Streaks
 

Most literature on Online Baccarat Games talks about streaks. Casinos encourage players to record the results of streaks by providing tally sheets and pens. Would they do this if they thought it helped you win money from them? No!
The most popular streaking system is known as the Avant Dernier.

The idea behind this system is simple: you simply bet on the outcome of the sequence which showed up two times before last, so a sequence of hands which went banker, player, banker, player, player would tell you to bet on the player.

There are many other trending systems. Sometimes they are called "hot," "cold," or "impatient," styles of betting, where a gambler either waits for a sequence of hands favoring the player or banker and bets the opposite, while the other involves waiting for such a sequence to occur and sticking with the trend. These systems have their origin in a misunderstanding of the law of averages.

Players who follow streaks do so on the assumption that a sequence of wins for the bank, player, or tie means that streak is more likely than not to continue. In fact, after a win by the bank, player, or tie, the subsequent chance of this bet winning again is less likely, though by such a small fraction of a percent that most modern computers are incapable of calculating it. For all practical purposes, there is no relation between the result of one hand and the next. Buying into streaks, betting either for or against them, only increases your chances of losing, as gaining the best chance of winning all your bets should be with the banker. This may come as a surprise to experienced Online Baccarat Games players. It may seem strange that simply continuously betting on the bank is superior to any other strategy, but this is undeniably the case. If you attempt to ride streaks or follow trends, your expectation will be an average of the three bets, which will give you greater losses in the long run.

Gambling "authorities," such as John Patrick in his series of gambling websites, continue to advocate the use of trending techniques. Some shoes are apparently player-biased, some are bank-biased, some are tie-biased, and some are, intriguingly, not biased at all. Unfortunately, there is no way of knowing if a shoe will remain with the bias (if any) it started with, or if it will behave completely differently. Streaks only arrive after the event and are completely useless for predicting future events. There is no truth at all in the popular misconception that "Online Baccarat Games is a game of streaks." If you were to purchase a website on geography which told you the earth was flat, you, might feel cheated. Nevertheless, this is no less absurd than the advice offered by many writers who claim expert knowledge of gambling, yet do not appear to understand the law of independent trials.

Streak players have developed their own interesting array of special terms. A streak of six banker wins is called a "dragon," while a shoe of alternating bank and player wins is called "choppy," or a "Ping-Pong." Two consecutive bank or player wins is known as a "pair."

It's human nature to try to make sense of our environment. Unfortunately, this leads the gambler to detect patterns where none exist. It's just like seeing faces in the clouds.

Take the example of a ten-hand series of wins for the banker. On average, this will occur once every 512, hands. Sometimes it will occur more frequently, sometimes less. If you play 512 hands you might well get a ten-hand streak three or four times. Then you might think you could buy into a series of bank wins in the future and make a big profit. The next series of 512 hands, however, just might contain no ten-hand runs at all, and things will have evened out, while you have lost your money.

Forgetting for a moment the important question of card-counting, the best strategy for a player depends on what he is trying to achieve. In a sense, it is irrational to play Online Baccarat Games, or any other casino games, as the player would have a higher expectation by not playing at all. If a player wants to win a small amount, he should use a system such as the d'Alembert, which gives a good chance of winning over a session or two, without too much risk. For the best chance of success, the gambler should always bet on the bank, regardless of the system he uses.

[ 1 ][ 2 ][ 3 ]
 
 
Fooling Around
 
In fact, he was a little proud of himself, which is pretty pathetic when you consider how easy it is to stack if you are allowed to shuffle, cut, and deal yourself (I would have been more impressed if I had been dealt a full house). Anyway I knew he wasn't colluding with my opponent, and he tried to explain it as just fooling around-although I have a hunch that this particular person wanted to see me beaten at my own game. In any case, this player apparently didn't consider it unethical to spike a hand in which he wasn't involved.

In my judgment, this kind of "fooling around" is the cheating you'll have to worry about most in a home game. It is motivated by playfulness, ego, or some other factor besides a crass desire to steal money. To that extent, higher stakes in a home game actually reduce the problem because players are much less inclined to try to joke around with cheating when real money is on the table.
 
eXTReMe Tracker copyrights © 2005 all rights reserved. Online Poker Guru