There's an interesting line of thought suggesting that the first half or 2/3 results of a shoe will slightly affect the probability of the remaining outcomes.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Right, very rare. But lesser productions of P single not so rare and is why I use the 1's as a key to help determine the bias. We can use a bet placement that exploits this. Any positive expectation (weighted count, regression to mean, etc.) has escaped me. Enter the "educated" guess.
Assuming you or anyone has identified such it no doubt requires a potential long wait. Waiting even for Sputnik's Ecart still produces the problem with variance due to the low odds. We'd have to be in the neighborhood of 75%+ prediction to make it practical.
Do you disagree?
I use the 1's only. If they have been average by the quarter shoe I don't expect much long streaks - until the second half when card composition often changes due to certain denomination depletion.
"Take care instead of what happened in the previous shoes at the same location." This bothers me. I've done quite a bit of shuffle tracking back in my BJ days. Okay, there's not a player cut in Baccarat anymore which would change the shoe order from one shoe to the next but . . .
Have you actually tracked live shoes by, say, half deck to see how the composition of low/high cards extended from one same color shoe to the next (1,3,5,7)?
How do you back up this claim?
I read numerous time,
but my English not good, thus I can't really grasp what you wanna teach,
please make a long example,
will greatly appreciate them.
thanks in advance.
The most probable way to lose all your money on Baccarat is by going all in on every hand, eventually there will come 1 hand to smack your cheek!