Super Baccarat

The Wizard described the game here.

It is played with six decks through a continuous shuffle machine. I understand that the way this shuffle machine works, which is probably like all shuffle machines, is that up to about three hands might be played with a short sequence of un-shuffled cards before those cards too are mixed into the deck and shuffled.

The dealer I spoke to about this version seemed to think that it was a game best played for all the side bets, versus for a straight Bank or Player wager, although the house edge as far as I know is the same at this game as at any other commissionless half pay for Banker 6 Baccarat for the straight bets.

The pit boss pointed out to me that placing, say, $50. to cover every one of the ten possible tie bets ($5. on each) would pay more for tie than normally (normally being 8X) except on 6 and 7, which would pay you only $5 x 40 or $200., and only $5. x 70 or $350. on 8 or 9, versus $50. on a straight tie where a 6, 7, 8 or 9 tie hit, which would pay $50 x 8 or $400.

I thought it was interesting though to consider how they have analyzed the game and obviously determined that certain tie hands (6 and 7) are far more probable than others (a tie with 1 or 2, pays 200X). I assume this has to do with that ties other than 6,7,8,9 must involve draws, and that ties involving some of the hands require 6 card draws, others might happen with 5 card draws.

I don't do exotic side bets at Baccarat other than, rarely, the tie, so this is not a game for me, but it is an interesting, colorful setup.

Mostly I don't like it because it has lower limits, and also, the subtle difference between a fixed deck and a continuous shuffle machine. At least with a fixed deck if there are going to be 30 Banks coming out of it, once the deck is cut, no one may take those away, but with a continuous shuffle the game becomes more like a craps game or roulette with each roll or spin a truly independent random event.

Quote: MDawg

I thought it was interesting though to consider how they have analyzed the game and obviously determined that certain tie hands (6 and 7) are far more probable than others (a tie with 1 or 2, pays 200X). I assume this has to do with that ties other than 6,7,8,9 must involve draws, and that ties involving some of the hands require 6 card draws, others might happen with 5 card draws.
link to original post

Yes. If those tie frequency numbers are not on WOO, I can dig them up for you. But you are essentially correct, a tie on 6-9 can involve scenarios in which only 4 cards are played (as well as scenarios involving 5or 6 cards), so the 6-9 ties are more probable than ties of 0 to 5 which require 5 or 6 cards.

Yes, so when I have some huge tie bet out there and dealer opens a 6 or 7, I can see now why the dealer gets so excited (especially if there is a side bet riding for the dealer). It's based on math.

And also why we get bat &^%$ crazy when a six card draw results in a 0 - 0 or 1 - 1 tie - it really is rare.

Quote: MDawg

Yes, so when I have some huge tie bet out there and dealer opens a 6 or 7, I can see now why the dealer gets so excited (especially if there is a side bet riding for the dealer). It's based on math.

And also why we get bat &^%$ crazy when a six card draw results in a 0 - 0 or 1 - 1 tie - it really is rare.

link to original post

Using some baccarat files that Miplet created (thanks Miplet!) this is what I calculate:

Play,Bank Total	Combinations	Prob.
0,0	28,979,901,420,544	0.005797838
1,1	20,499,217,668,352	0.004101157
2,2	20,006,606,104,576	0.004002603
3,3	22,250,510,129,408	0.004451528
4,4	36,294,133,463,040	0.007261153
5,5	39,684,046,743,808	0.007939353
6,6	96,170,001,308,416	0.019240164
7,7	101,051,004,798,976	0.020216677
8,8	52,158,519,656,960	0.010435047
9,9	55,146,054,060,032	0.011032745

Note: total combinations = 4,998,398,275,503,360

So, a 7,7 tie is about 5.05 times more frequent than a 2,2 tie.

Quote: gordonm888

Quote: MDawg

Yes, so when I have some huge tie bet out there and dealer opens a 6 or 7, I can see now why the dealer gets so excited (especially if there is a side bet riding for the dealer). It's based on math.

And also why we get bat &^%$ crazy when a six card draw results in a 0 - 0 or 1 - 1 tie - it really is rare.

link to original post

Using some baccarat files that Miplet created (thanks Miplet!) this is what I calculate:

Play,Bank Total	Combinations	Prob.
0,0	28,979,901,420,544	0.005797838
1,1	20,499,217,668,352	0.004101157
2,2	20,006,606,104,576	0.004002603
3,3	22,250,510,129,408	0.004451528
4,4	36,294,133,463,040	0.007261153
5,5	39,684,046,743,808	0.007939353
6,6	96,170,001,308,416	0.019240164
7,7	101,051,004,798,976	0.020216677
8,8	52,158,519,656,960	0.010435047
9,9	55,146,054,060,032	0.011032745

Note: total combinations = 4,998,398,275,503,360

So, a 7,7 tie is about 5.05 times more frequent than a 2,2 tie.

link to original post

Link to WoO is in the OP. Some of your numbers are different. I'm on my phone so I can't check to see where the errors are.

Quote: miplet

Link to WoO is in the OP. Some of your numbers are different. I'm on my phone so I can't check to see where the errors are.

miplet's numbers appear to be based on an 8-deck shoe, but the OP says this game uses a 6-deck shoe (well, CSM).

Here's what I get, for both 6 and 8 decks:

6 decks have 878,869,206,895,680 total combinations
8 decks have 4,998,398,275,503,360 total combinations

Result	6 deck combos	Fraction	8 deck combos	Fraction
0-0	5,068,928,240,640	0.005767557	28,979,901,420,544	0.005797838
1-1	3,604,674,288,960	0.004101491	20,499,217,668,352	0.004101157
2-2	3,511,429,301,376	0.003995395	20,006,606,104,576	0.004002603
3-3	3,913,285,080,384	0.004452636	22,250,510,129,408	0.004451528
4-4	6,373,370,044,800	0.007251784	36,294,133,463,040	0.007261153
5-5	6,981,859,713,600	0.007944140	39,684,046,743,808	0.007939353
6-6	16,880,962,938,048	0.019207594	96,170,001,308,416	0.019240164
7-7	17,892,276,227,712	0.020358292	101,717,538,899,968	0.020350027
8-8	9,628,376,803,776	0.010955415	54,879,416,675,072	0.010979401
9-9	9,697,800,292,992	0.011034407	55,146,054,060,032	0.011032745

Quote: ThatDonGuy

miplet's numbers appear to be based on an 8-deck shoe, but the OP says this game uses a 6-deck shoe (well, CSM).

Here's what I get, for both 6 and 8 decks:

6 decks have 878,869,206,895,680 total combinations
8 decks have 4,998,398,275,503,360 total combinations

Result	6 deck combos	Fraction	8 deck combos	Fraction
0-0	5,068,928,240,640	0.005767557	28,979,901,420,544	0.005797838
1-1	3,604,674,288,960	0.004101491	20,499,217,668,352	0.004101157
2-2	3,511,429,301,376	0.003995395	20,006,606,104,576	0.004002603
3-3	3,913,285,080,384	0.004452636	22,250,510,129,408	0.004451528
4-4	6,373,370,044,800	0.007251784	36,294,133,463,040	0.007261153
5-5	6,981,859,713,600	0.007944140	39,684,046,743,808	0.007939353
6-6	16,880,962,938,048	0.019207594	96,170,001,308,416	0.019240164
7-7	17,892,276,227,712	0.020358292	101,717,538,899,968	0.020350027
8-8	9,628,376,803,776	0.010955415	54,879,416,675,072	0.010979401
9-9	9,697,800,292,992	0.011034407	55,146,054,060,032	0.011032745

link to original post

I had not noticed that OP's post specified a 6 deck game, thanks for catching that and for adding the additional numbers on the 6 deck game. We both have identical results for 8 decks, except for 7,7 and 8,8 ties. I am still checking.

I found my error, I had omitted checking the last 100 rows on Miplets spreadsheet which has over 103,000 rows. I now get

Play,Bank Total	8 Deck Combinations	Prob.
0,0	28,979,901,420,544	0.005797838
1,1	20,499,217,668,352	0.004101157
2,2	20,006,606,104,576	0.004002603
3,3	22,250,510,129,408	0.004451528
4,4	36,294,133,463,040	0.007261153
5,5	39,684,046,743,808	0.007939353
6,6	96,170,001,308,416	0.019240164
7,7	101,717,538,899,968	0.020350027
8,8	54,879,416,675,072	0.010979401
9,9	55,146,054,060,032	0.011032745

Note: total combinations = 4,998,398,275,503,360

I think this correction brings me into agreement with ThatDonGuy.

The pit boss who explained the game to me told me it is a six deck game.

Check out the rules for the game as on file with the Casino Regulatory Authority in Singapore:
https://www.cra.gov.sg/docs/default-source/default-document-library/9-mbs-0691001-sands-super-baccarat-game-rules---cra-ver-2-(no-logo).pdf

The ties are proposed to be paid out as follows:


with as much as a 28% lower payout as at the game in Vegas, which means that either the game pays out much better in Vegas, or Sands decided to up the payouts after initially filing the game description.

Quote: MDawg

The pit boss who explained the game to me told me it is a six deck game.

Check out the rules for the game as on file with the Casino Regulatory Authority in Singapore:
https://www.cra.gov.sg/docs/default-source/default-document-library/9-mbs-0691001-sands-super-baccarat-game-rules---cra-ver-2-(no-logo).pdf

The ties are proposed to be paid out as follows:


with as much as a 28% lower payout as at the game in Vegas, which means that either the game pays out much better in Vegas, or Sands decided to up the payouts after initially filing the game description.

link to original post

My quick scan of these Singapore payout numbers are that the House Edges are in the range (approx) of 27 to 42% for most or all of these wagers. I imagine that either the Vegas casinos had some sense of shame or the Nevada Gaming Board suggested or mandated higher returns.

Here is my analysis. Does anyone find anything to be wrong or missing?

Singapore Marina Bay Sands Casino use shoe box to dealt cards, this side bet is VERY countable. This is why they introduced such low odds(LOL).

Please note that the original name of this side bet is UR WAY EGALITE.

Quote: ssho88

Singapore Marina Bay Sands Casino use shoe box to dealt cards, this side bet is VERY countable. This is why they introduced such low odds(LOL).

What counting method would work with this?

Quote: ThatDonGuy

What counting method would work with this?

link to original post

You can use TRUE COUNT or RUNNING COUNT method to beat the game.

The TRUE COUNT system can be developed from EORs(effect of removal) of each card.

Quote: Wizard

Here is my analysis. Does anyone find anything to be wrong or missing?

link to original post

On the WOO page, you appear to have made an unstated assumption that the game is 8 decks which was the same assumption I made earlier in the thread. ThatDonGuy has pointed out that MDawg reported in the initial post of this thread that the Super-Bacc game he saw was 6 decks, and DonGuy provided a set of 6-deck numbers which are, of course, different than your numbers.

Of course, there is only a tiny difference between the probabilities for 6 deck and 8 deck cases. I think there's only about 5 or 6 people in the world that really care, lol.

As far as I can tell, your WOO page numbers are in perfect agreement with ThatDonGuy's 8-deck results and with my 8-deck results as well.

Quote: ThatDonGuy

What counting method would work with this?

link to original post

A surplus of 7s and 6s would contribute to more 7-0/6-0 starting hands, which would increase the probability of getting a 6 or 7 tie, especially if there is also a deficit of low cards,1-5.

https://www.888casino.com/blog/side-bets/card-counting-the-ur-way-egalite-baccarat-side-bet

You explained it well!