Baccarat Card counting in baccarat with a different twist

It was bugging me that the win% was only 49.37% (should be closer to 50%) ... then I realized that I was testing for EZ Bac (instead of 5% commission, Player loses and Banker pushes on a 3 card 7 Banker win)! So for you bettors in California the result above was for you.

For the commission Baccarat players elsewhere the results are as follows:

49.86% winners. After commission, flat betting, it lost -(13,046) units over 25,000 shoes. EZ Bac lost less with fewer winners, as usual (lower house edge).

 

(1) Hi. Yes I have the Stetson Bailey manual. I like his ideas but arithmetic progressions like Stetson, Oscar's Grind, and others have a hard time climbing out of the hole that they create for themselves during a long losing streak. So Stetson eventually fails. Geometric progressions like Martingale and Grand Martingale do better but you have other problems like table limits and bankroll requirements with those. There is no best solution, unfortunately.

(2) Only two that I can recall survived the the 25,000 shoes. First was a private bet selection Jae sent to me years ago combined with Martingale. Second was the H&S Baccarat System that I posted a while back. I will talk as much as I can about these later (Jae asked for privacy) but now my wife needs my help with a task. Maybe later tonight.

 

Hi Joe Mr. Bailey is a interesting man his ascender,descender betting way kinda of a re thought D'Alembert with many options

 

The real reason all the checking xxx number of shoes is that I win playing to my win goal $$ in every shoe and stop playing. Many, many, people will not dare stop in a shoe before seeing either 1. last hand involvement . 2. thrill of playing every hand with hope of the "big kill' in winning, 3. in a losing position they, not the game caused, 4. GREED they can not control. I can not recall the last time I played the full shoe. I don't need 25,000 shoes to tell me if i'm winning or losing. Running that many tests on that many shoes is just silly. I earn plenty with playing that way and do not lose. If it takes me one hand or 30 hands from the shoe doesn't bother me. And I might say, it is a sizable amount. Unit size is of bets coupled with a betting system is better than the number of hands played. I learned long ago don't worry about walking with your pockets full. I play the same way every time and do not need large shoe testing of shoes. That in itself has never made me a dime. Sorry to rant but the baccarat games is hard enough to find a system for good players to use to win. I know many great players that have 45% winnings doing well.

 

Honestly that is the typical response I have gotten over the years when I test someone's bet selection.

"Please check the following yourself." You invited us to test your bet selection ourselves and I did. You did not like the result but there is really no need to get defensive.

One could just bet Player and win 49.3% or just bet Banker and win 50.7%. The purpose of a bet selection is to do better than this. If you cannot then why bother with the complicated bet selections that I see people using. I am happy that you are winning but it is not due to some extraordinary bet selection. You are not even winning 50%. If you are winning it is due to your money management combined with the fact that you are not betting every hand. I would focus on that.

It is not really possible to have a bet selection that wins only at 45% in the long run in Baccarat. Even the worst bettor will win in the range of 49.3% to 50.7% over time despite their worst efforts.

 

This whole style seems nons-sensical to me but than any style what have you wager on players and setting wins goals is nons-sensical for a start, hey hey.

 

Thanks.