Wendel

I think if you lose the OTR bet , just go back to playing opposite the winning side, which would put you under the bet you just lost. If you win , you should be sitting on a 4 iar. decide if you want to continue betting OTR , or if you want to leave the run after 4 iar and play opposite. If the last previous run was 5 or more , you would probably stay OTR for a bet or 2 . If 4 or less play opposite. Check Ellis's most recent posts in the S40 m2 thread. The specifics may be a little different for M2 , but the length of runs should apply as per Ellis's recent posts on the topic or your preferences. If you win OTR in M2 , I think you are sitting on a 5iar. At one point , I think Ellis was using a minimum length of 4. so if your o bet won you would bet once more otr regardless of whether there was a previous 4 or more. I think that still applies.

Now, you have me wondering. I think we only play the runs on the primary side not on the ATR side. If we lost our primary and secondary ATR bets we would go on the run. if the OTR bet hit we would play that run as appropriate. IF you haven't already take a long look at post 65 in the Million Dollar Bacarat @ 5 thread. That post has the same attachment as several other threads , but this one gives, I think, a good summary of how the 0 bet is used. the subsequent few threads are also pretty good.

I like the attachments separate anyway. I find them easier to print file and reference. Anyway, I think our solutions are out of sync At play 8, I played opposite (p1) At play 15, I played opposite (p1) I can't think of the rational for playing bank here At play 16 I played under the 2 iar (b0) The previous secondary prog ended at play 14. at play 20, I played p1 to follow the 0 at 16. at play 22 I played B2 at play 24 I played P3 at play 26 I played B0 actually we are closer than I thought. I like your version better, but I think mine was correct.

I started with a 0 bet under the first 2iar, play 3, and it went down hill from there for a while.

Brutal is a good word for it , although an understatement. I got all the way to -8, lost the complete secondary prog. just before the zzz run started. got all my money back + 6. gotta love those runs.

It seems to me , that if we stay on the runs to the end, we stand to lose 1 unit at the end and don't have to play the losing ATR to lose 6units. Further , I think that a run longer than about 3 is a bias, and who bets against a bias ?

took s40M1 +5 version to the casino yesterday. Here is the shoe: B42131221121 B1221111111116 B31

What other reasonable option do you have ? you are sitting there, having lost your secondary progression bet ATR.

Hi MVS, I think that hand 17 may be an OTR attempt similar to what we discussed yesterday. (361). He lost all three bets ATR which includes the bet for the secondary prog. Now there is nowhere to go but OTR. Wendel p.s. Are you numbering your plays beginning with 0 ? we seem to be out of sync by 1.

Thanks, That solution works for me . Wendel

Thanks, MVS I am glad to see that I am not the only one. I found myself hanging out there after the 1 bet ATR and wondering if I should follow immediately with my 2 bet and 3 bet. Wendel

Hi, I just can't hold this question any longer . I apologize if it is obvious and I can't see it or if it is yet to be dealt with. I cannot see how to deal with a sequence of B36 or any sequence where a long(er) run follows a winning 0 bet at the beginning of the shoe or later where there are no unresolved 0 bets.

I kind of like that approach, including playing on S40 M3. Unfortunately , I only have a 1 table casino and a 2 table casino, so I have to play what there is or not play. I believe that Norm played a 2 hi mandatory 2 prog, mandatory 2 means that all a 2 bet follows a 1 bet whether the 1 bet wins or loses. I think that he also would suspend the mandatory 2 bet if it fell where he didn't want to make a 2 bet there for some reason. He intended to explain it in more detail, but there is a post somwhere where he gives a brief description. If you search through the posts by Norma (there aren't that many) you may find what he has posted on the topic. A lot of his posts are good reads anyway. I have been experimenting with something similar I think, but I like to play it with S40 M2. this works out to the second optional OTR bet alway being a 2 bet. I don't have your scorecard in front of me, but I would have bet 121 atr and 2 otr (or 0 otr to maintain the integrity of the M3)

Although the 4 iar at the top of the first shoe may not have been a "true 4 iar" ,being the result of the cut. It may have been enough to disqualify this table as a s40M1 table. At the very best a 4iar puts you on the run and down 5. Does your experienced friend recommend to you that you play s40 M3 and quit if you lose a progression ?

were these 2 shoes played on different tables or on the same table ? Did you select M3 for your mode based on the O/R count ? One could have justified playing both of these shoes with OTB4L. I think playing the less aggressive prog in the second shoe to confirm the mode was a good idea. I would have liked to see the next outcome in both shoes. Perhaps you quit too soon. I have no real criticism of how you played S40 M3, but I noticed that both shoes would have played better with OTB4L.

In one of his posts describing Bas40, which is a +5 strategy, Ellis has written "In all cases stay on the run until you lose," after describing some OTR scenarios. So, if BACDJ126 is playing BaS40 , he is doing it by the "BaS40 book" and not the NOR Book. I think everybody is right on this one.

I thought that the 3 iar and 3 ones at the end of the first section might have been indicating a change in the shoe to S40. I am not sure how I would have handled this in the "heat of battle" I was as high as +17 at the end of the first section (I found an error in translating the first part of the shoe) so I was actually plus 15 at play 28 and plus 18 after the second section. With any kind of luck I would have left with a +15 and not even looked back to see how the shoe ended because it may have taken a while to recognize what was going on in the third part. wendel

ps I hit +10 @ around play 28, where I have enough to quit, but something interesting appears to be happening after that point in the shoe. I am looking forward to your post of the remainder of the shoe. W

Hi, Hi Hamster, I would play this shoe with NOR. If you want more specific answers ,you should post the question in the NOR Forum. I don't think you will get a more detailed reply from NOR members in the general forum. Wendel Wendel

I don't think there are "enough" shoes to guarantee long term success , and the fringe benefits are lousy. anyway. Never quit you day job, or find one that you can live with.

I think that you did quite well with S40. Starting where you did, the appropriate choice was S40. If you had waited a dozen hands or so , you may have chosen OTB4L , but I am not sure you would have done any better. I wouldn't have chosen F for sure. I seldom play F , but when I do I probably will have switched someplace mid shoe.

p.s. The enhanced rule for zz runs is exactly opposite to ST runs for zz runs if the o/r count is greater than 0 (+) play mode 2 if the o/r count is zero or - play mode 3

Hi Tracy, Actually, I thought that although you got in pretty deep early you managed it quite well. This shoe is not easy to play. But, you may not be aware of the refinement that has been made to mode selection and is buried somewhere in the forum. if the o/r count is greater than 0 (+) play mode 3 if the o/r count is zero or - play mode 2 Had you done that you would have beaten the first 4 iar and lost to the following 3 iar, but the rest of the shoe may have gone better. I haven't played it yet. and, as the previous poster has said it is easy to play a shoe after the fact, but I would try it using the above rule for selecting mode Wendel.

Thanks, BaccDJ126 I finally got the last one 4d-Analyzer-live-play(1) to work. I think I may have the wrong version of Excel and it was not presenting the password screen after I had tried to save the work sheet. I at least got to try what I wanted to try. I will play with it some more. Its probably just something procedural that I am not getting right.

Hi, These analyzers aren't recognizing the password supplied in Post #1. Does that mean the versions posted here are obsolete ? Which version of these analyzers is everyone using ? Thanks. Wendel