New Baccarat Player
I at first thought Martingale was a good strategy, until I started seeing crazy shoes after playing a few hundred of them.
So now my new strategy is to use a version of Martingale with alternating bets.
How it works is this.
Sit down at new shoe. Bet player - minimum bet (in this case it's 10 dollars).
If it's a win, switch to 10 dollar bet banker side.
If it's a win, switch back to player side at minimum bet.
If any of the above are losses double down to 20 and then 40. If a long streak of wins for the opposite bet, wait it out and don't bet, and then continue the bet at 40 and double until win. Then reset and repeat with the alternating. I don't play pairs or the tie bet.
Is this a better strategy than straight-up martingale? Every website I've used it at, I've always come out ahead in the end. I'm not looking for long term investments, and I plan on bringing about 1000 dollars with me next time, and stopping once I win around 250-300 dollars. Any advice would be much appreciated.
Quote: SynthetixIs this a better strategy than straight-up martingale? Every website I've used it at, I've always come out ahead in the end. I'm not looking for long term investments, and I plan on bringing about 1000 dollars with me next time, and stopping once I win around 250-300 dollars. Any advice would be much appreciated.
The way I understand it is:
1. Every bet you will make the house has an edge.
2. You will lose over the long haul.
Quote: mrcleanThe way I understand it is:
1. Every bet you will make the house has an edge.
2. You will lose over the long haul.
Doesn't every strategy lose in the long haul and doesn't the house always have a small edge?
Quote: SynthetixDoesn't every strategy lose in the long haul and doesn't the house always have a small edge?
Yeah, that's everyone's point about betting strategies!
Quote: Beethoven9thYeah, that's everyone's point about betting strategies!
I mean, I wouldn't really call it a strategy. Granted, it employs Martingale to a degree, but it doesn't rely solely on Martingale. Sometimes I make excepts to follow dragon's or just gut instinct. But having a certain plan of attack seems to be better than just randomly throwing money down and hoping that your side hits.
Quote: SynthetixBut having a certain plan of attack seems to be better than just randomly throwing money down and hoping that your side hits.
Better why? In a game like baccarat, it doesn't make you any more likely to win. But it'll keep you more engaged, and that's more fun, so it's probably better in that respect.
Lose $10
Lose $20
Lose $40
Win $80, but it's on Banker, so you won $76. Instead of winning your $10, you only won $6.
Lose $10
Lose $20
Lose $40
Lose $80
Win $160, but it's on Banker, so you won $152. Instead of winning your $10, you only won $2.
See the problem here?
Quote: DeucekiesPlaying Baccarat and betting Martingale absolutely do not go hand in hand unless you're betting Player every time. Remember if you score your win on Banker, you're paying commission on your win.
Lose $10
Lose $20
Lose $40
Win $80, but it's on Banker, so you won $76. Instead of winning your $10, you only won $6.
Lose $10
Lose $20
Lose $40
Lose $80
Win $160, but it's on Banker, so you won $152. Instead of winning your $10, you only won $2.
See the problem here?
Yeah, that's the least of the problems with this approach.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceYeah, that's the least of the problems with this approach.
Well yeah, his problems started with the word Martingale, but doing it on Banker just makes matters even worse.
Quote: DeucekiesWell yeah, his problems started with the word Martingale, but doing it on Banker just makes matters even worse.
You can just up the factor from 2 a bit and then it's no more ridiculously stupid than regular martingale.
Quote: DeucekiesRisking $310 to win $2. Risking $310 to win $10. Both are stupid, but one is definitely stupider.
As I said, you can raise the factor from 2. Also note that you actually have a better chance of winning.
But, yeah, it's a progression betting system. You are risking a lot to win a little. That's the point. That's why these progression players all go broke in spectacular fashion eventually. Nothing quite like watching someone blow off tens (or hundreds) of thousands of dollars while trying to win $25.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceAs I said, you can raise the factor from 2. Also note that you actually have a better chance of winning.
I assume you mean tripling the bet instead of doubling it? Not sure how you have a better chance of winning though.
Quote:But, yeah, it's a progression betting system. You are risking a lot to win a little. That's the point. That's why these progression players all go broke in spectacular fashion eventually. Nothing quite like watching someone blow off tens (or hundreds) of thousands of dollars while trying to win $25.
This we agree on 100%. Cue the banker from South Park. "Alright, you've got $15,000 in front of you aaaaaaaaaaaand it's gone."
Quote: DeucekiesRisking $310 to win $2. Risking $310 to win $10. Both are stupid, but one is definitely stupider.
Yeah, playing the one with a higher HE, much stupider.
Quote: DeucekiesI assume you mean tripling the bet instead of doubling it?
There is no need to triple it. There are numbers between 2 and 3.
Quote:Not sure how you have a better chance of winning though.
If you ignore ties, banker wins more than 50% of the time.
Quote: FinsRuleA better strategy is to bet $10 on Banker every time.
Knowing that I introduced my companion to Baccarat at some Asian Room in Biloxi. There was one Banker win and two Ties, all the rest were Player wins. It was still the optimal strategy in a theoretical sense but concerning that one shoe... well, perhaps it was her best introduction to Baccarat!
Quote: FleaStiffKnowing that I introduced my companion to Baccarat at some Asian Room in Biloxi. There was one Banker win and two Ties, all the rest were Player wins. It was still the optimal strategy in a theoretical sense but concerning that one shoe... well, perhaps it was her best introduction to Baccarat!
Wait, what? An entire shoe with one banker win, 2 ties, and the rest player? Was this an 8-deck shoe?
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceWait, what? An entire shoe with one banker win, 2 ties, and the rest player? Was this an 8-deck shoe?
I'll second that "Wait, what?". In an 8-deck shoe, that'd be about 80 player wins.
Please tell me she was pressing her bet while this was happening.
Actually bet with the trend, you'll make tons of money since the cards don't want to move over to the other side.
Actually bet against the trend, it's gonna flip flop and stay there for another dragon tail.
Actually....
Quote: djatcEveryone knows that you bet the opposite when there is a dragon tail on banker or player. You're due to hit since it's statistically impossible to have more than 6, or 7, 8, or 9 wins in a row. Or was it 10? I can't remember.
Actually bet with the trend, you'll make tons of money since the cards don't want to move over to the other side.
Actually bet against the trend, it's gonna flip flop and stay there for another dragon tail.
Actually....
I personally like to bet with the shoe- but will start over if dominant side reaches plus 5-7, though yesterday the banker won 26 more at end of shoe, I wished I had been playing a positive progression!
Quote: SynthetixBut having a certain plan of attack seems to be better than just randomly throwing money down and hoping that your side hits.
Since there's no plan of attack that will work, the answer is no it's not better to have a plan.
However, I actually feel that having a plan is worse, because if you do happen to win ... you're likely to think your plan was the reason... Thus causing you to play more, and lose. It's a viscous money eroding cycle.
Quote: djatcActually bet with the trend, you'll make tons of money since the cards don't want to move over to the other side.
Actually bet against the trend, it's gonna flip flop and stay there for another dragon tail.
Actually....
.....actually:
Develop a bet selection process with either 2 or 3 (at most) preferred selections that carry relatively high strike rates and relatively tight variances. Play the selection (or selections) that THIS PARTICULR SHOE (or portion thereof) is disposed to dispense. Adjust bet sizes should certain variance "drops" occur, in order to recoup efficiently. Combine this with conservative win goals per shoe/session, and you are GOLDEN. Why:
BECAUSE YOUR RISK OF RUIN IS VIRTUALLY NIL.
When you get your Bac game to that point, you'll know it.
As always, I wish you all the best of it.
Quote: IbeatyouracesImpossible!
Hello, Ibeatyouraces, I trust all is well with you.
Gambling is all about one's potential "risk of ruin". In order to minimize it, one needs a viable answer to certain questions:
What does my play lose to?
What is the average loss streak?
What is the "bottom" of the variance downturn?
When you can answer those questions effectively, you can construct a viable MM plan, complete with exit strategies.
And then you'll effectively minimize your RoR.
Quote: gr8playerHello, Ibeatyouraces, I trust all is well with you.
Gambling is all about one's potential "risk of ruin". In order to minimize it, one needs a viable answer to certain questions:
What does my play lose to?
What is the average loss streak?
What is the "bottom" of the variance downturn?
When you can answer those questions effectively, you can construct a viable MM plan, complete with exit strategies.
And then you'll effectively minimize your RoR.
Given that you don't know your own advantage, you can't calculate your risk of ruin, therefore you have no idea if you have minimized it.
Quote: thecesspitGiven that you don't know your own advantage, you can't calculate your risk of ruin, therefore you have no idea if you have minimized it.
Hello, thecesspit, I trust all is well with you.
No "calculation" is necessary, my friend. Not when you've played this game for as long as I have.
I reported right here in this forum that I was virtually lulled to sleep at the Bac table last Friday; my play has become, to me, that boring.
Oh, and you can replace "boring" with, Thank Goodness, "predictability". My strike rates are conforming to their expectations, as are my variances.
I can ask for nothing more from this game than that. It's what I refer to as "normalcy". Expectations met. When my expectations are met, my RoR is evaporated. I can ask for nothing more from this game than that.
Now, that all said, at tonight's session I'm given no guarantees. Heck, I might even lose. But, if I'm buying in for 20 units and I've been averaging just under 5 units per session and I lose a session once every 12 to 15, how am I doing? Anybody?
Quote: gr8playerhow am I doing? Anybody?
grrrrr8!
Quote: thecesspitGiven that you don't know your own advantage, you can't calculate your risk of ruin, therefore you have no idea if you have minimized it.
His risk of ruin is 100%. That is minimized.
not good when you lose 80 units during that 12 to 15 sessions.Quote: gr8player\
Now, that all said, at tonight's session I'm given no guarantees. Heck, I might even lose. But, if I'm buying in for 20 units and I've been averaging just under 5 units per session and I lose a session once every 12 to 15, how am I doing? Anybody?
However, when I asked you to play a shoe and make a wager on it. You said one show proves nothing. I agree however, with that record you should be begging me to make a wager with you, unless you are afraid my leprechaun.
Quote: AxelWolfnot good when you lose 80 units during that 12 to 15 sessions.
However, when I asked you to play a shoe and make a wager on it. You said one show proves nothing. I agree however, with that record you should be begging me to make a wager with you, unless you are afraid my leprechaun.
Standard baccarat player. Talks big; won't put his money where his mouth is.
My offer of a $10k bet on your supposed 53% strike rate still stands.
Quote: gr8playerHello, thecesspit, I trust all is well with you.
No "calculation" is necessary, my friend. Not when you've played this game for as long as I have.
Invalid assumption. It is in fact necessary if you are saying 'I've made it 0, with this method'. Specifically, RoR depends on bank roll, advantage, variance. RoR can even be calculated for -EV play, if you limit the number of hands. E.G: Whats my risk of ruin playing 2,000 hands of Baccarat with a bank roll of 100 units and flat betting. It's not 100%.
Quote:I reported right here in this forum that I was virtually lulled to sleep at the Bac table last Friday; my play has become, to me, that boring.
Oh, and you can replace "boring" with, Thank Goodness, "predictability". My strike rates are conforming to their expectations, as are my variances.
I can ask for nothing more from this game than that. It's what I refer to as "normalcy". Expectations met. When my expectations are met, my RoR is evaporated. I can ask for nothing more from this game than that.
Invalid assumption.
Quote:Now, that all said, at tonight's session I'm given no guarantees. Heck, I might even lose. But, if I'm buying in for 20 units and I've been averaging just under 5 units per session and I lose a session once every 12 to 15, how am I doing? Anybody?
I leave you working that out as your own exercise. Obviously you think you do fine. You don't have to prove that. But if you want to use mathematical terms but actually can't back them up (and I know you can't, as you never do, just waffle on about it, using words incorrectly), then expect people to point out how the emperor has no clothes.
Quote: AxelWolfnot good when you lose 80 units during that 12 to 15 sessions.
I win roughly 50 units (a little less) per every 10 sessions. I'll lose the 20 rarely, very rarely. But I have some "break even" or "minimal win" sessions, as well.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceMy offer of a $10k bet on your supposed 53% strike rate still stands.
Your offer, as stated, remains as an insult to my intelligence. I respectfully decline, yet again.
Quote: thecesspitObviously you think you do fine. You don't have to prove that. But if you want to use mathematical terms but actually can't back them up (and I know you can't, as you never do, just waffle on about it, using words incorrectly), then expect people to point out how the emperor has no clothes.
Yes, thecesspit, I've been "exposed" more times than I care to think about in this forum.
Alas, my friend, that's my fault, not yours. My Baccarat theories/methodologies are seen as, for lack of a better term, "voodoo" around here.
I get it. And I suppose that I really don't belong in this particular forum.
Shame, really....because I respect the majority of its members, our differences notwithstanding.
Finally you said something that makes sense. Please don't tease us.Quote: gr8playerYes, thecesspit, I've been "exposed" more times than I care to think about in this forum.
Alas, my friend, that's my fault, not yours. My Baccarat theories/methodologies are seen as, for lack of a better term, "voodoo" around here.
I get it. And I suppose that I really don't belong in this particular forum.
Shame, really....because I respect the majority of its members, our differences notwithstanding.
Quote: IbeatyouracesYou posting this garbage is an insult to your intelligence.
No I think it properly shows his level of intelligence !
Quote: gr8playerYour offer, as stated, remains as an insult to my intelligence. I respectfully decline, yet again.
So, then you don't have a 53% strike rate?
I'm still confused by this. You claimed to have a 53% strike rate. This is either correct (in which case my offer is a good bet for you) or it's a big fat stinking lie (in which case you are wise to decline the bet). Which is it?
If you don't like the strike rate bet, I'd also be happy to make a bet about your more recent claim that you can buy in for 20 units/session, only lose 1 out of 12-15 sessions, and average over 4 units won per session. Again, unless if you were lying, this should be a good bet for you.
How come all these people who claim to be able to have all these fabulous win rates which defy mathematics aren't willing to bet on them? Could it be that they are all lying? Shocking! I thought that everyone told the truth on the internet.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceStandard baccarat player. Talks big; won't put his money where his mouth is.
My offer of a $10k bet on your supposed 53% strike rate still stands.
I wish I had a 53% strike rate so I could take you up on it (now I've seen the light on why it's a monster good bet if I did have a 53% advantage).
Quote: thecesspitI wish I had a 53% strike rate so I could take you up on it (now I've seen the light on why it's a monster good bet if I did have a 53% advantage).
I wish that I had a 53% strike rate so that I could play with my 6% edge and win all the money in Vegas.
Seriously can you explain why? Give a legitimate answer.Quote: gr8playerYour offer, as stated, remains as an insult to my intelligence. I respectfully decline, yet again.
Pleases don't start with the anonymity thing as we can get around that. Please don't start with the I don't want people to know my system we can get around that.
enough sessions can be played to take out luck. Especially since you only lose 1 out of 12 to 15 sessions with an average of over 4 units. Certainly 10k is far better then 4 units @$10
Quote: AxelWolfSeriously can you explain why? Give a legitimate answer.
Pleases don't start with the anonymity thing as we can get around that. Please don't start with the I don't want people to know my system we can get around that.
enough sessions can be played to take out luck. Especially since you only lose 1 out of 12 to 15 sessions with an average of over 4 units. Certainly 10k is far better then 4 units @$10
He loses enough money playing bac in casinos, the last thing he needs is to lose another 10k to you on top of that.
Quote: soxfanWell, I am not fortunate enough to have a 53% hit rate as the gr888888888one does; but I have managed to pull down 987 units of sweet gross profits over my past 100 shoes played. So, I'll thank Zeus for my good fortune, hey hey.
Totally reasonable with a negative progression. How much do you lose when it goes bad?
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceI wish that I had a 53% strike rate so that I could play with my 6% edge and win all the money in Vegas.
Hello, AxiomOfChoice, I trust all is well with you.
I don't know about "winning all the money in Vegas", but:
Thursday night session 9:45 P.M. buy-in
First shoe W4 L3 (mid-shoe entry)
Second shoe W7 L5
Third shoe W6 L3
Session total: Won 17 of 28 bets for a 61% strike rate for a +6 units, all accomplished flat-betting
(Sidenote: Actual win was a +8, I won 2 units more through the use of two match-play coupons.)
Friday afternoon session 12:15 P.M. buy-in
First shoe W5 L4 (mid-shoe entry)
Second shoe W4 L8 ...worst flat-betting shoe result in quite some time...had to go to "2-ville" in my Gr8 prog for next shoe...
Third shoe W4 L1 ...needed a "three-over" in "2-ville" and got it relatively easily, winning 4 of 5 bets
(Sidenote: Quit this afternoon session a bit early, as the table was not a good one. Not as much regarding my results as much as the players...the players were either rather scarce or "squatters" (read: "non-bettors"), and that's not good for my sort of, shall I say, "selective" play (read: I sit our many hands, but I need the game to continually move along, otherwise it becomes rather tedious. And yesterday, it was very tedious, to say the least.)
Session total: Won 13 of 26 bets for a 50% strike rate (hey, AxiomOfChoice, you'd have taken me for 10K with your proposed wager) for a +4 units, with my largest drawdown of 4 units and highest wager of 2 units.
Trip Totals: W30 L24 for a 56% strike rate and a +10 units (actual win = +12 units includes match-play)
No, AxiomOfChoice, not exactly "all the money in Vegas", but, my friend, if you know anything at all of me, please know that I am a rather patient man. Give me time, man, give me time.
Oh, and one more thing:
I am well aware that these trip reports of mine, showing these relatively-high strike rates, are, shall I say, bordering on blasphemy in this forum.
So I can only imagine...wait, strike that...I know, by reading some of your responses, that there are members here that are questioning my veracity.
To those people I can say only this: when you read anything "gr8player", you are reading the truth.
That said, at this point, it becomes your responsibility to make of my posts what you wish.
Oh, and one more thing:
Should my bet selection process lay the proverbial egg, and I go one win and twelve losses, I will post that just as quickly (and honestly) as every other post of mine. In that vein, I will attempt to post these concise trip reports each and every week, time permitting.
Stay well.
Quote: soxfanWell, I am not fortunate enough to have a 53% hit rate as the gr888888888one does; but I have managed to pull down 987 units of sweet gross profits over my past 100 shoes played. So, I'll thank Zeus for my good fortune, hey hey.
Are you using a positive or negative progression? Are you physic? Or are you just bull s*******? Can you edify the forum? ho ho.
