Baccarat side bets - defense against counting

I had a solution to the "Baccarat counting dilemma" that Baccarat side bets are vulnerable to, and the solution is simple and elegant.

As we know, the countability of Baccarat side bets are typically not more linear like BJ - they remain fairly flat for 90% of the shoe, then EV's might fly through the roof exponentially at the tail end of the shoe. This is because of the effects of card removal are generally quite different in Baccarat, where you can only get a player-positive EV right at the tail end of the shoe, usually at a point that is less than one deck from the end in its standard eight-deck shoe.

By general Baccarat convention, the house must deal out the all eight decks, aside from the last few cards - and I mean few.

So, to protect side bets, the game's design or casino house solution is to insert a yellow "sentinel" cut card for the side bet (at let's say, 90% penetration), and let the "full shoe" regular cut card to still determine the end of main shoe. So.....
1. Insert the regular "Baccarat" cut card for full shoe penetration, for all cards to be played except the last 16 or so cards, or 7 3/4 decks out of eight decks.
2. Insert the yellow "Side bet sentinel" cut card at a depth appropriate for the side bet's vulnerability point, say, to cut off the last deck of the shoe from side bet play or late play only.
3. No new side bets after the yellow card appears, or just use no "mid-round entry" type rules for players who haven't been playing the bet, but were just otherwise counting the bet down.
4. Yet continue to deal and play the main bets of Baccarat until the official "end of shoe" Baccarat card shows.

I would assume it is gaming approvable, especially if designed as part of the game and its specifications, as it does not affect the main Baccarat game at all, and cut cards as "end of play" makers are typical.

And it would also be a cinch to deal: a yellow card simply appears at a certain point.

Now granted, it isn't "AP player" friendly, true, but this method is otherwise very undisruptive and inert, and game protection IS supposed to set bounds against advantage play. It even helps side bets, by allowing a lower house edges to be used for the bets without fear of defeatibility.

I was proposing this house defense method and idea to my mathematician Charles, and he said it would be very effective, its own real effect would be to thwart Advantage Play - with no other side effects at all.
I even joked about naming the idea after some Advantage Play Pundit, like calling it the "Max Rubin method," or the "Jacobson-Mousseau Solution,"

....or something like "High-Low No go" or "Knock-out Punch" (after these counting methods.) I think "yellow card method" is fine.

What are your opinions on this?

Paigowdan

I think this idea (for baccarat side-bet) has been use in some casinos already.

Quote: MrCasinoGames

Paigowdan

I think this idea (for baccarat side-bet) has been use in some casinos already.

Good.

I haven't seen it in the U.S. or Puerto Rico.
Can you name a side bet it is used on?

deleted

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

I've never figured out why casinos don't just use a csm for baccarat.

I think they are trying to introduce them on low-limit game in Macau. Much like 6-5 blackjack, the casinos have to introduce this bitter pill to players gradually. While the odds for the non-counter are the same in baccarat, the vast majority of baccarat players are very superstitious and believe the whole shoe tells a story and the object is to detect the patterns to predict the next hand. Utter nonsense of course, but they will say that putting the game on a CSM will just turn it into a coin flip game.

deleted

I think Dan's idea would be worthy of doing on a very countable side bet, but it wouldn't be without some push back. Some recreational players would not like being prohibited from making a bet they want to make.

deleted

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

I understand all that but I think eventually it will be the trend. Most likely in places that mainly use csm's on bj as well.

As for Dans idea. Although it most likely would work, I think it would just alienate the average player into thinking the casino is up to something. Plus think of all the side bets that won't be able to be made while the baccarat shoe is at the disadvantage. I think more would be lost this way.

I disagree. 90% of the shoe woud be live, at most a deck or even one-half of one deck (out of eight decks) would be the limit. Additionally, active side bet players may be allowed to continue if previously active.

You see, Baccarat counting is NOT like BJ shoe counting, in the sense that there are essentially no early or mid-shoe counting opportunities, as Baccarat counting opportunities generally exist only at the very end of a shoe, a few hands from a new shoe reshuffle point.

Alternatively, a full Baccarat "end of shoe" cut card may be placed seven decks out in an eight deck shoe, instead of 7.9 decks out, in an eight deck shoe, and you would then just shuffle up the next full new shoe. Certainly, seven full decks out of an eight deck shoe is deep penetration anyway.

CSMs are viewed with more disdain, because each shoe is considered to have its own composition and playing "personality;" CSM are constanty churning cards.

As for being "up to something," the thing is is that the players who were totally silent on a side bet for almost the entire shoe now give themselves away - by all of a sudden jumping in three hands from the end of the shoe. These were the ones who were "up to something," and a yellow card flag would make this noticeable.

In terms of looking like suspicious behavior, the people who lock their car doors or activate an anti-theft device before walking into a shopping mall are not the ones who are up to something. Such an action is done to stop others who may be up to something. Any reasonable loss prevention step or action is generally viewed as acceptable, especially if it has otherwise has no effect on any other operations.

Also, if the house edge of a Baccarat side bet can be considerably reduced by allowing 7 decks instead of 7.9 decks, then the lower house edge would indeed look fairer to players anyway.

Personally, I am more confident in Baccarat being less vulnerable than blackjack by a wide margin, but I think 7/8 of a shoe is better than 7.9/8 of a shoe, if it can provide us with newer and lower house edge side bet offerings

deleted

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

I'll put the question to a bunch of bac players today and see what kind of feedback I get.

I disagree with everything you said and honestly feel your idea, while it would work, would just be a waste.

BTW, I don't play, nor count baccarat.

Such focus groups are already being done, with the results saying that CSMs are the most unpopular game protection idea for Baccarat. And already, "intelligent shoe" technology for Baccarat is already being trialed in California and elsewhere.

As for agreeing or disagreeing with opinions, that's fine, as that is what forums are all about.

Some find the "yellow card" idea very fine, others find it threatening. Indeed, the yellow card idea would allow us to keep the full 7.9 Baccarat game AND safely offer side bets with reasonably deep, if not very deep penetration, AND with lower house edges, thereby helping the players.

I think this is a very fine compromise

Usually in a compromise both sides get something. What exactly does the player get ?

Quote: buzzpaff

Usually in a compromise both sides get something. What exactly does the player get ?

A lot, actually:
1. Lower house edge, since the designer does not need to raise the house egde to offset the effects of counting attacks from a minority of players.
2. A wider array of side bets for Baccarat, since side bets are now more viable and offerable for Baccarat.
3. The full shoe of Baccarat for the base game of Banker, Player, and tie bets.
It truly protects the game, and makes much more offerable.

Quote: Paigowdan

A lot, actually:
1. Lower house edge, since the designer does not need to raise the house egde to offset the effects of counting attacks from a minority of players.
2. A wider array of side bets for Baccarat, since side bets are now more viable and offerable for Baccarat.
3. The full shoe of Baccarat for the base game of Banker, Player, and tie bets.

All too often the casino will opt for a higher house edge. I know Stacey Perry was given the choice of lowering the payout on 5 wins in streak or not getting her game placed. However the AC dealers would remind players to wait until they lost a hand before making that bet LOL

Yeah, that's what the public in demanding in baccarat. More side bets,

Quote: buzzpaff

All too often the casino will opt for a higher house edge.

It's a question even being able to offer a reasonable house edge in the first place, when card-counters and AP player threats cause losses that all players cover through a higher house edge.

Quote: buzzpaff

I know Stacey Perry was given the choice of lowering the payout on 5 wins in streak or not getting her game placed.

Case in point.
And do know that many casinos, such as the Barona, look to lower house edge side bet offerings in order to generate more interest, when and if possible.

Quote: Buzzpaff

Yeah, that's what the public in demanding in baccarat. More side bets,

First of all, Look at the prevalence of side bets on many games. Do you think they'd be there if there weren't a demand for them?
Secondly, the public often doesn't know what they want until it is shown to them.

In theory, the 90% penetration yellow card seems like a great idea. However, to forbid a recreational player from making a bet just so you don't allow the rare advantage player from having an advantage is a mistake.

Here's a better idea:

Use the yellow card. Insert it at 90% (or whereever you like). When it comes out, just leave it on the table until the end of the shoe. Allow people to continue to place the side bet.

If anyone asks what the yellow card means, tell them the truth: "Our surveilance people like to pay attention to sudden or drastic changes in betting patterns, particularly at the end of a shoe." And/or more simply, "That card means there's only a few hands left."

A recreational player may or may not understand what that means, but either way, it will not affect their play. An advantage player will instantly understand and become paranoid to the point of not playing his advantage.

And that's your goal: Discourage the advantage player while not affecting the recreational player.

Mission accomplished.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

In theory, the 90% penetration yellow card seems like a great idea. However, to forbid a recreational player from making a bet just so you don't allow the rare advantage player from having an advantage is a mistake.

Here's a better idea:

Use the yellow card. Insert it at 90% (or whereever you like). When it comes out, just leave it on the table until the end of the shoe. Allow people to continue to place the side bet.

If anyone asks what the yellow card means, tell them the truth: "Our surveilance people like to pay attention to sudden or drastic changes in betting patterns, particularly at the end of a shoe." And/or more simply, "That card means there's only a few hands left."

A recreational player may or may not understand what that means, but either way, it will not affect their play. An advantage player will instantly understand and become paranoid to the point of not playing his advantage.

And that's your goal: Discourage the advantage player while not affecting the recreational player.

Mission accomplished.

Yes, very fine Dave, that works too. So much could be done with this.

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

I've never figured out why casinos don't just use a csm for baccarat.

Ever notice the Asian players keeping track on a card
as they play? They're playing down the shoe on paper,
you would lose 99.99999% of the Asian players if you
used a CSM. Might as well number every player station
4, it would have the same effect.

Quote: Paigowdan

Good.
I haven't seen it in the U.S. or Puerto Rico.
Can you name a side bet it is used on?

Hi Paigowdan,

Below is one of the game (Read Recommendation).
Here is a Link to the game (UR Way Egalite).

‘UR WAY EGALITE’ is an additional optional wager for the game of Punto Banco.

Players must place a standard wager on either the Player, the Banker or Egalite, in order to place a ‘UR WAY EGALITE’ side wager.

Players can select to place one or more wagers on the individual tied hands (egalite) offered.

The wager is that the two hands will be of an equal specific score, (i.e. an individual egalite). The wager will win if that specific individual egalite has been wagered on.

All other Individual Egalite bets not associated with the winning Individual Egalite will be lost to the House.

If the result of the coup is not an Egalite, all wagers on UR Way Egalite will be lost to the House.


Recommendation

If this wager is made available, then the second cutting card must be inserted 14 cards from the other cutting card. If the cutting card is displayed after a completed coup then the Dealer must announce that was last coup of the shoe and the cards reshuffled.

Very good! Thanks, Stephen!
In the Egalite side bet example, the second cut card is 14 cards from the end-of-shoe cut card, which is 16 cards out from the last card.

This is still a deep 93% penetration into the shoe.

Quote: EvenBob

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

I've never figured out why casinos don't just use a csm for baccarat.Ever notice the Asian players keeping track on a card as they play?

They're playing down the shoe on paper,
you would lose 99.99999% of the Asian players if you
used a CSM. Might as well number every player station
4, it would have the same effect.

Bob is 100% right. The Macau style of scoring is called the Roadmap, and, as others have noted, is about detecting and predicting the patterns of the shoe. Some casinos have a display showing it along with the history. If you destroy the composition of the shoe after every hand, you've eliminated what keeps the game interesting for a lot of players.

Several other important (to players) aspects of the game would be lost if you wanted to try to introduce a CSM to a big table game. You can't pass a CSM, so there goes one of the distinctions between big table and midi. You wouldn't be doing the huge elaborate Baccarat shuffle that is part of the extra ritual that you expect to be paying for at black chip minimums, and I know that I'd miss that.

Personally, I only bet on the side bets when I'm way up and feeling especially lucky. I don't mind that they exist. But I don't know if I'd like a game with a CSM at all. I already feel like mini-Bacc is different enough from Baccarat as I understand it that I think of it as being a separate game.

Quote: heather

I already feel like mini-Bacc is different enough from Baccarat as I understand it

But it still involves the rituals of the game, that a CSM
would destroy. If you've never played bac to any extent,
you can't know how extremely superstitious the players
are. They even have rituals in how they bet and react
when they win or lose.

deleted

CET shut down their games COMPANY-WIDE when they discovered counting teams in Vegas destroying the tables on the Dragon bet on EZ Bacc. When they reopened, they were at $25 maximums everywhere, and stayed that way for a while. However, my last trip to Horseshoe up in Hammond (near Chicago), I noticed the maximums were back up to $100. I didn't notice if there was such an idea employed to prevent the counters...

The only problem with the "yellow card" rule would be the people who are convinced that the yellow card means that the cards will change after it. It sounds ridiculous, but there have been threads that got very heated when a "wrong" card came out... the yellow card has the possibility of having that effect on players. Again, the idea is totally false, but people who are superstitious will just sit out those remaining hands, taking up valuable spots and not providing any action.

" but people who are superstitious will just sit out those remaining hands. "

That appears to be 99% of baccarat players.

I don't see that as a problem.

If they all sit out, just reshuffle.

After all, that's what the casino wants in that case, anyway....