Thread: Baccarat is Not Random: The Proof

Some people say that baccarat results are totally random. I say that it only appears that way if you don't know what areas to look at.

Think about this then. A simple definition of pure randomness is tossing a coin over a period of time and producing 50% heads and 50% tails, or near enough to that, no argument there surely. This outcome is the result of totally random events.

However, in contrast to this, a baccarat shoe has a fixed number of cards, cards values, and rules. When these three aspects interact together the result is certainly not random. No way.

I agree but how does one capitalize on that?

Originally Posted by AngelsFan

I agree but how does one capitalize on that?

There are a lot of strategies that are based on baccarat - your best bet is to get started learning the base tactics of baccarat and then move up to advanced learning.. for a great overview of the game (I'm currently reading this and it's fantastic for an overall view of the game) is Baccarat Battle Book.

There are tons of other great books on baccarat though, here's a forum post with some of the best ones:

10 Best Baccarat Gambling Books of All Time

G'day,

You are right about it not being random,
I have a "system/strategy"
It hasn't failed, I'm not trying to sell it!
For those who doubt me, grab a deck of cards or two
& email me

Glenn

G'day every one.
Have any one here ever try the sytem cal "Mystery Jones' Power Baccarat Winning System." yet , if yes ,could you tell me and every one here how good is this sytem work? is it good just for the short term or also good for the long run too, and how is it work? thanks in advance and good luck every one in the hunt for the best sytem in Baccarat so we all the players in the world can beat the crap out of the casino (the bigest ennemy for all of us the players).....

AngelsFan,

The P-B outcomes of baccarat are not random 'as 50-50', but more bankers. But the random 'as the process determining those theoretically-biased outcomes' in theory is random. (Possibly in practice the latter isn't random). For the sake of the random process, consider the following.

The interesting thing about the opposite states of randomness versus periodicity is where those overlap... the non-random--non-periodic "state". It seems more a question of how to keep things orderly, from becoming random, than of trying to induce the (perfect) random state. Orderly things seem to slide uneventfully into chaos, some where between, eg, the 6th and 7th standard shuffle. (Don't ask me what the 'standard shuffle' is, i think it was explained in a Scientic American magazine, a long time ago.) Anyways, if we had a model (, i have a geometric Penrose Tiling one based on the fibonacci math but i don't offhand know how to apply it,) of the NR-NP "state", couldn't we use the last-known order as input to the model, which would then generate the output, the next, future outcome? (Just as things go random, things can come back to order.) I wonder, if for each past shoe's P-B sequence there is a "compensating", nay, a "companion" future-sequence, allowing for minute variances given the "noises", etc (, mentioned by luckystrike.) Could that be a conscious process which could be developed through some type of 'fibonacci transform(ation)'? Certainly that's a more-worthy job for fibonacci than using it for a simplistic bet-progression.

There is a fellow (or gal) who says it is random and has posted wins from 72 days at the baccarat table games and they look rather impressive. He says betting for random events is the only to win consistently.

He is at www.baccaratedge.com never heard of it until searching for systems on internet.

soylentgreen,

please keep your(?) scams off the site.

Originally Posted by garnabby

soylentgreen,

please keep your(?) scams off the site.

I think this post by soylentgreen is ok. It is not abusive. If people want to pay for a method that is okay by me. I don't think we should assume he is a scammer. if we assume that then mustn't we also assume the game cannot be beaten?

I looked at the results. Only a 70% shoe win rate for the 40 shoes posted. The units won reveal a pretty deep progression. By that I mean he has to make some pretty big bets whether or not he uses a continuous progression. I consider making even occasional big bets a progression.

Archer

Archer,

After i read your post, i re-tried that link, wondering what i missed.

The message this morning talked about $5000 up front, +1/4 of all future winnings on the "honor system", unless the player later sent another $5000 in which case "... I would be glad to reward your honesty by sending the original $5000 back to you."

I then clicked on the email address, and wrote, "f off you ... a-hole". Perhaps that's why the hook was changed?

Sometimes free stuff is the best; sometime the most expensive stuff is the worst. But a scam is always a scam: nothing from me up front for all the money you have.

If we want a site that bans system sellers that is fine with me. I am just saying that I am in no way offended by an offer.

Archer

Originally Posted by garnabby

Archer,

After i read your post, i re-tried that link, wondering what i missed.

The message this morning talked about $5000 up front, +1/4 of all future winnings on the "honor system", unless the player later sent another $5000 in which case "... I would be glad to reward your honesty by sending the original $5000 back to you."

I then clicked on the email address, and wrote, "f off you ... a-hole". Perhaps that's why the hook was changed?

Sometimes free stuff is the best; sometime the most expensive stuff is the worst. But a scam is always a scam: nothing from me up front for all the money you have.

Free private forum members,

I have completed my idea wrt fibonacci in the private forum, under "My systems". Anyone else wishing to join, there's still 480 spots left.

Wheres my system at?

Sneakykid,

I started a free private (sub-) forum to which i will invite you, now that i have your username. Just click on your notifications tab at upper right of main forum. Then use the community tab to get to the social groups later.

Absolutely no strings attached. Membership will be limited to 500 in case some of the new systems actually do well.

Thanks, Mark.

Originally Posted by Sneakykid

Wheres my system at?

Originally Posted by garnabby

Sneakykid,

I started a free private (sub-) forum to which i will invite you, now that i have your username. Just click on your notifications tab at upper right of main forum. Then use the community tab to get to the social groups later.

Absolutely no strings attached. Membership will be limited to 500 in case some of the new systems actually do well.

Thanks, Mark.

how do i add myself?

Originally Posted by garnabby

Sneakykid,

I started a free private (sub-) forum to which i will invite you, now that i have your username. Just click on your notifications tab at upper right of main forum. Then use the community tab to get to the social groups later.

Absolutely no strings attached. Membership will be limited to 500 in case some of the new systems actually do well.

Thanks, Mark.

Im a new user and can contribute to your free private forum with over 15 years of experience with the game. Please invite me to join.

Thanks

BacFan1

Hi all I am the new member here. would like to share opinion with all of you, so pls give me the advice in case I make any mistake. Thanks

I am totally agree that ' Baccarat is not random " every thing could be prepair before hand by the casino themself, but how to prepair as we are not a professional so we dont know how they prepair.

Mikewin

Mikewin,

Casino policy, rules and regulations (, ie, preparation, execution, and payout) are standard information available to the public; and are closely scrutinized (mostly to prevent EMPLOYEE theft.)

It's nice when you can tip a dealer the odd green chip for overlooking your odd lost black one (when the table's busy) but ILLEGAL to work with a dealer to expose, set up, or otherwise manipulate the cards. Beyond that, (if this is to what you're referring,) there is NO way the casino can cheat using the standard shufflers (all casinos use.) In baccarat, unlike bj (where i know of at least one casino, in Michigan, which tried but got caught) removing some of the cards can have no significant effect on anything. The only way i have personally witnessed cheating at baccarat was ater several (intentionally?) boxed cards, the pit-bosses made several conflicting decisions (based in that casino's favor).

Ellis Davis, at beatthecasinoforums.com has built his scam systems around "orchestration" of cards before being placed in the shoe. There being NO possible way, all things considered of doing so, i asked him how that is done. His reply (now deleted over there) was, "Why help the casinos." I THINK THE CASINOS WOULD ALREADY KNOW, IF THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE DOING. Anyway, the casinos wouldn't if could put in more patterns (as he suggests) because everyone is looking for patterns. (We don't need his many "different" systems for each and every hand at "different" times of the casino day, after the fact of course for him.)

Lastly, a 'professional' is anyone making a living at it. There's as much to be learned from actually doing it as by sitting around thinking about it. First learn how to not "throw your money away". Eg, there is no casino game in the world for which any system needs to be paid for. (Even Ellis' methods can ALL be had for free from persons more than happy to share those with you, if YOU take the time to "get out there" and look.)

Originally Posted by Mikewin

Hi all I am the new member here. would like to share opinion with all of you, so pls give me the advice in case I make any mistake. Thanks

I am totally agree that ' Baccarat is not random " every thing could be prepair before hand by the casino themself, but how to prepair as we are not a professional so we dont know how they prepair.

Mikewin

baccarat is not random in the sense that the banker has a slight edge over the player. if it were truly random, banker or player would each have an identical probability of occuring, as in the flip of a coin. the game of baccarat is often compared to flipping a coin, but one can see how that is a misconception. as to there being some order or pattern of results in a shoe, that too is a misconception.

hozdaddy,

I can't as of yet say i can deny what you wrote. I, and certainly others, are working on it. Here is MY post elsewhere today:



Quote:
Originally Posted by Katweezel
In a John Scarne book, he talks about an Asian woman in Vegas who turned $200 into $250,000. It's extremely unlikely she managed to do that without some sort of winning system...



Katweezel,

Of course there are others, and at all the casino games. But i think that sort of luck rules out more than in a system of any kind. The casinos aren't worried about letting the lucky winners back, right? (However, if there's no "advantage" system for baccarat, can there be a disadvantageous one?)

I'm in the thinking minority who 'believes' (for the time being) baccarat, like most games, is beatable; but i have a few spare minutes to sum up my 'feelings' here.

On the one hand, players HAVE beaten the games by just luck (as above); and on the other WILL soon (with quantum computing) control the small-scale random "material" which our thinking continuous, large-scale predictable realm comprises. What interests me, though there are other more significant mathematical yields than waiting for the last 20 cards of a shoe (not yet listed here), is the middle ground between random luck and mechanical predictability... ie, what can be done now (before the quantum computers are even built and programmed to actually track the cards and outcomes which must flow continuously wrt space-time fields at each and every point.)

Specifically wrt baccarat, are there methods which can be applied to both the mathematical card-counting, etc, and to the patterning, from the random side, which will bring those together in the middle? One method could involve using the 'sqeeze theorem' of basic calculus to continuously (force) merge the two into a common workable language, to create a true patterning method (, while retaining the mathematical yields.) Sort of like conjecturing that on the other side of the crunch singularity (of the big bang) is pure randomness, and that is why the laws of physics seem to break down there.

Again, thanks for your interest and helpful notes.

Originally Posted by hozdaddy

baccarat is not random in the sense that the banker has a slight edge over the player. if it were truly random, banker or player would each have an identical probability of occuring, as in the flip of a coin. the game of baccarat is often compared to flipping a coin, but one can see how that is a misconception. as to there being some order or pattern of results in a shoe, that too is a misconception.

Originally Posted by garnabby

It's nice when you can tip a dealer the odd green chip for overlooking your odd lost black one (when the table's busy) but ILLEGAL to work with a dealer to expose, set up, or otherwise manipulate the cards. Beyond that, (if this is to what you're referring,) there is NO way the casino can cheat using the standard shufflers (all casinos use.)

You don’t think that a dealer can cheat the players? You should come and play at my house sometime. I know enough moves to bust out any player in short order. I’m not suggesting that any casino dealers are actually cheating the players, but the option is there if they decide that they want to. Also, knowing how to beat the game illegally might give you some ideas of how to beat the game legally. Often times the only difference between cheating and winning legally is the method you use the get the information. The strategy once you get the information is the same either way.

It is possible, but very hard for a dealer to just outright cheat a player.

The rules of the game are very easy to remember.


Anyway, baccarat is definitely not pure, 100% random.

Each shoe has a set amount of players and bankers. The rules of the game force each shoe to have a SET amount of players and bankers. The only thing that may be "random" if you must, is the burn cards. Or knowing exactly what amount of players and bankers are in the shoe.

Also, if the dealer accidentally draws a card he or she is not supposed to, the dealer has to now burn cards, changing that SET amount of players and bankers completely.

Pure random is more like roulette, where the next spin has 100% NOTHING to do with the previous spin. In baccarat since there is a set amount of players and bankers in each shoe, the next decision has everything to do with the previous one. But, determining what the next decision is very very difficult. But it is NOT like a coin flip. A computerized coin flip. Not a human coin flip. A human coin flip has too many human influenced factors involved. But a true random coin flip, is 100% random. Each baccarat decision is not 100%, new, true, random. It's just not. When factors, rules, etc. come into, that takes away the randomness.

I hope I've made some sense. lol

Originally Posted by neverdie14

It is possible, but very hard for a dealer to just outright cheat a player.

neverdie14,

Any dealer may intentionally botch any deal for any pit-boss to make any bad ruling on it; or may short-change any player at any stage of the game given the house's "blessing", and perhaps (freely) in the way you mentioned. Sometimes a casino will put in a "ringer" to "quietly discourage" consistent winners but more often will just outright cheat them as above. (What are you to do then? The other players will likely tell you to shut up and sit down.) Casinos may ban anyone at anytime from any game but that costs a lot of money to have it done legally; and where casinos aren't permitted to (legally) ban any player... they just won't deal you any cards. In more-unusual cases a player's chips may be confiscated (for "any old reason") and held "indefinitely"..., or worse.

Anyone forfeits many basic legal (and other) rights just by setting foot inside any casino. Eg, in most cases local law-enforcement has no jurisdiction; and the state/provincial arms of that aren't even "compelled" to produce evidence in a civil court of law, even if and when it were witnessed/studied by them.

And casinos know that the legal costs to bring about any even-possible large civil-court award (if and when a suit is launched and allowed to proceed) would make it a pyrrhic waste of also time for the plaintiff. This i know from the first-hand experience of representing myself (alone) against (several well-paid members in the defence of) a major casino... i won. But it left a "bad taste" in my mouth, more regarding who really runs things, and how "disposable" each of us really is.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

But none of that is ever of the secret "James Bond" machinations (to which Savant, and in particular, the others at http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/index.php refer when "cornered".) Eg, in my own experience, the cards are never "stacked", or otherwise "orchestrated" beforehand wrt baccarat because no one can know who will be betting on which side when with how much. (There just aren't enough instances of big banker-martingale bettors playing alone at a table to try to make that form of cheating even possible on the casino-floor.)

I just finished a post at the GG, "defending myself" (LOL) against those sorts of related cryptic/crazy, detail-void, self-serving hints and posts. How are new players, or anyone reading these boards for whichever reasons, to know better? Well, look at the newpaper-clippings on this site or on the general "web"; through your local courthouse's record of the dockets of cases against cheaters; or ask the regulars at your favorite casino. Those will all confirm that there just aren't any such methods "known only to a few savants but which are too-valuable to be posted anywhere, or even applied in any financially-motivated way, etc,". Eg, card-counting against an eight-deck bj-shoe, and the less-liberal rules, just isn't worth anything. And it's only common sense that, why would someone bribe a dealer if one already has a "computer program" to calculate the order of the cards? And anything "they" can figure out and effectively apply could and would have been as easily done by many others independently, and already known to the casinos long ago regardless. Furthermore, as anyone who dabbles in sleight-of-hand procedures will tell us, the eye IS faster than the hand close up when actually watching (and listening). Not worth your life in one of those (almost-non-existent-anyway,) big home-games.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by neverdie14

I hope I've made some sense. lol

Well, not really. Seems like you're still reaching for something, or ... .

I just hope it's not more of the "leading us on". (Somebody has to start asking the real questions.)

RANDOM RANDOM RANDOM


I've always thought this about RANDOM, if it were truly RANDOM almost every shoe, or every 10 decisions or 20 decisions would balance out with some degree of predictability. However, this does not OCCUR, so I've always thought that that means, ITS NOT REALLY RANDOM.


THANYOU,

Originally Posted by now here

RANDOM RANDOM RANDOM


I've always thought this about RANDOM, if it were truly RANDOM almost every shoe, or every 10 decisions or 20 decisions would balance out with some degree of predictability. However, this does not OCCUR, so I've always thought that that means, ITS NOT REALLY RANDOM.


THANYOU,

now here,

Randomness is what mathematicians call indeterminance. Regardless of the probabilities of the possible outcomes of any event, (which must add to one, if the scale of probability used is from zero to one,) outcomes shall then be distributed in an unpredictable (, by any means,) fashion but in exact proportion to the relative probabilities of each of the outcomes.

One of Ellis' fundamental misconceptions is that randomness means alternation. The sequence, WLWLWLWL.... certainly isn't (entirely, strictly speaking,) random. Because of that sequence, eg, which is rare as any other, we know that the outcomes are indeed (at least very-near, strictly speaking,) random.

Here is one of my posts from the GG in which i elaborated on this a bit more:

Some of my work is based on the long-term averaging out of the P-B and W-L results given a near equal number of bets on the P and B. There it's necessary that the runs (of whichever) occur quickly (as usually do) to be evened out somewhat later. It's easier to see that such bets very often even out over some time than to see that those tend to run faster, earlier on whenever play is started or resumed.

-------------------------------------------------------------

Now is an appropriate time to look at the "gambler's fallacy" a bit closer?

First, "even a paranoid has enemies", or so the saying goes. And with the "gambler", who claims, eg, if A then B. Just because he (wrongly) "feels strongly" that 10 bankers must follow 10 players doesn't negate the inherent chance of 10 bankers coming up after 10 players. The true odds haven't changed.

So second, p = 1/2 is still p = 1/2; and randomness is still random. Note that the latter isn't per se the former... the former still tells us something: that with certainty after a finite number of bets two (or more) sides of an even contest will repeatedly and exactly catch upto each other, to whichever is ahead.

It gets a little more complex when we add in the unknown process of randomization. How is it then that with p = 1/2 we can know what is to happen while we can't know? (If "heads" is 5 flips ahead, "tails" shall catch up; but at the same time/place no one is supposed to know which side is coming, let alone when.) I think that paradox, like any other, starts already broken-down, to only one of the presented option(s) to begin with. Whereas the chances of ever catching a further-and-further-ahead side initially fall exponentially (like a "bell-curve"), it begins to taper off... allowing for continued (low) lottery-like chances for the trailing side(s) catching up to "finally" hit. Of course, where one side enjoys a p of significantly more than 1/2, the other side (at some point, at least from a utilitarian point-of-view,) falls "hopelessly" behind. (That is not to say that super-lottery events can't occur... just that the multiplicative ratio of one side to an other will very likely continue to approach the one's p to the other's, is defined by that "inability" to EVER catch up.)

Another sort of paradox emerging from, eg, expecting a bunch of P's to "result in" more B's gradually on average later is that the P's would have to REPEAT much more than usual. Because like such additive differences should eventually even out, also should asymmetrical differences; namely, the asymmetrical should also be occurring at the beginning of a session along with the repeats. but how are repeats asymetrical, oddly-occurring? Well there are distinctions to be made also thereto dis-intwine those opposing concepts into one. (That one is answered under lilochik's system in the other forum.)

( Gambler's Glen Message Boards : Baccarat Message Board : ARTE'S BALANCE AND UNBALANCE .)

Garnabby,



thankyou for you time

Originally Posted by now here

Garnabby,



thankyou for you time

now here,

You are welcome.

Sorry for mis-stating something. Part of my above post was meant to read, "Just because he (wrongly) "feels strongly" that 10 bankers must follow 10 players doesn't negate the inherent chance of 10 bankers still coming up after the 10 players. The true odds haven't changed.

I mentioned this in a post sometime back but here it is again.

I once read in a gambling book written many years ago by a gentleman by the name of Dr. Alan Wilson which I think was called 'The Theory of Gambling' that it took about 150 shuffles (I can't remember the exact figure) to arrange 8 decks of cards in a random sequence. Now I am no mathematician but my laymen logic suggests to me that if the cards are not in a random sequence then maybe there are patterns which if identified could be exploited for a profit.

Most of the Baccarat shoes I have played have been 'squeeze games' where the players handle the cards. As the cards in those games get twisted and bent they are only used once and then discarded, therefore every game has brand new cards. Now in the casino I played in I know for a fact that before being introduced into a game the cards are washed once, a process where all eight decks are spread out on a table and swirled around. They are then hand shuffled once by hand before being taken to a table, placed in a shuffling machine where they are then shuffled 7 times so if you count the wash as a shuffle the cards are therefore shuffled 9 times before being put into play. So if Alan Wilson is correct as far as the number of shuffles required to make the cards random I think it may be possible to beat Squeeze games.

Mini baccarat games in the same casino however I believe the cards are used for possibly a month before being replaced so I imagine they are at some point totally random.

Moonraker

There is nothing random about baccarat, for someone to actually think that. knows very little of the game. It just appears as that. In an average shoe one on average can be guaranteed out of a shoe of 81-82 hands one can be certain of 15-20 hands. That is when one capitalizes.

Lol maybe I should start postings my winnings, not meaning to appear arrogant but , if one knows what they r doing one can win everyday at the casino, and post winnings.

Originally Posted by soylentgreen

There is a fellow (or gal) who says it is random and has posted wins from 72 days at the baccarat table games and they look rather impressive. He says betting for random events is the only to win consistently.

He is at www.baccaratedge.com never heard of it until searching for systems on internet.