Thread: Previous Knowledge of how a Shoe Played can give you a Tremendous Advantage!

As most of you experienced Baccarat Players know, the Casino's usually place two sets of (8) deck shoes in play at any given table; usually one deck set is RED and the other is BLUE. While one is in play at the table, the other is usually being shuffled in a shuffling machine. Now then, it has been my experience having analyzed thousands of shoes, that there is a REAL nuance to be found here. I have seen NEW cards opened, riffled, then shuffled by the machine, then placed into action on the table. Generally speaking when the cards are NEW and FRESH and have just been shuffled, you'll see an inordinate amount of hands that come out in streaks of 3, 4, 5, and 6+ BANK or PLAYER hands, I mean way above the average of what one would normally see. Let's say the RED deck was the first set of cards to go into action; then once finished they bring out the BLUE Shoe, now then, let's suppose you walk up to the table just after the BLUE deck is coming to close. The first thing I do is ask the folks at the table if they have their OLD scorecards from the RED deck that was played previously; I'll examine the shoe from their old scorecard, then I'll ask the dealer when these decks were placed into play, if the dealer says that both sets have been played just once, then experience tells me that I will probably see a RED shoe that will look similar to the first one out! Now, let's suppose after the examination, I saw many streaks of (3 - 7) BANK or PLAYER hands, the odds are that I will see a shoe like that again, thus, when choosing one of my BET Selection Strategies, I will select one that favors extended streaks of (3) or more. Reciprocally, if I saw many CHOPS of (3) hands or less, then I would choose a Bet Selection Strategy that favors "Changing hands".

A quick note, shoes will become more "CHOPPY" the longer they are in action. This is important to know, because if you walk up to a table and those cards have been in action for more than (10) hours, you can be sure that they've been shuffled by a machine at least (5) times or more and should NOT have a tendency for long streaks any longer, this is VERY IMPORTANT information to have at your disposal! You can almost make that a RULE of play in Baccarat!

Thus, my recommendation is to always find out how long the shoes have been in play, then ask someone if they have an OLD scorecard from the shoe that was dealt the time before last. A simple little query can give you a tremendous advantage over the house!

As always, I wish you all good fortune at the tables!

Grab the Gold

Originally Posted by Grab The Gold

As most of you experienced Baccarat Players know, the Casino's usually place two sets of (8) deck shoes in play at any given table; usually one deck set is RED and the other is BLUE. While one is in play at the table, the other is usually being shuffled in a shuffling machine. Now then, it has been my experience having analyzed thousands of shoes, that there is a REAL nuance to be found here. I have seen NEW cards opened, riffled, then shuffled by the machine, then placed into action on the table. Generally speaking when the cards are NEW and FRESH and have just been shuffled, you'll see an inordinate amount of hands that come out in streaks of 3, 4, 5, and 6+ BANK or PLAYER hands, I mean way above the average of what one would normally see. Let's say the RED deck was the first set of cards to go into action; then once finished they bring out the BLUE Shoe, now then, let's suppose you walk up to the table just after the BLUE deck is coming to close. The first thing I do is ask the folks at the table if they have their OLD scorecards from the RED deck that was played previously; I'll examine the shoe from their old scorecard, then I'll ask the dealer when these decks were placed into play, if the dealer says that both sets have been played just once, then experience tells me that I will probably see a RED shoe that will look similar to the first one out! Now, let's suppose after the examination, I saw many streaks of (3 - 7) BANK or PLAYER hands, the odds are that I will see a shoe like that again, thus, when choosing one of my BET Selection Strategies, I will select one that favors extended streaks of (3) or more. Reciprocally, if I saw many CHOPS of (3) hands or less, then I would choose a Bet Selection Strategy that favors "Changing hands".

A quick note, shoes will become more "CHOPPY" the longer they are in action. This is important to know, because if you walk up to a table and those cards have been in action for more than (10) hours, you can be sure that they've been shuffled by a machine at least (5) times or more and should NOT have a tendency for long streaks any longer, this is VERY IMPORTANT information to have at your disposal! You can almost make that a RULE of play in Baccarat!

Thus, my recommendation is to always find out how long the shoes have been in play, then ask someone if they have an OLD scorecard from the shoe that was dealt the time before last. A simple little query can give you a tremendous advantage over the house!

As always, I wish you all good fortune at the tables!

Grab the Gold

Here's a al old thread about the theoretical aspects of that, from which i concluded that ASM (automatic shuffling machines) should be producing much more random shuffles than by hand, but slightly less than by RNG. Baccarat system design

Then, for a number of reasons i'm not going to say or repeat here, we could expect, eg, the P-B distribution of out comes to move very slightly to runs of 2 and 3.

I realize that, egs, systemhunter and GTG are presenting varying emperical (field) data... which i am not in a position to thusly challenge. But the drawing rules alone of baccarat do work very well on their own to change up the position-relative (localized) orderings of outcomes from one shoe to the next, and hence perhaps the overall (global) ones as well.

In conclusion, it seems this is just one small piece of the "puzzle".

************************************************** **

For sure though, the more-random the cards, the less-predictable the outcomes, no matter which way those are considered. So, the best shoe-info by shuffling should be earliest.

Hi Garnabby,

Your sharing information is very interesting and does make sense to me. Does it apply to all previous same color card shoes or only the first and third shoes? In Malaysia, the casino here are using two different shuffling machines and the card colors are either purple or blue. The casino provides the number of shoes currently in play on the score boards. Good Luck to you.

Originally Posted by JohnMalaysia

Hi Garnabby,

Your sharing information is very interesting and does make sense to me. Does it apply to all previous same color card shoes or only the first and third shoes? In Malaysia, the casino here are using two different shuffling machines and the card colors are either purple or blue. The casino provides the number of shoes currently in play on the score boards. Good Luck to you.

JohnMalaysia,

Good to hear from you too.

I'm not sure there's much correlation between different-color decks... except were there any, i would have to agree with GTG, that (similarly- washed/cut) shoes would for a while be in sync.

I try to work with only the same-color decks, and w/i each deck.

John1234 has began looking at the card/holding (sum) values. I agree with his results so far... certainly those aren't wrong. He's working towards the independent-stream method, in which the trick is to find a few INDEPENDENT streams of information... which can be expected to better conform to the average. ( The Value of "0" . )

Also i started with the P-B stuff, then to the numbers. Lately i have returned to the P-B's, looking for ways in which the slightly-less-than-random ASM (card-shufflers), and the expected permuations of those in a shoe can be applied to predicting those.

It seems that the correct logical process, itself, for any undertaking, usually begins at the surface, works it's way down, and back. The idea is to make the complicated "appear" (deceptively) simple. I'm sure we all know persons who know a lot more than they "let on".

I'll invite you to the private forum here for that.