Baccarat Blue Equals Red - Baccarat Edition

Typically baccarat players will be all over a strong Bank shoe and there are plenty of baccarat shoes that edge out with more Bank of varying degrees. However, there are a good number of powerful Player shoes and segments of shoes that are dominated by Player.

To a fault, when a shoe just keeps trending Bank or Player a lot of experienced baccarat players don't capitalize the way they should.

So literally what is the recommendation by those who advocate only betting Bank? Typically these parties state that baccarat takes no skill, bet only Bank, all card information is worthless, don't do any baccarat shoe selection, all scoreboard information is worthless, all past play is worthless, all other players are worthless.

This is an easy 101 question for all of you who recommend Bank only. You are playing at a shoe and a substantial Player dragon tail starts. Are you going to choke down 7 losses in a row? 10, 17, 23 eh mate bruh? You can even call up the Dark Wizard and the AP Heat bruhs and all the bruhs over at the Dark Wizard's forum who apparently haven't gotten the message to get the fuck in here.

This is just one very basic example... I really don't care what you say at all, but you all talk quite the shit on the keyboards and the paper so curious to see what your mindset is. Thanks eh mate bruhs.

 

I am interested in this as well. I find betting Bank only to be expensive when you can take advantage of non commissioned Player wins. Thanks for the post.

 

For people who is bias on B and those who only bet B, there is a great way to do it. The problem is CAN YOU DEFEAT THE DEVIL IN YOU? I am talking about impatience and not follow through with your plan.
The plan is very simple . BET BANK but don't go against PLAYER. It is that simple. NOT against any PLAYER. You can sometimes bet P but never against P IF YOU ARE bias towards Bank. Prepare with a good size bankroll and ready to do a marathon session.

 

So what you’re saying is never bet against P on a streak or even after any P? And only bet Bank after Bank shows?

 

That is right. Remember "did not win is better to lose"

 

Not betting against a P streak has merit! On a basic level I am not sure about not betting B against any P when you consider how many P singles there are.

https://imspirit.wordpress.com/2011/02/26/p-and-b-events-statistics-a-comprehensive-comparison/

The above is no definitive guide to beat Baccarat however it can give you clues.

 

This is exactly what I mean by not betting against single P. Did not win is better to lose. The plan is NOT against P. If you lose against single P, on paper you are OK. But in real play, it may put you on tilt. It's the ' Human Thing'

 

Posts by Craps and Eugene right on the money .


ND

 

So you just wait until Bank wins and then bet Bank or wait until two Banks win and bet Bank. BOL on anything like this:

B P B P B P B P B P B P

B B P B B P B B P B B P B B P B B P

 

It give no such thing.

 

Anyone betting on "p" at ANY TIME is an idiot. Further more, anyone betting on baccarat WITHOUT a VERIFIABLE EDGE OVER THE GAME, which NONE OF YOU DO, is an even BIGGER IDIOT!!!!

 

Wow that is some great insight, from the best of the best. Very specific. With this brilliance in hand from the most genius math bruhs available, winning baccarat doesn't exist! I always appreciate hearing the Sun rises in the North.

Zero attempt and definitely zero ability to come up with any sort of response to the 101 cases mentioned in the first post because all of you match bruhs have no answer.

 

Do not cross the street when you see pink elephants



jibs what is your honest opinion ?


You are the cat who knows it all .

 

Very informative, eugene. I had no idea that single players outnumbered single bankers. Since banker wins more than player in the long run, this does not seem logical but I coded this quickly this morning to verify and this is correct. Also double players are about equal to double bankers. At triple streaks and above, banker dominates. This changes my whole perspective.

 

R 19., This is where we separate the novice from the professional. Every bet selection has its "waterloo"
Lets talk about the Gamblers edge.
1 What to bet
2. When to bet
3. Where to bet.
4. Stop/loss
5..Stop/win
6. Money Management ( probability to beat the house )
7. Charting
8. Advanced Charting.

If one were to ONLY bet B, one must chart and NOT play to a "fix" system.
If you use advanced charting, B P B P B P B P B P B P will look like

B B B B B B
P P P P P P if you record the shoe in 2's OR O for follow and X for against thus giving


B ( no bet ) then
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

The second pattern B B P B B P B B P B B P B B P B B P will look like

B P B B P B B P B
B B P B B P B B P

and follow and against pattern will look like

B X O X O X O X O X O X
O X X X X X

The Math guys are only right IF outcomes are EVEN then we are subject to the House Edge. But in reality, outcomes are very seldom even on any given day or any given shoe and therefore we must ignore the House Edge and swear by the Gamblers' Edge above.

 

We don't need a "MATH" edge to win. The CASINO don't need a " MATH" edge to win either even though they have it. I don't think you can win even with an edge. True fact is CASINO WINS MORE THAN HOUSE EDGE ALONE. JBS!!! Johnny Bull Shit

 

There is a lot of material out there that state even the top players in the poker world have a very small actual edge which they create.

Regarding a way to track, chart, and score... the formations I posted look the same to everyone at the start: B

Those that propose bet Bank only are also proposing some trigger that consists of sidelining when Bank wins again. There are many formations where basic variations of this would get caught with losses.

 

Thank you to everyone that commented. I can say for myself and my brothers and sisters we have to get much more aggressive during heavy Bank/ Player trends. These formations offer much more opportunity than segments that chop and break frequently.