For me isn't just the bet selection or the money management so not just where and how much to bet, but also the entire PLAN to follow.

Because obviously losing sessions will arrive, so in my opinion and facts the game ""can be beat"" more with the plan that just with where and how much to bet.

Then the MM and STRATEGY is a way to make the plan easier most of time or almost trying to make it easier.

Sure that then the plan is the mix of mm / strategy and fixed rule / concept to follow in every session with a finale goal.

Ps. Who success in baccarat most of time use differente approach from eachother, exist group of people that have similar approach but then everyone have his personal methods/ways.

In my humble opinion seems that also if person X have a good plan/mm/strategies that work if someone will use his same things will have different result I don't know if is a mental fallacy but in my opinion is like that.

Here we go.

If we think some shoes are affected by a kind of bias, then a possible MM could have some merit so lowering or even inverting the long term math percentages.

In reality ALL shoes are affected by a bias but it's impossible to track all the factors merging towards it.
And even though we're able to spot the bias, we never know for sure how long it will last unless we had run the same situations for many many trials (so getting us more precise sd values).

Therefore the bias isn't a potential factor shifting the results at some points but is an actual one, yet we have few legitimate means to spot it in the infinite world of random walks.

On the other end, there's a controversial thought about setting up a plan on "no biased" successions applied to the common bac successions registered.
It seems that now we're playing a "random" (so unbeatable) game but we're just taking a kind of "losing" part that can become a winning one.
More later

as.

You said, "The only way to theorize a possible baccarat vulnerability relies about a "bias" affecting the successions, meaning that each result is not perfect independent and so randomly placed than what we think (or instructed to think of); of course and most of the times such a bias cannot reach values capable to erase and invert the HE, otherwise it would be too easy to beat the game."

PERFECTLY STATED!

Along the same lines, when it is there, it is there, just bang it out. No matter what it is. Whether it makes sense (in correlation to what should happen or not).  And that is why so many people lose.  Because they are too busy writing something on their scorecard or pointing to the scoreboard that makes no sense as to what is actually happening.

You said:  "....winning big at a single session or at few sessions almost always is a sure sign of future disaster or, in presence of a verifed edge, a sign of a more likely impending negative deviation;

Unless you engage in a rock solid MMM plan with Levels and Plateaus you believe in, that govern your post-winning play, etc.  I have written about and detailed out my MMM plan that is one of my largest proven advantages.

I have/numerous others have written about, future sessions played after big wins, are extremely tough to replicate and until we all realize that fact, those future sessions are seriously'Booby-trapped'. 

The only way to theorize a possible baccarat vulnerability relies about a "bias" affecting the successions, meaning that each result is not perfect independent and so randomly placed than what we think (or instructed to think of); of course and most of the times such a bias cannot reach values capable to erase and invert the HE, otherwise it would be too easy to beat the game.

Therefore and according to our experience and long term data, it's virtually impossible to get an edge by wagering many hands per shoe as the volatile bias (even though properly assessed) must always fight with the constant math HE overcoming a possible statistical advantage.

Needless to say and we are 100% certain about that, a verified edge must show up by getting more wins than losses and the only way to ascertain this is by running a same situation infinitely and collecting the results (vig included).

Actually and in the absence of a winning propensity, even well balanced result situations will make the job but at the cost of waiting for some fictional negative deviations to happen. That means to observe several hands (shoes) before betting, a thing that it's quite difficult to put into practice.

Another important tool to take of is that more "easy" and rapid wins we got and greater will be the probability to get the same and some more amount of easy losses and nobody cannot get advantage of such positive strong propensity without suffering the inevitable negative counterpart, no matter how good some youtube or internet geniuses keep claiming. Unless quitting the game while ahead, of course.

That means that a possible edge will be always and inviariably placed by slight values and diluted along the course of the shoes dealt.

Summarizing, let's say that:

- baccarat is anything but a gambling game;

- playing baccarat for a living and getting fun at the same time is impossible;

- winning big at a single session or at few sessions almost always is a sure sign of future disaster or, in presence of a verifed edge, a sign of a more likely impending negative deviation;

- the rule is to lose, lose and lose. 99.99% of bac players are sure losers and probably a better estimate is that 99.999% players fit the loser requisite.

- only the players who have verified that after 5k or 10k of shoes examined the W/L ratio of their plan is shifted towards the left (by values capable to erase/invert the HE) can think of beating the house, otherwise they just fool themselves or, worse, others.

- money lost is forever lost. Without a verified and carefully measured edge, any future session will make us as sure losers, no one human instinct or strong positive variances will prevent us to separate our money towards casinos' pockets.

as.

1 Side Heavy Building 3rd Card (Repetitive)
1 Side Extreme Reduction 3rd Card (Repetitive)

As already sayed some time ago, those couple of factors originally described by Alrelax are particularly interesting to be assessed actually (the present shoe) but either in their long term volume distribution.

Providing a careful assessment, they are so powerful that we can even accept to bet the underdog side (the lower two card initial point) or the opposite of the favorite side (the higher two card initial point) as 3rd card(s) will make many "repetitive" lines disregarding common math values for "quite" long or at least for some "math unsound" situations.

as.

What a total scum bucket!  Should have a uniform when he goes to jail with the embroidered words, "Police Chief who lied and stole".

Attorneys should have a field day with countless cases being prosecuted by his department.


https://www.newhavenindependent.org/2026/02/20/arrest-warrant-chief-bet-4-4m-online/


Click below to read the actual affidavit with tons of detailed info in it, including money bet, wins and losses from online gaming concerns:

https://www.newhavenindependent.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/2600005814_Redacted.pdf

Quote from: KungFuBac on February 21, 2026, 04:37:14 AMGood list.


"...There are basically 14 presentment trends,.."

What are the 14?  thx in advance.

Yes Sir, IMO and Experience:

Chop-Chop
Doubles
Triples
1s & 2s
1s & 3s
Streaks
Naturals Cut
Naturals Stick
Ties Cut
Ties Stick
1 Side Heavy Building 3rd Card (Repetitive)
1 Side Extreme Reduction 3rd Card (Repetitive)
Equalization
1 Side Complete Domination (with singles occurring from opposite side)

Good list.


"...There are basically 14 presentment trends,.."

What are the 14?  thx in advance.


".. Change your responses. The presentments will not change your wagers. Your wagering must change and conform to the presentments..."
    I concur.

"...be super careful of bringing today's societal aura of 'Instant Everything' to the bac table...."

Yes indeed. The key IMO regardless of how one may choose to attack the shoe:
Patience/Discipline and be willing to watch/wait for that EV+ spot. There may only be a few (3-5 spots) in many shoes.


Continued Success,

I concur.
Unfortunately, for the current NewYorkers that whole area of NY(all five boroughs including Manhattan) is increasingly becoming an unlivable cesspool. The political nonsense, lawlessness, no consequences for crime, taxing the working folks(to give free stuff) to the free loaders has even bled over into surrounding areas. Such as N Jersey(Bergen County),..etc. The one question I would like the media to ask Mandami when he comes up with another FREE social program is : "Who will pay for this?".

Ok back to baccarat.

I wish all New Yorkers the best going forward.

If variance makes you uncomfortable, the problem usually isn't the game. It's the size, the pace, or the expectations going in.

Most mistakes start when people try to "fix" variance instead of adjusting their structure.

Originally posted by u/Unhappy-Badger-7464