Jump to content

Questions re SAP count and P vs. B


Recommended Posts

1. I still don't completely understand using only weighted event counts. E.g., with a SAP count of 6 10 20 8 the conventional wisdom is to bet 2s will go to 3. But there have been an equal number of 2s and 3s, 5 each. So why is it more likely 2s will go to 3 in THIS PARTICULAR SHOE, in which they're running equal, and which shoe doesn't know or care what the normal occurrences are in the long run?

2. When counting 1s, 2s 3s and 4s does anybody have an opinion as to whether it makes a difference whether they are Ps or Bs. E.g., if only, or mostly, Ps have been 3s, would you be less likely to bet on B going to 3?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baccarat Hall of Fame Member

Hi, I'll try to answer you between the lines:

1. I still don't completely understand using only weighted event counts. E.g., with a SAP count of 6 10 20 8 the conventional wisdom is to bet 2s will go to 3. But there have been an equal number of 2s and 3s, 5 each. So why is it more likely 2s will go to 3 in THIS PARTICULAR SHOE, in which they're running equal, and which shoe doesn't know or care what the normal occurrences are in the long run?

THE AVG OF 2S IS 1 EVERY 8 PLAYS, THE AVG OF 3S IS 1 EVERY 16 PLAYS THAT'S WHY THEYRE WEIGHTED DIFFERENTLY. IF YOU HAVE 5 2S ON AVG YOU SHOULD HAVE THEM IN AROUND 40 PLAYS, TO HAVE 5 3S YOU SHOUL SEE THEM IN 80 PLAYS, IT'S OBVIOUS THAT 3S ARE RUNNING MUCH MORE THAN NORMAL AVG. AND ARE HOTTER THAN 2S. THE SAP CHART IS TELLING YOU THIS: HEY, LOOK AT 3S! THEY'RE RUNNING ABOVE AVG, PLAY ON THEM!

2. When counting 1s, 2s 3s and 4s does anybody have an opinion as to whether it makes a difference whether they are Ps or Bs. E.g., if only, or mostly, Ps have been 3s, would you be less likely to bet on B going to 3?

THIS IS A CONSIDERATION I DID RECENTLY. IT'S PARTICULARLY TRUE WHEN A SIDE IS HOTTER THAN THE OTHER. THIS MEANS THAT ON THE DOMINANT SIDE YOU'LL HAVE MORE RUNS AND IN THE WEAK SIDE MORE SINGES. IF THE SHOE'S EQUILIBRATE THE EVENTS ARE DISTRIBUTED EQUALLY.

Hope this helps.

andrea

bacclover

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, Wolfman, but I still don't get why the one particular shoe you're playing is governed by statistics which are only meaningful in the long run. Would you bet against a run of 8 because it only occurs one time in 8 shoes and one just occurred in the last shoe? Or would you play what's happening right now? I guess I could understand If we're playing the odds over a large number of shoes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, Wolfman, but I still don't get why the one particular shoe you're playing is governed by statistics which are only meaningful in the long run. Would you bet against a run of 8 because it only occurs one time in 8 shoes and one just occurred in the last shoe? Or would you play what's happening right now? I guess I could understand If we're playing the odds over a large number of shoes.

SAP assumes that an identified bias will continue in the short run, even though events will likely even-up over many shoes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. I still don't completely understand using only weighted event counts. E.g., with a SAP count of 6 10 20 8 the conventional wisdom is to bet 2s will go to 3. But there have been an equal number of 2s and 3s, 5 each. So why is it more likely 2s will go to 3 in THIS PARTICULAR SHOE, in which they're running equal, and which shoe doesn't know or care what the normal occurrences are in the long run?

2. When counting 1s, 2s 3s and 4s does anybody have an opinion as to whether it makes a difference whether they are Ps or Bs. E.g., if only, or mostly, Ps have been 3s, would you be less likely to bet on B going to 3?

Well I think gablaw makes some valid points here. For #2, no it makes no difference if you are playing SAP but it would make a difference with F2 because F2 is a strong side system. But you don't need an SAP chart to play F2.

My thinking on the SAP system is this: SAP does well in streak, OK in chop and bad in neutral (runless shoes)

While casinos overall do the exact opposite. Casinos are at greatest risk in streak, much less in chop and no risk at all in neutral or runless shoes.

So what have we watched happen in Baccarat?

Except at BPH, streaky shoes have gotten less streaky. We see far fewer long runs. That strongly favors the casino's bottom line.

Except for a few places we see super chop lesss and less. That favors the casinos bottom line.

What we DO see is the advent of neutral shoes. We see more and more runless shoes where the casino kills the whole table.

During the same time span casino profits rose from 3% of the buy in money to 26% of the buy in money. They are obviously doing something right.

Meanwhile our SAP avg score went from 11 to about 5. It's probably even lower today.

Does all that seem to draw a pattern to you?

One last thing: At Gold Strike which is the casino I play the most, 4 of us, playing morning cards soon after the card prep. could not win with SAP to save our lives. But at night, with old cards we had no problem.

Now, could it be that casinos have the ability to prep cards to their liking? - That they know how to do that better now than ever before. - Their profits per dollar bet went from 3% to 26%. That is more than an 800% increase for crying out loud. Do you think the players got stupider? Or did the casinos get smarter? SOMETHING sure as hell happened!

Here is something I learned in the corporations: Whenever there is money on the table, SOMEBODY is going to cheat. Sure, profits can fluctuate a little each month - 3%, 5%. BUT we are talking 800%. Do you think that is a coincidence?

Now, let's go back to Gablaws hypothetical: 6 10 20 8

WHAT system should you be playing?

CLUE: low 1's and 4 or mores, high 2s and 3s. Which system does that point to?

It points directly at OTB4L doesn't it. OTB4L hates multiple 1's and it hates 4s but it loves 2s and 3s doesn't it.

SAP was a great system back when we designed it but lets face it: Today it sucks!

But look what I just did. I used the SAP counts to tell me the best system to play.

MY point? Let's not throw out the baby with the wash.

Gablaw, try OTB4L on that shoe and see what happens. Just make darn sure you know our OTB4L system rules.

Let me make one other point:

The casinos are favoring runless shoes more and more. What beats runless shoes?

Right, OTB4L. See why its one of my favorite systems?

When does the casino get exactly the kind of shoe they want?

Right, right after the morning card prep.

See why I like to play in the morning?

Now, why would the casino be favoring a shoe type that is easy to beat?

Because nobody else knows OTB4L except us. And how many are we?

They favor runless because it makes them the most money.

Does that mean you should always play OTB4L?

No! It means you should always check for runless shoes.

Like a table where everyone is losing. Check the toteboard. Is it runless? Probably.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use