Baccarat Flat Betting Possibilities

Hey Fathead, finally got home and was doing some testing on flat betting, but with a different approach then your 70% method.

I was thinking why not capitalize on the single Player and Bankers since they show up so often in shoes? As opposed to waiting so long for the perfect shoe with the right ratio of bankers to players. So I started to run some numbers on shoes and this is what I found.

Seeing how many single Players and Bankers there are vs the 2,3,4,5,6,7,8 etc in a row.

1 million shoes (simulated)

-18,673,141 (any 2+ in a row)

+19,444,350 (single player/bankers)

+771,209 total (single player/banker resulted in a higher frequency of showing up in shoes, then 2+ in a rows combined


Testing 2361 live shoes for single banker/player frequency

-41,343 (any 2+ in a row)
+42,460 (single player/bankers)

+1,117 total (single player/banker again, resulted in a higher frequency of showing up in shoes, then 2+ in a rows combined)

Testing zumma 1600 shoes for single banker/player frequency

-28,467 (any 2+ in a row)
+29,434 (single player/bankers)

+967 (single player/banker again, resulted in a higher frequency ofvshowing up in shoes, then 2+ in a rows combined)

From this data, I thought it might be interesting to test flat betting the opposite of a single banker or player result with 1 unit. If you lose, wait until the streak has finished and bet opposite of the next single player/banker that shows up.

The results for paper testing 53 zumma shoes was +66 units with a max draw down of about -20. Did not incorperate any stop win/stop loss. Average +1.2 units per shoe.

There are definite swings up and down..but overall, always stayed in an upward trajectory on units.

Of course...this all may be a fluke. I need a lot more data, but so far seems interesting.

I attached a few zumma shoes I worked on. If further testing shows this is viable, I'll go to the casino, try it live and post my results.

Let me know your thoughts.

 

That is Elliott Maricle's "Tide" system. He uses it for craps, though. He used to flat bet for hours on Pass / Don't Pass until he was ahead for the day. I am not sure if he still plays it or not.

I have tested it before. It loses in the long run after Banker Pushes or Banker Commission.

One problem is that you cannot capture all the singles. The two singles in bold below, for example were not captured because you were waiting for the streaks to end before betting.

P
P
B
P
B
B
P

 

Never heard of Elliot or the "tide system", but yes you are right, you are not capturing all the singles. Do you still have any of that data you tested?

Lets look at shoe below on the right. 22
times it was +1, 15 times was -1. Still was positive for the shoe even though, more then half the units were lost to a BB or PP etc.

Either way I like your idea of flat betting and waiting for the right opportunity to bet. But I'm a little worried that I'll be waiting a couple hours at the casino for the right shoe thats at that perfect 70% or more range.

Also, why not have a template for the shoes to easily track if you are at 70% in the shoe?
Below you know what numbers you have to be at to start betting (I rounded up on the %s)

10/13
10/14
11/15
12/16
12/17
13/18
14/19
14/20
15/21
16/22
17/23
17/24
18/25
19/26
19/27
20/28
21/29
21/30
22/31
23/32
24/33
24/24
25/35

 

The shoe on the right I mentioned

 

Surely that wouldn't be the case? As (from the top) you lose the 2nd P, so stop betting, then it's Banker, you bet Player and Win, 2nd outcome is unknown.

 

True

 

true, you miss the first OPPOSITE but catch the single, as same when you get the last opposite that’s the start of a multiple.

I could suggest you to add a Single/Multiple count?
you add +1 for every single and -1 for every multiple. bet with a positive count only.
this should help in skipping bad sequences and streaky shoes.

 

Yes, the template would be handy when trying to figure when to enter. That is the problem with this method, only 9 to 10 % of shoes qualify so you don't bet very often, unfortunately.

 

The theory is that since singles outnumber columns (streaks) in baccarat and craps, you should bet for the chop. So you wait for any streak to end, then start betting chop until first loss, then wait for first chop to begin betting again. However, by waiting for the streak to end (first chop) you cannot bet on the first single of the chop so about 50% of singles cannot be captured. You would think that it would still have a chance but in the long run it does not do well.

P
P streak
B streak ends (uncaptured)
P chop win <<begin betting
B chop win
B streak loss << stop betting
P streak ends (uncaptured)
? bet here

 

It is true that the last P may not be a single. If it turns out to be part of a new streak then it is worse since it is -1 loss.

P
P streak
B streak ends (uncaptured)
P chop win <<begin betting
B chop win
B streak loss << stop betting
P streak ends (uncaptured)
B chop win

or

P
P streak
B streak ends (uncaptured)
P chop win <<begin betting
B chop win
B streak loss << stop betting
P streak ends
P streak loss << stop betting

 

At the casino tonight...tried the 70% method. Got the trigger on second shoe at hand 14. Bet once on banker, won. I think having the goal of just one unit for the shoe flat betting is good enough. If I had played the whole shoe through, would have been negative by the end. Was an interesting shoe...11 ties .

 

Got another 1 unit on your 70% shoes

 

could you explain a bit how this template works?
thanks

 

Its very simple.
You are waiting for the first 13 hands in the beginning of the shoe...no bets. If you see 10 out of the last 13 hands %70.65^ (10/13) are player, bet the opposite on banker. Usually you are getting close to even players and bankers in a shoe, so the method is counting on that the player/bankers will "even out" in the shoe allowing you to pick up a couple units in profit because one side is currently dominant.

So 10/13 is the first time in shoe there is an opportunityg7

So 10/14 (10 out of 14)

Etc

Hope that makes sense

 

Very good. One unit per qualified shoe ... certainly nothing wrong with doing it that way. I think Jae used to aim for one unit per shoe when he first started out in the midwest. He played EZ Bac also at that time.

 

Baccarat Magician - can I refer to you regarding the stats you simulated.
I will write a PDF that solves the puzzle above.

I will name it 3 Points Ahead and is purely based upon math and probability.

Cheers

 

Sure) Just google

P and B Events Statistics: A Comprehensive Comparison imspirit wordpress

Should show 1600 zumma shoes, 2361 live shoes and 1 million computer simualted shoes.

 

It was a big surprise for me - my assumption has always been that there is as many series (with any length) as singles.
One of my Marigny De Grilleau book's makes the statement.

Cheers Patrik

 

Finding a place with those stats is very helpful to determining whether a method has any merrit or not. Wish more people were doing it

 

If your unit size is large enough, then 1 unit is all you need. You bypass the rollercoaster of the rest of the shoe. Ill keep looking out for those 70% shoes as I normally play. Havent lost one I flat bet on yet.