LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Strategy B12 Strategy B12
These triggers work well individually or as a combination:
BPPPP bet B (1 unit), If lose bet (2 units) next B
PPPBP bet B (1 unit), If lose bet (2 units) next B
The family of other Patterns are listed below.
(ignore Ties)
___________________________________
Against Zumma 600 and Zumma 1000
Hit Rate 52%
___________________________________
Several bet opportunities per shoe.
Can read shoe for virtual win first.
Bet unit = $50+
Shoe Target 1 Unit (2 Units)
Shoe Stop -3 Units (-6 Units)
Can be flat bet, but the 1,2 combination improves Baccarat result when Hits >= 51% over many trials.
As an example, consider coin toss, even odds case, where 4 bet play of 2 H wins and 2 T Losses, giving all 50% win outcomes:
W = Win, L = Loss
1) L L W W (-1-2+1+1) = -1
2) L W L W (-1+2-1+2) = +2
3) L W W L (-1+2+1-1) = +1
4) W L W L (+1-1+2-1) = +1
5) W W L L (+1+1-1-2) = -1
6) W L L W (+1-1-2+1) = -1
__________
+1 unit no stopping until 50% wins
__________
Of course, other outcomes exist, but this demonstrates by way of sample long term prospects of 1,2 progression for non-random coin toss with goal of attaining 50% Wins. (ex. LL over two tosses is subsumed by continuing betting until LLWW or continuing if a longer sequence is needed to resolve to 50% wins).
nb. If such parity is maintained over many trials then it would not form a random set.
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _________________
No advantage is gained against a random set by 1,2 betting.This is readily tested against all 16 outcomes (i.e. including LLLL, LLLW etc. upto WWWW).
Indeed for a fair coin we can expect the average divergence between Hs vs. Ts to increase as the square root of the number of coin flips, albeit Hs/(Hs+Ts) and Ts/(Hs+Ts) tends to 50%.
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _________________
The result does not rely on parity inside a shoe, nor over 4 bets as shown above.
An adjusted version is to stay at bet 2 units until a win, whereupon you return to bet 1 unit.
1) L L W W (-1-2+2+1) = 0
2) L W L W (-1+2-1+2) = +2
3) L W W L (-1+2+1-1) = +1
4) W L W L (+1-1+2-1) = +1
5) W W L L (+1+1-1-2) = -1
6) W L L W (+1-1-2+2) = 0
__________
+3 units no stopping until 50% wins
__________
With an early stopping profit target =1 (bets in italics) we can increase our total from +3 to +5 units over all outcomes without experiencing all decisions.
___________________________________
Update on last 5 hand Patterns rich in Player decisions:
Pattern Bet Units
PPPPP bet B (1)
PPPPPP bet B (2)
BPPPP bet B (1)
BPPPPP bet B (2)
PBPPP bet B (1)
PBPPPP bet B (2)
PPBPP bet B (1)
PPBPPP bet B (2)
PPPBP bet B (1)
PPPBPP bet B (2)
PPPPB bet B (1)
PPPPBP bet B (2)
Recommended Patterns to play are in bold.
Total Net Gain = +409.74 units (after 5% commission)
Total Bets 27,815 bets (1,600 Zumma's Shoes) by taking all pattern matches.
Approximately 1/4 unit gain per shoe.
nb. We can double a 100 unit bankroll in 400 shoes.
Drawdowns < 100 units
___________________________________
Testing
MORE LIVE DATA TESTING (BEYOND ZUMMA) IS RECOMMENDED BEFORE PLAYING.
To nulllify any curve fittiing influence on limited data set.
nb. Test using actual casino live shoe data, not computer 'shuffle' generated -
the latter involves an assumption of equivalence which may be erroneous.
Land casinos have differing procedures in shoe preparation, so test against data from your casino.
______________________________________
Example of Shoe #1 in Zumma 600 for pattern:
PPPBP bet B (1 unit) if Lose Bet B (2 units)
(Bet in Bold B)
BBBB
P
BBB
PPPPPPP
BB
P
BBB
PP
BBBB
P
B
PPP
BBBB
PP
BB
P
BB
PPPPP
BBB
P
B
PPP
BBB
P
BB
PPPP
B
P
BBB = +1
Net Win 0.95 unit
_______________________________________
Here is an example of a seemingly random game with intra-shoe bias.
It shows how a gambler's edge is a function of his strategy, and that betting for patterns can change that edge is seemingly 'fair' or 'random' game.
The House Edge is a separate issue, which assumes arbitrary bet placement.
Consider a 4 card deck : Ace, 2, Q, K
Values:
Ace = 1
2 = face value
Q = K = Zero
The game is simply to deal one card to Player P then one card to Bank B.
Gambler choices:
You can bet on either B or P to win
Bet on Tie
Make no bet
The side B or P with highest card wins.
If a tie then push on B or P bets, if bet on tie then win.
For a 4 card deck we can have two games... per Shoe
Here are all 12 outcomes for two games, with win outome in Bold type:
Game #1 ..........Game #2
1... 2...B.......... 0... 0...T
1... 0...P.......... 2... 0...P
1... 0...P.......... 0... 2...B
0... 1...B.......... 0... 2...B
0... 0...T.......... 1... 2...B
0... 1...B.......... 2... 0...P
0... 2...B.......... 1... 0...P
0... 0...T.......... 2... 1...P
0... 2...B.......... 0... 1...B
2... 0...P.......... 0... 1...B
2... 0...P.......... 1... 0...P
2... 1...P.......... 0... 0...T
nb. Q = K = 0 could just double for specific card in above outcomes.
Total games = 2 per 4 card
Total possible outcomes = 12
Total number games = 2x12 = 24
Counting all Player P wins = 10 Probability of P win = 10/20 = 1/2 (push on T)
Counting all Bank B wins = 10 Probability of B win = 10/20 = 1/2 (push on T)
Counting all Tie T wins = 4 Probability of T win = 4/24 = 1/6
To make this a 'fair' game we can assign odds of evens 1:1 for B or P win where T is a push (no loss)
To make a T wager 'fair' we can calculate payoff x:
Where T wins 4 times and loses 20 times when B or P hit.
4x- 20 = 0, x= 5, giving odds 5:1
______________________________________________
So,
any 1 unit bet on P expectation 1(1/2) - 1(1/2) = 0
any 1 unit bet on B expectation 1(1/2) - 1(1/2) = 0
any 1 unit bet on T expectation 5(1/6) - 1(5/6) = 0
A House Edge = 0%
______________________________________________
Any arbitrary bet (no strategy) will not give an edge is this seemingly 'random' game. The probabilities p(B) = 1/2, p(P)=1/2 and p(T)= 1/6 are analogous to those quoted when calculating the House Edge in Baccarat, except here we have 'fair' outcomes and no commission.
In fact, playing a 'fair' game you may still lose, because of the drawdowns on gambler's bankroll - which a casino can easily withstand. Good money management will save you from losing, but not give an edge to win over time with table limits and/or limited bankroll.
________________________________________________
But wait!
Let's count the Intra-deck outcomes:
Starting with P
Game #1 ...... Game #2
...P..........P... = 2
...P..........B... = 2
...P..........T... = 1
Probability T win (after P) = 1/5
T Odds 5:1 (remain same)
Expectation = 5(1/5) - 1(4/5) =1/5 or 20%
Starting with B
Game #1 ...... Game #2
...B..........P... = 2
...B..........B... = 2
...B..........T... = 1
Probability T win (after B) = 1/5
T Odds 5:1 (remain same)
Expectation = 5(1/5) - 1(4/5) = 1/5 or 20%
Starting with T
Game #1 ...... Game #2
...T..........T... = 0
Probability T win (after T) = 0
___________________________________________
The probabilities and our edge have now changed for our Pattern strategy.
So, by applying a strategy as follows:
B bet T
P bet T
you will win on average 1/5 units, in this seemingly random game.
(Ties are a good bet here, not so sure in real Baccarat?).
A note of caution: a poor strategy such as T bet T does worse than arbitrary betting.
____________________________________________
This example above, shows how the edge/expectation of a gambler depends on his strategy and not the House Edge. The latter assumes the gambler makes arbitrary bets and does not allow any intra-shoe bias etc.
Moreover, if the shuffle was restricted then some of the 12 outcomes
e.g. 1 2 0 0 could be more likely than others which could be exploited.
Testing will help find advantage, if any.
_____________________________________________
Your Edge is a function of your strategy.
_____________________________________________
In real Baccarat the probabilities and expectations change as cards are drawn from the shoe. The cards have no memory in the same way a real coin has no memory, but a real coin is likely to be bias due to physical structure and toss action, so a simple same-as-last H bet H or T bet T strategy can give an edge at even odds. In fact, unlike an independent coin toss, the probabilities inside a Baccarat shoe are dependent on the cards that have already been drawn - an odds calculator will confirm this.
This, in principle, gives credence to an experienced player's ability to 'read' a shoe whereby a rich information set of patterns can be assessed at some level without explicit calculation of changing probabilities.
To quote: Randomness is a question of whether there exists a lack of bias or correlation.
This is a probability issue. Few would argue that the card draw rules in Baccarat give a bias to Bank outcomes over many trial (without the payoff commission on Bank one would certainly beat the game by betting banker). On this basis we can argue that Baccarat is not a random game. Is it beatable? This is a question of expectation and whether the card draw rules or other factor give rise to bias which can be exploited by some strategy to give a positive expectation.
"Don't play everything (or everytime); let some things go by.
What you don't play can be more important than what you do." Thelonious Sphere Monk
__________________________________________________ ___
B12 Table of Results Attached (PDF)
Reply With Quote
Re: Strategy B12 
Originally Posted by Steve 
Bookmarks