Jump to content

A Horse with no name

Recommended Posts

  • Baccarat Hall of Fame Member

Hello, everyone...

Ever notice how casinos seems to be in the most out of the way places? The desert ( Vegas), A Riverboat ( all over), An island ( Bahamas, etc.)...maybe this is not just by accident, but perhaps is meant to weed-out those 1% WINNERS ...

So just to get yourself thinking straight, take 5 minutes and listen to the Band - America's song " A HORSE WITH NO NAME"...yes, you will feel right at home , just like you do playing in your favorite casino...guaranteed if you do this, next time you play you will not be able to get this song out-of-your-head!


OK, so here I'd like to explore a theory actually espoused by many Bac Dealers, NOT MY ORIGINAL IDEA!!, and I have to admit my experience ( after much resistance) does indeed bear this out...


Here it is:

Plain-and-simple, the more wins-in-a-row-on-one-side ( PLAYER OR BANKER), when it finally does switch to the other side, it has a higher than average propensity to "switch-back" to the strong side after just a single play in the opposite direction...


5-BANKERS in a row ( or PLAYERS)

Then 1 on PLAYER

SWITCH right back to the BANK for the next play!


I have had many Dealers call this the "80%" play, though I find my experience to be a bit different...BUT TAKE A LOOK BELOW!!!!!


If you have a bunch of cards with actual live casino play ( which I do), take a look and see what your experience has been. I have played for more than 10 years, and I have saved the last several hundred cards ( shoes) to actually examine this "myth" and here I have just looked back at the cards in my possession and think I have found an exploitable advantage...

Here are my actual results:

1) Note: TIES do-not-count as an interruption to the progression ( i.e - 2B in a row, then a T, then another B = 3 Bankers in a row)

2) 3-in-a-row, then 1 on the opposite side, then back to the original ("strong") side ( B or P) = 52.2%

4-in-a-row, then 1 on the opposite side, then back to the original ("strong") side ( B or P) =54.9%

5-in-a-row, then 1 on the opposite side, then back to the original ("strong") side ( B or P) = 56.7%

6-or-more-in-a-row, then 1 on the opposite side, then back to the original ("strong") side (B or P) = 59.4%

3) After 6-in-a-row or more, the % did not seem to be changed much...probably due to the infrequency/low sample size of > 6-in-a-row??


Sooooooo, does anyone out there in the FORUM have a bunch of live-casino cards they could look at to see what their experience has been??

I was very excited to see this myself, and I am anxious to see if this is an exploitable advantage we can use or not?

I know it does not seem possible, and in many shoes it does not play out this way, but take a look yourself and let us all know what you have experienced...Remember I do not count the TIES in a progression...ALSO, I HAVE NOT INCLUDED MULTIPLE OCCURRENCES ON A SINGLE SIDE AT THE END OF A SHOE...

Call me or email if questions...




Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, so I grabbed 10 shoes off the top of the pile and counted them up.

3's Win 19 Lose 22

4's Win 12 Lose 7

5's Win 6 Lose 1

6+ Win 0 Lose 4

It's obviously too small of a sample to make a decision but an interesting start for sure.

I'll watch and try to keep track of them in future shoes as a side note, just to watch the trend.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use