daytrader77459

Hi, Ellis, Have you and Keith decided when (day/time?) and where you all might play at Fri and/or Sat nights on the Las Vegas seminar weekend? Unfortunately I cannot attend Sat's seminar due to travel schedule. However, may be able to visit either Fri or Sat night. I am definitely looking forward to the Las Vegas seminar DVDs also! Thank you. Daytrader77459

Hi, Ellis, Sorry - more questions from Hollywood Penn National - Shoe 5. In this shoe, you started mid way after 5 Ps in a row. Then comes my questions: 1. Starting on Hand 3 - for some reason, the bets became placed using OB4L basis. Why the sudden switch? Previous shoes at same table? Not shown? For me - 5 Ps is a trigger for SS/F2/F3 NOR. 2. Likewise, after 3 Bs, why bet hand 5 on P (which is OBL betting)? The F2/F3 system would have indicted betting Bs for hands 4 and 5. Lose hand 5 to a P. Then jump right back to B with a 2u B bet. 3. On hands 16, 17, 18, - these would have all been B bets. Clearly a 9u swing in scores here. Summary - key question is what criteria/trigger caused immediate start using OB4L - instead of using SS/F2/F3 approach? Thank you for your time and learning points on these questions! Daytrader77459

Hi, Ellis, A quick question on the Hollywood Penn National shoe 2 (posted below my text). This was a good S40 shoe from the beginning and Column 1, had a winning (+10u). Why stopped the shoe? Fatigue? Dinner? Departure time? Normally in a good shoe like this, I would look to go 112 to lock up any winning shoe. But normally I see your shoes posted as having to go more than Column 1. Thank you. Daytrader77459

Hi, Ellis, Need your help with the shoes played on your trip at Hollywood Penn National - Shoe 1. Thank you, Davelevad, for posting these shoes. Please look at shoe 1. Started off w 4 Ps - so pretty much became SS/F2/F3 with P bias. Followed the U1D2 progression. Pretty clear thru hand 19. Now hand 20 - a bet of 4u was put on B - is this a recording error, Dave or Ellis? Or was this accurate for a 4u Bank bet? If accurate, why suddenly get off the F2 strong player bias? The 4u P bet would have been a swing of 8u. What am I missing here from the F2/F3 - NOR manual materials? Why not take the 2nd P bet at hand 20? Then hands 22, 23, 24 - lost 3 consec hands and (-6u). "Okay" however as this was per F2/F3 rules. But why jump to P after 3 Bs? If now have 1st run of 3 Bs, doesn't the F2/F3 rule set indicate that we should bet a 4th hand on B (hand 25)? What was the trigger to switch to OBL from F2/F3 on hand 25? Hand 21 should have been (+9u) after the winning (4u) bet on P for hand 20, plus a (2u) winning bet for hand 21 for P if following U1D2. But there was an obvious and immediate switch to OBL. Please explain criteria and principles behind this sudden switch. I recognize that the last four events were heavily biased on OBL with the PPPBBPPPBBB series. But still not a trigger to switch to OBL suddenly on hand 25. Ellis - appreciate your input and thoughts. Thank you! Daytrader77459

Hi, Davelevad, Yes, correct. My bad! In a hurry to post shoe for you - but great eye. Again, valuable to have multiple sets of eyes for study cases, reviews. I think the most important points are: 1. Is there a real bias on the table or shoe? 2. If yes, probably best to commit to one of the NOR systems until either stopped out or hit profit-taking exit points like half-decade mgmt. 3. I prefer conservative 1u bet OTR for one bet. Then if continued OTR, play out 1u bets OTR until 1st loss. Then back to (2) above. 4. Focus on managing bankroll equity highs especially in 3rd column or 4th column. I would even suggest 2nd column if unable to get ahead after 25 hds! I will try to post a shoe (or two) later today - highlighting some trouble areas for NOR players. Thank you. Daytrader77459

Hi, Davelevad, Thanks for posting the OBL shoe. You can see that the final is +4u. However, for me, I would have quit after +6u then 1st loss and ending with +5u. This is into the 3rd column - and I am looking to exit with a winning total. One other key point - had we started earlier in the shoe, the net total would be much better. This is another reason to exit early as I recognized that I missed the majority of column 1 which had many winning entries. Any ideas/comments? Thank you. Daytrader77459

Hi, Davelevad, Just emailed you OBL shoe for your review and help to post here. Thank you! Daytrader77459

Davelevad, Pls check your PM. Thanks. Daytrader77459

Hi, Davelevad, Sorry - had to go to New Thread to upload my jpg image. Couldn't upload shoe image on this thread using the http:// url method. I just used Davelevad Horseshoe OBL as new thread. Feel free to let me know if there is an easier way to upload jpg images. Thank you. Daytrader77459

Hi, Davelevad, Big apology for my post earlier on 2:14am. I meant to type OBL but typed in S40 instead. It was late and I had been studying your posts where you had typed S40. You started play on hand 18. After 1st 16 hds - 1s occurred 5x - above normal. 2s occurred 4x - above normal. 3s occurred 1x - normal. This is a setup for OBL. I will post my play-by-play for you later today. My scanner is not up and running - will use alternate means. Thank you. Daytrader77459

Hello, Davelevad, Kudos to you for posting your losing games, for your decision-making biases and sharing with BTC members more learning experiences. This is a great part of what makes the BTC website and its membership most valuable. Regarding your recent two shoes both losing, and you were compounding your own execution errors, and losing your big actual bets, but winning your big "virtual" bets - I am certain we have all been there and done that many times also! So I have great empathy for your post tonite. In my experience playing baccarat daily - I have found that changing NOR systems in mid shoe have been more damaging than helpful to my bankroll. Once I have isolated what I feel are strong table and shoe bias as emphasized by Ellis, I almost always stick with the NOR system I selected up front. I know Ellis said that switching is okay - if there is a much more stronger NOR system running alongside. However, if not, probably better to stick with your initial NOR system. For myself, your two shoes would have definitely been S40 shoes. After committing to the correct M2 or M3 - I stick to it. If lose 3 bets, I go 1u OTR. If win that 1u bet, I stop. Then if OTR continues again after my 1u win, I will bet OTR 1u until that run stops. Then go back to S40 (M2 or M3). I find that this simplifies my system selection decision making - and really helps me to focus on determining M2 or M3 and whether to go OTR or not. Of course, I am a very conservative player using 112 - until I am ahead +5u or +6u. Then I try 123 - if get to +10u, may try 234 as per Ellis. But - I can tell you it is NOT EASY to go 234 for my internal biases. But I am learning more to let go - and trust the NOR systems and the bet progressions. By the way - for me, I hardly ever hit (-8u) in a losing shoe. Most often, it is (-8u) from the HIGH equity of that shoe - I call this "drawdown" from max equity. Most of my shoes have drawdowns of (-6u) to (-8u) from max equity highs if I am "loose". In fact, being "loose" almost always end up being "lose". Most often now, I use the half decade rule even in the first 2 columns. Using 112 - I find I can hit +3u to +5u consistently. After my first loss (or 2nd if I am ahead from other shoes), I often just quit the shoe. I am in it to scalp winning portions. Sometimes my +3u can float up to +8u or +9 on a TT or ZZ or B or P run. Other times, I exit at +2u. Then look for new strong shoe bias. I know Ellis and more experienced players can strongly argue that I am giving up too much potential profit by this tight playing style. I just don't have the mental flexibility yet - to allow for greater bankroll equity volatility. Hopefully Ellis will continue to help me sharpen and improve on this specific weak aspect of my play in baccarat. Thanks again for sharing! Daytrader77459

Ellis, Keith, Looking forward to the play by play decision-making though processes, and betting strategies. To others who attended, it would be interesting to read about your own play-by-play betting and P/B selection choices - compared to Ellis' decisions. How close or far apart from the master baccarat player's decisions? Also look fwd to the seminar DVD when completed! Thanks, Ellis, for your teaching and time and effort! Daytrader77459

Hello, Ellis, Keith, BTC members, Good luck to you all this wknd. I am sure we are looking fwd to the seminar video for those who cannot travel this wknd! For those traveling and playing with Ellis, Keith this wknd - I think it would be a tremendous benefit for BTC members if you took detailed notes on shoes played at the casino in the live games. I would suggest focusing on the observations, biases - and decision-making judgments - of Ellis, Keith - as to why P/B or size of bets selected. Although we know the rule set for F2/3, OTB4L, S40, we also know that in live games, specific adjustments and deviations may be called for. What I think is important is fundamentally to determine and learn from the heuristics or decision-making biases from Ellis' tremendous experience base. Best of luck - and look fwd to hearing trip details, shoe details, etc! Have fun and a great learning experience - wish I could be there also! Regards, Daytrader77459

Hello, Ellis, A quick question on the use of OTBL in the NOR approach. Example: If 3s are MC, and I have selected OTBL as primary shoe bias. Then, after a "win" on a 1 going to a 2, instead of playing OTBL and play opposite - should the MC=3 take higher priority and thus the correct bet is made 2 going to 3 (contrary to OTBL if not account for MCs)? If 4s and 5s have been non-existent, is LC=4 or LC=4 and 5? If 3s and 4s are equal and > expected frequencies, then is MC=4s? Or is MC=3 or MC=3 and 4? Appreciate the review and clarifications. Thank you. Daytrader77459

Hi, Ellis, We all know hindsight is everything. However, in looking over this Sands IV shoe, on the first 5 going to 6 in a row, the O/R count became more significantly negative. In real time play, I probably would have switched to the F mode of playing instead of playing with OT-2. You have also advocated minimal change in system. So is the "better" preference to stick with OT-2, but play OTR through and through? Instead of switching to F2/F3? Any ideas or comments about how best to choose at that moment in time? Thank you for your help! Daytrader77459

Hi, Ellis, In Chap 11 of the NOR Approach, there was the example of the F2 vs OBL in the run: P BBBB PPP B PP Both methods won - but the OR count and the P/L suggested that OBL > F2 to use. My "real time" observation is that for a particular system to be truly biased, it would not have switched so quickly. In the P BBBB PPP B PP example, the F2 switched almost immediately from a Banker based F2 right into a Player based F2. I realize that it is possible to have such a quick switch in F2 - but most strongly biased F2 shoes I have played remained strongly Banker biased for many hands (assume that Banker F2 was signaled initially). The example in Chap 11 showed a Banker F2 switching almost immediately into a Player F2. Plus Banker never went to 5+. This would alert me to the possibility of going to OBL and hoping that OBL will last many more hands. Possible error here - but my personal bias - is that a 4 in a row is not strongly indicative for F series. I use F trigger at 5+. Please share your observations here - it is the subtle shifts in thinking and adjusting on a play by play basis that makes this game challenging. And, NOR has been a strong guide/map. But I want to continue to focus and pick your brain on the actual decision-making bias/heuristics. It is very difficult to translate your years of experience into black/white written instructions! I can appreciate your challenges to teach us all. Thank you for your efforts! Regards, Daytrader77459

Hello, KS, Thank you for your input! I certainly agree that your flat bet and "holding and waiting" approach is a very strong approach to NOR. Certainly the NOR instructions suggest the exact play you prescribed! :>) I prefer in actual cash games to wait for the shoe to "declare itself" with regards to the optimum "bias" that is either the S40 vs F vs OBL methods. In general I often wait until I have at least 15-20 hands played out. Many shoes I find that 15-20 hands have helped to define which bias is best. I don't often play at hand 3 like in the P11115 example. I am just curious to see if after the 1st two losing bets of P11113 - whether the lack of 2s and the clear TBL would suggest F (or TBL) > S40. I guess one can track the actual P/L (using 123 as base betting) and record the actual P/L of S40 vs F vs OBL at all plays and then just bet out to the system that is showing the better P/L. Just an idea. I would imagine that more experienced players (certainly for Ellis and Keith) that the immediacy of the lack of 2s would "automagically" alter their play to switch to the F or TBL bias. Thanks again, KS, for your comments and sharing your observations/experience! Regards, Daytrader77459

Gd mng, Ellis, Quick question off the NOR Approach example under "System Selection". There you posted an example of the P11115 example showing the overlap possibilities of using either the S40 or the F systems and betting. Can you check and see if my observations may be incorrect or lacking in key points if I played the P11115 in "real time" mode? First 3 plays - P111. I already begin to see 1s above normal (1 of 4 plays normal). Begin using S40. P11111 - Win 2 bets. P11112 - Lose 1st bet on a "2". P11113 - Lose 2nd consecutive bet on a "3" in a row. Now at this point, S40 with 2 consecutive losses will either change or continue. I am trying to avoid change as much as possible. However, O/R is at + having max at +4 Key question for system selection here: 1. O/R drift to + suggests keeping on S40. 2. However, in 7 plays - there has been no 2 in a row - this is strongly suggestive of either an F system (or a TBL). I recognize both S40 and F can beat and win over a P11115 series. But on a "real time basis", is item (2) and the lack of 2 in a row a higher priority over the O/R count? I recognize P11115 is a TBL series as well. But for purist sake, which is higher priority? The LC of the SAP count, or the actual O/R count? I appreciate all of your time and efforts to help make us understand these nuances of the game!!! Thank you!

Quick trip summary: Played Encore this wknd --> $25 min tables, 6d hand shuffled. Played 2 spots ($50 each as required 2x min bets for two spots playing). Played 1st, 2nd spots - usually total of 4 played spots plus dealer. Tracking filters: 1. Dealer bust rate 3+ every 10 hds. 2. Dealer 10s/As --> 4 or less every 10 hds. 3. Tens ratio --> every 5 hds --> if > 40% a. If end of round --> and won --> would increase bet 1 unit per spot. b. If high tens ratio --> allowed doubles/splits vs weak dealer up cards. Bankroll management (I am very risk-averse and try to minimize bankroll volatility): 4. Maintained $50 bets --> only increased after a win 1 unit at a time per win. 5. Max loss per shoe (2 $25 units per spot) --> (-12 units or -$300). 6. Target = $300 per shoe --> exit first loss after hitting target (if hit!). NBJ/WCB principles: 7. If clumped & guessing 1st card of new round --> focused on dealer strategy on low TR rds (else variable strategy on high TR rds). 8. If unable to guess 1st card of new round --> after 3 consec rds, looked to wait new shoe or find new table. 9. Insurance if high TR rd. 10. Splits, doubles --> only on high TR rds AND dealer bust rate > 30% every 10 hds (else better to play flat bets and protect bankroll). Results (monitored & played about 3 hrs over 2 consecutive nts): 11. Session 1: 1.5 hrs, played only filtered shoes --> buy-in $500. Exited $300 profit. 12. Session 2: 1 hr, had to scout favorable conditions 45 mins prior! Exited $500 profit. 13. Session 3: 45 mins, scouted 30 mins. Great run. Exited $870 profit. 14. Session 4: Full Sat nite --> tables full. Joined weak table, full 4 players. Played 5th and 6th spot. Unable to find favorable conditions. Then 3 consec shoes where dealer bust rate 10% per 10 hds!!! Loss = (-$300). Many lost thousands of $$$ at that table! Summary --> Ellis, you are RIGHT!!! Can't beat poor table/shoe conditions. Also better to not put in more capital for doubles/splits in weak table conditions and low TR rds. Insur plays for the 4 sessions above was 90% accurate!!! Insured against 9 dealer As, all turned out BJs! 1 insur bet was not correct. Very tempting and too easy to overstay at weak tables/shoes. I've found that learning to enjoy the hit & run approach is best for bankroll survival and advantage. Thanks, Ellis, for your ongoing ideas, lessons learned! Daytrader77459

Hi, Ellis & Mad Dog, Yes - definitely an interest here for a Vegas seminar on Twister, NBJ/WCBJ. FYI - sometimes I use the 1-1-3-6 for 50/50 games to go against 4 losses in a row. However, 50/50 gamblers should note that Monte carlo sims on 1000 trades (on 50/50 outcomes) x 20000 such groupings --> every 1000 trade groups had 5 or more consec losses. Max loss in at (-19) consec losses, and > 70% of the 1000 trade groups had consec losses < (-9). These stats have also been studied ad nauseum by BJ counters and math/stat depts. Seems consistent for 50/50 events to have 5 consec losses occurring with regular (at least more than desired) frequency. So bettors beware. The idea of using tiered-betting levels is also attractive for 50/50 outcomes. Hope you will provide more info on upcoming seminars. Regards, Daytrader77459

Hi, Mad Dog, Thanks for your ideas and observations. Currently I continue to play when my equity highs are continuously being reached or at least re-tested. I do not like to play thru shoes where I have a net four losses in a row. Regarding session plays, however, if I reach a shoe target, I tend to remain pretty disciplined about sticking to that target and not letting it draw down any worse than (-3 units) from its equity highs. Regards, Daytrader77459

Hi, Carlos, Mad Dog, Uncle Ellis, I am a newbie into the world of NBJ - I just found the NBJ manual fascinating and coincided with many of the observations and years of BJ playing I have experienced thus far. Just recently purchased the WCB manual. I would love to have a BJ members only forum for serious players. Carlos, your posts have been entertaining, helpful, and encouraging. I would love to observe a true professional at his craft in Vegas. That being said, I have a few brief very basic questions for you serious BJ professionals: 1. Given a new table, would you prefer 6D or 2D games? Why/why not? 2. If playing 2 hds heads up against the dealer, do you play hd 1 as 1st base strategies/betting (1-4-6 dual color chips), and play hd 2 as 3rd base strategies (using TRB, progressions, etc)? 3. Regarding the betting in 1st base - using 1-4-6 on the high color chips, do you all recommend a recon betting period using the low color chips until such time you can establish a shoe to be highly reliable (T's following Ts, regular sequences of high and low TRB's per round, etc)? At what point would one begin to "go for the jugular" in a shoe game? After seeing 3-5 reliable rounds? 4. Even if I have found a shoe that was highly reliable (i.e., T's following T's, etc), but my 1st and/or 3rd base plays kept on losing despite this highly reliable shoe, at what point would you want to walk to another table (departure point)? Normally I have a tendancy to give up a shoe if I lose 4 consecutive times. Do either of you have ideas/suggestions to departure points in a shoe relative to W/L or bankroll standards? 5. How often do you professionals end up staying at a table? Do you depart quickly after winning X units in one shoe? Or do you prefer to play for a specific interval (like for 4 shoes per day? or for 40 mins at a time? other types of playing schedules?)? 6. Carlos or Mad Dog - if you hit your target (let's say $2k per day) - would you stop even if you had a hot run in the first 30 mins of the day? And then wait for another day? Or do you recommend pushing on as professional players? I am certain I will have additional playing questions - I appreciate your patience and insights to helping us all learn to become better BJ players. Ellis, I'm looking forward to learning many more practical insights into the BJ modern games from the WCB manual. I hope to be able to observe/participate in some active learning/playing with you all in the future. Thanks again for your time and help! Daytrader77459