baccarat strategy lol
Some systems are "better" than others. It really comes down to your goal -- do you want to play for a long time, have fun, and most likely lose? You want to try to win 10x your buy in (infrequently)? Do you want to just win 1/10'th your buy in (frequently)?
If you want to chill out and play for many hours, you're not gonna bet 1/5'th your buy in and let it ride 5 hands straight for the big score (that'd be an aweful system for you). But that'd be great for someone else, who wants a big yet infrequent big score.
The next easiest way is to generate random numbers - you may have to build the RNG yourself if you want fair quality - and using this run trials.
The last way is to create random decks of cards and play the shoe out - but that's a fair bit of coding (and testing the decks are indeed random!).
Quote: pingclassicIm new so don't slam me to hard. I know all betting systems are flawed i get that but is it safe to say some are better then others in a sense? Also if i wanted to have my strategy tested through thousands of hand how could i do it? I've done so many with my eyes I'm almost blind!
Hi And Welcome to the forum.
Would you be able to work out what number of bets would go on Banker, Player and Tie, with your system, out of say 10,000 hands?
If so, simply plug the values into a table like the one below and it would tell you ON AVERAGE what proportion of your money you would lose.
That average would never change, but the variance, I.e. the margin of error on that average compared to a real session, could do so wildly. As RS said, you can create a system that wins 9 sessions out of 10 but then you risk losing all your worldly goods, or you can devise a system where you are almost sure to lose 9 sessions out of 10, but MIGHT win massively at some point. Or you can devise a system where you lose your money quite slowly, or quite quickly.
That's all your system can do: Change HOW you lose your money.
From a previous poster.'PopCan'
Quote: pingclassicis it safe to say some are better then others in a sense?
the Wizard created a betting system, so maybe some are better than others
https://wizardofodds.com/gambling/betting-systems/cancellation/
Quote: odiousgambitthe Wizard created a betting system, so maybe some are better than others
https://wizardofodds.com/gambling/betting-systems/cancellation/
No, no, no, the Wizard did not invent the Labouchere' System, he was just presenting it as an easy to follow system that has a high degree of success given an individual trial. Scarne even wrote about the Labouchere' in his Complete Guide to Gambling, as I recall...it's been around for a long time, started out being played on Roulette.
Quote: pingclassicIm new so don't slam me to hard. I know all betting systems are flawed i get that but is it safe to say some are better then others in a sense? Also if i wanted to have my strategy tested through thousands of hand how could i do it? I've done so many with my eyes I'm almost blind!
For baccarat, my favorite system is to just bet on banker every time. People say it's "boring" but I still find it to be a fun game that way.
Quote: pingclassic....I play the horrible marty but I don't bet till I see 2 wins in a row then i jump on the winner (adding 5% if its on the banker) and play it till it loses then start over.
Martingale can be a really fun way of losing your money, mostly because you only lose your entire bankroll once but you win lots of small victories ( Which makes you cocky )
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/betting-systems/21359-debunking-roulette-marty-with-pictures/ ( Same goes with Baccarat )
You do realise that waiting for 2 wins, waiting for 20 wins does not make a blind bit of difference to your probability of winning or going bust, except that while you are waiting and not betting, you are not losing.
Quote: Mission146No, no, no, the Wizard did not invent the Labouchere' System, he was just presenting it as an easy to follow system that has a high degree of success given an individual trial. Scarne even wrote about the Labouchere' in his Complete Guide to Gambling, as I recall...it's been around for a long time, started out being played on Roulette.
He gives credit to the Labouchere, and to somebody named Silberstang, but I got the impression that this system has some personal work he put in, in its manifestation. Perhaps not. It may not be that he would intend to say that "some are better than others" and he does in fact say it is equally worthless in the long run.
To say 'no,no,no' to such a revered poster is lèse-maj·es·té however. You are to suspend yourself for 3 days.
Quote: OnceDearMartingale can be a really fun way of losing your money, mostly because you only lose your entire bankroll once but you win lots of small victories ( Which makes you cocky )
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/betting-systems/21359-debunking-roulette-marty-with-pictures/ ( Same goes with Baccarat )
You do realise that waiting for 2 wins, waiting for 20 wins does not make a blind bit of difference to your probability of winning or going bust, except that while you are waiting and not betting, you are not losing.
No random betting system is a winner. However, someone that is typically a large bettor might find that Martingale actually does save them money, because it will lower their overall average bet, which means lower total action and lower profits for the casino. For example, someone that is accustomed to playing $1000/hand average bet at Baccarat might start their Martingale with $100, and go up to $6400. They'll win most sessions, and still have an overall average bet lower than $1000, which will generate lower theo.
They get to win most of the time, and still get the "thrill" of placing large bets every now and then. For some reasonably large gamblers that are not and will never be AP's, Martingale might actually deliver an improved gambling experience with lower overall losses.
A better random system might be taking half of one's bankroll and playing whatever they like for the duration of their trip. If they win, they win. If they lose, then they take the remaining half of their bankroll and bet it on a single hand of Baccarat. Including the sessions with the first half of the bankroll, they'll win on more trips than they lose in this way, and the single large bet doesn't generate very much theo.
Both of these systems will wind up losing money overall of course, but the point is to lower the amount being put into action while giving the recreational gambler something to experience.
Quote: cwazyHowever, someone that is typically a large bettor might find that Martingale actually does save them money, because it will lower their overall average bet, which means lower total action and lower profits for the casino. For example, someone that is accustomed to playing $1000/hand average bet at Baccarat might start their Martingale with $100, and go up to $6400. They'll win most sessions, and still have an overall average bet lower than $1000, which will generate lower theo.
They get to win most of the time, and still get the "thrill" of placing large bets every now and then. For some reasonably large gamblers that are not and will never be AP's, Martingale might actually deliver an improved gambling experience with lower overall losses.
Both of these systems will wind up losing money overall of course, but the point is to lower the amount being put into action while giving the recreational gambler something to experience.
I don't disagree with you at all.
As I say, 'Marty is a fun way to lose money' It's far more fun than flat betting.
Nowaday's, I've found as much fun messing about martying with £5 min bets and a very small session bankroll as I ever had playing £100 flat bets. Cap the session loss at say £200 and I can have an hour's fun for what previously might have been 2 hands.
Quote: odiousgambitHe gives credit to the Labouchere, and to somebody named Silberstang, but I got the impression that this system has some personal work he put in, in its manifestation. Perhaps not. It may not be that he would intend to say that "some are better than others" and he does in fact say it is equally worthless in the long run.
To say 'no,no,no' to such a revered poster is lèse-maj·es·té however. You are to suspend yourself for 3 days.
Again!?
Sorry, gut reaction, I just think the Wizard would flip if someone actually believed that he bothered to invent a betting system.
Quote: OnceDearThat's all your system can do: Change HOW you lose your money.
From a previous poster.'PopCan'
Shouldn't you omit the edge for the Tie bet, if you stick to only betting Bank and Player, any time there is a Tie it is a push.
Quote: CyrusVQuote: OnceDearThat's all your system can do: Change HOW you lose your money.
From a previous poster.'PopCan'
Shouldn't you omit the edge for the Tie bet, if you stick to only betting Bank and Player, any time there is a Tie it is a push.
If you place 0 bets on the tie, then just pop zero into the box where the 7 is. Then the cell with -1.0052 would also have a 0 in it, the total return will be nearer to -0.6 and the Edge will no longer be that massive -2.65 .
So, don't bet on the tie and the calculations take care of themselves.
