DislikedShould be some big time traders on here. Evaluate this baccarat system. I absolutely have found what they say about game characteristics and how you have to adjust your playIgnored
I Googled "NOR baccarat strategy", and the first link was to a PDF (attached), which I read. It talked about how to recognize "chop", "streak" and "neutral" shoes. The key is whether any of this gives you info as to what the card distribution remaining in the shoe is. In other words, info about the probable future, which is where any possible edge lies, rather than the past. If so, there may be some validity in it. Otherwise, it's just another variation of gambler's fallacy, in which case the betting and MM strategies that they propose will be worthless.
Dr Mike Shackleford (the 'Wizard of Odds') is a widely respected, and unbiased, expert on casino games and math. He says "Every baccarat table will have plenty of score cards and pencils for the players to keep track of the outcome of every hand. Most players will do so religiously and carefully analyze their card for trends as the winning hand switches back and forth from the banker to the player. This is a big waste of time! The smart player will bet on the banker every time and leave the score cards alone." (source) This is in complete contrast to what NOR is recommending, and tells me that NOR is probably a sham.
I also experimented with the Wizard's baccarat calculator (here). I tested a few different combos of cards remaining, and I wasn't able to find a combo that gave the punter positive expectancy. While the only way to win at blackjack is to count cards, I note that here he reaches the conclusion that "for all practical purposes baccarat is not a countable game."
Over time, casinos make millions, thanks to their small house edge. The MIT blackjack team demonstrated that all you need to do is turn a negative 1%-2% edge into a positive 1%-2% edge to reverse that, which is enough to take a huge amount from casinos, exactly what they achieved. In the NOR baccarat PDF, it says that the authors (Clifton Davis and Keith Smith) have collectively 60 years of baccarat experience, which -- if their system has even a small edge -- is plenty of time for them to have accumulated several million dollars. If they're multi-millionaires, then why are they selling membership to NOR for $600? (as stated in the PDF). That's a big red flag to me.
(The PDF also contains pictures of the 'Mr Monopoly' man, and from the James Bond movie Thunderball -- none of which is really significant, it looks like cheap promotional hype to me).
Anyway, I'm not willing to pay $600 to find out whether the NOR system works or not. I smell a rat. And I'm not aware of anybody who's made the news by making a career fortune from playing baccarat. This also suggests to me that the game can't be beaten in the longer term.
There are hundreds of vendors selling "systems" to beat roulette, and (unless they're based on the physics causing the way in which the ball interacts with the roulette wheel, or the way in which a wheel might be biased) they're all scams. Given the simplicity and accessibility of casino games, there are probably more scammers selling dodgy roulette, baccarat, craps etc "systems" than there are hucksters selling dodgy forex "systems". All of these folk are preying on the greed, laziness and ignorance of gullible folk who are looking for an easy way to make some quick money. Either these scammers understand the math behind the game, in which case they're intentionally committing an act of premeditated fraud, or they don't, which means they're no more knowledgeable than the chumps that they're selling their worthless junk to. Caveat emptor!
DislikedTrading systems developers should know that there is a difference between back testing and running a system live. Many of the gaming approach developers I am looking at state that testing an approach on a computerized gaming simulation does not reflect actual gaming conditions.
NOR baccarat system.pdf 3.5 MB | 1,894 download