baccarat question
Also if we saw 5 or 6 ten point cards in the last hand, the next hand should bet on Banker. Any reason to it?
I dunno. Did you ever see the dealer's girlfriend sitting there waiting for that sequence and then betting heavily on it? I mean if that poor guy standing up all day, constantly under camera scrutiny and hating his job doesn't believe it, then why should you?
>Also if we saw 5 or 6 ten point cards in the last hand, the next hand should bet on Banker. Any reason to it?
Of course. Its the same reason as if you did NOT see 5 or 6 ten point cards in the last hand, the next hand should be on Banker.
Banker Probability is 45.87 percent.
Player Probability is 44.63 percent.
Tie Probability is 9.51 percent.
There are usually six or eight decks loaded into the shoe. If you can keep track of the ten value cards and then do some really complex math in your head, can you use this information to choose your bets? Sure, you can. You can also toss a coin. Works out to pretty much the same thing.
I have been addressed as "Mr. Banker" while sitting at the Mini-Bacc tables. More than one time, more than one dealer, more than one casino. So I guess I do bet on Banker quite often but I indeed shift to Player from time to time.Quote: jsantee97Bet on the Banker...always!! And don't think twice!
The first time I had my companion join me for some Mini-Bacc it was an American dealer in an Asian Games Room and I resolved to impress upon her the necessity to "play the percentages" and bet on Banker. I think it was running about 70 percent Player, 10 percent Banker and 20 percent Tie that night! Perhaps that was indeed the best lesson in Baccarat I could have given her, but it sure was a disappointment, particularly since we were the only ones playing and so the play was rather rapid.
Quote: chanchanchaMy friend told me if the last 3 hands were Banker, Tie,Tie, then the chance of winning Player in the next hand is very big, is this true?
Also if we saw 5 or 6 ten point cards in the last hand, the next hand should bet on Banker. Any reason to it?
Past hand outcomes have nothing to do with future hand outcomes, so the odds of player winning aren't improved by the banker, tie, tie succession.
Banker is a slight favorite in every hand, you should always bet on banker:-)
Quote: jsantee97Bet on the Banker...always!! And don't think twice!
Unless you're using a match play, and often if you're a smart gambler, you're using your match plays on Baccarat.
If you're using one, bet on the player. Another promotion I've encountered is a "play until you win 4:1 or better" on the dragon bonus side bet, and then you get an extra $20. This is also best done on the player.
You might wonder why this changes the odds. It doesn't. The difference (which the Wizard explains much better on his match-play page) is due to the player bet being (very slightly) higher variance bet, as although it doesn't win as often, it also doesn't pay the commission, so it effectively wins "bigger". Variance is good for match plays, because increases in variance increase the upside of the bet, without an equal increase in downside (the match play portion of the bet always costs $0, even if you lose).
But yes, otherwise you're right, play 100% banker. It will save you .18% x the amount you bet.
Well, that 20:20 payout is indeed better than the 19:20 payout, but at my local Happy Wampum casino the match plays are rare and frustrating and are only for fifty dollars. So can someone figure out just what the difference between Banker with a Match Play For Fifty and Player with a Match Play For Fifty is? I can't do math this early in the morning unless I let go of my coffee up and right now that is simply unthinkable!Quote: kmcdThe difference is due to the player bet being a very slightly higher variance bet, as although it doesn't win as often, it also doesn't pay the commission, so it effectively wins "bigger". Variance is good for match plays, because increases in variance increase the upside of the bet, without an equal increase in downside (the match play portion of the bet always costs $0, even if you lose).
Quote: rdw4potusPast hand outcomes have nothing to do with future hand outcomes, so the odds of player winning aren't improved by the banker, tie, tie succession.
Banker is a slight favorite in every hand, you should always bet on banker:-)
I agree that past outcomes have nothing to do with future outcomes - but there is some common bench marks - at 3 or 3,5 STD things appers to stop or get weaker - that is based upon observations of many milions trails of simulations ...
Cheers
Quote: FleaStiffWell, that 20:20 payout is indeed better than the 19:20 payout, but at my local Happy Wampum casino the match plays are rare and frustrating and are only for fifty dollars. So can someone figure out just what the difference between Banker with a Match Play For Fifty and Player with a Match Play For Fifty is? I can't do math this early in the morning unless I let go of my coffee up and right now that is simply unthinkable!
I'm too lazy to look it up (see the Wizard's match play page), but off the top of my head, playing on the banker with a $50 MP versus the player will cost you a little under $1. So really nothing to fret about.
Yeah, can make that in two hours of panhandling! I think all this maths stuff in gambling is for rich folks what bet large.Quote: kmcda little under $1. So really nothing to fret about.
Quote: FleaStiffYeah, can make that in two hours of panhandling! I think all this maths stuff in gambling is for rich folks what bet large.
Do you go panhandling frequently? Maybe you shouldn't be going to the casino so much. I'm concerned.
JK
