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?

Do we have any Italian speakers here?  I came across a site by Jonathan Visconti (peddling his systems of course) but there was an interesting topic here - http://www.sistemaroulette.it/vincere-nel-limite-del-possibile/#comment-137

The reason I am interested is because I am trying to track down an article which is referenced in the discussion - by Sergio.  By using babelfish I can get an idea of what is being said but can't actually join any discussion and ask questions because I do not speak Italian.

Just wondered if there is anybody here who could comment.

thanks.

Esoito's story of his friend Hans is tantalising. The concept of combining results from different statistical measures is something I have been wrestling with for a while.  I don't think I am sufficiently strong in pure math to be able to derive stuff myself - I just don't know how to go about it.  So I thought maybe we could discuss it a bit and see if those who can handle it might like to weigh in.

I guess we should start with basics.  It seems to me that the first thing we need to ensure is that of statistical independence.  Am I right in figuring that the statistical measures ARE independent?  That is, for example, we can calculate the probability of an outcome being in the first dozen AND black by simply multiplying the respective probabilities.  12/37 x 18/37 = 0.1578.  But this is only true if the probabilities are statistically independent.  Is this a true assumption?

There are 128 legal bets on the felt (I think I have this right - did I count them up correctly?). In addition the wheel can be partitioned into neighbours, tiers, and any sort of breakdown you care to think up.  People can "cover zero", use the "imbalances" such as columns with more blacks than reds and vice versa, and so on and on. You can dream up all sorts of possible bets and the sky is the limit - there may be almost an infinite number of possibilities. It is no wonder that discussions, forums, schemes, systems, seem endless and there seems no end in sight of ways people are dreaming up to attack the game. What is a person to do?


I'd like to lend some brain power to "efficiency". If we were to accept that there is such a thing as "advantage play" (and I realize that this is contentious in its own right and worthy of a whole other discussion, but for the purposes of this one let's just accept it at face value), then how can we implement this in the most efficient way?  The line between negative and positive advantage is small, would you agree? Even with an advantage, turning this into a profit requires efficiency because playing inefficiently will swallow up the profit in the blink of an eye.


Or even - how can we find, or define, an efficient bet?  Should we use the math (i.e. statistics) or just plain logic. Statistics can be dangerous - but powerful when used appropriately. To quote Nassim - "it is a mistake to use statistics without logic, but the reverse does not hold: It is not a mistake to use logic without statistics".


To help kick it off and keep us on topic, here is a definition of efficiency.


A level of performance that describes a process that uses the lowest amount of inputs to create the greatest amount of outputs. Efficiency relates to the use of all inputs in producing any given output, including personal time and energy.
Being efficient simply means reducing the amount of wasted inputs.
Happy thinking!


Bryan