Baccarat Stats
Thread Rating:
I have been playing around with some various bet selections in baccarat and am interested in inbalance correction.
It invloves a betting trigger when there is an inbalance of wins of 6 and I continue betting until either the inbalance returns to even or the shoe ends.
Has anyone got any data on this style of betting?
Or would there be anyone who may be able to test this in a bac program for me?
I think it would be fairly simple to test for someone with experience in this type of thing.
Quote: DjangobillHi,
I have been playing around with some various bet selections in baccarat and am interested in inbalance correction.
It invloves a betting trigger when there is an inbalance of wins of 6 and I continue betting until either the inbalance returns to even or the shoe ends.
Has anyone got any data on this style of betting?
Or would there be anyone who may be able to test this in a bac program for me?
I think it would be fairly simple to test for someone with experience in this type of thing.
I believe this fails due to the gamblers fallacy? You're looking at entirely too small of a picture "until the shoe ends" to be able to expect to see the P/B wins "balance out" or reach their statistical mean.
Same thing as waiting for 6 red numbers in roulette then betting black like the following outcomes have anything to do with the previous outcomes. I.e. see Gamblers Fallacy.
Anyway thats why I would be interested to see the stats, to see if what I have witnessed in my trials is normal.
Quote: DjangobillYou would probably be surprised if you looked into it, more often than not it does even out within a shoe, and often happens twice within a shoe.
Anyway that's why I would be interested to see the stats, to see if what I have witnessed in my trials is normal.
Anything you've seen with this 'effect' is short term variance. Mathematically, over the long run they will balance out to the 45.86% and 44.62% they're supposed to win (9.52% tie). In ANY window of even 100 shoes, or 500 shoes, the results you see aren't necessarily accurate of the overall averages.
I find it interesting when the Gamblers Fallacy and the Law of Large Numbers fight each other, but unfortunately for this case it's all fallacy. You're right that they will eventually balance out to their 45% and 44%, however, just because you see 100 banker wins in a row today does NOT mean you can expect 100 player wins in a row today/tomorrow. It's a slowly balanced system over millions of shoes and hundreds of millions of hands. Those 100 banker wins might not 'average out' for another year, yet the guy who comes in tomorrow and see's 20 player wins in a row is then expecting banker wins. He would be looking at a very small window that isn't statistically relevant, just like you.
Quote: DjangobillHi,
I have been playing around with some various bet selections in baccarat and am interested in inbalance correction.
It invloves a betting trigger when there is an inbalance of wins of 6 and I continue betting until either the inbalance returns to even or the shoe ends.
Has anyone got any data on this style of betting?
Or would there be anyone who may be able to test this in a bac program for me?
I think it would be fairly simple to test for someone with experience in this type of thing.
You gotta pull the trigger with a max bet when the imbalance reaches two. It has been scientifically proven that waiting for a larger imbalance costs so much, that in some cases, you aren't even going to have the house edge. The house will.
Quote: SonuvabishYou gotta pull the trigger with a max bet when the imbalance reaches two. It has been scientifically proven that waiting for a larger imbalance costs so much, that in some cases, you aren't even going to have the house edge. The house will.
While your post is amusing to me, let's remember these forums exist to help educate people to be better gamblers. If Djangobill is inexperienced, he might think your post is real, which could lead to some disastrous results =p.
Quote: RomesWhile your post is amusing to me, let's remember these forums exist to help educate people to be better gamblers. If Djangobill is inexperienced, he might think your post is real, which could lead to some disastrous results =p.
Djangobill is 'the professor' of bac. Plus, my post is real. Don't listen to them Djangobill. Not everyone can play bac with an advantage like us. I have made multi-multi millions using my flat bet strategy.
Quote: SonuvabishYou gotta pull the trigger with a max bet when the imbalance reaches two. It has been scientifically proven that waiting for a larger imbalance costs so much, that in some cases, you aren't even going to have the house edge. The house will.
In my testing the problem with using 2 is that it needs to happen alot more often and if it doesnt and say for example player is infront the whole shoe:
1) I have bet alot more hands than if i was using -6 as trigger and therefore given alot more away in commission
2) If the shoe ends with player at -14, I will have lost more units than if I was using -6 as my trigger.
Anyway as I said its just something that looked interesting through some testing and would like to find out more.
Quote: SonuvabishDjangobill is 'the professor' of bac. Plus, my post is real. Don't listen to them Djangobill. Not everyone can play bac with an advantage like us. I have made multi-multi millions using my flat bet strategy.
I dont know why I bother replying to half the clowns on this site.
Did i ever say it beat the house edge?
I thought this site was for people who actually gamble in real life and not just sit behind their computers and talk shit coz they have no life.
Quote: RomesWhile your post is amusing to me, let's remember these forums exist to help educate people to be better gamblers. If Djangobill is inexperienced, he might think your post is real, which could lead to some disastrous results =p.
Hi Romes,
Thanks for your concern.
I dont listen to clowns like that sonuvabish above lol
Quote: DjangobillJust to clear up- i am an experienced gambler, more experienced than 95% on this site Id say and my post is not about beating the house edge. Any real life gambler who plays a begative expectancy game knows that the house edge cant be beaten so we look for betting strategies that suit our comfort levels in regards to variance and drawdowns.
The only thing your trigger changes is the frequency of betting. Each bet is still at the same percentage chance of winning as it was at betting every time or at a 2 trigger or a run PBP or any other reason to bet one or another.
Indeed, changing the strategy to get a different feel to the curve of results makes sense, and is under rated (knowing what the spread for a Martingale vs. a Labouchere versus a flat bet is revealing). But its important to realize ultimately, it makes very little difference.
On confusionm in a -EV game, your drawdowns are going to the size of your bankroll. I've always felt 'draw down' is a silly term for 'loss'.
AxelWolf actually has and does "gamble". When I started many years ago, I oftentimes played 16 or more hours a day. Nowadays I mostly go after sure things,low risk high percentage. I have plenty of experience with high risk low percentages. I would like to think I have a life, with A long time beautiful GF, friends and partners . Admittedly I spend to much time online (because sometimes I enjoy it more than "gambling")Quote: DjangobillI dont know why I bother replying to half the clowns on this site.
Did i ever say it beat the house edge?
I thought this site was for people who actually gamble in real life and not just sit behind their computers and talk shit coz they have no life.
Are you a math and gambling expert?
The nice thing is you have access to quite a few math experts right here, including The WIZARD himself. Extremely intelligent members and other experts have vigorously analyzed, tested, theorized on most games and betting systems for many years (from the beginning of gambling) your theory isn't new.
Take all the MATH, analysts, data and advice put it all together and use some logic. If you can't prove your theories then I guess you can just trust gamblers fallacy(there a reason they have a specific term for this), various crackpots and all the complete nonsense, or you can trust respected notable experts.
If the MATH and logic doesn't add up IT WONT AND CAN'T WORK.
well then you should know there's nothing to it.Quote: DjangobillJust to clear up- i am an experienced gambler, more experienced than 95% on this site.
Quote: DjangobillI dont know why I bother replying to half the clowns on this site.
Did i ever say it beat the house edge?
I thought this site was for people who actually gamble in real life and not just sit behind their computers and talk shit coz they have no life.
The imbalance flat betting trigger system DOES beat the house edge on baccarat. I don't know how many times I've told people on this site. I thought finally someone came here that I wouldn't have to explain this to, but I guess you're just another person who doesn't understand how to capitalize on the flow of the cards.
Good call. I doubt anyone else does.Quote: DjangobillI dont listen to clowns like that sonuvabish above lol
Quote: chickenmanGood call. I doubt anyone else does.
Oh, chickenman talkin smack. Must be crusin for a brusin. Whyd the chickenman cross the road? Cuz I slapped him and told him if he didn't cross the road, I'd make him my bish.
I've never, ever done this but now asking the mods to take note of this personal insult. My comment spoke to the quality of your 1100+ posts, not you personally.Quote: SonuvabishOh, chickenman talkin smack. Must be crusin for a brusin. Whyd the chickenman cross the road? Cuz I slapped him and told him if he didn't cross the road, I'd make him my bish.
Quote: SonuvabishOh, chickenman talkin smack. Must be crusin for a brusin. Whyd the chickenman cross the road? Cuz I slapped him and told him if he didn't cross the road, I'd make him my bish.
Personal insult, Trolling, Thirty Days.
Quote: Mission146Personal insult, Trolling, Thirty Days.
That's funny, I was just doing a tally on his
daily post count and thought, it's only a matter
of time. And now this. lol
Is it just me or does it appear that Sob is answering too chickenman as if he was django @ 4:59? He already has Axel wrapped up and just getting started.lol Maybe I been watching to much CSI?Quote: Mission146Personal insult, Trolling, Thirty Days.
So are you still on foot? Last I recall you were "carpooling" sort of.
Quote: petroglyphIs it just me or does it appear that Sob is answering too chickenman as if he was django @ 4:59? He already has Axel wrapped up and just getting started.lol Maybe I been watching to much CSI?
So are you still on foot? Last I recall you were "carpooling" sort of.
Pretty much still on foot, no big deal. I'll resolve that come tax time, actually, I've lost a bit of weight and I know I wouldn't walk if I had a car...so I may even hold off a bit until there's a really good deal on one.
I never watched Django, so I wouldn't get the reference.
