Maverick

[ADulay]

Here's a question for you then, Adulay. Are you or is anyone playing Maverick as it is written following all the rules or must one make adjustments from time to time based on individual shoe trends in order to win?


Archer

I'm playing it as written and of course you make adjustments based on the perceived shoe trends. Most system plays do that I believe.

If you're playing a system, any system, and that system says "BET OPPS EVERY HAND" and 15 Bankers in a row come up, wouldn't you 'make an adjustment' to the program also?

AD

[Egalite]

If you're playing a system, any system, and that system says "BET OPPS EVERY HAND" and 15 Bankers in a row come up, wouldn't you 'make an adjustment' to the program also?

NO, depends on the system and how much you eventually lose to 15 bankers. Which in my case would be 14 units. Or maybe the player thinks it might be better to switch to following the streak after a series of losses, which in itself pesents it's own problems, but more often.

[Archer]

I'm playing it as written and of course you make adjustments based on the perceived shoe trends. Most system plays do that I believe.

So technically speaking you do NOT follow the rules. Can't do both, follow the rules and make changes.

If you're playing a system, any system, and that system says "BET OPPS EVERY HAND" and 15 Bankers in a row come up, wouldn't you 'make an adjustment' to the program also?

AD

Yes, of course. Because following the rules we will invariably lose which has been proven over and over. Further, any "adjustment" is either a rule (which will lose) or a guess since if it is not a guess then it must be a rule and rules lose!

In the end it really is all about "perceived trends" isn't it? No matter how we decide to approach the game we are going to make guesses on trends repeating and then use MM to profit.

So in a real sense the method we use is insignificant since they all produce the same negative expectation.

Archer

[ADulay]

So in a real sense the method we use is insignificant since they all produce the same negative expectation.

Archer

True.

AD

[Profbac]

True.

AD

OK, an honest answer.

Begs the question, why should anyone pay $1,000 or more for a system
that yields a negative expectation?

[ADulay]

OK, an honest answer.

Begs the question, why should anyone pay $1,000 or more for a system
that yields a negative expectation?

I don't know.

Why not ask the guy that's selling it?

AD

[Profbac]

I don't know.

Why not ask the guy that's selling it?

AD

Did you ever hear a fish monger cry "rotten fish."

[punvit]

OK, an honest answer.

Begs the question, why should anyone pay $1,000 or more for a system
that yields a negative expectation?

The answer is, no one should pay anything for that system.

But, people do have difference thoughts and choices to make.

There is nothing we can do about it.

[Archer]

i don't know.

Why not ask the guy that's selling it?

Ad

lol

[Archer]

True.

AD

Yes, an honest answer and not unexpected. In a nutshell, a guessing game. But the game does have it's limitations and definite frequent "patterns" even if they are mathematically unpredictable. This is where the John May's of the world can and do criticize with certainty and impunity.

So, IMO, the significance of any system lies solely in the preference of the player. There are numerous ways to define the coin flip trends as has been represented here through divers "systems." But they all have a common origin represented by averages. Various systems attempt to exploit these averages in various ways. But none ultimately produce a positive value. Enter MM, good guesswork, discipline.

Therefore I don't object to system sellers - just unfounded and unverified claims and disinformation.

Ultimately it should be pretty easy to win this game - just depends on how much you want to win and how much you want to risk, lol. Suppose a player used a 10 step Marty and bet 5 Players in a row won't go 6 in a row! How long do you think it would take before one out of a hundred players busted his bankroll?

To Maverick's credit he has, I believe, NOT made any claims of his method having a positive advantage. Others like Frits Dunk-Jacobs, Ellis, Ryan, etc. have made claims that they do not wish to verify because they prefer to "embellish" that which they know to be false.

Archer