+ Register

[alrelax]

Found this photo on my phone back from 2020.  I don't believe I ever posted it. 

Good examples of Sections, Equaling Out, and most of all the 14 Bankers followed by a quick makeup of 12 players almost immediately. 

Will comment more later tonight. 

According to my note in my phone, I'm missing the last two hands when I snapped this picture.  There was another consecutive Player and the last hand was a Banker. 

[alrelax]

Highlights I will lay out and discuss:

1)  Sections

2)  Player strong in beginning

3)  Banker streak and quick player follow up

4)  Equalling out +10/+20

5)  Banker 1s and 2s with a single 3 in the beginning

6)  Banker 4 and the second 4 and then the streak

[alrelax]

Sections 1, 2 and 3.

[alrelax]

Okay let's discuss Sections/Turning Points first.  Look at the shoe above, I marked up 3 Sections within it. 

Goal.  A tangible, viable item, that if realized and recognized is extremely powerful when wagered with a positive progression. 

My Reasoning.  The reasoning for the 3 to 5 Sections is based on tens of thousands of live shoes being witnessed and played by myself, it is extremely rare for more than one half of the shoe to stay the same.  Meaning, all chops, all doubles, all streaks by one or two or even three or four times, etc., etc., and so on.  The common amount (could be a bit subjective to each of us, the actual number of hands) I would say is right around 15 to 20.  Therefore, at times a shoe of 80 hands would equal 4 Sections of 20 and as well, might equal 5 Sections of 15 and so on.  But no less than 3 and greater than 5.

Why My Reasoning Works.  There are numerous ways I use my Sections & Turning Points.  I have rarely (extremely rare I stress) seen repetitive whole shoe patterns and trends or presentments, whatever you wish to call them, repeat themselves over and over and over again for much more than one third of the shoe and even less, over a half of shoe.  After tens of thousands of shoes, I know it would be in the rare classification for there to be much greater than 15 alternating chops in a row, or greater than 12 doubles in a row, or more than eight 1s and 3s, or more than 3 streaks of greater than 10 in a row, etc., in one shoe.  I hope my point is coming across.

Sections 1-2-3 Defined for Above Shoe.  Turning point from Section 1 to 2.  The double tie followed by a single bank.  When the players appeared after that single banker, I marked up the end of Section 1 on my card.  11 players Vs. 3 bankers. 

Turning point from Section 2 to 3.  When the 4 bankers appeared I marked up the turning point.  Because there was 20 hands played, plus the fact the bankers did a first substantial showing after a failed one time 3 naturals IAR followed by a cut.  19 players Vs. 11 bankers.

Why No Section 4?  Normally I would have had a fourth Section right after that 14 IAR Banker streak.  But it was followed by 4 IAR players, consistently and extremely strong current Section, that was continuing so I just left it with Section 3 to end. The tie and one additional player, made up my mind to leave it without the 4th at that point. 

Likewise, when repetitive patterns, trends or groups of presentments seem to come back around, it would be later in the shoe, if they do at all. Sections & Turning Points can certainly highlight the groupings of presentments within their greatest appearing clumps or groups.  Weak or Strong in whatever the shoe is producing can be numerous things.  Streaks, Chops, Doubles, Ones and Threes, etc.  Sections & Turning Points assists me to define current presentments and the limited time they usually appear, narrowing down the possibilities of a BETTER WAGER or a WAGER WITH GREATER POSSIBILITY to win.

Now for a recap from a more technical post I made a while back and a comment from one of the most admired posters/player at B&M casinos that ever had a forum presence.

From 2019:

(NOTE:  Turning Points coincide with Sections.  Without Sections, Turing Points are worthless for the most part, without Turning Points, Sections are worthless for the most part as well.)

There are two ways to assist in determining where a Turning Point should be.  One, is by a definitive amount of hands played out; And two, is by the values of the hands being played out in each hands total.

1)  There will be at least 2, but usually 3 or 4 Turning Points per shoe, coinciding with the 3-4 or 5 Sections.  You cannot get the Sections and the Turning Points confused or fail to recognize them.  They will both exist and always be there in each and every single shoe. 

The definitive amount of hands will be somewhere from 15 to 25 per Section separated thereafter by a Turning Point.  The Turning Point is not defined by what we wish, desire or need to be presented in order to match up to your schedule of wagers we set according to anything.  Turning Points are to be set by the shoe's presentments.   

2)  The more complicated part and as well, subjective to one's interpretation, are the values of the hands being played out.  To me, as well as many others that I regularly play baccarat with, are the hand values.  Determining hand values and how those can and will identify a section within a Section, also known as clumping, will usually present itself, somewhere within the highest majority of most shoes.  You must be alert, conscious of what it is, looking for it, neutral and the many other things I have identified and written about that will lend advantages to you in the recognition of just that. 

Above all else, you must not attempt to change the shoe presentments and wager according to a pre-scheduled mechanical and thought out chain of event you wish to happen.  That will only produce false-positives that will lead you down a path you wish you never entered.  Realizing values of the presented hands are essential to capitalizing on the advantage that will allow you to literally, "Pounce on It". 

I am not going down the road of math, statistics or scientific probability of computer generated, long term testing or research results, etc., or anything of the like.  If you believe in those, STOP reading now and move on.  We do not see eye-to-eye or anything that will allow us to interface and learn from each other.  Reason being, anyone into math, statistics, or scientific probability measured in percentages can justify just about anything outside of the casino and away from actual play.  The long term simply does not matter/apply to a random game where a person is only playing a few shoes, even 10 shoes or so, even 15.  All the math and all the stats apply far less than 50% of the time with the amount of shoes or hands a player will sit in front of for a session.  If you are neutral and open minded and desiring to gain an advantage in baccarat, read on, comment, implement and discuss.

Either P or B, or both, can clump within a Section.  A great advantage to a person wagering is being able to get on the right side or the right events within any Section with some strong positive progression or parlay wagering.  For example the shoe below had a strong Section 2 as well as a strong Section 1.  Sections 3 and 4 would be the harder ones for myself to play.  After Sections 1 and 2, myself--I was done with the shoe and cashed out. 

3rd Card continuous additions or reductions in hand value.  Pay attention because this is what more clumping and more streaks or chop-chop or any other section of events with consistency is made up from. 

As an example I will post a shoe from the other night at the casino.  4 Sections with 3 Turning Points.  The first clump came at the beginning of the 2nd Section. 

P
B-B
P
B
P
B-B
P                                      (Section 1)
B-B
P-P
B
P-P
B
P
B
_______________________________________________________

P-P-T-T-P-P-P-P-P-P
B-B-B-B                                  (Section 2)
P-P-P
B-B
P
_______________________________________________________

B-B-T
P-P
B
P-P                                        (Section 3)
B
P-T-P-P-P
B
P-P-T
_______________________________________________________

B
P
B-B
P
B-B
P                                    (Section 4)
B
P
B
P
B-B
P-T-P-P-T
*******************************************************

FINAL:
Banker=30
Player=39
Ties=7
Panda 8s=2
Fortune 7s=3
3 Card 8/9s=1

TOTAL COUNTS BY SECTIONS:
Section 1=Player 9, Banker 10
Section 2=Player 21, Banker 16
Section 3=Player 31, Banker 21
Section 4=Player 39, Banker 30

Please refer to the + - 10/+ - 20 Count I have detailed in other threads.  This sticks more than almost anything other consistent happening throughout the shoe, IMO, experience and witnessing over the years.

This particular shoe finished with a Player +9.  Use the + or - as one guideline, coupled with others that are presenting themselves, will allow you to gain a certain advantage and be there when something develops on the correct side.  Rather than joining most everyone with the verbal astonishment's and open mouth disbelief's as for example, how the Players side can present 12 straight Players with 5 naturals, and the other 7 Player wins having a 3rd card bring the Players side total to either 8 or 9 nearly every time. 

Comment by Lungyeh (whom I talked with yesterday and he is doing absolutely great and is in good health):

"This is a good narrative for most who wants to win. A good description of the background of the game. It is difficult to do it precisely as you go along especially when you are also betting. Glen has done it with much effort, and with some adjustments in retrospect, I would think.

Anyway, the analysis of each shoe into sections is one thing. Each section will appeal to different types of players. A dragon player may make a killing a n one section. A chop chop guy in another section while a random player in yet another section. Point to be made is, like Glen pointed out, do you have the patience to wait for the section that suits your personality profile? Such sections sometimes don't happen. There are a few, very few, who have the flexibility to be able to bend to the wind and don't break. Able to see each different section of games are at play and capitalize on it

Anyway, good piece. Keep the articles coming Glen."


   

[alrelax]

Okay second, let's discuss Players strong in the Beginning.  Look at the shoe above, you will clearly see it.

Another love-hate within this game. But IMO and experiences, more serious clumping and streaks in the beginning 1/3 of the shoe belong to the players. 

Another classic example of why flat  betting the bankers as so many say on all the forums and in so many publications will net you so much money, this is how it will really hurt you in the short run of the shoe as well as the entire shoe.  Because, and you can debate this until you're blue in the face, if you flat bet the bankers by the time you got to that 14 IAR Banker streak and all those four IAR bankers you would still be fat betting  because you would barely be getting your money back and you wouldn't risk it again. Armchair quarterbacking, you could say you would but at the actual tables you will not.

When it is happening, as with most other things, follow it. Leave your desires elsewhere when you sit down. I've said it countless times. Play the shoe as it is being presented, do not wager requiring the shoe to match your desires and your plan.

But IMO and decades of B&M play, there are a heck of a lot more player clumping/streaks in the beginning as well as chop or 1s and 2s.

Look at the shoes I posted in the attached thread.  Look at the players in the beginning.  Yes, anything can happen, but more so than bankers clumping and streaking in the beginning, my experience is, it does favor players for some kind of domination in the first 1/3.

https://betselection.cc/index.php?topic=11423.15

[alrelax]

I would like to take a short break here and comment on a very sad memory of this shoe. 

There was a guy playing at another table and when the banker of 14 came along, most all the seated players were on the bankers side.  Around hand 6, most all are pumping it up with a few large positive progression wagers out on the bankers.  Hand 6  bankers win, high fives and screaming, go banker, banker in for the kill, etc., etc., etc.  Guy comes over from another table puts 1,500 on the players with the comment, bankers are done.  Bankers win again.  Hand 8, the guy pumps it up to 3,000 on the players.  Bankers win again. Hand 9, the guy pumps it up to 6,000 on the players.  The hand was a tie.  The guy gets extremely verbal with numerous sediments about cutting after a tie, etc.  Hand 10 and he remains on players with his 6,000.  He is standing so he can't touch the cards (this was a Macau/touch game) so the dealer flips a natural 8 for the players. The guy is fist pumping into the air.  Verbalizing that he just won an easy 1,500 and how everyone sticking on the bankers was just plain foolish.  Well, the player with a table max bet (2-5,000 chips) gets the bankers cards.  Flips one which was an Ace.  Peeks at the second one and announces he has a three line card.  Says out loud, you know-three lines, three means a possible three outcomes-win, tie or lose.  The whole table breaks out laughing.  Then the chant for a snowman breaks out.  The guy working the cards became extremely slow and peeking and peeling back on the vertical end.  Finally announced, no worries at all, we got at least a 7 my peeps.  The snowman chant gets louder.  The guy turns the card around and begins his super slow and methodical peel back.  He looks up and smiles.  Looks over at the guy standing that was fist pumping and points his finger at him and shakes it.  The guy says, problem for you pal.  Guy flips over the 8.

I remember all that like it was last weekend. 

Hand 11 comes and the guy put 3,000 up on the players again.  Banker wins.  You can see the look of hurt and how stupid am I being, in the guys face very clear.  Hand 12 he puts up his classic but failing martingale of 6,000.  Tie comes out.  He stays on the player and everyone is telling him to switch up or stay out.  He mumbles something about how everyone will witness the players make it's come back.  Hand 13 produces another bankers win and the guy puts 9,000 on the 14th hand, once again on the players.  Said he was going to recoup his 9,000 just lost and be down the 10,500. Hand 14 produces another winning banker.  He retreats away from the table and the dealer tells us, just about all that 25,000 he just lost came from wins he had the other night which were well above his normal wagering amounts, etc. 

No matter what, you can't change the shoe from doing what it's going to do!

[Albalaha]

With my variance management rules he could have won huge. Bankers and Players both do fine in the long run but people start playing martingale type suicidal idea that can win the least and lose the maximum. Strange to see such people in plenty still.

[8OR9]

"But IMO and decades of B&M play, there are a heck of a lot more player clumping/streaks in the beginning as well as chop or 1s and 2s."        From post # 4 above

For me, the most important statistic in baccarat is that "approximately, in the long run"  88% of baccarat hands will be comprised of runs or 3 or less in each shoe
  I repeat again, that's in the long run....lots of chops, 1-2'2    2-2's    3-3's
1-3's  2-3's    etc etc etc

[alrelax]

For me, the most important statistic in baccarat is that "approximately, in the long run"  88% of baccarat hands will be comprised of runs or 3 or less in each shoe
  I repeat again, that's in the long run

Absolutely, singles, then doubles, then triples.  Going to a 4 IAR, really jumps higher in the result to cut after the 3 IAR.

But, there are a heck of a lot of 4s and 5s. 

Disclosure:  I am not telling anyone what to wager, trigger wise.  I am merely sharing an actual B&M shoe and experiences from the casino.  As well, my thoughts, actions, wagers, etc.

Stats are stats, great for testing and informational data.  Stats seldom apply to 80 hands of a shoe or two if you are going to base wagers according to statistical results.  IMO and experiences.   

[alrelax]

Okay third, let's discuss the Banker Streak and Player Catch Up. 

What happened in the shoe is typical and is not rare except for the ending from hand 49 on. Hand 49 is the second hand after the natural tie, third hand of the banker streak. 

As I have said countless times, follow what the shoe is doing. Not what you desire—to have the shoe meet your beliefs etc. 

14 IAR is not a common event. But when it presents it—the same as an extended chop chop, ones and twos, doubles and so on, wager on it.  Win one, pump it up, and pull down every forthcoming win, not thinking about the cut, not attempting to figure anything out, just merely losing the last one (win many-lose 1) when it does finally cut to the opposite side. 

I do recall on this streak as well as a very common belief is pulling down or switching sides when a tie occurs. Look before this banker streak and you'll see five out of six ties did cut to the opposite side.  That is where so many people do give back their wins or fail to win because they are demanding the shoe meet their own beliefs.  Very common misbelief, as a person wagers for the cut after a tie and wins, he remembers that. But when the cut fails to come about, the memory goes by the wayside as to what his belief was and he doesn't remember.  Thus, just about everything appearing can repeat itself several/numerous times and then will not.  Which is why, if you can be understand and be conscious of my Sections/Turning Points, you allow yourself an easier betting decision with the shoe.

Halfway through the shoe, hand 47, the first natural Banker after the natural tie on the third hand of the streak, almost everyone at the table did move their wagers to the players side, with the reasoning three naturals in a row—-Banker is done. Almost even on the count of the Players and Bankers. Lots of comments about the last part of the shoe will be chop, weak, etc. and so on.

IMO and my experience, once the banker made the fifth win, you should stay on it or not wager at all. To me, that is a clue for at least a couple or a few more bankers to win.

The Players Performs it's Catch Up.

When the players appeared after the 14th Banker IAR, It was a 5 IAR win for the deficient Players side. Bankers were 29, Players were 22 at the end of the bankers  streak.  After the Players 5 IAR it was 29 Bankers and 27 Players.  Then another 2 bankers appeared.  Now it was at 31 Bankers and 27 Players. 

Also a nice repeat/match up tie was another natural tie on that same 3rd row down after the 2nd banker of the streak as well.  Most people placed large wagers on the tie for that one I recall. 

Then a quick 8 Players IAR (pic was taken 2 hands before the ending). End of shoe was 32 Bankers and 35 Players with 12 Ties. 

I do recall most people were extremely conservative with their players wagers.  I can only contribute that to all of the publicity, you tube stuff, publications and forum chatter with so much swearing about bankers having advantages over the players, bankers will win in the long run, flat bet the bankers and a person will make easy money and so on, etc. 

You can view it any way you desire. But the shoe produced a classic near Equaling a Trend for both sides. Which does occur more times than not.  Something that has treated me extremely well with clues that stick out and allow me advantages.

[alrelax]

Wagering or Not.  On the Right Side or Wrong Side.  What the highest majority of baccarat gamblers are affected by.

People play and play and play and believe compelling biases that cannot and will not hold up on a regular and a consistent basis totaling the majority of their play. Period!

'Flip of the Switch'. In other words, the lights were turned out on the player.  He lost once again.  Simple.  As well, once the action starts, say 4 Bankers appear, half the gamblers next to him just know and say out loud, how it has to cut back to the Players side and begin to wager for such.  The rest of the people there, just know it has to continue and streak with the Banker.  So a switch gets flipped in the person's brain somewhere, changing the way we each define the game.

And when you don't have the experience, the knowledge, the insight and much more, the compelling biases are truly overwhelming, 'Flipping of your Switch', when you are in the game playing, actual play with actual money.  And if you lose and are losing more than you are winning, it is not the auto shuffler, it is not the unlucky dealer, it is not you lost count of the VIN/SAP Counts, it is no the failure of the Banker to continually excel the way it is supposed to, it is not the failure of the shoe to produce an exact replication of those 1,000,000 shoes broken down to the 3 or 5 or 10 you sat down to gamble at, etc., etc., and so on.  It was the fault of your wagering in direct conflict with what legitimately came out of the shoe, no matter if you wagered or not. You were just convinced to wager on the losing side because of the numerous factors I wrote about earlier and those factors turn very quickly into strong compelling biases that almost everyone has no idea what they are or how to figure them out.

And therefore, with yourself deep into biases, you play and play and play and believe compelling biases that cannot and will not hold up on a regular and a consistent basis totaling the majority of your play.  Unless and only unless, you can twist, turn and manipulate the same system that legally, with precision a well-planned entire scenario, relies on human nature to wager with their desires coupled with greed, that governs the player based on their beliefs that wreak havoc on their emotional and financial life.

[alrelax]

Okay 4th, let's discuss Equalling Out +10/+20.

Shoes will almost always (KEYWORD ALMOST) always equal out. But it is very easy to have swings of + or -10 and + or -20, in favor of one side or the other.  Use it to your advantage when it is happening as well as, right after it subsided.

For some reason it will run quickly up to 10 and reach a high of 20. At rare times it will go beyond 20, but not very often.

As a mean norm it will be right around the + or -10 count. Usually this will occur in the 1/3 to 1/2 area of the shoe, and hands 25 - 50's.

The correction (equaling out) will come either slowly or on occasion quickly. Here is an example of what I am referring to, that happened the other night. The players were ahead and the banker pulled the correction to equal itself out.

1s, 2s, 3s and a single 4. 

[attachimg=1]

Then it happens.

[attachimg=2]

27 Players to 17 Bankers at hand 44.

And very often the dominant side that will lessen up, once it does, will usually win with only one or two hands only at a time. While the side that will catch up, usually does so in twos, threes, fours and occasionally fives, more than any other combinations.

In the example given, the banker came back super strong, with 3 Fortune 7's, both of the back the back ties were natural 8s and natural 9s, and there was also one three card players 0 with the banker having a three card 9, for a dragon bonus of 30 to 1.  A complete and super dominant second half by the side that was weak prior.

Reference the positioning of the + -10/+ - 20.  Not necessarily in a Section or meant as a Turning point, might very well be spread out over half of a shoe, etc.

I do not specifically mean + - 10/ + -20 will be all streaks or contained within one section. 

The equalization I am referring to is over at least two sections as a norm, because I view almost all shoes as 3 to 5 sections and turning points.

FYI, if I divided up the above shoe into Sections, I would have the Sections with their Turning points as follows:

Section 1:  Hands  1-24
Section 2:  Hands  25-50
Section 3:  Hands  51-64
Section 4:  Hands  65-79

Hope that helps.

[alrelax]

Okay 5th, let's discuss Bankers 1s and 2s with the single 3 IAR, in the beginning half.

To me, the 6 single bankers, one double and a triple Natural Banker are pretty typical, not rare first half of the shoe.

Clearly the players dominated in the beginning. Flat bettors for the bankers got hurt and would have been lucky to get their losing Wagers back if they continued the shoe.

This shoe and its events is such a great example for numerous reasons, but most of all, not to be biased in your wagering beliefs

[alrelax]

Final Comment

Okay 6th, let's discuss the Bankers 4 IAR and the second 4 IAR that started the bankers streak. 

The first 4 IAR bankers followed by the 3 players IAR and then the 4 more IAR bankers (1 tie) was my clue as to either a players or bankers streak of 6-7-8 was likely.  My "tap on the shoulder" was that clump of 4Bs-3Ps-4Bs and the clincher was that 5th IAR bankers. I guess a good way to define the feeling was, the shoe turned strong and getting stronger. 

As I just said, when the fifth banker appeared, that was my lock to press up in stay Bankers until it cut to the players. Thus, only losing the very last wager. No guessing, no contemplating moving to the cut, nothing but stick and win with no thinking whatsoever.

After the first player appeared following the bankers streak, I did bet the next two on the bankers and lost. But I realized what was happening. And that was the players catch up and equaling out was occurring. I stuck with the players until the end, losing those two bankers that appeared. So I lost five wagers after the banker streak but I won a total of 10 out of the 15 hands.

[KungFuBac]

Thx for pic/post alrelax.

Re: First pic with 14B streak. Interesting tote board and mostly typical until that 14B streak. In hindsight I don't think this would have been a lucrative shoe for me.

IMO and contrary to what some may think that most players would have made thousands. If I was a betting man (and I am) I would bet that several of my typical daily table mates would have busted on that 14B run by running a Marty as anti-B. Probably 1 or 2 players would have been riding the B streak, though probably not pressing on each win to the end. Hopefully I am wrong with this hypothesis.

Along the same thinking as 8OR9 above I would have likely picked up a few wins in front half of shoe though probably no pospro W streaks longer than 2-3 IAR from various spots.

Re:14B streak. I would have likely been in anticipatory mode thinking B would try to catch up some and close the gap as we approached the latter third of shoe. I would probably think the closing-of-gap would occur in patterns such as 3-1 or 4-2,...etc. I would have been wrong.

Personally, I would have possibly looked to the immediate left at the two 4iar columns and the P/T column further to the left and concluded there was a recent shelf at 4 and would have made two attempts anti-B (e.g., 1u, 2.1u), stopped, and possibly made two more attempts anti-B at or near the 7th/8th tier, then watched it to the end. "Maybe" placed a B wager and let it ride (but no pressing).

Hopefully someone would have extracted huge sums of cash. Unfortunately, I do not think it would have been me.


Continued Success,