no3bet

I don’t think Ellis ever mentioned that specifically. However from my understanding after reading his sample plays, this is what it seems to me. The secondary prog is either a test (0 bet) or a progression set up to fight against the culprit (win back what he have lost before). We place only one bet and no matter whether it wins or not, we continue with our primary bet. Now that there may be a favor of play by looking at those previous hands (ie, play 43 and 53 or the S40M1 either going for 5iars or stop at 4iars). In this case I choose OTR because 4iars is a LC event of which we continue our OTR bet and that’s what Ellis did. Ellis please come in if I am wrong. AYS

Hand 15 is the 2nd bet of the secondary prog. The 1st secondary prog bet at hand 6 rules that hand 15 to bet 3 will stay 3. After that loss we go OTR with our 1st prog which is hand 16. It is a continuation of prog 1 bet. After it loses hand 17 restarts again with another prog 1 bet. Remember we are on Basic S40 therefore we restart prog 1 always with a 1 unit bet after OTR loses. This is similar at hand 12 and 13. AYS

That's because we shall act just like a robot !?! LOL AYS

Hand 17 should be a restart of prog 1 betting opposite after OTR loses. I hate to see any consecutive loses of more than 4. I wonder if Ellis may have a solution that will NOT cause consecutive loses of more than 4? AYS

Before Master Ellis would give us an official response to those questions you have raised, I wish to submit my own thinking for other member’s discussion also. Perhaps Master Ellis when have time to response may correct any of my “wrong†thinking as below such that I may have a clarification of my own mind as well. With the casino pre-shuffled cards nowadays, there is no better tricks they could introduce rather than mixing the three bias namely NOR into one single shoe. The worst kind of pre-shuffled cards would come depend upon frequency of sporadic one’s and two’s they may inject among the three bias and ruin our MC counts by varying the length of streaks that would kill us. The way I play have been trying to switch between systems of which is not recommended in order to handle them. After all we all have the basic techniques we have already learned from BTC and they are just S40, F, OTB4L and SAP as well. So S40 and F may be combined into playing S40 alone by varying methods of handling runs using modes. However no matter what system or mode we play we always lose to a culprit whether it would be 2s, 3s or 4s. Progression betting let us try to overcome culprit loss but we never know how the game may go with culprits showing up that would cause us to lose. Losing could be so easy as we exhaust a full progression bets but winning them back is such a tiring job of no fun at all. So there has been arguments whether progression plays are useful or not compare to flat betting. Nevertheless what Master Ellis has always been good to us was to teach not to try winning by high bettings – whether with progression or not! The way I see it difference among BaS40 and S40M1 (BaOTB4L has not been taught yet) from NOR is that the two playing systems try to amalgamate S40 and the handling of sporadic one’s and two’s such that any shoe may be handled within a deck of cards filled with all three NOR bias. And it is this S40M1 or BaS40 with the secondary prog set up that would function in a way just like jumping and winning over the sporadic 1’s with grouping of 2’s together and beat them under one mixed NOR method causing NO TABLE SELECTION possible. The formulation of a ZERO bet after an unconfirmed 2’s would allow us hitting the sporadic one’s with riding over sporadic 2’s culprit and beat it using a secondary progression set up. S40M1 is indeed a primary flat betting system when playing under the 1st prog alone. Whether we should quit upon +5 reached will depend upon our own mood during plays with money management. For myself as a gambler I wouldn’t bother in switching table after +5 as Baccarat is supposed to be random and a 50/50 games itself as long as we continue to play. But for a Baccarat Mentor like Master Ellis he who must well define a stopping point such that a system like the +5 can be tagged SUCCESSFUL and WORKING with achieving goals. So down to the bottom, my feeling is that BaS40 and S40M1 are basically the same. We choose among them to play just because any of us may wish to play a bit different on culprits handing. They should apply equally well to any of those so call random pre-shuffled cards with +5 goal easily achieved. And BTW would Master Ellis think it might be feasible to introduce yet another third split progression for the handling of 3’s and 4’s as well. But then we might be betting ZERO all over places instead of gambling. Over the one year period of my joining the BTC, I have tried many times programming a spread sheet with planning onto a betting device that would allow beating the Baccarat game mechanically. I guess many of the BTC members were doing the same thing as I was. However none of those previous systems at my limited learning experience would work perfect or near well. Hopefully I may do this after the +5 systems could be completely learned from time to come! Look here Keith may begin chasing after me for royalty now.... LOL Finally good luck to all the BTC members… Very Best Regards, AYS from Hong Kong

Sorry my typing mistake: Hand 15 bets Repeats because it is now CONFIRMED 3iars. AYS

Hand 12 continue from 11 betting Repeat Hand 13 restarts the 1st prog loss and bet Opposite as of S40M1 Hand 14 triggers the 2nd prog first bet ZERO (as of 0123) Hand 15 returns to prog 1 continue betting Repeat after the ZERO bet won and is not confirmed 3iars Hand 16 continues prog 1 making 1 bet on Repeat as hand 16 won as well Hand 17 restarts prog 1 but bet Opposite because hand 16 was a loss (again S40M1 by default) Hand 18 triggers again the 2nd prog because hand 17 was a loss but this time we are betting 1 on Opposite because our last ZERO bet was a loss and causes all subsequent bet to bet 2iars will stay 2. We bet 1 unit because this is the 2nd bet of the 2nd prog 0123 (ie, bet #2 of the 2nd prog) Hand 19 is back to prog 1 again but this time we bet Opposite as prog 1 is always S40 except continues from 3iars. I hope this helps and Ellis please correct me if I am wrong. AYS

Yes, I concur with Brian and wonder why the two 1st progs would not continue for 5 iars? AYS