PDA

View Full Version : Baccarat - Betting Against A Streak



Chuck2009x
03-06-2011, 05:17 AM
The one issue I can't seem to get my head around it why you shouldn't bet against a long streak. I went back and looked at the Wizard's appendix table where he shows the probability of streaks (ie. basically starts out at 50% on hand 1 and gets cut in half on each succeeding hand).

What he doesn't state clearly, but what I interpret after seeing other references, is that those probabilities apply BEFORE hand 1 is dealt.

In other words, if you were able to place a bet up front that the next 7 hands wouldn't be all Banker (or all Player), you would win that bet 99% of the time. However, once a streak of 6 has been established, the probability that it will continue on the next hand is still 45-45-10, same as any other hand.

I get that mathematically, but it somehow still feels right to push out big on the other side once a streak reaches 6 or 7. I did that on my last trip and only had to martingale a loss once. The toughest decision for me was when a streak was established, I bet the other way, and then comes a tie. In all ofthose cases, I left the bet up and won.

The longest streak I saw last trip was 9 Banker, and I was playing at only Banker at the time. I basically always bet Banker except when it establishes a long streak. I did see a few way lopsided shoes on the trip, usually when I was just passing by a table, and they were mostly in favor of Player.

Do you bet against long streaks? If you don't, is it because of the math, or because you subscribe to the "strong" Banker or Player theory?

UKFanatic
03-06-2011, 09:14 AM
I used to bet against streaks, following the gambler's fallacy that the other side is "due". But recently I've started sticking with streaks, just because it is more fun. Ultimately, we all know streaks don't matter. Since each hand is an independent variable, a streak does not predict what will happen with the next hand. So play whichever way is more fun for you

joyglen
03-06-2011, 10:29 AM
The most absurd and ludicrous thing to do in Baccarat is go against a streak or any other pattens, i.e.; Second Line Bets, Chop Chop, etc.

I have witnessed hundreds of people lose their bankroll doing just that over the 30 years or so I have played the game.

Odds are over millions of shoes, they dont count with the 10 shoes or so you play in a gambling session.

Sure, eventually the streak will end, but you are going to lose 5 or 8 or 10 units you wager thinking that way. There is nothing stronger in Baccarat than a streak.

There is usually one person betting against the streak on a table. Watching him/her wgaer on the other side of the streak and get a natural 8 and the streak side get a natural 9= PRICELESS.

It always happens.

Personally if I am not on the streak side, I wait it out and don't wager. Jumping in is sudden death more times than not. If I am on the streak side after 4 or 5 wins, whatever I had up as my wager I would leave it until it falls off. I usually press or add on to my wager during the first 3 or 4 wins.

PopMegaphone
03-06-2011, 10:58 AM
The most absurd and ludicrous thing to do in Baccarat is go against a streak or any other pattens, i.e.; Second Line Bets, Chop Chop, etc.

I have witnessed hundreds of people lose their bankroll doing just that over the 30 years or so I have played the game.

Odds are over millions of shoes, they dont count with the 10 shoes or so you play in a gambling session.

Sure, eventually the streak will end, but you are going to lose 5 or 8 or 10 units you wager thinking that way. There is nothing stronger in Baccarat than a streak.

There is usually one person betting against the streak on a table. Watching him/her wgaer on the other side of the streak and get a natural 8 and the streak side get a natural 9= PRICELESS.

It always happens.

Personally if I am not on the streak side, I wait it out and don't wager. Jumping in is sudden death more times than not. If I am on the streak side after 4 or 5 wins, whatever I had up as my wager I would leave it until it falls off. I usually press or add on to my wager during the first 3 or 4 wins.

Each baccarat hand is independent of each other. Hands have no memory, so this isn't true.

If I flip a coin 4 times and I get heads each time, what is the probability I will get heads on the 5 flip?

The answer is there is a 50%. Each coin flip is independent of each other. That's true for any amount of flips (or shoes).

The first reply got it right.

Stacks O. Purple
03-06-2011, 11:06 AM
Regardless of the actual odds, I'm with Glen. If I look at my worst losses at any game, it always seems to be when I can't get away from betting against the improbable. In gambling, the improbable happens every day - especially in the short term.

joyglen
03-06-2011, 11:13 AM
Each baccarat hand is independent of each other. Hands have no memory, so this isn't true.

If I flip a coin 4 times and I get heads each time, what is the probability I will get heads on the 5 flip?

The answer is there is a 50%. Each coin flip is independent of each other. That's true for any amount of flips (or shoes).

The first reply got it right.

Two words. "Yeah Right" and a couple more, the casinos would love you.

Seriously, the game does the improbable the majority of the time. No matter what, yes--there is a 50-50 chance of either side for the upcoming hand. I give you that. However, once you have played the game long enough, you will understand why I said what I did.

So just for shits and giggles, go find a baccarat table in play and wait for the banker or player to have 5 or 6 wins in a row. Set you wager down on the other side and make a ton of money.

Also, I never said streaks are going to prevail over switching back to the other side.

When I was at Canterbury Park (notice I did not say 'downs'!) we had about 4 shoes of one, twos and threes, never more than 3 in a row. The 4th shoes started out bad. After about 15 or so hands the Banker went all the way down to the bottom of the screen about 10 or 11 streak and then when it switched to Player, the same thing--all the way down to the bottom again, then when it switched back to Banker, it went down almost to the bottom--maybe 8 or 9 hands. The majority of the players lost money betting the opposite side. They were just so convinced it could not have done what it did.

For those of you who play there, ask the male Asian dealer with the ponytail. Ask him about the player that gave him the black chip. He should remember cause they keep their own tips there.

PopMegaphone
03-06-2011, 11:25 AM
Two words. "Yeah Right" and a couple more, the casinos would love you.

Seriously, the game does the improbable the majority of the time. No matter what, yes--there is a 50-50 chance of either side for the upcoming hand. I give you that.

Casinos love gamblers who think they see trends and patterns that don't exist. Vegas wouldn't be in business if what you said was true. Do improbable things happen? Of course they do, but what you're suggesting is magic.


However, once you have played the game long enough, you will understand why I said what I did.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority




So just for shits and giggles, go find a baccarat table in play and wait for the banker or player to have 5 or 6 wins in a row. Set you wager down on the other side and make a ton of money.


Honestly, it doesn't matter which side you bet, in the long run you'll lose around the house edge (minor differences on edge for banker vs player). You can't out think the game.


Also, I never said streaks are going to prevail over switching back to the other side.

I don't understand what you are saying here.

By the way, this is nothing personal. I enjoy reading your posts. :p

joyglen
03-06-2011, 11:59 AM
I am not implying anything authoritative.

There are things learned and garnered over the years. The game can not be figured out and I would never think that I or anyone else could out think the game.

That is why it is there.

It is a guessing game and nothing else. But at times, there are patterns and trends and if you can recognize them--your in the money, and at times there are none, more of the latter than the former. No player can create or make a pattern or trend, merely recognize and there is a huge difference, at least in my book anyways.

I will leave it at that.

PopMegaphone
03-06-2011, 12:05 PM
It is a guessing game and nothing else. But at times, there are patterns and trends and if you can recognize them--your in the money, and at times there are none, more of the latter than the former. No player can create or make a pattern or trend, merely recognize and there is a huge difference, at least in my book anyways.

I wasn't suggesting a player can create a pattern or trend. I'm saying players can't improve their odds by predicting trends based on previous shoes or hands. If what you're suggesting was true Vegas couldn't exist.

I think this article covers my view pretty well: http://wizardofodds.com/gambling/bettingsystems.html

That was written by a mathematician who has worked for casinos.

DonD
03-06-2011, 12:14 PM
I'm saying players can't improve their odds by predicting trends based on previous shoes or hands.They can about half of the time.

PopMegaphone
03-06-2011, 12:57 PM
They can about half of the time.

Can you provide evidence?

shifter
03-06-2011, 04:31 PM
Can you provide evidence?

he was being facetious. basically saying that you have a 50/50 chance on any given hand, so you can "predict" the trend about half the time.

PopMegaphone
03-06-2011, 04:37 PM
he was being facetious. basically saying that you have a 50/50 chance on any given hand, so you can "predict" the trend about half the time.

Maybe you are right but I said "improving your odds" so his comment didn't make sense. 50/50 doesn't improve your odds.

shifter
03-06-2011, 04:38 PM
Honestly, it doesn't matter which side you bet, in the long run you'll lose around the house edge (minor differences on edge for banker vs player). You can't out think the game.

you are correct that every hand has about a 50/50 chance on either side regardless of previous hands. however, you're much better off betting with the trend than trying to fight it. the reason is risk vs. reward.

let's say you sit down at a table and see that banker has won the last 6 in a row and you say "player is due" and decide to fight that and bet player until player wins. you use a martingale system so as long as player wins one of the next few hands, you'll come out ahead. let's say i sit down at the same table and say "banker is strong" and decide to bet banker until player wins.

your best case scenario is player wins one hand before you blow your bankroll and you win 1 unit. your worst case scenario is banker keeps winning and you lose your entire bankroll.

now my worst case scenario is player wins the very next hand and i lose 1 unit. however, my best case scenario is unlimited. i can keep winning bet after bet on banker forever. 5 more ... 10 more ... 20 more ... i've seen it happen and made lots of money on them.

it's not that you're more likely to win playing the streak, it's that your best case wins dwarf your losses and you come out way ahead of someone who fights the streaks.

shifter
03-06-2011, 04:40 PM
Maybe you are right but I said "improving your odds" so his comment didn't make sense. 50/50 doesn't improve your odds.

your odds are improved half the time. half the time you win 100% of the time.

joyglen
03-06-2011, 04:44 PM
I have witnessed and played at tables where I have seen 17 to 21 wins straight in a streak, although not every trip but numerous times.

Just depends how long and how often you play.

And yes, 17 to 21 is very long and not an everyday event, but it does happen.

Again, go flip a quarter and mark down the results. It's about the same.

DonD
03-06-2011, 06:24 PM
Can you provide evidence?Sorry, I thought that I was agreeing with you. :peace:

FoolsGold
03-06-2011, 07:39 PM
The one issue I can't seem to get my head around it why you shouldn't bet against a long streak. It is just as erroneous to think that a streak will continue as it is to believe that the existence of the streak makes the alternative result "due" to happen.

Five Banker Hands in a row? Ten Banker Hands in a row? ... The streak will either continue or not. The cards don't know about the previous ten hands. And if they do know, they don't care.

joyglen
03-06-2011, 07:57 PM
It is just as erroneous to think that a streak will continue as it is to believe that the existence of the streak makes the alternative result "due" to happen.

Five Banker Hands in a row? Ten Banker Hands in a row? ... The streak will either continue or not. The cards don't know about the previous ten hands. And if they do know, they don't care.

Very very good and simple. In Baccarat there is nothing stronger than a streak when it does happen, that is all I am saying. I wouldn't want to be the one betting against it to make a one wager win. I would have to compare that to speeding on a certain road where you know cops sit all the time with radar. LOL, but ture.

shifter
03-06-2011, 10:12 PM
I wouldn't want to be the one betting against it to make a one wager win.

that's exactly the reason not to bet against a streak. all you're going to do is win one wager. betting with the streak you can win 5, 10, 15, 20 ... streaks are how you make the big money.

FoolsGold
03-07-2011, 04:37 AM
In Baccarat there is nothing stronger than a streak when it does happen, And nothing weaker.
For the streak, so far, has no effect whatsoever on that next hand. NONE.
If there have been five hands that have been Banker... you are just as sensible betting banker on the next hand as you are betting player. The last five rolls have absolutely no effect on that next roll. None. None whatsoever. Not strong, not weak. None!!
If you are lucky enough to catch a streak, its no different than if you lucky enough to be at a very choppy table but to catch those flip flops between Banker and Player just right.
A streak of Banker wins, a streak of Player wins and a streak of flip-flops between Banker and Player all have the same "power". None at all!!

Player pays 20:20.
Banker pays 19:20.

The difference in the probability between the two is so slight that one tip to the Tray Lizard will erase it. Choose one or the other ... and good luck to you, but please don't think that either one is more "due" than the other simply because the last few hands have had a certain result.

joyglen
03-07-2011, 06:57 AM
So many (notice I did not use alot-it is NOT a word) of you think I am referring to Baccarat hands as being 'due' or expecting to come out.

NOT. Repeat>>>>> NOT.

However, streaks and patterns and trends do happen and they are merely interpreted by many in just as many different ways.

Some of them 'guess' right and yet other players 'guess' wrong in their interpretation.

Betting against a streak say when there are 3 straight wins at hand, and the streak goes to 15, you are insane, dum, and don't know the pitfalls of the game. But then again you can win playing like that at a choppy shoe, The only downside is that there might be a 10 to 15 streak even at a choppy show and you buck that the whole way cause of your way of thinking.

I have never lost money being on one side and leaving it there and pulling down my wins, worse case-----I lose the last wager when it falls off to the other side.

I do quite well on chop chop and second line bets and player after tie.

I have a problem like almost every player, when the she does 1's, then 2's, maybe a 3 and then back to 1's and 2's with no ryhmn or reason. It is a guessing game, we all that.

You can sit down and play a few hands out of a few shoes and make a couple of hundred. Personally I go gamble and play several nights and usually wind up playing 5 to 8 shoes a night. It is what it is.

PopMegaphone
03-07-2011, 08:08 AM
you are correct that every hand has about a 50/50 chance on either side regardless of previous hands. however, you're much better off betting with the trend than trying to fight it. the reason is risk vs. reward.

let's say you sit down at a table and see that banker has won the last 6 in a row and you say "player is due" and decide to fight that and bet player until player wins. you use a martingale system so as long as player wins one of the next few hands, you'll come out ahead. let's say i sit down at the same table and say "banker is strong" and decide to bet banker until player wins.

your best case scenario is player wins one hand before you blow your bankroll and you win 1 unit. your worst case scenario is banker keeps winning and you lose your entire bankroll.

now my worst case scenario is player wins the very next hand and i lose 1 unit. however, my best case scenario is unlimited. i can keep winning bet after bet on banker forever. 5 more ... 10 more ... 20 more ... i've seen it happen and made lots of money on them.

it's not that you're more likely to win playing the streak, it's that your best case wins dwarf your losses and you come out way ahead of someone who fights the streaks.


What if I bet against the player and I win? What if for the next 10 hands I randomly bet the bank or player and I win? Every hand is completely independent of each other. Players who follow to steaks give meaning to random distributions of events.

Another way to say this is I can use the martingale system (bad idea, but I will for this example), while randomly betting player/banker and I have the exact same potential for winnings as a player who follows streaks.

TrekTiger
03-07-2011, 08:46 AM
I don't think anyone here that is in favor of riding the streak is trying to argue against the gamblers fallacy.

It seems that some people become bull headed because the math tells them to do this and that.

I would much rather lose a unit trying to ride the streak than to get felted because the math told me to.

Bossplayer21
03-07-2011, 08:55 AM
I am one of the most strict Basic Strategy BJ players around ( I know the OP is about Baccarat, hear me out). I know the math down to percentages. I hardly ever win, not even just a little. Actually I lose way more then I win but yet the math tells me I should only be about a 1% dog. If I gave you my session results, most would say that my results are mathematically unlikely, yet it has occurred. I am an engineer, I know math, I like math, but F$%* you math.:grrr: Knowing all this hasn't helped one bit.

So I keep grinding away playing perfect BS and keep getting rick rolled. Should I stop doing this? I am tired of hearing "well you played it right and lost, no shame in that" I don't get a badge for playing "perfectly", I would much rather win my ass off playing completely "wrong".

PopMegaphone
03-07-2011, 09:06 AM
To the two posters above...

Ultimately you should do what is the most fun. For instance, I never bet against the pass line despite having better odds. Understanding the math doesn't have to make you a machine. That's why I said the first reply got it right. It was the perfect answer.

thecarve
03-07-2011, 09:07 AM
I don't think anyone here that is in favor of riding the streak is trying to argue against the gamblers fallacy.

It seems that some people become bull headed because the math tells them to do this and that.

I would much rather lose a unit trying to ride the streak than to get felted because the math told me to.

No one is arguing that “math” is telling you to go against a streak!

Math will not tell you to follow a streak…math will not tell you to go against a streak. Math will tell you that the last 4…or 9…or 276 hands DO NOT MATTER! The likelihood of the next hand being banker after 27 consecutive bankers is exactly the same as it would be had 27 players come up…or if 13 straight shoes have no streaks of more than one in them.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with following streaks. And there is nothing wrong with betting against them. Over the long run your results will be the same. The only thing "wrong" is arguing that one way is better than the other.

joyglen
03-07-2011, 09:09 AM
I don't think anyone here that is in favor of riding the streak is trying to argue against the gamblers fallacy.

It seems that some people become bull headed because the math tells them to do this and that.

I would much rather lose a unit trying to ride the streak than to get felted because the math told me to.

Exactly. What the heck is wrong with pulling down 5, 10, or even 14 wins and losing the last one to the house?????????????? What are some trying to do, be a hero and call a winning wager to off a streak??? Big Hero, sorry but true.

No one is going to make the cards change, no one player decides anything in the game of baccarat.

With that said, I was at Bellagio Asian New Years, not sure if VegasBJ and Shifter was there, can't remember if this was Sunday or Monday night when they were gone. Well, anyways, there was about 4 or 5 in a row and another player from the table behind ours looks over and decides to place $10K in yellow chips on the opposite side (thinking bet against the streak) he looses, next hand same thing-looses again. A little while goes by and I don't remember what the current bank to player count was, but I did notice the gentlemen scan the table and place his wager as the only one on the opposite side then what everybody else was betting. Loose again. $30K lost. Personally I do not know his way of thinking but I do know other's that try that move from talking with them. Their way of thinking is the same thing talked about here. "Bet the opposite of what everybody thinks", etc.

Face it, either side can come out at anytime. One side might have 20 in a row and that side may never make a double hit the rest of the shoe. Or you can see 4's, 5's and 6's, etc., in a row for the majority of the shoe or you can have a complete shoe of 1's and 2's. Darn near the very high 90% of the shoes will even out to almost the same amount of bank and players per shoe you might get an extremely lopsided shoe in the middle and I have won a ton of money playing the weaker side to equal out, just cause it almost always does. But then again, you can get zonk'ed that way too, cause I have seen shoes that ended up 15 to 20 more on one side.

That is Baccarat.

The easiest game to win and the easiest game to lose.

shifter
03-07-2011, 10:33 AM
The easiest game to win and the easiest game to lose.

truer words were never spoken.

Lincster
03-07-2011, 08:13 PM
What I want to know is why Glen was at Canterbury Park? $300 max and small table doesn't seem to be your style. That said, when I've strolled through the bacc tables look more and more serious.

Playing streaks in bacc is like playing passline in craps for me....it doesn't really matter which side you play, but one is more fun than the other.

joyglen
03-07-2011, 09:24 PM
What I want to know is why Glen was at Canterbury Park? $300 max and small table doesn't seem to be your style. That said, when I've strolled through the bacc tables look more and more serious.

Playing streaks in bacc is like playing passline in craps for me....it doesn't really matter which side you play, but one is more fun than the other.

I go to the Twin Cities very often. Family there now and I am in the process of buying a home there in Plymouth. I have dibbs in on a vacant car dealership to house a future venture I am working on along I-94 just west of the Twin Cities Beltline.

Last weekend was a special little girl's birthday party and after Chuck E. Cheese, Mall of Amercia Kiddie Rides, Johnnie Rockets Food and Toys R Us buying Barbie Dolls, I decided to check out Canterbury Park.

Played a few times at Mystic in their high limit which is $2k to $3K max at B.J. only and The Grand also, I heard they had a Mini Bac table, so I gravitated to it. And $300 is their max, I asked. A little gamble is fun, very non stressful to me, especially wagering $300 a hand.