rd1 RD1 | N Discussion and Rules ECD Group February 22, 2010

[res]

example 1a why a 1 bet on black on hand 57 when the last bet lost was a 3 bet?

[nizm0racer]

That's true res I think it's supposed to be a 4 then wait again then 5

[ECD]

Due to a rule correction, this shoe no longer applies. I have removed it

PJ

Edited February 24, 2010 by ECD

[res]

PaPaJoe

Here are 2 shoes I did one from Harrahs and another one from a Indian casino. Both shoes I lost but I might not be playing it correctly using the last 10 plays

Harrahs -11

B411131121131

P12432111311

P311221331111

P11

INDIAN CASINO - 7

B211112142122

B413112152

B22111331114

P331112

I don't want to test anymore until I see if I am doing it correctly.

[res]

Sorry I found alot of mistakes. I was not playing the 1-2 and will redo those shoes sometime today and post my resutls.

[ECD]

This example moved to post #80

Thanks

PJ

Edited February 26, 2010 by ECD

[ECD]

Hi res,

Remember, we're dropping "when a prog loses it's resume bet it goes in nibernation" Forget that, just run the prog and let the weak side/strong side rule govern the PL.

thanks,

PJ

[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?

[ECD]

Hi nizmOracer,

The way I determine weak side/ strong side is whanever a side loses 2 bets in a row, I look back 10 hands and check to see if it is weak (hibernate), or strong (go to 3rd bet. This gives us more current info instead of looking all the way back to the beginning.

Oh Yeah, If there is only a difference of 1 between the two sides, I go ahead and make the 3rd bet.

Thanks,

PJ

[res]

PJ

In your example hand 23 should be a 2 banker bet which changes hands 24 to 36 which now I got at +20

[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?

[ECD]

if you count back 10 from the 5 i count 7 red and 3 black

whaaa?

Pj

[ECD]

PJ

In your example hand 23 should be a 2 banker bet which changes hands 24 to 36 which now I got at +20

Yeah "Eagle Eye" that's right. +20!

I'm getting tired of making these changes... why don't you post one or two. Just email them to me waterdoc@juno.com.

I'll be glad to post them. Make sure you check them real good for mistakes first!

PJ

[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.

[res]

I have a meeting tonight and hope tomorrow afternoon I will be able to post a couple of shoes. I know Friday I will have more time but will try tomorrow afternoon.

[ECD]

OK, now i can check....

When red loses hands 42 and 43, it's time to check weak side/strong side. Let's see, from hand 33 - 43 there are 7 red circles and 3 black circles.

Red is the strong side, so we go ahead and make that 3rd bet on red. It wins, and we continue on.... NOW IF red had been the weak prog, it would have went into hibernation at hand 44 and black would have bet unopposed. But that was not the case.

Black resumes (wakes up) at hand 44 because that side has just had a WW.

The only time I look back to check is when a prog loses 2 bets in a row.

Does this help?

PJ

Edited February 25, 2010 by ECD

[ECD]

Here's a little pocket rules card I made with the RD1N Rules. I'm gonna have mine laminated and put it in my wallet. That way if I need to take a peek, I'll have it handy. Also it's great to have on the desk at home when playing a shoe.

It's msword (.doc) file. Just click on the link, print it and cut it out.

Makes it easier to keep the rules straight.

PJ

[kkriats]

Thanks res,

The problem is my "when a prog resumes, if it loses the resume bet it goes back into hibernation" rule.

I suspected that during the last several corrections to Example #1a. You guys helped me to see that this was not a good rule. We need to forget that rule. I'll remove it.

I'm also taking down Example #1a, since we are no longet testing that way.

This is your #1 Harrah's shoe played without that rule. Check it for mistakes and let me know what you think.

PJ

Hi PJ

On play#23 the black 2 bet should be on Bankers if I am correct? Thanks-Kostas

[ECD]

Yeah res has already mentioned that, I'm re-posting it now.

Thanks,

PJ

Edited February 25, 2010 by ECD

[kkriats]

Yeah res has already mentioned that, I'm re-posting it now.

Thanks,

PJ

Hi PJ

Thanks for your answer one mor observation: soppose the was no mistake why you proceed to make the third black bet if he previous black prog is the weak one as it can be seen from the previous 10 or 15 plays.Thanks again -Kostas

[ECD]

Hi PJ

Thanks for your answer one mor observation: soppose the was no mistake why you proceed to make the third black bet if he previous black prog is the weak one as it can be seen from the previous 10 or 15 plays.Thanks again -Kostas

OK then, I always look back 10 hands. So looking back from hand 23 to hand 13, there were 5 black and 5 red, so I went with the 3rd black bet.

Thanks,

PJ

Edited February 25, 2010 by ECD

[stanislaus]

I have a question about the 0-0 start in the shoe example in Post #7. In that shoe the black dot in decision 2 loses. Player won decision 2. The black dot in decision 3 went under this Player decision. However, in the shoe examples in Posts 36, 24, and 8, the black dots were posted opposite those in Post #7. It post #7 wrong?

[ECD]

Hi Stan,

That's a very good observation. It goes to how we handle the 0 vs 0 start.

I made a change to the sporadic 1's example because I realized I had used the wrong start. There are 2 ways to look at the 0 vs 0 start

1. We place a zero under bank and player before the first hand is delt. The winning side gets the black circle the other gets red. We would start table betting at hand 2 always with the RD1 prog taking the lead.

2. We wait until the first hand is delt, then we put the black zero under the winning hand and the red zero on the other side. Our first table bet will be at hand 3. Now we let the weak/strong aspect of this system go to work. If red gets the circle we start betting anti-RD1 at hand 3. If black gets the circle, we start with RD1 at hand 3.

I think #2 is better. By doing it this way we are not taking it for granted that RD1 prog is the lead prog. If red wins the first circle it goes ahead and bets the anti-RD1 mode. Black has to win a circle before it comes in.

Instead of going back and changing all the examples, let's just use this #2 start unless you guys see it differently. Remember this thread just started a few days ago and this is the normal "work out the bugs as we go" phase. (and correct PJ's mistakes phase)

We're real close to getting the rules nailed down. I think we have them right, but we should know when we test a few more shoes. We still don't know what it loses to. We know it falters whan we get an abundance of sporadic 1's, but it seems to get through those without too much damage.

1-2-1-2-1-2-1-2 would increase our pucker factor, but not to bad.

Let's just do more testing and see what develops.

PJ

[MVSeahog]

That leads me to the next point. Can we get some volunteers to start testing. You can test with or without the sporadic 1's suggestion, just let us know which way you tested when you post.

PJ

You can add me to the list of people now in "test" mode with RD1/n.

Currently rereading all the messages to get fully up to speed.

MVS

[ECD]

Thanks MVS,

Bases on your testing with your MVS+ system, I know you'll do a thorough job of testing RD1N. The latest rules are in post #25. The o vs o start is only discussed in the previous post.

Have fun,

PJ

I just tidied up the rules in post #25..... here they are again so you don't have to go back

RD1/N Rules Last Updated 02/25/2010

Start at hand 2 with 0 vs. 0 (put a black zero under the winner from hand 1 and a red zero on the other side)

Net bet RD1 vs. anti-RD1 U1D2 No M2

First table bet is at hand #3.

When net betting, there is always a strong prog and a weak prog. In RD1/N we use 2 colors to track the progs. The RD1 prog is black and the antiRD1 prog is Red. This makes it simple to see which is which and help eliminate mistakes. In order to identify the strong and weak progs, just look back 10 hands, if you see more black circles than red circles, you know that black is the strong prog and red is the weak prog. If you see more red, then red is the strong prog and black is the weak prog.

Another way is to keep a count giving +1 to each black circle and -1 to each red circle.

Hibernation Rules:

A prog hibernates and suspends betting as follows:

The strong prog will hibernate after 3 losing bets. The weak prog will hibernate after 2 losing bets.

A hibernating prog resumes when it wins 2 bets in a row or has a W-L-W. When a prog resumes, it resumes where it left off.

When a prog resumes after a losing 5 bet, it resumes at 3 (D2)

OPTION: Whenever one prog is hibernating, the other flat bets at 2 and when it loses it goes back to 1.

That’s it.

Edited February 26, 2010 by ECD