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!

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.

I made a mint on it, but I sure didn't do it betting that player would catch up.

The chips were the win, not the watch. I started and ended the shoe with the same watch. 😇

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

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.

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 mean...

https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/d6dc8040-f0de-465f-b8e2-95ac96a6be02

Quote:ThatDonGuyI 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

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.

Unless you have like 1 billion spare money just to gamble, betting 1 million per game, playing 5 games only at the end of the shoe. You will be earning small change of $1,600 per bet in the long run. LOL.

I'm frankly shocked that you're shocked. You haven't been paying attention.Quote:sabreI'm frankly shocked you don't know this.

And if you could use a computer and sit out until the time is right what what type of an advantage of woud you have on average?Quote:WizardI see no reason to believe this strategy would help you. As I've said many times, unless you're tracking every card and using a computer, studying the past in baccarat won't help you.