Baccarat Simulations Series 8: MB Advanced Tie Count
Results from Baccarat Simulations Series 8 are presented below.
In this series, I examined the Michael Brannan’s Advanced Tie Count Method. Read a discussion of the results in the following post, The Ties That Bind.
| Strike +30 | Strike +40 | Strike +50 | Strike +60 | |
| Total Units Won | 219,736 | 60,480 | 13,272 | 2,416 |
| Total Units Lost | 259,623 | 70,761 | 15,854 | 2,944 |
| Total Units Bet | 287,090 | 78,321 | 17,513 | 3,246 |
| Player’s Advantage | -13.8936% | -13.1267% | -14.7433% | -16.2662% |
| Percentage of Bets Won | 9.5674% | 9.6526% | 9.4730% | 9.3038% |
| Percentage Bet Opportunity | 3.4268% | 0.9349% | 0.2090% | 0.0387% |
Data Set: 100,000 baccarat shoes (ref. My Baccarat Shoe Factory).
For this set of 100,000 shoes, the frequency of Player, Banker, and Ties were as follows:
| Player Wins | 3,738,456 | (44.6232%) |
| Banker Wins | 3,840,209 | (45.8377%) |
| Tie Wins | 799,170 | (9.5391%) |
| Total | 8,377,835 |
Player’s Advantage is the net units won after commissions divided by the total units bet. The theoretical player’s expectancy for the tie is -14.3596%.
Flat betting only.
Strike +30, +40, +50, +60 = MB Advanced Tie Count after which to bet tie
Percentage of Bets Won = Percentage of all bets won for tie, where the theoretical expectancy for winning the tie is 9.5156%.
Percentage Bet Opportunity = Percentage of all betting opportunities available to bet, determined by the strike count.
__________________________________________________________
Graphs of Net Units Won per Shoe:
Strike +30, +40, +50, and +60 (full view):
Strike +30, +40, +50, and +60 (close up):
__________________________________________________________
Other Statistics:
Percentage of Ties and Hands per Count:
| Advanced Tie Count Bins | Frequency of Ties per Count | Frequency of Hands per Count | Percentage Ties per Hands |
| -71 to -80 | 31 | 265 | 11.6981% |
| -61 to -70 | 180 | 1,923 | 9.3604% |
| -51 to -60 | 1,100 | 11,511 | 9.5561% |
| -41 to -50 | 5,018 | 52,522 | 9.5541% |
| -31 to -40 | 17,581 | 184,004 | 9.5547% |
| -21 to -30 | 49,516 | 519,538 | 9.5308% |
| -11 to -20 | 111,411 | 1,172,155 | 9.5048% |
| -1 to -10 | 200,952 | 2,113,769 | 9.5068% |
| 1 to 10 | 202,404 | 2,111,641 | 9.5852% |
| 11 to 20 | 111,902 | 1,171,674 | 9.5506% |
| 21 to 30 | 49,663 | 521,043 | 9.5315% |
| 31 to 40 | 17,866 | 186,878 | 9.5602% |
| 41 to 50 | 5,111 | 53,178 | 9.6111% |
| 51 to 60 | 1,143 | 12,079 | 9.4627% |
| 61 to 70 | 215 | 2,296 | 9.3641% |
| 71 to 80 | 39 | 404 | 9.6535% |
| 81 to 90 | 5 | 67 | 7.4627% |
| 91 to 100 | 1 | 2 | 50.0000% |
Frequency of Ties and Hands per Count:
| Advanced Tie Count Bins | Frequency of Ties per Count | Percentage of Total |
| -71 to -80 | 31 | 0.0040% |
| -61 to -70 | 180 | 0.0233% |
| -51 to -60 | 1,100 | 0.1421% |
| -41 to -50 | 5,018 | 0.6482% |
| -31 to -40 | 17,581 | 2.2710% |
| -21 to -30 | 49,516 | 6.3963% |
| -11 to -20 | 111,411 | 14.3916% |
| -1 to -10 | 200,952 | 25.9582% |
| 1 to 10 | 202,404 | 26.1457% |
| 11 to 20 | 111,902 | 14.4550% |
| 21 to 30 | 49,663 | 6.4153% |
| 31 to 40 | 17,866 | 2.3079% |
| 41 to 50 | 5,111 | 0.6602% |
| 51 to 60 | 1,143 | 0.1476% |
| 61 to 70 | 215 | 0.0278% |
| 71 to 80 | 39 | 0.0050% |
| 81 to 90 | 5 | 0.0006% |
| 91 to 100 | 1 | 0.0001% |
| Total | 774,138 | |
| Advanced Tie Count Bins | Frequency of Hands per Count | Percentage of Total |
| -71 to -80 | 265 | 0.0033% |
| -61 to -70 | 1,923 | 0.0237% |
| -51 to -60 | 11,511 | 0.1418% |
| -41 to -50 | 52,522 | 0.6472% |
| -31 to -40 | 184,004 | 2.2675% |
| -21 to -30 | 519,538 | 6.4022% |
| -11 to -20 | 1,172,155 | 14.4444% |
| -1 to -10 | 2,113,769 | 26.0478% |
| 1 to 10 | 2,111,641 | 26.0216% |
| 11 to 20 | 1,171,674 | 14.4385% |
| 21 to 30 | 521,043 | 6.4208% |
| 31 to 40 | 186,878 | 2.3029% |
| 41 to 50 | 53,178 | 0.6553% |
| 51 to 60 | 12,079 | 0.1488% |
| 61 to 70 | 2,296 | 0.0283% |
| 71 to 80 | 404 | 0.0050% |
| 81 to 90 | 67 | 0.0008% |
| 91 to 100 | 2 | 0.0000% |
| Total | 8,114,949 |
Advanced Tie Count Bins = bins of 10 tie counts
Frequency of Ties per Count = how often ties occur for each count
Frequency of Hands per Count = how often a hand has a count
__________________________________________________________
Graphs of Other Statistics:
Frequency of Ties vs. MB Tie Count (log scale):
Percentage of Ties per Hands vs. MB Tie Count:




November 1, 2010 at 11:34 am
[...] that Brannan’s Tie Count method yielded no genuine advantage in predicting ties (ref. Series 8 Results, The Ties That [...]
November 12, 2010 at 12:43 pm
Did you omit counts of -71+ from your net units won graphs because they occur so infrequently or because it would have shown to be positive?
-TheArchitect
November 12, 2010 at 1:14 pm
Thanks for your question.
The answer is both: infrequency at those high counts makes the statistics unreliable, as well as impractical.
November 12, 2010 at 1:24 pm
I should point out, too, that all the simulations included the 71+ events, since the strikes are minimums upon which to start betting.
October 26, 2011 at 4:36 pm
[...] using a particular counting method has been shown to be impossible in practice. (Reference: Data: Simulation Series 8: MB Advanced Tie Count, and Discussion: The Ties That [...]