3 in a row appearance baccarat update?
1463 hands total / 19 shoes / 77 hands per shoe
3 in a row player in a row appearance average
player appeared 1.82 avg per 1 shoe
banker appeared 2.0 avg per 1 shoe
Player 3 in a row had sum appearance of 35 times ouf of 19 shoes (1 shoe is 77 hands)
Banker 3 in a row had sum appearance of 38 times out of 19 shoes (1 shoe is 77 hands)
So, for every 19.25 hands a 3 streak will appear (combined banker and player)
or for EVERY 9 hands in a row, a 3 streak banker will appear or a 3 streak of player will appear
SO THIS IS WRONG (this is saying for every 6 hands, a 3 streak player OR a 3 streak banker will appear
'The chance to get three Players or three Banks is 1 in 6. However, it does" SOURCE IS BS???
/baccarat-guide/baccarat-ratios/#:~:text=The%20chance%20to%20get%20three,you%20join%20the%20baccarat%20table.
Please confirm what i posted is true or false
Looks like 0.5^4 = 1/16
Ties are omitted, so there's where your extra 3.25 hands comes in.
I usually do 6 in a row which would be 0.5^7 = 1/128
6 in a row Player would be about 1/137, while 6 in a row Banker would be about 1/120 not counting ties. This is where betting Banker adds up, the 6 in a row wins become more markedly frequent. How the 5% vig affects your wins is another story.
Quote: pronexusSo, for every 19.25 hands a 3 streak will appear (combined banker and player)
or for EVERY 9 hands in a row, a 3 streak banker will appear or a 3 streak of player will appear
link to original post
How do you get from the first statement to the second? Doesn't the first one say, "For every 19.25 hands, a streak of 3 will appear," and the second one says, "For every 9 hands in a row, a streak of 3 will appear"?
Quote: ThatDonGuyQuote: pronexusSo, for every 19.25 hands a 3 streak will appear (combined banker and player)
or for EVERY 9 hands in a row, a 3 streak banker will appear or a 3 streak of player will appear
link to original post
How do you get from the first statement to the second? Doesn't the first one say, "For every 19.25 hands, a streak of 3 will appear," and the second one says, "For every 9 hands in a row, a streak of 3 will appear"?
link to original post
#1 For every 19.25 hands dealt, a streak of 3 will appear (this is directed towards both BANKER or PLAYER) confirm you got this?
or if you want to break it down by the color (see below)
#2 So, for every 9.625 hands dealt, a SINGLE 3 STREAK of PLAYER will appear. Confirm?
#3 So, for every 9.625 hands dealt, a SINGLE 3 STREAK of BANKER will appear. Confirm?
Quote: ChumpChange/games/baccarat/appendix/4/
Looks like 0.5^4 = 1/16
Ties are omitted, so there's where your extra 3.25 hands comes in.
I usually do 6 in a row which would be 0.5^7 = 1/128
6 in a row Player would be about 1/137, while 6 in a row Banker would be about 1/120 not counting ties. This is where betting Banker adds up, the 6 in a row wins become more markedly frequent. How the 5% vig affects your wins is another story.
link to original post
can you do 3 in a row ? 1/?
then lets do 2 in a row? 1/?
And can we not count ties? I might have messed up then since i counted ties.. i will give updated count on this by removing TIES
Quote: pronexusQuote: ThatDonGuyQuote: pronexusSo, for every 19.25 hands a 3 streak will appear (combined banker and player)
or for EVERY 9 hands in a row, a 3 streak banker will appear or a 3 streak of player will appear
link to original post
How do you get from the first statement to the second? Doesn't the first one say, "For every 19.25 hands, a streak of 3 will appear," and the second one says, "For every 9 hands in a row, a streak of 3 will appear"?
link to original post
#1 For every 19.25 hands dealt, a streak of 3 will appear (this is directed towards both BANKER or PLAYER) confirm you got this?
or if you want to break it down by the color (see below)
#2 So, for every 9.625 hands dealt, a SINGLE 3 STREAK of PLAYER will appear. Confirm?
#3 So, for every 9.625 hands dealt, a SINGLE 3 STREAK of BANKER will appear. Confirm?
link to original post
For #1, it's not necessarily "for every 19.25 hands dealt, a streak of 3 will appear," but, "On average, there should be 1 streak of 3 per 19.25 hands dealt."
#2 and #3 are definitely "deny" - look at it this way; if every 9.625 hands dealt had a streak of 3 player wins, and every 9.625 hands dealt had a streak of 3 bank wins, then every streak of 19.25 wins would have both 2 streaks of 3 player wins and 2 streaks of 3 bank wins, which is 4 streaks - but #1 says there is only 1 streak.
(Note that when I simulate 40 million 8-deck shoes with full penetration, I get an average of 82.3 hands per shoe, 5.05 runs of 3 player wins (about 1 per 16.3 hands), and 5.39 runs of 3 bank wins (about 1 per 15.25 hands).
You are confusing expected values with guarantees. Look at it this way:
In 2 coin tosses, you are expected to get one head and one tail. This does not mean that every two coin tosses will have exactly one head and exactly one tail; if it did, then you would be tell which was going to come up every time after the first one:
Suppose the first one is heads. Since every two coin tosses "will" have one head and one tail, the second toss "will be" tails.
Now, since every two coin tosses "will" have one head and one tail, and the second toss was tails, the third toss "will be" heads.
Using this thinking, the coin must always alternate between heads and tails.
Of course this isn't what actually happens.
Quote: ThatDonGuyQuote: pronexusQuote: ThatDonGuyQuote: pronexusSo, for every 19.25 hands a 3 streak will appear (combined banker and player)
or for EVERY 9 hands in a row, a 3 streak banker will appear or a 3 streak of player will appear
link to original post
How do you get from the first statement to the second? Doesn't the first one say, "For every 19.25 hands, a streak of 3 will appear," and the second one says, "For every 9 hands in a row, a streak of 3 will appear"?
link to original post
#1 For every 19.25 hands dealt, a streak of 3 will appear (this is directed towards both BANKER or PLAYER) confirm you got this?
or if you want to break it down by the color (see below)
#2 So, for every 9.625 hands dealt, a SINGLE 3 STREAK of PLAYER will appear. Confirm?
#3 So, for every 9.625 hands dealt, a SINGLE 3 STREAK of BANKER will appear. Confirm?
link to original post
For #1, it's not necessarily "for every 19.25 hands dealt, a streak of 3 will appear," but, "On average, there should be 1 streak of 3 per 19.25 hands dealt."
#2 and #3 are definitely "deny" - look at it this way; if every 9.625 hands dealt had a streak of 3 player wins, and every 9.625 hands dealt had a streak of 3 bank wins, then every streak of 19.25 wins would have both 2 streaks of 3 player wins and 2 streaks of 3 bank wins, which is 4 streaks - but #1 says there is only 1 streak.
(Note that when I simulate 40 million 8-deck shoes with full penetration, I get an average of 82.3 hands per shoe, 5.05 runs of 3 player wins (about 1 per 16.3 hands), and 5.39 runs of 3 bank wins (about 1 per 15.25 hands).
You are confusing expected values with guarantees. Look at it this way:
In 2 coin tosses, you are expected to get one head and one tail. This does not mean that every two coin tosses will have exactly one head and exactly one tail; if it did, then you would be tell which was going to come up every time after the first one:
Suppose the first one is heads. Since every two coin tosses "will" have one head and one tail, the second toss "will be" tails.
Now, since every two coin tosses "will" have one head and one tail, and the second toss was tails, the third toss "will be" heads.
Using this thinking, the coin must always alternate between heads and tails.
Of course this isn't what actually happens.
link to original post
So what you are saying is
#1 google dot com/search?q=3+players+in+a+row+baccarat+odds ( source: THE ANSWER HERE of 1 in 6 ) is wrong ?
#2 my count is also incorrect right? (i'm fine with it). And yes, i meant AVERAGE not "for every"
Quote: ThatDonGuyQuote: pronexusQuote: ThatDonGuyQuote: pronexusSo, for every 19.25 hands a 3 streak will appear (combined banker and player)
You are confusing expected values with guarantees. Look at it this way:
In 2 coin tosses, you are expected to get one head and one tail. This does not mean that every two coin tosses will have exactly one head and exactly one tail; if it did, then you would be tell which was going to come up every time after the first one:
Suppose the first one is heads. Since every two coin tosses "will" have one head and one tail, the second toss "will be" tails.
Now, since every two coin tosses "will" have one head and one tail, and the second toss was tails, the third toss "will be" heads.
Using this thinking, the coin must always alternate between heads and tails.
Of course this isn't what actually happens.
link to original post
So, baccarat streak count seem to be different than flipping a COIN quarter streak count, confirm? because that website is saying 1/6 will be a 3 streak run from: CASINO NEWS DAILY
Quote: ChumpChange/games/baccarat/appendix/4/
Looks like 0.5^4 = 1/16
Ties are omitted, so there's where your extra 3.25 hands comes in.
I usually do 6 in a row which would be 0.5^7 = 1/128
6 in a row Player would be about 1/137, while 6 in a row Banker would be about 1/120 not counting ties. This is where betting Banker adds up, the 6 in a row wins become more markedly frequent. How the 5% vig affects your wins is another story.
link to original post
so what is this saying? 1 out of 16 average hands will have a 3 streak of both banker/player in a row?
Quote: pronexus
So what you are saying is
#1 google dot com/search?q=3+players+in+a+row+baccarat+odds ( source: THE ANSWER HERE of 1 in 6 ) is wrong ?
#2 my count is also incorrect right? (i'm fine with it). And yes, i meant AVERAGE not "for every"
link to original post
1. Yes, although if it was 50-50, it would be 1 in 8 for the player and 1 in 8 for the bank.
There are eight possible sets of results for any given three hands: {P, P, P}, {P, P, B}, {P, B, P}, {P, B, B}, {B, P, P}, {B, P, B}, {B, B, P}, and {B, B, B}. One of those eight is 3 player wins in a row, and one is 3 bank wins in a row.
2. I wouldn't say your count is incorrect; for example, is your count including tied hands? Mine is. I think the most likely reason for the difference is, your count is based on a shoe that isn't dealt all the way through - it may stop at around 90%.
