Baccarat Strategy 55% who has simulator?

Hey guys, on baccarat over 100,000 shoe simulations 55% of the time after 5 players in a row the 6th will be player, and about 55.5% of the time after 5 bankers 6th will be banker. Can anyone simulate 1 million shoes to see if these results are correct? I don’t care what you think about the fact that it’s always 50/50 and strategies don’t work. For the most part i agree, but there are mathematical ways to best baccarat and I don’t care if you think otherwise.

I just ran a billion shoe simulation. Your percentages are dead accurate

I can't drive 55.

Quote: Kj4646

but there are mathematical ways to best baccarat and I don’t care if you think otherwise.
link to original post

If you don’t care if we think otherwise, why do you ask when you KNOW we think otherwise.

But if I actually believed what you believe, I’d be sitting at a Baccarat table with thousands of dollars waiting for that sixth hand that occurs around 1 out of 16 hands, bet whatever my bankroll could afford (use Kelly Criterion), and reap the rewards.

Quote: SOOPOO

Quote: Kj4646

but there are mathematical ways to best baccarat and I don’t care if you think otherwise.
link to original post

If you don’t care if we think otherwise, why do you ask when you KNOW we think otherwise.

But if I actually believed what you believe, I’d be sitting at a Baccarat table with thousands of dollars waiting for that sixth hand that occurs around 1 out of 16 hands, bet whatever my bankroll could afford (use Kelly Criterion), and reap the rewards.
link to original post

That's what I was doing until I became the first player to ever get 86'd from casino for playing the super secret 55% 5 player in a row strategy. It's a bug in God's coding script for lucky coin flips.

OP why did you release this amazing trick that casinos HATE for us to know?

Quote: Kj4646

Hey guys, on baccarat over 100,000 shoe simulations 55% of the time after 5 players in a row the 6th will be player, and about 55.5% of the time after 5 bankers 6th will be banker.
link to original post

Past performance does not assure future results.
All investments carry a degree of risk.

Best of luck in your endeavours.

Netflix stock is down 50% in the last 2 months. It could have been 55%, maybe tomorrow.

Quote: Ace2

I just ran a billion shoe simulation. Your percentages are dead accurate
link to original post

Can’t tell if your being sarcastic or not, although I’m assuming you are because the computing power required for a 1 billion shoe simulation would have to be a lot.

Quote: SOOPOO

Quote: Kj4646

but there are mathematical ways to best baccarat and I don’t care if you think otherwise.
link to original post

If you don’t care if we think otherwise, why do you ask when you KNOW we think otherwise.

But if I actually believed what you believe, I’d be sitting at a Baccarat table with thousands of dollars waiting for that sixth hand that occurs around 1 out of 16 hands, bet whatever my bankroll could afford (use Kelly Criterion), and reap the rewards.
link to original post

Because I know there are ways to beat house in baccarat, I’m just not 100% sure about this particular strategy. I don’t want a whole bunch of trolls and losers spamming me and telling me that it’s impossible to beat house in baccarat. I simply want an answer to my questions backed by a simulation

After a million shoes...I assumed you bet after five in a row, looked at the result and then reset the counters.
After five Players
Betting on Player had a HouseEdge of 1.17% (lose 10604 from 906158 bets).
Betting on Banker had a HouseEdge of 1.12% (lose 10139.25)
After five Bankers
Betting on Banker had a HouseEdge of 1.03% (lose 10486.40 from 1017500 bets)
Betting on Player had a HouseEdge of 1.26% (lose 12854)
[edit - added}
2nd run confirms the same pattern

Quote: Kj4646

Because I know there are ways to beat house in baccarat, I’m just not 100% sure about this particular strategy. I don’t want a whole bunch of trolls and losers spamming me and telling me that it’s impossible to beat house in baccarat. I simply want an answer to my questions backed by a simulation
link to original post

Trolls and losers: Well, maybe you pre-insulted me and whoever posts next.

Be 100% sure that that strategy is bunk. CharliePatrick has humoured you with a real simulation. Now, go off in search of another ten million hands of REAL BACCARAT. It might take you a while to analyse them. Maybe you can pay someone on fiverr.com to test it for you.
Better yet, borrow as much cash as you can. Mortgage what you can, take the money to your casino of choice and camp out on their baccarat table and wager to your strategy till you prove it to yourself. No need to report back here.

As SooPoo advised. You MUST follow kelly criteria or your winning strategy will still see you go bust.
Good luck.

Next time someone comes into class to show off the Holy Grail, I swear to god, I'm going to beat him over the head and steal it. That'll teach him not to sip from it discreetly as he lives forever.

Quote: Kj4646

I don’t care what you think about the fact that it’s always 50/50 and strategies don’t work. For the most part i agree, but there are mathematical ways to best baccarat and I don’t care if you think otherwise.
link to original post

(emphasis added -D)

I am at least curious why you are focusing on prior hand results as indicators.

________________


I believe this is a way to beat baccarat - until somebody shows me that I'm wrong - but I don't think that will happen

it has obvious limitations which I won't go into - but still

highly skilled blackjack players can watch the shuffle carefully and then cut themselves an Ace dealt out on the first round - a skill known as Ace cutting

there's no reason that a person who can do that couldn't cut the Player a 9 or an 8 at the bacc table

cannot be done with an automatic shuffler

I'll leave it to the mathletes to state what edge a bettor has betting on Player if he knows the Player will get a 9 for his first card

I'm not sure about that - but I believe it's a large edge comparaed to edge a player can normally get counting at blackjack

so, obviously the strategy would be to make the tiniest bets possible only on Banker until you cut the Player a 9 or an 8 - and then get down huge


.

You've got to be ready win or lose 75 hands.

keep going, we've gone from marginal 52% to roll-in-the-dough 55% now. And we know the secret! Casinos here I come!

Quote: lilredrooster

I believe this is a way to beat baccarat - until somebody shows me that I'm wrong - but I don't think that will happen

it has obvious limitations which I won't go into - but still

highly skilled blackjack players can watch the shuffle carefully and then cut themselves an Ace dealt out on the first round - a skill known as Ace cutting

there's no reason that a person who can do that couldn't cut the Player a 9 or an 8 at the bacc table

link to original post

The skills of precision cutting may apply.

Are you familiar with the "baccarat burn"?

I'd have to go do some research, but my fallible memory says first card 8/9 information is worth around 6%.

Quote: Dieter

Are you familiar with the "baccarat burn"?

no, I had never heard of that until you mentioned it and I looked it up
it looks like that would invalidate precision cutting

I goofed off on mini bacc years ago and I don't remember them doing a baccarat burn - I'm just about 100% sure they did not

but things may have changed - I don't really know


.

Quote: Kj4646

Hey guys, on baccarat over 100,000 shoe simulations 55% of the time after 5 players in a row the 6th will be player, and about 55.5% of the time after 5 bankers 6th will be banker. Can anyone simulate 1 million shoes to see if these results are correct? I don’t care what you think about the fact that it’s always 50/50 and strategies don’t work. For the most part i agree, but there are mathematical ways to best baccarat and I don’t care if you think otherwise.
link to original post

Kj, I'm willing to set aside the math. You say you mostly agree. 'Nuff said, IMHO. (Did we ever deduct 5% of Banker's wins?)

Now, about the "simulation." I like to use the Wizard's data when I ponder such curious questions. Furthermore, I think there's a reasonably easy way to check using the 10 carefully crafted Baccarat data files he created, each of which has 25,000 8-deck shoes and is specifically tailored to be a statistically random simulation. We have good data. (Apologies. I'm multi-tasking, so you have to find the files at WoO, OK?) One assumption I'm making: B-B-B-T-B-B and B-T-T-B-B-B each count as 5 Bs in a row, so ties don't matter.

Download each of the 10 data files, and save each as a plain, ASCII text file. Instead, if you choose to use your word processor, use a mono-space font so columns align. Open a file and look at the data. It has digits and commas, plus the following letters: B, P, and T. (Are you with me so far?) Continue as follows to get the data you seek:

1. Delete every instance each character EXCEPT B's and P's
2. Search for a string of 5 Bs in succession
3. Check and record the next result.

We once thought the earth was flat and the center of everything. If you really are onto something, the data -- somehow or other -- eventually will demonstrate the fact. Good luck.
[Minor typo edit]

Quote: Kj4646

Hey guys, on baccarat over 100,000 shoe simulations 55% of the time after 5 players in a row the 6th will be player, and about 55.5% of the time after 5 bankers 6th will be banker. Can anyone simulate 1 million shoes to see if these results are correct?

I'll do better - after 100 million shoes, I get a player win after 5 straight player wins (ignoring ties) happening 49.314% of the time, and a bank win after 5 straight bank wins (again, ignoring ties) happening 50.677% of the time.

Quote: lilredrooster

Quote: Dieter

Are you familiar with the "baccarat burn"?

no, I had never heard of that until you mentioned it and I looked it up
it looks like that would invalidate precision cutting

I goofed off on mini bacc years ago and I don't remember them doing a baccarat burn - I'm just about 100% sure they did not

but things may have changed - I don't really know


.
link to original post

I think if fortune smiles on you and you track a slug of about 24 9's and you can cut to the start of it, you could do OK.

I think there may be a smaller number of hydrogen atoms between here and the sun than the denominator in that probability, but anything can happen in a casino.

Quote: Dieter

<snip>I think if fortune smiles on you and you track a slug of about 24 9's and you can cut to the start of it, you could do OK.<snip>
link to original post

If you DO know the first 24 cards will be 9's, bet the farm on "Tie"!

Dog Hand

Quote: DogHand

Quote: Dieter

<snip>I think if fortune smiles on you and you track a slug of about 24 9's and you can cut to the start of it, you could do OK.<snip>
link to original post

If you DO know the first 24 cards will be 9's, bet the farm on "Tie"!

Dog Hand
link to original post

They would be more likely to be tens or faces, so I'd track them.