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:

Disclaimer: The betting strategies and results presented are for educational and entertainment purposes only. Gambling involves substantial risks, and the odds are not in the player’s favor by design. The author does not state nor imply any system, method, or approach offers users any advantage, and he shall not be held liable under any circumstances for any losses whatsoever.

Advertisements

5 Responses to “Baccarat Simulations Series 8: MB Advanced Tie Count”

  1. […] that Brannan’s Tie Count method yielded no genuine advantage in predicting ties (ref. Series 8 Results, The Ties That […]

  2. TheArchitect Says:

    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

    • Thanks for your question.

      The answer is both: infrequency at those high counts makes the statistics unreliable, as well as impractical.

    • I should point out, too, that all the simulations included the 71+ events, since the strikes are minimums upon which to start betting.

  3. […] 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 […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: