gman72

It worked out ok playing it BaS40 with the 120123 progression. Any reason not to work it with the 121235 progression you suggested yesterday? And using the OR count to decide the play after the first 3iar and then let SAP make decision on play after 3's later in the shoe?

I think his results are pretty close to inline with what I have been experiencing in my practice. Maybe slightly better. Here's how I break it down based on what Mike has reported: 3 shoes won at Mirage to +5 each. Several shoes at HR on Sunday and Monday. (I call several 3 shoes without anymore clarification and had to be losses to offset reported winnings.) Lost one shoe at HR. Amount not reported. +10 one shoe at Luxor. +9 one shoe at Mandalay Bay +3 one shoe at Aria This is a total of 10 shoes. 6 wins for total of +37 units. 4 losses, unknown amount, but had to be at least a total of -10 units. 6 wins/4 losses = 60% shoe win rate. This would give a net win of +27 units. Since he reported playing $200 units, this is a win of $5,400. Which corresponds to his reporting being up over $5,000. Nice job! That's a good win for only a few hours of play. Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, this is just what I got out the two posts.

I'm not having any better results this way either. I've tested quite a few shoes this morning and I'm getting basically the same shoe win rate of just over 50%. Something is just not working here. Hell, maybe it's just me.

Ok, but I'm still confused on the 0 bet. All of our progressions for MDB start the secondary progression with a 0 bet (0123), which points us to where we place the rest of the 123 secondary progression bets, whether OTR or ATR depending on if the 0 bet wins or loses. How would that work with the progression you are showing?

Could you clarify this a little for me. I'm not sure I follow. S40M1 progression is currently 10123, with the 1 bet as the primary progression and 0123 as the secondary progression. So do you mean try S40M3 with a 121 primary progression and a 02 secondary progression?

S4 is still a streak system, it's purpose I believe is to get you on runs quicker. Your idea might work as a tweak to S4 in a high 3's and 1's situation. I'll have to think it through some more, but this might work. Not sure what the consequences will be if a run of TT or 4+'s hits before the SAP count points to a different system, but I think we can test it out.

Ellis, I certainly don't disagree with your odds on the 3iar's before 4iar's etc. as they relate to winning the secondary progression. In all my practice, I believe I have only once lost my 3 bet of the secondary progression. My issue is, I'm still not "seeing" how winning the secondary progression saves you from losing the shoe to the primary progression bet losses. I'm still only winning shoes at somewhere just slightly above 50% following the mechanical rules of MDB. It seems the frequent system changes caused by the changing SAP counts, is causing the primary progression bets to lose frequently and you never get far in the secondary progression because it keeps starting over with each system change. The plus is you are betting the zero bet in the secondary progression more often than moving forward to the 1,2,3 bets of the secondary progression I guess.

I don't know about concrete proof, but I certainly think it would be nice to hear about Mike's recent results in Vegas. He mentioned he was going back for a 4 day trip a week ago or so, it would be informative to at least hear how it went. Especially for those going to the seminar in two weeks. (Note: I'm not going, would like to, but family obligations prevent.) Obviously he has no requirement to tell us squat, but if he's going to be a presenter/instructor at a seminar it would be telling to see what his results with MDB have been. I hope they have been great, I'm rooting for everyone to be successful.

I'm actually really glad to see Ellis post this particular piece of information, because it has been causing me a lot of consternation is my practice when the SAP count is high with 1's & 3's and 2's & 4+'s. Even 3's and 4+'s are a problem for me. I try to base my system selection on the highest two counts. For now what I'm doing is adjusting my play when these "difficult" counts come up. What I do is simply stop betting until the count moves to one of the more favorable ones, such as high 1/2, 1/4 or 2/3. Until we find a better solution for these "difficult" counts, I'm trying to be a little more conservative in my play.

I've played them, pretty much same results as from the Wizard shoes I played. And it's already been established those are Vegas, preshuffled shoes. My conclusion, based on my practice, is that starting a shoe at play 2, with S1 is basically close to a 50/50 proposition for +5. It appears to me that the better solution is to stick to waiting till the shoe is established and using the appropriate system for what the shoe is presenting. DISCLAIMER: This is just my opinion. I'm not a teacher, just a learning member.

For the record: I should have been clear that my working those shoes would NOT be any kind of definitive proof of how MDB performed! I was simply showing what I had done in my practice and pointing out one way to practice working shoes. It's a good way to learn disciplined play, such as when to quit a shoe at your stop loss, and how to continue play when you get a hot shoe early. It's all for PRACTICE! I defer all knowledge about "random" shoes and RNG shoes and the Wizard to Ellis. I'm just practicing the methods against a set of shoes and was posting my results just for kicks and curiosity for anyone. It's difficult to find a large sample of shoes to work and these just happened to be one I found. I keep forgetting to put my disclaimer at the bottom of my posts. I am not a teacher on here. I like posting here to participate in and keep the discussions going. I'm still learning just like most on here.

I worked the next 40 shoes in the simulation 1 file from Wizard of Odds. (Shoe #41-80) Shoe win rate was a little better at 67.5%. I had 27 wins and 13 losses. One thing I did different was stop at 0 or breakeven after the first column if I had hit 0 two or three times already in the shoe. I had five breakeven shoes. I recorded these 0 score shoes as wins. That made the shoe win rate higher than the first 40 shoes, but my total net units won was less. I only netted +59 units before commission for an average of +1.475 units per shoe. For simplicity it would probably have been just slightly less than +1 unit per shoe average with commission. Obviously I’m starting at play 2 on all these shoes, so I could have drastically different results if I’d wait to see a few events and start with an established SAP count. Not sure, but I’m hoping that would be the case. I’d really like to have a program to analyze different scenarios. Hopefully that’s something in the works that we’ll all be able to try out.

The numbers listed are the post # in the NOR+ thread. Here is the link to the first page in the NOR+ thread. http://www.beatthecasino.com/forum/showthread.php?t=7281&page=15 It starts with post #1. Just follow the pages in the thread to see all the posts. It really is the best place to start reading after going through the NOR manual.

Here is a few more losing shoe starts, to go along with 3,4 and 4,2, for preshuffled cards, starting S1 at play 2. 5,2,2 3,1,1,1 1,3,1,1,1 1,5,3,2 And the 3,1,1,1 is a shoe killer I seem to run across all the time.

I don't see how that could be a bad idea. Those decisions when three SAP counts are tied makes system selection difficult. It might be best to sit out and look for a better spot when the SAP count is more defined. I haven't tried that in my practice yet, but I might give it a shot and see if I can fare any better in those tough shoes.

I used the MDB MM rules. +5 stop win unless I hit +5 on or before play 15 then play on with half-decade MM, but capture +4. Always out at -5 or out at -4 facing a 2 bet. I only had 5 of the forty shoes get ahead early and go over +5.

I'm always looking for shoes to practice on. I decided to use the simulated shoes over on the Wizard of Odds site. You can find them here on this page down under Simulations. http://wizardofodds.com/games/baccarat/ Here is what the website says about the shoes: I'm using the simulation 1 file and have worked the first 40 shoes. The results are 23 shoes won and 17 shoes lost, for a shoe win rate of 57.5%. I won 150 units and lost 81 units for a net win before commission of +69 units. That's an average of +1.725 units per shoe. Let's just say for simplicity, +1 unit per shoe net of commission. This is not too great, but it's better than losing. I've gotten better and learned/had clarified a few more things since I started working the shoes, so I'm going to work the next 40 shoes and see how MDB fares. The way I work the shoe, so it resembles live play by not seeing the whole shoe, is this: I downloaded the file to excel. Each row is a shoe. What I do is highlight the row and change the font color to white, that way I can't see the whole shoe. Then I select the first cell where I can see the result in the top bar. I then make my bet for the next play and then hit the arrow button to the next cell to the right to see the result. Works ok. Edit: I forgot to point out, I started each shoe at play 2 using S1 and switching systems based on SAP.

Really?? I have to wonder if you really are reading through the threads. I mean the thread right before this one you started gave you everything you need to keep going with your NOR/NOR+ study. Check it out, I guarantee if you read everything it shows you will be up to date on NOR/NOR+. Good Luck. http://www.beatthecasino.com/forum/showthread.php?t=8102

Here is the shoe played out for you jmz91: image2014_06_06_16_18_240001.pdf Started just as you did with S1, and switched to S4 at play 8 when the 4+ SAP count went high. The 4+ count stayed high, so I played the shoe out with S4. Never got ahead really anywhere, hit a high of +3 in the third column, but it went down hill to end at -4. Those three 3iars at the end would have preferred S23, but the SAP count didn't point you there in time because the 4+ count had gone so high and then the shoe ended.

Billd21, see my reply over in the NOR Forum.

Billd21, this is a reply to your post "nor manual' over in the public part of the forum. I'm responding here just to make sure only NOR members have access. Here was your post: My answer to you can be summed up in a post I made a year ago when I was a new member like yourself. I had questions, but I spent countless hours going back through the forum, reading and printing posts to create my own additional study guide to NOR. Everything you need is here in the forum, you just have to spend the time to find it. Here was my post: http://www.beatthecasino.com/forum/showthread.php?t=7281&page=2&p=36749#post36749 It is post #537 in the thread. Read it and you'll understand. A lot has been written since then, and you should read it all, but this will get you started. Good Luck! Gman

image2014_06_06_14_51_240001.pdf Brutal shoe! SAP counts with all the ties is tough. It shows the 3,4 start and how it loses. The rest was just played out for practice.

A quick note on shoe starts. I have found two shoe start combinations that are quick losers to MDB. They are 3,4 and 4,2. As the rules are set now, starting at play 2 with S1, you are done with a -5 at play 7 with a 3,4 start and done with a -5 at play 6 with a 4,2 start.

Ok, I replayed shoe #1. Here it is: image2014_06_05_10_24_580001.pdf This time I played like I had been before the rules thread came up yesterday. This is what I did and why. Started S1 and stayed there till after play 10. Even though 2’s were higher, when I start a shoe I stay S1 until 3’s or 4’s go high, then I switch. After play 10, 2’s and 3’s were high so that’s my signal to switch to S23, which I did at play 11. I had a decision to make after play 17. SAP count is 3,4,4,4. Three counts are tied. I always find this a tough spot. In this situation I stick with the first two high counts recorded and wait to see if the third count that just jumped up (in this case the 4+) is a fluke or a trend. So I stay S23. A couple of plays later the SAP count continues to confirm S23. After play 23, the SAP count goes high 1’s and 2’s now, so I switch back to S1 at play 24. Continue to play this until a decision needs to be made after play 31. Now 2’s are highest and 4’s next highest, but 1’s have been coming on strong, so I decide to stay S1. S1 is confirmed a couple of plays later and I stay with it through play 43 where I finally pick up a +5 and I’m out. This play doesn’t follow the rules to the letter, but I think I’m taking the spirit of the SAP count and applying it in a way that makes sense to me. Maybe I’m just lucky here, but it’s been working in my practice.

This is straight from the rules you posted yesterday: "4+ tied with anything is still S4+" That's why I switched at play 18! SAP count after play 17 was 3,4,4,4. If this system is mechanical and all we have to do is follow the rules, then that is what I did. The way I had been playing MDB I would not have switched, but I followed the rules as you posted yesterday when I worked this shoe. I think for now I'm going to stick with what was working and continue to focus on the two highest counts when making my system selection decisions. I think you covered this in a post today over in the question/comments thread.