+ Register

[alrelax]

Is it 'Beatable'?  Or, is it 'Not-Beatable'?

Here is something I found on the board and it does raise some issues, mainly to educate those that are new to the game and those that have played for a while and are just being stubborn and failing to realize why they do not prevail much more than they actually do.

"Claiming that the game is not mathematically beatable, why are they on here?" 

Those kind of statements, IMO—come from the members with a commercial purpose of being here of some type.  Also, there are a certain breed and mentality of member that feels a need and desire to gang-up with those of a commercial endeavor to help support them and fight the other members in the name of their so-called comrade and against those that tell the truth, share their knowledge and experience as well as discredit fallacies and sheer hype that will only hurt a player financially.  Both groups of people are generally offensive in nature and they twist statements and posts in their attempt to discredit other members and give themselves some type of credence or position. 

One can compare what I am trying to say to going to one of two classes.  The first would be to an instructor that is just taking up space and just trying to fulfill his space until the class is over, each day as well as the entire course.  The instructor has a set plan he adopted from 'somewhere' and generally knows nothing more other than, what the content he is throwing out that most likely was pre-packaged and pre-planned by others.  When any interested students of the course asks questions, they are almost always answered in one of two ways.  Either, 'look it up and do you own research rather than seeking the easy way out', or 'That is not part of what the course content is, that is of no relevance'.  Then there is the second instructor.  He runs a classroom that asks many questions and each and every one of them is met with answers and reasoning's as well as discussion and content.  Subject matter is learned rather than a course content being temporarily absorb to pass a test and the entire course taught almost nothing about the subject to the students that would be truly useful.  The instructor clearly defines every 'how and why' with his own knowledge and experience. 

With that said, I shall continue.  Is baccarat beatable or not?  It is not, in the sense of learning or discovering or purchasing a system that will show the player how to make bet placement scheduled wagers and continually win.  Whether that is advertised at 75% or 87% or 90%, etc. However, there are numerous advantages a player can give himself. 

The knowledge and the experience of others that show such things as the proper and guaranteed money management of 'win money', positive progressions of wagering for shoe presentments that allow a player to capitalize on opportunities, side parlaying wagers that are built up out of win money and removed from your chip stack, as well as numerous other factual results that have residually shown themselves I have written about.  Those things have tremendously allowed me to prevail much more than lose a session.  In consistent play—yes.  Every shoe—every session—no.  But, overall most definitely. 

And, the other question that is presented by another on this board attempting to discredit and lend itself to the exposure of 'something', is the following:  "If someone is smart enough to know that 'it' cannot be beaten and loss is inevitable, why the hell is he a member of a board like this". 

Using part of their own lingo and terms, I shall answer that.  You can think out of the box all you desire, math and science are not static or flawless.  However, math and science will not provide a way to consistently by any means, beat the game—hand after hand or shoe after shoe with any reasonable identifying trends, patterns or any other labeled events allowing the gambler to have a consistent win with scheduled bet placement wagers of any type.  For the simple proven fact since the 1950's that since baccarat came to the USA from Cuba proved.  The same bet placement method employed that allows you to win will also be the exact same one that will cause you to lose.  Period.

The key to baccarat is not in bet placement once a player understands the basics of the game and what will probably not happen in the terms of patterns, trends or events.  It is strictly the frame-of-mind, psych and the player's ability to realize with 100% consciousness everything that he is doing and coming at him in the game while he is at the table, just before and immediately after. 

The problem lies with the authors and the sellers of gambling systems and discovered secret holy-grails along with the naïve, inexperienced and/or desperate players that patronize them.  The aftermath that the two types of people just mentioned create, subtract from the real, factual and experienced information posted on here that has proven itself extremely defensive to many players allowing themselves to realize larger win holds and less loss money to the casino. 

The hype, the drama and the all things along those lines are created just about each and every time because someone is selling something and a few others have decided joining up with the person claiming to have the holy-grail or another secret form of magical dust for sale—is being discriminated against, treated unfairly and illegal by myself or others that have played this game for a while.  Every single time just about, come to think about it. 

So why in the hell would someone that does not believe in bet placement scheduled methods employing a secret holy-grail or a recently discovered form of magical dust will not prevail---being on a board like this?  Because, we expand our minds, discuss what we know and share our experiences playing at the casino.  We just realize that there is no holy-grail and/or secret magical dust that can be purchased or learned that will 'beat' the casino.  And the other mind-frame players, the ones that preach and believe in the holy-grail or magical dust bet placement pre-scheduled wagering systems, are here to sell those and have nothing to really share except the advertising, sale and marketing by any means whatsoever in their attempts to earn money rather than employing their own system at the casino to make millions  Perhaps better yet, why not ask the question, "Why would someone having the knowledge and the holy-grail of a system that can beat the casino actually be here wasting their time on the board rather than be earning the ez living and huge cash in a casino everyday, all day"?

[Bally6354]

I would say Baccarat and also Roulette for that matter are not beatable the way the casino would like you to play those particular games. There is no future in placing lucky birthday numbers on the felt or employing the martingale on Banker in Baccarat and yet that's how a lot of players go about it. Obviously the games wouldn't exist if there was an easy way to continuously win. But what's to stop someone from creating their own 'game' and just using the Baccarat or Roulette table as a vehicle to place bets. After all, is that not the real meaning of advantage play and we all know the casino don't like those type of players. In fact they refer to them as cheats and yet when these 'so called' cheats occasionally get taken to court, the ruling is often that they didn't cheat. As long as you don't tamper with the cards or interfere some way with the gaming equipment and use your brain, how exactly are you cheating.


Blackjack ie.. card counting
Roulette ie.. biased wheel play
Baccarat ?

Why would they not be a way to beat baccarat and how would someone know anyway. Nobody knows everything. It strikes me as a conditioned stance if someone believed such and such a game is not beatable when they can't possibly really know one way or another. These forums don't actually help either (most of the time) as well as the plethora of absolute junk out in the marketplace regurgitating the same old tired rubbish year after year.

The games are beatable, just not the way 99% of the people go about it.

[alrelax]

The games are beatable, just not the way 99% of the people go about it.

Exactly.

It is generally all in the players psych and beliefs and the casino changes almost all of the players that do play.  Changes their mind set, frame-of-mind, wagering knowledge and ingrained knowledge, etc. 


I won very good my 2 last sessions last week.  I went to the casino last night.  I saw very clearly what the shoe was doing and yet, my own psych steered me to go along with another player because of some other meaningless, stupid and insane reasoning because I started to lose.  I clearly called what the shoe was doing and going to do.  But yet--I did not follow what I honestly thought, saw and desired to do.  I lost and lost an entire buy-in of $1,600.00 within 20 hands.  Might have won 5 wagers out of the 20 I did play that shoe. 

More often than not and by far, this one particular player I did follow because I was losing, I almost always recover or stay stable with, probably like 9 out of 10 times or more, probably like 19 out of 20. 

But hey-I went against everything I stood for, I write, and I genuinely believe in.  Sucks, because I should have doubled if not tripled that buy-in and then banged it out.  But that is the huge downside to this game and if you have not been there, then you have no idea what I am writing right now!  The money lost was not huge and it was part of win money---but that is not the point, the point is---I actually went against everything I wanted and desired---not for camaraderie, but just got sucked in and did not believe in myself.  There is no rock solid protocols and rules to follow at the table.  Psych plays a huge part, sometimes for the better and other times for the worse.  I actually reasoned out in my mind, I was making mistakes and my mind was clouded so I should follow this player I knew quite well as I have in the past. 

It is all about vision and my vision was absolutely blurred and my psych pushed me to go along with another player that had blurred vision also. The reasoning we discussed among ourselves that we did follow was the path I was on when I was losing anyway.  I pointed out the turning point and I pointed out how the player side was going to get all strong and prevail.  Then 2 back to back Pandas came out and 2 of the 3 people said the Banker side would surely prevail and F-7's were coming up.  I attempted to point out the equaling of the sides within 2 wins of each other and the player consistency winning with 1 point over the Banker--no matter what the Banker had.  Then the Player came on strong after those 2 Pandas.  Like 1 Banker and 4 Players, 1 Banker and another 3 or 4 Players with 1 Banker following and then a series of 2's that looked like this, B-PP-BB-PP-BB-PP-B-PPT-B.   

[8OR9]

My feeling is if you are going to play bac, play at the mini bac tables, even if you are a big better, ( most minibac tables have a $15000 max bet ) because if you play at  a midi or big bac table ( $ 100 minimum bet ), you will be more influenced by what other players are doing compared to a mini bac table.....and those players don't know their ***  from a hot rock.

If you are looking for camaraderie, or fun, or looking to make friends......join a country club......don't play baccarat.

[Blue_Angel]

Roulette ie.. biased wheel play

There's not such a thing as biased wheels, only biased minds...

It would be better to say Law Of Thirds or universal bias.

I'm professional player but I've never used what you call biased wheels, nor roulette computers, neither visual ballistics.
The later from those 3 though is admittedly not cheating and is working if you use it properly.

I remember a banned former member of this forum, user RollexWatch has said: "on Baccarat there's no advantage, only money management could make a difference"

I agree with the above statement but we couldn't say the same about roulette, you see Baccarat is so simplistic, like tossing a coin and wagering for head or tails, which becomes boring for me.
A small part of roulette contains the whole Baccarat game, Black and Red for example instead of Banker and Player, not to mention about the 2 extra EC pairs (Even/Odd, High/Low).
Besides there is also the ''le partage" rule which you receive back half of a lost wager due to 0, that's lower HE than Baccarat.

I see no reason why would someone select Baccarat from all available casino table games. 

[alrelax]

My feeling is if you are going to play bac, play at the mini bac tables, even if you are a big better, ( most minibac tables have a $15000 max bet ) because if you play at  a midi or big bac table ( $ 100 minimum bet ), you will be more influenced by what other players are doing compared to a mini bac table.....and those players don't know their ***  from a hot rock.

If you are looking for camaraderie, or fun, or looking to make friends......join a country club......don't play baccarat.

Entirely depends on where you are at.  There are numerous casinos that have 'Minibac' only on the main floor (outside of the High Limit, which are lower table max' limits by far.  Then there are the mini or the midi, also on main floor tpye of places, some have the same max limits but usually midi is a higher min limit. 

Numerous places in the Midwest Region are mini $10 to $1,000 or $10 to $2,000 and midi $25.00 or $50.00 to $3,000 or $5,000 as a norm.  But a player can always elect to have the dealer turn his cards if he is the highest wagering player to forego the ritual, etc.

If you are referring to me citing 'camaraderie' with the sole aspect of the players taking the cards to shoe their magical powers, strength, etc., that is not really what I was referring to.  I was referring to a few or all of the players really playing together and 'over powering' the shoe.  The players banding together to 'pool' the knowledge, thoughts, experience, gut feelings, visions', etc., and that is what actually over powers the shoe in a sense.  Versus a couple of players wagering together and then you have another player looking at you out of the corner of his eye and when you throw your money up on the Banker he slides his on the Players and says something in his native language he thinks you cannot understand, etc.  Once in while what I do when they do that, is take my wager down.

As far as a larger wagering player handling the cards, personally I do not have a problem with it.  Only when they are hell bent on getting players to wager with them and they thoroughly convinced that they can change cards or prevail because of their physical touch, etc.

Now, on the other hand, I have seen (more than one time of course) larger players passing the cards to other players with near table min wagers to expose the cards.  It is all in the belief and the superstition players have, the same as the highest amount of players in a casino have, no matter what game they are playing.

[Manchester]

you can win ,if you beat your greed inside you.   I mean you have 200 unit and your goal is 5 unit then leave the casino. I consider that a win

[alrelax]

Like I said, your psych and vision has so much to do with governing the way almost all people act/react at the baccarat table. 

[AsymBacGuy]

A small part of roulette contains the whole Baccarat game, Black and Red for example instead of Banker and Player, not to mention about the 2 extra EC pairs (Even/Odd, High/Low).
Besides there is also the ''le partage" rule which you receive back half of a lost wager due to 0, that's lower HE than Baccarat.

I see no reason why would someone select Baccarat from all available casino table games. 

Blue, here you are wrong...sorry.

First, baccarat is a card dependent and finite game; at roulette every spin is totally independent from the previous ones.

You can't compare two total different situations (roulette EC with B/P hands).
For example, itlr the number of B/P singles and B/P streaks will get different values than roulette EC, all due to both the asymmetry and the finiteness of the shoes.

EC = 50/50,  B/P = 50.68/49.32.

Finally the roulette partager rule will provide a 1.35% house edge, whereas the house edge at baccarat is 1.06% on Banker bets and 1.24% on Player bets. Both values lower than EC bets.

Moreover the EZ baccarat tables will feature a lower house edge on every Banker bet, being 1.01%.

Sayed that, there's no notice in the history of roulette that a player could get a favourable edge other than utilizing illegal electronic devices or by taking advantage of biased wheels.

At baccarat definetely such player's edge exists.

The fact that some players can get some profits by playing roulette doesn't change the negative mathematical edge unless such players are able to demonstrate this mathematically.

Hence it's better to play baccarat than roulette unless proven otherwise.

as.

 



   





   

 

[alrelax]

"At baccarat definetely such player's edge exists."

And, it is all within the player.  The player can have the means to control the edge with his own psych and vision, when and if--he can recognize the edge.

[AsymBacGuy]

"At baccarat definetely such player's edge exists."

And, it is all within the player.  The player can have the means to control the edge with his own psych and vision, when and if--he can recognize the edge.

Yes Al, but it's not all in the player. Most of it, surely.
If anybody is willing to count the 7-F bets, he's going to get a sure indeniable edge.

It takes a lot of patience but itlr he/she will be a sure winner.

About the no mathematcial edge I'm going to post a new thread.

as.

[Blue_Angel]

Finally the roulette partager rule will provide a 1.35% house edge, whereas the house edge at baccarat is 1.06% on Banker bets and 1.24% on Player bets. Both values lower than EC bets.

So how does this 0.29% (1.35-1.06) or (1.35-1.24) 0.11% difference is being translated in actual play?
Such difference is insignificant for the players, but for the casinos is important because the total wagers from all players are creating big money action, that's why receiving 1% from 1,000 is different story from receiving the same percentage from 100,000 gross.

Besides that's the casino's edge, not the player's, what good is the finite cards when the same cards do the same for both sides, you could also bet both sides, so what difference does it make to count cards?
You cannot use card counting as on Blackjack, I'd accept your claim if it wasn't for Baccarat.

[AsymBacGuy]

So how does this 0.29% (1.35-1.06) or (1.35-1.24) 0.11% difference is being translated in actual play?
Such difference is insignificant for the players, but for the casinos is important because the total wagers from all players are creating big money action, that's why receiving 1% from 1,000 is different story from receiving the same percentage from 100,000 gross.

Besides that's the casino's edge, not the player's, what good is the finite cards when the same cards do the same for both sides, you could also bet both sides, so what difference does it make to count cards?
You cannot use card counting as on Blackjack, I'd accept your claim if it wasn't for Baccarat.

Hi BA!
We extensively wrote about the bac player's advantage play right here, Dr Eliot Jacobsen book could help many people to think that baccarat can be beaten mathematically.

as.



   

[alrelax]

From 'Bally 6354':

I re-read this entire section this morning while looking for something.  This is pretty much spot-on and often overlooked by many:

"Obviously the games wouldn't exist if there was an easy way to continuously win. But what's to stop someone from creating their own 'game' and just using the Baccarat or Roulette table as a vehicle to place bets"