Baccarat In depth discussion of trends in Baccarat

Forget the research. Go out and PLAY the game . You will be much happier . Win or Lose .

 

Thank you for the advice. I have not played at all for a long time. Not that I don't like the game. It is because I don't have time and have other thing to do. Now I just devote my time into stock market, that make me more rewards as it has more opportunities for things >50% chance. I just come back and try to see some of my friends how are they doing. Well, I will play again some days later.

 

Taking the advise from well known US American Gambling Gurus : Play at a table with the lowest minimum and bet
the lowest amount possible .,





ND

 

You are right. With the vision of how you and everyone looks at the game, it is hard to believe. I don't use trends or biases. I am telling you that what I look for happens 100% of the time. Yes 100% of the time. The thing that I can't control is when it happens but I have streamlined it enough where I can say it is hard to lose a lot. Want to give it a shot? Email me at [email protected]

 

Pretty comical, can't lose too much of gambling, what casino do you work for?

 

$200-$250 minimum.Only increase slightly if if you get to $700-$800.Then if you get over $1000 bet $300 only on a definite trend only only once when it looks good!!!! bet $25 the rest of the time and DON'T BET OFTEN!!!!!A loss may occur and if so lower your bet to $20 and start again.Its all about MONEY MANAGEMENT!!!!!!

 

What`s that ? A bankroll for shorty short cash at a Baccarat table . A sure loser .

 

I really like this topic. I read it again and again twice. Hope it will give me good ideas. Thank you.

 

Trends and patterns are simply non-existent over your course in placing hundreds and thousands of bets in an EC game.

There would be no reason as to likelihood of x happening after a series of y has occurred in an even chance game such a Baccarat. Sure, you can place a based on your own strategy after something has happened that triggers your bet and do this over the course of several hands and win, but to think you have an advantage in any sort of bet selection that does not approach 50% over thousands of hands is delusion.

Trends and patterns only exist within the mind in such a game. You may win following a pattern but you will guaranteed lose at one point or another following a trend or pattern which is the nature of the game. You will always find a pattern no matter what table you go to, but that pattern will never be actionable as patterns don’t exist objectively in an EC game.

 

maybe it's just about having a "knack."

 

I don't agree - you can apply both math and probability calculations for balance and imbalance.
We can not talk about limits, even if no imbalance passes 5,45 STDV after several million simulations.
This is based upon specific playing models where you use values for certain events.

A trend can be complex to catch but simple to understand.
And I will give one simple example.

One specific playing model.
Series has the value of 1
Singles have a value of 1

Now you can experiment with strong imbalance, waves of overrepresented events.
(A) will they continue to grow stronger? (B) will they stop growing stronger and get weaker (C) Stop getting stronger and not getting weaker and hovering around zero point.

Those are three things that can happen and when they continue to grow stronger you will do nothing.
And when you get an indication of the other two scenarios you would jump on board.

This becomes like using charts with the stock market.
Would you get a growth of imbalance growing stronger with one indication and stops and grows stronger again, then you will lose.
That would be a spike upwards and a small, tiny break and grow stronger again.

The tiny break can not become medium or large as you would then win.
So a zig-zag formation of a 2,5 STDV stop and grow to 3,5 and stop and grow to 4,5 stop and grow to 5,5.
So all trends and selections no matter math and probability will have a chance to bust.

But I rather base my selections on math and probability, because then I can use charts to understand behind the mechanism that makes the trend or triggers work or not work with some degree of likelihood.
I know for a fact that to break the record of 5,5 STDV I would be more than happy to experience that moment live in a casino.
Because it would be rare for a sports athlete to achieve a new world record.

So with the help of math and probability, you can calculate the ratio of the spices from one certain entering point or using several different entering points categorize the spikes into small, medium, and large and find the average ratio between a starting point up to 5,5 STDV.
Then you know with some degree of certainty based upon your mapping chart that you will catch at least one winning bet.

That is one among many ways to complete and build a playing model on math and probability.
The argument that math and probability don't beat the game is that fact that the world record can be broken as the events have no memory.
But we have the bell curve and median values and math calculation to measure imbalance and no imbalance.

I am pretty sure that many gamblers would do better if they used the law of series and applied math and probability.
Where you tackle overrepresented events kontra underrepresented events.
It also works in a reverse way with the right setup of playing model where you bank on the growth growing stronger.

So trends are real but misunderstood as patterns with no value.
Trends we can measure using math and probability and different theories to explore.

 

Hi Sputnik,

Very interesting read. I've had to read it several times to try to understand the mathematics behind trends from your viewpoint.

I agree with you in that trends are very much a real thing that you can analyze and take advantage of, but I believe that they can only be taken advantage of in hindsight. I also agree with you that all selections have a chance to bust, and that chance becomes a reality in many scenarios. That's why you must have a proper plan other than bet selection to be truly successful.

I understand from your point of view that many gamblers can't take advantage of a trend as it may be very difficult to come by and see them as patterns with no inherent value to how they are playing. I see that you have created some sort of mathematical reasoning and formula as to how you specifically play for or against these trends and that's great, as it suits you as well as your staking plan and if you have been successful in your play then keep doing what you're doing. However, I still do not truly understand the imbalances and having waves of overrepresented events. If I am not mistaken, you indicated that if trends become stronger, you do not place a bet. Would this in itself be a variation of bet selection which could be useful to a different person that uses a different staking plan if they in fact did bet with the trend as it is getting stronger? Since you follow the other two indications, getting weaker and hovering around zero point; wouldn't that be just as effective as having indications that it will get stronger, or hovering around zero point based on the shoe?

I personally believe that any bet selection works, some work better than others based on your own staking plan. Many gamblers will never understand the maths behind their play. While I also may not have a deep understanding the mathematical forces behind my own or your selections, I appreciate you took the time to reply.

Thanks!

 

@Sputnik. So Patrik, this is reminiscent of ECD "weighted " imbalance remember?

I wonder how many opportunities to wager per, say 100 spins, for a specific identified imbalance? So unless there's a number of opportunities it may be impractical live.

And wouldn't the value of the STDV allow for increased wager amount based on the scale?

In blackjack we would occasionally see a 2% advantage based on a strong true count. Up to a 15 : 1 spread. Might a similar thing work with what you are looking at?

With BJ one could wait a LONG time flat betting paying rent. I would be concerned that variants could be a real problem with what you're looking at.

OTH Before I played what I'm playing now I would always consider the singletons vs. the series as the key to imbalance.

Cheers