Playing Baccarat as a small side job
Thread Rating:
Quote: sabreYour strategy is sound. Don't listen to anyone who says otherwise.
It's definitely sound from a money management point of view, but not mathematically.
Quote: hyngchl1Simply stop after you win $20 and call it a night.
There is a 100% certainty that your losing sessions will eventually exceed your winning sessions.
Quote: gamerfreakThere is a 100% certainty that your losing sessions will eventually exceed your winning sessions.
That's false.
Quote: gamerfreakThere is a 100% certainty that your losing sessions will eventually exceed your winning sessions.
EDIT - Duplicate post (weird)
One might think the more you drink the more you will win, that may be true, however, you can overdo it.
Quote: hyngchl1gamerfreak - Please back up your claim :)
You are playing a game with a negative expectation.
Bacarrat has a house edge of 1.06% for the banker bet or 1.24% for the player bet. So for every $100 you wager on the banker, you can expect to lose $1.06.
Now will that happen every session? No. That’s just what is theoretically expected. Sometimes you will run better, sometimes you will run worse. But it’s a statistical certainty that the more hands you play, the closer you will get to losing 1.06%-1.24% of the total amount you wager.
Luck is on your side right now. But sooner or later, you’ll have a few days with losing sessions in a row, and you will rethink this whole thing.
Sort of makes the long lines at the airport kind of unrewarding.Quote: SOOPOODo you really walk into a casino, and if you win two $10 bets you just get up and leave?
Its probably a matter of 'Lady Variance' or else the online casino is trying to sucker you into making larger bets by rigging the results.
That house edge applies to every bet, hand after hand.
Quote: hyngchl1Has anyone tried playing Baccarat as a small side job to supplement income? I play 5 days a week and I have found it to be very successful. People say "oh it can not be beaten" but with patience and self-control, it can be beaten. I start with a $3,000 bankroll and flat bet anywhere between $5-$10. I follow a flat betting strategy (no progression betting) and simply stop when I make $20 profit. I don't follow silly patterns. My bets are completely random and I just follow my intuition. When my gut tells me to sit out for a couple rounds, I sit out. Very simple. I follow this and make $100 a week (not a lot but money is money and it supplements my income. I have a full time job and do other side hustles as well :) )
What is your loss limit when you are losing?
Hi, welcome, relatively new poster.Quote: hyngchl1Has anyone tried playing Baccarat as a small side job to supplement income? I play 5 days a week and I have found it to be very successful. People say "oh it can not be beaten" but with patience and self-control, it can be beaten. I start with a $3,000 bankroll and flat bet anywhere between $5-$10. I follow a flat betting strategy (no progression betting) and simply stop when I make $20 profit. I don't follow silly patterns. My bets are completely random and I just follow my intuition. When my gut tells me to sit out for a couple rounds, I sit out. Very simple. I follow this and make $100 a week (not a lot but money is money and it supplements my income. I have a full time job and do other side hustles as well :) )
I'm afraid your ploy is a very, VERY bad idea. It's a typical 'I can hit and run' fallacy. It may be a fun way to spend your time and ultimately a fun way to lose your money, so I won't knock it for that, but it is just plain doomed as a side job.
There's a pretty plain and simple debunking of your process in my blog post at Debunking hit and run
Basically, on each of your sessions, with your $3000 bankroll, and ANY playing style, your probability of session success is approximately 3000/3020 = 99.338%
That sounds good, but to 'earn' 3000, you'll need to repeat that success 150 times.
Your probability of failing to repeat that success is (1-0.99338^150) = 63%
And of course, when you do fail, you've handed $3,000 back to the casino, whether it was their money or yours.
And all of that is before we even consider the house edge, which nibbles away at every dollar you put on the table.
Quote: hyngchl1IKeep calm and don't chase losses.
Isn't sitting at the table until you're $20 up actually chasing losses some days?
Agreed. He has the info. He's had the advice. Let fate deal with him. He'll get no congratulation if he is fortunate and no sympathy when he isn't.Quote: djatcGuys lets just let OP do this and see how it turns out
Sadly though, he will be back here crowing about his many successful sessions ( like certain other members ) and fade into the sunset when he fails (again, like certain other members).
That leaves a forum where dumb-ass strategies will SEEM to work.
Quote: hyngchl1people always say long run, long run but what if I never meet the long run? you gotta understand, i'm not going to be doing this for life. i am not a gambling addict. it's just a temporary thing i'm doing to boost my income until i hit my overall target savings.
How do you know you'll get to your target savings before negative expectation kicks in?
I mean, yeah, if you stop right this second and never play again, you will have "won." But how will you know when to stop?
Quote: djatcGuys lets just let OP do this and see how it turns out
One of the downsides of the internet is that it has given very ignorant and uninformed people a voice. Anti-vaxxers, creationists, conspiracy theorists, MLM participants, mathematically challenged persons (who may as well argue that 2+2=5), etc, all have a megaphone and can gather on a global scale.
In the past, it was just best to ignore these people; but now they gather in a group, and they take advantage of a schooling effect, where they grow by draw in people who are apathetic. So you can’t just ignore them.
Primarily, the arguments aren’t for the benefit of the person positing the statement, it’s for the benefit of other listeners/readers.
We all know how the OP will turn out. He’s not the concern.
d'ya reckon?Quote: hyngchl1...with more than an enough bankroll to secure myself from going bankrupt.
I disagree.
Slimmer than what?Quote:most realistic worst case scenario- Lose 7 straight $5 bets on my Player or Banker bet, I'm down $35. Lose again, I'm down $40. Shit, then why not employ the martingdale here and bet $40? (Even though I very rarely do). Bam. I'm back even now. But what are the chances of even that scenario happening? Very slim.
I'll say from the outset, that I, myself do wager quite like this. I do it for amusement, have for ages. I can afford to lose when I do. I've had some luck with it and document my luck in my blog. see where I had 34 consecutive winning sessions with similar goals.
Lets do some estimating:--
Lets say, ignore ties and just consider it a coin toss proposition.
Probability of losing your first 8 wagers: Simple enough 1 in 2^8 or 1 in 256
But what about the alternative ways of losing $40: win a few, lose a few, ebb and flow for a while? That will happen often. Expect that very roughly four sessions per week.(p=roughly 40/60 = 67% per session) you'll find yourself in this situation.
Now you martingale. Let's see how far you can go. . .
40
80
160
320
640
1280 : Cumulative loss after those 6 consecutive losing hands =2560 (+ your original 40). You are a bit short of Marty stake and have a mighty climb back.
And don't forget that if one of those marty bets wins, you still haven't met your win goal.
Once you start the marty, you are only 6 consecutive losses away ( 1 in 64 chance) from being $2560 out of pocket and scratching for survival.
But you propose to only make $20 per day for shall we say 100 days. I.e. objective $2,000 profit.
OnceDear's rule of thumb says that to turn $3000 into $5,000 ( where alternative is total loss) is roughly 3/5 = 60%
Not terribly bad, but not terribly good either.
And before you say it, it doesn't matter whether it's baccarat, blackjack or coin tossing. It doesn't really matter much how you place your bets or arrange your sessions. And I generously ignore the house edge, which will be constantly nibbling at your ankles.
It's your money. Play it as you see fit. Enjoy it.
Quote: klimate10Primarily, the arguments aren’t for the benefit of the person positing the statement, it’s for the benefit of other listeners/readers.
We all know how the OP will turn out. He’s not the concern.
Abso-bloody-lutely. ^^^THIS ^^^
That's why we curmudgeons bother to reply to nonsense.
Quote: klimate10One of the downsides of the internet is that it has given very ignorant and uninformed people a voice. Anti-vaxxers, creationists, conspiracy theorists, MLM participants, mathematically challenged persons (who may as well argue that 2+2=5), etc, all have a megaphone and can gather on a global scale.
In the past, it was just best to ignore these people; but now they gather in a group, and they take advantage of a schooling effect, where they grow by draw in people who are apathetic. So you can’t just ignore them.
Primarily, the arguments aren’t for the benefit of the person positing the statement, it’s for the benefit of other listeners/readers.
We all know how the OP will turn out. He’s not the concern.
Personally I am grateful for people like the OP. I want the casinos to succeed wildly. I need a few hundred OP's going at least weekly, so the casino has money to support me. Can you all please stop bashing him/her. Systems need support not hate.
That's one line of thought. We don't want the casinos to be the ones to end up with fools' money, except to hold it a while for us to take and enjoy.Quote: MaxPenPersonally I am grateful for people like the OP. I want the casinos to succeed wildly. I need a few hundred OP's going at least weekly, so the casino has money to support me. Can you all please stop bashing him/her. Systems need support not hate.
Personally I'd prefer some casinos to struggle to find enough suckers and have a few go bust. Then the rest would have to be more competitive and appealing. Ultimately I'm prepared to have a world with less suckers and more educated and intelligent folks and less predators like you and I.
yep. some experts say the long run is forever.Quote: hyngchl1people always say long run, long run but what if I never meet the long run?
well, what do they know??
you want to win how many times in a row before you stop winning??
you risk $3000 to make $20 flat betting betting $5?
at Baccarat?
How much commission do you pay on a Banker win?
you have about a 1in 10 to 1 in 20 chance that any one session will LOSE $3000 before winning $20.
this is simple using the Gambler's Ruin formula, btw.
in other words, when you convince 1000 others to do exactly what you are doing, about 50 to 100 of them
will lose $3000 trying to win just $20, using their gut just like you do before winning even $20!
you BETTER add in Mr Marty to make those numbers much higher, imo.
you also mentioned you would do just that!
excellent!!
NO Bacc player even has any patience. They just want to win and win now. come on tell the truth!Quote: hyngchl1People say "oh it can not be beaten" but with patience
NO Bacc player even has any self-control. They all gamble!Quote: hyngchl1and self-control,
Oh, super! Now you sound like my Mom.Quote: hyngchl1My bets are completely random and I just follow my intuition.
so funny!!Quote: hyngchl1When my gut tells me to sit out for a couple rounds, I sit out. Very simple.
you really sound like my Mom.
at best your 'gut' is worth 0% patience and self-control.
I think - wait - I know- you would be way better off using a random method of selecting when to bet, what to bet and how much to bet. I think a cell phone can do just that.
that would take the 'gut' out of all Bacc playing, where it belongs.
out
thank you for sharing your funny thoughts
good luck to you (you will need it)
Sally
Quote: mustangsally
you have about a 1in 10 to 1 in 20 chance that any one session will LOSE $3000 before winning $20.
this is simple using the Gambler's Ruin formula, btw.
Sorry Sally, but I can't see that.
Setting aside your 'gamblers ruin formula' :-
For a low house edge game where he restricts his upside to 3020 and will put all 3000 potentially at risk, I estimate 3000/3020 =9934% probability of session success. The house edge is surely not so massive as to bring that down anywhere near to 90% to 95%?
Or will it really?
yes it will.Quote: OnceDearSorry Sally, but I can't see that.
Setting aside your 'gamblers ruin formula' :-
<snip>
Or will it really?
you forget maybe, I said flatbetting $5.
that is trying to win 4 units. not 1 unit.
I also used 49.5% avg win from this paper about Baccarat risk of ruin
"The Impact of a Finite Bankroll on an Even-Money Game"
Kelvin Morin – Manitoba Lotteries Corporation
that pdf has been looked at before.
Sally
betting $20 each hand
How much does the ratio of Bank Roll to Bet Unit have an effect? (ie. in this case you have 150 X $20 units vs 600 X $5 units to flat bet)
If the win rate is above 90%, i don't think it's horrible to attempt for the couple of months OP is suggesting.
What about the gambling bug getting a greedy bite and switch to "win 4 units" at $20 with $3000 BR? ($80 WG with 150 flat bets at $20).
BINGO!Quote: HornHighYo11I assume this is suggesting try to achieve your Win Goal with larger bets by reducing exposure to the house edge?
the line of thinking is about Bold Play versus timid play
It is a very large factor to be sure, imo.Quote: HornHighYo11How much does the ratio of Bank Roll to Bet Unit have an effect? (ie. in this case you have 150 X $20 units vs 600 X $5 units to flat bet)
depends on what you mean by horrible.Quote: HornHighYo11If the win rate is above 90%, i don't think it's horrible to attempt for the couple of months OP is suggesting.
here is a table showing the chance of success after X in a row bets with success chances of 92% and 98%.
most think it is close enough
but the truth is in the numbers
| session | 92% success | 98% success |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.92 | 0.98 |
| 2 | 0.8464 | 0.9604 |
| 3 | 0.778688 | 0.941192 |
| 4 | 0.71639296 | 0.92236816 |
| 5 | 0.659081523 | 0.903920797 |
| 6 | 0.606355001 | 0.885842381 |
| 7 | 0.557846601 | 0.868125533 |
| 8 | 0.513218873 | 0.850763023 |
| 9 | 0.472161363 | 0.833747762 |
| 10 | 0.434388454 | 0.817072807 |
| 11 | 0.399637378 | 0.800731351 |
| 12 | 0.367666388 | 0.784716724 |
| 13 | 0.338253077 | 0.769022389 |
| 14 | 0.311192831 | 0.753641941 |
| 15 | 0.286297404 | 0.738569103 |
| 16 | 0.263393612 | 0.723797721 |
| 17 | 0.242322123 | 0.709321766 |
| 18 | 0.222936353 | 0.695135331 |
| 19 | 0.205101445 | 0.681232624 |
| 20 | 0.188693329 | 0.667607972 |
| 21 | 0.173597863 | 0.654255812 |
| 22 | 0.159710034 | 0.641170696 |
| 23 | 0.146933231 | 0.628347282 |
| 24 | 0.135178573 | 0.615780337 |
| 25 | 0.124364287 | 0.60346473 |
| 26 | 0.114415144 | 0.591395435 |
| 27 | 0.105261932 | 0.579567526 |
| 28 | 0.096840978 | 0.567976176 |
| 29 | 0.0890937 | 0.556616652 |
| 30 | 0.081966204 | 0.545484319 |
| 31 | 0.075408907 | 0.534574633 |
| 32 | 0.069376195 | 0.52388314 |
| 33 | 0.063826099 | 0.513405478 |
| 34 | 0.058720011 | 0.503137368 |
| 35 | 0.05402241 | 0.493074621 |
| 36 | 0.049700617 | 0.483213128 |
| 37 | 0.045724568 | 0.473548866 |
| 38 | 0.042066603 | 0.464077888 |
| 39 | 0.038701274 | 0.454796331 |
| 40 | 0.035605172 | 0.445700404 |
| 41 | 0.032756759 | 0.436786396 |
| 42 | 0.030136218 | 0.428050668 |
| 43 | 0.027725321 | 0.419489655 |
| 44 | 0.025507295 | 0.411099862 |
| 45 | 0.023466711 | 0.402877864 |
| 46 | 0.021589374 | 0.394820307 |
| 47 | 0.019862224 | 0.386923901 |
| 48 | 0.018273246 | 0.379185423 |
| 49 | 0.016811387 | 0.371601714 |
| 50 | 0.015466476 | 0.36416968 |
| 51 | 0.014229158 | 0.356886286 |
| 52 | 0.013090825 | 0.349748561 |
| 53 | 0.012043559 | 0.34275359 |
| 54 | 0.011080074 | 0.335898518 |
a BIG difference I do see
about a 50/50 chance to make the 34th session a winner (34 in a row)
for 98%
and only 8 sessions for 92%.
yep, I BIG difference one can see.
looks like a 1 in 12 session chance of ruinQuote: HornHighYo11What about the gambling bug getting a greedy bite and switch to "win 4 units" at $20 with $3000 BR? ($80 WG with 150 flat bets at $20).
excellent observations I do say!
Sally
I also should point out the average number of non-Tie games it would take to hit the target or ruin.Quote: mustangsallyI said flatbetting $5.
that is trying to win 4 units. not 1 unit.
I also used 49.5% avg win from this paper about Baccarat risk of ruin
$3000 bankroll with flat bet $5 = 600 betting units
p=0.495 (avg win)
win goal = 4 units = $20
goal prob: 0.923113449
ruin: 0.076886551
average number of non-Tie games
win:399.95
ruin:50395.7
of course no one would ruin a $3k bankroll just flatbetting $5 each hand
even the OP said MARTY TIME!
a few others*****
$3000 bankroll with flat bet $10 = 300 betting units
p=0.495 (avg win)
win goal = 2 units = $20
goal prob: 0.960694569
ruin: 0.039305431
average number of non-Tie games
win:195
ruin:20343
*****
$3000 bankroll with flat bet $20 = 150 betting units
p=0.495 (avg win)
win goal = 1 units = $20
goal prob: 0.979182187
ruin: 0.020817813
average number of non-Tie games
win:77.5
ruin:6649
no patience and no self control once losing starts in
bet big and wild and enjoy the ride to ruin or hitting the target!
Sally
Agreed. It's all about the ride.Quote: mustangsallyenjoy the ride to ruin or hitting the target!
Sally
