Jump to content

Horseshoe Casino, IN, Scorecards & Play


Recommended Posts

shuttlesmasher

Going back to basics. If you do use a 112 progression. you only win if you win your first, bet winning your 2/3 bet is breakeven.

teh chance of losing 112 progression is 1 in 8....0.5x0.5x0.5=

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 166
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • davelevad

    51

  • shuttlesmasher

    15

  • daytrader77459

    7

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Just one thing, just have been thinking, we have this great forum that can possibly give us an advantage in play. HOwever, these advantage players are banned at casinos. So if thats the case, is there

I just play online at Dublinbet because it is a brick and mortar casino. But unfortunately, I cannot find any any bias in the table. So I just select the system from the 8 to 20 first hands. I apply N

Hi, Davelevad, Yes, correct. My bad! In a hurry to post shoe for you - but great eye. Again, valuable to have multiple sets of eyes for study cases, reviews. I think the most important points are:

Going back to basics. If you do use a 112 progression. you only win if you win your first, bet winning your 2/3 bet is breakeven.

teh chance of losing 112 progression is 1 in 8....0.5x0.5x0.5=

Exactly right shuttlesmasher which is why I don't recommend the 112.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok, the 1st is F2, the second is OTB4L2 (+15 in the first col) and the third is 40. Not much consistency is those two new cards shoes but easy to beat anyway. But they really aren't come back tomorrow shoes.

Ok, thanks very much.

Thank you again for all of your time in evaluating my situation, and all the other time you've spent helping me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
So it goes to the old queation:without table selection we can not win?

Jerry, the follow is my opinion, and Ellis or the other BTC members here may or may not agree with it, which I completely respect ...

In my opinion, if you play baccarat with a pattern-based, mechanical approach (which would include all of Ellis' methods in NOR, SAP, ADN, net-betting, and all of his prior methods, as well as Mark's Maverick, Maverick Ultimate, etc., that is, any method which involves a procedure of rules based on the past history of the P/B results of a shoe to make a bet decision), it can do no better in the long run over a random set of shoes than simply always betting Banker.

I have investigated this quite extensively with computational simulations of both simple and complex systems, and have written quite a bit about my results at my blog ImSpirit. A summary of my conclusions can be found in the ImSpirit post Transcendental Baccaratology. Every competent mathematician in the world would agree wholeheartedly with my results, and would think I had wasted my time for trying to seek a case where 1+1 would not equal 2.

In that same post, I propose that if someone (such as Ellis) is able to consistently win playing baccarat, he must be utilizing something outside of the game itself. For Ellis, that something else is casino & table selection, which are based on the premise that casinos control the shuffle to their advantage, and thus, create an opportunity for us to use it against them.

So, to answer your question within the context of Ellis' approach to baccarat, quite simply, No, you cannot expect to win in the long run without the advantage of casino & table selection.

As I had to learn the hard way, it appears the shoes produced by Horseshoe are not consistent enough to be routinely exploitable. They are too random, without sufficiently consistent, stable biases, rendering table selection inaccurate. Ellis would say that Horseshoe has learned to control the shuffle to consistently produce neutral, random shoes, which are the hardest to beat, and hence, their favorites. Whatever the real reason, it appears the kind of edge that Ellis looks for in baccarat shoes are not available there.

So, if I try to play on, I'm basically reduced to being just another gambler hoping to win more than lose, and unfortunately, Horseshoe will always win such a contest in the long run, despite my best hopes and efforts.

Hence, the rational course of action for me is to simply not play under these circumstances.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks davelevad! I understood what you say...Has a little bit sad, one day all the casino shoes all like Horseshoe's, how do we do?

Yeah, I know what you mean - after all of the time, effort, and money invested, and not to be able to capitalize on it. It is disappointing and frustrating.

I suppose if a casino is consistently producing random shoes, one way to play is to use a method such as ADNet. But of course, even in the midst of random, there will be naturally arise strong biases, as well as the killer patterns for any method you wind up choosing to use. So, it becomes that much more difficult to consistently navigate through the game and stay ahead. The swings in your score (variance) will become much greater, and you'll often be forced to step up to higher progressions. It becomes "challenging," which Ellis says playing baccarat is not supposed to be. Then again, he also says consistently winning baccarat is not easy anyway, so I guess all around, it is a difficult task.

Link to post
Share on other sites
shuttlesmasher

absolutely! and really the point is totally, if you placed the right bet to win and it wins, your doing fine... if you lose than thats the problem.

as much as the chance of it for you to lose, there is the chance of you to win as welll since its 50/50.

but really, following tendencies is the closest attempt to exploit this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
shuttlesmasher

moreover, say the game is 50/50 thus if you place 10 bets, then it would be fair enough to say you will lose 5 and win 5.

if you can exploit tendencies and you place 10 bets and win 6 thats a bonus .... 1unit win.

and i WILL take ANY units of winning.

Link to post
Share on other sites
moreover, say the game is 50/50 thus if you place 10 bets, then it would be fair enough to say you will lose 5 and win 5.

if you can exploit tendencies and you place 10 bets and win 6 thats a bonus .... 1unit win.

and i WILL take ANY units of winning.

Ha, actually that is +2 units less any commission but you've got the right idea!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good grief guys quit passing the crying towel. Dave is right as far as he goes but he doesn't go very far and he hasn't said anything you haven't heard a million times before.

Basically NEVER play in the blind. Not even a single bet. If you have no reason for your bet, don't bet. Wait until you have an advantage.

As I've said on this forum and all other Baccarat forums is that ALL purely mechanical systems break even in the long run and then there is commission. These guys like on BF and others who spend their lives designing and testing ever more complex mechanical systems are wasting their time and their lives. That is NOT an opinion, it's pure mathematical fact.

As I've said before the ONLY way to win is to take advantage of the non randomness of cards. Moreover, not all cards are non random but most are. BTC is the ONLY forum that recognizes this and teaches you how to recognize and exploit non randomness. And I have ALWAYS taught this from the beginning 30 years ago.

One advantage I have over you guys is that I have been all over this game since its inception into the US. I was playing this game back when the shuffles used, while far more complex than the shuffles used today, produced shoes far less random than those we see today. I was playing this game playing full time in AC before the Asians could even spell Baccarat.

When you see 20 in a rows and 26 in a rows on a daily basis you KNOW the game is not random. Nobody would be fool enough to argue the point back then because it was as obvious as the nose on your face. But watching the old fan shuffle, you would swear it would completely randomize the cards - until you saw the shoe that it produced.

Another advantage I had was that I had learned BJ first. I was perhaps the top BJ player in AC in those years. Hey, the AC casinos barred me but not Kenny Uston. Whether you are a counter or a clumper it amounts to the same thing. You are exploiting the non randomness of cards. I just found that clumping worked far better after trying both.

I brought that very same technology to the Baccarat table and it worked very well right from the start, however rudimentary my initial play was. Anybody of any common sense back then HAD to notice that streaky shoes stayed streaky and choppy shoes stayed choppy. Streaky tables stayed streaky and choppy tables stayed choppy.

All of that is still true today - just less so, if there even is such a thing as "less non random" or "more random". In mathematics there are no such terms. Everything is either "random" or "predictable". It is only us who looks at these priciples in degrees. And well we should!

So Dave tests a bunch of mechanical systems, ours and others, and proves that they are break even. Big whip! First, any mathematician should already know that intuitively before testing. Second, we had already run the same tests here years ago. Third, I've been saying publicly and for years that is what will happen.

How many scammers have I exposed by saying their system is purely mechanical and therefore break even?

Archer said just yesterday on ImSpirit that I am a scammer because I say my systems beat random shoes.

No, I NEVER said or even implied that. I have always said, and ALL mathematicians and schools agree: you can't beat random numbers. That is, in fact, the very definition of "random" - "unpredictable", following no pattern, insensible, unintelligible, RANDOM.

All of my systems were designed for specific shoe types - from the beginning. And I have always said that none will work when applied to the wrong shoe type.

Even the free net bet systems on my public Bac forum I say that those who use table selection will win and the rest will lose. And that is exactly what happened.

When I posted a version of S40 at BF THE FIRST thing I said was this is a good chop system, perhaps the best.

So how did they test it? Against a random generator. Broke even, exactly as I said it would. So what do they do? They call me a scammer because 40 won't beat a random generator. Who is their chief tester? Archer.

No mechanical system will beat a random generator. That is why they call it a "random" generator. It's FREAKING random!

If you had any idea of the technology that goes into a random generator to make it random, you would quickly realize that no where near that much techology goes into a casino shuffle. Two or 3 hand shuffles and presto by magic 8 decks are random? Bullshit! And the machines are designed to duplicate hand shuffles.

So why did BF test 40 against a random generator? Two reasons:

1) They preach that Baccarat is random and therefore skipping table selection makes no difference.

2) They KNOW that no system can beat a random generator so if they test that way they can "legitamately" call me a scammer.

The powers to be over there hate me because every time I go over there the members start listening to me instead of them and that really pisses them off. But I've had it with those idiots and I don't go there any more.

Look, I've exposed more scammers than Archer even knows. I know nearly all the scammers and they all have one thing in common. They don't play at all. They CAN'T let their constituants see them play. I don't know of a single scammer, BJ or Bac, who actually plays the game in public nor have I ever heard of one. Some say they will if you pay them enough money first but I know of none who have actually done this except maybe a couple of Martingalers. But Martingalers don't count because everyone knows that it is just a question of time - and usually, not much time at all.

On the other hand, I play both with and in front of my students all the time. Scammers don't do that. But at this point I have played in front of thousands of my students. If you haven't seen me play yet then you know somebody who has and I don't lose. They will tell you that. Sure, I lose a shoe now and then but not by much. But overall, I win. I'm merely trying to teach you HOW I consistently do this. Because ANYBODY can learn to do the same thing. It isn't Voodoo and it isn't rocket science. It just seems that way at first.

Sure Dave likes to brag about how I won six straight shoes at 4 tables in two casinos with a PA of 26% W/O ever betting more than 3 units. He's likely never seen that before. I doubt that more than one in 500 Bac players has ever done that.

But you haven't seen me bragging about it have you. Why not? Because if I were going to brag I would point to many incidences of 10 straight wins or 20 or even 40. Not 6.

OK, back to the question: Can we win W/O table selection? The quick answer is YES. After all, I just did it didn't I. There was no table selection available at either Hollywood or Trump Plaza. NONE!

Here is the way I see it:

First, we do not have only one way of obtaining an advantage - we have 5.

And we can't point at one and say its the most important. On any given day any one of the 5 can be the most important. So what are the 5 ways?

1.) The stability of new cards

2.) Selecting the most biased table

3.) Playing what the shoe start tells you to play (THAT is how I won those 6 shoes)

4.) Matching the right system to the right bias. (That may be somewhat redundant)

5.) Matching the right Mode to the shoe at hand (This only helps if we have selected the right system)

I don't know how to use a computer to test any of these things, but I'm no computer expert.

My test is 30 years of experience. And I'll take that over a computer's conclusions any day of the week. Computers have no intelligence - yet. They use the programmer's intelligence. And the programmer is no Baccarat expert, unfortunately. But their time will come.

OK, let's take 1.) New cards:

I could easily pick this as the strongest because it has won me so many shoes over the last few years. OTB4L won me almost every shoe for 3 years playing against the morning card prep at Gold Strike, Tunica. I had two incidences of winning 20 in a row. But before that S40 won against the morning card prep at Horseshoe, Tunica for 2 years. Ha, almost always with the same dealer and almost always head to head. In fact the dealer warned me that there was a lot of talk about barring me and to change casinos. Which I immediately did. Hence, Gold Strike.

But here is an important fact to know about new cards: Yes, it's nice when a card prep produces a certain shoe type. But that is not the only advantage. New cards are simply more stable both in Bac and BJ. However it starts out, that is pretty much how it is going to be. I guess it's because every card underwent exactly the same process.

Most of you guys don't know the difference between a morning card prep and a standard shuffle. Go watch one. Then you'll know.

BTW, new cards becomes virtually meaningless with today's factory preshuffled cards.

So will all casinos go this way eventually. No. Why not? Because then the casino that sticks with standard cards will get all the play. Also, they are illegal in most states. I don't know about Canada???

2.) Selecting the most biased table:

Here, the more tables a casino has, the better. Other than perhaps new cards, this is the simplest way to win. I used this method to win 40 straight shoes with basic S40 at 5 different casinos in 3 different states. I also won 20 in a row this way at Gold Coast over 3 days of play. It is tried and true over 30 years.

I have also used this method against factory preshuffled. There was no noticable difference. This probably accounts for Dave's overall success at Horseshoe, IN as well as his lack of success against new cards there.

I would certainly guess that the longer such cards are played, the more stable they become. I've seen this first hand when factory preshuffled cards are played for a full day. But I'm only guessing what happens when they are played longer than that. But I can't send out a player to bet hard earned money on one of my guesses. You guys know where guessing gets you in Baccarat.

I think the other 3 advantage methods speak for themseves and I'm sure you guys are getting tired of me by now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, BTW, how did I know it was Archer? Because the same guy says the same thing in the same words over and over and over again. The perfect Republican! I didn't just get off the boat you know.

And BTW, while thousands have seen me play, even Garnabby, Archer has never seen me play. So how did HE get to be the expert on me? Easy, he simply makes stuff up as he goes. Like I told you, the perfect Republican.

And BTW, for you newer guys who don't know, Archer was once a member of BTC. But he got voted off of BTC by the membership. Why? For arguing all the time, name calling, and stating his opinions as fact.

But the lesson obviously didn't take, did it.

Edited by Guest
Link to post
Share on other sites

Dave, via email, is asking if any system can beat random cards? Well no if you are talking "random" in a purely mathematical sense but yes if you are talking "random" in a traditional Baccarat sense meaning random in the long term but not in the short term of individual shoes. No, I'm not referring to all out war which I withdrew many years ago and never sold. ALso, I'm not talking about new factory preshuffled cards, when they are new. But I think old factory preshuffled cards may present a different case.

Let me put it this way: If I had to play every shoe in the blind and with no regard to table selection, I would play SAP. SAP is not a mechanical system. It searches out any shoe bias and automatically follows it. The SAP System is a 2 Hi net bet system and has proven good for about 6 units a shoe. It's nemesis is OTB4L or runless shoes. But it won overall inspite of this and with an extremely low ABS and hi PA. In fact some tried flat betting SAP and did quite well.

Back when I was first contemplating NOR I realized that one option was to have only 2 systems, SAP for both streak and chop and OTB4L for neutral. The only reason I didn't go that way was simplicity. SAP requires an SAP chart and that chart governs every bet. But for most, that's not that hard to do.

I am no longer an expert at SAP but I bet Andrea and PJ are and maybe Paul too.

Would it beat Horseshoe IN if we stayed away from new cards? I don't know but if I were going to try, SAP would probably be the best bet as well as the least risk.

The problem with that casino is we have no experience with those specific circumstances. No one does. Is it worth a try? Not much to lose.

Edited by Guest
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Ellis. I might give SAP a try, at least run the shoes I've already played at Horseshoe with SAP.

Is a complete set of SAP rules posted somewhere?

I'm also considering going down to Harrah's a few times next week, just to watch their first few shoes of the day. If the cost of playing easy games is an extra 2 hours/day commute, it'll be well worth it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Common Sense in Baccarat (My Opinion based on what I’ve learned from Ellis)

I just wanted to sound off about using a little common sense when we play in order to stay out of trouble and keep winning. It’s normal for the new guys to be confused by all that is available here at BTC. It’s like a kid with a new toy. Naturally you want to take it out and play with it. But we’re not little kids anymore. At least me, I’m an ‘ol fart, but one who has learned a few things from Ellis about baccarat.

First question: Is baccarat a random game? Yes it is BUT its only Random over the long run (thousands and thousand of hands) in order to win, I look at the short run for little deviations from the overall randomness. These little deviations are called a baccarat shoe.

IMHO, it doesn’t matter if the cards are preshuffled, machine shuffled or if they are hand shuffled. You are going to get a non random shoe. I’ve only seen one, maybe 2 shoes that ended in a truly random distribution of events, and even in those shoes there were non-random sections that could be exploited very easily. It’s exactly the same as a coin flip. If you flip a coin a million times, you will have a random result where the number of heads and tails will be equal. If you flip a coin 80 times, you will see patterns, clumps and everything but random.

Ellis has done a great job of teaching me the “Normal” distribution of events in a 72 hand baccarat shoe. How do I use this information? I use it to recognize “Normal” so I can tell when that little section of the shoe is NOT normal, and exploitable. I'm so used to SAP, that I can pretty much do it without a scorecard. I use it for both Long term shoe history and short term history. Caution though... SAP is not the total answer, it's just another tool.

I repeat; in the baccarat SHOE things are not random, cards come in singles, repeats, clumps and PATTERNS.

That’s what I look to exploit. It’s amazing how reliable the non random events are, ex... when I see a 2-2-1 after 2s have been scarce thus far, the hair stands up on the back of my neck (Like Ellis, I don't have any on my head), and I get ready to start betting OTB4L on the next hand. I allow only 2 losing bets. If OT doesn’t hold true, I stop and wait for another non random event. BUT if OT starts to run, I might just bet bigger (3-5 units) on the next play. It’s amazing how the TT’s can act just like a straight run (22-22-22-22-etc) Of course, there are many other examples of this non randomness for our eyes to catch. You’ve got to THINK as you play and play enough to recognize these patterns so you are ready when they appear. You don’t know if they will hold true, but you risk a unit or two to see, and pretty soon you are right a lot more than you are wrong. Then with good MM, you take your winnings home.

All this, at least for me, (after trying a multitude of mechanical systems) confirms that mechanical systems don’t hold up any better than pure guessing. I like to look for exploitable events instead.

I need to mention how important SAP is in my playing. It makes it easier to see what is “out of whack” than any other indicator. Yes, there is a lag time in SAP (lagging events trying to catch up to their normal occurrences) but that’s why I stop after 2 losses and wait for a good indication to continue betting.

Ellis teaches the best systems and approaches to the game and I use them all. NOR, Sys40 (opposites), OTB4L, F2/3, TB4L, ADN, Repeats etc. I just keep my eyes open and ask the question Ellis asks himself. WHICH SYSTEM/MODE WOULD BE WINNING THIS SECTION OF THE SHOE RIGHT NOW?

If I can answer that question, I place my bet, If I can’t, I sit on my hands until I can.

Thanks Ellis,

PJ

Edited by ECD
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the vote of confidence PJ. I took the liberty to copy your post to ImSpirit what with Archer sounding off over there at the moment with his normal BS. Hope you nor Dave mind.

BTW PJ, I just used your name in vain below wondering if SAP might be the answer to the shenanigans going on at Horseshoe, IN. By your post, it seems you might agree with me that SAP might be an appropriate ploy to try???

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks, Ellis. I might give SAP a try, at least run the shoes I've already played at Horseshoe with SAP.

Is a complete set of SAP rules posted somewhere?

I'm also considering going down to Harrah's a few times next week, just to watch their first few shoes of the day. If the cost of playing easy games is an extra 2 hours/day commute, it'll be well worth it.

Damed if I know if SAP is still posted anywhere. Does anybody else know? Dave, at this point I think you would be better off with one or 2 of the guys who went on with SAP and developed it even further. These are some very sharp guys.

PJ, Andrea, Paul, can you guys help Dave out here a little? He's a great guy and he's one of us. But he's up against a stacked deck at Horsesheoe IN. On the other hand, I'd like to beat those bastards. Hey, if we can beat THEM, we can beat ANYBODY.

Dave, in a way, I'm glad you aren't giving up so easy. But, mark my words: those guys are going to be tough as nails. You are playing the Benions, the sharpest family in gambling and in IN there are no laws. It is open freaking warefare with no holds barred. On the other hand, you've got us. Ha, but I've never felt so puny.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dave,

After following this thread since the start I feel I need to ask. How much have you practiced the NOR Approach? Have you played enough shoes to really develop a feel for the method? I'm not talking about 10 or 20 shoes here, it will take more than that.

res

Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s good to see a renewed interest in SAP. I have been involved with SAP since I joined the forum. Andrea, myself and a few others have done a lot of work on the concept and refined it to what is a very powerful tool. Is it flawless.. NO!. But it sure helps you spot the exploitable events easily.

SAP is based on the normal occurrences of events in a baccarat shoe. Originally we used SAP to adjust the length of our progression. Today we can use it for a lot more.

It’s based the 50 % rule:

8 decks = 72 hands avg. not counting ties. Half will be opposites, half repeats.

72 hands create 36 events. Half of the EVENTS are 1's giving you

18 1s = 18 hands

9 2s = 18 hands

4.5 3s = 13.5 hands

2.25 4s = 9 hands

2.25 5+s = 13.5 hands

36 events = 72 hands

Or you could say it this way:

a 1 every 4 hands = 72/4 = 18 events per shoe

a 2 every 8 hands = 72/8 = 9 events per shoe

a 3 every 16 hands = 72/16 = 4.5 events per shoe

a 4+ every 16 hands = 72/16 = 4.5 events = 36 events total.

On our SAP chart, these events are weighed according to the following scale:

1s get 1 point

2s get 3 points

3s get 4 points

4+s (4 or mores) set 4 points.

By tracking the events and comparing them to what the normal occurrence is at this point in the shoe, we can spot the “out of whack” events and be in a position to exploit them.

Here is a SAP scorecard filled out to show how we track these events. Notice that we fill in the count after every opposite.

NSfilledout.jpg

See the small numbers in the AV (average) column. By comparing this number to the actual event count we can quickly see if the event is at, above or below average. This sets us up for the exploitation of that event.

See how you can tell if the 1s, 2s, 3s or 4+s are out of normal occurance. We can see if an event is above it’s normal occurance or below it’s normal occurance. We refer an event that is not “normal” as being “high” or “low”.

Here is what I call NEW SAP. It’s based on exploits.

New SAP Revised 11/01/2010

When starting a new shoe, wait for a Strong SAP signal. Sometimes this requires a mid-shoe entry. That’s OK, even preferable. Don’t bet until you have a clear reason to bet.

Use the following order to look at the SAP events. ▲= Event is high (above normal occurrence). ▼= Event is low (below normal occurrence)

1. Look to see if 3’s or 4+'s are MC event.

3’s MC = bet OTB4L.

1s low AND 3s or 4+’s MC = bet REPEATS.

2. If 3’s or 4+'s are not the MC event, THEN look at the 1’s and 2’s.

1’s▲ 2’s▲= OPPs 1’s▼ 2’s▼= RPTs

1’s▲ 2’s▼= F2 or TBL 1’s▼ 2’s▲= OTBL

4. Stop table betting after 2 consecutive losses. Wait for the Strong

SAP signal to resume table betting.

If the second loss ended on run of 4 in a row

ZZ or Straight, do not stop table betting, risk 1 more bet to go OTR.

Player Options:

When you see three streaky events, (3 events with no single 1’s in between), bet Repeats until you see a confirmed 1. Then once again, select based on the SAP count.

When you encounter a 4 in a-row, ZZ or Straight, then based on past shoe history, you can bet OTR until the run ends.

When all events are tied, stop betting until there is a clear SAP indication or if you must bet, bet OTB4L.

When to sit on your hands:

When you lose 2 iar, or when you are not sure of the validity of the SAP info., when you don’t see what exploit would be winning in this section of the shoe.

Here is my New SAP card with the rules right on the card.

Sapcardwrulescolor.jpg

Here’s a blow up of the bottom of the card:

image_name9.jpg

I hope this helps anyone interested in exploring this style of play. Remember all of this does not substitute for THINKING and letting the shoe tell you how to win.

SAP is only a tool like all the others.

The New SAP option is just how I use SAP. Lately I’m experimenting with play based on the tote board. We get the last 20 hands in Tunica. I just watch the SAP events unfold along with MC/LC and the other exploitable events.

Hope this is helpful to those who are interested in SAP. If there is enough interest maybe we could start a New SAP thread.

PJ

Edited by ECD
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your input PJ! Even though I designed it myself I have to say that sometimes, between Scotches, we have these very rare glimpses of perfect mathematical clarity. It's like freaking lightning!

Don't get me wrong - I have the utmost respect for the Benions. They are the best there is! That's exactly why I want to beat them. The question is: Can SAP do it?

Ha, you know what? I think if I was a part of THAT family, I'd feel right at home.

Edited by Guest
Link to post
Share on other sites
Dave,

After following this thread since the start I feel I need to ask. How much have you practiced the NOR Approach? Have you played enough shoes to really develop a feel for the method? I'm not talking about 10 or 20 shoes here, it will take more than that.

res

Hi Ron! Yes I get your point. What you have to realize is that there is nothing new about NOR. All 3 systems have been played ad nausium. NOR is a conserted effort to put the way I have successfully played for 30 years into words. To boil it down from 20 systems to the best 3. But the whole thing is ONE consistent philosophy - to match the system we play to the shoe at hand. That basic philosophy hasn't changed in 30 years. We are merely trying to boil all the BS out of it and get it down to brass tacks so that the average player can actually perform it. There really is nothing new here. It is merely an attempt to make a proven concept actually playable.

Take Jack Nicklaus for instance: When he tried to express in words what he actually does in a split second, he found that it took a 300 page book. Such is NOR.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the great feedback & support!

Thanks to PJ for the SAP rules - I will study and practice to get really good at it.

Ellis, no problem at all about the ImSpirit comments - I've posted them all. Not sure this "Jim" is Archer, though, as it seems he is not signing with Archer's usual email address.

Yes, I would love to be able to go back to Horseshoe and truly "beat" them. That's where I lost Maverick/MU to last year, and got cut down to size again this year. So, at the moment, they definitely have the upper hand on me strategically, psychologically, and monetarily. You are right: if I can win there, I can win anywhere.

res - regarding your question about how long I've practiced NOR - I'm quite familiar with the 3 separate systems on their own, having used them extensively in the past both in live play and computational testing, but this is the first time I've systematically used them together as part of one, larger meta-system. I've written my play-by-play as best as possible in earlier postings.

However, coming from my background of experimental knowledge, I am more focused on the casino/table selection aspects of Ellis' approach to the game, and less on the mechanics of the systems, because I know that is where one can find a true edge. (I know both are important.) What one really needs for consistent, long term success is to find the right casinos & tables offering stable and consistent shoe types. That is the "hard" part, I think. The rest should be simple.

Link to post
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