Has anyone ever heard of this? Do you think this is a good idea to create a deeper level of penetration in prevention of dragon/panda counting systems or would their be some negative repercussion?
Yeah, definitely agree with Dan. Eight is considered particularly lucky in Chinese culture as well. The Beijing Olympics Opening Ceremony began on 8/8/08 at 08:08:08pm.
I can see this being a factor, I was just wondering how deep the attachment was to the length of a shoe. I am personally unsure that an increase in the length of a shoe to disrupt their attachment to the game, but I do appreciate the opinion of others.
What about a 9 deck shoe? I know 9 is particularly lucky in Chinese culture.
In the UK most Baccarat games utilise 6 decks. In London there are one or two casinos that used 8 decks.
Recently a provincial casino trialled 8 decks and the patrons didn't like it. Not sure why, perhaps it took longer between going outside for a smoke, so the 8 deck game was ditched.
Having played both type of shoes fairly extensively, I did prefer the 8 deck games, although now it would probably be strange seeing a shoe churn out 70+ hands.
I find 6 deck games really strange in respect to expected streak length frequency. Some with dubious intent often throw around expectational nonsense about how often you should expect to see certain streak lengths, the number of singles, repeats, you should expect to encounter on average. These kind of stats simply do not apply to a six deck shoe or series of shoes, if indeed they apply to an 8 deck game.
I've had a six deck session were nearly every shoe (6~8 in total) produced a streak length of at least 10, multiple long streaks of 8 or more in a 50 hand sample and it goes on.
The Punto side dominating the Banco results, 6 shoes from 8 for successive nights, this does occur often. Whereas with an 8 deck game, I recall this occurring about once in every 10 shoes. Length of repeating patterns being the same as 8 deck games, despite there being fewer cards and less hands played.
Find it hard to explain why and I just put it down to "despite the ratios being the same"; fewer cards equals fewer variables being called upon, i.e 24 x a card value, compared to 32, using the latter and IMO you end up with less craziness and I've seen many bizarre six deck shoes / sessions, is the best way I would describe it.