All here we know that Baccarat is a -EV game (like every game in a casino), but that is if you play all the hands, I think (maybe I am wrong) if you choose certain hands you could have a tiny advantage. I will share with the forum my numbers:

Shoes: 600

Hands: 41.496

Profit: 122 units (122% up initial bankroll)

I have years of background in value betting so I am familiar with the concept of variance. Like I say I don´t bet in every hand, my % of entry with my "system" is very very small, I play only in 22 shoes of the 600, and bet only 1022 units. In this first 40K hands I reverse the 1.24% edge of the casino to a 0.29 edge in my favour. Joseph Buchdahl, someone that I admire said than after 1000 bets with odds around 2.0 (like Baccarat) less than 10% of the players will be in profit, and with 10.000 bet will be less than 1%.

So my question is, this first 600 shoes are only luck? it´s the inevitable variance? or someone thinks that is really possible to beat Baccarat in the long term?

Thanks in advance.

Cheers,

Cristóbal

Only placing bets that will win seems like it could be a very effective system.

How will I know before I bet which side will win?

Quote:CristobalHi guys, I discover this forum about a week and I have read a lot of things here. I play Baccarat online about 3 months ago and I have a question to people who knows a lot more than me.

All here we know that Baccarat is a -EV game (like every game in a casino), but that is if you play all the hands, I think (maybe I am wrong) if you choose certain hands you could have a tiny advantage. I will share with the forum my numbers:

Shoes: 600

Hands: 41.496

Profit: 122 units (122% up initial bankroll)

I have years of background in value betting so I am familiar with the concept of variance. Like I say I don´t bet in every hand, my % of entry with my "system" is very very small, I play only in 22 shoes of the 600, and bet only 1022 units. In this first 40K hands I reverse the 1.24% edge of the casino to a 0.29 edge in my favour. Joseph Buchdahl, someone that I admire said than after 1000 bets with odds around 2.0 (like Baccarat) less than 10% of the players will be in profit, and with 10.000 bet will be less than 1%.

So my question is, this first 600 shoes are only luck? it´s the inevitable variance? or someone thinks that is really possible to beat Baccarat in the long term?

Thanks in advance.

Cheers,

Cristóbal

link to original post

Welcome to the forum. It is simple. It is not possible to beat baccarat in the long term. That does not mean you might not be ahead after any large number of hands played. There are exceptions that might allow you to be ahead in the long term, but that is not beating the game as it is meant to be played. If you can see what the next card will be, you can have a HUGE advantage. If there are loss rebates available you can also gain an advantage. Comps theoretically can turn this negative game to a positive. As far as counting cards, it has been shown to be ineffective at changing the game from -EV to +EV.

Anyone who tells you ‘bet a streak’ or ‘sit out 3 hands then bet two’ is just speaking mumbo jumbo.

Thanks for the feedback.

Thanks again for your post.

Quote:CristobalThanks Soopoo for your comment. Let me ask you something, for you what is long term in Baccarat, I mean how much hands? Maybe the question have a relative answer I know. My background like I said is sport, tennis particulary, for me someone in profit in tennis after 500 bets have an edge. With the juice of sportbooks, being in green after that number on bets in a sport like tennis have nothing of luck. Then like always will be variance, but that you have an edge you have it. But in Baccarat I don´t have idea. How much hands will be? 10.000? 50.000? 200.000? There have to be a number, we can play 20 years with no one in red, having profits and will still say that is only variance?

Thanks again for your post.

link to original post

I’m not good enough at math to give you an accurate answer. Someone will be able to chime in and say (example…. not necessarily even true). If you play 10,000 hands at $10 per hand you have a 8% chance of being ahead. It will vary slightly depending on whether you bet banker or player, or alternate.

As far as the tennis point, it is certainly possible for someone to analyze the odds made by sports books and find inefficiencies and exploit them for a profit. I think it will be a rare individual that could do it, but it is definitely plausible.

Thinking you can win at baccarat as an expectation without the special examples I previously mentioned is just foolish.

Cheers.

Quote:CristobalI understand your point, and thanks again for the feedback. Could you please say me how you get to that 8% is ahead after 10.000 hands? I made Montecarlo simulation with my spreedcheet on Excel with the 40.000 hands and the results was a lot less than 1% ahead, exactly 0.38%. I am not being ironic, I am really interest.

Cheers.

link to original post

I think you can figure it out better than I can! I just made up a number. So you have the answer! Playing 40,000 hands you have a LESS THAN ONE IN 200 chance of being ahead. So it is CLEARLY not a good idea to play baccarat to make money. You figured it out yourself!

Quote:CristobalHi Dieter, thanks for the welcome. English is not my native language so maybe I don´t explain well. I loss a lot of bets, my large DD was 18% of my bankroll, but I win more hands that I lost, exactly 122 hands more.

Thanks for the feedback.

link to original post

You are welcome!

I think you said you played 1022 rounds, and won 122 more than you lost. Lose 450, win 572?

Congratulations.

Why did you choose to bet the way you did, and sit out at other times?

Private messages are open.

I choose the bets if happen 3 factors in the shoe, and these 3 factors happens before the 58 hand, later is too risky, where I play there are 69 hands for shoe aprox. And I only play Player. One of the factors is counting cards, the other two I prefer to not say it here, I hope you understand. In a little more than 3 months I will reach 100.000 hands and I will make a few conclusions here.

Cheers.

Quote:CristobalHi Dieter, exactly that is, I don´t inclued ties in that 1022 hands.

I choose the bets if happen 3 factors in the shoe, and these 3 factors happens before the 58 hand, later is too risky, where I play there are 69 hands for shoe aprox. And I only play Player. One of the factors is counting cards, the other two I prefer to not say it here, I hope you understand. In a little more than 3 months I will reach 100.000 hands and I will make a few conclusions here.

Cheers.

link to original post

Geez! So now there are two ‘factors’ that you won’t say what they are here….. and you want us to do an analysis for you…. but you aren’t giving us the (most likely totally useless) WAY YOU DECIDE WHEN TO BET!

Since you mentioned counting cards, why don’t you tell us what you are counting and when the count will tell you to bet? And do the other ‘factors’ override the count???

Quote:DieterQuote:CristobalHi Dieter, thanks for the welcome. English is not my native language so maybe I don´t explain well. I loss a lot of bets, my large DD was 18% of my bankroll, but I win more hands that I lost, exactly 122 hands more.

Thanks for the feedback.

link to original post

You are welcome!

I think you said you played 1022 rounds, and won 122 more than you lost. Lose 450, win 572?

Congratulations.

Why did you choose to bet the way you did, and sit out at other times?

Private messages are open.

link to original post

Here’s an analysis.

1,022 decisions were made all on player.

Null hypothesis: player wins 49.315% of decisions.

Expected win: 504

Actual win: 572

Difference: 68

Standard deviation = sqrt (.49315 * (1 - .49315) * 1022) = 16

t score = 68 / 16 = 4.25

That’s pretty compelling if all accurate. Physicists claim new discoveries at a 5 standard deviation standard.

Quote:CristobalHi Dieter, exactly that is, I don´t inclued ties in that 1022 hands.

I choose the bets if happen 3 factors in the shoe, and these 3 factors happens before the 58 hand, later is too risky, where I play there are 69 hands for shoe aprox. And I only play Player. One of the factors is counting cards, the other two I prefer to not say it here, I hope you understand. In a little more than 3 months I will reach 100.000 hands and I will make a few conclusions here.

Cheers.

link to original post

My PM's are always open.

I know you don't know.me, but I like to think I'm somewhat trustworthy with secrets.

My gut instinct says you need about.20x more play than you have to demonstrate that whatever you're onto isn't just luck, but I'll defer the.math to the math people.

I will post the results when arrive to 800 shoes (about 55.000 hands) that will happen in about 3 weeks more. Numbers are too high, win 122% of the bankroll in only 3 months it´s insane, I know that number will go down a lot. I wiil be happy if I made consistenly 5%-6% for month in average.

Thanks again man.

Thanks for your feedback.

Quote:Cristobal20X it´s a valid way to see it, but I think it´s too much. That will be more than 800K hands, I play about 6-7 hours per day, 20 days a month, at that level I will reach that number in 5 years more. I think 200K it´s a good parameter too see if luck have something to say. Anyway I know this game only 6 months ago (3 months studyng 3 months betting) and surely you have a lot more experiences than me.

Thanks for your feedback.

link to original post

I must have misunderstood.

i thought you played 1022 hands (not counting ties); 20,000 hands seems adequate to know if it's working.

Thanks again.

Cheers.

If you keep winning more hands than expected that is not something that may be calculated, other than to say that yes it is within expected variance or no it is not within expected variance.

Shoes: 700

Hands: 48.415

Units play: 1342

Win: 674

Lost: 546

Tie: 122

P/L: 128 U

Yield: 9.54%

Edge: 0.26%

A few thougts:

1- For me at least playing Baccarat it´s boring like hell, 97% of the time I only put data in my spreedsheet, and only 3% I am really playing.

2- The exacts results of the 48.415 hands are: Player: 21.810 (45.05%), Banker: 22.115 (45.68%) and Tie: 4.490 (9.27%). The odds would said that Player "should" win 21.605 times and really wins 21.810, that means that is 205 bets up. Maybe that is one of the reason that I am in a good performance (I only bet in player).

3- If I should bet in ALL the hands I would be -305 Units instead of +128 Units.

4- I am pretty sure than when I reach 100.000 hands the % of Player, Banker, Tie would be at it expected (44.6, 45.9, 9.50). My best results by far where when the player was undereated (44% and lower) and then go up to his natural %. Cards have no memorie, but math it´s implacable.

Any feedback it´s welcome.

Regards,

Cristóbal

If the above is not the case, but you still aren’t willing to share how you choose the time you will bet, there is nothing anyone here can offer you as to a ‘why’ you are ahead, other than surmising just good luck!

Quote:SOOPOOYour results are all online, correct? With no real money bet, correct? There are unscrupulous sites that have it set up for you to win when no real money is on the line, but when you start betting real money they either have a fair game, with a small house edge against you, or even worse they just set you up to lose.

If the above is not the case, but you still aren’t willing to share how you choose the time you will bet, there is nothing anyone here can offer you as to a ‘why’ you are ahead, other than surmising just good luck!

link to original post

I play online with real money in Pinaccle Casino (it´s a Sportsbook also). My bankroll it´s a four midle number, 80% of my money is in Betfair (Orbit) where I play pre-match tennis about 4 years now.

I am only trying to guess where is the limit when you can stop talking about variance or good luck and you start talking that you have a very tiny edge against the casino. I know 90% of the members here thinks that it´s imposiblle in a game like Baccarat, I even not know yet if that is imposible or not, but I will give it a shot untill numbers prove me that I am wrong.

Quote:CristobalQuote:SOOPOOYour results are all online, correct? With no real money bet, correct? There are unscrupulous sites that have it set up for you to win when no real money is on the line, but when you start betting real money they either have a fair game, with a small house edge against you, or even worse they just set you up to lose.

If the above is not the case, but you still aren’t willing to share how you choose the time you will bet, there is nothing anyone here can offer you as to a ‘why’ you are ahead, other than surmising just good luck!

link to original post

I play online with real money in Pinaccle Casino (it´s a Sportsbook also). My bankroll it´s a four midle number, 80% of my money is in Betfair (Orbit) where I play pre-match tennis about 4 years now.

I am only trying to guess where is the limit when you can stop talking about variance or good luck and you start talking that you have a very tiny edge against the casino. I know 90% of the members here thinks that it´s imposiblle in a game like Baccarat, I even not know yet if that is imposible or not, but I will give it a shot untill numbers prove me that I am wrong.

link to original post

I know English isn’t your native tongue, but I think you are saying you are playing baccarat online at Pinnacle casino for real money, and are ahead after some time. Since you won’t share what makes you think you have an edge, all we really have is an anonymous internet account alleging he is beating baccarat somehow. Like I’ve said before, without any information it is hard to analyze what you are doing or even hazard a guess why you’d be ahead, other than just being lucky.

Frankly, if I were you and found some ‘system’ that beats baccarat, I wouldn’t be wasting my time on WoV. I’d be figuring out how I can open many more accounts….

Quote:CristobalHi guys, I discover this forum about a week and I have read a lot of things here. I play Baccarat online about 3 months ago and I have a question to people who knows a lot more than me.

All here we know that Baccarat is a -EV game (like every game in a casino), but that is if you play all the hands, I think (maybe I am wrong) if you choose certain hands you could have a tiny advantage. I will share with the forum my numbers:

Shoes: 600

Hands: 41.496

Profit: 122 units (122% up initial bankroll)

I have years of background in value betting so I am familiar with the concept of variance. Like I say I don´t bet in every hand, my % of entry with my "system" is very very small, I play only in 22 shoes of the 600, and bet only 1022 units. In this first 40K hands I reverse the 1.24% edge of the casino to a 0.29 edge in my favour. Joseph Buchdahl, someone that I admire said than after 1000 bets with odds around 2.0 (like Baccarat) less than 10% of the players will be in profit, and with 10.000 bet will be less than 1%.

So my question is, this first 600 shoes are only luck? it´s the inevitable variance? or someone thinks that is really possible to beat Baccarat in the long term?

Thanks in advance.

Cheers,

Cristóbal

link to original post

Hello Cristobal, making some calculation with your data, rounded.

You tracked 41.496 hand which are included in 600 shoes of 69 hands

You said you played a total of 22 shoes times 69, you played a tottl of 1520 hands

As your tottal wagged was 1022 ,I can only suppose you flatbetted 0,672 units per hand playing any side which has a house edge of 2,7% aprox.

You played 1520 games of 0,672 units, your average hit rate should be 760 hits and 760 misses.

As you won 122 units playing 0,672 yu hit 181 times more than you should.

These performance within these 1520 hands gives you +10,4 standard deviations in your game, in short, it is not random

What I guess is that you vary the amount of bet, in that case you must separate each group of bets of 0,672, 1, 2 or whatever, to make a true calculation

regards

ybot

Thanks again.

Regards.

Quote:CristobalHi everyone, I would like to share with the forum my results and a few thoughs now that I reach 700 shoes.

Shoes: 700

Hands: 48.415

Units play: 1342

Win: 674

Lost: 546

Tie: 122

P/L: 128 U

Yield: 9.54%

Edge: 0.26%

A few thougts:

1- For me at least playing Baccarat it´s boring like hell, 97% of the time I only put data in my spreedsheet, and only 3% I am really playing.

2- The exacts results of the 48.415 hands are: Player: 21.810 (45.05%), Banker: 22.115 (45.68%) and Tie: 4.490 (9.27%). The odds would said that Player "should" win 21.605 times and really wins 21.810, that means that is 205 bets up. Maybe that is one of the reason that I am in a good performance (I only bet in player).

3- If I should bet in ALL the hands I would be -305 Units instead of +128 Units.

4- I am pretty sure than when I reach 100.000 hands the % of Player, Banker, Tie would be at it expected (44.6, 45.9, 9.50). My best results by far where when the player was undereated (44% and lower) and then go up to his natural %. Cards have no memorie, but math it´s implacable.

Any feedback it´s welcome.

Regards,

Cristóbal

link to original post

N= 1,220

Null hypothesis = 601 wins

Standard deviation = 17.5

Actual wins = 674

Excess wins = 73

Standard deviations from average = 4.17

My score so far:

9,700 Banker bets.

Expected to win (.507*9,700)= 4,918 hands

Actual hands won = 5,356

Difference 438 (Commissions consumed more than half of that)

If I calculated correctly, the SD is 8.9 to this point.

Null hypothesis = 601 wins

Standard deviation = 17.5

Actual wins = 674

Excess wins = 73

Standard deviations from average = 4.17

link to original post

Thanks again for the SD unJon. This last 100 shoes were the worst since I start playing, a lot of variance and "only" 6 units won. In the long term player it´s overreated wich is bad for my goals, let´s see how it continues.

Quote:TankoI play stadium and selectively bet Banker only. Never online.

My score so far:

9,700 Banker bets.

Expected to win (.507*9,700)= 4,918 hands

Actual hands won = 5,356

Difference 438 (Commissions consumed more than half of that)

If I calculated correctly, the SD is 8.9 to this point.

link to original post

Nice numebrers,Tanko. If I calculated well you have won 170.2 units net. That´s a yield of 1.76%, most of professional bettors would kill for that number in the long term.

Regards.

Quote:Tankoselectively bet Banker only.

My score so far:

9,700 Banker bets.

Expected to win (.507*9,700)= 4,918 hands

Actual hands won = 5,356

Difference 438 (Commissions consumed more than half of that)

If I calculated correctly, the SD is 8.9 to this point.

what do you attribute this great success to - 8.9 SDs to the good______?

what is the nature of your selectivity_____?____________unless it's your secret

.

We have an example of 10.000 hands in Baccarat, the distribution is like this:

Player: 4.212

Banker: 4.836

Tie: 952

And we know that the "correct" distribution should be something like this:

Player: 4.462

Banker: 4.586

Tie: 952

Do you think that the % of the player in the next, let´s say 1.000 hands is what they should be (0.446247%) of their odds would be a little higher (something around 0.45XXX%) for be underreated (-250 hands) in this first 10.000 hands?

Thanks in advance.

Regards

You could run a Kolmogorov–Smirnov test to determine that.

Quote:unJonI think what you are asking is the chance that the sample with player underrepresented comes from the expected distribution?

You could run a Kolmogorov–Smirnov test to determine that.

link to original post

Exactly that, unJon. I know that the chance in the1 hand would be the same at the 9.637 hand, but the law of large numbers show us that all finally goes to their expected distribution.

First time I hear of the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test, I will google it to give it a try.

Thanks,

Quote:Cristobal]Nice numebrers,Tanko. If I calculated well you have won 170.2 units net.

Less than two units net per session. Only worked well for Interblock RNG games. Still may, but I haven't played them in months.