My System

[John12345]

I was working on a system and then a major flaw was pointed out so i went back and fixed it up. Here it is. I will have an example shoe at the end.

Systems Used:

1) OTB4L

2) TB4L

3) Neutral System

4) OTR

Progression: 2,2,2 program

-Lose the first bet, then bet 3 units, win or lose go back down to 2 units {2,3, 2}

-Lose the first and second bet, then bet 3 units on the third bet. {2,2,3}

-Win both first and second bet, bet 2 units on the third bet. {2,2,2}

If at anytime you win all 3, 222 bets then go into exploit mode. Continue betting the winning side until you have a loss.

O/T Count:

OBTB4L and TB4L. Subtract 1 for each TB4L and add 1 for each OTB4L cap both at +/-4

Keep a SAP count

OTB4L:

If the OT count is +1 or higher Play OTB4L for at least 3 plays following the 222 program. If you win all 3 plays the continue in exploit mode. If you lose at least 1 play then begin another 3 plays in OTB4L mode

TB4L:

If the OT count is -1 or higher than follow TB4L for at least 3 plays. Same rules apply as OTB4L

Neutral:

If you hit +1/0/-1 in the 3-4 times in the last 10-12 plays then go into neutral mode. The mechancial way of playing neutral is to follow the last decision. But I tend to look at more than that. You stay on neutral for at least 3 plays following the 222 program. If you win all 3 bets stay in neutral exploit.

OTR

If you see 3 confirmed streaky events go into OTR mode. Bet OTR until you get 2 losses then figure out what mode to go into

Example shoe High +51 finish +49

tb4l_otb4L.xls

Edited August 11, 2010 by John12345
Had to fix all of this

[jerseyslim]

I would think, if I'm understanding what you're doing, should the disparity between the sides became let's say 10 or more. Now let's say further in the shoe things are starting to even out whereby it was no longer +10 bur rather near even. Wouldn't you be betting on the wrong side for some time having a bunch of losers. That's the problem I see if I understand what you're doing.

[jerseyslim]

In your two examples, it appears the side that was dominant, stayed dominant, so it played right into your system. However, if there was a huge swing the other way, you'd be on a long losing streak. Once again, that's if I'm understanding what your are proposing but I could be way off base on my interpretation.

[John12345]

yes, I pointed this out as well in my first post. The only thing that we would have have to is maybe reset the count or cap the count I think.

[John12345]

actually it might make more sense to play OTB4L and TB4L rather than disparity. This way we don't have to deal with losing to the opposite side. This would mean that we would need an O/T count which I would probably cap at +4/-4

[John12345]

i fixed the entire thing. Go up to Post #1

Edited August 11, 2010 by John12345

[John12345]

This shoe finished +15 with a high of +24 there was a moment when I when I started OTR late. I do not go into OTR until I complete my 3 bets of whichever side I was on.

ot_n_2.xls

[steve6969]

Progression: 2,2,2 program

-Lose the first bet, then bet 3 units, win or lose go back down to 2 units {2,3, 2}

-Lose the first and second bet, then bet 3 units on the third bet. {2,2,3}

-Win both first and second bet, bet 2 units on the third bet. {2,2,2}

for your 2nd rule, "-Lose the first and second bet, then bet 3 units on the third bet. {2,2,3}" ...

i think it might be a typo ...

should it be: "-Win the first bet and lose the second bet, then bet 3 units on the third bet. {2,2,3}"?

(because if you "lose the first and second bet," by your 1st rule, the bets will be {2,3,2}")

(i think there were a few betting errors in your first spreadsheet, then)

also ...

If you see 3 confirmed streaky events go into OTR mode. Bet OTR until you get 2 losses then figure out what mode to go into

do you mean "if you see a confirmed 3-in-a-row"?

("3 confirmed streaky events" sounds like 3 runs of 4+s, like 454 etc.)

Edited August 11, 2010 by steve6969

[steve6969]

i tried using your system with a shoe which i played at horseshoe in indiana last monday:

B2111142251

P11115821

B1214211211211

P3141121

with your system i lost -11u at the end, with a high of +9u and low of -15u.

the high score occurred during the back-to-back streak of 58 (T & OTR)

but mostly i was struggling when 1s and 2s are high in either mode (T earlier in the shoe, O later on)

at the tail it was in O mode but there was just the right smattering of 1s 2s 3s and 4s to really do damage

i tried playing it as if i were at the table and not trying to "look ahead" to see what i "should" do

well maybe you can play it better

Edited August 11, 2010 by steve6969

[John12345]

for your 2nd rule, "-Lose the first and second bet, then bet 3 units on the third bet. {2,2,3}" ...

i think it might be a typo ...

should it be: "-Win the first bet and lose the second bet, then bet 3 units on the third bet. {2,2,3}"?

(because if you "lose the first and second bet," by your 1st rule, the bets will be {2,3,2}")

(i think there were a few betting errors in your first spreadsheet, then)

also ...

do you mean "if you see a confirmed 3-in-a-row"?

("3 confirmed streaky events" sounds like 3 runs of 4+s, like 454 etc.)

it actually should read this:

if you win the first, and lose the second then bet 3 units on the third. Thus 223.

As far as OTR is concerned I mean 3 events. So something like 323 322 would count. Unless otb4L has a really strong count then I stay with that.

[John12345]

i tried using your system with a shoe which i played at horseshoe in indiana last monday:

B2111142251

P11115821

B1214211211211

P3141121

with your system i lost -11u at the end, with a high of +9u and low of -15u.

the high score occurred during the back-to-back streak of 58 (T & OTR)

but mostly i was struggling when 1s and 2s are high in either mode (T earlier in the shoe, O later on)

at the tail it was in O mode but there was just the right smattering of 1s 2s 3s and 4s to really do damage

i tried playing it as if i were at the table and not trying to "look ahead" to see what i "should" do

well maybe you can play it better

Thanks for sharing. Maybe all of those shoes that I played were just luck. I am starting to get some losses as well.

[beeegeeb]

WOW ,from hand #9 thru until hand #45 lplaying Maverick pure it was F2 all the way from decision #10 playing banker.At #46 and #47 either bail or switch.I probably would have bailed with a pleaseant little profit.Nice shoe sir,just my 2 cents.

Maverick crushes choppy and streaky shoes,too cool !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[ECD]

WOW ,from hand #9 thru until hand #45 lplaying Maverick pure it was F2 all the way from decision #10 playing banker.At #46 and #47 either bail or switch.I probably would have bailed with a pleaseant little profit.Nice shoe sir,just my 2 cents.

Maverick crushes choppy and streaky shoes,too cool !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Was it Maverick or F2 that earned you those units?

[ECD]

Thanks for sharing. Maybe all of those shoes that I played were just luck. I am starting to get some losses as well.

Nevertheless John, the betting system portion seemed quite interesting don't you think?

[ECD]

Switching systems mid shoe has always been a damned if you do, damned if you don't type of dilemma.

When you switch after a certain number of losses, half the time you switch right when you would have hit.

Half the time the last 7 plays is meaningful and half the time it means the exact opposite. The same is true if you pick any other number of plays.

One observation: If you lost two out of 3 bets with your current system, it's exact opposite system would have won 2 out of 3. Where that gets us I don't know. Just thinking out loud. Does it give anyone any ideas?

[ECD]

i tried using your system with a shoe which i played at horseshoe in indiana last monday:

B2111142251

P11115821

B1214211211211

P3141121

with your system i lost -11u at the end, with a high of +9u and low of -15u.

I can't help but notice that System 40 with 3s culprit would have killed that shoe since there was only one 3.

[jerseyslim]

Possibly stay with the system you started with and when you run into trouble, stop the progressions, flat bet, and don't bet anymore until things straighten out. Just a thought.

Switching systems mid shoe has always been a damned if you do, damned if you don't type of dilemma.

When you switch after a certain number of losses, half the time you switch right when you would have hit.

Half the time the last 7 plays is meaningful and half the time it means the exact opposite. The same is true if you pick any other number of plays.

One observation: If you lost two out of 3 bets with your current system, it's exact opposite system would have won 2 out of 3. Where that gets us I don't know. Just thinking out loud. Does it give anyone any ideas?

[ECD]

BTW, I've mentioned that With system 40 that when I go OTR with 3s culprit I only stay OTR for 2 winning bets

and when I go OTR with 4s culprit I only stay OTR for 1 winning bet

And when I go OTR with 2s culprit I stay OTR until I lose.

There is a method to that madness that will reveal itself to you.

But I don't think I've mentioned what to do when you came OFF the run and lose your first bet.

In that case I go off, on, off, on until the run ends.

That protects us from very long runs like the 8 in a row in Steve's shoe.

Had we used that procedure for the 8 in a row in Steve's shoe, we would have gained units on it or on any run longer than 8. We do even better on the more common 7 in a rows.

And it satisfies the rule: Never be found betting against a long run.

Edited August 12, 2010 by ECD

[ECD]

Possibly stay with the system you started with and when you run into trouble, stop the progressions, flat bet, and don't bet anymore until things straighten out. Just a thought.

Right, but I'm trying to FIRST sttempt to avoid getting into trouble in the first place as much as possible.

Switch when you lose 2 in a row or 2 out of 3 such as a LWL. If that fails, then stop until you reevaluate.

[jerseyslim]

But there's that switch again after 2 in a row or 3. I thought you wanted to avoid switching because that was what originally you were looking to avoid since that's when we start zigging when we should have been zagging. LOL

Right, but I'm trying to FIRST sttempt to avoid getting into trouble in the first place as much as possible.

Switch when you lose 2 in a row or 2 out of 3 such as a LWL. If that fails, then stop until you reevaluate.

[ECD]

But there's that switch again after 2 in a row or 3. I thought you wanted to avoid switching because that was what originally you were looking to avoid since that's when we start zigging when we should have been zagging. LOL

Right again! The two concepts work out opposed to each other. Probably best to stay with the MAIN bias of the shoe and use no bets when the shoe goes contrary. There have been too many posts about I stuck with F2 or I stuck with RDH or OTB4L or whatever and did very well.

I think that is the weakness of Maverick. It doesn't isolate the MAIN bias or therefore the STRONGEST system and fall back on it when in trouble. The last 7 plays is fine if there is no main bias to fall back on but there usually IS a main bias and the last 7 plays can lead you away from it instead of back to it.

[jerseyslim]

That's why to me personally, ADOT within the system itself provides for a switch, but it's still within the system. It's switching between different systems that I have a problem with.

Right again! The two concepts work out opposed to each other. Probably best to stay with the MAIN bias of the shoe and use no bets when the shoe goes contrary. There have been too many posts about I stuck with F2 or I stuck with RDH or OTB4L or whatever and did very well.

I think that is the weakness of Maverick. It doesn't isolate the MAIN bias or therefore the STRONGEST system and fall back on it when in trouble. The last 7 plays is fine if there is no main bias to fall back on but there usually IS a main bias and the last 7 plays can lead you away from it instead of back to it.

[jerseyslim]

Steve and John.........as per the shoe Steve listed using John's method having a loss of 11 units. I ran the same shoe using ADOT and I was never more than a -1 unit in the hole and by hand 46 was up +15 units which is my stop win. I really like this ADOT. To me, no point in reinventing the wheel.

i tried using your system with a shoe which i played at horseshoe in indiana last monday:

B2111142251

P11115821

B1214211211211

P3141121

with your system i lost -11u at the end, with a high of +9u and low of -15u.

the high score occurred during the back-to-back streak of 58 (T & OTR)

but mostly i was struggling when 1s and 2s are high in either mode (T earlier in the shoe, O later on)

at the tail it was in O mode but there was just the right smattering of 1s 2s 3s and 4s to really do damage

i tried playing it as if i were at the table and not trying to "look ahead" to see what i "should" do

well maybe you can play it better

[John12345]

I find that this method works best if you pay attention to the OT count. sometimes you need to really stop to wait to see where it is going. I am actually not too interested in this system anymore as I have found something that works out better for me..here it is if anyone wants to try it out:

I have been trying to come up with something that takes disparity into consideration. Sometimes there are periods within a shoe where staying with one side is the way to go, sometimes this even happes for an entire shoe. Then we also have those shoes that stay within a 50/50 range. I spent awhile playing a system that I called 3D. I took the total disparity and the disparity of the last 3 plays into account, so I had 2 disparity counts going on. If the total disparity is greater than 3, then I bet for whichever side occurred more often in the last 3 plays. I am not sure why I choose greater than 3, my logic (which could be wrong) is that the side would be starting to pull ahead. But I also included the last 3 plays so i would not have to deal with getting on the wrong side of the side that is trying to catch back up, so it still gave me a chance in those 50/50 shoes. If the disparity is less than 3 then I bet with the minority of the last 3 plays. I bet every 3 plays, this includes the last decision that you bet. So you make your bet then wait for 2 extra plays then make another bet. I used the Up1 D2 prog and it worked alright for me. but then I started to notice something. When I had a loss, the decision that I was betting for was usually the next outcome. So to take advantage of this trend I began to use a 111 program. If I hit my bet then I stop and wait for another 3 plays. If I lose the first bet then I bet 2 units. If that bet wins then I stop and wait 3 plays. If I lose the first and second bet then I make the 1 unit bet. Win or lose I wait 3 plays.

I added a 5 streak rule which adds betting every single decision when you see a run of 5 and you get until the run ends. then wait 3 decisions and go back to the disparity program

I added a 3 Run Event rule that says when you see 3 streaky events in a row such as 222, 333, 323, anything like that and more, you bet with the runs to continue using a 1,2 progression until you lose. 2 bets then wait for another 3 plays and either go with the disparity system, 5 streak program if it applies or 3 run event program

I have been able to use a -6 stop-loss which is somewhat small for the system and some of my wins have been as high as +19. I am not too sure if it is long-term yet, but this is something that has been working well for me. If anyone would like more info on it then feel free to ask.

But to sum things up the main systems that I am using in this system include

-The disparity system

-5 streak program

-3 streaky event program using a 1,2 prog

-a zz program could even be added

I am not a fan of betting every single decision so I don't really like doing that unless I have to. This system has a mix of betting every decision and waiting which I like.

Edited August 12, 2010 by John12345
SPELLING!!!!

[jerseyslim]

Here's how I played Steve's shoe with ADOT. It may be a little messy in some areas. This is my first shot at importing an image so here goes. I know I made a mistake or two like missing the ZZ's at 21 but everything worked out all right anyhow. Oh and one other thing, when it's a repeat I use +1 and an opposite -1. I just naturally went this way since in my mind an opposite is a negative and a repeat is a positive. Don't ask why but I kept making mistakes doing it the other way. Screwed up brain I guess. After the shoe gets going I don't record the + and -. I let the losses determine what mode I should be in after that.

Edited August 12, 2010 by jerseyslim