+ Register

[sqzbox]

OK - I admit it - you have piqued my interest now!

There has been some discussion on whether or not baccarat is beatable and I've made my opinion clear in another thread. But I did read Carlito's link and I did read the comments of a few who say they believe that baccarat outcomes are not random, citing shuffling methods or the 3-card rule or whatever. I don't subscribe - BUT - it did make me wonder - IF baccarat is non-random, what does this mean? How does it manifest itself? That is, how can it be seen?

How could one demonstrate this non-randomness? Would it show up as a generally more-than-expected streaky shoe? Or more Bankers (or Players) than expected? Or what exactly? And if so how could one separate that from normal distribution? Because if you can't separate it from normal distribution somehow then this non-randomness is unable to be capitalised on and so is effectively useless - it may as well be 100% random. And, in fact, I would argue that it actually IS 100% random and all you have witnessed is simply normal variation within a standard distribution.

And is this non-randomness able to be measured? Because, again, if the answer is no then it is of no practical use whatsoever. Basically what I am saying is - if it can't be measured then it doesn't exist - a basic corollary of the tenet that everything that exists (i.e. is "real") can be measured. If it is real (this non-randomness) then it has to be measurable and it has to be repeatable.

So I would be interested in hearing from those who say that baccarat is not random. Tell me "how" - the "why" is perhaps interesting but doesn't really matter. How does this non-randomness manifest itself? How can it be measured? Maybe the "why" will point to the "how" but in any case, it has be seen to be believed, right?

[james]

Can you measure randomness? What is the unit for radomness?

[sqzbox]

Sure - look up binomial distribution.

[roversi13]

Very good question.
I think that Baccarat is a perfect random game(like roulette).
I know that there are people that think the opposite.
I hope that they don't make confusion between randomness and standard deviation.
For these people the only way to determine the non randomness of a given shoe is to analyze a string(short??,long??) of hands having a particular behavior.
I am sure that there is no other method.
Question:how can they be sure that randomness(if it exists!) will continue?
Impossible.

In any case I suggest to study "the arcsine law"(trigonometry),that would demonstrate that randomness in Baccarat is a reality.
If in x hands there are a certain condition,in y hands the probability of winning for the player are higher than usual.
Difficult to believe,at least for me.

[Carlitos]

Ps, i just posted the link.
Iam not saying or claiming Baccarat is not random.
I thought the website plus Prof Ellis YouTube video were intresting to read and view.


Carlitos 

[Gizmotron]

The way to measure randomness is with a valuation system that enables you to read a stream of characteristics from the recent or immediate past, in order to revel any current or trending states or patterns. Whether the game is random or not does not really matter much, as long as these states are present, and as long as you make an effort to discover them. Once that takes place you can use your best strategy to take advantage of any duration of continuing effect from this data.

[Garfield]

First do the non-random event we're talking about is about a particular shoe or in general?

I believe one, or some shoe, could show a strong un-randomness event (i.e : one side dominant, a chop after streak, no streak more than 3 etc etc).

But, in a general, IMHO this is stil a random event. If one said that some approach could fit every shoe, every time it played, I believed it was a "temporary luck / coincidence"

Like I stated before, we would never know what kind of event we are going to face. It could be 1999 shoes of un-random event, then 234 shoes of pure random, and vice-versa, or somewhere between.

There is always 2 side of everything.

[greenguy]

Found this dictionary meaning for random that suits casino games well.

of or characterizing a process of selection in which each item of a set has an equal probability of being chosen.


So non-random would be.

of or characterizing a process of selection in which each item of a set has an unequal probability of being chosen.

..and that's the hard part for system/method players. The AP guys have us covered here, they would say.

[sqzbox]

Yep - agreed. I was just hoping that one of the guys who claim that it is not entirely random would front up with an explanation. Because if it is true that it is not entirely random then it would seem to me that this non-randomness should be able to be capitalised on once it is understood how it manifests. Not too surprised at the resounding silence really.

[21 Aces]

How many shoes do you play in an outing?  VARIANCE and non-random.

[sqzbox]

Are you asking me? I'm a theoretician - I don't play since I realised I can't win. That doesn't mean that I gave up on trying to find a way though. So your question has a point?

[21 Aces]

I'm asking everyone - how many shoes they play in a typical session at a real casino?  I bet the number is very low.  I also bet that many are using a P&L driven stop point, a time driven stop point, an energy driven stop point, or a combination that has no correlation to game house edge or statistics.

Math and statistic pros will give you their view all day long just like the economists and financial analysts that can't explain the thousands of occurrences of all sorts that should never happen in the markets.  Advantage players have a similar view.

For example, the odds of 13 Bankers in a row are:

(0.458597)^13 = 0.00003968311 =>>> 1/ 0.00003968311 = 1 in 25,199.

I am not going to disclose what XX of what side in a row I have seen, but I have seen well over that.  I have also seen many other serious XX in a row and streaks of other kinds in under a few months.  In such a short amount of time with how little casino time I have I should not have seen what I have seen statistically.  As a result, I believe there is non-random variance in the game.

[Garfield]

I'm asking everyone - how many shoes they play in a typical session at a real casino?  I bet the number is very low.  I also bet that many are using a P&L driven stop point, a time driven stop point, an energy driven stop point, or a combination that has no correlation to game house edge or statistics.

I played around 7 - 8 shoes average. Yes it also depend on this circumstances :

1. Whether I have reached my target goal or not.
2. Whether my buy-in BR for that session was busted.
3. Whether I am exhausted or not.

For point no 3, IMHO there is no way we could match the casino. Because they work in shift.

[21 Aces]

I played around 7 - 8 shoes average. Yes it also depend on this circumstances :

1. Whether I have reached my target goal or not.
2. Whether my buy-in BR for that session was busted.
3. Whether I am exhausted or not.

For point no 3, IMHO there is no way we could match the casino. Because they work in shift.

And there you have it which seems to be completely lost on those looking at gaming mathematics.  I play a ridiculously low number of shoes in comparison so let's say we play exactly the same bets.... do you think we each would look at our session differently given the difference in duration of play? YES

The shoes and hands don't change, but two players making the same bets along the way can have a very different experience for a number of reasons.  In my view, all of these can be big drivers of performance.

UPDATE:  This is getting off topic. More later.  I think the fact that you can see many shoes in progress and decide when and where to play are also important to consider so you can get into strong short term characteristics of a shoe.

[AsymBacGuy]

Hi sqzbox!

First I'd say that a random event/system is any event/system where my betting choices will meet the total impossibility to modify the probabilities of the game.
Imo, roulette perfectly fits to this assumption.

At baccarat things work quite differently as it's a finite card dependent game.

One dealer or a shuffle machine might act as randomly as wanted, but once the 8-deck is placed into the shoe we know that every single hand but the first will be affected by the previous card removal. Of course the more we remove cards the better are the chances that the future hands will be affected by the previous card exhaustion.
Furthermore, any hand won't be the product of a perfect 50/50 proposition since there's the third card rule favoring one side. And at the same time the third card rule effect is a byproduct of the deck composition.
So even though any hand seems to be 50/50 placed, it doesn't. That should be true because the so called 50/50 hands include cards that could more or less favor the subsequent side in a way or another.

Most of the time, and that's why baccarat still exists, such discrepances are very slightly placed yet they do act. Expecially itlr.

A sure confirmation that baccarat isn't a random game comes from some foolproof studies.

Dr. E. Jacobsen, a true expert of advantage play, has shown that a so called "perfect strategy" set up by a pc capable to register every card played (and obviously accounting that the most part of any shoe will be played) will get the player an edge. A mathematical edge I mean, not some kind of weird stuff coming from people like me or gr8player.
The fact that this edge is minuscule compared to the work needed (and even considering that any electronic device is illegal almost everywhere) shouldn't discourage us into trying to disclose other favourable opportunities.

Another sure proof the game isn't a mere successions of random events is given by the dragon bet and panda bet vulnerability. Even in this case we are speaking about a mathematical edge.

Hence, if we can get the best of it by counting cards, we should assume that the game won't be randomly placed because it is finite and card dependent by any means.

Are those EV+ spots so frequently placed along the way?
Nope. They are quite rare and they are the product of a careful registration of cards used, mainly after many cards have been removed form the deck. 

Now the question: knowing that sometimes the game is really beatable, could we find ourselves in the position to bet EV+ spots without a card counting procedure?

Good question.

I'd dare to say that most of the time it isn't. So, imo, there's no point to try to guess the mostly ungueassable baccarat world (or better sayed an insignificant shifted world considering the vig, the variance and other issues).
We do know that every hand won't be perfectly 50/50 placed but we don't know which side might be favored.

So we must act into the high empirical world of getting something by long term statistical evidences.
And, imo, only a very long study could help us to define the restricted terms when certain spots are going to more likely produce some so called "non random" outcomes.

They are diluted results but they exist, the same way we must accept that some very unfavorite side bets are beatable even if they are burdened by a well higher negative edge than BP hands present along the way.

as.