House edge and finite dependent successions

There's a strong difference between wagering at an independent model or at baccarat.
Think about side bets: they are offered with huge HE just to prevent acute players to get the best of a finite dependent succession.
For example the tie bet being payed 9 to 1 instead of the common 8 to 1 keep assuring the house a strong advantage, yet no casino will offer this better (for players) payment.

So is it possible to make a plan capable to exploit tie bets no matter how much is the HE?
The answer is no, unless we want to live at bac tables without betting a dime for long (very long).
Tie favourable conditions are too rare to happen, but more importantly tie distribution is too much affected by volatility, a real enemy for players.

Tiger bets (B winning with a 6 point) move around a more depicted scenario (even featuring a higher HE than ties) but still difficult to chase for the same volatility issues.

The same about F-7, Panda bets and other side bets.

Curiously the best bets featuring the lowest HE and where all players (correctly) focus their main action are B/P hands but with no avail for the simple reason that it's very difficult (say almost impossible) to guess which side will be kissed by the higher point other than by luck.

Actually what we need to conquer a finite dependent model is not centered about the HE but about the volatility.

A perfect random (so totally unbeatable) distribution is any succession where each spot is completely independent from the previous ones and getting the same relative probability to appear without featuring "jumps" or "falls".
BP hands are sensitive of those jumps and falls but unfortunately we can't assess which side will be favorite unless, IMO, we are linking many hands together so to build "complex" patterns more affected by a diverse probability to show up.

More probable winning points

Most results are made by 7, 8 and 9 final points so if we're putting into a graphic the 7-8-9 category vs any other winning point (1,2,3,4,5 and 6) we might get an idea of the average winning points distribution (gaps, clusters, etc).
This graphic features a very low (controllable) volatility as besides the strong impact of 9s, 8s and 7s, many points will be formed by two or three card totaling 7, 8 or 9 winning points.

Actually some time ago we've found four casinos offering a side bet where players have to guess which point will be the final winning point, no matter which side won.
Tie hands are just a push (no win no loss).
Of course and without any doubt there's a HE so a continuous play will get only losses for the unfair payment at each winning point class.
But good news is that each winning 7,8 and 9 class will get a low variance for any shoe dealt so differently than any other bac side bet.
That means that a kind of conditional probability is working at many steps of the shoe, moreover enforced by card counting 7s, 8s and 9s.

That's one of the few occasions to make a sort of progressive multilayered betting plan based on the probability of success.

Actually even a simple selected betting made upon the sole 8 and 9 winning points vs all the remaining points move around a coin flip probability but getting a very low variance than real coin flip tosses.
 
Related considerations about BP hands

Higher final winning points will favor more the P side than B side, in fact Banker's advantage is mostly centered about 5 and 4 final winning points.

Therefore if we'll expect a 7,8 or 9 winning point, we somewhat deny most part of asymmetrical hands favoring B side.
Moreover P side is payed 1:1 and B side 0.95:1.

Guessing right the side getting a 7,8 and 9 final winning point is just a matter of short term luck, we need to think about the long term picture.

I know that confiding that very soon a 7-8-9 winning point will come out at any side it's way better than estimating which side will win (despite of the HE being nearly 5x worse at the former scenario), yet we shouldn't forget that what wins at 1:1 ratio is way better than what wins at 0.95:1.

Obviously if we'd think that the more probable next hand will be included within the 7-8-9 range, betting the Tiger bet is just a waste of money.

Next we'll see how BP patterns might be linked to get a kind of favourable side bet.

as.

Done Deal.  I was wrong on the score, but I wasn't on the winner.  Sheer dominance from start to finish.

Little celebration after the game.  Thin cut bone in rib eye platter and a fresh bowl of PHO soup.

Eagles 40-22

Good job.

as.

I can't understand why our software put a plus on Eagles side about the Louisiana wheather conditions.

as. 

Eagles 37 and Chiefs 6 with 9:51 left.  Can't see Chiefs winning on sheer time factor alone.  Eagles can run the clock down each time they get it. 

Plus Eagles just fumbled recovery from a Mahomes dropped ball at 9:42. 

Eagles win this 99.99% chance. 

Mmmhhh we're wondering why our computer told us it was "a slight advantage" for Ph Eagles...
Maybe it works better with bac algorithms than about football predictions....uahahahhah

as. 

Our computer never fails....

Now only a very unlikely bad beat could change a sure Eagles win

as.

Eagles.  Interesting indeed.

As you said: "IMO we do not need to win what happens at the shoe we're playing at, just winning the most part of the shoes we're wagering."

What you wrote above is worth its wait in 100% pure gold, as I have also written about countless times in countless posts.

Our wagering, within Sections, no matter what the entire shoe does and produces is what matters.

A win is a win, no matter what the 80 hands produces.  If I wagered 15/20 or thereabouts, those are what counts, not the 65/60 I didn't. 

Al wrote:

However if you believe in the reality of the game of baccarat and set aside your desires, you just completed one tiny (could be large) step and put on a great game face that can lead you down paths to your advantage.

Good point, but IMO we should raise the ability to process the actual informations with the general more probable card patterns not giving too much emphasis to single results.
Itlr we'll succeed.

For example, and I'm referring to the KFB reply too, if we could restrict the range of an 8 or a 9 as a first card falling at Player side, we'll get a strong edge.
We do not need to be right every time, just more than average (general probability is 2/13, of course).
Into a general heavy symmetrical card model and without pc findings or other advanced tools, the easiest spots to extract a kind of advantage are those focused about the first card of any new hand dealt.

If the first card is a 7, 8 or 9 more than 3/13 of the times, we are in the position to reduce, erase or invert the HE in relationship of how much we are able to alter that ratio towards the left.
Of course even 6s belong to that category.

On the other end of the spectrum, zero value cards or aces, 2s and 3s perfom the exact opposite result (maybe eliciting B wagers).

IMO we do not need to win what happens at the shoe we're playing at, just winning the most part of the shoes we're wagering.

More later.

as.