Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The wizard of odds

http://wizardofodds.com/gambling/bettingsystems.html

says that it is impossible to beat the casino playing a negative expectation game.

Does anyone here have proof that anything works to beat baccarat or any other game?

Proof to me is:

A verifiable simulation showing a win rate of at least 1 unit per shoe for 100,000 shoes or more.

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone here have proof that anything works to beat baccarat or any other game?

Proof to me is:

A verifiable simulation showing a win rate of at least 1 unit per shoe for 100,000 shoes or more.

Thanks

Dweezel7,

Here we go again. This is all sounding very familiar.

Anyway, "does anyone have proof" .......

Well, I've seen a lot of guys/gals who are showing much more than +1 for all of their shoes, including me. But I doubt any of them has played 100,000 shoes to make it legitimate I guess.

Pretty much everyone and their brother agrees that a strictly mechanical approach to a negative expectation game is doomed. No surprise there. Heck, everybody who has ever run an Excel spreadsheet over hundreds of thousands of hands will verify that. It's old news.

That only leaves something that helps you with the shoe that's staring you in the face. If one loses 99,990 shoes and wins big in the remaining 10 to show a profit of +1, does that mean it's a good play? No, of course not, so using the 100,000 shoes with the +1 average is not a good gauge I shouldn't think.

What's a good measure to see if anything is working? Well, some kind of "year to date" measurement would be nice. How about a running total over a few years? That should at least give you some idea of the direction your system play is going, right?

As to proof? Somebody could run a million hand simulation showing a winning system but if I can't play it, it's a pointless exhibition of computer skills. (There is a guy on BaccaratForum who has done just that, but nobody has tried to play it for real).

In my case, the "proof" I need to see is what my gambling bankroll is doing from month to month. Easy enough to plot, instant gratification when you look at it and if you're in a downward spiral (losing) it will be painfully obvious in more ways than one.

So, I really don't know what to offer you in regards to "proof" of system play. There are several out there that appear to be working just fine for a lot of people but as you've seen in a lot of the forums, anyone actually expressing that fact (hey guys, I'm on a winning streak) is immediately blasted as a liar, cheat, scammer, hoodlum, thief, crook, shill or whatever the current flavor of the month is for people who win in a loser's forum.

As I have no ego to bruise and really don't care what 99% of the odd forums seem to think of me, there's no longer any reason to post up the "proof" that so many are desperate for. Most of them won't believe it anyway, so there's no point in posting it up! That may account for the current lack of "real winning" stories instead of the make believe stuff that pock marks the few, remaining baccarat forums.

Hmm, I've gotten long winded here.

You've seen me on other forums and we've carried on conversations in the past so you know that I''m not out to impress anyone nor am I about to sway anyone's opinion, so I don't try.

On your original question of "proof"? It's up to you to set what you believe to be a realistic "proof goal" of some sort and try to find it.

I did, and I'm one happy camper and I got my start right here, so this is where I spend a lot of time gathering more ideas and "proving" that this is the solution for me.

In closing, I hope you find your 100,000 +1 avg simulation program. I'll settle for live data from real tables with a profit potential vs session loss that is acceptable to my personal limits.

It's been good talking with you again!

MVS

Edited by MVSeahog
My spull chukker let me dawn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The wizard of odds

http://wizardofodds.com/gambling/bettingsystems.html

says that it is impossible to beat the casino playing a negative expectation game.

Does anyone here have proof that anything works to beat baccarat or any other game?

Proof to me is:

A verifiable simulation showing a win rate of at least 1 unit per shoe for 100,000 shoes or more.

Thanks

Well The wizard is an excellent mathematician when it comes to random numbers but he is clueless when it comes to the inner workings of casinos and the technology of casino game presentation. Neither Baccarat or BJ are random games. All the wizard need do to prove this is to try and explain how a casino retains 26% of the drop in Baccarat. If the game is 50/50 for the players it is also 50/50 for the casinos. But the 1.25% commission does not begin to explain 26% of the drop if the game is, in fact random and 50/50. In further demonstation of this The Horseshoe LV dropped commission altogether for a time until other casinos complained. This didn't even put a dent in their profits. How could this be in a random 50/50 game? Only one way: the game is not random. The opposite of random is "predictable". If the game is predictable to any degree it is beatable.

You can easily prove this to yourself beyond question by touring any casino with a good number of Baccarat tables. Check each table at the point of shoe end but before commission. If the game were random, overall the players should be about 50/50 winners vs losers. You will soon see that this is decidedly not the case. Over time you will see about 99% losers before commission, very often the whole table. But if the game were random it should be just as hard to lose a hand as win a hand. This is simply not the case as can be seen by even the most casual observer. If the cards are not random they are biased. Biased cards can be beat by a knowledgeable player.

I just completed a trip with another BTC member. Our actual 17 casino cards are posted on the private forum. We played NOR and averaged 12.5 units per shoe. We were playing factory pre-shuffled cards at $25 tables. NOR is a method of playing biases. We NEVER bet more than 5 units. NOBODY could do that against random cards.

Since it is quantity that impresses you, one of our NOR players recently posted his NOR results after a year of full time play on our private forum. He was a very consistent winner and made more money than the avg Doctor or Lawyer gets paid. This would be decidedly impossible against random cards.

In BJ in the 60s Edward O Thorp designed true Basic Strategy where all 13 cards were given a different value. He mathematically proved that original Basic Strategy had a player advantage of 5% in random cards. Yet his player Kenny Uston could only achieve a 1% advantage playing perfect original Basic Strategy. Did this prove Thorp's math wrong? No! Later computer tests proved Thorp's math perfect. Therefore, Thorp proved that casino BJ is NOT random and therefore biased.

I used the biased condition of the cards to beat BJ playing AC full time for 3 years W/O a single losing day. One of my students is doing the exact same thing in Vegas the exact same way as we speak.

Your 100,000 shoe tests are a complete waste of time and prove nothing. You have taken the shoes out of context of the casino. You might show a .06% advantage in one test only to show a -.06% in the next 100,000. Standard Deviation. If you know how to beat biases, you will know it well within 100 in casino shoes. I've never seen performance statistics change significantly after 40 shoes and I've been conducting such tests for 30 years. BTW, I play both Bac and BJ to about a 15% player advantage while card counters struggle to achieve 0.5%. Oh, and I frequently play with my students.

I don't post much here on the public forum because I consider it pretty much a waste of time fighting all the misinformation, superstition and plain old wives tales surrounding both BJ and Baccarat. But stay tuned and I'll post my trip report and shoe commentary from the private forum along with student Q&A here on the public forum for all to see. That will give you some idea of how and why NOR is the very best way Baccarat can be played. Then you can decide for yourself.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That type of proof in a totally random game does not exist e.g computer simulation. What you need to investigate with statistical analysis is assignable cause variation instead of regurgitating the old school train of thought by people who rarely if ever play the game. If you can't win or the guys you hang with can't win, it's because they don't understand how to. This is painfully obvious by the statement you made. You think this is the end all be all to analysis, you have not even etched the surface. This is what we teach you and we know. Not to mention 1 unit average per shoe over the life of a random game would be proof of nothing even in a random game.

I suggest you investigate

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common-cause_and_special-cause

You can tell the winners and honest players by how many times they admit they lost 
not by how many times they say they won.

Need Information Messenger

https://m.me/beatthecasinodotcom

司奇士

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is Baccarat, in fact, a negative expectation game? In Poker we pay the casino to deal the cards. Does that make Poker negative expectation?

In Baccarat we pay the casino 1.25% of our bets to deal the game. Why don't we also throw in the gas money we paid to get to the casino as well as our tips? If you flip a coin you win half your hands long term. Think your brain can beat a coin flip? Only if you know what you are doing and why. Most players haven't a clue. THEY can't beat the game so they declare it unbeatable. Most people can't hit a golf ball either. Does that make the game unbeatable? Somebody better tell Tiger. The fact is the more you study and practice BOTH games the luckier you get. But you need a qualified teacher.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well there is this method that I've been testing for fun when I don't feel like making any money. It produces 2.43 units per shoe over 740 shoes so far. 2.43 is peanuts though I'd have to play $5000 units to even want to waste my time with something so little.

My only suggestion to you dweezel7 just give up now. Your mind already believes that this doesn't work. Though wizard of odds is a smart guy, the only person you need to listen to is yourself. There are thousands of people to beat the casinos every day weather it be in baccarat, black jack, craps, roulette you name it they do it. Everyone has a different method and a different style of play. I used to be like you thinking this kind of stuff doesn't work based on the math. But the math only takes you so far. Take craps for an instance, I'm sure you've heard of dice control. Is it possible? yes, I truely believe it is. Do others believe me when I say it is possible? no. can I prove it to them that its possible? no. Why? because I can't do it myself. But if you talk to Dominic LoRiggio he will show you that with simple physics that it is possible and show you how to "dominate" the craps table with it. His casino alias is "the dominator"and the "golden arm" are just some of the nicknames this man as earned through the years because of this.

If there is a simulation that could prove Dominic's methods could be replicated then the sky would fall down. He also teaches money management, and playing on both sides of the table (in craps that would be pass/don't pass) that you need to use when you're playing with dice control. What you're asking for is literally an impossibility, I have only seen it done once in my entire gaming life and that is the MIT blackjack team. Heres the real kicker though, the original documents were all destroyed. NO ONE knows what it is that they were exactly playing that could prove that they would have a 0.5%-1.5% edge over the casino in 100 million hands. and unfortunately in this day and age unless you find someone who has the will power to do that much testing you'll never see the results that you're looking for especially when 1 mistake means losing that 0.5%-1.5% edge. I recall being at a seminar with Mike and Semyon both members of the very original team and this is what they teach can they prove it? no they can't they don't have the simulations that the very original team leader had done. They took his "word" for it and made millions. Documents that could prove a method to that extent is worth 100s of millions on the market. Teams like BTC, B5 and my personal team BLG are all founded on methodologies over the short term play, BEG is another team much like MIT that play for a long term statistical advantage but instead of blackjack they play for Baccarat, if thats what you really looking for then look for a person named Zuan in the Macau casinos. but be warned now if you can't stomach a 64 unit bet then you should just quit BEG plays a limited marty progression, not to mention you'll need millions in order to roll with them. I've seen them drop over 300k on a single bet without flinching, I would be hiding behind the chair praying for dear life.

Inorder for me to be a part of thier team I would have to pay 100k into thier pooled bankroll that I would never see again. BEG players are classified as "whales" to major gaming corporations because they fall into the category of highrollers that could take a big cut out of thier bottom line or increase thier bottom line with weeks worth of profits.

The wizard of odds

http://wizardofodds.com/gambling/bettingsystems.html

says that it is impossible to beat the casino playing a negative expectation game.

Does anyone here have proof that anything works to beat baccarat or any other game?

Proof to me is:

A verifiable simulation showing a win rate of at least 1 unit per shoe for 100,000 shoes or more.

Thanks

Edited by KIDDO
more info on BEG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dice control? Now that's something that could easily be proven, yet no one has.

That would be because it's bullshit.

OK guys, you have found the "secret to riches" by beating the casino. Since you are so good at this, why don't you challenge yourselves and take a experienced but losing player and turn him into a lean mean money machine?

Teruya took a chance and challenged players to "get off their asses" and join his program for $1,000. He guaranteed their success. Not one participant make thier $1,000 back and Teruya fought the credit card chargebacks like the professional sociopath he is.

I have a friend that took the GOYA challenge and was dicked around by Teruya for 2 months til he final forced Mark to refund his $1,000.

My friend is dedicated and got little help from anyone. Get him making $1,000 a day and you will have something.

Otherwise, you are just blowing in the wind with claims that few can verify.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I win just over 65% of the hands I bet and I play approximately 56% of the hands in a shoe. I make 9 units per shoe on average and never less than 3 or 4. I have played hundreds of shoes where I only get 5 or 6 hands wrong and I've recorded over 2,000,000 hands of my own live casino play.

If I use a progressive bet on losses, my net units per shoe are much higher, but there is no point, since I've already turned a negative expectation game into one with a 15% player advantage by FLAT-betting. As a result, I never need to carry a large bankroll and I never have to stress over making big bets near the end of a shoe (as in most progressive betting strategies).

Imagine how it feels to successfully flat-bet and win, while all around you other players are suffering through gut-wrenching swings in their bankrolls (usually going broke, in the end).

The funny thing, is that the crazier the board 'pattern' looks, the better I do. When no one can figure out which way to bet, I am usually over 80%. Everyone comes to me when they're stuck 4 or 5 grand, asking me to help them get their money back. I help a lot of people but I never teach anyone how I actually do it.

People ask me all the time if they can pay me to teach them, but I really don't see the point. I always question those who make wild claims in order to sell a 'system' because what makes sense to me, is that if you have a winning system, you'll likely make more money using it than selling it.

At one point, I made my program available to a number of players online, with the promise that they would send me 10% of their winnings when they hit $50,000. Unfortunately, those people all received a million dollar gift from me and never sent a dime. That pretty much killed my philanthropic mind-set.

If you're ever in my neck of the woods, I'd be happy to let you watch me play and you're always welcome to match my bets (can't stop anyone from placing a bet, right?).

Good Hunting

The greatest thing about Baccarat, is the fact that you're never affected by anything any OTHER player does; you are in total control of your wager and decision-making strategy. This separates it from every other game in the casino, along with the fact that you do not need to play every hand.

Most people and ALL casinos, believe the game cannot be beaten and that card counting does not apply, but the game CAN be beaten and the cards CAN be counted, using a very simple math formula. It took me several months and $140,000 to figure it out, but I have been winning ever since (I always joke that I was half way to my first million before I realized I was going the wrong way).

No one lives long enough to get rich slowly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dice control? Now that's something that could easily be proven, yet no one has.

That would be because it's bullshit.

Not my game but I'm not so sure you are right. I've heard from reliable sources that there are those who can and have beaten the game.

OK guys, you have found the "secret to riches" by beating the casino. Since you are so good at this, why don't you challenge yourselves and take a experienced but losing player and turn him into a lean mean money machine?

Right, that is what we do here and we have many successes. One is at $3000 /day and updates me weekly.

Teruya took a chance and challenged players to "get off their asses" and join his program for $1,000. He guaranteed their success. Not one participant make thier $1,000 back and Teruya fought the credit card chargebacks like the professional sociopath he is.

Mark jumped the gun. He was merely a 2 year student himself. But I know for a fact some have done well playing his way. I see you don't speak of them.

I have a friend that took the GOYA challenge and was dicked around by Teruya for 2 months til he final forced Mark to refund his $1,000.

2 months? So he demanded his money back in what, 2 weeks? What was he looking for, a miricle? I doubt he knew how to properly fill out his score card that quick.

My friend is dedicated and got little help from anyone. Get him making $1,000 a day and you will have something.

You call THAT dedicated??? I think you need to take up something far simpler than beating casinos. Your idea of "dedicated" and mine are two entirely different things.

Otherwise, you are just blowing in the wind with claims that few can verify.

Right, "few" can. Few have the dedication. But those who do CAN verify.

Look dweezel, this is not for you. You would never have the required confidence in your teacher - Even after you watched him win. It takes hard work and practice with REAL dedication.

I'm not responsible for what Teruya teaches. He ran from here half baked. As a result, His system is flawed. It doesn't cover neutral shoes. But that's his business, not mine. NOR recognizes that about a third of all shoes will be neutral. In this month's trip, in the 17 shoes I played, 1/3 were choppy, 1/3 were streaky and 1/3 were neutral. I beat them all except 1 playing NOR right out of the book. You could be doing that too. But you'd rather waste your time arguing. Now THAT is something you are good at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dunwerken, nice post as usual. I just noticed today when I checked due to the PM you sent me that my reply to you on the BJ forum got lost somewhere in computer land. Sorry. I'll go back today and reconstruct it. Sounds to me like you are playing Bac similar to our SAP method which also requires a count of sorts. Many of our members also flat bet that method and those who don't never go beyond 2 units.

Again, I'm not so sure we can mathematically call Bac a negative expectation game just because we pay them to deal the cards. But that is just semantics. 65% is an excellent hands won rate. Keep up the good work!

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baccarat Hall of Fame Member

Dweezy-

Get with the program, if you want to be THE ONE everyone looks to at the Bacc tables to follow...

You paid your dues to be a Junior Member. Best $50/month you ever spent!

If you just take a few hours to practice a few of the systems, figure out which one you like, and then apply it, you will make your money like the rest of us...

Day in, day out...you will almost always go home a winner... And even on those days you have to stick with your stop loss and go home feeling like the weakling of the 3LittlePigs clan, 'MAN-UP' and go back tomorrow to see just what a difference a day will make!

You will not win every shoe :(

Cannot quit at your "stop-win" ( you won your shoe goal...get out!)? or, No stop loss? You will "net" even less $$. :(

Not convinced of your own abilities and cannot play at least 10 shoes on any system you choose, just to prove you will win net/net after commission and including shoes you have to "bail" from due to your stop loss? :(

Still want to "blame everyone" for being some kind of 'scammer'? :(

Just try it... you will soon join BTC for life ( way cheaper than the monthly dues...) :) :) :) :) :)

I wish you only the best...there is no magic, the casinos are operated by a bunch of professionals with really deep pockets, and they spend their time figuring out how to find more self-doubters like The Dweeze!

Don't give in, but DO find a system on BTC you like, and for sure if you obey your stop-win ( quit while you are comfortably ahead) and stop-loss objectives, you will come back a winner...all of us here are hoping to hear the good news you will soon be posting...

Best of luck to you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK guys, you have found the "secret to riches" by beating the casino. Since you are so good at this, why don't you challenge yourselves and take a experienced but losing player and turn him into a lean mean money machine?

I think this forum already has done that, many times over. Uh, they did it with me! Evidently you would like somebody to do this for YOU I think.

Teruya took a chance and challenged players to "get off their asses" and join his program for $1,000. He guaranteed their success. Not one participant make thier $1,000 back and Teruya fought the credit card chargebacks like the professional sociopath he is.

That's not correct and you know it. In fact, I believe we've had this same basic conversation a few months ago when you were fighting over on the Maverick side too. I can point to 4 people who DID finish the challenge, albeit quietly. On the chargebacks, I'm sure there were a few but I'm not privvy to that information at all.

I have a friend that took the GOYA challenge and was dicked around by Teruya for 2 months til he final forced Mark to refund his $1,000.

And everyone on the Maverick forum knows why he got his money back. You didn't seem to mention that though.

My friend is dedicated and got little help from anyone. Get him making $1,000 a day and you will have something.

Nope. I'd veto him in a heartbeat because I know who it is and why he's a consistent loser.

Otherwise, you are just blowing in the wind with claims that few can verify.

Your mind is made up. You are firmly convinced that nobody can win in a casino but you appear to continue to strike out against those that do for some reason. There's nothing anyone can do until you, yourself, are convinced it can be done.

I really don't know what more to add. We've gone over this at Maverick's place where you asked the same questions and got basically the same answers.

I think one of your big complaints was that nobody was posting losing shoes, only winning ones. Well, there's a reason for that I think. Since you've left, there are losing shoes, and commentary, posted with continuing work.

You seem to be looking for a "one system kills all shoes" type of thing, and that's just not out there, at least not that I can see. Mav loses shoes, Sys40 loses shoes and any of the other good system plays lose. It happens. Deal with it and move on.

There's also a reason why a lot of shoes never get posted publicly. Anytime a winning shoe shows up, people like yourself start the accusations of lies, deceit, Photoshop and all kinds of trickery. There's no need to put up with it so after awhile, the shoe posting stops, and for good reason. Who needs the grief?

It does matter HOW you lose and HOW you win. Screw up the former and the latter may not recover for you!

You currently have access to System 40 and other plays. Work with it. Learn something. Take away a good experience and add it to your collective knowledge of the game and YOUR manner of play.

MVS (why do I continue to get into these discussions?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dunwerken, nice post as usual. I just noticed today when I checked due to the PM you sent me that my reply to you on the BJ forum got lost somewhere in computer land. Sorry. I'll go back today and reconstruct it. Sounds to me like you are playing Bac similar to our SAP method which also requires a count of sorts. Many of our members also flat bet that method and those who don't never go beyond 2 units.

Again, I'm not so sure we can mathematically call Bac a negative expectation game just because we pay them to deal the cards. But that is just semantics. 65% is an excellent hands won rate. Keep up the good work!

Thanks for the response. BTW, the reason baccarat is generally considered a negative expectation game is that like all other casino games, the house has a vig. Although the true vig is only 1.15%, the actual table drop is substantially more.

The addition of the 'Dragon 7' has increased casino profits by 40-60%, simply because people do not understand how to play it. I watch players putting $10-$75 on this side bet EVERY hand, but if played like 'half-price commission' (on bank bets only), it keeps the vig very close to traditional bac.

Hope this helps anyone playing on a dragon table.

No one lives long enough to get rich slowly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the response. BTW, the reason baccarat is generally considered a negative expectation game is that like all other casino games, the house has a vig. Although the true vig is only 1.15%, the actual table drop is substantially more.

The addition of the 'Dragon 7' has increased casino profits by 40-60%, simply because people do not understand how to play it. I watch players putting $10-$75 on this side bet EVERY hand, but if played like 'half-price commission' (on bank bets only), it keeps the vig very close to traditional bac.

Hope this helps anyone playing on a dragon table.

Aaa, I teach vig is 1.25%. Assume half your bets are on B and you win half your B bets = 5%/4 = 1.25%. Don't know where your are getting 1.15% from???

But correct, the Bac drop in Vegas is running up to 26% and vig doesn't begin to explain this. And it was running 26% before the dragon bet was introduced. Probably higher now.

It would seem impossible to lose 26% of all your buy in money in a 50/50 game. I don't think tie and dragon bets account for all of this. I think its mostly because inexperienced players tend to bet on whatever is behind. For instance if B is ahead of P, they bet on P. If twos are behind they bet on 2s. They would do well to do the exact opposite.

I recall when Jerry Patterson came out with a silly Bac system that essentially said count B vs P in the first half and bet on whichever is behind in the second half. This system lost so consistently that Jerry had to give everyone their $8000 back. You could do very well betting dead against those guys. But, he in fact DID give everyone their money back which speaks highly of him. He probably would have done well to send all the buyers a letter that said "I neglected to send you page 2 which says bet dead against page 1."

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

tried system 40

worked well until it didn't

Dweezel, as most know by now, there is no such thing as a purely mechanical bet placement scheme like opposites (Sys 40) or TB4L or OTB4L or Repeats that can do better than break even in the long run. Then there is commission. It doesn't take 100,000 shoes to verify this. Simple 4th grade math will do nicely.

I wouldn't have posted Sys 40 on BaccaratForums if I thought everyone could win every shoe with it. I posted it because it was better than anything else posted there. 99% of the players there still don't know when or if they should go OTR or when to get off the run even though it is plainly and clearly posted.

I also clearly posted that Sys 40 is a CHOP system that beats the choppy half of all shoes. It therefore requires table selection which most players have no conception of. Esp. when you have idiots like Archer over there saying that all shoes are random and therefore table selection makes no difference.

I just won 16 out of 17 shoes matching the system to the bias of the shoe. The same exact bias that Archer says doesn't exist. So much for Archer. And BTW, these were factory preshuffled cards.

So, when you played 40 did you in fact screen your shoes and only play the choppy half. I think not. Too much work. Because if you had, you would have likely won every shoe IF you in fact played 40 correctly in the first place, which is doubtful.

Let's assume you played 40 correctly. Now all you need is a Streak system and a Neutral system to go with 40. AND you need to know how to determine if the shoe at hand is Streaky, Choppy, or Neutral. If you think all that is too complex, don't even attempt Blackjack!

Did you think it was going to be that easy? Beating casinos takes study and practice and lots of it. It's not for everybody.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a note to the general public: It should be noted that Dweezel is not now nor has he ever been a member of the BTC private Baccarat forum. He seems to be trying to learn by some strange form of osmosis.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baccarat Hall of Fame Member

To Dweezy, whether he is a member or not, or to anyone else interested.

The Dweeze stated that SYS 40 "worked well until it didn't"...Ha, ha...all of our methods are like this! None of them work every shoe, every situation, every day!

Ellis has done a great job of giving us the means to modify/adjust/change our approach to a given shoe/ a given set of circumstances...including IF IT A'INT WORKING, GET UP AND LEAVE! ( my words, not his...)

This is the reason for stop-losses, this is the reason for various approaches to a shoe, this is the reason we sometimes simply have to "sit out" a period and get back to "paper betting" w/o real $$ out on the table...

In the end, nothing beats 'experience', nothing beats having played a bunch of shoes in a bunch of different casinos/settings/on different days, etc.

With each successive "casino experience" , and with each step you make towards a willingness to "learn" and practice (!!) the methods explored/examined/reviewed/taught here...you will become a better player and...................

THE MORE YOU ARE LIKELY TO WIN!

Thanks Ellis, Keith, Seahog, et. al for sharing and making us all better players...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aaa, I teach vig is 1.25%. Assume half your bets are on B and you win half your B bets = 5%/4 = 1.25%. Don't know where your are getting 1.15% from???

But correct, the Bac drop in Vegas is running up to 26% and vig doesn't begin to explain this. And it was running 26% before the dragon bet was introduced. Probably higher now.

It would seem impossible to lose 26% of all your buy in money in a 50/50 game. I don't think tie and dragon bets account for all of this. I think its mostly because inexperienced players tend to bet on whatever is behind. For instance if B is ahead of P, they bet on P. If twos are behind they bet on 2s. They would do well to do the exact opposite.

I recall when Jerry Patterson came out with a silly Bac system that essentially said count B vs P in the first half and bet on whichever is behind in the second half. This system lost so consistently that Jerry had to give everyone their $8000 back. You could do very well betting dead against those guys. But, he in fact DID give everyone their money back which speaks highly of him. He probably would have done well to send all the buyers a letter that said "I neglected to send you page 2 which says bet dead against page 1."

The vig isn't actually calculated based on the assumption that you will make half your bets on Bank and that you will win half of those.

The bank wins 1.47% more hands than player, based on the rules of card draw, so with the 5% commission, the house has a 1.06% edge on bank and 1.24% edge on player... overall house edge (vig) is 1.15%.

The reason the drop is higher (as in all games) is because of poor play, along with the tie (14%) and either or both of the dragon side bets (9% & 7.6%).

With regard to 'pattern' betting, having recorded over 2 million live hands, I can tell you unequivocally that there is no pattern-style betting strategy that will work ALL the time. And every negative wagering system has one thing in common; you will trade lots of small wins for the occasional HUGE loss.

No one lives long enough to get rich slowly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The vig isn't actually calculated based on the assumption that you will make half your bets on Bank and that you will win half of those.

The bank wins 1.47% more hands than player, based on the rules of card draw, so with the 5% commission, the house has a 1.06% edge on bank and 1.24% edge on player... overall house edge (vig) is 1.15%.

The reason the drop is higher (as in all games) is because of poor play, along with the tie (14%) and either or both of the dragon side bets (9% & 7.6%).

With regard to 'pattern' betting, having recorded over 2 million live hands, I can tell you unequivocally that there is no pattern-style betting strategy that will work ALL the time. And every negative wagering system has one thing in common; you will trade lots of small wins for the occasional HUGE loss.

I totally agree with you on pattern betting. Unfortunately it was one of my students, Sherry Pelzman, who started that whole fiasco and coined the term "pattern recognition".

Not to belabor the point, I also agree that your vig math is correct. If I were in casino marketing I would present it that way too. But those are the same guys that say the house edge in BJ is only 1%.

I think to be realistic you must assume that players in total will make half their bets on Bank and half on Player. And being essentially a 50/50 game we can further assume they win half their Bank bets.

Let's take a practical example: 72 plays not counting ties. Player wins 36, Bank wins 36. You make half your 1 unit flat bets on Bank and win 18. Your vig is 5% of 18 or .9 units = 1.25% of 72. I think you agree thus far, right. Now you correctly say but Bank has an edge on player. Right, but the Bank edge INCREASES vig from 1.25%. It doesn't lower it to 1.15%. If we increase the Bank wins to 19 and win half, we increase vig. We don't lower it. Therefore even when I say vig is 1.25% of total bets, I'm giving the casino the benefit of doubt. But I understand why a casino would insist the vig is only 1.15%.

I've had to correct The Wizard's math from time to time also. For instance, in his Baccarat frequency of occurrence tables he doesn't account for the fact that you can't have a 20 in a row in the first 19 or the last 19 hands of a shoe. This destroys his frequency of occurrence projections for ALL runs. Worse is his presentation. What players call a 4 in a row, he calls a 3 in a row (3 Repeats in a row). This is correct but renders his frequency of occurrence tables useless to actual players. His projection for 5 in a rows, for instance, will be more than 100% wrong based on what actual players call a 5 in a row.

Oh, and I haven't forgotten your BJ question, which was an excellent post. I've just been a little inundated lately and the flu is slowing me down to boot.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To Dweezy, whether he is a member or not, or to anyone else interested.

The Dweeze stated that SYS 40 "worked well until it didn't"...Ha, ha...all of our methods are like this! None of them work every shoe, every situation, every day!

Ellis has done a great job of giving us the means to modify/adjust/change our approach to a given shoe/ a given set of circumstances...including IF IT A'INT WORKING, GET UP AND LEAVE! ( my words, not his...)

This is the reason for stop-losses, this is the reason for various approaches to a shoe, this is the reason we sometimes simply have to "sit out" a period and get back to "paper betting" w/o real $$ out on the table...

In the end, nothing beats 'experience', nothing beats having played a bunch of shoes in a bunch of different casinos/settings/on different days, etc.

With each successive "casino experience" , and with each step you make towards a willingness to "learn" and practice (!!) the methods explored/examined/reviewed/taught here...you will become a better player and...................

THE MORE YOU ARE LIKELY TO WIN!

Thanks Ellis, Keith, Seahog, et. al for sharing and making us all better players...

Thanks Kachatz, the check's in the mail!

I wrote an article to you guys a short while back that basically said to beat casinos Attitude is secondary only to knowledge. Once you know HOW to win you must have the confidence in yourself to make it happen. You see these guys in casinos that seem to have an almost visible black cloud over their head. They seem to be out to prove they can lose and they go right ahead and lose. "I'll be right there Honey as soon as I lose these chips!" The Dweeze's black cloud IS visible.

On the other hand I also got a call of thanks from my #1 BJ player just yesterday. He's been at $3000 a day for nearly a year now. He says when he sits to a table he KNOWS he's going to win! He "cultivates" the table playing green. He is very well financed! His initial purpose is not to win but to prepare the table for winning by separating the tens, even splitting them. Usually the other players leave because of his strange play. Then, he's got the dealer to himself with prepped cards and he deploys the 146 prog with black. From there he increases his unit Fibonaci style. The dealer hasn't a chance. That is BJ at it's finest. Can you picture the Dweezel doing that? Ha!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I totally agree with you on pattern betting. Unfortunately it was one of my students, Sherry Pelzman, who started that whole fiasco and coined the term "pattern recognition".

Not to belabor the point, I also agree that your vig math is correct. If I were in casino marketing I would present it that way too. But those are the same guys that say the house edge in BJ is only 1%.

I think to be realistic you must assume that players in total will make half their bets on Bank and half on Player. And being essentially a 50/50 game we can further assume they win half their Bank bets.

Let's take a practical example: 72 plays not counting ties. Player wins 36, Bank wins 36. You make half your 1 unit flat bets on Bank and win 18. Your vig is 5% of 18 or .9 units = 1.25% of 72. I think you agree thus far, right. Now you correctly say but Bank has an edge on player. Right, but the Bank edge INCREASES vig from 1.25%. It doesn't lower it to 1.15%. If we increase the Bank wins to 19 and win half, we increase vig. We don't lower it. Therefore even when I say vig is 1.25% of total bets, I'm giving the casino the benefit of doubt. But I understand why a casino would insist the vig is only 1.15%.

I've had to correct The Wizard's math from time to time also. For instance, in his Baccarat frequency of occurrence tables he doesn't account for the fact that you can't have a 20 in a row in the first 19 or the last 19 hands of a shoe. This destroys his frequency of occurrence projections for ALL runs. Worse is his presentation. What players call a 4 in a row, he calls a 3 in a row (3 Repeats in a row). This is correct but renders his frequency of occurrence tables useless to actual players. His projection for 5 in a rows, for instance, will be more than 100% wrong based on what actual players call a 5 in a row.

Oh, and I haven't forgotten your BJ question, which was an excellent post. I've just been a little inundated lately and the flu is slowing me down to boot.

I understand where you get the numbers and I also agree that the wizard is very often out to lunch, but I think it's because he's a mathematician only and not a player. As such, he's not inclined to believe that casinos can be beaten, so he starts all investigations with that premise.

The only point you missed in your calculations is the fact that bank will actually win 1.47% more hands than player and when you add the assumption that you will ALWAYS bet on bank, the house vig really is 1.15%, due to commission.

This is where the casino gets their number, as it's always based on perfect play, which would exclude all bets on player (like the pass line in craps).

House odds, in the long run, have very little to do with the outcome of any game, but at least in baccarat, we are in control of every aspect of our play, so we don't have to succumb to any assumptions.

No one lives long enough to get rich slowly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand where you get the numbers and I also agree that the wizard is very often out to lunch, but I think it's because he's a mathematician only and not a player. As such, he's not inclined to believe that casinos can be beaten, so he starts all investigations with that premise.

The only point you missed in your calculations is the fact that bank will actually win 1.47% more hands than player and when you add the assumption that you will ALWAYS bet on bank, the house vig really is 1.15%, due to commission.

This is where the casino gets their number, as it's always based on perfect play, which would exclude all bets on player (like the pass line in craps).

House odds, in the long run, have very little to do with the outcome of any game, but at least in baccarat, we are in control of every aspect of our play, so we don't have to succumb to any assumptions.

Right, we must live in the real world to play in the real world. We can't trust or believe in casino marketing math or even The Wiz.

It's far worse in BJ. BJ books are full of so many mathematical errors they are pretty much rendered useless. Basic Strategy itself contains many errors and omissions. Always splitting Aces for instance. They overlook the fact that when you hit Aces you ALWAYS get at least two chances to make your hand. But if you split with lows running you usually lose twice. Aces is NOT nearly as good a hand as the books portray.

Doubling on 9 vs 8 with tens running is one of the highest % DD in BJ yet you won't find it in any book but mine.

Assuming there is a ten under the dealer's ten up as most books say is just plain ignorant. The odds are actually better she has a low card down. Better yet, we'll teach you how to read the dealer hole card from 3rd base with incredible accuracy. We'll teach you how to insure with better than a 50% hit rate. It pays 2 to 1, and MANY other tricks of the trade.

BTW I was once ejected from the Claridge for getting every insurance bet right for 5 hours straight. Every time I insured she had the ten and every time I didn't, she didn't. They said that was impossible W/O cheating. But it isn't!

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only reason I mentioned teruya is because he at least had the guts to try a risky promotion like "If you don't make your sign up money back in 30 days, I will give you a full refund." Contrary to popular belief, I am not interested in raining on anyones parade. Of course I would like to be in the parade, but haven't found a way to do it. Might be because I'm too: dense, impatient, right-brained, (add your reason). Or it might be because this is impossible to do without risking the farm. I mean making a living at this, not treating it as entertainment at the $5 table. $100,000+ with zero risk.

The basic question anyone who is selling a way to "beat the casino" should answer satisfactorily is "If you are so good at this, why do you need me?"

If a system seller is really interested in helping people learn to do this, they will have to upgrade the curriculum, tools and attitude. Video, webinars, live skype training like mark did is good as well. As it is mow, it feels like a chat room for accountants, where only the CPA's know what is really going on and anyone else is forced to wade through endless lists of jargon in an attempt to separate the signal from the noise. If they don't understand something, they haven't "worked hard enough" or they have a "bad attitude"

Is the risk removed from the game by system 40 or any system? If not, how much of the risk has been removed? If the risk has not been removed, I am still gambling, and I have no interest in gambling.

Please answer this question: The main problem with evaluating any system is: _________________________________________

The answer is "the sample size is too small". martingale is an example of this. if it works for a year, playing 3 hours a day, can you count on it to pay your mortgage?

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