NOR Manual Questions

[ECD]

My question to Papa Joe, Ellis and others who have experienced great success using NOR & SAP, what is your increase in units bet when you see 2's as MC in OTB4L or a plethora of 1's in SB40 situation. If we are adhering to a 123 4 bet placement strategy. Would you jump say from a 1 unit bet to 3 units in these of situations? Just want to get an idea of has been working over time as a sensible approach to increasing the unit size in higher percentage bets. Also,how many units in profit are you in before you think about increase your units size?

I started out betting 5 units on the 2nd liners and sometimes, depending on the way they are clumping, I still bet 5, but generally speaking and to be a bit more conservative, I would recommend 3 units. So if you win the 1 unit, instead of a 2 unit bet on the 2nd line, I would bet 3. This is especially true when on OTB4L because it thrives on 2s and is a good place to bet more. If OT continues and is very strong you could raise that 2nd bet even higher as you go. but once you lose a 2nd bet go back to the lower bets.

PJ

Edited December 8, 2011 by ECD

[kachatz1]

Congratulations Ellis! This has to be the best and most complete manual you've ever written bar none. The examples are well chosen to demonstrate the systems, and modes of NOR. I think it is probably the best work ever written for baccarat profit seekers.

I just have one comment from my personal perspective. You know how I like to exploit second liners and I am constantly watching for the clumping of the 2+s. Well here's my suggestion. When playing the NOR approach and we are in OTB4L mode, why not place a larger bet on the 2nd liners. OTB4L thrives on them and if it's an OTB4L shoe this would be a very good chance to increase out profits. Just had to add that!

For the Sappers, it's like when 2s are MC.. 2nd liners are HOT!

Thanks for your excellent work.

PJ[/quote

pJ

So I just had to give it a try.... And so I did!

Played 12 shoes at TheHardRock Biloxi last two days and reformatted my card to make it more like PJ's approach

lo-and -behold, I noticed some things Never noticed before....

Maybe better then ever I learned to look for the 2222222222222222's in excess of normal distribution , and sure enough, I picked up some nice wins just paying attention to capitalizing on the 2's when they were MC....yes, they would have

showed up as MC on my regular cards, but here they really " stood out" when formatted as PJ describes!

One More Trick In The Book and it is a W.I.N.N.E.R.!!!

[B@cc@r@t]

I also had a great success with playing like PJ and Kev. I start paying more attention to numerical values such as natural, etc. I know I am not at the level where Kev & PJ are but I am closely approaching to comfortable level. Thanks so much for great member contribution like Kev and PJ. Of course, I also thank Ellis that put a lot of effort into the NOR manual and help fellow Bac players.

[bacattack]

Ellis,

Could you please clarify, perhaps provide examples (graphics), with starting at the beginning of a shoe, showing S40 and OTB4L in Mode 3 , then switching to Mode 2, adding your personal comments on when the switch in both Modes occurs throughout the shoe. Thanks jrry

[Guest]

Ellis,

Could you please clarify, perhaps provide examples (graphics), with starting at the beginning of a shoe, showing S40 and OTB4L in Mode 3 , then switching to Mode 2, adding your personal comments on when the switch in both Modes occurs throughout the shoe. Thanks jrry

Sure bacattack but if you will notice in the new manual, I withdrew the rule to always start S40 in Mode 3. Yes, Mode 3 will beat 87% of all events BUT, as Witchygal pointed out Mode 3 always incurs a 3 bet as soon as the shoe produces its first 3 in a row which usually doesn't take very long. If we start in Mode 2, we go OTR with a 1 bet after losing our first 1,2. Should we lose that 1 unit OTR bet, next time we go OTR we can bet 2 and if that also loses, next time we can go 3.

If we start in Mode 2 instead of 3, we incur a lot fewer 3 bets and sometimes none at all, and NO 4 bets, let alone 5 bets. This is the way I played in the casino sessions played after the last two seminars.

So, you might ask, what if it turns out to be a Mode 3 shoe starting out? OK, fine, this new starting concept cost us 1 unit to find that out. But, on the other hand, suppose we start in Mode 3 as before and it turns out to be a Mode 2 shoe. It would cost us a 3 unit bet to find that out. That is the bet we avoid with this new starting concept.

The only way we could do it any safer, as I also pointed out in the manual, is to skip the bet after our first losing 1,2 altogether and use that 0 bet to confirm our starting mode.

Both of these start up procedures can be used with all 3 NOR systems.

No matter how we decide to make our bet after our first losing 2 bets in a row, the next bet is our 3rd bet in our prog regardless if we decide to make it 0, 1, 2, or 3. If our 3rd bet wins we stay in that mode for next time. If it loses, we change modes for next time regardless of the size of our 3rd bet and regardless of which way we made it, OTR or not.

I think this is both the simplest way as well as the safest way to start any shoe regardless of which system we decide to start with or how long we wait to start.

Let me put it this way: The 3rd bet of our prog always decides the mode for next time regarless of what size of bet we happened to make it. This method avoids all SAP and events counts yet is just as accurate if not more so.

Again, as I said in the manual, the only thing that can go wrong is when we get a shoe where the mode keeps changing every time an OTR bet comes up. Here we are best to STAY in Mode 2 and increase our OTR bets by 1 unit every time we lose an OTR bet. Again, that is the way S40 was played when it won 40 shoes in a row at 5 different casinos. We can afford to do this and still make our +10 especially if we count that +10 from our worst position instead of from 0.

Switching systems mid shoe is an entirely different question than switching modes. Switching modes is purely mechanical and always decided by the win or loss of our 3rd bet no matter which mode we were in.

Switching systems is caused by a wildly changing OR count just like we had in the casino demonstation shoe. Remember that shoe started with a 2,7 which caused the OR count to go straight down to -6. (F for sure). But then we had a ZZ of 7 which caused the OR count to come straight back up to 0. (S40 for sure) But then the OR count hovered at -1,0,-1,0 for 10 plays switching us yet again to OTB4L driving our score to +8. Then it went to hell yet again causing us to lose our 1,2. So I got out with +5, 10 units up from my worst position.

But put yourself in the casino's position: Out of a clear blue sky 50 people gather around a Bac table to watch some jerk play. If you had a trick up your sleeve would't you consider deploying it right then and there??? And believe you me, casinos ALWAYS have a trick or two up their sleeve.

Like the Stardust: All of a sudden 240 people walk into the high stakes pit to watch some jerk play a $100 table. At play 25 I'm up +20 units. They had no trick up their sleeve so they simply closed the table and barred me. Every player walked out of their high stakes pit on a Saturday night! The pit boss's job lasted about another 5 minutes.

As far as switching systems goes I only end up switching systems in one shoe out of ten. In the Luxor shoe I had to switch 4 times IN THE FIRST COLUMN! I started with OTB4L at play 5 because of 2 twos. Switched to F at play 7 because of the 5 in a row. Then to S40 at play 12 because of the 4 ZZ, then back to OTB4L at play 19 because of 2 twos again. That was the first time I ever switched 4 times in the first column. If you think that was a happenstance occurence of random cards, I've got this bridge in Brooklyn.....

Edited December 15, 2011 by Guest

[Guest]

I also had a great success with playing like PJ and Kev. I start paying more attention to numerical values such as natural, etc. I know I am not at the level where Kev & PJ are but I am closely approaching to comfortable level. Thanks so much for great member contribution like Kev and PJ. Of course, I also thank Ellis that put a lot of effort into the NOR manual and help fellow Bac players.

Well, I don't want to burst your bubble or discourage you in any way but I would like to at least get you barking up the right tree.

Sit back and look at the big picture. It is a deck of cards for crying out loud. Well, OK, 8 decks. The point is, they are merely cards. They can't think. They have no mind of their own. They don't know their own numerical value. Whether Bank wins 9 to 0 or 1 to 0 has no significance whatsoever. The only FACT is that Bank won! By how much is totally meaningless.

The OR count IS meaningful because it is a function of the quality of the shuffle.

You remind me of these guys that peak under the same card 4 times thinking this will somehow change its value. That is pure superstition. Superstition has no place in Baccarat.

Look, when the first card is dealt, the die is cast. The whole outcome of every hand is already decided. NOTHING can change that fact. Numerical values are totally meaningless. No kind of math can give value to card values. Only superstition can. And superstition is meaningless. Do you throw salt over your shoulder too? And watch out for those cracks in the sidewalk.

Look, 2nd liners are 50/50. HALF of all shoes produce a minus OR count and half produce a plus OR count. The more - an OR count the more 2nd liners will hit above 50%. The more + an OR count the less second liners will hit below 50%. There is nothing magical about this. It is pure math.

So if you want to play 2nd liners, do it only in the half of all shoes that have a - OR count. Better yet, only in shoes with a high minus OR count. In plus counts, especially high plus counts, bet AGAINST 2nd liners. That is logical. But it certainly is not the BEST use of an OR count. The BEST use of an OR count is NOR mostly because it gives you 3 uses for the OR count instead of only two. Sure, you will win! BUT, a well studied NOR player will put you to shame. You are not going to be seeing any 26% PAs. Figure on about a 0.5% PA. That's what blows up the skirts of card counters. BTW, there are NO winning card counters. They only exist in the movies. Movies are makebelieve!

Second liners are just as make believe. I'm sorry but the FACT is they only win exactly as often as they mathematically should which is exactly half the time. Minus OR bet ON 2nd liners; plus OR bet AGAINST 2nd liners. Remember ones are HALF of all events. Math is REAL! Superstition is makebelieve.

Edited December 15, 2011 by Guest

[ECD]

Let me briefly defend my position on 2nd liners. I have found it to be a very reliable improvement in my play.

I believe playing 2nd liners offers a definite advantage to the seasoned player. The best way to play 2nd liners is to just watch for clumping! Are 2+s clumping? Go for 2nd liners. Are 1s clumping? Don't rely on 2nd liners, play opposites (S40).

It's what Andrea always talks about... playing “Groups vs. Singles”. You could even use a simple count to determine which is the case; +1 for a confirmed 1 iar, and -1 for a 2 or more. If the GS (Groups vs. Singles) count is "+" singles are dominating, if it is "-", 2nd liners (groups) are dominating.

Yes, half of all events are singles and the other half is 2+s, but the reason I like 2nd liners is when 2+s are clumping you have a higher hit ratio on the 2nd liners, and it's one of the best times to raise your bet. Remember you can't have any runs of 3 or more until you first have a 2nd liner. The reverse is also true when 1s are clumping , you have an advantage in betting for opposites, but I would not bet larger here. I would bet larger for the 2nd liners because you can’t have any straight runs without first having a 2nd liner.

Most times when 2+s are clumping you will be playing OTB4L, which by default supports 2nd liners. I wouldn't advise playing for 2nd liners in Sys 40!

Even with the NOR approach, when 2+s are clumping, I would feel very confident to place a larger bet on the 2nd liners. Even it it's only 1-2 units more.

Here's another observation concerning the GS count. It can be a new tool in our toolkit. If the GS count is +, System 40 is the way to go. If it is "-" You would be better off with OTB4L or the "f" series. By telling us when NOT to play SyS40 we have just added another advantage to NOR. I like this GS option.

This strategy is not for everyone and I only promote it for the seasoned player. It all boils down to "heads up playing" Since the order of the cards is pre-determined once they are placed in the tray, I only try to watch the shoe as it is played and react to what the shoe is putting out. It is good to know the baccarat math regarding normal occurrences of events, but once the shoe is in play, they don't mean much. It's what THIS shoe is producing that we have to react to. A shoe can change nature several times during those 72 hands. We just need to use all our baccarat tools to react properly to what is being produced.

they are merely cards. They can't think. They have no mind of their own. They don't know their own numerical value.

This is certainly right. It’s the player who must do the thinking!

Edited December 15, 2011 by ECD

[Guest]

No defense necessary PJ. It is fine for experienced players like you and Andrea who already know at a glance when twos are above or below normal as well as when ones are above or below normal. But a lot of these guys have never played before and have yet to develop these kinds of skills. They need a more automated approach and less intuition. Plus, I want to start them with a vertical card.

BTW, the existing OR count is totally adequate for determining 2nd liner bets vs first liner bets.

I think this is a good project for down the road once everybody gets the basics down first. It is also a good deal mathematically once students fully grasp the 2nd liner concept. But first they need to grasp basic Baccarat Math and Opposites vs Repeats and have it all taught correctly to them since virtually all Baccarat books have it totally wrong.

The pure mathematical fact is that in minus OR count shoes 2nd liner bets MUST have a higher hit rate than first liner or third liner or 4th liner and so forth. This is a mathematical fact that we can use to enhance all of our NOR systems. AND the opposite is also true - In plus count OR shoes first liner bets MUST have a higher hit rate than all other liners. Pure fact that virtually nobody knows.

But rather than intrude when students are trying to get Baccarat basics down, I'm already thinking in terms of a "NOR Advanced" class that puts these two mathematical "gifts" to good use. When you think about it, you can identify the liner with the highest hit rate in the shoe at hand virtually every time. THAT is the bet we SHOULD be betting the most units on. But we need a correct mechanical way to identify, qualify, and quantify that "super" bet. I already see exactly how this can be done, and done reasonably and safely.

But we must teach in digestible steps. Suffice it for now that students KNOW that someting big is in the offing down the road a little. We are already the best players on this planet. BUT there is a whole new league awaiting us. NORA!

[joeystyle]

No defense necessary PJ. It is fine for experienced players like you and Andrea who already know at a glance when twos are above or below normal as well as when ones are above or below normal. But a lot of these guys have never played before and have yet to develop these kinds of skills. They need a more automated approach and less intuition. Plus, I want to start them with a vertical card.

BTW, the existing OR count is totally adequate for determining 2nd liner bets vs first liner bets.

I think this is a good project for down the road once everybody gets the basics down first. It is also a good deal mathematically once students fully grasp the 2nd liner concept. But first they need to grasp basic Baccarat Math and Opposites vs Repeats and have it all taught correctly to them since virtually all Baccarat books have it totally wrong.

The pure mathematical fact is that in minus OR count shoes 2nd liner bets MUST have a higher hit rate than first liner or third liner or 4th liner and so forth. This is a mathematical fact that we can use to enhance all of our NOR systems. AND the opposite is also true - In plus count OR shoes first liner bets MUST have a higher hit rate than all other liners. Pure fact that virtually nobody knows.

But rather than intrude when students are trying to get Baccarat basics down, I'm already thinking in terms of a "NOR Advanced" class that puts these two mathematical "gifts" to good use. When you think about it, you can identify the liner with the highest hit rate in the shoe at hand virtually every time. THAT is the bet we SHOULD be betting the most units on. But we need a correct mechanical way to identify, qualify, and quantify that "super" bet. I already see exactly how this can be done, and done reasonably and safely.

But we must teach in digestible steps. Suffice it for now that students KNOW that someting big is in the offing down the road a little. We are already the best players on this planet. BUT there is a whole new league awaiting us. NORA!

I love the deep analysis being done by both PJ and Ellis. Increasing the bet size on second liners will definitely help my bottom line as well as others. Also will get me the hell out of shoe earlier. Because as we know, the worm does turn. If I may make a suggestion. since the next scheduled NOR seminar will be 4 hours in length in AC, could this cover the advanced concept of mathematics that we are speaking about now in this thread?

Ciao

Joey

[Guest]

I love the deep analysis being done by both PJ and Ellis. Increasing the bet size on second liners will definitely help my bottom line as well as others. Also will get me the hell out of shoe earlier. Because as we know, the worm does turn. If I may make a suggestion. since the next scheduled NOR seminar will be 4 hours in length in AC, could this cover the advanced concept of mathematics that we are speaking about now in this thread?

Ciao

Joey, if you are referring to the mathematical fact that a plus OR count MUST produce a shoe highest in first liners (1 or mores in a row) while a minus OR count MUST produce a shoe highest in 2nd liners (2 or mores), the concept is not that difficult. It is just that no one, to my knowledge, has ever realized or used this fact before.

Consider that 1's are the only event that can cause an OR count to go plus because 2s break the count even and 3 or mores produce a minus OR count.

A 1 in a row produces one Opposite and no Repeats

A 2 in a row produces one Opposite and one repeat (break even)

3 or mores produce one Opposite and 2 or more Repeats

All straight runs of 2 or more produce a 2nd liner.

All runs of one or more produce a first liner.

Therefore all minus count shoes have more 2 or mores than 1's. That is the only way a minus OR count can be produced. Since EVERY run contains a 2, every run produces a 2nd liner and the shoe MUST have more 2 or mores than 1's to have produced a minus count in the first place.

Likewise, every Plus count shoe MUST have more 1's than 2 or mores but ALL events (one or mores) produce a first liner.

Therefore we can define a plus count as a shoe with more first liners than 2nd or more liners.

And we can define a minus OR count as a shoe having more 2nd liners than any other liners.

See, isn't that perfectly clear now?

Ha, it's no wonder that nobody ever noticed this before. I think I need a vacation after that brain buster!

Hey PJ, is your head still spinning? See that? The OR count determines which liner will come in the most between 1st and 2nd liners and exactly how often. The OR count is a perfect quantifier and should be determining our bet size on 1st and/or 2nd liners.

Remember, you heard it at BTC first! And you'll likely never hear it anywhere else. But when you think about it, this is a huge Baccarat breakthrough that no one ever noticed before. We will put it to good use!

Edited December 16, 2011 by Guest

[aegis21]

A 1 in a row produces one Opposite and no Repeats

A 2 in a row produces one Opposite and one repeat (break even)

3 or mores produce one Opposite and 2 or more Repeats

Good Morning Ellis,

Isn't this off by one? I think as you taught me a one in a row counted correctly has to have two opposites.(unless it is the first play of the game, which then you don't know if it was a one or the ending of a two or more)

BBpBB two opposites with the player

BPPB two opposites with the player two in a row and one repeat

BPPPB two opposites with the player three in a row and two repeats

BPPPPB two opposites with player four in a row and three repeats

Is this correct?

I am just trying to get back up to speed for my annual Birthday trip to Foxwoods next week! lol

Thanks

John

[Action Mike]

Ellis,

Sign me up for this NORA class!!. Better yet, come down to Florida where it is warm to do it I like the idea of deeper mathematical analysis on any shoe, that is one of the main reasons I chose baccarat is that by doing analysis you can always improve your game. Games that do not allow us to record outcomes make it very difficult for us to improve our play. Someone once said to me, "It's all in the numbers"

No defense necessary PJ. It is fine for experienced players like you and Andrea who already know at a glance when twos are above or below normal as well as when ones are above or below normal. But a lot of these guys have never played before and have yet to develop these kinds of skills. They need a more automated approach and less intuition. Plus, I want to start them with a vertical card.

BTW, the existing OR count is totally adequate for determining 2nd liner bets vs first liner bets.

I think this is a good project for down the road once everybody gets the basics down first. It is also a good deal mathematically once students fully grasp the 2nd liner concept. But first they need to grasp basic Baccarat Math and Opposites vs Repeats and have it all taught correctly to them since virtually all Baccarat books have it totally wrong.

The pure mathematical fact is that in minus OR count shoes 2nd liner bets MUST have a higher hit rate than first liner or third liner or 4th liner and so forth. This is a mathematical fact that we can use to enhance all of our NOR systems. AND the opposite is also true - In plus count OR shoes first liner bets MUST have a higher hit rate than all other liners. Pure fact that virtually nobody knows.

But rather than intrude when students are trying to get Baccarat basics down, I'm already thinking in terms of a "NOR Advanced" class that puts these two mathematical "gifts" to good use. When you think about it, you can identify the liner with the highest hit rate in the shoe at hand virtually every time. THAT is the bet we SHOULD be betting the most units on. But we need a correct mechanical way to identify, qualify, and quantify that "super" bet. I already see exactly how this can be done, and done reasonably and safely.

But we must teach in digestible steps. Suffice it for now that students KNOW that someting big is in the offing down the road a little. We are already the best players on this planet. BUT there is a whole new league awaiting us. NORA!

[Guest]

Good Morning Ellis,

Isn't this off by one? I think as you taught me a one in a row counted correctly has to have two opposites.(unless it is the first play of the game, which then you don't know if it was a one or the ending of a two or more)

BBpBB two opposites with the player

BPPB two opposites with the player two in a row and one repeat

BPPPB two opposites with the player three in a row and two repeats

BPPPPB two opposites with player four in a row and three repeats

Is this correct?

I am just trying to get back up to speed for my annual Birthday trip to Foxwoods next week! lol

Thanks

John

Right John, I DID say that and still do. I realize it is a little confusing - like computers are for me. A single 1 produces 2 opposites every time except when it is the first or last play of the game. But only the 1st 1. 5 1's in a row does not produce 10 Opposites, only 6. Go figure. Only the first 1 produced 2 Opposites.

Ha, wait until we teach them how to count the length of ZZs correctly when every Bac book and every other Bac forum gets it totally wrong. Or that OTB4L is nothing more than betting Opposites will follow Repeats and Repeats will follow Opposites. You don't even need to look at the time before last and then bet Opposite it.

John, don't hurt your head. Just take my word for it. Have you ever known me to be wrong?

[Guest]

Ellis,

Sign me up for this NORA class!!. Better yet, come down to Florida where it is warm to do it I like the idea of deeper mathematical analysis on any shoe, that is one of the main reasons I chose baccarat is that by doing analysis you can always improve your game. Games that do not allow us to record outcomes make it very difficult for us to improve our play. Someone once said to me, "It's all in the numbers"

Hmmm, sounds like an offer I can't refuse Pomp. I'm thinking the next seminar after the March AC seminar. I should have Nora all figured out by then.

[aegis21]

John, don't hurt your head. Just take my word for it. Have you ever known me to be wrong?

Nope and Nope! Won't hurt my head, it is as hard as diamonds! lol btw I think I can make the AC seminar in March, but really St. Patricks day? Did you pick that to show a whole Blackjack pit having seven player games push the dealer with all tens???

[Action Mike]

Hmmm, sounds like an offer I can't refuse Pomp. I'm thinking the next seminar after the March AC seminar. I should have Nora all figured out by then.

Just be careful it itsn't too late in the year. Summertime down here isn't favorable for people not used to it. April-May is the sweet spot. Right after spring break the weather is still cool enough to be tolerable for northerners and the population subsides leaving the hotel business begging for tourists. After the middle of June-July it gets too humid here for people that are not full timers.

[ECD]

The OR count determines which liner will come in the most between 1st and 2nd liners and exactly how often.

Well, sort of…

The OR count does not tell which WILL come in most between 1st and 2nd liners, or how often, rather it tells how many at this point in the shoe have come in. Yes, it's is a good indicator and I’m not saying we should put any less importance to the OR count, but (as you have taught me) it is a tool that should be combined with other information that the shoe is giving us.

It can be used very effectively as a trend indicator, but the problem with all these counts is it’s kind of like driving your car and only looking in the rear view mirror. That’s why I also look for “clumping” of the 2+s before I commit to a 2nd line increased bet. The more info I have the more confident I am at risking my bet in this 50/50 game of baccarat.

We know the math overall is 50/50, but in this shoe (the shoe we are playing) the events were locked in when those 8 decks were placed into the tray. I just try to see how they unfold as the shoe is played and go with the flow.

The OR count is a perfect quantifier and should be determining our bet size on 1st and/or 2nd liners.

I agree, accept I would say that it should be helping to determine our bet size. We should also use other historical info like which side have most 2nd liners been hitting B or P? (the game within a game)

I know you also prefer the vertical score card, but I can really see the patterns better on the horizontal card.

However, lately, I’m drifting back to a vertical card for the SAP count (another important piece of the puzzle). I’m starting to use a split SAP card that tracks the events separately for the bank side and the player side. It’s a concept suggested in my forum by Andrea and we’ve been using it on my bacc forum going on two years now. It lets you clearly see the events like MC, LC, OT, ZZ etc. for each side. It’s like playing a game within a game and makes it easy to see exploitable situations when they appear.

With the split sap card it is now easy to see 2nd liners when you look at both games (the player side and the bank side). It also helps if I use RED for the player side (and RED for player sap events) and BLUE for the bank side (and BLUE for bank sap events). The 2nd liners and other exploits slap you in the face.

Remember new guys, all of this may sound confusing, but if you are serious about being a consistant winner, you’ll dig thru all the previous threads and absorb all the info. As Ellis says they are “arrows for your quiver”, and prepare you for success.

Ellis, I know all of these ideas may not fall into NORA, but just like 2nd liners, feel free to use any of these ideas for NORA.

Mi casa es su casa!

PJ

Edited December 16, 2011 by ECD

[core]

Hello papajoe,

What is the url address for ur forum?

[ECD]

Hello papajoe,

What is the url address for ur forum?

Hi core,

Thanks for asking, but my intentions are NOT to promote another forum here on BTC. My forum Baccarat Bandits, is more of a think tank, and membership is by invitation only. I'm not trying to make money like Maverick was by enticing folks to come over to my forum and join. We don't sell anything. The only way in is thru invitation.

Please don't feel slighted, it's just that our little group is for the most part, already set.

I have shared many of the ideas we have brainstormed here at BTC and will continue doing so as long as Ellis does not object.

Thanks,

PJ

Edited December 16, 2011 by ECD

[Ivan heng]

Hi Ellis,

i would like to know the trigger or when do i change from OTB4L to S40 or F2??

[MVSeahog]

Remember new guys, all of this may sound confusing, but if you are serious about being a consistant winner, you’ll dig thru all the previous threads and absorb all the info. As Ellis says they are “arrows for your quiverâ€, and prepare you for success.

PJ

A very true statement for sure. Taking the time to look back and read "how we got here" makes more sense than one would think!!

MVS

[jerryczy]

Therefore all minus count shoes have more 2 or mores than 1's. That is the only way a minus OR count can be produced. Since EVERY run contains a 2, every run produces a 2nd liner and the shoe MUST have more 2 or mores than 1's to have produced a minus count in the first place.

Likewise, every Plus count shoe MUST have more 1's than 2 or mores but ALL events (one or mores) produce a first liner.

Therefore we can define a plus count as a shoe with more first liners than 2nd or more liners.

And we can define a minus OR count as a shoe having more 2nd liners than any other liners.

Hi Ellis, I have a little confused here. For Example, we have a shoe like this:11171, OR count is -2,here we have 4 1 liners and only 1 2s+ liners.

[Guest]

Hi Ellis, I have a little confused here. For Example, we have a shoe like this:11171, OR count is -2,here we have 4 1 liners and only 1 2s+ liners.

Ha, I'm not surprised. The math is a little confusing at first but the fact is, using this tecnology you Still would have won!

OK, your OR count starts out plus so you win your bets at plays 3 and 4 and lose at play 5. But then you don't get a first liner bet until play 11 and you are 1 unit up assuming you only flat bet. Now the count is minus so your next bet would be P at play 12. The whole run just cancels out. You are only betting either 1st or 2nd liners - never both. So you are at +1 waiting for the outcome of play 12. Not bad at all considering the oddity of the shoe thus far. Get it now? Pretty damn neat!

[jerryczy]

Got you, thanks. It's diff than PapaJoe's GS count.

[bacattack]

Ellis,

When playing S40 with Mode 2, when we lose the 1,2 unit bets, and we also lose our first 1 unit OTR bet, (for a total of -4 units).

What is our next correct unit size bet? Would you bet 3 units based on the 123 4 progression or would you bet 1 unit? If the correct bet is for 3 units, and you did lose this bet, would you exit the shoe with an overall loss of -7 units? Thank you for your assistance.