[You have often heard me say that no betting system or progression no matter how long, can, by itself, beat Baccarat. Well this is mostly for public consumption. I don't want to argue with a world full of mathematicians but I have found 3 exceptions: 1.) Our own U1D2 straight OTB4L beat our own 10,000 shoe test to the tune of a 7% PA - way outside the standard deviation. 2.) U1D1M2 beat the same shoes the same way to the tune of a 34% PA. No Mathematician would believe this. 3.) Keith's 221 staking line betting system beats way more than its fair share of shoes.] Ellis, I am impressed with the above percentages, i.e. the 7% and 34%, respectively. However, I find it hard to understand that there would be such a HUGE difference between the two. Why does UP1D1 exceed UP1D1 by such a large margin? And if so, why not just play the later exclusively for a higher PA, and consequently, higher profit?