Baccarat Bet Selection Options

Apologies to those I bumped from my site, I assumed most know I have a pet hate which are lurkers and free loaders, I've stated it often enough, here there and almost everywhere!

So soz, I'm a bit more open and flexible, for reasons unstated.

Enjoy

 

JK trip reports are very welcome on my part and not to be missed .


Thanks.



ND

 

Guys, I know next to nothing about calculating odds. I have no doubt in your calculations.

But the ball analogy can only be applied to lottery, not baccarat. The numbers that you are working with are completely different.

 

Zhang Wei WHY? I'm dealing with "from the out-set". Banker vs Player are just like Binary outcomes, 1's and 0's, there are 256 x 8 column combinations as I've shown here in the sets of Truth tables I've uploaded. Obviously the 128 or 256 odds don't apply if you don't bet every hand of a 7 or 8 set. Otherwise I would say my analogy is correct, it is also correct based on the sheer numbers of shoes I have played, literally thousand and thousands which for a 7 or 8 column subset bears truth. Not withstanding, each and every bet you make is 50-50 shot, however I always bet, no matter how I am playing using a series of bets. This is the power of Template betting which somebody introduced me to over 20 years ago.

 

SMH, it's truly amazing that ya still got some meats-head coconut still harumph and bluster and squeal about the baccarats bein the 50-50 proposition when that ain't the case, hey hey!

 

Because a 8-deck shoe has 416 cards, not 128 or 256.
And there are only 10 numbers.
(32 1's, 32 2's, 32 3's, 32 4's, 32 5's, 32 6's 32 7's, 32 8's 32 9's & 128 0's)
There is no 120, 90, 50 or 24.
And the picked balls do not go back into the bag.

 

Ah I see, you have misunderstood the concept.

A column of 8 can produce 256 different binary combinations after the event.
https://www.gamblingforums.com/threads/binary-truth-tables-baccarat-edition.14268/#post-72690

I bet any of those 256 combinations won't repeat within 8 trials, statistical probability over a given series.

Your lottery example, is incorrect BTW as chosen balls do not get returned to the bag.

I'm busy at the mo, but next trip report might be of interest.

 

Read above first. There has been a lot of new talk recently about different kinds of bet selection so I thought I would bring this old post up by Johno. Another selection he doesn't mention in this post but is discussed on this thread is the 7 column which is also an excellent bet selection method.

So if we don't have a known mathematical edge all this conversation recently about bet selection is a waste of time as he says. And for me personally is extremely boring. Maybe that's why Johno a nd some others don't post anymore. So without a mathematical Edge we must admit that our selection is basically just guessing. Even if we start with a Baseline selection. Soxfan is 100% correct on that count.

Betting criteria, MM, discipline and proper bankroll are all we should be concerned with.

BTW. I guess I should confess here that I do win (on average) four units a shoe and have been doing that for some years now. Except, lol, when occasionally I take some of my accumulated winnings and try to win the lottery by making large bets here and there. Sometimes that does work out but it has affected my bottom line negatively overall.

So whatever your bet selection is it's no better than the next guys bet selection and probably a lot worse.

Cheers

 

@Jimske is the 7 column selection easy to play? I can never find a really good description on how it’s executed at all.

 

I didn't find it easy to play. I never played it live for that reason. You can play it vertically and horizontally looking at the first four to see if they match another column or row. But that may be just me. It averages 9 Wagers per shoe.

 

Bet selection in a completely random game is a fools errand. Use Soxy’s BANKER only play and annoy the dealer with the commish.

 

exactly you catch streaks both way i been trying to avoid the losing streaks as well so hard to figure out

 

I like this topic and want to add something from my arsenal when it boils down to using random against random.

When you pick a string of outcomes they can come as opposite or same and the most common is that you get a mix of both rather than just one side of same or opposite only.
So I have been experimenting with one simple but still effective trigger with good success.

For example take a string of four in a row.
Then when you get your next sequence you watch if the first outcome is the same or opposite.
If it is the same you can conclude that the whole string will not become the same and the likelihood is getting a mix of both.
So you bet opposite three times.
And if it were a opposite as trigger you would have bet the sa I.

Here is another one that is very cool.
You have four formations using groups of two.
11, 10, 00. 01.
So you can get straight or zig-zag.
Using them as opposite/same formation using random sequence reduce the likelihood for the whole sequence going in the same direction.

For example sequences of five.
S, S, and here you bet O for three times.
S. O. and here you bet for the zig-zag to end for three times.

There are very nice LW-registry using this kind of methodology.

Cheers

 

nice ill test the 1st one what if you broke it down to groups of 3 with the same method have you tried?

 

With S. O. Instead of the chop going:

S. O. S.

You will want to bet O. S. O.?

 

Johndepz - Anyone is free to use any spread of outcomes or small, medium or large sequences.

@cps10
This is how I test it using zig-zag.

B
B
P
B
P

B S
P O TRIGGER (BET FOR THE ZIG-ZAG TO END)
P S L
B S W
B

B S
P S TRIGGER (BET FOR OPPOSITE)
B O W
B
B

Hope that clears things up.
You can use it any way you like, but my experience says that betting against any five in a row give better results than following with those short testing I have done.
Even if the math says there should not be a difference.

Cheers

 

Thanks Patrik. I will take a look. With wins like that you could build a good MM to go with it. Could also work in craps and roulette really.

 

thanks i tried the 1st method on a shoe and won 24 units flat betting wild it was prob just a really good shoe but maybe with a 3 step martengale it could work long term

 

3 step Martingale would only lose 7 units so you could be right. Looking forward to your further testing.