Counting Baccarat

Hello Mr. Wizard,

I'm trying to learn more about counting baccarat. The system I have come across frequently online places the following values: +1: A, 2, 3, +2: 4, -1: 5, 7, 8, -2: 6, 9 thru face 0. It also requires accounting for the true count. The system requires a true count of +16 before wagering on player.

The system on Wizard of Odds only has single digit values and seems to rely solely on the running count without calculating true count? The value to bet on player is -4 or less.

I'm not great at math and I'm having trouble wrapping my brain around the two systems. If say hypothetically, you were on the last deck of a shoe, the running count would be the true count for the first system, yet there is a huge difference between deviating to player on a -4 or less and a +16 or greater?

What am I missing here?

Thanks!

Quote: PastPoster

Hello Mr. Wizard,

I'm trying to learn more about counting baccarat. The system I have come across frequently online places the following values: +1: A, 2, 3, +2: 4, -1: 5, 7, 8, -2: 6, 9 thru face 0. It also requires accounting for the true count. The system requires a true count of +16 before wagering on player.

The system on Wizard of Odds only has single digit values and seems to rely solely on the running count without calculating true count? The value to bet on player is -4 or less.

I'm not great at math and I'm having trouble wrapping my brain around the two systems. If say hypothetically, you were on the last deck of a shoe, the running count would be the true count for the first system, yet there is a huge difference between deviating to player on a -4 or less and a +16 or greater?

What am I missing here?

Thanks!
link to original post

The systems described on the WOO site are wizard's own design.
https://wizardofodds.com/games/baccarat/card-counting/
https://wizardofodds.com/games/baccarat/appendix/2/

They seem to show how a player can reduce the house edge VERY slightly, with quite a bit of effort. Where the house edge is still around 0.99%, it's no more that a fun exercise and doesn't cost in. Systems that convert to true count will tend to be better, but what's the point?
I can say nothing about other baccarat card counting systems from other sites, except to say that if there was a great card counting system for baccarat, that could eliminate the house edge, then it would be more evident, more talked about and more feared by casinos. We never read about players being backed off for Baccarat counting, so that gives a clue to how big a problem it is for casinos. And how big an opportunity for us.

Quote: PastPoster

Hello Mr. Wizard,

I'm trying to learn more about counting baccarat. The system I have come across frequently online places the following values: +1: A, 2, 3, +2: 4, -1: 5, 7, 8, -2: 6, 9 thru face 0. It also requires accounting for the true count. The system requires a true count of +16 before wagering on player.

The system on Wizard of Odds only has single digit values and seems to rely solely on the running count without calculating true count? The value to bet on player is -4 or less.

I'm not great at math and I'm having trouble wrapping my brain around the two systems. If say hypothetically, you were on the last deck of a shoe, the running count would be the true count for the first system, yet there is a huge difference between deviating to player on a -4 or less and a +16 or greater?

What am I missing here?

Thanks!
link to original post

Can we add another rule to suspendable activity, bringing up baccarat counting?

Quote: DeMango

Can we add another rule to suspendable activity, bringing up baccarat counting?
link to original post

When I started my casino career, I wondered whether baccarat could be counted and had similar questions about whether the WOO analysis was the final answer on the topic. It's certainly okay for people to ask questions.

If you could keep track of every card dealt and its order, as Nicolas Zographos did, that knowledge could be used in Baccarat. As he did.

Quote:

If you could keep track of every card dealt and its order, as Nicolas Zographos did, that knowledge could be used in Baccarat. As he did.
link to original post

I provide a tracking spreadsheet for free on my website where you can test for yourself the edges after any sequence of cards have been played. I discussed that in my video above. This is the same type of risk analysis spreadsheet that is used to assess players for various types of cheating, and is modeled after a spreadsheet I created for an Asian casino client to do actual live risk assessment. Get it here:

https://researchers.one/doc/5f848e142c77e400043aadd8

Essentially you are playing computer perfect baccarat. I discuss the microscopic edge you can gain by doing this in my book and on my website. The downside of my analysis is you will have to read it. I don't believe I've ever made a video about computer perfect play.

https://www.888casino.com/blog/baccarat-tips/computer-perfect-play-against-baccarat

Here is a summary of my analysis for the Player bet, from the article:

Quote:

For example, with the cut card placed at the standard location of 14 cards, with computer-perfect play against the Player bet:

The player will make a bet on average once per 6.78 shoes. With a $1000 wager whenever the player has the edge, and otherwise no wager, the player will earn about 95 cents per 100 hands using computer-perfect play.

Here is a summary of my analysis for the Banker bet, from the article:

Quote:

For example, with the cut card placed at the standard location of 14 cards, with computer-perfect play against the Banker bet:

The player will make a bet on average once per 6.12 shoes. With a $1000 wager whenever the player has the edge, and otherwise no wager, the player will earn about 76 cents per 100 hands using computer-perfect play.

Here is a graphic that shows your profit using a computer at the table -- this includes also playing the Tie bet when the computer shows an edge for that wager. For example, with the cut card at 14 cards and $1000 wagers, you will earn about $9.66 per shoe on average in profit. Most of that ($8.27) is from the Tie bet.

Dr.Teliot

Could you please explain computer-perfect play as it relates to baccarat with an example.

Does it involve the card count , deck composition or weight of banker vs player in relation to the variance , or "something more" as The Wizard alluded to in regards to a winning baccarat session by someone who many people consider to be a very popular " long term " documented and yet-unchallenged winning player ?

Thanks

Quote: cwwbjr

Dr.Teliot

Could you please explain computer-perfect play as it relates to baccarat with an example.

Does it involve the card count , deck composition or weight of banker vs player in relation to the variance , or "something more" as The Wizard alluded to in regards to a winning baccarat session by someone who many people consider to be a very popular " long term " documented and yet-unchallenged winning player ?

Thanks
link to original post

From the second paragraph of the article:

Computer-perfect play means keeping track of the exact house edge on each of the Player, Banker and Tie bets each round, based on the exact composition of the cards left in the shoe. The player then makes a wager on a specific bet whenever he has the edge over the house on that bet; otherwise the player just sits on his hands and waits. The point of an analysis such as this is to put an absolute upper-bound on the win-rate from ordinary advantage play against baccarat using methods such as card counting. This analysis does not cover more sophisticated methods, such as location play, hole-carding or edge sorting.

If you want to see an example, download the spreadsheet and click on the "Risk" tab, there is an example in it to get started.

Thanks for your explanation.

So this system does suck. Try the android sim "baccarat sim". Its green. Track the system you speak of. You will go through thousands of shoes with no advantage. Then, when you ever do, if you ever do, it is just that, an advantage on average, not a guarantee. It is a waste of time. Try this guy out

[edit by mod: Link failed]


Worth investigation