Jump to content

nizm0racer

Legacy Players
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    109

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 Content Type 

Everything posted by nizm0racer

  1. nizm0racer
    Brian, It's 8 decks you can see how thick the shoe is. It's just that they're cutting at least a deck or half a deck which is cutting the hands shorter (minus the ties). The official way to do it is to cut a certain number of cards e.g. 14-16
  2. nizm0racer
    I found here at : http://wizardofodds.com/baccarat I sent it to their casino manager "Jack" in an email. Hopefully he'll get back to me. Yeah cutting it short is wrong because that's not how the game is meant to be played.
  3. nizm0racer
    I ran into the problem last night with the shoes being cut short multiple times last night (5/27/10) at BPH. If anyone knows if there is solid ground rules that the shoe MUST be cut at a certain amount in the back e.g. 13-15 cards in the back to ensure ~72 hands (not including ties) that'll be greatly appreciated. I spoke with the casino manager who was sort of rude to me stating if I can find it anywhere online to email it to him and he'll check it out. Let me know guys. I'm still searching. RJ
  4. nizm0racer
    I don't know what they're trying to do but they're cutting waaay too much off the back on table 4 (maybe other tables too) because I've got to under 45 total hands so far in my last two shoes.
  5. nizm0racer
    ToMm, Do you know when they change the cards out at BPH?
  6. nizm0racer
    It ended that time I believe PST for me. Yeah I saw a ton of 4's 5's and 6's. Shoes look real good so far.
  7. nizm0racer
    I'm wondering Tom if you played the same shoe I did. I was playing good old school SAP(hybrid to be exact) scored a +18 as well using half decade management after a +13 or more P.S. I really enjoy the change up on the shuffle (long wash) makes the shoe really streaky RJ
  8. nizm0racer
    That's kind of scary to see shoes ending that quickly especially when you could be well on your way to recovering or hitting a goal. Do you guys think if you consistently win there that BPH would cut you off or hold off paying you out?
  9. nizm0racer
    Scratch the double 0 start. I noticed you lose to a 312 pattern which to me is more common of a start than a 414 (single 0 start)
  10. nizm0racer
    Hey Norm, on what unit numbered bets do you put a dragon bet on? 3 and above?
  11. nizm0racer
    After the shoe is fully dealt they sort of strip it splitting the 8 deck shoe in half then taking about 1-2 decks in one hand from each stack and then slowly with 1 hand holding the 1-2 decks they take the middle portion of the decks and set it down in the middle. They repeat this until all the decks are "stripped down" so that it sort of recreates a new shuffle before it goes back into the machine
  12. nizm0racer
    I just got back from Gold Coast LV yesterday. Had some mixed results (Will post the end results soon) but I have a really weird fishy feeling about GC. I don't like how they "strip" the cards after each shuffle. Really manipulates how they will start in the next rounds thereon. I did win more than lose but not enough to rant about. I spoke with Tom(uneek) the other day about game starts. I personally do believe that this system would benefit from a double 0 start so that you can avoid a catastrophic loss (-4 or more) in the first 5-7 plays. I noticed if it went a certain way in the beginning per say PBBBB or so you would lose a lot of units off the bat. So I believe I will utilize a double 0 start from here on out.
  13. nizm0racer
    Res, you wait for another WW or WLW if you're weak side lost it's 3 bet. Personally through much testing I do not like the 2-hi version unless you can somehow help out the sporadic 1 problem
  14. nizm0racer
    At play 45 you count back 10 decisions and see which is stronger the Red or Black. I counted 7 Red vs. 3 Black starting at play 45 and back.
  15. nizm0racer
    If you count back 10 from the 5 I count 7 Red and 3 black so that should mean that the black should hibernate after 2 losing bets am I reading it wrong?
  16. nizm0racer
    I see what you did in that example. I followed that same rule(continue on don't let it hibernate) and it resulted in a bad result. I'm rereading it and I noticed the anti bets are winning more so shouldn't that mean that we only allow 2 losing bets to the losing progression which would be the RD1 bets?
  17. nizm0racer
    That's true res I think it's supposed to be a 4 then wait again then 5
  18. nizm0racer
    My mistake guess it was late night but the "unopposed 5" was opposed by a 3.
  19. nizm0racer
    I hit a shoe where the anti was on the weak progression but there was a 5 unit bet by itself. Has anyone else run into this? Now if we do should we just run with the 5 unit bet by itself and it'll be a 5 hi system?
  20. nizm0racer
    I noticed at play 23-24 you only did a 4 bet then skipped twice instead allowing two losing bets then resuming at D2 (3)
  21. nizm0racer
    Ellis, Since you said we should play our progressions in columns of 20; what happens when both a 4s and 5s show up or even a 4zz or 5zz in the same column? How would we then decide how to set our progression? I understand that you wait until lose your 3 bet progression to go OTR then you set it from what happened before. But per say we see a 4s in the 1st column then in the 2nd a 5s then immediately it's followed by a 4s again in 2nd column? What then would we do if we encounter them both in the same column? I just don't know which to follow. I hope this makes sense RJ
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use

  I accept