Baccarat two in a row

Hello, credits go to VLS or Victor for this one.

Charting you take three outcomes and list them on a note book.
For example.

111
123
122
113

You use singles and series of two.
And series of three or larger in the same category and note them as three.
The essense of Sputnik's March.

When you get three columns with 2s you wait until one gap is missing 2s.
Then you play once for three attempts to catch 2s.
For example.

112
133
313
212 x
132 x
223 x Dominating and are present, wait for a gap
312
111 Gap
322 LWWW two in a row
312
112
311 Gap
222 WW two in a row

I test this using Holloway Progression in columns of three.
It's pretty conservative betting.

Personally, I think this one performed with excellent results.
But I don't play seriously I only play for fun to have a good time at the casino without losing my shirt.
Collect a couple of units and then order a free dinner and something nice to drink.

The Carch Variant of the Star would also perform well using a column of three up to nine attempts.
With three levels would give a total of 27 attempts for the bold punter.

Cheers

 

Hi Patrik

I use a similar strategy when looking for these 2’s. In your example above:

112
133
313
212

The middle column is now missing a 2 whereas the outer columns now have 2s.

The next result is 1

112
133
313
212
1 <- at this time bet for your 2. The 3 then surfaces which by definition would win your next bet creating a 2 before the 3 is hit. It is a waiting game for sure but it is effective. The same can be said with 1s. For me, it is a one-bet situation win or lose.

I don’t bet for 3s although you could essentially do the same thing. Betting for a 3 when you have a 1 will win automatically if you have a 2 show up. You could then bet for the 3 to actually occur but since a 3 will only occur for 25% of all streaks, it’s a tougher bet to win.

I use the MM that you and I have discussed over the years and it does well for me. It can also be applied to craps, roulette and Sic Bo if you like that game.

Thank you for bringing that to my attention.

In your example, betting for a gap with the 2s and 3s, I would have won 8 bets and lost 2 bets for a flat profit of 6 units less the Banker’s commissions on some of them.

Cheers!

 

Hello, cps10 and all ...

I have also been looking at 1s using the clustering of three and see some pretty solid consistency.
But I don't understand the reasoning behind it.

Singles and series have a 50/50 appearance, check.
And with Marigny De Grilleau we know that when series chop we will have a stronger likelihood for singles to show, check.
Where series has the value of 1 and singles the value of one we can measure the STDV/ECART for imbalance, check.

We also know that six of any kind have a 1,5% likelihood of happening and a 98.5% likelihood of not happening, check.
But when I look at the clustering groups it does not add up why 1s has such a high strike ratio.

Here are the groups, the clustering threes.
27 combinations and each group has 9 combinations.
I mark the groups with only series.

333 x
332 x
331
322 x
321
323 x
311
312
313

- - -

222 x
223 x
221
233 x
232 x
231
211
212
213

- - -

111
112
113
122
123
121
133
132
131

- - -

Now assume we only would aim for 1s and if we get a group of series we take three loses.
Then the LW-Registry would look like this...

W
LLW
W
W
W
W
W
LLW
LLL
W
LLW
W
W
LW
LW
W
LW
LW
W
LLW
W
LW
LLW
LLW
LW
W
W
W
LW
W
W
W
LLL
LW
W
LW
LW
W
W
W
W
LLW
W
LW
W
LLL
LLW
W
W
W
LLW
W

Personally, I think three groups of three losses is a very small string of variance when you have eight out of twenty-seven groups of series with three.
I think a Holloway Progression would perform as a good slow grind using 1s.

111
112
222
333
445 ...
and so on (up and down ladder)

Here are around 300 generated outcomes...
Maybe you can see other dominations with the sample below...

131
231
112
111
131
132
113
321
323
113
221
131
113
312
313
111
213
212
131
221
111
313
231
221
311
121
133
123
211
132
121
113
333
213
111
312
313
111
121
122
131
331
131
311
121
323
231
111
132
111
331
123

Cheers

 

Hi Patrik

This is an interesting read thank you.

21 of these 27 series have a 2 or more 2/3s in them and 1 or fewer 1s. This presents an interesting opportunity to bet. Especially if you are dealing with the Holloway.

For instance, betting for a 2 or 3 on the following:

111 LLL -3
112 LLW -1
113 LLW -1
121 LWL -1
122 LWW +1
123 LWW +1
131 LWL -1
132 LWW +1
133 LWW +1

211 WLL -1
212 WLW +1
213 WLW +1
221 WWL -1
222 WWW +3
223 WWW +3
231 WWL +1
232 WWW +3
233 WWW +3

311 WLL -1
312 WLW +1
313 WLW +1
321 WWL -1
322 WWW +3
323 WWW +3
331 WWL +1
332 WWW +3
333 WWW +3

As you can see the way to go is with streaks

However, in reality, the 3s would be the same as the 2s since you are making one bet to create a streak. Shrinking it down to 1 (for a chop) and 2 (ANY streak of length of 2 or more consecutive decisions) would look like:

111 LLL -3
112 LLW -1
121 LWL -1
122 LWW +1

211 WLL -1
212 WLW +1
221 WWL +1
222 WWW +3

It ends up being a zero sum game at that point. We know that the chops and streaks occur at a 50/50 clip but even based on 2s coming in at 25% and 3s at 12.5%, the possibilities of using 1 2 and 3 for measuring suggests that the opportunity for profit is much higher despite the odds. Now how do we account for this? And what would be our trigger to start playing for 1s or 2s for that matter? That’s they mystery. I am continuing to explore it though.

 

Hello guys,

I am trying to get my head around this but always seem to get stuck with it somehow.

If you have 113

Does that mean something like PBPPP or BPBBB and if the P or B continued at the end, it wouldn't matter because you are only counting up to a run of 3?

So if I am looking for that second 1 in the 113, then that's a chop and I would bet opposite of the first one?

Those are the basics I suppose and I think I am ok with that, but here was something in Sputnik's opening post....

112
133
313
212 x
132 x
223 x Dominating and are present, wait for a gap
312
111 Gap
322 LWWW two in a row
312
112
311 Gap
222 WW two in a row

I am not 100% sure how he is arriving at the LWWW 9 rows down. If he is looking for a 2, would he not have already had one with the 3 reaching a 2 before the 3?

Any help would be appreciated, thanks!

 

Yes that’s correct. A 113 would be BPBBB (or more B’s) or PBPPP

If you want to bet for the middle 1 then when you see BP then you bet B. If you see PB then bet P.

 

Thanks cps10.