Baccarat Imbalances.

I really went crazy today thinking about the potential of imbalances. I'm trying to understand what Sputnik is doing. I am not sure I get what he is doing. But I do like the idea of Series imbalances. But today I thought I'd look for JAE OG 100 unit virtual losses. I know they're prettty common and I did find one right off. But one person looking at 5 different shoes can be tricky. Easy to miss stuff while looking at a different shoe. I spent about 5 hours which is generally more time than I like to be there. Then there was this one which started well but I didn't get the chance to follow up. I still take pics but you got to be d discreet.

I was working on this next one. I had to rewrite it. My scorecard too small and got sloppy. But here it is written out. Your looking at 3 shoes from top to bottom. Note the 496/39 on second shoe. I started looking around for JAE to see if he had a bunch of tickets handy . But nope. Lucky think because the third shoe would NOT cooperate! It ended 895/70. Sorry, I don't know what happened but I'm glad I wasn't betting it! I'm pretty sure it would come back with a win but at some point as long as you have the bankroll. It ain't pretty.

But JAE did say you could lose! But maybe wait for -500! Wait for -1000??? Wait for a thousand and make a couple big bets and done?



Interesting.

 

I’m game to help research it @Jimske

 

where do you play i would help

 

Lots of ways to look at it. I think in terms of "statistical limitations." There's stuff that you just don't see a lot of. Those shoes above had a 41% B strike rate and 59% P. Started with about a -100 with JAE OG. Can you wait for -500? IMO most shoes that hit even a -20 resolve pretty quick. I did a shoe today and when it hit -50 I figured I'd give it a shot. Fortunately it worked out. Most progressions use a "cutback" to reduce escalation. Maybe there's a way to "freeze" a reduced bet to reduce real bad shoes. But whatever we do to reduce escalation cuts into a potential profit. It's always a give and take.

I stopped after the 4B resolved. But what else about this shoe maybe makes sense to bet? Series of 1 and Series of 3 sticks out. You win this shoe, Hugh, what did ya get? 3 units less commission 2.4 Net? I think Patrik "Series Count" wins this, too.

Okay, I'm outa here. Enjoy the Holiday everybody who has one.

 

Anybody running a stream of SAME/DIFFERENT would have had a nice time of it as well!

DDDD (4)
SS (2)
D (1)
SSS (3) ****
DDDDD (5)
SSSS (4)
DD (2)
SSSSSSS (7)
DD (2)
SSSS (4)
DDDD (4) **** A DOMINANT RUN WITH NO SINGLES FROM THE SSS TO HERE
S (1)
D (1)
SSS (3)
DD (2)
S (1)
DDDDDDDDD (9)
SSSS (4)


From hand 10 to hand to 42

PP (2)
B (1)
P (1)
B (1)
P (1)
B (1)
PPPP (4)
B (1)
PPPPPPPP (8)
B (1)
PPPPP (5)
B (1)
P (1)
B (1)
PP (2)
BB (2) The double B appears and so the end of the P domination.

Straight after from hand 43 to hand 60

BB
P
BB
P
B
P
B
P
B
P
B
P
B
B
B
B A nice B domination although with a long chop.

It was a shoe of domination for one thing or another. There is nearly always something dominating sections of a shoe. Sometimes it is on the surface. Even the SAME/DIFFERENT is on the surface for anybody with the inclination to track it. You can dig even deeper and look below the surface and find the same domination in sections of the shoe and this is why following the shoe is your best bet. If you decide that you are only going to bet one side come hell or high water, you are a hostage to the shoe and the gambling gods.

cheers

 

baccarou, you're a smart man. Keep up the good work seeking out those doms and you'll do just fine at this game.

Jimske, good insights, as always, from you. You've gotta be one tough out for the casino every time you sit down to play, and frankly, isn't that something that we all strive for? Good for you.

Happy Holiday Weekend, all.

 

Gr8 - you and I use a similar staking style. Just want to commend you on yours. Mine is a tad more aggressive but we have similar paths. To me, there’s no rush to win. Just let it happens when it happens. I think my progression does that.

 

Thanks gr8player!



For anybody new or wondering,

PPP
BB
P
B (so here is the start of the dom because there was a double B followed by the single P. Now you are hoping the P's continue in single fashion along with some B runs. If it chops, that's ok and a 12 neg progression will keep gaining you a unit until the PP comes along and takes 3 units of you.)
P
BBBB
P
BBBBBBBB
P
B
P
BBBB
P
B
P
B

What will beat the doms?

The 2's

BB
PP
BB
PP

Basic stuff but good to know because you see so many players in this situation who would keep betting the P thinking the B run would break but I have seen doms last 35 hands and players lose everything betting against it.

cheers

 

every single betting system has a nemesis i think better then dom would be always bet opposite except when 2 in a row then bed repeat until it breaks then back to opposite

 

Hello John, I tested your idea on the following shoe...



WWWW
LL
W
LLLLLL
W
L
WWWWWWWW
LLLLLL
WW
L
W
L
WW
LLLL
W
LL
WWW
L
WW
LLL
W
LLL
WWWWW
LLL
W
L
W
L
WWW

up half a unit after tax. It goes ok apart from losing to the 2's but then most things lose to the 2's. In comparison, playing that shoe looking for the 'dom' on either the Banker / Player returned -1 flat betting.

 

Now on saying that, if I play the 'dom' on the SAME / DIFFERENT stream on the above shoe and then I get around +10 flat betting because it's behaving a lot more consistently without seeing those 2's so much! You have choices to make and in keeping with the title of the thread, where are the imbalances happening? Which stream are they happening in? Figure that out and you make your couple of units per shoe which is all anybody can really ask for.

 

i. the last shoe you made 10+ units?? i think only way to win is random vs random
bc it does not have a nemesis

 

If I was playing the shoe above, I would have took advantage of the 2's from around hand 11 to hand 15, got on the P run which followed shortly after and then another run of 2's straight after the P run. That would be more than enough for me to get out of the shoe with a nice profit. I don't go into a shoe with the preconceived idea of playing for the 'doms' (where you have a run interspersed by singles) although for sure I look out for them because if you ignore them when they are happening, it can hurt you.

In regards to a dom, it can be anything. A run of chops, 2's, a streak of something. BBBPBBP (like in the example a couple of posts above) It can also be a run of several characteristics which morph from one thing into another. If you recognise it, you can play it.
A new shoe is an open book, all I know is that there is very likely to be several doms / imbalances happening somewhere along the line. I just wait until I can identify them and then hopefully take advantage to grab a few units if they are short lived or ride them for all they are worth.

 

I like to see this. My problem is that I can never see those trends early enough to capitalize on them.

 

My opinion is that it's all how you record your shoes when playing.

As an example, let's take the 2's.

B
B
P
P
B
B
P
P

Now suppose you add a number for each pair of results.

BB =1
BP = 2
PP = 3
PB = 4

So taking those 2's again...

B
B 1
P 2
P 3
B 4
B 1
P 2
P 3

You can see that it's running in a 1234 loop. It makes it easy to spot the 2's and they won't creep up on you!

 

Great breakdown! Thank you!

 

Jimskey - I can upload the Z-score for baccarat - where you put in the number of wins and amount of losses and get the Z-score value.
From here you can build your charts of imbalance and correction charts based upon pure math and probability expectation that works in real life with cause and effect.

Skip the guessing part and gamblers' fallacy and develop the closest you can come to a crystal ball that will allow you to glance into the future and give good and solid ground for your expectation that most of the time will come true.

Here is one example (forget about a larger series than 3 in a row at the moment) to make illustration and example easy and clear as water.
Take singles versus a series of three and give them the value 1 each as two opposite things that can happen.
Allow these two events to create the pendulum effect for you with balance and imbalance.

Now if you get 14 singles and 2 series of three in any existing combination as one isolated window of events or sequence you have exactly 3.0 Z-score (that means if you put in them as losses and wins in the baccarat Excel sheet you will get the value 3.0 STDV) this happens 0,5%.
And 12 singles and 2 series of three happens 1%.

So now if you bet for example against 4 singles in one segment or level with a certain staking plan and lose.
Then you know that if you get 8 more singles and only one series of three you have to reach the 0,5% sequence of window.

Here you can open up discussion test different angles or estimate what happens next.
So let's say you have 4 singles in front of you and wait for a series of three - two things can happen.
You get a series of three after 4 singles or you get more singles and the imbalance grows stronger before the first series of three appear.
In both situations, you have a good chance to get a series of four or five as each extra outcome in length for a series of three is one point.

But if the situation ends with a series of three then the expectation increases that you will get at least one more series of three first or before you get 4 more singles - like pressure and the most common occurrence if you compare several sequences with the same quality in output.

Now let's say you get 4 more singles and after that a series of three.
Then you are closer to reaching the 0,5% benchmark - but the pressure increases and you have better odds favoring you and your situation.

Reason for this and the point I want to make at the end here and know is - that you will always have a minimum of three series of three in length opposite to 4+ singles and one series of 3 and 4+ more singles and one series of 3 and 4+ more singles

So no matter what window you use in any combination you will with both examples above have the expectation of at least three series of three among 14 singles in any combination or more
Or the same with 12 singles in any combination and more as the most common window or sequence occurrence odds and % wise

But they don't have to come as series of three you might instead of three series of three get a series of five that has the value of 3
Or one series of 4 that hast he value of 2 and one series of three that has the value of 1

Now you might understand singles opposite larger series and windows and correction expectancy based upon math and probability calculations.
This is a blu print to succeed with Oscar Grind and build expectancy charts that wins the majority of times or aim for the extreme.

Now you will understand the following playing modell

Singles has the value of 1
Series of two has the value of 0
Series of three has the value of 1
Series of four has the value of 2
Series of five has the value of 3
And so it continues

CHeeres