Jump to content

System 40 Advanced


Recommended Posts

Ellis,

I dont want to promote another website but that website included beat the casino as a educational tool to use to learn baccarat. It is bettorbaccaratwizard.com You buy a software to download to analyze your different shoes that you have played. It looks great to test out the different systems available. It is $69.95. What do you think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Users

Here's a shoe I just completed with real money at Bet Phoenix. By the time I tuned in there, they were already into nearly the 20th hand. By time I had everything written on my score sheet and was ready to rumble, they were at hand 21. At this point when I start a shoe, it will either be OTB4L or system 4.0. If there are a lot of singles, then it's 40. If there are a number of multiples, I'm going OTB4L. In this case as you can see it started off with multiples so that's how I went. I bet that mode UNLESS I've got some good SAP data that tells me to bet differently. I'm using the dual SAP chart as illustrated by PJ in this room. It just so happens I stayed in OTB4L mode for this whole shoe but I did vary the bets when the SAP indicated it had good data I could bet on. It will usually take a good 20 hands or more before I feel confident about it. If you'll notice, I've got some red or blue circles around the events that the outcomes are matching the SAP. In other words I've got good enough data with my SAP's that I can rely on them to make actual bets which may vary from the OTB4L mode. Once I get a red circle on my SAP chart, it tells me not to bet the count again until it shows me I can rely on it. This shoe had a high of +42 on the last hand and a low at +1 whiich was from the first bet I made at hand 21......Jersey

post-3234-14500261345376_thumb.jpg

Edited by jerseyslim
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Furthermore, we definitely need a thread devoted only to Sys 40A betting strategy choices. I've mentioned the 234 prog before but not the 345. This is a very valuable option and makes a lot of sense.

Think about this: When you lose your 3 bet prog playing standard U1D2 M2, you are automatically down either SIX base bets (123) or half the time, NINE base bets (234). Pretty touch to make up for that loss.

But with a straight 345 with no Mandatory 4, when you lose the entire 3 bet prog you are only down FOUR base bets and it is ALWAYS only 4 base bets. Much more conservative and far easier to make up that loss. FOUR winning bets makes up for a losing prog rather than 6 or 9.

With U1D2 M2 a GREAT start has you up ten in the first col. But with both the 234 and the 345 prog we often found ourselves up 20+ late in the first col.

With U1D2 M2 +20 is a great shoe!

With a simple 345 prog we are already looking at shoes in the 20s, 30s, 40s, and 50s.

Yet your down side risk seems less - down -1, and down -5.

Yet no one in the Baccarat world has ever tried this before.

!

I'm curious...does the 345 progression give us any advantages with net betting? Interesting!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Users
I'm curious...does the 345 progression give us any advantages with net betting? Interesting!!!

That is a seriously interesting question Audionut! It's a little too early here for me to get my head totally around it but, on the face of it, I can't see why not.

When I was experimenting with the 234 vs the 123 a couple of months ago I found that you DON'T have to win most of your base bets for the 234 to produce superior results over the 123 as you would initially think. Gambling Math, (Calculus) can be very deceiving. As a result, gambling books, especially BJ Basic Strategy and Card Counting books are FULL of mathematical errors that GREATLY effect your overall results. Your actual results are far below the results promised making such books scams whether on purpose or design. To demonstrate this:

I used to open all my BJ seminars with what I called the shell game. It's kinda fun. I put a hundred dollar bill under one of 3 overturned cups on the podium. Then I'd ask a member of the audience to pick a cup. When they did, I turned over one of the other 2 cups showing everyone that it was empty. Then I'd ask, Do you want to change your mind? So what do you think? Are they better off to change their mind or does it make no difference???

BTW, the movie 21 started with the exact same shell game which they copied right from my seminars. They got the answer right but the reason wrong.

So what do you guys think and why?

Keith, you are disqualified!

Edited by ECD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Users

Audionut, now that I've got the juices flowing a little, here's what I think about your 345 net bet question: Yes, the 345 would usually outperform the U1D2 M2 prog when net betting. It would make no difference while BOTH progs are in operation, because your table bets would still only be 1 and 2 BUT as soon as you suspend the offending prog after 2 losses the remaining prog would be betting 333333 down a run rather than 121212. So the 345 will outperform on all long runs while producing equal results the rest of the time. Very interesting!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Users
Here's a shoe I just completed with real money at Bet Phoenix. By the time I tuned in there, they were already into nearly the 20th hand. By time I had everything written on my score sheet and was ready to rumble, they were at hand 21. At this point when I start a shoe, it will either be OTB4L or system 4.0. If there are a lot of singles, then it's 40. If there are a number of multiples, I'm going OTB4L. In this case as you can see it started off with multiples so that's how I went. I bet that mode UNLESS I've got some good SAP data that tells me to bet differently. I'm using the dual SAP chart as illustrated by PJ in this room. It just so happens I stayed in OTB4L mode for this whole shoe but I did vary the bets when the SAP indicated it had good data I could bet on. It will usually take a good 20 hands or more before I feel confident about it. If you'll notice, I've got some red or blue circles around the events that the outcomes are matching the SAP. In other words I've got good enough data with my SAP's that I can rely on them to make actual bets which may vary from the OTB4L mode. Once I get a red circle on my SAP chart, it tells me not to bet the count again until it shows me I can rely on it. This shoe had a high of +42 on the last hand and a low at +1 whiich was from the first bet I made at hand 21......Jersey

Jersey, very good job and extremely well reasoned out! You present an excellent argument for retaining OTB4L in the 40A umbrella as an obvious starting system. If you have no information otherwise at a new table, why not start with a neutral system until we see what's really going on.

At Hollywood I really didn't have the no information start up problem. They change cards at 8 AM and their card prep produces reliably choppy shoes. For later on, they have good tote boards. Chop turned into streak after just a couple shoes telling me the machine was set for a fast shuffle. As you can see on the shoes, we tuned into the right system very early in every case. But as soon as the table turned ambiguous I dragged Keith and Ron out of there. Why play tough shoes when we can wait for easy shoes in the morning? We were better off at the bar.

It isn't about how long you play. It's about picking the right time to play and matching the right system to the strongest bias. Why fight city hall. Our BIGGEST advantage is we can choose the shoes we play. The dealer CAN'T.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Users

This one guy who had told us he wanted to be a member the day before walked up to the table on day 2. We were at +36 and he looked the situation over. We were in the middle of a long 212 run and he proclaimed: "It's reliably choppy insn't it." (using our lingo from the previous day) We said absolutely! We had our 3 bets on Opposite when he put a huge bet on Repeat. He lost and walked away highly disgruntled. Go figure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Audionut, now that I've got the juices flowing a little, here's what I think about your 345 net bet question: Yes, the 345 would usually outperform the U1D2 M2 prog when net betting. It would make no difference while BOTH progs are in operation, because your table bets would still only be 1 and 2 BUT as soon as you suspend the offending prog after 2 losses the remaining prog would be betting 333333 down a run rather than 121212. So the 345 will outperform on all long runs while producing equal results the rest of the time. Very interesting!

Ahhhh! Wow! THIS is why I love this board. Where else would you see WINING strategies like this!!! Thanks, Ellis!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Users
Ellis,

I dont want to promote another website but that website included beat the casino as a educational tool to use to learn baccarat. It is bettorbaccaratwizard.com You buy a software to download to analyze your different shoes that you have played. It looks great to test out the different systems available. It is $69.95. What do you think?

Well I looked it over xingbnso and it might make a good practice tool. Cheap too. But most on line casinos provide a free practice mode.

I appreciate the BTC plug but he also plugged BF which I consider a junk site and a haven for known losers but a good source for new BTC members. They cry in each others beer and think winning is impossible. Many of our current members came to us through the BF site and have found here that winning is not only possible but relatively easy once you get away from those ridiculous naysayers and wannabes. Easy competition.

He also plugs the Wizard which I agree with. But the Wizard's site, while correct math, is highly misleading because it does not follow our accepted Baccarat language. Our 4 in a row, for instance, is the Wizard's 3 in a row because it is 3 repeats in a row. So the Wizard's frequency of events table, while correct in his strange lingo, is highly misleading in ours.

For instance, while we say 3 in a rows normally occur every 16 plays he says 3 in a rows occur every 32 plays because what he calls a 3 in a row, the whole Baccarat world calls a 4 in a row. So in common Bac terminology which we invented 30 years ago, he's off by a factor of 100% for the average real world Baccarat Player. Worse, is the fact that the average player has no idea that he is speaking in a totally different language.

Likewise he differentiates between Bank frequencies and Player frequencies and has no average frequencies. Yet we play in average frequencies because we have no Bank only or Player only systems. Highly misleading to the avg player.

Also, The Wizard's statistics are based on continuous play but we play in shoes. For instance you can't have a 20 in a row in the first 19 plays but the Wizard can and does. If one shoe ends in ten Banks and the next shoe begins with ten Banks, that is a Wizard 19 in a row. So his long run statistics end up off by a country mile and highly misleading. This all makes the Wizard's site a good site to stay away from.

Your guy implies that he doesn't use a random gen. but when you look at his wording you realize that he actually does. I don't like the idea of practicing with a RG because RGs, by definition, do not have shuffle induced biases which is exactly what we play. Therefore you cannot accurately test bias systems with a non biased RG. BF makes that same mistake.

I think the only way you can accurately test, or practice is with REAL cards whether you deal your own, play real casino shoes or live games on on line casinos.

Even with a pile of real casino shoes at home, you've taken those shoes out of context of the casino. You have no idea of whether the shoe you are playing came from a Choppy table, a Streaky table or a Neutral table or what time of day it was dealt. Definitely NOT real world.

So, I'm thinking that while his product is cheap, it may very well end up doing you more harm than good.

Edited by ECD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Users

OK you choose cup #2. So I turn over cup #1 and show you its empty and ask you if you want to change your mind? The question is are you better off to change your mind or stick with #2. Can changing your mind affect math?

What you say about on line casinos is unfortunately true. That is why you MUST stick only to live game on line casinos. whether for real play or practice play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Users
Changing mind does affect the math. If you stick to cup #2 we have 1/3 chance to win. Change cup and we have 2/3 chance to win. I think it's called something like Monty hall-problem, remember it from school..=)

Correct Fred. Anybody know WHY?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Users
You originally had a 33% chance to win after one cup was eliminated you have a 50% chance.

Well you would be happy to know that 99% of all math professors asked agree with you. Seems like simple Math. But Father Fred was right:

As soon as you select a cup, the odds of it being the right cup are one in three. We all agree ob that.

Therefore the odds of the other two cups are two in three.

Eventually I'm going to turn over BOTH THE OTHER Two cups so turning over one of them changes no odds in either camp.

But now, in the 2/3s camp you know that one cup is empty so the odds on the other cup are 2/3s while the odds on your first cup remain at 1/3.

So by changing your mind and selecting the only cup in the 2/3s camp it could be doubles your odds of winning from 1/3 to 2/3s.

Don't take my word for this. Try it 100 times on your kitchen table and you'll see I'm exactly right.

So what is the point of all this? The point is that gambling math (Calculus) is not always what it seems. Accepted and obvious gambling math is often wrong. Even in gambling books.

For instance: In a Baccarat game obvious math tells you that the odds against you are 1/4 of comission since you pay commission on 1/4 of the hands on avg. Well 1/4 of 5% commission is 1.250% so that is what casinos advertize. Yet casinos actually make about 26% of your buy in money on avg. So what are your REAL odds? Casinos avoid telling you THAT. But here at BTC, that is exactly what we do - beat the REAL odds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Users
Ellis, Please play this interesting shoe using the latest rules.

B11117153

P3161522

B41111121111113

P31121111

Regards, John

Hmmm, not as difficult as you might think John when you correctly apply System 40 Advanced technology: While this shoe has an overall -2 OR count the OR count actually hits -15 in the 3rd col.

This points directly at our System 40A streak component systems RD1 or F2 and rules out 40 completely. So now the question becomes WHICH streak system? Well, we know that RD1 hates 1's so RD1 is ruled out right off the bat. We also know that F2 LOVES both straight and ZZ runs as well as sporadic 1's and this shoe is chock full of all 3 right from the get go.

Even if you had no clue at the beginning of the shoe it starts with a ZZ run of 5 followed by a straight run of 7. A half way alert player would be onto F2 somewhere during the straight run of 7. But a shoe this streaky does not come out of no where. It is highly likely our player would have been onto F2 even BEFORE this shoe began.

SO, I played it F2 all the way incorporating my new F2 rule: When you switch sides and lose your first bet, switch right back. As it turned out, this rule hurt you as often as it helped you but in the end, you wouldn't care as you will see.

I also played our new 345 prog with a high bet of 5. If I lost the whole prog I simply started over at 3. Hard to get more conservative than that. Exactly as we played Hollywood.

I was pushing a +70 already in the second col with a +69 at play 36 so +70 became my goal. I hit +70 at play 57 and anyone in their right mind would have quit right there with the highest shoe of their life. But if they threw caution to the wind they would hit +78 at play 65 only to drop back to +71 at play 67 where ANYONE would quit.

Are you kidding me? +70?

Did this shoe come out of your Casino Niagara?

And what were the prior shoes like?

BTW at plat 57 where you would certainly quit with +70, your Player Advantage was a record 37.4%.

And those idiot card counters shoot for a half of a percent!

So do you think maybe we've got something with this Sys 40A technology?

Edited by ECD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Users

BTW, in that shoe we actually won our base 3 bet 11 more times than we lost it which accounts for our great success. But that only accounts for 33 units out of 70. The additional 37 units were due to our 345 prog. And of course having such a streaky shoe didn't hurt. But sometimes that is what you get esp. late at night. BTW John, what time of day did you record this shoe?

BTW, I find the math surrounding our 345 prog just as perplexing as the math surrounding the shell game. Our advantage is far greater than it would seem at first glance. It completely solves the problem of a run away prog and puts all the emphasis on selecting the right system in the first place - just as I've been saying for 30 years.

Edited by ECD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Users

While this shoe has an overall -2 OR count the OR count actually hits -15 in the 3rd col.

This points directly at our System 40A streak component systems RD1 or F2 and rules out 40 completely. So now the question becomes WHICH streak system? Well, we know that RD1 hates 1's so RD1 is ruled out right off the bat. We also know that F2 LOVES both straight and ZZ runs as well as sporadic 1's and this shoe is chock full of all 3 right from the get go.

Even if you had no clue at the beginning of the shoe it starts with a ZZ run of 5 followed by a straight run of 7. A half way alert player would be onto F2 somewhere during the straight run of 7. But a shoe this streaky does not come out of no where. It is highly likely our player would have been onto F2 even BEFORE this shoe began.

here is were I get lost

1 were can I find this F2 system?

2 this wast taken from the 40 manual

A - OR count means we start with one of our two streak systems. This will usually be RD1, 2 or 3 but in low twos or low 3s we can start with F2 or F3 respectively. In a Neutral OR count (hovering 0) we can start with System 40N or OTB4L.

so does it take a -8 count to make use use one of the streak systems?

3 does the 40 advanced replace the need for the 40N part of the system?

4 do we really need to change systems I thought our sap chart would keep us out of trouble?

Edited by MrEvo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Users

Mr Evo, the F2 rules are here someplace and will also be included in the new 40A manual. But since I made a change I'll repeat them right here: MVS pay attention to how I played it because I would like you to post that shoe.

F2 rules (Follow the 2).

Start at play 2 directly under the first circle if you already know its a good F2 table. (MVS that is how I started.)

Or start under the first 2 in a row.

Or start anywhere on the side with the most recent two in a row. (Depends on if you are starting with F2 or switching to F2)

Change to the other side when it has a 2 in a row. But if you lose the first bet on the new side change sides again.

Otherwise bet under all two in a rows and stay on that side until there is a 2 on the other side.

Bet any progression such as U1D2 M2 but we have done particularly well with the 345. That is it.

Keep your progression aggression relative to the quality of the shoe. You can even flat bet F2

OK the new double switch rule makes the losing pattern a 2 on the other side followed by a 1, 2 rather than a 2 on the wrong side followed by a 3. I figure that the fact that we play F2 in streaky shoes only make the chance of the 212 pattern starting on the wrong side less likely than the 2,3 pattern starting on the wrong side.

Both the 2,1,2 and 2,3 starting on the wrong side losing patterns occur at the same frequency of once every two shoes or once every 128 plays but I figure the 212 pattern is the less likely in streaky shoes.

F2 likes streak both straight and ZZ.

F2 likes high minus OR and OT counts.

F2 likes sporadic (single) ones as well as multiple 1's.

F2 likes the continuous 21212 pattern when you are on the 2 side.

F2 likes strong sided shoes. (The shoe favors one side for long periods)

RD1 also likes streak but only in the form of straight runs and straight runs following straight runs.

When the table is streaky (high minus OR and or OT counts) you will usually be selecting F2. You would only select RD1 when you see a lack of 1's and straight runs following straight runs. But I have played Vegas when every casino was straight runs following straight runs. Go figure.

OK, MVS would you please post that shoe played to the above rules with a continuous 345 prog starting at 3 on play 2. You will hit +70 at play 57 where you could put a single hash mark to denote an obvious quit point. Put a double hash at play 67 to denote a MUST quit point. (+71) but play to the end. Your final score is 64 if I made no mistakes.

You will see that col 1 is Bank all the way except play 20

Col 2 is Player except play 39.

Col 3 is Bank except pays 41, 42, 58 and 59.

Col 4 is Player except play 68.

Thanks!

Guys, You'll see what happens when the new F2 rules hit their losing pattern at the end of the shoe. This should demonstrate why we almost never play a shoe to the last play.

BTW guys note that there is nothing particularly strange about this shoe. The final OR count is -2. The longest straight and ZZ runs are both 7. The shoe has no 3s which means that Sys 40 would also do very well.

Edited by ECD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use