Sarrom
-
Posts
72 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
5
Posts posted by Sarrom
-
-
Hi all,
I'm looking for feedback on the original MDB (+5) mechanical play Ellis rolled out consisting of BAs40/s40m1/otb4l.
All input is appreciated.
Thank you!
-
I didn't realize there way any additional pricing with MDB+. I'll address with Keith. Thanks.
-
Hi Way2fast,
Is there a thread where I could find the MDB+ signals?
Thank you
-
Hi guys,
This may be a silly question, but after having read through posts from the last 6+ months! I'm suddenly confused about what preshuffled cards are.
At my local casinos, the morning preps have dealers spend 10-15 minutes shuffling every 6 or 8 deck batch of cards. Shuffle includes washing, pitching cards all over the table, riffling and cuts. Every table gets 2 batches. Every batch is run through the respective shuffle master before loaded into the shoe.
Would this qualify as a preshuffled cards? I had always assumed that preshuffled cards were considered those where individual decks came preshuffled from the factory, but I've read a few posts that insinuate that there are casinos that load brand new, sorted decks into the shuffle machine - which if find bizarre.
Are these shoes more conducive to NOR or MDB?
Thanks
-
I want to join MDB - is there a discount for existing NOR members?
Thanks.
-
I'm glad to hear you're having more success with your new method and understand if you don't want to share.
However, could you kindly share how much higher your shoe win rate is as well as your PA? Has it gone up?
Thanks
-
Ellis - I'm on board for making the seminar the prereq.
Your mentorship alone has been far more valuable than any of the costs associated with joining the forum, other webinars etc...
-
Thanks K - you never know... If I do, I'll bring donuts!
Vic - it means exactly that. NOR is a shoe bias, not a table bias. When you're table searching, how often do you actually watch a shoe before hand to gauge the strength of the table bias?
Invest some time looking at completed tote boards and you will see far more than just neutrals, opposites and repeats. You can own more than just the shoe with table selection - you can own the table. Why do you think Ellis will hammer a specific baccarat table shoe after shoe if he's beating it? Strength of bias.
Lastly consider this: What else has Ellis taught us? He's taught us that an actual non bias is also a bias.
-
This isn't a fiction book, but I thoroughly enjoyed the book. It's called 'Fortune's Formula' and has some great stories about Edward Thorpe, the supporting cast, birth of the Kelly Criterion etc... I believe it's by William Pounstone. It's a great read.
-
Wow - massive synchronicity in my bacc experience this week!
In light of having fun with the riddling, I can attest to the table biases going beyond NOR. Many of my local sessions are like a game of 3 card monte. Most of the players fall prey to the trickery, but an astute one won't fall for the casino's sleight of hand.
I wonder how stacked, non shuffled cards would play out?
-
Maybe I haven't been around long enough to witness all the crazy theory posts, but I do know this.
This type of scrutiny is a form of prejudice and disempowers creativity on this forum. I believe that scrutiny should be saved for the material posted, not the poster. Progress comes from creativity. Look to Ellis as an example. He was the first professional BJ player to say that counting didn't work. Ridiculed by his peers, he stood firm on his belief. End result - the birth of NBJ... Do you think he was the first to come out with a new BJ theory after Thorpe?
Everybody has the choice to not participate in the thread.
Consider this as well, if all he is leading up to is nothing but illogical craziness... Perfect! At least well all know that the process is flawed and it raises the believability on the approaches we are using. Better still, for those of us who continue to explore optimizing our play, perhaps the experience gives us an aha moment. That is part of the fun.
Every seasoned player should have enough of a handle on the material, and it's supporting theories to make this kind of discernment.
-
Hi All,
When I joined BTC, I did so because I wanted to explore the game of baccarat. Today, I am convinced that the game can be beaten and thanks to Ellis and NOR, I feel equipped with the skills to do so. I haven't learned the 4d yet, so speaking to NOR only, I have some opinions I'd like to share.
I think NOR is brilliant, but not perfect. The biggest challenge for me and for most everyone else, is tackling the runs. We do have the best mode tools that serve to flatten out anomalies to the bias and that's great. They work because the mode decisions are better than 50/50 hence, I do not fear any runs. NOR when applied well, definitely works. But I still see 2 distinct opportunities with NOR:
1). Heavy weighting on decisions that are showing me a potential change in shoe bias
2). Capitalizing on the shoe when the bias flows most freely
Point 2 is easier said than done, because the truth of the matter is that nobody knows when this happens... Or do we? Anybody who has been playing NOR and winning likely feels they can spot sub biases, or runs in the shoe which then can be used exploit more bias flow.
I believe this is in part what Kramden has been alluding to. I commented previously on my Predator mode and the success I was getting. I'm basically looking for opportune times to go and hit a quick 1-2 progression. My decisions are NOR/SAP and flow based. What I didn't share then was that my hit rate is far higher than that of playing straight NOR and NOR+. Having already won over 200 units playing straight NOR, I think that says something.
Whatever Kramden was trying to share, I can't help but offer my opinion that we should let him share it. The guy believes he's onto something big and it's not some funky ass 12 step wonder progression that's going to force a remortgage on the house. He alludes to being able to flat bet it, so shouldn't we be more teachable? The true meaning of education is to draw information out from within... It's not to have something handed to you on a silver platter. So, in his posts, was he not trying to draw out ideas and conclusions from our play experience? Is this not the best way to teach? Please take note: The power in Ellis's teachings are not only his play methodology. The true gift of his teachings ties in with the inspiration to 'think'.
If Kramden chooses to share more of his findings and continues to use the drawing out method of teaching, I hope that those whom which do not enjoy his 'game', not participate. You guys are like the punk kids in class, trying to be cool. You're not cool.
Thanks Kramden - the 1-3 rocks.
SS
-
I haven't played at the other locations... But will likely give the Gold Coast a looksy this summer during the WSOP.
Hollywood park has a bunch of tables - at least 20. There are 5 in the high limit room and more outside. Overall, it was never tough to get a seat, especially in the high limit room.
-
Hi Sakana,
I don't have access to all the stats now, but I must have sat into at least 40 shoes. However, there were many shoes where I played less than 10 hands. Either I was challenged with back to back mode bets quickly or I could see a much better tote board and would abandon the weaker shoe. I'm not used to having so many tables to choose from, so I tried to capitalize on the best bias I could find at all times.
I very seldom jump into a shoe without seeing at least 5 events, but this trip, my average entry point was likely around the 20th hand.
As for penetration, I simply played to 10 units but set tight capture points along the way depending on how the shoe was playing out. I used 6 as a stop loss and would begin playing a 1-2 or straight 1's if my I fell behind.
All in all, I think I played pretty tough, but had still made a whole bunch of mistakes.
-
This update is quite a bit behind, but I wanted to share how it went at the Hollywood Park Casino.
Overall, table selection was decent. There were 4 high limit hand held tables and about 8 low limit dealer dealt tables. I never saw more than 4 low limit tables going, but the tables in the high limit room were always going. $25 min inside and $5 min outside. It was all no commission with dragon and panda bets.
Games were good, and in the high limit room, it never became crowded to the point where you couldn't find a seat. I found the high limit room to hold better biases than the tables outside.
Casino was far from 'nice' and resembled what would be considered a slight upgrade from a bingo hall. It was very safe though and I would definitely go back.
My trip results were good. Most of the shoes I played were either chop or neutral, though I saw some very streaky tables outside that I couldn't get into. I pick up 70+ units over 3 sessions playing basic NOR only straight from the manual.
I encourage you all to check it out if you're in LA close to the airport.
-
Ellis,
Would we also select modes through OR count when playing NOR+, or would our decisions be event driven like the examples provided in the NOR+ thread?
Also, when playing s40m1, after losing a 1 bet on the run, would you support making a 2 bet to recover the 1 bet loss?
Thank you,
SS
Logical thinking, but...The problem being solved is using the 3rd bet rule for mode selection, while logical, it can be wrong every time and keep switching you just in time to be wrong again. You would have been much better off to stick to one mode. But which?
The other problem solved is our illogical habit of starting shoes in a given mode. When you think about it, this makes no sense.
Our new rule for mode selection is to go by the OR count including your starting mode.
A + count = Mode 3.
A - or 0 count = Mode 2.
This way you are right more than half the time which is the whole object of Baccarat. And it works in all 3 NOR systems more than half the time.
You are a good thinker so think about it:
In streaky shoes you want to get ON runs quicker So "Mode 2 is our STREAK Mode." (- OR Count)
But in choppy shoes you want to outlast the chop So "Mode 3 is our CHOP Mode" (+ OR Count)
Bingo, you are right more than half the time either mode and you are more in tune with the shoe - You tend to score higher and easier because you are not fighting the bias of the shoe.
It seems backwards until you think about it. But after you THINK about it you'll be asking: Why didn't we think of this before?
Well, better late than never. It is a huge improvement to all NOR systems and NOR in general.
While you are at it here is another NOR contribution you likely missed. Hell, half the people that WERE here missed it.
F is the best possible way to play Strong Side shoes (more than a 2 to 1 ratio).
But F is NOT the best way to play streaky shoes with runs on BOTH sides, including ZZ runs especially when such shoes are low in 2s, which they usually are.
Those are TB4L shoes. The 4D pointed that out.
BUT, another topic you likely missed is S40M1. This is even better than TB4L for streaky shoes with straight runs on both sides including ZZ runs. Think about it: You are ON ZZs from the beginning and you are on Straight runs from the 3rd circle. When playing this way we simply stay on all runs until we lose because we got ON them so early. You HATE 2s! So when you lose the bet under a 2 you stop betting until the TTs end. Another big improvement to NOR.
OK, now you are up to date at least as far as NOR is concerned.
-
Should we ever consider entering a shoe for a second time if we've either won/lost in the shoe previously?
-
Can someone direct me to where I can access past webinars?
-
I've been getting better results as well using events to drive my mode decisions.
However, what's working best for me is blending the 2 and making the best decision from that. I seldom hit my first mode bets, especially early, at full units if at all.
-
I guess it's my turn to chime in on something...
I joined BTC and learned NOR about a year ago and stopped playing after a few months because it wasn't producing the results I had anticipated. I came back on a little over a month ago because I knew the game was beatable and I want very much to become one of the few who can beat the game.
My approach this time around was different from the first. I came back in very teachable. I read through the entire NOR forum, played through hundreds of mock shoes and started incorporating stop losses on my plays just as Ellis had taught. I'm guilty to have not done these things before because NOR itself is extremely simple and I thought I was smart enough to just absorb it on a couple of reads. Thank goodness I understand the importance of a high teachability index and I realized how stupid I really am... Long story short, not that I've been crushing the casinos, but in the couple of weeks I've been back playing again, I'm up almost 100 units in my play. I never had results like this in the past. Here are some of the things I've changed that you may benefit from:
1) I'm now officially looking for the strongest bias I can find when table searching. For me, this piece also contains an element of shoe penetration meaning I would rather jump into a shoe that's been played deeper, with a strong bias, than a new shoe with 2/3 sets of events and a picture perfect bias. 2) I use all the recommended money management recommendations from the NOR manual. Some of us on this forum are trying to recreate our targets, stop losses etc... Why would we bother doing that when it's all been laid out so well for us?
3) I'm through trying to learn all the different methods of play and employing them all. If you want to be a master, then you must master the basics. I'm committing my time to master NOR first before moving forward and trying to learn something else. Is there an opportunity cost associated with taking this route seeing as newer systems may create a higher PA? Only so for a short term thinker. Consider that Ellis crushed baccarat with systems far simpler than NOR. BTW, my definition of NOR mastery is not the absorption of it's concepts - I'm looking for both statistical significance in my number of shoes played and decisions made, PA and lastly, the number of mistakes I make in play and system selection.
4) I began searching for my own answers. Ellis has been gracious enough to answer some of the questions I do have, but I've realized now that I get far more benefit going through the forum trying to find the answer for myself. By reading old posts, questions etc... you are getting exposed to answers to questions you didn't even know you had. For me, this has created a stronger depth of knowledge and is critical for people to really fully grasp NOR and it's application.
If anybody wants to learn how to play baccarat, I am convinced 100% that it can be done. I don't think we'll only win at the game, I think we will crush it! The question now becomes how many people are willing to do the work? Are they willing to do whatever it takes? To study and practice and really become a student of the game? Or will most people approach the game with the same sort of mentality they bring to their daily jobs? The mentality of fear, ungratefulness and entitlement. The latter are the main ingredients to not only a losing player in game of baccarat, but a loser in life.
If you want it - go for it! Simple as that.
I think that to study the NOR materials and apply them in a coherent manner is the toughest job for newbies even seasoned players get stuck every now and then looking at the forum.I wish I have a few thousand bucks to burn at the live tables just to gain some experience and practice...but for most people even 1k initial loss is too much feeling demoralised and broke.,people just give up ..how many of us have pro players looking over our shoulders guiding us when we just starting,I guess most of us just go down playing solo in the casino... -
Just wondering if anybody has played there before and if so, could perhaps give me a heads up on what to expect?
I'm flying in for a conference and will likely spend a night, maybe 2 perusing the bacc tables.
Thanks!
-
I know we play modes by OR count, but would you start m2 because of double 1's?
Hmm, kilieu, my highest bet was a single 4 at play 18.The shoe was:
B11232321113
P221232121112
B141161
Starting at play 3 with OTB4LM2 U1D1M2 my bets were:
P1,B2,P1,P2,B1,B2,B1,P2,P1,B2,B3,B2,P1,P2,B3,B4,B3,P2 =+13
P3,P2,B1,B2,P1,P2,B3,P2,P1,B2,B3,B2,P1,P2,B3,P2,P1,B2,B3,B2 = +35
Don't need the 3rd col. I would have quit at play 33 with +30.
In Mode 2 you go OTR after 2 losing bets for 1 bet. Did you do that?
This one is pretty cut and dry.
-
Correction to my last post.
I meant s40m2, not otb4l.
Which brings me to another thought... If 4iars+ are so uncommon, why not play a 1,2,4 prog on opposites in OR+ shoes? Maybe the progression can be contingent on 2 factors such as no 4 iars and a positive OR count. We could play it by column, trending, or even some sort of +OR true count like with BJ counting. If we are playing to hit and run, an easy set of goals like this makes sense to me.
Granted, I'm a little koo koo so if I'm more than a little off the mark, just toss me a word slap.
-
Glen, I was strictly talking about the Twist in that post when I said go down 2 on winning bets of 5 or more. And the Twist is strictly a side bet on top of whatever system you are playing.
Ann and I strictly played BaS40 in mode 2 to win 40 shoes in a row but I should have mentioned that we waited for a 2iar to start.
But see I had not invented OTB4L at that point.
Today, NOR players know an OTB4L shoe when they see it.
But we can use the same prog within a prog feature with OTB4L to play it a much safer way. When you lose a 2, bet 1 under the 4iar. And if that loses bet 2 under the next 4iar. Going back to that 324 shoe start, OTB4L would already have hit +5 and if we continued on after that we would be at +2 with a 1 bet due under the 4iar - still in pretty good shape.
Brand new members can play exactly as Ann and I played until they learn more.
NOR players are better off to chose between BaS40 and BaOTB4L or even BaF, or BaTB4L.
In all cases the Ba feature means to go back to 1 after a losing 2 and go with the prog within a prog. But your stop win is only +5.
If you choose to go on after that, capture +4.
In other words, we can still play all 3 of the NOR systems if we know how plus TB4L. But we bet the BASIC much more conservative prog within a prog way and make our stop win +5.
The whole idea is to have an effective but conservative way to get to +5. If we can do that, then we are ready to try the million dollar plan. Because that is all that is needed for the million dollar plan - a bunch of +5 shoes.
So we get out of a lot of shoes early. Good, that gives us time for breaks. Hey, if we are going for a million dollars, we're gonna need some breaks.
Now, I've only just started teaching this +5 thing. We want to be playing much better than Ann and I were. We know a lot more today about how to safely get to +5. We STILL won't always make it. But fortunately the million dollar program does NOT need you to win every shoe. We can screw up a little now and then and STILL get to a million dollars. That's the beauty of it.
I of course realize that a million dollars sounds a bit much. But look at it this way: All it really needs is for you to win +5 more often than you lose - 5.
That sounds a lot more practical doesn't it. That is why I think the whole direction of the forum needs to be about the best and safest ways to win +5 more often than you don't. Because if we can do that, we can win a million dollars. Im thinking that is what this forum needs to be about. I'm thinking what it DOESN'T need to be about is the most complex way possible to win +5.
Now, if you like the idea of a little Twist along the way, just for the fun of it - Fine! But let's do that in a SAFE way. Sticking with U1D1M2 no matter what is NOT a safe way. We must go down 2 and we must switch bet selection at a prudent point. Agreed Kevin? Aren't you glad I bailed you out?
Hi Ellis,
This BA approach sounds to me like NOR, but rather than playing 'through' the OTR situations, we play 'within' them by means of mini step progressions. The BAS40 would simply be OTB4L with an OTR mini prog. Is this correct?
If the basic BA goal was to break even in 3iar+ situations, why wouldn't we just skip the OTR's completely and resume play on fulfilled mode 3's and wait for the completion of mode 2's (staying OTR)?
If we lose a 2 bet while playing opposites, would we loop back to a 1 bet for the next set, or play a 2/3?
You mentioned fate in one of your first post on this thread. The night I opened up this thread for a read, I had gone to bed with the intention of finding a post regarding short win targets. A hit and run method with a goal of 5 units. I guess I picked it out of the Ether. If we randomly approached tables with bas40 and we were playing frequencies only, where would be the bias we are playing to? This seems more like a math play and I thought math plays didn't work for bacc? Unless, this particular play strategy is break even over a perfect distribution of outcomes, and we are playing to hit a crest of favorable distributions and quit...
Am I missing something?
Are casinos really creating the biases...
in BeatTheCasino.com Q and A Baccarat and Blackjack
Posted
Thank you very much for the play by play Oz - it was very enlightening, and extremely beneficial for all to let us into your thinking process.
I know that you've committed to not letting the identity of your Mentor be known, but if I could ask one simple question:
Was he a previous student of Ellis' teachings?
Thanks again!
Sarrom