We see that no matter what are the actual results according to the game rules, any single shoe formed by a finite card distribution and dealt almost entirely will be somewhat biased (from a strict probability calculus point of view).
We just need to know how to take advantage of such bias recurring per every shoe dealt.

Of course if baccarat still exists is because the bias either is very limited or not always detectable by the common forms of registrations made by ridicolously simple mechanical processes.
The more we are complicating our registrations, better is the probability to disprove that baccarat is a random game.

In reality some simple events happening at baccarat are affected by certain very low dispersion values that when properly selected are offering a player's edge easily surpassing a possible 10-15% negative edge established by the house.
Quality events like the naturals apparition on either side, for example.
Unfortunately no casino is so stupi.d to offer such side bets, they want us to enlarge the uncertainty by forcing us to guess the exact winning hand.

Now, if a 34.2% probability presents low dispersion values, why to bother about a well higher 49.32% or 50.68% winning probability?

Indeed there's a big difference when betting low dispersion values at an almost 1:2 winning probability compared to an almost coin flip probability where dispersion values are considered as undetectable.
Quality happening on former situation must be converted into a quality feature on the latter events.
The B doubles succession is one of the simplest strategy to adopt with the important caveat that differently to naturals either side apparition, many shoes are not fitting the requisites to get a proper quality factor for a lack of space or obvious intrinsic features not neceessarily related to key cards fall.

as.

In the way presented so far, we see that at baccarat we do not need complicated math formulas to prove or disprove randomness. A simple place selection method forming a miriad of subcollectives will make the job.
Leave to the experts and casinos the idea that bac shoes are randomly produced or, conversely, that a possible unrandomness will be recognizable by the formation of repetitive patterns or stuff like that.
Baccarat could be solved (or not) first by the negation or confirmation of the strictest definition of randomness ever made and then and only then by the probability calculus applied on such random or unrandom environment.

Probably one of the reasons why bac is considered a random game happens as BP limiting values of relative frequency itlr will conform to a 50.68/49.32 steady proposition.
Thus every shoe will be eligible to be included in the registrations and that each playable spot will provide given probability values no matter what.

Bighornsh.it by any means.

First, BP probability values vary a lot by the actual shoe composition and actual card situations not regarding a so called general or so "equally likely scenario", secondly many BP "higher level" outcomes will surely provide lower dispersion values, third and more importantly, place selection issue will form infinite subcollectives not fitting the above expected BP dispersion values, especially whether involving a "same" or "opposite" result at given spots happening at certain shoes.

Consider my plan #2.
That is about the restricted probability to get multiple BB consecutive scenarios at various degrees.
We may think that after any given BB situation the most likely pattern will be BBB and not BBP by a better 0.18% long term degree.

Rattlesnake.sh.it.

Tomorrow the fundamental steps to restrict the variance.

as.

Hi Asymbac, 

in regards of this post on randomness, what is the best table to choose from?

A. The cards are being shuffled by hand by being all spread on the table first?

B. The cards are being shuffled by hand , pile by pile whit ease ,grace and skills  ?

C. Shuffled master machines ?

D. Woo site simulations results ?  Or RNG  ?

I am looking to play shoes where the early presentments will be significatives for a good portion of the remainder of the shoe . 

At first, i have been playing around with your unb plan no2 using Woo sites simulations results and got some good results !  But let's not forget that every lost =3 ...

Since, i have been looking at live data from two different kind of shuffling technics and they just don't look the same as RNG ones  !!  Lol 

This is telling me that the way it is shuffled is of a great importance .

Hi Fran!

Randomness is a quite intricate topic and baccarat wasn't resolved so far as "experts" made a fatal mistake considering bac shoes as randomly produced.
Actually the very few players making a living at this game know very well this bac vulnerability.

No matter the game involved, any shoe formed by multiple decks provide "unrandom" situations as key cards could be more or less concentrated in some portions of the shoe.
Itlr such key card distribution will dictate the results, say their weight on the whole picture, thus the probability of success of certain bets.
At bac we have the luxury to decide what, when and how much to bet. Not mentioning the fact that bac shoes are dealt almost entirely.
In some sense we should know that most of the times some event/s must happen at least one time or, it's the same concept, that certain situations are very very unlikely to happen even considering every single shoe dealt.

About your specific question, let's say that any physical shuffling procedure will provide some valuable unrandom spots to bet into, practically it's just a matter of space. Say of available betting space. And of course we should expect very few occasions to bet profitably.

By any means SM machines working on the same shoe provide the best opportunities for the player. Obviously I do not want to go into details, keep "experts" and casinos thinking that such shoes are randomly placed. Overall those tables provide huge profits for the house as many players like to wager the innumerable side bets offered (without trying to use the proper card counting techniques).

I do not know how Woo shoes are produced, I guess they are not springing from a real physical source. Thus they do not mean nothing to me. Even if my unb plan #2 had provided good results to you.   
The same about RNG shoes.


I am looking to play shoes where the early presentments will be significatives for a good portion of the remainder of the shoe .

It depends about the portion of the shoe you have considered and about the quality of the hands dealt so far.

Say it's virtually impossible to miss a winning hand unless a proper betting space is available to you.

as.

Starting to consider baccarat from the strictest definitions of randomness it's the way to go.

When playing you do not want to only adhere to those fkng roads displayed on the screen.
They are springing from too simple situations very vulnerable to our main enemy: variance. Even whether unrandomly produced.
That's because after some mechanical given conditions are met, they consider each hand as eligible to be registered no matter what.

It's obvious the more hands we are collecting per any given shoe higher will be the variance and this strongly relates to some insensitivity to place selection and probability after events features.
I mean that we have to discard from our registrations many resolved hands pretending as they haven't happened at all.

It's just this fact that makes beatable this wonderful game.

as. 
   

Thank's a lot Asymbac for those complete replies . What i meant by ,

I am looking to play shoes where the early presentments will be significatives for a good portion of the remainder of the shoe .

I read a post from Alrelax some time ago  and can not find it back for the moment  and as a hint , he was stating that if at the beginning of a shoe , there is a streak of players or bankers , we could then find some very good spots to play the side of the streak.

The way it starts could stay this way for a while until a major turning point or even for the whole shoe?

I am probably losing my time but i am working on a betting bet selection strategy  where  i need singles and at worst doubles . Then i have  a stop loss plan for shoes with lots of streaks .

Sometimes, if i am alone at the table ( i need cards to play ,lol) , i will stop and reverse when there is a triple showing  shooting for a streak of 7 using the 1+4 side parlay wager of Alrelax  -:) .  This  bet need to be successful one out of 15 to break even ...   I don't have statistics or  lots of experience  but i think it should succeed one out of two shoes on average  .

In a random game, past doesn't tell your future. It can not say that if a pattern seems to work, it will continue or end right there. At max, you may get a good guess on sequential probabilities. For example, if a run of 15 bankers has just happened which ended by a player, there may not be another stretch of 15 bankers just there. It is not impossible to happen but most unlikely. All other guesses are just guesses without even slightest degree of accuracy.
         By the way, I do not intend to disrupt a discussion with my inputs which may look off topic to you. I just want to let you understand that working on betselection will not yield you anything. I have been doing extensive researches on random games like roulette and baccarat and have analysed several millions outcomes in thousands of ways in past 14-15 years. In the beginning, I was as naive as a routine gambler. I wasted thousands of hours working to find the best bet, strangely, there is none.
            If you want to earn from a random game, only way is devise your own money management considering all kinds of variance you may get. With that all games with slight house edge will be beatable, not just baccarat.

From a guy with so many years of experience, your input is more than welcome!

I do agree with you ,  '' in a random game, past doesn't tell your future '' .


I will not play RNG  bac games or even try to figure out presentments occurring.

That's why i find Alrelax and Asymbac post so interesting .

They are playing a game where randomness is questionnable. 

On a related note, I know I touch on many subjects and many intricacies of real live brick-and-mortar casino baccarat play.

I do not believe in trying to define card order or the meaning of Randomness and how to literally beat it. I don't believe anyone ever will and I don't believe it's possible to do any type of mechanical or scheduled wagering with successful results with consistent play.

In summation to this quick note, I believe in identifying and recognizing and wagering when something is there that is powerful and presenting itself while capitalizing on it with positive progressions with my money management methods involving win money.

How to win at roulette, baccarat, sports betting etc etc ( negative expectation games )

1. You will always lose more bets than you will win. Sorry about that.

2. You have to win more on your winning bets than you lose on your losing bets to show a profit.

3. Set a maximum, conservative unit loss per bac shoe or pre-determined number of roulette spins or pre-determined number of sports bets and set a planned unit profit per bac shoe or   pre-determined number of roulette spins or pre-determined number of sports bets ......such as 30 roulette spins or 30 sports bets

For example, assume you will lose a max of 8 units a baccarat shoe or               
pre-determined number of roulette spins or pre-determined sports bets.....then assume a worst case of losing 4 of those shoes or predetermined number of roulette spins or pre-determined sports bets in a row so that you lose 32 units ( 8 units x 4 =32 ) A losing run of 4 sequences in a row will eventually happen ...sorry about that.

You can use 5 instead of 4 to be really conservative. Also those losing sequences do not have to be in a row, they can also be  a net loss of 4 or 5 sequences over a large number or sequences such as WLLWWWLLLLLWLLL  = net loss of 5 sequences.=loss of 40 units ( 5 sequences  x 8 unit lost per sequence =40 units lost )

Now assume your profit objective  is 4 units a baccarat shoe or over a               
pre-determined number of bac shoes or pre-determined roulette spins or             
pe-determined sports bets.

Then raise your bet size to 2 units which will give you an 8 unit profit and in 4 bac shoes or 4 pre-determined sequences of spins or 4 pre-determined sequences of sports bets an you should be even ( 8 x 4 units = 32 units)

You lost 32 bets and won 16 bets so you only won 16/48 bets = 33 % of your bets but you broke even by winning more on your winning bets than you lost on your losing bets.

However, over a long series of bac shoes or roulette spins  or sport bets where it takes a long time to break even, the 33% number will increase to more than 33%   
( in my example, you won the next 4 sequences in a row...which rarely happens.......)

For example, a sequence WLLLWWLLWLLWLL  gives you a net loss of 4 sequences and lose 32 units ..then raise your bets to 2 units a bet and then you get a sequence of LLWWWLLWWWLWWW so you get a net win of 4 sequences at 8 units a bet so you won 4 x 8 =32 units and you broke even

You have to set a pre-determined number of roulette spins or sports bets since there is no "shoe" in roulette or sports betting since the number of roulette spins and sports bet go on towards infinity.

In baccarat a sequence is the same as a shoe.

I use sequence of 5 .  I took the idea from gr8player ( he use 7 i think)  from his  ''en ville ''  negative progression .

When a sequence is negative,  0 win-5loss , 1 win-4loss, 2 win-3loss then i triple for the next one .  If a loss again then i quit playing that shoe or i do revert to one unit betting until another winning sequence .

What i am looking for is a bet selection that produce short streak of losses and of course i have to sacrifice long streak of wins as well .

What i am looking for is a bet selection that produce short streak of losses and of course i have to sacrifice long streak of wins as well .

Perfect.
And this is going to happen only and only whether outcomes are springing from a unrandom source.
Since you can take for grant that live bac shoes are not randomly produced, it remains to define how, when and how much such unrandomness work on the shoes dealt from a practical point of view.

After all we are not talking about gas kinetic or Brownian movement theories, just a stu.pi.d finite 416  card arrangement following specific rules that produce A or B results.

At baccarat the A/B probability varies a lot after some multistep conditions were met or not along each shoe, thus simple linear assessments won't go but to nowhere.
The same about certain "balancement" strategies that, imo, are worthless.

To do that we have to put in action several different random walks NOT registering each hand, thus trying to negate the concept that each bac hand will be equally likely (or following the natural slight asymmetricity) at every single step of the shoe dealt. This being a complete fkng nonsense made by mathematicians or some "gambling experts" that know about baccarat what I know about astrophsyics. That is zero.

By putting in action several random walks working into a sure unrandom enviroment, some spots will provide an edge well superior to any precise edge sorting techinque.

And differently than "I know the first card nature", we'll be surely get payed.

as.

Imo and according to a couple of serious players the best situation to aim for is to win just one unit per shoe. Say per every playable shoe.
Hence there are no "good" or "bad" shoes, just shoes that may or not offer enough "room" to get the searched situations.
"Room" doesn't necessarily means the number of hands dealt so far. There are many of additional factors involved I don't want to discuss here.

Actually in some cardrooms shoes are still shuffled manually, say quickly and badly shuffled thus we could think to get multiple wins per each shoe, but I do not suggest to apply this strategy as bac remains a game full of traps (unless a huge betting spread is utilized after the profit was secured).

I know it's not that appealing to set up a mere +1 profit per shoe (especially knowing that not every shoe is eligible to be played), but think that we join bac tables just to win getting an astounding high probability of success and not to gamble.
Moreover we see that the "luck" factor will be placed in the remotest corner; after having assessed that a given shoe is playable, we do know that a certain event must happen at least once.
A thing confirmed by the fact that itlr profitable spots will produce points mathematically favorite at the start, meaning that no matter which side we've got to bet, itlr the side we wagered got the highest two-card value by values very different to a random environment.

Again you can measure the validity of your system/method/approach by simply controlling the percentages of the two-card highest point happening on the wagered side.
If itlr such values tend to be equal, alas the method can't work. It's just a mere kind of taxed unbeatable coin flip proposition.


as.

@alrelax,

QuoteI do not believe in trying to define card order or the meaning of Randomness and how to literally beat it. I don't believe anyone ever will and I don't believe it's possible to do any type of mechanical or scheduled wagering with successful results with consistent play.

Well, I agree with your first sentence but not with second. Actually, people did not witness any mechanical strategy so far that beats the house edge and variance both together but it is not impossible either. Until when an aeroplane was devised and successfully flew with man inside the machine, it was considered a dream only. Many people tried even silly things to do the same but all failed. Now, we not just go to continent to continent flying, we are reaching even Mars. I will not proclaim that I have done something like that recently but I am close to that. It is pretty doable.

A supposedly random environment having the same attributes (collective) produces a miriad of subcollectives that should confirm or not that the original source was produced really randomly.
Of course we need a lot of samples to assess that as many subcollectives are formed by diluted outcomes that may present a short term positive (or negative) variance wrongly fooling or discouraging us.

The best watchdog of randomness is the statistical concept of dispersion, being the sd the most common one.
In a word, opposite results whatever taken should follow the distribution laws of the theorical probability of each result, in our example that itlr resolved results are pB=0.5068 and pP=0.4932.

We know that there's no fkng way such values are really working per each hand dealt or per every shoe dealt, being the result of two different finite 50/50 or 57.93/42.07 ratios.

A supposedly random environment having the same attributes (collective) produces a miriad of subcollectives that should confirm or not that the original source was produced really randomly.
Of course we need a lot of samples to assess that as many subcollectives are formed by diluted outcomes that may present a short term positive (or negative) variance wrongly fooling or discouraging us.

The best watchdog of randomness is the statistical concept of dispersion, being the sd the most common one.
In a word, opposite results whatever taken should follow the distribution laws of the theorical probability of each result, in our example that itlr resolved results are pB=0.5068 and pP=0.4932.

Actually we know that there's no fkng way such probability values are really working per each hand dealt or per every shoe dealt, being the result of two different finite 50/50 or 57.93/42.07 ratios.

The fact that long term values tend to more and more approach such values doesn't necessarily mean each shoe dealt is randomly placed. In reality an astounding amount of two fighting results are not getting the sd values expected for a mere theorical probability. What we need to set up a long term unbeatable plan.

as.