Jump to content

speculator9

Legacy Players
  • Posts

    54
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

speculator9's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

  • Week One Done
  • One Month Later
  • One Year In Rare

Recent Badges

0

Reputation

  1. bluetri: Thanks for the link, unfortunately the is bad. It goes to an "unable to locate" page.
  2. way2fast, Thanks for the "heads up"on the NB2hi thread. I've printed it out and skimmed it, but I will wait until after this weekend's seminar to really study it, along with Ellis's new Universal 2hi rules. I agree, the Palazzo is weird. I am not sure how they have their shuffle machines programmed, but they give out an unusual, and frequently mind boggling, assortment of shoes. It did not seem to affect Stadium Gaming (Imperial Baccarat) originally, but it sure does now. I've been glad to read that MDB+ is still working for you at the various high roller no-touch games. I still hope to get their eventually. Unfortunately, with my luck, that's when they will become unplayable (that's a joke, I hope). Dcur; I will try to find them. I usually treat any scorecard where I actually played, like gold, but after recording the first few of the "new" shoes at Imperial Baccarat, i started "circular filing" them before I left the casino. I probably should have kept them, but frustration makes you do stupid things sometimes. I think I have a few from the first day I went back, but I have seem to lost them in the shuffle. I will look for them after this weekend's seminar and will post as many as I can find. The one think I can tell you from memory, is that they seem to have come up with a way of "clumping" 2's & 3, so that after you get your MDB+ entry signal you do not see a "win" (ex. a 3 until after 3 more 2's show up, or a 2 until after 3 more 3 show up). This causes you to have gone thru your 3 bet sequence and lost, before you could win. A 4 level progression might work, but then you would be putting too much money on the line, in my opinion
  3. Greetings to everyone This is my first post since last October as I did not play anytime from November thru January due to other commitments. However, when I returned from my final trip to the Panama Canal, I was ready to hit the Palazzo again. Unfortunately, I was in for a very unpleasant surprise. First of all, Stadium Gaming (per se) is no more. They have renamed the area Imperial Baccarat, ditched the roulette wheel and added a second Baccarat dealer. They now have two dealers, each dealing two games, so there a four ongoing Baccarat games at one time. When I first went back to play in February, I thought that was going to give me more possibilities for MDB+. Nothing could have been further from the truth. Since I hadn't played for 3 months, I only recorded games to start with to see how things were going. As it turned out, I never stopped recording games, or started playing MDB+ before I gave up. In the 45 shoes that I recorded, I would (had I played) have won only 15 of them and lost the other 30. That would have (but fortunately didn't) given back everything that I made in all my previous play. It looks like they did something to their automatic shufflers that makes MDB+ almost impossible to win with, at least at the Palazzo. So, it you are an MDB+ player the only suggestion I would have for you is to forget everything I said in my previous posts and stay away from Imperial Baccarat at the Palazzo. That being said, I also have a warning for NOR players that might want to play there. As Ellis has said many times, MDB+ is for random shoes and NOR is for biased shoes. Obviously, if the current games at the Palazzo are not random they should be biased and, in fact, I saw a lot of biases while doing MDB+ paper play. But here is the rub and the warning. As I previously mentioned, they now deal 4 games at one time. My guess is, and I have nothing but anecdotal proof, is that after they shuffle an 8 deck sequence, they do not put it back into the same game shoe to be dealt. Instead they stick it into another game's dealing shoe. While I might see a particular bias in say, game #!, the next time that bias appeared it was in game #4. Or a game #2 bias might show up again, but in game #3 this time. There was no observable bias, from deck to deck, within any one game. If you are going to play NOR there just be aware that a bias you see in one game is probably not going to continue, at least not in that game. So save your NOR play for a mid shoe entry, if possible. For me, not being able to currently play at the black level, the old Stadium Gaming was my ticket to get there, since it took me from single red to green play. However, it seems that path is now solidly blocked. I'm glad that way2fast, and other players, are still having good results at their level playing MDB+ and I will get there one day, I hope. Although I originally had not planned to attend the Universal 2Hi seminar, I just signed up this morning. I hope it is as good as Ellis has been posting. If so, that should be able to give me (or any of us) the pathway to higher denomination chip play. See you there.
  4. Wow, Chief, that was one hell of an erudite post. And, I have to say, you hit the essence of what I have been trying to accomplish a lot better than I ever possible could. Unfortunately, that being said, it looks like all the effort will go for naught. My wife tells me I am stubborn, but like any mule, if you get hit between the eyes with a sledgehammer enough times you eventually get the idea. Based on Ellis's recent final blow, I now officially give up and bow out of this effort. What will turn out to be my final PM exchange with Ellis indicates that is unable or unwilling to grasp what I have proposed (and Chief so eloquently explained) and is in the process of creating something that, he thinks based solely on his opinions, the members want. That is, of course, ignoring completely what at least a few of the members have been trying to tell him. You have seen his new post about the only way he is willing to do this and I am sure the advertising hype will make it sound awesome, but, unfortunately, like most other BTC things it will be, to me, contrived and not a particularly good learning experience. The most informative experiences I've have ever had, and I think a lot of people would agree, tend to be based on the times when you are on losing, at anything, not winning. Back when I traded futures on the CBOE and CMT, another trader who made more money than any of us can dream about told me one day; "The worst thing that can happen to a trader is winning his first trades. He will learn nothing from that." Other members may be willing to pay to attend, to be shown what is "right" rather than trying to understand how to handle the times when everything goes "wrong." I referenced the Poker Championships in my last post for a simple, but I think very good reason. The greatest players rarely ever win the bracelet. That's because the "Luck of the Draw" is against them even in game based mostly on skill. I don't care if you look for table biases, shuffle patterns, shoe histories, etc. When you sit down to play, nobody and I mean nobody (except maybe the Almighty, who I am sure does not care), knows what is going to be dealt from a shoe next. Each member will have to decide whether his approach will turn out to be right or not, and I wish him. and everyone else the best. I know I will not pay for or attend the Ellis's proposed version of the webinar, since I now almost irrevocably believe that Ellis, for all his Baccarat brilliance, cannot embrace any new teaching concepts. Ellis's view of what the BTC members want is based on, (to crib from Patrick Swayze,) "It's either my way or the highway" It's only my opinion, but I feel webinar he is working on will be just another repetitive version of something BTC has done many times before, and not the brand new experience I was hoping to see created. But, for every interested member that may choose to attend, I hope it will turn out to be worthwhile. Thanks for the support, but I am done wasting my time and breath (typing actually). I wish it could have ended differently but, for now, I am going back to concentrating on my actual Baccarat play with the information I already acquired. Best of Luck to everyone at the tables. Sayonara.
  5. To all interested BTC Members First of all, Chief and Oz, I appreciate your comments and I am glad that you, and others can see the value of the experience I am trying to create for all those who interested. Chief, for what it's worth, I consider your original post brilliant. Second, I apologize for being absent from the ongoing discussion that have happened on this thread. I have been having a PM exchange with Ellis and Steve, trying to make this work, without much luck. And Oz, I feel your previous pain. Trying to get them to understand what this member, and I think other members, desire, is like trying to herd a bunch of big horn sheep. Climbing up and down the mountains gets tiring real fast. That being said, currently, I do NOT support the ideas that either Ellis or Steve have posted on the thread. I have been trying to create an "Out of the Box" experience for everyone, and all I get back in "BTC Business as Usual." The title I proposed for the webinar to Ellis was: ANALYZING A SHOE IN PLAY: How to Diagnose and Handle Changing and Losing Shoes and that is what I was looking for. I can't seem to get that across to the powers that be in the Forum. I am only one member, and other interested parties may have different views. But I am tired of "Guided Practice" or Realistic Casino Conditions." (Actually, right now, both those terms make me shudder.) I have attended almost every BTC Baccarat seminar/webinar ever since I joined in 2011, and I am have had enough of that type of experience I am trying to create something completely different. What I, personally want to see created is a Baccarat version of a Philosophy course, where we get to view as spectators, and Chief puts it, a genius at work. Consider it like watching the final table to the World Poker Championships, except with narration from the "greatest" player as to how he is viewing every bet and deciding to respond. I am not trying to "force" my will on the forum or on any other member. I simply have a very clear idea of what I am looking for and that does NOT include "Guided Practice" or "Realistic Casino Conditions." For those who have taken any Philosophy course, in College or Secondary School, your class probably started out with the question (or something similar) "If a tree falls in a forest, and no one hears it, does it make a sound?" Is that question realistic, of course not. But it is the start of a course that is trying to teach "Thinking", not "Doing." The only real difference would be instead of students discussing their thought process, this webinar would be all about Ellis's thinking process as the most unrealistic shoes, for a previous preselected system, unfolds. I am willing to keep continuing to work on it with Ellis and Steve, and I am more than willing to see the concept, fleshed out by other members, revised to fit in different concepts. However, please remember the old saw: "Too Many Cooks Spoil The Broth." Hopefully, we can come up with something. Unfortunately, I can honestly say I am not particularly hopeful. Perhaps, and no insult meant to Ellis, perhaps you really can't teach an old dog new tricks. If there is a webinar posted by Steve and Ellis, I will have only one comment to make on it. If it fits the parameters of the experience I am looking for, then I will announce that I have paid and will be attending. However, if it does not, I will also post that I will not pay for or attend the webinar. We will all, individually, have to decide if the webinar is worth it to them to pay for and attend. And I am not expecting my decision, one way or the other, to be particularly influential. But, since I am the one who proposed this whole concept, it would do all the other members a disservice, and would be leaving them, twisting in the wind, so to speak, if I "voted with my feet" and did not attend, but other members thought that the webinar met my parameters and that I would be a paying attendee.
  6. Hi Ellis As you say, this is just my opinion and it will require a bunch more BTC members who want to see it to make it work. Just 2 clarifications: 1) You would only be playing Ten (10) shoes, two for each of the five different BTC systems that are currently in the arsenal. 2) I do not think using a live, dealer dealt, web shoe would work for this. What I was proposing would use something like the Wizard of Odds Baccarat game, or one of the other free on-line casino games where the player controls the pace of the deal. (Steve does it that way in his webinars). I realize that these are random number generated shoes, but for this type of demonstration, I don't think that would matter. 3) Although the system for demonstrating a particular shoe would be preselected, we could agree on a certain number of "free" hands, before you decided how you wanted to start the system. My experience, playing solo, is that most LV casinos balk at anything over 5 free hands at the beginning of a shoe. If it looks like enough BTC players are interested in this type of seminar, then I can boil down my posts into a specific set of ground rules, without the explanation verbiage, that everyone can have a say in refining. At that point, you could go ahead and schedule the seminar. If you don't get enough participation, then, even though I will regret missing the opportunity, I will understand. It has to be worth your time and effort.
  7. Keith Exactly when in November? I would love to play at Stadium Gaming with you and Steve, but family obligations are going to keep me out of LV for a good part of November. I was actually not planning to play during the month, but if I knew, in advance, when you two are coming I would try to arrange my schedule around it. Having someone to converse with, while waiting for the betting opportunities, would be a welcome change from my usual boredom.
  8. Ellis I understand your concerns, but this is one of those examples of looking at something from two completely different directions. You are looking at it in terms of how you would play particular conditions and whether or not you could win a particular shoe. And, possibly, as you say, you might not do better than anyone else, playing shoes blind. But, the seminar I proposed is not about whether the shoe is won or lost, would be all about the way you think when looking at a shoe. What germinated this idea was when a group of us, during the baccarat crawl, were watching you play at the Caesar's Big Bac table. You made a MDB+ bet that seemed to be inexplicable to us. There were 8 of us in the group I was in, and none of us could figure out why you made the bet. Obviously, there would have been no way for you to describe your WHY in those conditions, but THAT is what we wanted to know. You response focused on MDB+, but if you look at the proposal, it was based on your playing 2 shoes of EVERY BTC system (NOR, Net Betting, OvT, MDB with SAP, MDB+) And part of your response nailed it when you said that you would need to play a casino speed so that you could narrate each play. I see no problem with that. But, if you are going to be able to properly evaluate, and implement, the proposal, you have to STOP thinking in terms of "Winning." You have to realize that this would be all about demonstrating your "Thinking Process" and that is what I, and others would be paying to see. What I don't think you realize is that what comes intuitively for you is not that way for most of the rest of us. When you approach a shoe so that you can "Win" it, that is great in a money environment where that is the purpose. It is not, however, a very good teaching tool. Think back to your days teaching statistics. You did not throw a complex formula on the blackboard, with the answer already calculated, and tell your students "This is how it's done." and move on to the next topic. You broke the equation down into it's components, explained each one, how they worked together, where they came from and finally, after all that you solved it. The you told your students to try it on their own. That is the webinar version of what I am looking for. And, I don't care about realistic conditions, in fact, for me, the more unrealistic the better. This would be a version of the philosophy question: "If a tree falls in a forest, and nobody hears it, does it make a sound?" Is this a ridiculous question probably so. But, it has been the basis of teaching the "THINKING PROCESS" in Philosophy for decades and it works in starting to teach people, not how to DO something, but how to THINK about it. That is what I am proposing. Look, if you don't want to do it, or wouldn't feel comfortable doing it, I can understand that. However, if you try to change this into a "I'll teach you how to win" webinar, then I, for one, am not interested. We have had many of those, and they have all left me mostly unsatisfied. That is why I dreamed up those very restrictive ground rules. I want to watch you explain how you think as you go through shoes, unrealistic losers preferably, in which you have no better clue as to what is coming then we do. If it can't be done, so be it. Not all seeds fall on fertile ground
  9. Ellis I was looking over our past post exchanges in the other thread, and realized that, although I feel the criticisms are valid and justified, they do nothing to resolve my or anyone else desires. It is just a self-indulgent exercise to complain if you have no possible solutions to offer. I have received PM's and direct emails that have all, privately, supported my contention that you are doing BTC members a disservice when all you do is take a posted shoe and say "Here is how I would have played it", because that leaves out the all important WHY? If you look back on any number of your own posts, about what you were going to do when the new systems were introduced, you promised with MDB, OvT and others that you would post annotated play by play shoes listing the bets made, why, what might trigger a switch, etc. Except in a few cases when you posted a new system example, you have not done that. Now, I am aware of your health issues, and the type of work involved in that kind of tedious "Lesson Preparation" may not really be doable for you at this point. So here is what I would like to suggest as a possible solution that benefits everyone. Why don't you and Steve (or Keith) collaborate and put together a webinar that strictly follows these proposed ground rules: 1) No system teaching - If someone doesn't know a system, they need to learn it on their own time. 2) No questions (absolutely none for any reason) allowed during the webinar - No one but Ellis (including his seminar partner) takes up any teaching time during the webinar - Any questions can be asked on a follow-up thread after the webinar is over in a separate, private thread. Additionally, the webinar could be recorded and put in this private thread for the webinar attendees to review and for anyone else who would pay for access to this thread to see in the future. 3) Neither you or any other webinar presenter asking participants how they might play a shoe situation. This would be all about your (Ellis) thought processes only. 4) All shoes played all the way through until the end without Stop Wins or Stop Losses. 5) The webinar would be all inclusive covering everything on BTC except the 4D (ie: NOR, Net Betting, OvT, MDB with SAP, and MDB+) This is a webinar that I would be willing to shell out a couple of hundred bucks, putting, as they say, "My money where my mouth is." I want a webinar where you, Ellis, play live, computer generated shoes blind (I do not care whether they would be representative or not) using all the BTC Systems. What I would want to see, and hear, in this webinar, is two shoes (about 150 hands) played for each BTC system. That would be a total of ten shoes to play and would probably take about a 6 hour webinar with breaks. It could be done in two shorter session, over two days, if you felt that a continuous 6 hours might be too much for you. The way I see it is that you would start a shoe, blind from the beginning. I know you do not like going into a shoe blind, and prefer to see game biases first, but this whole webinar would be about "Process" not about winning. Steve, or any other seminar presenter could handle the on-line game play and marking the webinar scorecard for participants to view and do the video recording. What I want to see you do is explain verbally, in detail, the game as each hand is dealt: a) When you decided to start the shoe with the system you are demonstrating and why. What play, bet you will be making for the next hand, before it is dealt. c) What you are seeing from the shoe pattern and what it indicates to you. d) Since you are going to play every shoe all the way through, when (and I hope that will happen) a particular system gets in trouble, when and why you would consider a system switch, mid-shoe to something else. No shoe exits allowed and I do realize a shoe could be "perfect" for the system you chose which would not allow you to really demonstrate how you think, but I would be willing to take that chance. e) Play by Play commentary on what "YOU" are seeing in the shoe (Counts, Patterns, Least Events, Most Events, etc.) that are being used in your decision making process-In sports terms, they would call this a "Play by Play Commentary." Basically, I do not care whether each shoe turned out to be +100 or -100 units when it ends. Actually, personally, I would prefer to see at least one (preferably more) absolutely disastrous shoe, an example of such might be an OvT shoe where you had a dozen switch signals, none of which really worked . We would all be able to see that this is a shoe that should not have been played, but we would also all benefit from seeing the process you were using in determining switches, even if they failed. What I am really looking for is the Baccarat Master (you) showing his Disciples (BTC members), the thought processes you go through while you are actually playing live, not after the fact. I want to see, in real time, how you think your way through a shoe. I doubt I would ever be able to duplicate it, but just watching you do it would go a long way to helping developing my own (and others) way of looking at a unfolding shoe. And Ellis, you would have to basically swear that you would adhere to the proposed ground rules religiously. Unfortunately, at most of the seminars I attended (and I have been at all the LV Baccarat ones since 2011) you have allowed yourself to get drawn "Off Track", told amusing stories and discussed what the casinos are doing, etc. This was always interesting, however, what you were suppose to be teaching never seemed to get covered in any meaningful way. Now, I may be the only member who would be willing to pay for this type of experience, but I do not think so. But, then, what do I know? At this point, I need some help from the other BTC members. If Ellis is going to do something like this, then it has to be worthwhile to him. If this is a webinar you would be willing to pay for and attend, please post your interest on this thread. There are 26 spaces available on the Go To meeting software (25 after me), and if BTC members are willing to fill a webinar up, at a reasonable price for both sides, (I would propose $200 per participant and you would have to be a MDB member (Ellis, this amount is only proposed and is obviously negotiable)) that would be a good payday for Ellis and, I believe, an incredible learning experience for the rest of us. If it turns out the I am only one of a few BTC members who would want to attend this type of demonstration, then I realize it would not be worth Ellis time to do it. In that case, I guess, I, for one, will always regret never having been able to have that kind of experience before Ellis leaves us for good. Please let Ellis know what you think! Most Important: Ellis what do you think?
  10. Hi Everyone. As I am sure we all know, Steve is continuing to run his NOR Boot-camps. I had taken a live session with him in LA back in 2012, but I thought his ideas, first mentioned in a recent MDB webinar I took with him, relating to Crazy Shoes made it worthy to do a follow-up. (FYI, the MDB webinar and manual was also time well spent). I am glad I did. Steve has come up with not only a new manual, but a couple of different viewpoints as how you can look at NOR shoes as well as combine NOR concepts with MDB and OvT It's too soon to tell how all that will work out, as it relates to my play, but the session gave me a lot to think about,and test, and was well worth the time and money spent. I can HIGHLY RECOMMEND this updated seminar to any NOR (or MDB) players who are looking to get some new ideas as to how to handle current casino conditions.
  11. Ellis I'll kick in 1/2 a unit ($500) for the $1,000 units you want to play. Anybody want to take the other half? See you at the Quad on Saturday.
  12. My last suggestion is to listen to Brian and Phishalot. Your being seduced down the same path that got me started losing at Baccarat in the 90's. The system you are reading about uses the Martingale progression which has been around since 14th century France and has been proven not to work in any circumstances. THINK ABOUT IT. Does it make any sense to bet $1,600 to win $10? Even if you won, if the bet was on Bank, you would owe $80 in commissions. I, and any other Baccarat player, can guarantee you that the sequence will present it self where you lose that 160 unit bet and you need to make a 320 unit bet, which you don't have the bankroll for. Why do you think the casino's have table limits? The sole purpose they were instituted was to make sure they can beat Martingale players. Your certainly welcome to spend (lose) your money any way you want, but if you follow the road your book outlines all you are going to do is sweeten the casinos bottom line. To paraphrase a TV attorney here is Las Vegas: "Enough Said!"
  13. I don't know about the book, but I tried an "Ultimate Baccarat System" many years ago. That system I played was based on using the TBL (time before last) play method where you used the results of the last 3 plays to determine if you should be betting "MIN/MAX of the last three plays. If that describes the method in the book you are reading, save your 2K bankroll for something else. This system does NOT work. If it has a different play method, then I am not familiar with anything else by that name.
  14. Hi Ellis Count me in. I have already signed up and paid for the seminar since I would not want to get "closed out," due to a limousine that has only so many seats. I got way too much out of the June 24th seminar on MDB with Keith and Mike to risk missing this one, especially with you there. If nothing else, you can help me keep certain, unnamed (but very tall) players on the "straight and narrow" especially when it comes to the secondary progression and first progression restarts. Looking forward to hearing about the new "Surgical Strike." I expect to be able to play MDB blindfolded before the seminar date, and I hope to be able to report a lot of my success with it, since I plan to start daily play, here in Las Vegas, in about 10 days or so. To all other BTC Members, the only recommendation I can give you, based on previous personal experience, is that you should not miss this seminar, especially if you really want to get comfortable with Million Dollar Baccarat. I have already posted twice in the "Vegas Seminar" about MDB and my observations from actually playing and observing MDB play. Prior to the seminar, I was EXTREMELY skeptical that any mechanical system could work, and being honest, I probably would have filed MDB away in the dustbin with the 4Dand several other BTC dead-ends. But now, using the win rate and bankroll rules I previously posted, I would not play anything else. Please understand, I am not trying to be a "shill," I just cannot really express how enthusiastic I am about MDB (and making that million dollars from the casinos) after the recent seminar/play with Keith and Mike. I'll put it in very simple terms. If you want to keep playing NOR or any other of the excellent BTC "judgement" systems then you would probably not get much from a MDB seminar, so coming would be a waste of your time and money. But, if you think the some of the things I said in my posts make any sense at all, and you really want to "clean the casino's clocks," have a "real" chance of making a million dollars, then sign up for this seminar/play sessions; spend the next few weeks learning the current MDB rules (and I mean until you can play them "MECHICANICALLY AND AUTOMATICALLY" with no thought) and come join everyone at the seminar. I seriously doubt you will have any cause for regret either for the time and money spent at the end of the day.
  15. Hi Ellis Count me in. I have already signed up and paid for the seminar since I would not want to get "closed out," due to a limousine that has only so many seats. I got way too much out of the June 24th seminar on MDB with Keith and Mike to risk missing this one, especially with you there. If nothing else, you can help me keep certain, unnamed (but very tall) players on the "straight and narrow" especially when it comes to the secondary progression and first progression restarts. Looking forward to hearing about the new "Surgical Strike." I expect to be able to play MDB blindfolded before the seminar date, and I hope to be able to report a lot of my success with it, since I plan to start daily play, here in Las Vegas, in about 10 days or so. To all other BTC Members, the only recommendation I can give you, based on previous personal experience, is that you should not miss this seminar, especially if you really want to get comfortable with Million Dollar Baccarat. I have already posted twice in the "Vegas Seminar" about MDB and my observations from actually playing and observing MDB play. Prior to the seminar, I was EXTREMELY skeptical that any mechanical system could work, and being honest, I probably would have filed MDB away in the dustbin with the 4Dand several other BTC dead-ends. But now, using the win rate and bankroll rules I previously posted, I would not play anything else. Please understand, I am not trying to be a "shill," I just cannot really express how enthusiastic I am about MDB (and making that million dollars from the casinos) after the recent seminar/play with Keith and Mike. I'll put it in very simple terms. If you want to keep playing NOR or any other of the excellent BTC "judgement" systems then you would probably not get much from a MDB seminar, so coming would be a waste of your time and money. But, if you think the some of the things I said in my posts make any sense at all, and you really want to "clean the casino's clocks," have a "real" chance of making a million dollars, then sign up for this seminar/play sessions; spend the next few weeks learning the current MDB rules (and I mean until you can play them "MECHICANICALLY AND AUTOMATICALLY" with no thought) and come join everyone at the seminar. I seriously doubt you will have any cause for regret either for the time and money spent at the end of the day.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use