1. Welcome to the #1 Gambling Community with the best minds across the entire gambling spectrum. REGISTER NOW!
  2. Have a gambling question?

    Post it here and our gambling experts will answer it!
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Discussions in this section are assumed to be EV- as they are outside of the Advantage Play section. For EV+ discussions, please visit the Advantage Play section.
    Dismiss Notice

Baccarat Is there any strategy can win the house??

Discussion in 'Baccarat Forum' started by THIEN QUANG, Jun 25, 2022.

  1. THIEN QUANG

    THIEN QUANG New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2022
    Likes:
    1
    Location:
    VIET NAM
    Hello every one !

    This question always in my mind. I often find strategies but i have find out yet.

    Who has any stategy can we discuss ??
     
  2. Nathan Detroit

    Nathan Detroit Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2014
    Likes:
    2,087
    LDS . DBL.AS 3 or 4 are all strategies in a game of Luck .
     
  3. Ezmark

    Ezmark Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2020
    Likes:
    19
    Location:
    USA
    Welcome:
    There are or may be several winning methods discussed on this forum in recent years.. Also on other sites like BetSelection.cc .. There is a lot of wasted energy expressed also... Many common money management methods are free on the internet... A winning method is precious .
     
  4. Nathan Detroit

    Nathan Detroit Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2014
    Likes:
    2,087
    No strategies but Money Mgt. is the key in this game .
     
  5. Nathan Detroit

    Nathan Detroit Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2014
    Likes:
    2,087
    Naught strategies in the following games baccarat , roulette E C , Craps , Sic Bo .
     
  6. Bombus

    Bombus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2016
    Likes:
    436
    Location:
    amongst flowers
    Bet with the Dragons and bet against the Worms.

    All you need to do is figure out in real time who's a Dragon and who's a Worm at any given table.

    Add to that your comfort zone/strategy as regards money management and you're a winner.
     
    Last edited: Oct 5, 2022
  7. Nathan Detroit

    Nathan Detroit Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2014
    Likes:
    2,087
    A new set of thieves.
     

  8. Jae

    Jae Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2018
    Likes:
    346
    Location:
    Connecticut
    I rarely agree with this guy, but money management is THE STRATEGY. The biggest pitfall for most players and one of the key things the casino wants out of a player is a small bankroll that won’t survive the negative swings. Even if you walk in with a million, if you are making ten thousand dollar bets, that’s a small bankroll for that unit size (at least the way that I play). Small bankrolls in my opinion are small donations you are making to the house. Sure, you’ll get lucky from time to time, but the HE will get you after a few sessions. I think some methods are better than others, but I still think all methods need a large bankroll. Understanding and figuring out how much of a bankroll your method needs to survive the big swings is the money management strategy.
     
  9. stephen

    stephen Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2017
    Likes:
    46
    Location:
    USA
    Mathematically if you can not win flat betting no money management can make it a winner.

    THE STRATEGY with a large bankroll will win many small wins and lose big eventually resulting in net loss. Alan Wilson in his book "The Casino Gambler's Guide" has shown that Oscar's Grind eventually loses.

    However Jae seems to have a winning formula and wins consistently. If you want to emulate Jae you should know the method, have bankroll that wins often and loses occasionally so that the small wins more than offsets occasional big loss. The method also should take into account the maximum bets allowed in the casino.

    Another method is to flat bet based on patterns and to walk away when losing and stay in the game when winning.
     
  10. Nathan Detroit

    Nathan Detroit Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2014
    Likes:
    2,087
    I do not recommend MM betting methods but flat betting is not the best for this game .
     
    mr j likes this.
  11. Nathan Detroit

    Nathan Detroit Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2014
    Likes:
    2,087
    I keep it simple as in my post # 4 above .
     
  12. Punkcity

    Punkcity Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2020
    Likes:
    1,287
    Occupation:
    CEO, manager of sublease my account name.inc
    Location:
    Troll tag team one accounts head , Skipptophia.
    This is worthy of it’s own tread. Cheers
     
    Jae likes this.
  13. Jae

    Jae Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2018
    Likes:
    346
    Location:
    Connecticut
    I believe a better and more accurate phrase would be: “if you can win flat betting, money management can utilize more those wins with proper money management.”

    I avoid this topic a lot because it might be seem too complicated for some to understand, and it also may rain in parades… but my opinion is that everything is flat betting.

    The martingale is flat betting…

    So obviously you have your initial bet in a martingale of 1 unit. (This 1 unit is what most people would consider true flat betting, but to me it’s all flat betting).

    As part of using the martingale system, upon losing that first bet, the player bets 2 units. Again, this is just a flat bet of two units. It’s a flat bet because it’s always just two units after a loss. It doesn’t change. It’s not a hunch, it’s not a play based off of feelings. It’s a two unit flat bet triggered by a loss.

    It plays out nearly identically to a universally accepted idea of a flat bet at 1.5 units per bet. So if we bet 1.5 units as a “flat bet,” and lose twice, then we’ve lost 3 units. If we start a martingale at 1 unit and lose twice, we are down 3 units.

    To anyone following me so far, I’m sure your eyes are rolling in the back of your head.

    Let’s say at this point the “traditional flat bettor” isn’t quite following my logic, so let’s state it this way:

    If my bankroll is $1,000 and I decide to flat bet $5 units, this gives me a minimum of 200 possible flat bets. Let’s say I burn through all of that, so now I’m down $1,000 and now I decide to buy in for $2,000 and flat net $10 units. I for one, still consider this flat betting in the traditional and universal sense. Clearly at this point we know two things though, if we start winning with our $10 flat net, we’ll recoup in half the amount of wins as we would if we were trying again at a $5 unit; and we also know that we would be losing twice as fast if we don’t recoup.

    $5 units and $10 units would be what I would call phase 1 and phase 2 of a method.

    At this point, if you’ve burned through two bankrolls, your triggers and selection criteria might suck a little bit, or you have witnessed a bad down swing, but we are left with only a few options going forward. You can quit and cut your losses, you can remain at the $5 level… or the $10 level, or you can essentially turn this 200 unit string of flat bets into a large scale martingale and start again with a $4,000 bankroll betting $20 units.

    I’m a firm believer in regression to the mean. I do understand that these cards have no memory, but I also know that the HE is very low and swings can go both ways. Ideally, I’m just trying to survive the downswings and utilize money management to capture the benefits of the upswings.

    Now the traditional martingale in my opinion is too dangerous and cannot survive the small house edge (at least not in any trigger system or method that I know of aside from one which is an extremely patient practice that’s benefits don’t outpace the rewards).

    I also feel the same way about traditional flat betting. Always using one fixed unit size without any modifications is a bust in my opinion. I’ll admit that it’s a safe way to play for someone who wants to unwind and have fun without breaking the bank, if you consider baccarat “fun.”

    I’m a decent poker player, but I don’t think I could ever come out ahead if I were only capable of making a fixed size betting amount. I’ll stop there, I know that any analogies and comparisons I make between baccarat and poker wouldn’t even be fair, so I’ll just quit.

    Final point is, when we stop looking at differentiating systems and methods from flat betting, and realize it’s all a flat bet, we can understand how it all comes down to how we manage that flat betting amount. A few months ago I was in one of the craziest grinds I have ever been in. My bets went as high as $34,000. This series went on for nearly 5 hours. Even when I was betting $5,000 a hand versus $34,000. It all came down to how well I managed the money. I did come out of the series with a very minimal loss of just a few thousand, but to me it was a win. Especially considering my losses outweighed the wins by a lot. Traditional
    Flat betting would have had me at a deficit for tens of thousands during that span.

    I haven’t read Alan Wilson’s 70 year old book about his brief mention and introduction of Oscar’s grind to the world in years. But when I did read it, here was my takeaway:

    We all know that he attributed the name
    Of the system to an old tale of a man in Vegas who played the pass line in craps for a dollar unit, the man claimed to have never lost with OG and that intrigued Wilson. Wilson then ran some simulations on OG and said that it was possible that as a weekend player, shooting for a small goal of $100 a weekend which wasn’t small change in the 50’s when Oscar played, that it was possible that Oscar ne we did lose.

    In his simulations, Allen reported that 1 out of 5,000 sessions (which I think he meant to say series) that an OG user should expect a loss of $13,000.

    Wilson didn’t write a lot about his testing simulation, we don’t know how accurate it was or what he was running it on, or how it was set up. But let’s assume he was correct in his findings with what we do know:


    It was tested for craps, passline bettors with a $500 max bet. When you hit the max bet, that’s the end of the simulation, and now you report the loss of $13,000.

    What I find fascinating about this information is how people take it in and say… well, sounds like a bust to me.

    I look at that information and say… that sounds amazing.

    If you know of any betting method or strategy or system that can win 4,999 times out of 5,000, I’ll gladly pay top dollar for it, even if that one losing series causes extreme damage.

    We know the martingale can’t do it, and to show the quick math… let’s set it up like a 1950’s craps table. $1 minimum, $500 max.

    That gives us nearly 9 tiers:
    1-2-4-8-16-32-64-128-256

    We obviously know that we’d never see 4,999 winning series out of 5,000 with that setup.

    Of course we also know that, the 9 tier bust hitting the max limit would only put us at loss of a little over $500,

    Ultimately, you could probably do the math and even if you have the martingale $13,000 to continually perform multiple 9 tier martingales, maybe the math would out to a similar HE as OG or any other method.

    Doesn't matter, because the distinction is staying power. OG has the prolonged staying power, and managing your money during that prolonged staying power is how you can overcome the house advantage.

    The flaw I always saw with Wilson’s brief description of his simulation of OG wasn’t in his final statement of saying out of 4,999 sessions you’ll lose 1 for a big bust of -$13,000, it was the fact that there wasn’t a mention of how deep the grind got without busting. What’s the maximum bankroll I need to survive the 4,999 series while accepting a bust periodically. Because, I was always more focused on how I can roll my profits into my working bankroll and maximize my winnings. That’s money management.

    An easy example is a 5 tier martingale.

    1-2-4-8-16

    We need 31 units. So ideally, if we could win 31 units, we can double our unit sizes. Unfortunately, we know that the odds of surviving 31 wins is small before busting. Increasing our wins unit size is the hardest the first time, because we need 31 wins. To increase again, we only need 16 more wins.

    That’s a simple example, but we all know it’s not feasible. The martingale just sucks. But due to variance, it’s not impossible to win 100+ times without busting. So if you were to properly manage your money and increase as you went and got out at a good time, or regressed at certain milestones, then obviously, you could maximize profits while also potentially minimizing losses.

    Busting out once out of 5,000 seemed like a great opportunity to utilize that theory. But holdup…. Obviously, the number would be way less than 1 in 5,000, because nobody is going to start out a process like this with a bankroll high enough to hit the max bet, so since Allen didn’t really give a good average number of highest bet and what bankroll you would need to achieve this goal, I had to do it with my own trials.

    Since we are talking about my method now, the numbers drastically change. While on paper, the house edge in baccarat and craps looks quite similar, even though on paper banker bet looks slightly better. But in reality, it’s much better, because I when it comes to regression to the mean, banker bet in baccarat is the most ideal bet in the casino for this since it wins more than 50% of the time.

    In my own trials of tens of thousands of real life shoes (which isn’t even a great number for simulations). I realized that the 1 in 5,000 never came. Not even 1 in 2,000.

    So I began my journey of utilizing compound interest if you will and rolling my bankroll further and further to the point where I felt invincible. I’ve seen my share of small losses, but my wins have far outweighed everything. I’m sitting very pretty and have set myself up for life.

    Money management.
     
    stephen, Punkcity and cps10 like this.
  14. cps10

    cps10 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2016
    Likes:
    326
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Nice post Jae. I have found my money management as well and it can ride out a very cold period on the tables, even with blackjack, roulette, craps or baccarat. Sometimes it’s a big time grind, other times hitting a goal is quite easy. But the money management is holding it together for me for when the results come back into balance, which we know they will eventually even in the short term.
     
    Punkcity likes this.

  15. Punkcity

    Punkcity Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2020
    Likes:
    1,287
    Occupation:
    CEO, manager of sublease my account name.inc
    Location:
    Troll tag team one accounts head , Skipptophia.
    Good post, even if others disagree it’s a worthy post for many people to think about.

    The compound of profit to increase unit value is a totally misunderstood aspect of professional casinoverse play. Most are only in to get a profit on each and every occasion, unrealistic as it seems, they continue to use matybaiton ,ladder betting etc to try to curtail those losses and turn the session into a profit. They constantly fail, the brickyard casinoverse is a shining testament to that and the collective endeavour of the majority that continue to try that, they just go broke, they never understood anything in the first place. Forums like this are exhausted by the to and fro of their idiotic excuses and denials of the simple fact that you cannot win EVERY session.

    They lack the discipline to grow a small bankroll into a large bankroll over time . The prime reason is that any return in the startup stage is NOT enough in their mind to be of ANY worth. They have a unrealistic belief that they should be able to live off the profit from the get go. This is ludicrous especially if they only go to the brickyard on the weekend, once a fortnight, or on annual holidays once a year. They act like rank amateur they received what rank amateurs received, nothing .

    Further the money management discussion, as a recreational player your time it takes is much slower to achieve compounding as would a professional that is at the brickyard on a daily basis. The recreational player can benefit of course but they need a huge shift in their mindset, if you only go once a year for your 2week holiday, as an example, treat the outlay and return as a totally DIFFERENT bankroll to your normal holiday money bankroll. That is don’t hit the piss if you had a big win today using your gambling bankroll. Hit the celebration from the holiday bankroll. If your holiday bankroll can’t sustain a celebration then you need to address your own attitude. The betting bankroll is not a surrogate cash cow, this is the most common mistake. So now your holiday is over, with the professional approach you should have most of your starting bankroll hopefully, if not a small loss. Perhaps you have increased your bankroll over the two weeks to 10 or 30% extra. So you DONT spend it when you get home, you save it for the next trip .

    NOW you can compound to the next unit size level. For the recreational player this can take a few years at 2to 3 weeks per year play, you can also add to it in the meantime from your own disposable income ( optional but can accelerate compounding effect and reduce time) in time you can FUND the holiday FROM the betting bankroll BECAUSE you are eventually betting at a HIGHER unit level all due to compounding, discipline, money management and having realistic expectations.
    The professional is able to achieve this as a full time job in months if not within the year.

    It can be done.
    Cheers
     
    cps10 and Nathan Detroit like this.
  16. Chip Magnet

    Chip Magnet Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2019
    Likes:
    31
    Location:
    NYC
    Ran fifteen Oscar's Grind 1,200 hand craps sessions. $5 Pass Line bet. $10K bankroll.

    1,200 hands is the equivalent of 10 hours of play. The pass line wins 49.3% of all winning hands. Same as the Player bet in Baccarat.

    Highest bet reached: $565 or 113 units Avg. High bet: $193

    Thirteen winning sessions total win: $3,445

    Two losing sessions total loss: -$9,015

    Net Loss: -$5,570

    Tested Oscar's Grind on 35K Zumma Craps Rolls

    No Bet Limit hit a high bet of $3,600. Total loss -$104,000

    High Bet Limit: $2,500 or 500 units Total Loss: -$79,120

    High Bet Limit: $500 or 100 units. Total Loss -$34,835
     
  17. Chip Magnet

    Chip Magnet Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2019
    Likes:
    31
    Location:
    NYC
    Wilson ran 280,000 OG sequences, starting with a $1 bet and a 500 unit limit on an IBM 709.

    He did not mention how many of the sequences were losing sequences, but one out of every 4,200 sequences was what he referred to as a 'catastrophic sequence'. The trial ended with a total loss of -$584,000. or 1.46% of the total amount wagered. Almost exactly the 1.41% expected loss.

    Wilson referred to his OG trials as an exposé of the system.

    “The law of large numbers reveals just how deadly this system can be.”

    “The first ruinous loss can occur at any time.”

    “Although the probability of a single disastrous event may appear remotely small, “The cumulative effect with many sequences, leads to a nearly certain disaster.”
     
    cps10 likes this.
  18. stephen

    stephen Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2017
    Likes:
    46
    Location:
    USA
    Perhaps Oscar's grind with banker bets will give better results since banker bets win more than 50% of the time.
     
    Jae likes this.
  19. Jae

    Jae Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2018
    Likes:
    346
    Location:
    Connecticut
    100%

    I’ve been preaching this for several years. I’ve been utilizing this for several years. I’ve made more money waiting for a trigger on banker bets using OG than most successful professional poker players make in a lifetime. There are a few players that I’ve met through this forum that have now made 6 figures doing this.

    I can and will always vouch that this is in my opinion a legit way to make money in the casino. I have never and probably will never condone this method for any other bet. Not the player bet, not the passline, not roulette, not blackjack, and while it may be possible to develop a method to win on the don’t pass, I think it’s too risky and too time consuming that it wouldn’t make sense to apply any effort in seeing if that would even be feasible.
     
    cps10 likes this.
  20. cps10

    cps10 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2016
    Likes:
    326
    Location:
    North Carolina
    OG can keep bets low during a long losing streak too. I didn’t think a Banker’s only would be good. Great idea. I use a stepladder approach to MM but I could fuse an OG stepladder to work well.
     

Share This Page