Archer

For all practical purposes the numbers of statistically significant hands one will win in maybe even a lifetime of Bacc is a 50-50 proposition. Discounting the commission of course. So we can expect to win half of our hands. Like flipping a fair coin. So if we run a progression of any type; whether it is one sided, two sided, combination, etc. and combine ALL the players win/loss results at, say any given progression, we will see a bell curve depicting each player as a dot on the curve. Okay. So if we then all of us play a zillion shoes our bell curve will show all players as one dot because everyone will have won 50 and lost 50 (Bank has an advantage so that's not quite true). Now, if we only plot a few thousand outcomes then we will see dots representing various players all over the curve. Some 50-50 (even) some losing and some winning but most around the 50-50 center. There will also be some extremes. A few players winning big and a few players losing big. We call that VARIANCE.

ILLUSION? Some players will have their highest bets fall on winning hands! By pure chance! They will be the ones who love the system. But then there are the unlucky ones.

In a 50-50 game (or even 49-51) you go up and down. So you might think you are winning or losing but you won't know until you have played a LOT of shoes. (I have played over 1000 shoes myself and I have a record of them!)

Unless our big bets in the progression are on hands with a positive EV we will eventually win approx. 50-50!

So how can we win? Simple! You got to know which bet placements have an advantage over the other. Stated in another way you got to know on a given hand which is more likely to occur - Banker or Player. If you know this you can just flat bet. If you know this you may use a progression on the hands that are most likely to win and either don't play or bet small (paying rent) on the likely losers.

Archer

aegis21

Hi Archer, You sound like a statistical type of guy flaunting around words like variance and such. If you go by strick math and statistcal analysis, then the following is assumed by your analysis: Every event is totally independent of any event that has previously occurred. So at any time a bank or player has the same odds of occurring. With this math/statistics comes the realization that the casinos win by the commission only. (not really true when you know what comm. is and compare that to thier overall take) With your dot/scatter graph analogy we can say that all 50% of the players in the world over an etremely long time will bet bank and 50% bet player.
So your flat bet on one side or the other could never have an advantage with your line of reasoning. I think....... Talk me down on this, please!

__________________
-----------------------
John

E. Clifton Davis

Then there was the 1000 shoes we ran on OTB4L U1D1 M2. And what was the result John when we played continuous?

__________________
BeatTheCasino
ellis@beatthecasino.com

Archer

OK Mr. Administrator! First please document that the casino take in Bacc is anything more than the calculated edge (commission). If you can document this (which you can't) then we might talk about it. Otherwise your comment is just myth. But yes, exactly, if each successive event has the same likelihood of appearing then the casino makes their commission, period.

If the events have different likelihoods of appearing then one event has advantage over the next. But if we cannot predict this event in advance we cannot exploit it. Therefore, if you are saying that your systems CAN predict these events you have a predictable advantage and you can win flat betting. Well? This ain't brain surgery!

The addition of a progression to an advantage (positive EV) bet will have different effects on draw downs, shoe win % and even units won per shoe but that is another conversation.

No progression will take a negative expectation bet and turn it into a positive expectation bet! Just calculate your average bet size and multiply it b your % disadvantage adn that is what you will lose.

I didn't mean to imply that players bet the same number of times on Bank as Player. That is irrelevant. The bell curve analogy is just to point out that without being able to PREDICT which bets have a greater likelihood of winning a progression method is just a lucky guess. Those players whose big bet happens to fall on more winning decisions will win more and vice versa. So you have a bunch of players winning/losing a little bit and a few winning big and a few losing big. Thus the bell curve.

Hope that is clear.

Archer

aegis21

Good Evening Archie,
Document the casino's take from baccarat.... isn't that done by the casino control comm. and gaming regulators? I don't need to document it again.
The point that you may have missed or just choose to ignore is with each event the same probability exists for either a bank or player to occur. Whether you use a flat bet or progression of any type you need to win more bets that you lose to obtain a positive outcome. If you are winning more than you lose it is only because you can predict which side will win.
Now can you do that with certainty? 100% certainty? 90% certainty? 70% certainty?
Let me know your answers, unless you want to ignore these questions too.

btw I am only a house keeper here on this forum. I get no financial gain from cleaning up the dirt around the forum. In other words I am totally un-biased. I just like to explore all aspects of gaming.

__________________
-----------------------
John

Archer

OK, I accept that you are an unbiased objective truth searcher. -)

Re: Casino take. Disclosure depends upon the jurisdiction. You stated that the casinos make much more than the commission per dollar bet, didn't you? Point is we don't know what the casino % take is per dollar bet on Bacc. So why do you assume it is more than the commission?

I am not ignoring questions! Flat bet you need to win more hands than lose to win. I am glad that is cleared up, phew. With a progression it is the same. Yes we still need to win more bets than we lose for the prog. to win. This is because we have an average bet size. That is just like betting flat. There would be no difference in the final outcome in units won. If your average prog. bet size was, for example, 4 units than it would be the same as betting 4 units flat every time. Over time of course.

But yes, I could calculate very closely what percentage of bets I will win. That is easy. I just count my winning bets verse how many hands played. I haven't had a reason to do that - until now.

Archer XX---------------->

aegis21

Good Morning Archie,
Other than answering the question of what % of certainty you have of winning any one particular bet. The real reason you should have in the past and from now on is very simple. If you track which bets you win 70% of the time (or lose 30% of the time) vs which bets you win 90% of the time(again losing 10% of the time) you would or should adjust your bet size accordingly. Doesn't it make sense to put more money on a 90% chance of winning bet than a 70% chance(30% chance of losing) bet. Opps, now we are talking some sort of betting progression. Since I haven't attained millionaire status as of yet, that allows me to place more money on better bets with confidence. Ok we could say a 100 dollar bet on a 90% bet plus a 50 dollar bet on a 70% bet will be the same as flat betting 75 dollars. In a series of twenty bets you lose four bets in a row and are down 300 dollars. Win the next 16 bets and you are up 900 dollars total for that series. (I picked 20 bets to illustrate a 90% winning bets combined with 70% winning bets 90% you won 9 of ten, 70% 7 of ten or total 16 of 20 bets) You low or draw down, was minus 300 dollars. Your total win was 900 dollars (1200.00 won minus 300 lost = 900) Now If we bet 100 on th 90% and 50 on the 70% bets in the same game we have still the same number of bets won/loss, the same average bet size 75 but losing first four bets would only have us down 250 dollars and we would win 1250 for a total win of (1250 - 250 = 1000) 1000 dollars. A distinct advantage over flat betting.
So you may now have a reason, other than my asking, to track your winning percentages on which bets are better bets and why they are better. So while winning more than half your bets is good for flat betting, changing betting size according to your winning percentage is very helpful to your bottom line. Now if you are a millionaire and money is not that big of a deal and you are playing only to show you can beat the casino, flat betting is perfect! You should join the Universal forum and find out how we do it with only using a one verse two unit bet! Have a sparkling day Archie!
losing four bets in a row you are down

__________________
-----------------------
John

E. Clifton Davis

[quote=Archer;11214]OK Mr. Administrator! First please document that the casino take in Bacc is anything more than the calculated edge (commission). If you can document this (which you can't) then we might talk about it. Otherwise your comment is just myth. But yes, exactly, if each successive event has the same likelihood of appearing then the casino makes their commission, period.


Arch, if you are going to continue to take up our time coming on here please take the time to get your facts straight first. Otherwise you are wasting our time. The casino % of the drop in Baccarat went from 3% in '87 to 26% today while commission remained the same. Push the right buttons on your computer and look it up. The casinos must publish their records by law and those records are right there on your computer. Baccarat is the most profitable casino table game by a mile and doubles BJ. They could eliminate commission altogether and it would still be the most profitable. In fact, for a time, the Vegas Horseshoe did exactly that. Use your head. Commission is 1.25% of the money bet. Casinos could not even afford to deal Baccarat for that kind of profit.

If you play a lot of Baccarat, like you say. then you have frequently experienced the point when the game is over but commission has not yet been collected. What you are saying is at that point half the players are ahead. If that is what you think you obviously don't play much Baccarat. I find, more often than not, that I'm the ONLY player ahead before commission. Our players frequently remark about how often they are the only player ahead before commission. If you think half are ahead you've got to get out more. It's no where near half and a whole lot closer to ZERO.

Geez, Steve, one of our players and I personally pulled a flat better off the table two months ago. He was betting on a whim too, just like you. He was down $40,000 and the casino was laughing up their sleeve. That thankful player, an RR worker from N.C. could not begin to afford a $40,000 loss and is now a member of the public forum and can vouch for what I say. So can Steve. 50 50 my ass.

__________________
BeatTheCasino
ellis@beatthecasino.com

Archer

[quote=E. Clifton Davis;11234]Please send me the site that backs up your claim that the casinos publish their % of the drop on Baccarat. I understand that the take increases due to the tie bet (14% against I believe?).

I am not quite following the rest of your post.

ArcherXX-------------------->

E. Clifton Davis

Somehow that doesn't surprise me. Ties pay 8 to 1 and occur 1 in 10. Worst bet in the casino except perhaps tha dragon bonus. But that has remained constant since the game was introduced in the US. Use your search engine to get individual casino records. I don't have the time for this. Who's telling you ties are responsible, some casino employee?

__________________
BeatTheCasino
ellis@beatthecasino.com