Latest practice shoe II

[gman72]

Here's another good practice shoe for discussion by anyone interested. (This is a repost of a post lost during the server changeover.)

History: This is a red shoe that you just couldn't get a handle on the first time through. You jumped in mid shoe the last time through in what looked like a pretty good OTB4L table, but just couldn't get a handle on it and after about 20 plays you couldn't get anywhere and stopped playing with a -1 loss. Now the red shoe is up again after just playing a pretty good blue shoe. Here it is:

P241123112111

P21411211211111

B11315114111

P22121142

How would you play it? When did you get out? Why? I'll post how I played it in a little while. This is a real shoe played live at a casino.

[gman72]

P241123112111

P21411211211111

B11315114111

P22121142

How would you play it? When did you get out? Why? I'll post how I played it in a little while. This is a real shoe played live at a casino.

Ok, here's how I played it. Started out OTB4LM3 at play #2 and by mid-way through the second column I just couldn't get things going. After my 5 bet at play #32, I decided to switch to S40M2 at the next play and played the rest of the shoe out that way. You can see where I pointed out my mistake at play #57 where I should have been in M2 and not M3. It cost me some units, but I still ended up +13 units for the shoe. Any questions?

I'm just posting these practice shoes to spur any discussion about proper NOR(NOR+) play and mode changes if anyone is interested.

[Guest]

Ok, here's how I played it. Started out OTB4LM3 at play #2 and by mid-way through the second column I just couldn't get things going. After my 5 bet at play #32, I decided to switch to S40M2 at the next play and played the rest of the shoe out that way. You can see where I pointed out my mistake at play #57 where I should have been in M2 and not M3. It cost me some units, but I still ended up +13 units for the shoe. Any questions?

I'm just posting these practice shoes to spur any discussion about proper NOR(NOR+) play and mode changes if anyone is interested.

Ha, well I probably shouldn't tell you this because it has to do with general Baccarat experience rather than NOR. What struck me first glance is the high Opposites. No I didn't do an OR count although later I noted the OR count hits +14 (very rare).

What caught my attention was the high 1's normally 5 per col together with a longest straight run of only 4 thus far..

So I immediately tried betting Opposites only with U1D1M2

Yep! +49 at play 70 where I would quit. My highest bet was 5.

That's what 30+ years of Baccarat will do for ya!

BTW, I've only broke +60 a few times. But I've tried many times. Eventually I figured attemping to break 60 is a no no. So if I hit +49 or 50 or 51 on the nose, I quit. But also your highest PA quitting point is after a winning 1 bet.

I was at +40 at the bottom of the 3rd col which is another good quitting point.

Such is the power of U1D1M2 in a highly biased shoe.

These are the kinds of things only experience teaches you.

[gman72]

Ha, well I probably shouldn't tell you this because it has to do with general Baccarat experience rather than NOR. What struck me first glance is the high Opposites. No I didn't do an OR count although later I noted the OR count hits +14 (very rare).

What caught my attention was the high 1's normally 5 per col together with a longest straight run of only 4 thus far..

So I immediately tried betting Opposites only with U1D1M2

Yep! +49 at play 70 where I would quit. My highest bet was 5.

That's what 30+ years of Baccarat will do for ya!

BTW, I've only broke +60 a few times. But I've tried many times. Eventually I figured attemping to break 60 is a no no. So if I hit +49 or 50 or 51 on the nose, I quit. But also your highest PA quitting point is after a winning 1 bet.

I was at +40 at the bottom of the 3rd col which is another good quitting point.

Such is the power of U1D1M2 in a highly biased shoe.

These are the kinds of things only experience teaches you.

While I obviously don't have much experience, I do like to see how you observed this shoe and started betting opposites aggressively. I didn't get aggressive with my progression, but I did recognize by the middle of the second column that I should probably be in a different system and my switching to S40 (opposites) worked well. Your observation reinforces my thinking on this shoe and helps validate my reasoning for switching. Thanks as always.

[Guest]

While I obviously don't have much experience, I do like to see how you observed this shoe and started betting opposites aggressively. I didn't get aggressive with my progression, but I did recognize by the middle of the second column that I should probably be in a different system and my switching to S40 (opposites) worked well. Your observation reinforces my thinking on this shoe and helps validate my reasoning for switching. Thanks as always.

Well, on second thought, I definitely should NOT have said that this comes from experience only but, for sure, experience helps.

I said very early on that every now and then you come across a shoe or tote board that is so choppy or streaky that it DEMANDS that you drop all pretense of systems and play straight Opposites or Repeats with U1D1M2. These are little gifts we get when the casino makes a mistake.

Keith and family and I had such a shoe at Harrah's last Vegas seminar. We weren't more than 10 plays in when we all said at the same time "let's go to straight repeats. The shoe had started with a 6,4 or some such nonsense. It stayed that way just as they usually do and we all killed it.

We had an almost purely opposites shoe at Gold Coast that Zebra and I and a couple more of our guys noticed on a tote board. Everybody had quit the table mid shoe. (Ha, not enough runs) We jumped in, played straight Opposites and only lost 3 bets in the rest of the shoe.

You or one of the guys posted a shoe just recently that was nearly pure 1's and 2's. I SHOULD have pointed this out then but I didn't want to muddy the waters. It was definitely a straight opposites U1D1M2 shoe.

I had a hand shuffled minibac shoe playing head to head at Foxwood. There were only 5 opposites in the entire full shoe. I killed it U1D1M2. Mid shoe, the dealer said "I'm going to get fired over this - they told me not to use that shuffle!" Yet most people believe that all shuffles somehow produce random cards - Ha!

You have often heard me say that no betting system or progression no matter how long, can, by itself, beat Baccarat.

Well this is mostly for public consumption. I don't want to argue with a world full of mathematicians but I have found 3 exceptions:

1.) Our own U1D2 straight OTB4L beat our own 10,000 shoe test to the tune of a 7% PA - way outside the standard deviation.

2.) U1D1M2 beat the same shoes the same way to the tune of a 34% PA. No Mathematician would believe this.

3.) Keith's 221 staking line betting system beats way more than its fair share of shoes.

Now you would think that a Martingale system, like you see all over the internet, could do likewise but it can't because it eventually always runs up against the table max. Then, you are sunk.

But in our tests, we came nowhere near the table max. But we did have significant draw downs along the way that prove that you can't bet such systems indiscriminately. BUT, in highly biased shoes.....

So are such shoes common? Yes, if you look at enough tote boards. Every member here should always be on the lookout for such gifts. It is all part of the game.

Again, I can't help but wonder, in Keith's 221 system, what would have happened if, instead of playing straight repeats, they played repeats or opposites, whichever was ahead. I think THAT might be pretty much unbeatable!

BTW, I conducted lengthy tests of Martingale vs U1D1M2. U1D1M2 won just as many units BUT with far smaller bets!

It doesn't take a whole lot of experience to note that a shoe or tote board is highly favoring either Opposites or Repeats. Just one such shoe can make your whole trip!

[gman72]

You or one of the guys posted a shoe just recently that was nearly pure 1's and 2's. I SHOULD have pointed this out then but I didn't want to muddy the waters. It was definitely a straight opposites U1D1M2 shoe.

Just for clarification, when you say you bet just straight opposites, do you mean you forget about S40 and modes and just bet the progression straight opposites without any OTR bets?

[Guest]

Just for clarification, when you say you bet just straight opposites, do you mean you forget about S40 and modes and just bet the progression straight opposites without any OTR bets?

Correct! We call this Exploiting. It can be used whenever you see a very strong bias toward opposites or toward repeats or toward Bank or Player or ever OTB4L or TB4L. The most immediately obvious is Ops vs Reps and Bank vs Player. But the safest is Ops vs Reps. That bias is caused by the shuffle, particularly the card prep, but it can show up right out of the blue - For instance: Let's say the players are killing a late night table. The pit boss must react because that is his job. Think about it: what else is he doing back there? Why is he paid more than the dealers? He is responsible for his pit's bottom line for his shift. So he changes the settings on the shuffle machine - changes the program card. But this can cause an accidental super chop or super streak shoe. We strike!

Yes, we can see a very strong Player or Bank shoe but in my experience this is not as reliable as super chop or super streak. There is no known cause for strong Bank or Player but there is a known cause for Chop vs Streak.

An experienced player will usually pick up on this just watching his card. But ANYBODY can pick up on it by watching the OR count. When you are seeing 4 or more per column in either direction, you are watching an Exploit situation.

U1D1 and U1D1M2 are not as risky as they seem in the right situation. All U1D1M2 requires is that you win half your bets or more. Well, if you have a shoe that is say 60% opposites or more and you are betting straight opposites.....

In fact, the higher your bets get the more you win as long as you can get back to a 1 bet or even a 2 or 3 bet.

And you have lots of control should things get rough. Suppose you are betting straight opposites and up jumps a 7 in a row. So OK you win your 7 bet. You might decide to bail out a little and go down 2 instead of 1.

Your quit points are anytime you win a 1 bet because that is when your PA is at its highest.

What seems obvious to me after 30+ years of play may not be obvious to new players at all. Maybe we should devote a thread to Exploiting. If you think so, start a new thread called Exploiting and I'll fill in the blanks.

[Guest]

While I still have that shoe on the top of my desk let me give it to you play by play. You'll see that what I'm doing could not be simpler. There is no question on any play. Then if we want, we can use this play by play to start a new Exploit thread.

The shoe again was:

P 241123112111

P 21411211211111

B 11315114111

P 22121142

Starting at play 2: U1D1M2 on Opposites ONLY:

B12 P1234 B3 P2 B12 P123 B2 P1 B23 P2 B1 = +12

P2 B12 P1 B2345 P4 B3 P23 B2 P1 B23 P2 B1 P2 B1 = +30

P23 B2 P123 B2 P12345 B4 P3 B2345 P4 B3 = +40

P2 B12 P12 B1 P23 B2 P1 QUIT = +49 with a highest bet of 5

And sometimes you simply get an Exploit table!

For instance: I was at Gold Coast Vegas for a BJ tournament a couple years ago. In between BJ sessions I played this one exceptionally choppy Bac table for 3 days for a total of 20 shoes. I origionally found this table doing my standard table selection process. The table stayed choppy every day for 3 days. In 20 shoes only 1 ST run went past 4 and it went 7. I won every shoe. I lost the BJ tournament to my brother-in-law but I really didn't care. I won more playing Bac than he won winning the BJ tournament.

[Sakana]

[You have often heard me say that no betting system or progression no matter how long, can, by itself, beat Baccarat.

Well this is mostly for public consumption. I don't want to argue with a world full of mathematicians but I have found 3 exceptions:

1.) Our own U1D2 straight OTB4L beat our own 10,000 shoe test to the tune of a 7% PA - way outside the standard deviation.

2.) U1D1M2 beat the same shoes the same way to the tune of a 34% PA. No Mathematician would believe this.

3.) Keith's 221 staking line betting system beats way more than its fair share of shoes.]

Ellis, I am impressed with the above percentages, i.e. the 7% and 34%, respectively.

However, I find it hard to understand that there would be such a HUGE difference between the two.

Why does UP1D1 exceed UP1D1 by such a large margin? And if so, why not just play the later exclusively

for a higher PA, and consequently, higher profit?

[gman72]

While I still have that shoe on the top of my desk let me give it to you play by play. You'll see that what I'm doing could not be simpler. There is no question on any play. Then if we want, we can use this play by play to start a new Exploit thread.

The shoe again was:

P 241123112111

P 21411211211111

B 11315114111

P 22121142

Starting at play 2: U1D1M2 on Opposites ONLY:

B12 P1234 B3 P2 B12 P123 B2 P1 B23 P2 B1 = +12

P2 B12 P1 B2345 P4 B3 P23 B2 P1 B23 P2 B1 P2 B1 = +30

P23 B2 P123 B2 P12345 B4 P3 B2345 P4 B3 = +40

P2 B12 P12 B1 P23 B2 P1 QUIT = +49 with a highest bet of 5

For the more visually inclined, here is the shoe played out as Ellis describes:

[Guest]

[You have often heard me say that no betting system or progression no matter how long, can, by itself, beat Baccarat.

Well this is mostly for public consumption. I don't want to argue with a world full of mathematicians but I have found 3 exceptions:

1.) Our own U1D2 straight OTB4L beat our own 10,000 shoe test to the tune of a 7% PA - way outside the standard deviation.

2.) U1D1M2 beat the same shoes the same way to the tune of a 34% PA. No Mathematician would believe this.

3.) Keith's 221 staking line betting system beats way more than its fair share of shoes.]

Ellis, I am impressed with the above percentages, i.e. the 7% and 34%, respectively.

However, I find it hard to understand that there would be such a HUGE difference between the two.

Why does UP1D1 exceed UP1D1 by such a large margin? And if so, why not just play the later exclusively

for a higher PA, and consequently, higher profit?

First gman, thanks much for posting the shoe. I'd like all to note how extremely simple this U1D1M2 (Mandatory 2) Exploit process really is. No modes. Just bet pure opposites in a high +OR count shoe and bet U1D1M2. If Opposites remain high or even go to normal you simply can't lose. The higher the count goes the more you win. The same is true of high Repeats, high P or B or high OTB4L or TB4L. The only question that ever comes up (and it is very rare) is if you get a long run against whichever you are betting, should you ever go OTR??? I usually don't, Keith usually does. So, when playing together we have a standing deal. We cover it both ways and divy up the profits later. ONE of us is always right.

Now Sakana, that was an extremely astute question! THAT was the question we ALL had as soon as we double checked our test results. There were no errors. It is IMPORTANT to note that we were testing with actual casino shoes - not RG shoes. Our results SHOULD have been impossible and WOULD have been impossible if we had used RG (Random Gererator) shoes.

So, what do our results mean? They mean that casinos favor OTB4L shoes. Why? Because virtually all players (except us) lose to OTB4L shoes. They lose to RANDOM shoes. But WE excell in random shoes because we know OTB4L. Now you know why NOR+ bases with OTB4L.

Yes, the difference between U1D2 and U1D1m2 is huge. Why? Because we are betting in what I call bet pyramids. Every time you win a 2 bet you win your pyramid and start the next pyramid at 1. But U1D1m2 wins a whole lot more money on each pyramid than U1D2. And the m2 wins a whole lot more on a run than U1D2.

Lets compare what happens with both systems when you lose 5 bets but then eventually get back to 1.

So, Ok, U1D2 loses 12345 and then wins 642. It completed its pyramid but lost 3 units. See that?

Now, U1D1m2 loses the same 12345 and then wins 65432. OK, it won only half its bets in the pyramid but it is up 5 units for the pyramid instead of down 3. See that? See why I say you only need to win half your bets to kill the shoe?

Sure, U1D2 completes more pyramids but it actually loses money on some of them. U1D1m2 CAN'T lose on ANY pryamid as long as you get back to a winning 2 bet which only requires that you win half your bets - which just happens to be the actual game odds of Baccarat. But add a bias and watch what happens - you kill!

So why not ALWAYS bet this way??? Bias or not???

Nope! Sorry but you'd eventually get killed.

Our professional tester, Aegis, was very quick to point out that on the way to the 34% PA, we had huge draw downs. Yes, at times we were up 300 units but at other times we were down 300 units. You could not survive these draw downs.

But what actually caused them? Easy - A string of S40 shoes or a string of F shoes. So, about now you should be starting to see how NOR was born. Sure, play OTB4L in OTB4L shoes. BUT also play S40 in S40 shoes and F in F shoes. Now, if you couple that with a less aggressive progression, the draw downs disappear, hence NOR. See that?

But overall the shoes decidedly favored OTB4L, hence, NOR+!

Now you know my design secrets.

But what about this favoring stuff? How could shoes favor OTB4L?

Well, this is something you virtually had to see to believe.

I was there for the whole evolution of Baccarat. I wasn't just playing a lot, I was playing full time - tens of thousands of shoes. Back then it was all 14 player tables, brand new regular cards every shoe, high stakes. $100 mins in the '80s was like $1000 mins today. Every shoe we waited for the card prep and wash and then the standard shuffle. But we played very fast back then and even including the prep we were getting about one shoe every 45 minutes. I usually got in 20 shoes a day, 7 days a week. Every casino in the world used the same card prep and the same standard Bac shuffle. It produced extreme streak. I saw 20 iars or more every day - both straight and ZZ. This worked out fine for the casinos at first, until the players finally caught on and started playing TB4L which killed every shoe. The casinos reacted by changing the prep and shuffle causing pure chop. So I designed the very system we are talking about today and kept on winning nearly every shoe. Then the casinos went to the terrible 3s era. 3s are normally 4.5 per shoe. We were seeing that many per column. So I designed the ladder system which exploited 3s and could easily win 100 units a shoe. We closed the table at Turning Stone NY with that system. The casinos quickly caught on and went to OTB4L where they are still at today. That is the history of Baccarat in a nut shell. I realized that this was all accomplished through shuffle and card prep technology just as it had been done in BJ.

People, including the casinos, were asking for my systems just as they had in BJ. I wrote some 13 books, including 9 on

Baccarat which were all about what was working at the time. My most frequent buyers were the casinos themselves. Yes, I kept changing because the game kept changing. During that time period casinos went from 3% Bac profits to 15% with some years as high as 26%. How? By shuffling against the way most players were playing. They are very good at that - don't ever let anybody tell you different. I was there! So were some of the other guys. They know. For instance, TB4L worked great in the '90's. Today, you'll get killed playing it. That is why I don't include it in NOR. BUT, every now and then..... and that is one of the shoe types we can exploit - among others. Are you beginning to get the picture?

[samjai]

on play 22 after u lose 123 bet on mode 3 u bet otr only one time right why bet 4 and 5? thanx

[Guest]

Before somebody askes, Why did casinos go to terrible 3s? Easy, they are smart bastards. All systems, except OTB4L which is virtually unknown, are either Chop systems or Streak systems. Both lose to 3s. Think about it! S40 is the best chop system there is but it can't beat a 3. M2 outright loses to a 3 and M3 merely breaks even.

Likewise TB4L was the best streak system and is still the most common streak system today, in fact, the most common of all Bac systems. But it can't beat a 3 to save its life. Yes it wins the 3rd circle of the 3 but then immediately loses to the 4th circle which isn't there. Get it? See why casinos like 3s?

How do they do that? Well shuffle technology is a science in itself. It is far too complex to get into here and totally unimportant. Don't bother to ask WHY things happen. It is unimportant. Suffice it to know that things happen for a reason. Forget the reason. PLAY WHAT IS!

[Guest]

on play 22 after u lose 123 bet on mode 3 u bet otr only one time right why bet 4 and 5? thanx

Correct samjai! When you are Exploiting Opposites you strictly bet opposites. There are no OTR bets with this Exploit style of play. Therefore, no decisions. We keep it as simple as possible. I think you meant play 52.

[Sakana]

First gman, thanks much for posting the shoe. I'd like all to note how extremely simple this U1D1M2 (Mandatory 2) Exploit process really is. No modes. Just bet pure opposites in a high +OR count shoe and bet U1D1M2. If Opposites remain high or even go to normal you simply can't lose. The higher the count goes the more you win. The same is true of high Repeats, high P or B or high OTB4L or TB4L. The only question that ever comes up (and it is very rare) is if you get a long run against whichever you are betting, should you ever go OTR??? I usually don't, Keith usually does. So, when playing together we have a standing deal. We cover it both ways and divy up the profits later. ONE of us is always right.

Now Sakana, that was an extremely astute question! THAT was the question we ALL had as soon as we double checked our test results. There were no errors. It is IMPORTANT to note that we were testing with actual casino shoes - not RG shoes. Our results SHOULD have been impossible and WOULD have been impossible if we had used RG (Random Gererator) shoes.

So, what do our results mean? They mean that casinos favor OTB4L shoes. Why? Because virtually all players (except us) lose to OTB4L shoes. They lose to RANDOM shoes. But WE excell in random shoes because we know OTB4L. Now you know why NOR+ bases with OTB4L.

Yes, the difference between U1D2 and U1D1m2 is huge. Why? Because we are betting in what I call bet pyramids. Every time you win a 2 bet you win your pyramid and start the next pyramid at 1. But U1D1m2 wins a whole lot more money on each pyramid than U1D2. And the m2 wins a whole lot more on a run than U1D2.

Lets compare what happens with both systems when you lose 5 bets but then eventually get back to 1.

So, Ok, U1D2 loses 12345 and then wins 642. It completed its pyramid but lost 3 units. See that?

Now, U1D1m2 loses the same 12345 and then wins 65432. OK, it won only half its bets in the pyramid but it is up 5 units for the pyramid instead of down 3. See that? See why I say you only need to win half your bets to kill the shoe?

Sure, U1D2 completes more pyramids but it actually loses money on some of them. U1D1m2 CAN'T lose on ANY pryamid as long as you get back to a winning 2 bet which only requires that you win half your bets - which just happens to be the actual game odds of Baccarat. But add a bias and watch what happens - you kill!

So why not ALWAYS bet this way??? Bias or not???

Nope! Sorry but you'd eventually get killed.

Our professional tester, Aegis, was very quick to point out that on the way to the 34% PA, we had huge draw downs. Yes, at times we were up 300 units but at other times we were down 300 units. You could not survive these draw downs.

But what actually caused them? Easy - A string of S40 shoes or a string of F shoes. So, about now you should be starting to see how NOR was born. Sure, play OTB4L in OTB4L shoes. BUT also play S40 in S40 shoes and F in F shoes. Now, if you couple that with a less aggressive progression, the draw downs disappear, hence NOR. See that?

But overall the shoes decidedly favored OTB4L, hence, NOR+!

Now you know my design secrets.

But what about this favoring stuff? How could shoes favor OTB4L?

Well, this is something you virtually had to see to believe.

I was there for the whole evolution of Baccarat. I wasn't just playing a lot, I was playing full time - tens of thousands of shoes. Back then it was all 14 player tables, brand new regular cards every shoe, high stakes. $100 mins in 80s was like $1000 mins today. Every shoe we waited for the card prep and wash and then the standard shuffle. But we played very fast back then and even including the prep we were getting about one shoe every 45 minutes. I usually got in 20 shoes a day, 7 days a week. Every casino in the world used the same card prep and the same standard Bac shuffle. It produced extreme streak. I saw 20 iars or more every day - both straight and ZZ. This worked out fine for the casinos at first, until the players finally caught on and started playing TB4L which killed every shoe. The casinos reacted by changing the prep and shuffle causing pure chop. So I designed the very system we are talking about today and kept on winning nearly every shoe. Then the casinos went to the terrible 3s era. 3s are normally 4.5 per shoe. We were seeing that many per column. So I designed the ladder system which exploited 3s and could easily win 100 units a shoe. We closed the table at Turning Stone NY with that system. The casinos quickly caught on and went to OTB4L where they are still at today. That is the history of Baccarat in a nut shell. I realized that this was all accomplished through shuffle and card prep technology just as it had been done in BJ.

People, including the casinos, were asking for my systems just as they had in BJ. I wrote some 13 books, including 9 on

Baccarat which were all about what was working at the time. My most frequent buyers were the casinos themselves. Yes, I kept changing because the game kept changing. During that time period casinos went from 3% Bac profits to 15% with some years as high as 26%. How? By shuffling against the way most players were playing. They are very good at that - don't ever let anybody tell you different. I was there! So were some of the other guys. They know. For instance, TB4L worked great in the '90's. Today, you'll get killed playing it. That is why I don't include it in NOR. BUT, every now and then..... and that is one of the shoe types we can exploit - among others. Are you beginning to get the picture?

Ellis,

Thank you for your detailed and thorough reply. So, if you played 20 shoes/day @ 45min./shoe in the 80's, that means your were

spending some 16 hours a day, 7 days a week playing baccarat? That's some dedication! Where I play (West Virginia and Maryland) it takes

between 1.5 and 2 hours to deal a shoe - which is okay for a NOR apprentice such as myself, but would probably frustrate a more experienced player.

[gman72]

Likewise OTB4L was the best streak system and is still the most common streak system today, in fact, the most common of all Bac systems. But it can't beat a 3 to save its life. Yes it wins the 3rd circle of the 3 but then immediately loses to the 4th circle which isn't there. Get it? See why casinos like 3s?

This statement has me baffled??? I thought OTB4L liked 3iars.

[Guest]

This statement has me baffled??? I thought OTB4L liked 3iars.

Ha, I, of course, meant TB4L. I fixed it.

[Guest]

Ellis,

Thank you for your detailed and thorough reply. So, if you played 20 shoes/day @ 45min./shoe in the 80's, that means your were

spending some 16 hours a day, 7 days a week playing baccarat? That's some dedication! Where I play (West Virginia and Maryland) it takes

between 1.5 and 2 hours to deal a shoe - which is okay for a NOR apprentice such as myself, but would probably frustrate a more experienced player.

Right, 15, 16 sometimes 20 hours a day. My longest game ever was 27 hours straight in a high stakes BJ game.

Yes, I was insanely dedicated. My home and family were in Saratoga Springs, N.Y., home of the Saratoga race track and the Canfield Casino, a high stakes parlor for the rich and famous horse people and the first casino in the US anywhere.

But I moved into the Madison House in Atlantic City for 3 years, right next to The Sands and the Claridge - my favorit casino. I could get up in the morning and be on a table in 10 minutes. The huge first floor bar at the Madison House was also the biggest dealer hang out in A.C. I bought a dealer shirt and learned all their secrets buying tables full of dealers pitchers of beer.

For technical reasons I played BJ on Tues Wed and Thurs and Bac on Fri thru Mon.

I went home, about 3 hours away, only every month or 2.

I had to be dedicated because until I wrote NBJ my playing was my family's only source of income.

I put in thousands of hours of practice before I ever stepped foot in a casino.

Yep, I'd say I was dedicated. In current dollars, I was making about $620,000 a year playing Bac and BJ full time.

Ha, but my first Bac book, self published, made $667,000 in actual dollars it's first month of sales. My first commission check for NBJ was for $87,000 in actual dollars. It ended up with more sales than all other gaming books combined. So the family was pretty happy with my choices. As a college math professor, I had been making $40,000 a year.