Hello guys, I am running some tests on "trying" to beat a casino game called baccarat. Believe me when I say that I have been working on this project for many months at this point. Without getting in details on a system or how to (if it really works) or it is even possible (that is not the point of this post), I will go directly to my simulation results which is what I really want to discuss and where I need to be sure that I am focusing/doing the right mathematical/statistical/logical thing. Having the following two scenarios and based on more than 12K shoes:

*the ocurrences are based on different "cases" where I will stop playing a shoe or even discard it without playing (the ones in 0), i.e. for case A after winning 20 units and going below that level (for case B 40 units)

As you can see scenario B produces more in net units, almost 10K more (45K in total); also it give us 1 more unit (4 in total) per shoe on average. On first thought, in the long run this looks better than A.

But here comes my doubt...

1. Isn't it better or even lower in risk to look or insure a higher % of occurences of your top case (the one where you win more on average... 21 units 49%)?

2. Moreover if we consider to play 2 tables at the same time, wouldn't it be better to have more possibilities/probabilities/ocurrences of getting one of the shoes from my top case?

I will put you a 3rd scenario based on A but with 2 more cases to stop playing a shoe; I guess the % of ocurrences are more distributed:

Based on all the above and I hope it is clear enough, which one do you think is the best/optimal scenario? (definitely consider minimizing risk and maximizing profit).

Thanks in advance for your time and any advice/thoughts/light! that you can provide.

J.

*the ocurrences are based on different "cases" where I will stop playing a shoe or even discard it without playing (the ones in 0), i.e. for case A after winning 20 units and going below that level (for case B 40 units)

As you can see scenario B produces more in net units, almost 10K more (45K in total); also it give us 1 more unit (4 in total) per shoe on average. On first thought, in the long run this looks better than A.

But here comes my doubt...

1. Isn't it better or even lower in risk to look or insure a higher % of occurences of your top case (the one where you win more on average... 21 units 49%)?

2. Moreover if we consider to play 2 tables at the same time, wouldn't it be better to have more possibilities/probabilities/ocurrences of getting one of the shoes from my top case?

I will put you a 3rd scenario based on A but with 2 more cases to stop playing a shoe; I guess the % of ocurrences are more distributed:

Based on all the above and I hope it is clear enough, which one do you think is the best/optimal scenario? (definitely consider minimizing risk and maximizing profit).

Thanks in advance for your time and any advice/thoughts/light! that you can provide.

J.

Last edited: