poli2k01
poli2k01
Joined: Aug 17, 2020
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 4
August 17th, 2020 at 10:15:14 AM permalink
Hi Mike! I'm glad I've stumbled upon this forum. I've been a gaming enthusiasts for more than 10 years and have been trying to figure out any undiscovered advantaged play out there in the casino gaming world....

So here's my mathematical theory and I hope you can validate my thinking. Using the theory of propensity, will it yield any slight advantage to the player given the following variables in Baccarat:

1.) Standard 16-deck shoe
2.) On the average, a shoe will have 80 results/games played
3.) If a player keeps waiting, and take the first 75 game results, observing # of Player wins vs Banker wins.
4.) If the ratio of the PLAYER wins vs BANKER wins outnumbers the Banker by AT LEAST 2:1, FLAT BET on the last 5 games on the banker.
e.g. 50 Player vs 25 Banker wins,
51 Player wins vs 24 Banker wins,
55 Player wins vs 20 banker wins

My thinking is it's either one of these two:
A. It may yield a very small advantage (similar to card counting in Baccarat), however, because it's insignificantly small, it would not be worth it and nobody in their lifetime can look for at least 100,000 shoes with the similar pre-requisite variables.
B. The way the # of decks was designed for the game, resulting to the average # of games played (e.g. 75) per shoe, any propensity % (as the game goes longer) will not be significant for the player to gain any advantage.

Appreciate you enlightening me on this one, and more power!
poli2k01
poli2k01
Joined: Aug 17, 2020
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 4
August 17th, 2020 at 10:16:35 AM permalink
Correction on my statement in B. (I meant 80, not 75)
B. The way the # of decks was designed for the game, resulting to the average # of games played (e.g. 80) per shoe, any propensity % (as the game goes longer) will not be significant for the player to gain any advantage.
MDawg
MDawg
Joined: Sep 27, 2018
  • Threads: 16
  • Posts: 1248
August 17th, 2020 at 10:24:05 AM permalink
What about this actual shoe

I made a mint on it, but I sure didn't do it betting that player would catch up.
I tell you itís wonderful to be here, man. I donít give a damn who wins or loses. Itís just wonderful to be here with you people.
MDawg
MDawg
Joined: Sep 27, 2018
  • Threads: 16
  • Posts: 1248
Thanks for this post from:
RogerKint
August 17th, 2020 at 10:28:22 AM permalink
End result ahead of that shoe, and I was barely betting:

The chips were the win, not the watch. I started and ended the shoe with the same watch. 😇
I tell you itís wonderful to be here, man. I donít give a damn who wins or loses. Itís just wonderful to be here with you people.
ThatDonGuy
ThatDonGuy
Joined: Jun 22, 2011
  • Threads: 95
  • Posts: 4343
August 17th, 2020 at 10:42:16 AM permalink
I think the answer is a combination of the two - if there is an effect on the house edge, then, even in the rare situations where the difference is maximized, it doesn't come close to making up for the house edge either way.

After a simulation of 20 million shoes (burning 2-11 cards off the top based on the top card - i.e. if the top card is a 6, burn 6 more cards; if it is a 10/face, burn 10 more - and dealing until there are fewer than 6 cards in the shoe; note the range of hands per shoe was 75-90), I get the following results after 75 hands in each shoe:
44.626% player wins
45.862% bank wins
9.512% ties
charliepatrick
charliepatrick
Joined: Jun 17, 2011
  • Threads: 33
  • Posts: 2149
August 17th, 2020 at 2:57:01 PM permalink
I guess, I wouldn't know as I haven't simulated it, that if you counted every card gone there might be a slight advantage (either one way or the other) as you get near the end of the shoe. However you'd have to wait throughout the whole shoe for perhaps one or two hands at the end and there's no guarantee any particular shoe would have an opportunity. At some places it might take a long time to get through each shoe.

The casino might take a dim view of you just sitting there not betting (although you could stand just watching) and only making occasional big bets at the end of a shoe. Also you have to be able to make the calculations and you may only be able to make a few bets per hour, so it's probably not worth the bother.

If I read it correctly Eliot has worked out you can make a measly 16c/shoe based on a $100 bet on all profitable occasions ( https://www.888casino.com/blog/baccarat-tips/beating-baccarat https://www.888casino.com/blog/baccarat-tips/card-counting-7-up-baccarat ).

In summary - sorry it's not really a profitable plan.
MDawg
MDawg
Joined: Sep 27, 2018
  • Threads: 16
  • Posts: 1248
August 17th, 2020 at 3:02:34 PM permalink
There are no mechanical systems, or progressions, that work consistently for Baccarat. Unless you have something special going on. 🤫

You get a good shoe, running, or with a pattern, or both, you make bank, and then you leave. You get a bad shoe, not running, no pattern/random, you bet small or leave.

If you stare at the above shoe I posted and say anything to yourself other than "I woulda cleaned up," then this is not the game for you.
I tell you itís wonderful to be here, man. I donít give a damn who wins or loses. Itís just wonderful to be here with you people.
MDawg
MDawg
Joined: Sep 27, 2018
  • Threads: 16
  • Posts: 1248
August 17th, 2020 at 3:15:14 PM permalink
Honestly though, who wants to waste time with Baccarat or casino gambling at all when the stock market is making us money hand over fist effortlessly lately?

I mean...

https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/d6dc8040-f0de-465f-b8e2-95ac96a6be02
I tell you itís wonderful to be here, man. I donít give a damn who wins or loses. Itís just wonderful to be here with you people.
ThatDonGuy
ThatDonGuy
Joined: Jun 22, 2011
  • Threads: 95
  • Posts: 4343
Thanks for this post from:
poli2k01
August 17th, 2020 at 3:26:29 PM permalink
Quote: ThatDonGuy

I think the answer is a combination of the two - if there is an effect on the house edge, then, even in the rare situations where the difference is maximized, it doesn't come close to making up for the house edge either way.

After a simulation of 20 million shoes (burning 2-11 cards off the top based on the top card - i.e. if the top card is a 6, burn 6 more cards; if it is a 10/face, burn 10 more - and dealing until there are fewer than 6 cards in the shoe; note the range of hands per shoe was 75-90), I get the following results after 75 hands in each shoe:
44.626% player wins
45.862% bank wins
9.512% ties



OOPS - this doesn't limit the hands to when the number of player wins to bank wins is 2/1 or higher after at least 75 hands in the shoe.
When you include this limit, I ran 250 million shoes
Whether the player/bank or bank/player ratio is 2/1 or better after 75 hands, the winning percentages were the same (ignoring ties):
Player wins 49.3%
Bank wins 50.7%
Note that when the player/bank win ratio was 2/1, there was an average of 1 hand per 74 shoes
When the bank/player ratio was 2/1, there was an average of 1 hand per 36 shoes
Last edited by: ThatDonGuy on Aug 17, 2020
sabre
sabre
Joined: Aug 16, 2010
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 892
August 17th, 2020 at 5:15:57 PM permalink
Quote: MDawg


If you stare at the above shoe I posted and say anything to yourself other than "I woulda cleaned up," then this is not the game for you.



The shoe you posted consisted of a flying inverse double whammy probation. You had a 97.3% of going bust the way you bet it. You got very lucky. I'm frankly shocked you don't know this.

  • Jump to: