Don't waste time to test marches, betting selections, MM or whatever.
They all will fail itlr.
We want a system that mathematically will get the best of it itlr, no matter what.
Seat at a EZ table aiming to get a dragon bonus. Then assign a -1 value to any 4,5,6 or 7 card and a +2 value to any 8 or 9 card removed from the deck.
Whenever the true count (actual count compared to the estimated amount of decks left) will reach the +4 or higher point you'll get a sure f undeniable edge over the house.
Itlr you cannot lose but only win. Mathematically.
I know this isn't the solution you were looking for, still is by far the best and sure option to beat baccarat on very long terms.
as.
Too bad I don't have dragon bonus in my casino. Sigh.
harrahs atlantic city has dragon bonus....
i won a lot of money on it following another player when I first started out and had no idea what i was doing
does counting it work?
Quote from: AsymBacGuy on February 17, 2016, 12:37:06 AM
Don't waste time to test marches, betting selections, MM or whatever.
They all will fail itlr.
We want a system that mathematically will get the best of it itlr, no matter what.
Seat at a EZ table aiming to get a dragon bonus. Then assign a -1 value to any 4,5,6 or 7 card and a +2 value to any 8 or 9 card removed from the deck.
Whenever the true count (actual count compared to the estimated amount of decks left) will reach the +4 or higher point you'll get a sure f undeniable edge over the house.
Itlr you cannot lose but only win. Mathematically.
I know this isn't the solution you were looking for, still is by far the best and sure option to beat baccarat on very long terms.
as.
Agree..you can beat baccarat mathematically..no bets based on patterns/trends or so called marches will work..just wasste of time and money..
Quote from: BaccPM on February 17, 2016, 02:44:19 AM
Is there a relationship between the number of naturals and the likely hood of a bonus hand?
Could the person I mention in one of my threads actually be looking at the boards for a high number of naturals relative to hands played without a bonus hand?
Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeesssssssss!!!!!!!!!!!!
Naturals will cancel any bonus hand probability as bonus hands are by definition the product of drawing hands.
Don't be fooled about the fact that Dragon bonus bets will be payed 1:1 on naturals winning on the wagered side: even utilizing a perfect and sophisticated card counting strategy the edge will be very small on such bets.
Only Dragon and Panda side bets are really worth to be counted. Variance will be quite high but positive results are 1 trillion guaranteed.
as.
So millions of players play Banker and Player because they all lose doing it. If there were such a simple guaranteed way to consistently win on leveraged bets then players would only do that.
I do believe that some players consistently gain on a net basis on leveraged bets though.
Btw, the average win rate will be almost the 60% of your standard bet PER SHOE.
Meaning that itlr and betting $20 units, after 1000 shoes you'll get an average SURE profit of $12.000.
Not bad.
as.
Quote from: 21 Aces on February 17, 2016, 03:24:27 AM
So millions of players play Banker and Player because they all lose doing it. If there were such a simple guaranteed way to consistently win on leveraged bets then players would only do that.
I do believe that some players consistently gain on a net basis on leveraged bets though.
Counting cards is a consuming job, then you have to endure long losing periods.
Most players think it's better to try to get an edge by mystical reasons than counting cards.
Millions of baccarat players, despite being very smart, are contributing to the second best profits any casino game could provide.
as.
I still wait for yer book, hey hey.
Quote from: AsymBacGuy on February 17, 2016, 03:39:24 AM
Counting cards is a consuming job, then you have to endure long losing periods.
Most players think it's better to try to get an edge by mystical reasons than counting cards.
Millions of baccarat players, despite being very smart, are contributing to the second best profits any casino game could provide.
as.
So there is no way to count and win on Banker or Player bets which pay out 1 to 1, but yet you can count and win at leveraged bets that pay 8, 25, and 40 to 1? Makes sense.
Quote from: 21 Aces on February 17, 2016, 04:05:47 AM
So there is no way to count and win on Banker or Player bets which pay out 1 to 1, but yet you can count and win at leveraged bets that pay 8, 25, and 40 to 1? Makes sense.
I got your same conclusion but mathematiccaly that's the truth
As.
One Shoe on line.
Count / win or lose. 3 cards to make a seven on Banker side win
-3 win
+4 l
-6 w
+4 l
+7 l
+5 l
+6 l
+6 w
+4 l
:footinmouth:
_3 w
-8 w
Quote from: offaxis on February 21, 2016, 09:18:10 PM
One Shoe on line.
Count / win or lose. 3 cards to make a seven on Banker side win
-3 win
+4 l
-6 w
+4 l
+7 l
+5 l
+6 l
+6 w
+4 l
:footinmouth:
_3 w
-8 w
So that shoe produced 4 dragon wins?
as.
Yes it did. but they did not hit at +4 very often. More on the minus side. I should of wrote down what the cards where. I do remember that once it was two face and a seven. I will keep trying to see if how it works out. It only once once after +4.
Quote from: offaxis on February 27, 2016, 11:48:56 AM
Yes it did. but they did not hit at +4 very often. More on the minus side. I should of wrote down what the cards where. I do remember that once it was two face and a seven. I will keep trying to see if how it works out. It only once once after +4.
Of course variance is very high on such bets, in that matter I'd suggest to take a glance at a dragon bet simulator existing somewhere in the net. ;)
We could simultaneously add to Dragons even the Panda bets. Unfortunately although providing a lower variance, Panda bets need a more complicated counting system.
as.
Banker 3 cards win 7
-7 (9,5,3)
+4 L
-1 (3,9,5)
0 (7,3,7)
+5 L
+4 L
Let's see if we can get some help from additional mathematical considerations.
The probability to get a EZ dragon bonus is 2.25%, so we'll have on average about two occurences per every 100 hands dealt.
Of course not every Banker three card combination will get the same probability to produce a Dragon Bonus.
Zero-zero-7 will account the highest ratio by far: 19.2%;
the next more likely scenario is zero-2-5 (6%), then zero-1-six (4.8%) and so on.
So zero value cards and sevens will produce the highest number of Dragons, then there are zero value cards with 5s and 2s and zero value cards with 6s and 1s.
Despite of what the aforementioned system prescribes, we see that 3s and 4s might play an inferior role than zeroes, 7s, 5s, 2s, 6s and 1s.
Of course cards denying the possible appearance of Dragon Bonus are 8s and 9s for two distinct reasons:
- the likelihood to get naturals is higher when a deck is rich of those cards;
- any third card being an 8 or 9 (on both sides) more often than not will dictate a standing Banker hand (totally denying the DB possibility) or a total Player point higher than 7 and an outcome different than 7 when Banker takes an 8 or 9 as a third card.
So we could reconsider a perfect deck to be more likely to produce Dragon Bonus if it's (in descending order):
- particularly poor of 8s and 9s
- particularly rich of zero value cards
- particularly rich of 7s
- particularly rich of 5s, 2s, 6s and aces.
An interesting sidenote is trying to assess which B/P side is more likely to show up in those instances in a sort of "backup" betting plan.
Of course contemplating many classes of cards will get too numerous combinations, so we should get more help restricting our course of action.
Since the most likely scenario to get a DB is a deck full of zero value cards and 7s and poor of 8s and 9s, we know that such situation will entice more standing 7s on each side, but one side will be 5% taxed with the other one being 1:1 payed.
So our best "backup" plan in those (rare) circumstances should be to bet the Player side with the hope to hit the DB bet.
as.