Baccarat Imbalances.

saintpreaks · Jul 18, 2024

Sputnik said: ↑

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
Click to expand...

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

Sputnik said: ↑

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
Click to expand...

If 1 0 1 is repeated in S, is it a bet that expects 2 3? I can't reach your level. I can't be as good as you in the future

Sputnik said: ↑

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
Click to expand...

Your theory seems difficult even for ChatGPT to explain.. I'm really curious about it tt

Log in or Sign up

Baccarat Imbalances.

saintpreaks Member

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

Baccarat Imbalances.

saintpreaks Member

Share This Page

Useful Searches