+ Register

[RouletteGhost]

Rumor has it, the dragon bet can be exploited.

Yes?

[owenslv]

Perhaps:

Have a look at this: https://wizardofodds.com/games/baccarat/dragon-bet/

At the end of the article there is also a link for a Panda bet count as well.

I haven't tried it personally yet however it looks interesting and at 40/1 t may be worth a try.

Awesome wishes,

Garry

[Xander]

Rumor has it, the dragon bet can be exploited.

Yes?

Ghost,

Read Dr. Jacobson's page. 

"By comparison, playing the Dragon side bet in EZ Baccarat, the AP expects to earn about $60 per shoe. It follows that LN returns 857% more than the Dragon side bet. The closest baccarat side bet to LN in vulnerability is the Easy Six side bet that returns about $89 per shoe.  In this case, LN returns 545% more than Easy Six. These comparisons make it clear that LN is extraordinarily vulnerable to card counting."

[alrelax]

I have my own set of 'guidelines' or 'key triggers' that I have been highly successful at hitting positive on F-7's well over the majority of times as comparing, losses to winning.  I would never and never have wagered every hand for the F-7, never.  But I do not find the Wizard's writing to be accurate in overall outcomes.  Maybe his stats are right, but his deducing down and definitively saying what he did about 7's and 10's, I find to be terribly inaccurate.  Maybe over 1 million shoes, but we do not play 1 million shoes in a night.

"Table 3 indicates the extreme importance of ridding the shoe of 8's and 9's. Also, the 7 is the most important card, as expected, to remain in the shoe. The other cards diminish in value as their pips go down, presumably because they are used in fewer and fewer situations to draw to a dealer total of 7. Working against intuition, the counter's situation improves as zero-valued cards are removed from the deck."   And again, that information comes from someone that claims 'big table' bac only exists in Europe and in the James Bond movies.  He has admitted to rarely, if ever playing baccarat.  Stats are one thing and playing t game is a total other story.  Like driving a car in an arcade video machine and driving on an interstate.  Totally different in every way, shape and form. 

I have won countless times greater on the F-7 without all 10's and a final 7, etc.  I have won countless times greater without the final card 7, period.  6's the best for me followed by 3's and 4's and then by 2's and 5's and than a 7.  Again, for myself.

Here is one for a win of $1,800.00 on a $45.00 wager on the F-7 a few weeks ago I previously posted.

The key is, like a lot wagering in bac--do not define events that have to happen and wager on them to happen in order to win, wager on what is happening and/or for the opportunities that are presenting themselves or possibly will if there are indications as to that is what might occur.

[attach=1]

[Xander]

And again, that information comes from someone that claims 'big table' bac only exists in Europe and in the James Bond movies.  He has admitted to rarely, if ever playing baccarat.  Stats are one thing and playing t game is a total other story.  Like driving a car in an arcade video machine and driving on an interstate.  Totally different in every way, shape and form. 

Ermmm fyi.  Dr. Jacobson is a PhD mathematician and casino consultant, that ran over 100 billion hands to sim the results.  Lol!

[alrelax]

Ermmm fyi.  Dr. Jacobson is a PhD mathematician and casino consultant, that ran over 100 billion hands to sim the results.  Lol!

Please do not assume I was referring to him, I was not.  I was referring to the person that wrote the info contained in the quote I made.  Please, this is why info is twisted up on here and other forums, now you are accusing me of saying what I did about the person you are concerned with.  That quote--the words within my quoted statement are not from your referenced 'Doctor', they are from the person that write them, entirely different. 

[alrelax]

Perhaps:

Have a look at this: https://wizardofodds.com/games/baccarat/dragon-bet/

At the end of the article there is also a link for a Panda bet count as well.

I haven't tried it personally yet however it looks interesting and at 40/1 t may be worth a try.

Awesome wishes,

Garry

Here, let's start all over:


Re: Ez baccarat dragon bet
« Reply #3 on: Today at 01:29:18 PM »

    ReplyReply
    Quote
    Remove
    Split Topic

I have my own set of 'guidelines' or 'key triggers' that I have been highly successful at hitting positive on F-7's well over the majority of times as comparing, losses to winning.  I would never and never have wagered every hand for the F-7, never.  But I do not find the Wizard's writing to be accurate in overall outcomes.  Maybe his stats are right, but his deducing down and definitively saying what he did about 7's and 10's, I find to be terribly inaccurate.  Maybe over 1 million shoes, but we do not play 1 million shoes in a night.

"Table 3 indicates the extreme importance of ridding the shoe of 8's and 9's. Also, the 7 is the most important card, as expected, to remain in the shoe. The other cards diminish in value as their pips go down, presumably because they are used in fewer and fewer situations to draw to a dealer total of 7. Working against intuition, the counter's situation improves as zero-valued cards are removed from the deck."   And again, that information comes from someone that claims 'big table' bac only exists in Europe and in the James Bond movies.  He has admitted to rarely, if ever playing baccarat.  Stats are one thing and playing t game is a total other story.  Like driving a car in an arcade video machine and driving on an interstate.  Totally different in every way, shape and form.

I have won countless times greater on the F-7 without all 10's and a final 7, etc.  I have won countless times greater without the final card 7, period.  6's the best for me followed by 3's and 4's and then by 2's and 5's and than a 7.  Again, for myself.

Here is one for a win of $1,800.00 on a $45.00 wager on the F-7 a few weeks ago I previously posted.

The key is, like a lot wagering in bac--do not define events that have to happen and wager on them to happen in order to win, wager on what is happening and/or for the opportunities that are presenting themselves or possibly will if there are indications as to that is what might occur.

Here, let's include the link, so it is simple as I was already accused of saying what I did about someone other than whom wrote the quote, I quoted:

Again:  "Have a look at this: https://wizardofodds.com/games/baccarat/dragon-bet/"

Table 3 comes from within this article:

"Home › Game Odds & Strategies › Card Counting the Dragon Bet in Baccarat
Card Counting the Dragon Bet in Baccarat"

And, the author of this article, I will quote in his own words, written by him, reference what I said leads me to say--he ha next to no real world experience in baccarat and his statistics suck, IMO--full liability and my research of what he writes!  No real world experience is fantastic, if you live--eat--breath and never leave the classroom!  Again, IMO, experience and real-life world adventures.

Quote:

"Wizard
Administrator
Wizard

Joined: Oct 14, 2009

    Threads: 1043
    Posts: 17462

January 27th, 2018 at 11:05:23 AM
permalink

    Quote: gamerfreak

    I think big table implies that the shoe is passed around the table and the players deal the cards.

I must confess I've never actually played baccarat at a big table. In fact, I have played almost no baccarat at all, as it is a boring coin-flip game. However, and correct me if I'm wrong, a dealer still deals the cards at the big table. I think it is in the James Bond movies where the player does it. I suppose they did it that way in Europe at one time."

There, I DO NOT make stuff up, that is from the doctor wizard of casino everything whom so many idolize, quote and wager and lose their hard earned money because  of.

There, that is what I quoted.  Ref:  "TABLE 3" and I made no reference to----"Dr. Jacobson is a PhD mathematician and casino consultant, that ran over 100 billion hands to sim the results.  Lol!".  Okay?

[Xander]

Wizard of Odds, aka Mike Shackleford is a an actuary.  Just curious...do you have any idea how hard the actuary  exam is to pass?
In short, Mike is a mathematician minus the "Dr.".  When Mike, or Dr. Jacobson tell you the odds, you should believe them!  Both can teach you a great deal about how to exploit the games. 

By the way, did you know that both are/were consultants to casinos?  Mike also taught gaming mathematics at the university.  Dr. Jacobson's credentials speak for themselves as well.

Best of luck!

-Xander

[alrelax]

Wizard of Odds, aka Mike Shackleford is a an actuary.  Just curious...do you have any idea how hard the actuary  exam is to pass?
In short, Mike is a mathematician minus the "Dr.".  When Mike, or Dr. Jacobson tell you the odds, you should believe them!  Both can teach you a great deal about how to exploit the games. 

By the way, did you know that both are/were consultants to casinos?  Mike also taught gaming mathematics at the university.  Dr. Jacobson's credentials speak for themselves as well.

Best of luck!

-Xander

Yes, I do and have known that.

Yes, I understand their mathematical skills and knowledge. 

Yes, their statistics and their simulations/theories are probably correct for the series and the amount of shoes that they test.  I have never challenged those or said those were wrong or inaccurate, not by any means.  And if I did, it was meant in the context of what I was sitting in front of or have experienced for the evening or session, etc. 

However, I have played this game since Atlantic City came about continuously.  I have learned boats loads about the reality of gambling, gambling players, the casino, psychology, the effects of winning and losing, the benefits of deciphering certain things the game brings about, the system of hosting--comps--average plays--casino comp theory--money management--benefits of a player remaining neutral--reality of bank rolls and buy-ins, the application of a players mind and what he is engaged in, etc., etc., and so on. 

In other words, 'tons of stuff'.  I do not play every hand/every situation--event/every shoe the same and have no 'system or preset scheduled beliefs', with wagering schedules, etc.  IMO, if one does--you will at best (hopefully) break even eventually.  I wholeheartedly, through my experience believe that there are numerous opportunities and events that might come about and when they do--wagering for a definitive type of outcome, will have devastating results to a serious player. 

It is the same exact thing in my business of hazardous materials and high risk incident management.  I have personally witnessed many very intelligent and highly educated engineers coming on scene in the field during an emergency.  Basically they know more than me in countless ways about chemical composition and the technical aspect of the spilled or released product.  But as far as cleaning up the site with the Department of Transportation or County Emergency Managers and the State Environmental Officials as well as the EPA, Railroad Environmental Departments or the Bureau of Indian Affairs,  with all the other restrictions, rules and regulations we have to and do follow, those highly educated and super-university diploma holding professors, engineers and related, are bothersome, get in the way, apply needless information and data having no value whatsoever in the field, do not meet emergency response certifications and lack extreme basic sense and protocols at the sit--so many times.  There are countless courses, certifications and much needed experience to work in the field, safely, legally and meeting regulations set forth by the state and the federal governments, that renders the type of people with great knoweldge, completely useless and even illegal in the field at an emergency site. 

The same thing IMO, holds true for the casino gambling table in so many ways.  I do have non-mechanical and non preset wagering that works much higher than the majority of the times for me.  I have attempted to identify many of them within my writing here and the reason so many, such as yourself--do not agree with me and desire to challenge, twist my words around, add innuendoes and spar--is that you follow and abide by the mathematical statistics of the game of baccarat.  Period.  Not much room for discussion because  you and some others like yourself will continually challenge, without offering your 'holy-grail' that allow you to continually win and be so successful at the game.  Are you actually wealthy and very successful in the classical definition of those words at playing baccarat?  I don't know about the words and the challenges you consistently offer on the board-leaves many to believe you are.  All fine and I am happy for you if you are.  But I know, IMO and experience, for the same thing with using the results of both of those individuals you endorse and follow, will allow you to win and lose.  Again (IMO and experience) boils down to all the things I have defined, that has nothing or not much to do with the math and the statistics of game as to what will or will not happen.  There is so much more to the game of baccarat (in a live casino wagering actual money) rather than sitting at home on the computer in theory or even on-line gambling.   

So the same thing holds true, if you do not employ many or all the this I have written about, defined, suggested and exploited myself, there is no possible way you can multiple and continue winning using your conversion of mathematical statics of the game or by sprinkling magical dust on the cards in front of you, while you go through a one minute ritual of peeling and peeking at the cards themselves.  Period, pretty much the end of the story. 

So, in this case and all others it is really no darn different than the old fashioned car drag strip.  The first one to the end wins.  No matter what colors, what training, what beer they drink, whom their sponsors are what energy drinks or soda pop they have decals for or if one is a country boy or an acid rocker with tattoos over his eyes and nipples.  Does not matter.  If my car beat yours, I was faster, drove better, had more skill and had a better pit crew and took advantage of other situations I found at the time, no matter what they were.  As long as I did not get disqualified for cheating or getting caught at cheating, I won fair and square and no matter the reason, I WON!  Period.  If your car beat mine, the same thing applies to you.  Period.  However, back in the pits, the same exact thing will be going one that happens at the baccarat table.  You will come over to me and say, "Yeah.....but---------", and then go on about how your lane had a bit of extra oily media & debris that gave me an advantage and only because  of that, I was able to beat you but in all actuality, you are better, faster and more experienced than myself, etc., etc., and so on and forth.  As you poke me in the chest and tell me all that gibberish and self serving rubbish, while everyone has a beer or a Corona and a lime or a paper plate of nachos-cheese and jalapenos in front of them watching and waiting for the fight to break out.  And back at the casino, you and others are there pushing money back and forth and applying mathematical statistical data and all that.  Great!  Fantastic!  I begin playing and it is like my buddy H-Money that called me.  Say I was at the shoe.  When those bankers came along for 6 Bankers right after a 9 handed chop-chop, I pounced on it--for whatever reason I convinced myself or that I saw coming.  Does not matter the reason.  Say I wagered $500.00, parlayed a couple of times.  While the rest of the table cited all kinds of 'cut' has to come out reasons.  I won 6 times lost once, they lost 5 times and won once.  It also happiness with a 20 series chop-chop event and as well with a 15 or 20 handed repeating banker or player run. 

That same thing I referred to happened at the baccarat table.  H-Money my buddy called me a few weeks ago when he was continually losing money at the tables.  He tells me, "Hey Glen tell me what I should do.  The shoe started out and it was 9 time chop-chop and then 6 bankers came out and then 3 pairs of doubles and then 6 more bankers that matched exactly the first little run of bankers".  Totally impossible without being there and seeing what the numbers of the winning and losing hands were and many other things.  Even then, of course--my way of identifying events and opportunities work and do not work.  The trick that I mastered and serves me well, is within my money management, my side parlays, a bit of positive progressions, my beliefs and ability to identify certain events and as well--have the knoweldge and the willpower to 'pounce on them' while staying completely neutral and viewing as well as believing, I am using tools instead of money, etc., and everything else (once again stating) that I have written about and that works well or me.  Can I lose with my knowledge and my system of beliefs?  YES.  Can I win with them?  YES.  But when I won over $40,000.00 the other week I wrote about and posted pictures of, I lost about $15,000.00 of it one night employing what I call stupid statistical intelligence and following what I thought would be another easy and fun win.  I was dead wrong and no matter what I did, follow other players, follow myself, listen to dealers, wager on superstition or employ what I did on other shoes or the exact opposite, I would lose.  I went against everything I write about and know--in other words I admit what almost no one this board will admit, I was dead-on 100% stupid and foolish thinking I could do something that I would overrule and command with knowledge and experience.  And the irony of it was, if I did employ and use my 'systems' that I adopted and write about--I would not have lost that $15,000.00 I brought to the casino.  If you cannot or will not think and apply what will govern and assist you to win large and lose small, you will suffer and suffer with great pain at the game of baccarat.  Simple, an IMO--period.   You can debate that, I cannot and will not.

So in closing, do my systems work, yes for me. Will they work for another player, sure why not?  Are they exclusive to myself?  In some ways yes and some ways no.  Why?  Because I tailor them to my own situation, beliefs and financial position.  I truly gamble what I have set aside and I do it with the protocol that my buy-ins are tools and my tool box is strong and can absorb the loss or loan out of tools until I replace them.  I have three sets of financial envelopes.  Every week or two I build them or use them for their sources.  One is for all household expenses, another is for the kids and my family and future reserves.  The third is for gaming.  None of the envelopes or banks are ever intermingled, which i learned a while ago is dead-on wrong.  My buy-ins are a small portion of my bank roll.  My wins far out number the amounts of my losses and I also reset and refresh during a shoe as well as at the end of the shoe and most importantly, at the end of each winning and losing session.  I did not at the end of the 3rd one a few weeks ago and that is why I lost  $15,000.00 instead of $600.00 to $1,500.00 range.  I proved beyond any reasonable doubt to myself that my systems and beliefs and experiences--if intermingled in my own way, work darn good with great safe-stops and protection. 

I hope this clarifies the misunderstanding you have of me and the failure you show in reading the other writings of mine.  Quite simply, two people playing a pinball machine, each with their own style, beliefs and mixture of feelings, experiences and knowledge of what might or might not happen can easily succeed numerous times or fail countless times.  What leads myself a bit above others,most times--is my ability to cut losses while or before they happen and as well, to compound and quickly build winnings far above the average player that analyzes the wrong way into the shoe before it is happening or ever will come about while he is there gambling. 

But, as far as following a certain written protocol based upon mathematical statistics that a certain hand or even number of hands will produce a certain outcome in baccarat, is beyond foolish and absurd to me.  And, if that does work--by all means follow it and stay within the casino without challenging me by twisting my words and looking to spar. Then when you tire of winning, contribute the great knowledge you possess to the board and others.   

[Xander]

Alrelax,

I'm glad what you're doing is working well for you. 

As a professional gambler I've found that with some gambler's... experience can be detrimental.  As an AP it's more important to rely on solid data, facts, and math...rather than experiences.   Relying on experience rather than data/math can lead to poor decision making.  The reason is that our memory of events can become biased based on our mood at the time of the experiences.  I've found it easier to train a successful AP that's new to the game, because they're a blank slate, void of superstitions and fallacies.

Money management and gaming discipline are the easiest part of being an AP.  Everything that really needs to be said about them can be said in just a paragraph or two at most.  Unfortunately way way way too much time is wasted discussing them, rather than discussing how to actually get the best edge.  When playing, it's more important to rely on the data, math, the fundamentals, and the optimum play strategy.   Money management is nothing more than a percentage of the bankroll based on the probability of ruin and (edge/expectancy x confidence level).    As far as win goals, etc...that's for gamblers, not APs.  Our goal is to win as much as possible.  The bigger question is whether to milk a situation or burn it down and risk being trespassed.

-Xander

[Mike]

The key is, like a lot wagering in bac--do not define events that have to happen and wager on them to happen in order to win, wager on what is happening and/or for the opportunities that are presenting themselves or possibly will if there are indications as to that is what might occur.

Why should wagering on what is happening make any difference? It would only have merit if what is happening is more likely to continue (at least in the short term) than not. Where is the math or stats which back up this assertion?

You see the problem : you dismiss the long term statistics of events which "have to happen" because you only play "in the short term". And I agree ; sometimes what "has to happen" may actually happen in a shoe, sometimes it won't (and even it does, it may not happen in the ORDER that you need it to happen in order to win).

But in order for your alternative hypothesis (that what is currently happening is a better bet) to have any weight behind it, you need math or STATISTICS to prove it. But you've already explained why using statistics as guide to bet selection is ineffective (and I agree).

See the contradiction? 

Same goes for "opportunities" and "indications". An indication as to what might occur (and there obviously has to be a better than even chance that it will occur, given the indicator, otherwise it's no better than a blind guess) can only be recognized as such if you have STATISTICS (or math) to back it up, but you (rightly) deny that any such statistics are of practical use.

[alrelax]

Why should wagering on what is happening make any difference? It would only have merit if what is happening is more likely to continue (at least in the short term) than not. Where is the math or stats which back up this assertion?

You see the problem : you dismiss the long term statistics of events which "have to happen" because you only play "in the short term". And I agree ; sometimes what "has to happen" may actually happen in a shoe, sometimes it won't (and even it does, it may not happen in the ORDER that you need it to happen in order to win).

But in order for your alternative hypothesis (that what is currently happening is a better bet) to have any weight behind it, you need math or STATISTICS to prove it. But you've already explained why using statistics as guide to bet selection is ineffective (and I agree).

See the contradiction? 

Same goes for "opportunities" and "indications". An indication as to what might occur (and there obviously has to be a better than even chance that it will occur, given the indicator, otherwise it's no better than a blind guess) can only be recognized as such if you have STATISTICS (or math) to back it up, but you (rightly) deny that any such statistics are of practical use.

Mike,
Your mathematical and definite wagering system is brilliant and well defined by yourself and the mathematical professors (Mike S. & Bill E) along with yours and theirs contribution to the gambling players of the world playing Baccarat. Thank you I appreciate it.

And there is something I wrote in the month of April of last year right about this time called randomness equality and bias it was an article I wrote numbered, 8 out of 10 in a series. It is within my blog in the highlighted section on the very first page. Now we're going to turn this thread back over to a roulette ghost as it is his, and this is inappropriate to go back and forth within his thread, but thanks anyway.

[alrelax]

Alrelax,

I'm glad what you're doing is working well for you. 

As a professional gambler I've found that with some gambler's... experience can be detrimental.  As an AP it's more important to rely on solid data, facts, and math...rather than experiences.   Relying on experience rather than data/math can lead to poor decision making.  The reason is that our memory of events can become biased based on our mood at the time of the experiences.  I've found it easier to train a successful AP that's new to the game, because they're a blank slate, void of superstitions and fallacies.

Money management and gaming discipline are the easiest part of being an AP.  Everything that really needs to be said about them can be said in just a paragraph or two at most.  Unfortunately way way way too much time is wasted discussing them, rather than discussing how to actually get the best edge.  When playing, it's more important to rely on the data, math, the fundamentals, and the optimum play strategy.   Money management is nothing more than a percentage of the bankroll based on the probability of ruin and (edge/expectancy x confidence level).    As far as win goals, etc...that's for gamblers, not APs.  Our goal is to win as much as possible.  The bigger question is whether to milk a situation or burn it down and risk being trespassed.

-Xander

First of all I said the same exact thing that you said you've just twisted my words around or if you did not do that you've always known that what you probably did because it's not rocket science and you just use other words. Secondly, for playing baccarat no one has ever got trespassed at any casino I've been at or that my family members have worked at, and that's quite a lot of them and upper management in the bigger gaming jurisdictions unless they're cheating or doing something that the Tran gang has done. But strictly for winning at baccarat no one has ever been asked not to play or told that they cannot play it just does not happen except in fallacy or possibly outside of the USA. Other games yes baccarat never in the United States. Not one article, not one person has been barred or trespassed from winning at the game of baccarat, let's make that clear.

There is something I wrote April 17th of last year it's in my highlighted section of my blog, entitled Randomness it was Article number 8 of a series of 10.  Exactly what I said is contained in that article explained most of what you are claiming.  I believe how I described it in my own words and experiences for the people and I've had much positive comment on it. I can't go back and forth with in roulette ghosts thread here as I feel it's inappropriate and his space with different content.

Oh yeah also the money management system that I've talked about in detail as you kind of pointed out explicitly is that it allows me to win as much as I can, with the situation and  it governs me and it's the best thing that I've ever found in that department.  By the way you fail to read many of the things I write and I have explicitly said I have no win goals, I do not do the loss stop thing with so many units or the win stop, I am definitively against it for myself and anyone I gamble with.  I have no win goals I have zero win goals to make it clear, IMO they haunt a player. Thank you.

Thanks for posting I appreciate it.

[Mike]

Mike,
Your mathematical and definite wagering system is brilliant and well defined by yourself and the mathematical professors (Mike S. & Bill E) along with yours and theirs contribution to the gambling players of the world playing Baccarat. Thank you I appreciate it.

lol, ignore what I actually wrote and my questions, substitute for it something I didn't write and then be sarcastic about what you made up. Nice work, especially for a moderator.

[Xander]

My main game is roulette.  And yes I have been tresspassed several times. 

I have not been banned for playing bac, but associates have.  Several AP sort/edge players have been.
It is far less common though to be banned as an AP bac player.

You forget, I'm a professional player.  I mean no disrespect, but as a fulltime ap I have more experiences inside the casino than most recreational players such as yourself.  I also keep up to date on the latest casino risk management news, etc and network with other aps and some consultants.

Regarding this Dragon bet...the edge is toO low.  I wouldn't cross the street to play it.  However lucky nines was very lucrative.  APs don't chase trends, they chase opportunities.