I would be playing at a no commission table as either player or banker I suppose

I need to figure out the odds of my system working while taking into account the risk of hitting an exact pattern of "win, loss, loss" within the system.

By "working" I mean what would be the odds of a catastrophic failure (which I would define as losing on the 6th "tripled bet" aka the ninth overall bet).

Thank you!

Here is the system:

After 3 consecutive losses, begin tripling bet (5,5,5,15,45,135,405,etc.)

Net profits on triple bets will be the bet ("Y") minus initial bet ("X"), divided by 2 and then you subtract an additional ("X") from that remainder.

Payouts would be as follows:

Lose 5

Lose 5

Lose 5

Bet 15--> Net 0

Bet 45--> Net 15

Bet 135--> Net 60

Bet 405--> Net 195

Bet 1215--> Net 600

Bet 3645--> Net 1815

Your "system" won't work; there is nothing to test.

Baccarat streak probabilities: http://wizardofodds.com/games/baccarat/appendix/4/

You are just as likely to lose after eight consecutive losses of the same bet as you are after eight consecutive wins, or eight bets where wins and losses alternated, or any of the 252 other sets of eight consecutive non-tie results.

("Don't you mean 253?" No, as there are two sets of eight bets with alternating wins and losses - WLWLWLWL and LWLWLWLW.)

Quote:DghyczyThe idea though is that winning is a good thing, so it doesn't matter how many consecutive wins you have, its more about how many consecutive losses you have.

You could have 30 consecutive small winning sessions in a row, but the 31st could be the one to wipe you out clean of profit plus initial stake. And if the system were so foolproof, why stop at any point and not keep playing?

No progression or betting system can overcome the house edge.

You're constantly betting at a disadvantage each time you bet banker or player.

Quote:ShadowlessYou could have 30 consecutive small winning sessions in a row, but the 31st could be the one to wipe you out clean of profit plus initial stake. And if the system were so foolproof, why stop at any point and not keep playing?

No progression or betting system can overcome the house edge.

You're constantly betting at a disadvantage each time you bet banker or player.

But would it be more advantageous (using my system) to wait for two losses to begin tripling or wait for 3?

Waiting for three gives me one more hand as insurance against a catastrophic loss but also lessens net profits and risks the WLL scenerio.

I just want to know if that extra hand is more statistically advantageous than the alternative.

Thanks!

Quote:DghyczyBut would it be more advantageous (using my system) to wait for two losses to begin tripling or wait for 3?

Waiting for three gives me one more hand as insurance against a catastrophic loss but also lessens net profits and risks the WLL scenerio.

I just want to know if that extra hand is more statistically advantageous than the alternative.

Neither has any advantage over the other.

You are just as likely to lose 9 bets in a row if you start betting after 3 losses in a row as you are if you start betting after 2, or 4, or 9, or 250, losses in a row.