1. Welcome to the #1 Gambling Community with the best minds across the entire gambling spectrum. REGISTER NOW!
  2. Join our $5,000 Cash Giveaway!

    Win Cash by Posting and Inviting New Members!
  3. Have a gambling question?

    Post it here and our gambling experts will answer it!
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Dismiss Notice

Baccarat Finally figured out something that keeps working!

Discussion in 'Baccarat Forum' started by Jae, Jun 16, 2018.

  1. Jae

    Jae New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2018
    Likes:
    10
    Location:
    Missouri
    Hello all, long time lurker, finally made an account so I could gloat a bit.

    I’ve been playing baccarat for 16 years and have tried everything under the sun. About five years ago I stopped believing in systems and triggers and faced the cold hard truth of the math. A few months ago I started dabbling with something that seemed absurd at the time and found a unique trigger. I tested it through about 400 baccarat cards I’ve kept from brick and mortar casinos. My goal was 1 unit per shoe (which I know might seem like small potatoes to most) flat betting worked, and setting up a stop loss of 5 units a shoe I ended up being up 1 unit per 3 shoes. Up 158 units out of 400 shoes. Again, I realize that doesn’t sound all that appealing unless your unit size is large.

    I tested my trigger through the 1,000 8 deck bac shoes on wizards of odds and came up with similar figures. Profiting 1 unit every 3 shoes on average when playing to win 1 unit a shoe with a stop loss of 5 flat betting.

    Imretested all the shoes using different systems, and what came out a solid winner was Oscar’s Grind (Hoyle’s Press) combining that with my trigger with a bankroll of 30 units (which had never lost out of those 1400 shoes) I was able to profit 1 unit per shoe.

    9 days ago I decided to try it in real play. I went to my local casino with a $300 bankroll, looking to play two tables of ez bac simultaneously (which I is quite feasible with my trigger).

    My daily goal was to play 20 shoes, I initially figured 20 shoes between 2 tables would take around 10 hours, but I quickly realized on day 1 that after 14 shoes I was ready to go. So I reestablished my goal and since I can play single dollar chips in ez bac, every time I made enough money to add a dollar to my unit size, I would.

    After 9 days, my original $300 bankroll is now a little over $14,000!

    Monday I’m going to start over with a bankroll of $3,000 and play 10 shoes a day for the entire week and progress with my winnings the same way I have.

    If anyone is curious how it goes, I’ll update you, cheers!
     
  2. Prank Sinatra

    Prank Sinatra New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2017
    Likes:
    0
    Location:
    Chattanooga, Tennessee
    Sounds pretty promising! I’d love to learn what the trigger is, thanks email me!
     
  3. Joey Torres

    Joey Torres New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2018
    Likes:
    4
    Location:
    Canada
    Hello! Really exited about your method of play. More details will be appreciated.
     
  4. cps10

    cps10 New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2016
    Likes:
    7
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Yes. Details would be much appreciated. That being said congratulations.
     
  5. gizmotron

    gizmotron Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Likes:
    282
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    The West Coast of USA, RV'ing
    Uh? This is a new guy festival. Did someone let the lemmings out?
     
  6. brokercny

    brokercny Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2017
    Likes:
    19
    Location:
    new york
    Just my opinion, but doesn’t sound right here. 9 days, you went from $300 to $14k? With flat betting? Kind of outrageous. Even if I were to use my martingale strategy and if I didn’t lose at all in those 9 days, I couldn’t even come close of turning $300 to that amount. I hope you have found the holy grail but it doesn’t sound like it’s possible.
     
  7. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    651
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    LOL

    I always wonder why they don't use better/less obvious tactics on forums.
    I just joined today - here's my amazing results !
    I just joined today too ! - tell me all about it.
    Hey ! I just joined today too !!!!!!!! I'm INTERESTED !!!!!!!!

    Just sit back and laugh, it's free entertainment.
     
    gizmotron likes this.
  8. Nathan Detroit

    Nathan Detroit Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2014
    Likes:
    266
    Gizmo ,

    A sales pitch is on the horizon ........

    ND
     
  9. Jimske

    Jimske Active Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2014
    Likes:
    33
    Well, JAE, can't blame people from being cynical. Simple, just tell us what. Otherwise why bother to post?
     
  10. Jae

    Jae New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2018
    Likes:
    10
    Location:
    Missouri
    I used a 30 unit Oscar’s Grind and increased my bet size every time my net wins allowed me to do so.
     
  11. Jae

    Jae New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2018
    Likes:
    10
    Location:
    Missouri
    Like my post says... I bothered because I wanted to gloat. Is this forum not a place where people can come brag a little bit or share their excitement?
     
  12. Nathan Detroit

    Nathan Detroit Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2014
    Likes:
    266
    I know the MOP from a publication by V. Bethell circa 1910. Beating the bank with flat stakes . Only difference that in Baccarat one does not need to worry about the zero ( s) .

    For recreational purposes only . Play at your own risk.



    ND
     
  13. Jimske

    Jimske Active Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2014
    Likes:
    33
    Sure, if that makes you feel good. No harm in that. So now that you've accomplished your purpose are you going to continue wasting your and everyone's time? OR Are you going to continue to post this nonsense until you get enough gullible PM's who will offer you cash for this new holy grail of yours? LMAO
     
  14. Jae

    Jae New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2018
    Likes:
    10
    Location:
    Missouri
    While the negativity and cynicism is bothering me a little more than I thought it would, I’m not going to hold it against any of you. I get it, truly I do. Thing is, you’re a loser and you’ve probably seen posts similar to mine and have never seen anything manifest out of it. I’m not trying to talk down or belittle you, I was a loser too. I’ve got nothing to sell, my bankroll is big enough to to see how far I can take this thing.

    With that said, I am going to share with everyone my trigger and exact style of play very soon, first I want to challenge anyone truly interested in knowing to see if they can figure it out based on a bit of the knowledge that led me there.

    Sometime last year, I came across a a pretty cool old video, possibly 1950’s or earlier of some men showing experiments displaying randomness. (If anyone knows what video I’m talking about, please share, I’m having trouble tracking it down but I believe I originally saw it on a gambling forum) In one section of the video they had this huge wall filled with squares that were a different color on both sides and they blew a large fan at the wall while all these squares spun around and the final result was this wall filled with random two colored squares. Another portion of the video showed them dropping several balls down a plinks style setup, and the balls would fill slots at the bottom, and each time they performed the experiment, the amount of balls in each slot were different. The fan demonstration reminded me of baccarat results and it got me thinking down a new path.

    We all know that no two baccarat shoes in a sample of millions of shoes are going to produce the same exact results, especially two shoes back to back.

    I ran a few tests lining up several separate shoes to figure out any sort of entry point.

    Let’s say on shoe 1 we record our results vertically, example

    B
    B
    P
    B
    P
    P

    I ignore ties and don’t record them.

    After the results from shoe 1 are recorded, we record the results from shoe number 2next to the previous shoe, so the results would look like this

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

    I didn’t know what exactly I was looking for when I started testing all of this, I’ve never been a fan of trying to rationalize randomness or using it as an advantage, but since I’ve tried everything and have a huge fascination and small vendetta with the game, it’s not totally unheard of me to play around with a little bit of crazy theory.

    The entry point I was first looking for was after observing 5 shoes, I was thinking about using a martingale approach after a decision was made in the same spot of a shoe 5 shoes in a row and then betting against it continuing to be in the same place for 10 shoes.

    It should be of no surprise to anyone here that this didn’t pan out, as in my initial testing, I wasn’t but about 27 shoes in when I came across an event that happened 14times in a row across 14 shoes. I again tested a few hundred shoes testing a reverse martingale betting every hand hoping that 3 positions ina shoe would repeat 5 times, I had some success, but eventually it flopped as well.

    I abandoned my testing for a few months and earlier this year started exploring a few other options. I found something simple in the second shoe, and while it didn’t make complete sense to me why this entry point was working slightly more than 50% of the time, I just kept telling myself it was variance and short term luck. After testing 1,400 shoes on paper and seeing it still holding strong, I went from flat betting to experimenting with the martingale and d’alembert, and everything really. A 3 step martingale did slightly better than flat betting, a 4 step did slightly worse (don’t know why)and a 5 step did better than flat betting, but slightly worse than a 3 step.

    It was Oscar’s Grind that ended up being a really viable system for my trigger.

    I feel 100% comfortable using 30 unit bankroll.

    I only bet banker. I have a goal of 1win per shoe (so there’s quite of bit orphan waiting around, but it’s also important to continue tracking a shoe even after you’ve won, because you might need those results for the next shoe).

    I have tested my trigger using player, but after a few hundred shoes I found myself need 47 units for the Grind and I finished the shoe -17. I think better player is still a viable approach and I just saw more variance with it, as far as flat betting, when I tested it through 1400 shoes I was only up 63 units in the end, so I personally abandoned it but will possibly revisit in the future.

    50% of the time you will win the shoe your first bet. (Yeah, obvious, I know). Each shoe will give you several betting opportunities, but I feel it is important to stop after 1 win, if your first win is really early on in the shoe, it’s obviously possible to go for a second win, but I don’t.

    When it comes to the math and why this is working for me, I’ve struggled to understand a little bit myself, then something occurs to me about the randomness video I watched.

    We often treat baccarat hands like a coin flip. We all know a coin flip is 50/50,and aside from banker having a slight advantage, it really comes down to the decision being 50/50 as well. Cards have no memory.

    Going back to the wall of squares from the video, I believe the wall was made up of 100 two-sided/colored squares.

    When the fan would blow, all the squares would spin and then settle down to one of their respective colors. The end result isn’t going to have an outcome of 50 squares of one color and 50of the other color.

    Lamenting over this gave me a new perspective on something that helped me understand why my trigger is beating randomness.

    I’m trying to make more sense on a few things. I want to create a statistical correlation of the baker and player results from previous shoes, how they affect the trigger points in the next shoes where my trigger points are.

    I want my type of advantage play to be recognized as true advantage play without the mention of fallacy. When I give out my trigger, I want to be able to fully explain why it works so that we can all use this information to possibly exploit more triggers in the game.

    This is where YOU, the non-cynical player come in. If you can figure out my trigger based off the information that I’ve given, I will reward you with a $3,000 bankroll and would also be willing to fly you out to my local casinos in Missouri to meet up and play for a few days. If you come up with something better... I urge you to goo make some money and have fun.

    I’ll post my exact strategy on August 1st.

    Cheers!
     
  15. Jimske

    Jimske Active Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2014
    Likes:
    33
    Look, I'm pretty satisfied with my game and don't need you or anyone to call me names or a loser with no justification. Personally I'm not interested in playing any version of Oscar's Grind. So if you want to explain your method after throwing out a teaser go right ahead. It's commendable that you do more than "gloat."

    I'm sure lots of guys here would be happy to entertain your concepts. I don't happen to be one but don't let that stop you.
     
  16. brokercny

    brokercny Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2017
    Likes:
    19
    Location:
    new york
    Jae, you should clarify when calling people a loser. It can get very offensive. You went into great lengths with your strategy, which is something I didn’t expect. Sounds interesting but it wouldn’t be for me. My mentor and I have something of our own and it seems light years simpler. Good luck with what you have and if you’ve reached the milestone of winning $1mil+, than maybe I might be interested.
     
    MNYTRBL likes this.
  17. gizmotron

    gizmotron Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Likes:
    282
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    The West Coast of USA, RV'ing
    I know what you think your trigger is. Only one problem. You are just in a short termed win streak. There is a sequence that kills your method based on the most unlikely sequence to occur method. I'm not being clear or specific. You are using a past sequence to define an almost impossible to repeat second sequence to somehow relate a trigger. Guess what? You won't get what you want in the long run and until you learn that you won't have learned the lesson regarding the nature of randomness. You need to find a way to power test this. It will show you the true result. At this point it is magical thinking. Once you have it scoped out you will see it is a common fallacy. Sorry, just trying to help a fellow loser.
     
  18. Jimske

    Jimske Active Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2014
    Likes:
    33
    Yeah maybe but he said he ran about 1500 shoes including the live ones so . . . if he got a 5 unit stop loss that suggests he may have 5-10 wagers per shoe. 7,500-10,000 is not the long run but it's something. I guess with the actual numbers the SD and risk of ruin could be calculated.

    LOL, I think it's worth giving it a shot like he's doing; particularly using Oscar's Grind! In fact, if it failed he could enter into a LaBouchere progression to recoup.
     
    gizmotron likes this.
  19. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    651
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    Here you go. I posted it here a long time ago - it was taken down, then Fossell reposted a new link for me.
    It's a damn shame more people don't pay attention to exactly what they are saying.

     
    MNYTRBL likes this.
  20. Baccarat man

    Baccarat man Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2017
    Likes:
    5
    Occupation:
    Sales assistant
    Location:
    Ireland
    It can be done getting from 300 to 14000 but courage is needed by placing large wagers as your bankroll increases.
     
    Jimske likes this.

Share This Page