You were probably going to say 15.7%, or 10.7% after the commission. But you can only realize it if you have coincidentally already bet Banker on the hand. After you know the scenario has occurred you cannot place a bet. So it's a totally useless probability.

I disagree.
Everything detail counts at baccarat, the are no simple spots to look for and few efforts were made in the past in order to beat BP hands, mostly by card counting. To state that probabilities don't help, well you should know them in every detail. Along with other key features as randomness flaws due to manual shuffling or imperfections of CSM.

You can't get an advantage simply keeping track of all ranks, at baccarat there are key cards to look for that could increase or not the probability to get a B or P hand within very restricted ranges.
This involves even a positional study of what happened in the given shoe and per many shoes, naturally the last portion of the deck is designed to give the best opportunities.

Anyway the banker advantage on P x-x-8 with B 3 spots is 7.68%.

Knowing all the conditional probabalities that make up the known unconditional probability, is like those TV poker displays that show changing probability on each street after a preflop all-in. Interesting but not useful information. If you can't bet on it then it's irrelevant. The only probability that matters is the one when the money goes in.

Right.
But key cards have a probability to appear and there are two main decisive spots where such cards will fall.
Let's consider only high cards.
Positions 1 and 3 on P side and by a lesser extent positions 2 and 4 on B side.
Whenever you bet P you want a 8, 9 or 7 falling on 1-3 spots. Otherwise you are betting a long term dog side (of course you could get a 6-2, 5-4 and 5-3 along with 6-A, 5-2, 4-3, 3-3, but they are less favorite to come). Even a 6 may be slightly good when betting P side.

Since high cards have a general probability to appear consecutively or clustered and a specific probability to appear consecutively or clustered (or not) knowing the cards removed, itlr some specific spots will get a higher, average or lower probability to get such cards.

Of course itlr the number of high cards will fall here and there in relationship of their liveness and probability to fall into specific spots.

Therefore a high card falling here or there should be considered as a kind of bonus or a missed opportunity (when combined with a low card).
But itlr the probability to get a high card remains the same, yet the room to get the opposite situation on the same shoe is more limited than expected.

Without insight into the sequence of cards to be dealt from a CSM, getting EV of 0.5 or better for player or banker is about 10e-12, as shown above. This is about 3 orders of magnitude more difficult than winning powerball.

Yes but...

Clustered and consecutive, don't you see?

There are some legitimate techniques which take advantage of weaknesses in the shuffle. I've only known them to be applied to blackjack, though. I think all of the techniques that I'm aware of would be less effective at baccarat than blackjack (sequencing and zone tracking).

I've heard claims that older shuffle machines had weaknesses, but I find it hard to believe that a modern shuffling machine would have any weaknesses at all. Of course hand shuffles can be extremely vulnerable. One time I saw a single pass riffle being used in a casino to shuffle a shoe.

I'm not backing up asymbacguy's claims. This is just a related ramble.

Of course I was wrong in identifying CSM in B&M Baccarat, the cards are not replaced after play.

I believe most casinos will hand shuffle a shoe prior to an automated shuffle. That would be difficult to track, as any key cards are replicated 8 times in a standard 8 deck shoe. But I don't rule anything out.

Sorry I improperly named as CSM (blackjack and other games) the automated shuffle machines employed at several baccarat tables.
To speed up the game such tables utilize alternatively two different 8-deck shoes.
We've found that some card classes tend to remain clustered in the same shoe, advantaging or not one side or, even better, the probability to get or not certain side bets.

Naturally the number of possible profitable opportunities is quite restricted but at baccarat we can bet whenever we want.

Some time ago a casino corporation recruited the UCLA Department of Statistics to give scientific proof about the random shuffling of such machines.

So we should probably re-label this thread "automated shuffler tracking as it relates to Baccarat advantage play."

Yep.
But regarding BP bets, the only way to ascertain if we are really getting an advantage remains a) the asym/sym hands ratio that must be more shifted to the left than expected on our Banker wagers and b) the drawing/standing ratio that must be more shifted to the right than expected when betting Player.
Itlr those "altered" values tend to vanish if a luck factor was involved, instead they tend to slowly but steadily grow up whether we are betting the right side of the propositions.

As you know well, baccarat is a game where we want to guess situations mathematically advantaged and not results.
Peddling for results is just what losers like to do.

Since I know that player/banker provide essentially zero AP opportunities with > 20 cards remaining assuming random shuffle, I am interested in the techniques you describe to get an edge with a less than random shuffle.

One of the techniques is to assess the situations where F-7 probability (2.253%) is quite less likely than expected up to the point where betting banker produces a pure advantage as it's payed 1:1 on all winnings hands.
Naturally there are sequences of cards which could improve or not the F-7 probability, depending on how 8s/9s were removed from the deck and how many key cards are still alive.
But if we'd suggest a no perfect random shuffling on the same shoe, we should track such card classes in terms of consecutiveness.
And there are many interesting topics to know on the subject, not only for the F-7 bet.

if you'd have channeled your bacarrat obsession into more valuable plays you'd probably be much better off than you are now. what's your net results so far? the backend for all this sort of thing is less than it used to be by like 500% which is where the money is, so i'm really left wondering what the upshot is here for you. even with some non linear dependent evaluation technique it's still weak. you haven't even hinted at any of the actually strong plays on bac, you're just babbling about sequential subsets or something of that nature generally. so how much are you clearing on all this?

It depends, what do you mean about "valuable play"?

There's only one way to know whether a baccarat BP player is really getting an advantage itlr whatever conceived:

- when betting player side the overall amount of P standing hands must be higher than expected up to the point where the disadvantage is inverted.

- when betting banker side, the overall amount of P drawing hands must be higher than expected up to the point where the asym factor can overwhelm either the 5% vig or the F-7 apparition.

A P standing point is favorite to win itlr, period.

A P drawing hand is favorite to get the B side winning itlr, period.

It happens there are statistical situations that may endorse or not either P standing or P drawing points.

Actually at baccarat one side is favorite to win when it gets a standing point or a possible standing point: P will hope about a 6,7,8 or 9 point and B will confide about possible 3,4,5,6 and 7,8 and 9 points.

Whatever the short term results will be, a standing point or a possible standing point will win.
Itlr.

The run we care of.

Have you ever actually described how tf this system works in a way that someone else can understand it?

His attempts in other threads seemed to boil down to cards having memory and patterns being due.

Cards have no memory, key cards have a strict probability to fall here or there once they are removed or not from the deck, especially whether the shoe wasn't perfectly shuffled.

Baccarat inventors tried to make things more complicated than a simple high card game but the principle remains the same. It's a high card game designed to get four main positions, two for each side.

Bac patterns are just the reflex of the average card distribution that will get its peaks and valleys (positionally speaking).
Itlr bac seems to be a kind of coin flip game, actually every hand of each shoe will feature winning probabilities very distant from a 50/50 game even in the symmetrical spots (as a pure drawing-drawing same point situation is quite rare).
Such "natural" asymmetricity working into an already asymmetrical game established by rules could give us profitable betting opportunities.

So if I understand your post, you pick your betting opportunities based on the hands you have already seen, correct?

Partially.
Any shoe dealt is going to produce certain patterns 100% of the times. We do not know when but they surely will.
Since every shoe is a finite and card dependent proposition, we should think about ranges of apparition of certain patterns.
Actual card situations may improve the probability to get either streaks or singles and should be compared to the general average card distribution (in term of patterns).
Despite there are infinite card situations, the number of naturals and standing points very rarely falls distant to the average number.
The same about the 8.4% asym hands probability.

I remember an english team allegedly capable to assess the slight propensity to get either streaks or singles after a substantial portion of the shoe was dealt.
They only played 6-deck shoes with very few cards burnt.
It seemed they only played just 2/3 of the total shoes dealt.

So that's a yes. Which means your strategy is one of two things:

1. counting cards in order to place a rare bet when the penetration is high enough to gain an advantage

or

2. the theory that deals are not independent but can be predicted based on whether certain patterns have come out yet or are "due" to come out

#1 is known to possibly be very marginally profitable, but probably worth less than the free drinks because the advantage happens about once every few hours at best.

#2 is really what you have always talked about every time you start one of these threads. I know that nobody is ever going to disabuse you of this notion of some kind of quantum entanglement between the cards. Best of luck.

Best of luck? Thanks, probably we only need not to be severely unlucky as happened yesterday.
We'll see if today your wish help us to recover the six bets lost.

So that's a "No", then.

No one bac player would be interested to know how to win an average of one bet per 2-3 or more shoes dealt, especially whether the betting rate is ridiculously low.
Would you?