+ Register

[AsymBacGuy]

Now "selective" Banker only betting is something completely different and not to be confused with Banker Only Every Hand.

Good point. This is the only option we have to get something from this game. Notice that "to get something" I mean certain ploys to reduce the HE up to the point where in some instances we can even invert it.

as.

[alrelax]

But why limit it only to Banker?? The exact same would also hold true for Players, Singles, or Doubles or many other things.     

[AsymBacGuy]

But why limit it only to Banker?? The exact same would also hold true for Players, Singles, or Doubles or many other things.     

Hi Al!
From a strict probability and mathematical point of view, Player cannot get any advantage over the Banker besides the situations where the deck is plentiful of small cards.
Unfortunately any card counting strategy won't give us any help about this (rare) P favourable opportunities.

Hence we must rely upon a general probability to get more Bs than Ps.
Even though it seems that the shoe will produce almost only P hands.

If we think baccarat as a game of considering Banker as our ally and Player as our enemy we are building a preordered plan in the same way any bj player consider high cards vs low cards.

At least we are mathematically reducing the house edge by a 0.18% degree.

Then there are the normal fluctuations of the game, we can easily get 2-3 or more shoes favoring the P side. Or getting shoes with a lot of consecutive B singles, and so on.

The normal deviations can be registered in many different forms: B/P hands gap, singles/doubles on any side, etc.

The deeper we want to register the different B/P outcomes, the better will be the probability to get lower deviations than expected, as any hand is quite dependent from the previous ones.

For example, one player might be ahead after one shoe played; after two shoes the number of players being ahead is logarithmic lower, up to the point where after 10 shoes played the number of winning players will be very very low, if any.

Of course everything will depend about the real number of hands wagered. Let's say any player had bet 2/3 of the total hands of every single shoe.

It's interesting to notice that on average almost no one losing player had lost the expected 1.06% or 1.24% of the total money wagered. But this has to rely upon the bad attitude of many players wanting to break even or to win a lot.

For sure and independently of the strategies involved, we also must deduce that an important role of the bet selection is working.

What worked so far now is not working. Why?

The answer is that the more we play higher will be the probability to get expected results. If we had won by following a general expected results strategy (more B than P, more B streaks than B singles, etc), we know that sooner or later such strategy will be counterbalanced by opposite results. If we had chosen to wager "actual" results, no matter how expected should be or not, we know that sooner or later such trend will be canceled by "counter" results.

Therefore there are two distinct ways of thought: betting toward expcted results and betting toward actual results.

Both reach some points, either positive or negative, but only the expected side values are mathematically known, I mean tending to get well known ratios. And naturally it takes some time to get such expected results to appear.

The problem, not an easy task to accomplish, is just to "limit" at most the random world, so letting some deviations to flow without betting. Actually many players want to get the best of any single pattern every shoe is providing or, even worse, to get expected outcomes within too short time.

The concept that after 10 or more played shoes very few players will be winning (and the losing ones are well more behind than the 1% they are entitled to) should be taken just on the opposite side of the medal.

No matter what we are playing, there are two ratios we should care of: the W/L ratio and the expected ratio of various outcomes. But always wagering Player we know that we'll get more losses than wins and vice versa. And any mix of the two can only add confusion to the whole picture.

Imo, the most important features any player should look for are the old ones: waiting and trying to get the best of the most likely outcome in its various forms.
Knowing that the heaven and the hell can only exist on the shortert terms.

as. 

     


       

   

   



     

[alrelax]

There are elaborate mathematical and statically numbers that mean literally ZIP when sitting down to play 2 or 4 or 5 shoes at a casino. Doesn't matter what those 100,000 or 10,000,000 hands showed!

Likewise, there are different approaches to tackle winning. Does not matter if you are wagering on Banker, Player, Chop, Doubles, Streaks, F-7's, are 25 other numerous classified traits of the game.

My approach works far better then the average player sitting there with their score card vertical and wagering on so and so because there never was more than 3 or 2 or 4 in a row or because it cuts every time on a natural or the other 20 insane reasoning 'the' all seem to have.

[AsymBacGuy]

My approach works far better then the average player sitting there with their score card vertical and wagering on so and so because there never was more than 3 or 2 or 4 in a row or because it cuts every time on a natural or the other 20 insane reasoning 'the' all seem to have.

Average players don't count :-)

as. 

 

[ProfessorSlot]

Hey guys,

New to this forum and come from Australia.

I am a newish Bacarrat player, playing for about 5 years in brick and mortar casino here in Sydney

Just wondering if anyone has flat bet on bank before. I would just like to hear some feedback. So far this works pretty well and it profitable for me to take a 2 unit profit every time I play. Even on player strong shoes, I can wait it out and get my profit on the next one.

Has anyone ever tried this before at a real casino???

Cheers guys.

You mention that you're successful baccarat player for 5 years so I don't consider you a newbie. That's already pretty good years and if you are successful in that method don't ever think of altering it. Kudos to you because never tried it yet but I find it very entertaining and I'm amaze. For now, I am still in the process of learning the flat betting and hoping to try this out soon.

[alrelax]

Average players don't count :-)

as. 

Average Better=The Highest Majority of Players I come in contact with.