Baccarat M*&%$#@ F)*&%$!!!!

So, I was eyeballin Heavy dice forum and come across a posting about the baccarats. And, when I took a looksee I find that some cat has seemingly taken my style to write a damned book. This Evans Lee cat say the best way to buck up against the baccarats is to use a 13 step parlay style. He also advocate the bankers only bets selection. And he even say verbatim that ya gotta have balls and bankroll to win! Bwwwwwwwwwwwwwwaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, I'm dyin over here I tell ya! I'm gonna need a whole damned keg of Guinness for this, hey hey!

http://www.axispowercraps.com/crapsforum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=5561
"Here is a great excerpt from Lee’s Volume One on a 13 step negative progression…“The rules are structured so that it takes two hands to resolve a bet. The strategy is simple, in Baccarat single events are the most common, followed by doubles, followed by triples. This betting system relies on there being at least one double at some point along the sequence. If we pass through the entire sequence of bets without a double we bust and lose. However, if we hit a double at any point between bets 1-13 we recover any loss units and show a profit. If we get a double we start the sequence over from bet 1. If we bust, we start the sequence over from bet 1. My system does both, I push when I am ahead and I push when I am behind. I push when I am ahead by letting my entire winning bets ride that is, my base bet plus my win becomes my next bet this is known as a pyramid strategy. When I win two hands back to back my base bet is multiplied by 3. However, when I lose, I only lose my base bet.”

http://www.axispowercraps.com/crapsforum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=5561
"Just for illustration, just as it happened in the first ten real-data shoes I tested, 6 were Player dominant and four were Banker dominant shoes (something I think you could encounter quite a bit actually). All ten shoes line betting Player LOST 85 units in total (there were three bust outs on Banker dominant shoes). All ten shoes line betting Banker WON 413 units.

You won’t win line betting Banker on all Player dominant shoes but, you will win some! IMO, this kind of stacks the deck in Banker’s favor, in the long run.

Why? IMO, I tend to think and see, in most shoes, that there are typically more Banker “back to back” wins, within the 13 step progression, obviously. In the majority of my current testing data, the average amount of Banker “back to back” wins, per shoe, was 12.17 (1765 Banker “back to back” wins in 145 shoes). This 12.17 per shoe figure would usually be higher (maybe 14-15) but, my 12.17 per shoe figure included the shoes where I busted out with only very few or NO “back to back” Banker wins before busting. That brought the average down naturally. I don’t understand why there seems to be more Banker “back to back” wins in any given shoe but, I suspect it is the card drawing rules leaning towards the Banker’s favor. Incidentally, Player, in all those same shoes, averaged 9.80 per shoe. Hmmm…12.17 Banker vs. 9.80 Player per shoe."

http://www.axispowercraps.com/crapsforum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=5561
The entire key to all of this is one thing, Win/Win or “back to back” wins. As long as you can get a “double” win within your negative progression string of 13 levels, you will prevail. Yes, sometimes it takes balls of steel losing/betting up until the last couple of levels in a progression, but Profit is Profit! It just seems to work out in the long run.

 

Jesus that hasn't half been twisted. I've got all of Lee's publications, which are very well written, he's a genuine guy. I exchanged a few emails with him few years ago. What he promotes is the use of a positive progression, one side only on the Banker side.

 

PLAYER-PLAYER will just about always perform worse than BB, BP or PB.

Here are the first three shoes from the Zumma 600.

The 6.2 figure for Shoe 1 is the average time it takes for PP to appear. BB has an average of 5.4
The BP and PB sit at 4.2 each.

Long term testing shows that the average waiting time using a coin for HH/TT is 6 and it's 4 for HT/TH.
The figures are going to be a liitle bit different for BB and PP in Baccarat because of the slight advantage towards B.

Shoe 1:



Shoe 2:



Shoe 3:



I did actually make a slight mistake in Shoe 1 for the PP from hand 15 to 25. I recorded an absence of 2 when in fact it should be 11. So the 6.2 should be a bit higher still. All the rest is accurate.

Personally speaking, I consider this a great starting point for anybody who is interested in bet selection and not just the MM side of things. Combining the two together (bet selection +MM) can only make you a stronger adversary for the Casino at the tables.

 

Wondering if you could build a system around that?

Record a shoe using columns of 2's. Whatever the top line result is, bet the opposite for the bottom of the column, if you lose, you must wait for a virtual win / or, the top line result has to be different than the proceeding column, to prevent you losing too many bets against any long streaks, repeating 2's. Curious if the loss strings would be manageable!!!

 

Bullshit!! All it will EVER do is make the person using it a habitual casino loser!

 

You should change your name from jbs to IBS because you are quite irritable to say the least!

 

Nice original way of putting it.

No doubt jbs is one bitter old loser.

 

It's a good idea JK and something worth looking at. This is why I have always adhered to the timing approach as just as important as anything else. You can see the figures showing that the BP and PB have shorter lengths of absence and naturally so because of the 'law of series'. Trying to capture them through some kind of timing technique / spot play is going to work out better than just going at it hand after hand and running into long streaks of Banker or Player.

 

The spot play could be waiting six or so decisions before playing Banker only waiting to capitalize on the parlay that soxfan says. The highest drought that Eugene shows is 17 so a six decision waiting period would still encompass a 13-step progression. Of course you would miss out on some winners on quick streaks but that would be a safer way to do it and you’d be undefeated through those three shoes.

 

Yeah, that's always the problem with virtual bets. Whatever we do to reduce escalation costs us in the profit column.

 

My motto is, "it's better to not lose than to win". (who cares about missed wins, so long as you grab some of them, the tables are always going to be there).

I rather break even than suffer a loss.

 

Reminded me of THE BACCARAT CODE by I don't know who because I just got the manual without the cover page! Maybe some of you may know. It's a pairs system attempting to exploit the dominant pair trending in a shoe. Toward the end he gives the long term % outcomes of the 4 pairs:

 

Jimske, I think the Baccarat Code was some guy called Dr Lim....not to be confused with Dr Tom! Boy, these doctors sure do like the game of Baccarat!

 

https://imspirit.wordpress.com/2010/11/04/does-a-ph-d-help-in-baccarat/

I remember reading it years ago and I thought it was too simplistic even back then. Well I agree that certain characteristics can run through a shoe, I wouldn't agree that once they break, you should keep chasing them indiscriminately because you can quickly do a lot of damage chasing things which aren't appearing IMO. It's a bit like the hot number theory in roulette. A number can appear 4/5 times in one cycle and then not appear at all over the next 2/3 cycles and yet still remain as the hottest number overall depending on where you entered the game.

 

Yup, that's him. What bothers me about his betting pairs is you can get pairs but just miss them being out of sync depending where you start.

 

Just to add that in live play I do see the BB or PP go missing for 20+. The longest I have seen just lately was 31.

Needless to say that just a short 12 progression cleans up on anything with a long run because you are only getting single losses.

A short example betting against PP.

B bet 1 w
B bet 1 w
P bet 1 l
B bet 2 w
B bet 1 w
P bet 1 l
B bet 2 w
B bet 1 w
P bet 1 l
P bet 2 l (end of series) result = +3.

 

In reading the thread on Heavy forum it struck me that they got result proportionally the same as mine. They got -85 unit testing players only and +413 units betting bankers only. And I got -777 units betting players only and over +4000 units betting bankers only. I'm stilling looking at bucking up against bankers only but gonna try to find a progression style what don't require to make bets of large unit, hey hey.

 

Yep, that's like all that VdW stuff! You could have BBB and win because of the 123 AP result. Then you get a further BB. On a rolling basis, it's two more wins. If you waited for the third spin and it hits P, you lost and are back to level again.

 

Having played Birthday Paradox for a long period against a 6 deck game, what struck me, is usually a pair will dominate. So simply bet which ever pair is ahead. For every two bet's placed, you have a 75% of being right...

I would also stop after a single win betting pairs, because the second bet is just s 50-50 proposition. Which puts you at +4

 

I used to play a similar type of way to that JK on roulette but the same applies for Baccarat hoping for the missing couplet to stay missing.

Four pairs....

BB
BP
PP
PB

I tracked for the one missing / furthest back.

So….

BB
BP
BB
BP
PP (so the missing one is PB)

Now if PB continues to miss, you can get either....

BB
BP
PP

So the first hand is more likely to be B and the second hand is more likely to be P.

Over several years, the most I saw the missing pair keep appearing on the very next 2 hands was 6 times equalling 12 losses in total.
That doesn't seem too bad on the face of it, but when you start hitting LLL W LLL etc.. It's a long climb back and no guarantees things are suddenly going to go in your favour.