Thanks for your reply Al, that's what I was mostly referring to. 
Al wrote: IMO, it all equals out somewhat. As with almost everything in the game of Bac, equalization is just about paramount. Of course we never know exact turning points and at times, things do not equal out.
Same points were brilliantly discussed by KFB in his posts.
-------
Casinos make a lot of money from bac players not for the tiny HE but for a simpler reason:
They rely upon the probability that it's impossible to be more right than wrong at random sequences happening at a kind of coin flip game.
Really? No way.
Actually bac successions are far from being randomly distributed, let alone mirroring an independent coin flip game.
A coin flip toss succession relies about a constant 50/50 probability to get H or T, meaning that any hand has no link with the past outcomes.
More deeply, no "general" plan could be devised as anything can happen everytime.
On the other end, bac successions are the by product of a finite card distribution, now key cards (nearly 30% of total ranks) will make a huge impact on the long term results, then nearly 30% of the deck is neutral (0 value cards).
The average key cards/neutral cards concentration/dilution ratio is the main reason why patterns will be asymmetrically or symmetrically placed.
Obviously there are many other secondary situations to get a W or L hand, yet we can safely assume that key cards distribution (0 value cards as well) are more asymmetrically than symmetrically shaped.
Baccarat (mostly for the third/s card impact) is sensitive to many "incidents", so what is naturally asymmetrical seems to be symmetrical shaped.
Nobody investigated so much how first two-initial cards will affect the final results in terms of W/L ranges.
Let's run some shoes, consider the common 4 roads (BR, ByB, SR and CR) and tell me if you would find some patterns to rely upon. I guess the answer will be in the affirmative field.
But, as we know, fkng third(s) cards will tend to destroy this plan.
Nonetheless, a BP succession and its derived sequences are entitled to get a bit larger number of asymmetrical situations, of course in proportional relationship of the general probability to happen.
Anyway the decisive tool to take care of, in our opinion, is that once a symmetrical pattern had shown up, we must wait this will ends up as the more likely distribution works at new fresh successions always fighting against a less likely another new symmetrical distribution.
After all and per every shoe dealt, the probability to cross asymmetrical spots not forming at least one cluster is 0.
On the same line, asym/sym distribution will take a strong kind of RTM effect, meaning that possible "(unlikely) symmetrical consecutive and different patterns will get the room to more probable asymmetrical shapes.
See you in a couple of days, I'll provide many examples extracted by live shoes data.
as.

Al wrote: IMO, it all equals out somewhat. As with almost everything in the game of Bac, equalization is just about paramount. Of course we never know exact turning points and at times, things do not equal out.
Same points were brilliantly discussed by KFB in his posts.
-------
Casinos make a lot of money from bac players not for the tiny HE but for a simpler reason:
They rely upon the probability that it's impossible to be more right than wrong at random sequences happening at a kind of coin flip game.
Really? No way.
Actually bac successions are far from being randomly distributed, let alone mirroring an independent coin flip game.
A coin flip toss succession relies about a constant 50/50 probability to get H or T, meaning that any hand has no link with the past outcomes.
More deeply, no "general" plan could be devised as anything can happen everytime.
On the other end, bac successions are the by product of a finite card distribution, now key cards (nearly 30% of total ranks) will make a huge impact on the long term results, then nearly 30% of the deck is neutral (0 value cards).
The average key cards/neutral cards concentration/dilution ratio is the main reason why patterns will be asymmetrically or symmetrically placed.
Obviously there are many other secondary situations to get a W or L hand, yet we can safely assume that key cards distribution (0 value cards as well) are more asymmetrically than symmetrically shaped.
Baccarat (mostly for the third/s card impact) is sensitive to many "incidents", so what is naturally asymmetrical seems to be symmetrical shaped.
Nobody investigated so much how first two-initial cards will affect the final results in terms of W/L ranges.
Let's run some shoes, consider the common 4 roads (BR, ByB, SR and CR) and tell me if you would find some patterns to rely upon. I guess the answer will be in the affirmative field.
But, as we know, fkng third(s) cards will tend to destroy this plan.
Nonetheless, a BP succession and its derived sequences are entitled to get a bit larger number of asymmetrical situations, of course in proportional relationship of the general probability to happen.
Anyway the decisive tool to take care of, in our opinion, is that once a symmetrical pattern had shown up, we must wait this will ends up as the more likely distribution works at new fresh successions always fighting against a less likely another new symmetrical distribution.
After all and per every shoe dealt, the probability to cross asymmetrical spots not forming at least one cluster is 0.
On the same line, asym/sym distribution will take a strong kind of RTM effect, meaning that possible "(unlikely) symmetrical consecutive and different patterns will get the room to more probable asymmetrical shapes.
See you in a couple of days, I'll provide many examples extracted by live shoes data.
as.