Re: Is baccarat that great/bad a game?

>>  "Alan Shank" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

There's that idea again! This is a gross misunderstanding of probability. In
a negative-expectation game, the house will come out ahead, long term; the
players, taken as an aggregate, will lose. This DOES NOT mean that ALL the
players will lose. Some will win, even long term. This is due to variance,
our friend. <<

You're right, of course, Alan in your assertion that some players will be
long term winners.  So will those few lottery players who hit the Power Ball
mega jackpot and walk away with $50 million or so.  But that's sort of
beside the point.  In Baccarat, or any other casino table game in which the
odds are immutable and favor the house, one can neither identify nor predict
which players will be fortunate enough to be long term winners.  Moreover,
decisions one makes at the table are completely irrelevant in terms of
influencing the results achieved.

In other words, at Baccarat, you're sort of like a spectator.  You put your
money down, make no decisions whatsoever, and if you're incredibly lucky you
might be a long term winner. And despite of the fact that betting "Banker"
is one of the best casino bets available, it still favors the house, and in
the long term the vast majority of people lose.

You can go into a bookstore and get a copy of  my book, "Gambling For
Dummies," and see for yourself, or just take my word for the fact that a
player exerts no control over the results at the Baccarat table, and while a
few lucky souls may be long term winners, the majority are losers.  The
exception, of course, is if you're name is "Bond....James Bond," in which
case you'll not only win but you'll bed down a glamorous femme fatal who's
also a secret agent masquerading as a Baccarat shill.
_____
Lou Krieger
Raise your game with Lou Krieger, author of "Poker For Dummies," at Royal
Vegas Poker.
http://www.royalvegaspoker.com/lou