against that. Chances are, it's almost certainly going to come out a loser.

3. Do the same thing as #2, except come up with your own random numbers. BTW: Be sure to use actual random numbers.

4. Similar to #1, but determine how often banker wins vs loses (ignore ties), and do the math to see how frequently you'll win or lose X amount per "round" (a "round" being where you start at your min bet and play until you win a hand or until you lose the biggest bet [at #9?]). I'd go here: https://wizardofodds.com/games/baccarat/basics/

Win rate for banker while ignoring ties is 0.458597/(0.458597+0.446247) = 0.50682438077

Player is 1-0.50682438077 = 0.49317561922

50.68..% of the time you'll win $14.25.

0.5068*0.4931 of the time you'll win $18.25

0.5068*0.4931*0.4931 of the time you'll win $45

....etc.

Then 0.4931..^9 of the time you'll lose $26,875.

Then multiply the winning amount by how often you win that, and the losing amount with how often you lose that, then add up all those numbers, and whatever that final number is, will be how much you expect to win/lose (it'll be a lose) per round.

2. https://wizardofodds.com/games/baccarat/1000-baccarat-shoes-8-deck.txt

Run your system against that. Chances are, it's almost certainly going to come out a loser.

3. Do the same thing as #2, except come up with your own random numbers. BTW: Be sure to use actual random numbers.

4. Similar to #1, but determine how often banker wins vs loses (ignore ties), and do the math to see how frequently you'll win or lose X amount per "round" (a "round" being where you start at your min bet and play until you win a hand or until you lose the biggest bet [at #9?]). I'd go here: https://wizardofodds.com/games/baccarat/basics/

Win rate for banker while ignoring ties is 0.458597/(0.458597+0.446247) = 0.50682438077

Player is 1-0.50682438077 = 0.49317561922

50.68..% of the time you'll win $14.25.

0.5068*0.4931 of the time you'll win $18.25

0.5068*0.4931*0.4931 of the time you'll win $45

....etc.

Then 0.4931..^9 of the time you'll lose $26,875.

Then multiply the winning amount by how often you win that, and the losing amount with how often you lose that, then add up all those numbers, and whatever that final number is, will be how much you expect to win/lose (it'll be a lose) per round.

February 19th, 2018 at 5:57:21 AM
permalink

Quote:RS1. Simply put, when you play a game at a disadvantage, you are expecting to lose.

But the martingaler thinks he can erase a loss every time if he had the guts , except for an astronomically rare chance of bad luck. He can't see that it is actually a likely if not probable chance of bad luck.

It gains a mystical aura by returning the bankroll to even when it works. That it is just a way of betting more when a player is losing becomes lost in the aura.

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

February 19th, 2018 at 7:59:10 AM
permalink

this is easy in ExcelQuote:iwinthebetHOW DO I PROVE THIS DOESN'T WORK!! ? It's killing me :(

0.493175619^9=0.001725895

prob of 1 win = 0.998274105 <<<<sweet!!!

or about 1 in 580 attempts you have -$26,875 =loss

579 times you win on average $43.06

579* 43.06=$24931.74= win

win + loss = -$1,943.26

average loss per round = -3.397979895

p(win)=0.506824381

q(loss)=0.493175619

now winning on average only $43.06 means one needs to win (26,875/43.06=624.1291222)

625 times in a row or

bankroll can not make that 9th required Marty bet.

0.998274105^625=0.339725855

about 2/3 chance that a MAJOR loss will occur on average before winning $26,875

I think there are way more fun ways to play with a way higher probability of hitting a win target as double bankroll before a BIG BUST and ouch!!!

just my 3 cents.

625 times in a row or

bankroll can not make that 9th required Marty bet.

0.998274105^625=0.339725855

about 2/3 chance that a MAJOR loss will occur on average before winning $26,875

I think there are way more fun ways to play with a way higher probability of hitting a win target as double bankroll before a BIG BUST and ouch!!!

just my 3 cents.

hand | bet | cum loss | Banker 5% comm | net win on win | q^(hand-1)*p | E*F(return) | win given win prob | avg win on win |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

1 | 15 | 0 | 0.75 | 14.25 | 0.506824381 | 7.222247426 | 0.507700619 | 7.234733817 |

2 | 35 | 15 | 1.75 | 18.25 | 0.249953428 | 4.561650058 | 0.250385567 | 4.569536599 |

3 | 100 | 50 | 5 | 45 | 0.123270937 | 5.547192145 | 0.123484057 | 5.556782568 |

4 | 225 | 150 | 11.25 | 63.75 | 0.06079422 | 3.875631555 | 0.060899326 | 3.882332052 |

5 | 500 | 375 | 25 | 100 | 0.029982227 | 2.998222732 | 0.030034063 | 3.003406296 |

6 | 1200 | 875 | 60 | 265 | 0.014786504 | 3.918423434 | 0.014812068 | 3.925197914 |

7 | 2800 | 2075 | 140 | 585 | 0.007292343 | 4.266020674 | 0.007304951 | 4.273396107 |

8 | 7000 | 4875 | 350 | 1775 | 0.003596406 | 6.383620279 | 0.003602624 | 6.394656785 |

9 | 15000 | 11875 | 750 | 2375 | 0.00177366 | 4.212441676 | 0.001776726 | 4.219724477 |

10 | no bet | 26875 | . | -26875 | 0.001725895 | -46.38342987 | . | 43.05976662 |

. | . | . | . | total | 1 | -3.397979895 | 0.998274105 | . |

Here is my fast excel in Google

check it over if you wish for any erors

https://goo.gl/avPyod

sure fun playing that way, until you know

that impossible

Player win of 9 in a row. Casino rip-off for sure!!

Sally

I Heart Vi Hart