[Seeking For Advice]

Hello pvdh. Thank you for your reply. Actually I was playing 1st base - basic strategy and I was using a 1-1-2 neg prog first and then jumped to 1-2-4 neg prog. What I've noticed is that one2six produces quite random cards and after 2 hours it produces clumps and 10's pushes. These days I tried 3rd base and played basic and variable strategy (when there were clumps). At first I tested the waters playing the minimum bet and then used again 1-1-2 and 1-2-4 neg prog. I think I did it much better than the last time and followed Elli's advice to leave the table if I feel that something is going wrong. So I saved my half bank roll last time rather than totally loosing it. Of course there were times where I was winning, especially in the beggining.

What are your experiences? Have you found a way to beat them?

The cards from the One2Six are quite random indeed, so I don´t see many clear clumps. And moreover it can change very quickly, I had many tens following tens, but suddenly it changed radically into high following low more often. In my opinion is the Variable Strategy (clumped or random) not suited enough for the European BJ (no hole card, shuffle machine, a lot of players). However I strongly believe in not splitting/doubling (too much).

One more thing. A shufflemachine stopped working, so I could have a look inside. I saw that the inserted card is put on top of the little deck in the machine, that means that the inserted card will be dealt first (when that little deck is moving to the exit of the machine). Im thinking about this, if I know something more, Ill let it know.

[Seeking For Advice]

I´ve had quite the same circumstances as you did; one2six shuffle machine, 6 decks, no hole card, but I played 3rd base. You say that your cards were quite random, so which strategie did you choose? basic or still the hi/lo runnings?

And what do you mean with the stop loss method? Is that a negative of positive betting prog?

Thanks in advance

pvdh.

[Quite random but still good odds for bank]

It was a 6 deck game in the Netherlands.

There were some real readings possible, but they ran out before I could hit/stand.

And the ace predictability is just an extra and wasn´t (still isn´t) my main aim.

But what I truly don´t understand is your negative betting prog. I think it´s better to raise your bet when you are winning. Why should you raise when you´re losing?

pvdh.

[Quite random but still good odds for bank]

Yesterday I tried reading cards in the casino, and sometimes it worked but mostly it didn´t. During the playing I had the idea that the cards were quite random, but I almost couldnt believe that for a friday night.

The high/low runnings were too different to rely on and arguing other players are very annoying as well (`why do you hit with a 12 vs bank 6`).

However, placing bets on 1st base after the last card dealt was an ace, worked out much better, with a 3 out of 5 win.

I had some difficulties with the hands 15 and 16 against a ten (up card) of the bank when high is running. I was third base and it was a no hole card game. I don´t know what gives me more advantage (or it maybe doesn´t matter), hit or stand. Only the cards 2 till 6 are valuable to me, but in this case a 2/3/4/5/6 would be a negative card for the bank (chance to bust, because highs are running). If I hit a high card I bust, but if the bank hits a high card he will win. So in my opinion it´s better to stand, but what are your points of view?