April 13th, 2014 at 12:40:34 PM
permalink

Quote:Ibeatyouraces*shakes head* Why do you people bother????

This. It is a pretty obvious troll.

NO KILL I

April 13th, 2014 at 1:01:38 PM
permalink

Forgot to mention that if the first hand is P then you treat it as BP so you start from the second hand to trace numbers of BPB and BPP instances.

April 13th, 2014 at 1:08:22 PM
permalink

Quote:wz60Well I know you want to know the methodology, here it is:

1 First no one can derive an equation for this thing, you need large Baccarat data to run some computer analysis

You can iterate -- the third option that you didn't consider. Iterate over all possibilities of cards for three hands, then do the same analysis. Your results will be exact and your theory will be disproven.

"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice."
-- Girolamo Cardano, 1563

April 13th, 2014 at 1:18:48 PM
permalink

Quote:MathExtremistYou can iterate -- the third option that you didn't consider. Iterate over all possibilities of cards for three hands, then do the same analysis. Your results will be exact and your theory will be disproven.

Well get your number to make your point. You will be surprised.

If you have data and be willing to run simulations I will be glad to work with you.

April 13th, 2014 at 1:42:38 PM
permalink

On the first page, OP says he has a sampling of 10000 (shoes?).

I'm going to go out on a limb and say....maybe THAT's where he's coming up with this idea?

I'm going to go out on a limb and say....maybe THAT's where he's coming up with this idea?

April 13th, 2014 at 1:47:46 PM
permalink

Quote:RSOn the first page, OP says he has a sampling of 10000 (shoes?).

I'm going to go out on a limb and say....maybe THAT's where he's coming up with this idea?

Yes, that's why I suggested iteration. This thread is sort of like flipping a coin 100 times, seeing 53 heads and 47 tails, and inferring that everyone's been wrong about coin flips forever.

"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice."
-- Girolamo Cardano, 1563

April 13th, 2014 at 2:49:56 PM
permalink

wz60, here (under simulations) is a lot of data. Please try your patterning technique on it and report back.

April 13th, 2014 at 3:08:39 PM
permalink

Quote:endermikewz60, here (under simulations) is a lot of data. Please try your patterning technique on it and report back.

Thank you very much and a very constructive contribution for such discussion. I did not know the availability of these large data.

Lets see what numbers I will get and I welcome anyone who can run my patter to these data to challenge my calculations.

April 13th, 2014 at 3:44:28 PM
permalink

If my uncle's name was Mary, he would have been my aunt! :)

“There is something about the outside of a horse that is good for the inside of a man.” - Winston Churchill

April 13th, 2014 at 6:07:46 PM
permalink

Well, use the data "simulation1" in your link, I did find a winning bet selection although some other results are not quite in line with what I got from my data:

Here is what I got from betting B after BP:

1 If just make one bet if the first hand is P: 51.37% wins, total 12280 bets, so a net winning edge +0.17% (win)

2 If bet these selections up to 20 hands (without ties): 50.98% wins, total 125040 bets, so a net winning of -0.58% (loss)

3 If bet these selections to the end of a shoe, 50.81% wins, total 457946 bets, so a net winning of -0.91% (loss)

Unless someone can prove that the above numbers are not correct from same data source, I need go no further to prove my point: bet selections do make a difference, gr8 has left and he was correct about only betting certain selections ----- which significantly reduce your disadvantage expectation, or even possibly give you advantage expectation.

Here is what I got from betting B after BP:

1 If just make one bet if the first hand is P: 51.37% wins, total 12280 bets, so a net winning edge +0.17% (win)

2 If bet these selections up to 20 hands (without ties): 50.98% wins, total 125040 bets, so a net winning of -0.58% (loss)

3 If bet these selections to the end of a shoe, 50.81% wins, total 457946 bets, so a net winning of -0.91% (loss)

Unless someone can prove that the above numbers are not correct from same data source, I need go no further to prove my point: bet selections do make a difference, gr8 has left and he was correct about only betting certain selections ----- which significantly reduce your disadvantage expectation, or even possibly give you advantage expectation.