todays bacarrat @ sands worth every penny

[Sport]

kieth,his wife and ellis are the real deal.after expenses took home $925.they even took every one to dinner on them.everytime i meet these guys i learn more and more about the game.hey kieth please post the bac results cards from the sands and sign me up for the february vegas 4 d clinic.a definite date would be very helpful for making reservations.thanks p.s. my son won $220 playing poker. thanks again

[Keith Smith]

Shoes -

P21111111111111111212113

P13221121111111414213362253311

P3215221

B3114122

P3215221

P221112111112313111113

Thanks Ruebel,

I will scan them we had some obvious shoes that were easy to play but it was a struggle as we changed approaches too often.

We didn't end up ahead as we changed too often but it was a learning experience. The early games we missed playing the repeat shoes and was a casino horsepower error. I have some partial shoes that I will scan. Thanks to everyone who came and supported BTC. We will be having a Las Vegas social coming up where we I will organize the dealers school.

K

[kachatz1]

Shoes -

P21111111111111111212113

P13221121111111414213362253311

Keith 1's, 2's and 3's seemed rocking and rolling ( compared ro normal diatribution) over the various shoes posted... Likely mode switches would have made even better.

I think Ellis will have a close look and say this was kind of shoes ripe to exploit his last post B4 his trip to Sands...told us he had revelation about latest observation on kind of shoes the shuffle master delivers lately. ( it is NOT just Vegas!)

Thanks for getting more team members involved in real casino conditions, real casino play...( it is NOT the same as " live dealer action" online, unless the wifey or neighbor lady is acting as cocktail 'waitress tomake sure you are " over-served", the music is blaring, local 20-something's are modeling little black dresses, the neighbors are all standing over your shoulder commenting about " P/B.. And what they would have done last hand ( versus what YOU did, fool!), where you live has no windows/ no clocks, and the milkman moonlights chez vous and , by agreement, as your bad-ass personal Pit Boss

[Edgonsal]

Hi guys,

I was there too. My experience was a lot of fun, exciting & very educational in watching what happens to even the best players at any given time in the live casino. This particular trip to this (new to me) casino reminded me once again that THE CASINOS AREN"T YOUR FRIEND. They will use every trick in the book to get your hard earned money!!! ITS OUR JOB TO BEAT THEM AT THEIR OWN GAME. The Sands used pre-shuffeled cards, (my first experience with them)- made it tough to get any real consistency for prolonged periods in the shoe. Very tough to choose the correct system with confidence. We were all scratching our heads at one point or another - EVEN ELLIS - LOL. Keith had an easier time of it, but then again he had pretty Vicky by his side . The NOR approach works just fine as long as you have the discipline to use it properly! Although I was one of the players who left money there, the overall experience was worth it. There were some winning shoes as well which I didn't bet in due to bank roll protection and higher table limits that I don't play at. I wouldn't have traded this experience of talking shop with the "Pros" in live action for anything. Lunch was great - Thanks Keith and Vicky. A couple of suggestions for the next trip would be to casually meet first, discuss bank rolls, money management and strategy. We should reserve our own tables and try to play as group through out the day. Thanks again and hope to see you all again real soon, Ed

[Guest]

Shoes -

P21111111111111111212113

P13221121111111414213362253311

P3215221

B3114122

P3215221

P221112111112313111113

K

Well, I'm working on a complete trip report but I think I'm still missing one game. Keith has the same game

twice but I think there were a total of 6. Alice, I think I'm missing the $15 game you were playing with Keith

at the end table next to the isle. I think it was the last shoe played.

If anyone has it would you please post it using our short cut method so I can complete my report. Or you can

PM it to me if you don't want to post. Or Email it to me at Ellis@beatthecasino.com or phone it to me:

901 405 1723.

Thanks! Meanwhile I'll get the report started as it will be pretty lengthy.

[Guest]

Trip report: Sands Bethlehem 10/19/13: Ellis:

I note that Keith does not have the games in the order that they were played. But I numbered my cards so that I have

the games in the right order. You will soon see that this is extremely important.

It was a shock to see that this casino had gone to preshuffled cards especially after the Casino Mgr at Hollywood, PA had

recently told me the PA Casino Control Com. would NEVER allow preshuffled cards!

But that was not our problem except that I'm sure it played on our opening confidence level.

Our problem was that getting all our people at ONE table totally eliminates our entire table selection process

which, in my experience, is more than half the battle. W/O it you are pretty much doomed before you start.

We didn't even know that this casino allows as many free hands as you want at the start of a new shoe.

We could have put that to good use. W/O table selection the next best thing would have been to watch 20 or 30 hands before

starting the first shoe. Just as when you first enter a casino on your own, your first job is to find the most biased tote board.

So you are always starting your first game mid shoe. At least we could have got the mid shoe part right. But no table selection

is a major handicap no matter how you slice it.

I have mentioned before many times how important it is to WIN your first shoe of a session. That is WHY we have table selection.

Whenever I lose the first shoe of a session, which is extremely unusual, I usually quit the session to give my confidence a chance

to rebuild itself. But of course I couldn't do that the way we had this play session set up. I should have realized that before hand

but the problem just didn't dawn on me until it was too late.

But we SHOULD have won the first shoe anyway had I been awake:

I've been looking at something lately that I consider extremely important. And it would have saved us in the first shoe.

So in my first scan I'll show you how we played it (by the old rules) vs. how we SHOULD have played it by the new rules

I'll tell you right now:

Currently we say, very arbitrarily, to start OTB4L in Mode 3 and S40 in Mode 2 unless we know better from prior shoes.

But this is STUPID. I can say that because it was me that made the mistake of setting it up that way.

We should NEVER be doing ANYTHING arbitrarily in Baccarat.

Look, we know that OTB4L Mode 2 prefers streak and Mode 3 prefers chop. Therefore when our first 3 bet comes up we need

to merely note at that point, is our OR count plus or minus. If it is + we start Mode 3. If it is minus we start Mode 2.

That way we will have a lot more winning first 3 bets because we have a solid mathematical method to our madness.

Another way of doing the same thing is if the first 3 bet comes up in the first several hands it should always go OTR

because the OR count MUST be minus for the first 3 bet to come up early.

Likewise if the first 3 bet comes up later in the column the OR count must be plus so we should play it Mode 3.

See that? Why in the world did I not see that before? But, you know, some of us geniuses can't tie our shoes. This

should have been obvious to me right along but it simply wasn't until lately.

That simple trick would have won the first shoe and THAT would have changed the whole day.

AND, I would have been in MUCH better spirits when I got to shoe 5! And THAT would have changed everything!

Shoe 5 was a once in a lifetime exploit shoe! As a pro, I KNEW that. I was just too rattled at that point to take advantage of it.

Sure, I hit my goal and quit when I hit +10 the 4th time. Some of the guys went up on that shoe and did much better than me.

I'll show you exactly how this SHOULD have been played with NO RISK whatsoever and how I WOULD have played it had I

not been so down in the dumps by then. That is NO EXCUSE for a pro. I missed a chance of a lifetime even though I knew exactly

how to play it and have played the up as you win Fibonaci many times before.

As far as preshuffled cards being a negative thing - that's just an excuse. It really was a positive thing:

They were coming out with new cards often. I quickly noticed that brand new cards were ALWAYS S40

at that casino while old cards were always OTB4L. That is a huge advantage had I only got the Mode right

in the very first shoe, which BTW was NOT new cards.

So let me see if I can figure out how to post my scans and I'll give you a full explanation of how each shoe should have been played

and why:

[alice]

Hi Ellis

Here is the $15 game that I played with Keith.

We left the table after winning 10 units

P522132112261232313333347141121

Thank you for doing a report.

Alice

[alice]

Hi Ellis

Sorry I gave you the first shoe instead of the last shoe

Here is the last shoe that I played with Keith

B2112211241211216224111

Let me know if you need any other info

Thank you

Alice

[Guest]

Hi Ellis

Sorry I gave you the first shoe instead of the last shoe

Here is the last shoe that I played with Keith

B2112211241211216224111

Let me know if you need any other info

Thank you

Alice

OK thanks Alice! That makes 7 shoes altogether. I'll post all seven played and with play by plays once I figure out

how to upload my scans.

BTW guys these two shoes also adhere to OTB4L for old cards with mode selected according to the OR count:

Again + = M3 and - = M2.

I should have mentioned that when this casino comes out with new cards which appeared to be every 3 or 4 shoes,

the new factory preshuffled cards go through another complete hand shuffle at the table. So it stands to reason that

new cards will end up choppy and that is what we saw. Sorta strange that they would do that but lets not complain

because it clues us in on when to base with S40 and when to go OTB4L. Using this code I never had to switch systems

and I always started in the right mode. On the game scans I noted which shoes were new cards.

I should mention that I also used the same general principle for selecting the starting mode for S40. Super chop was M3

and regular chop was M2. This new mode selection process worked out correct in all 7 shoes.

scan0027.pdf

scan0028.pdf

scan0029.pdf

scan0030.pdf

scan0031.pdf

scan0032.pdf

scan0033.pdf

scan0034.pdf

scan0036.pdf

scan0027.pdf

scan0028.pdf

scan0029.pdf

scan0030.pdf

scan0031.pdf

scan0032.pdf

scan0033.pdf

scan0034.pdf

scan0036.pdf

Edited October 23, 2013 by Keith Smith

[Edgonsal]

Hi Ellis,

Should have, could have & would have are all things that we say many times in the casino. Losing our first couple of shoes sucked. It certainly through me for a loop! I had to try and rebuild my confidence. Live action is supposed to separate the "Pros" from the average players. Thanks for manning up and admitting to your mistakes. That in itself should be a lesson to us all!!! After all, we are here to learn how to "Beat the Casino" Ed

[Guest]

Well, as a pro, "should have" is not strong enough. I definitely should have used the new starting mode selection method in the first

shoe. That would have started the day off right. There was nothing difficult about these shoes. OTB4L for old cards and S40 for new cards.

Never even had to switch systems. Some of the guys did well in spite of my starting mistake. I'm proud of them. I need to apologize to

all who were there. I'll try to make up for it by teaching you this new starting mode selection method. I think it is a real breakthrough!

It certainly did well on the seven Sands shoes and it makes perfect mathematical sense.

[Edgonsal]

Yes I agree. We need to increase our odds by knowing when to start betting and how to make sure that we are using the correct system from our very first bet. I just found out that both CT casinos use pre shuffeled cards. I had no idea! They always had the cards face down, so I assumed that they were regular cards. My mistake. Something that I never would have looked at if not for our Sands trip.

Ellis, I have watched how both casinos deal now - Mohegan deals 2 consecutive cards to the player first and then 2 to the banker side.

Foxwoods - deals 1 to the player side and 1 to the banker side and so on. In your opinion does this matter?

I seem to have a tougher time in Foxwoods, would love to have your thoughts on this, Ed

[Guest]

Sands shoe#1: scan0027.pdf‎(513.4 KB, 2 views) Hit the link at post #9 below. Then, on this one, hit view and rotate 270*

It would be good if you could make a copy of the game so you can see it with this explanation side by side. Or, make a copy

of this explanation.

OK, I'm going to take these games one at a time. Recognize that I didn't do anything unusual or controvertial in any shoe.

When they dealt brand new cards (two shoes) I played straight S40 by the book.

The old cards shoes I played OTB4L by the book.

I did not switch systems in any shoe. I started every shoe at Play 2. (This caused no problem)

Now, On the scan I'm showing you 3 different ways of playing this same 16 play shoe.

LEFT - How I actually played it. OTB4L M3 per our usual (I quit at -5 - stop loss)

Middle - How I should have played it. OTB4L M2 - per the new starting mode selection method.

Right - If I wanted to get cute with U1D1M2

OK, look at the Middle version : How I should have played it.

Note the first 3 bet of the shoe comes due at play 11.

At that point before deciding M2 or M3 I do an OR count up to that point.

The count is -3. This tells me play Mode 2.

Why? Mode 2 is our streak mode. It prefers a minus OR count. See that?

Had the count been + I would have gone with M3.

This is far, far stronger than always starting in M3 with OTB4L and M2 with S40 and it makes a whole lot more sense.

Now for ZZ runs (see shoe 2) I still started M3 because M3 beats the very common double 1's while M2 doesn't.

The U1D1 way on the right - I just put that in there as a point of interest and comparison.

Are there any questions ?

Once you are familiar with this new starting mode selection method, you should have played this shoe exactly as I did.

[Guest]

Sands shoe #2 scan0028.pdf‎(472.8 KB, 5 views) Hit the link at post #9 below.

OK this short shoe I managed to screw up too. Everything was fine up to play 10.

I did my OR count from where I started playing. So at play 10 I went M2 according to the -2 OR count.

But I had missed the first 5 plays of the shoe which were B1211.

I should have done my OR count from the beginning of the shoe which would have given me a PLUS OR count at the critical play

putting me in Mode 3 - as I played it here.

So at that point I was really down in the dumps - TWO stupid mistakes.

[Guest]

Sands Shoe #3 scan 0029 - See post 9 for link

Pretty strange shoe in that it goes from pure chop to pure streak. But as you can see, book OTB4L has no problem at all.

My first straight down 3 bet never comes up until play 29 where the OR count was +5. So no question - Mode 3.

Recognize that once I start my mode according to the OR count, I'm then changing modes according to the 3rd bet rule.

That happens a lot in this shoe:

I lose my first ZZ 3 at play 16 putting me in M2 for play 20. I lose my 2nd OTR attempt at play 21 putting me standard OTB4L.

The winning 3 at play 29 confirms M3 which causes me to lose a straight 3 at play 42 putting me in M2 for play 52.

I quit at +20 in the bottom of the 3rd, which is always a good idea at that point.

But I want you to note that this shoe has a 9 ZZ together with 2 4s, a 5, and a 6. But even with all of that, our highest bet is 4.

This should show you that OTB4L can handle runs quite well.

This shoe would likely do well with S40 too but my point here is to show you that OTB4L is pretty darn consistent with preshuffled cards.

[Guest]

Sands Shoe #4 scan 0030 - See post 9 for link

NEW CARDS!

I had watched one other new cards shoe from the isle and it was super choppy. So I wasn't surprised to see this super chop shoe,

especially after a full hand shuffle of cards already shuffled.

I first show you OTB4L so you can see first hand that is NOT the way to go with new cards at Sands Bethlehem.

S40 kills.

The OR count stays way + finishing at +10 so we are DEFINITELY in Mode 3 and no mode changes ever come up.

This would have been an excellent canditate for U1D1M2 and I would have done about 10 units better without a hint of trouble.

Not bad for a column and a half!

[Guest]

Sands Shoe #5 scan 0031 - See post 9 for link

I should be shot! I've been in this situation 1000 times before and I know EXACTLY what to do. But this time I didn't do it.

I'll remember this mistake the rest of my life. Yeah yeah, I hit my goal but my goal itself was a mistake.

Look, if you play this game long enough you'll be in this same situation sooner or later. It is WHY we play Bac.

So let me show you exactly what to do.

So OK we win 4 bets in a row but unfortunately we are only betting 1 unit. Remember the 234 and the 345 from Basic NOR?

When you are winning most of your FIRST bets you advance you prog from 123 to 234. And when that hits you immediately

advance to 345.

So OK, we finally decide to attempt the 234 at play 7 and our 2 hits! So we immediately go to 345 and our 3 hits.

THAT is a brand new ball game when that happens because we have just won the first 4 bets of a true Fibonaci progression.

1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 89 etc. Every bet is the total of the last two.

Once we win our 2 bet their is NO risk to a Fibonaci. All you can lose is what you just won on the last 2 bets. So your

ONLY risk is when you went from 1 to 2 - you risked ONE unit. That's the end of the risk so their is no reason not to do this

once you have won your 3. So OK you are betting 5. But you just won those 5 units to make your 5 bet with, See that?

Up around the 21 bet you need to be asking what the table max is. Get that issue out of the way ahead of time.

OK the Sands is $15,000.

OK, I never make the 89 bet. 90 is a whole lot easier to count your bet size.

So OK you win your 90 unit bet. Now what?

OK, your next bet in line is 145 units. But that is stupid too.

Bet the table max of 150 units instead of 145.

If you win, flat bet at the table max until you lose. Now what?

OK, if you are betting up a straight run it's all over when you lose your first bet.

Color up and get a guard to walk you to the cashier.

Why not bet once more? Because you would be betting on the weak side which is suicidal. See that?

BUT, if it is a ZZ run THAT is different because both sides are equal strength.

With a ZZ run, like we had here you want to keep betting opposites until you lose 2.

After all the shoe is spitting out opposites like crazy.

So that is why I played it as I did.

Result: $113,500.

What's the commission? Who cares?

See that? Now you know why I've been kicking myself ever since!

[Guest]

Well it's noon here and I'm still in my PJs. Been working since 3 am. Time for a break and some food!

[ECD]

Well it's noon here and I'm still in my PJs. Been working since 3 am. Time for a break and some food!

Ellis, first a big thank you for posting shoes with commentary. This will be a great way for newer students to really grasp some key concepts/relationships which more experienced players just "know".

Second, I was interested in your idea of using the OR count to determine the selection of the first 3 bet. I looked at my last 30 cards where I played OTBL or S40, and can report that this selection approach was accurate in 19 of those games, or about 63% of the time. Of course, this is a small sample, but interesting. When I play, it is rare that I will make a 3 bet the first time it comes up (usually only if it is later in the shoe and I am already well ahead or if there is a strong bias already). I will continue to monitor this as if it remains a strong mathematical advantage, I can start to take greater advantage of the opportunity.

[PeterUK]

Very useful insight relating OR count with Mode Selection, and logical...

What about 2nd bet in NOR+? ;-)

[tricky]

This thread is very helpful. Thank you for posting the shoes.I have run into shoes like Sands Shoe #5 scan 0031, I will try Fibonaci when I get the right situation, plus my usual casino has 100,000 max bet.

[ztomsk]

Sands Shoe #3 scan 0029 - See post 9 for link

Pretty strange shoe in that it goes from pure chop to pure streak. But as you can see, book OTB4L has no problem at all.

My first straight down 3 bet never comes up until play 29 where the OR count was +5. So no question - Mode 3.

Recognize that once I start my mode according to the OR count, I'm then changing modes according to the 3rd bet rule.

That happens a lot in this shoe:

I lose my first ZZ 3 at play 16 putting me in M2 for play 20. I lose my 2nd OTR attempt at play 21 putting me standard OTB4L.

The winning 3 at play 29 confirms M3 which causes me to lose a straight 3 at play 42 putting me in M2 for play 52.

Hey Ellis - great play by play. It's refreshing to see that I play almost just like you - your teachings have sunk in well. I did have one question I can't seem to figure out....

Why do you bet 3 units on the player at hand 22? Shouldn't it be a 3 unit bet on the bank? Which would then lead to a 5 unit bet at hand 24 on the bank making THAT your first down 3 bet using Mode 3? Just curious why you bet 2 players IAR would go to 3 players IAR? Doesn't standard OTB4L always bet against that? (unless you have some SAP players noting that 2's were going to 3 and wanted to get fancy)

The only thing I can think of is that you "started" standard OTB4L at hand 22. Yea I think that's what you did... has it always been done like that???

[Guest]

Hey Ellis - great play by play. It's refreshing to see that I play almost just like you - your teachings have sunk in well. I did have one question I can't seem to figure out....

Why do you bet 3 units on the player at hand 22? Shouldn't it be a 3 unit bet on the bank? Which would then lead to a 5 unit bet at hand 24 on the bank making THAT your first down 3 bet using Mode 3? Just curious why you bet 2 players IAR would go to 3 players IAR? Doesn't standard OTB4L always bet against that? (unless you have some SAP players noting that 2's were going to 3 and wanted to get fancy)

The only thing I can think of is that you "started" standard OTB4L at hand 22. Yea I think that's what you did... has it always been done like that???

Well no ztomsk - there is no mistake. I'm playing standard OTB4L from the beginning. I lose my 3 ZZ bet at play 16.

That puts me in Mode 2 for ZZs. (the 3rd bet rule) I win my 4 OTR at play 17. That was an M3 bet so I only stay OTR for the one bet.

So I go back to OTB4L at hands 18 and 19. That is my 2 losing bets for M2 so I go OTR at play 20 and win. Since I

am in M2 I stay OTR for a 2nd attempt at play 21 and lose my 2 bet so a 3 bet is due regular OTB4L which I make on P

at hand 22 - the regular OTB4L bet since I lost my OTR 2nd attempt. Everything is standard OTB4L U1D2 per NOR+.

But look at the 3rd column! I win 7 bets in a row - 5 of them 1 bets. I should have advanced to the 234/345 at play 47. I would

have made a few extra units.

But I do see one mistake - At hand 49 my score should have been 19, not 18. See that. So I would have hit my +20 goal sooner -

at play 54. Ha, so I actually ended up with 21 units quitting at hand 56. I was probably wondering where the hell that extra

unit came from??? It helps to add your score up correctly.

[Guest]

This thread is very helpful. Thank you for posting the shoes.I have run into shoes like Sands Shoe #5 scan 0031, I will try Fibonaci when I get the right situation, plus my usual casino has 100,000 max bet.

Well tricky, FIRST, welcome to the forum! Right, we don't see these opportunities very often so it is extremely important to know

exactly what to do when they DO pop up - always when you least expect it.

We could have made a lot more money by "pressing" our bet. But this is foolish and amateurish because you are risking your entire

winnings every bet. With the Fibonaci you are always only risking the winnings of your last two bets - a far, far safer proposition.

BTW, the Finonaci progression was not invented by man. It is found repeatedly in nature. We merely copied it from nature.

So you might think: "well, if it is good enough for God.............

[Guest]

Sands Shoe #6 scan 0032 - See post 9 for link

Well first, anyone who thinks preshuffled cards are random or that they should be feared - shoe 6 is yet another example

of just how perfectly biased and therefore predictable these Sands shoes were. Perfect NOR+ shoes!

We never had to switch systems in any shoe. I think it is a lot like BJ - the more the casino tries to screw around with the cards -

the more predictable they make them.

Shoe 6 finally gives me a chance to play a full shoe out. I quit at +30 because we are really pressing our luck if we attempt

to go past +30 with U1D2 standard OTB4L.

The OR count is minus when my first 3 bet comes due already at play 5 - so I start M2 (streak mode) per the new rule.

The new rule really saved our skins this shoe. Without it we would have started in M3 and hit our stop loss already at play 5.

So the new rule turned a -5 into a +30 - or perhaps +40 if I play it NORSAP as I'll show you on the next scan.

In spite of the early 5 and 6iars this is a perfect OTB4L shoe. We don't even get to our only 4 bet until the 3rd col. So we hit

our +30 very early at play 61. Straight forward OTB4L - nothing the least bit fancy or controvercial.

My hit rate was so high I could have safely bet this shoe U1D1M2 and scored about +45. In the first col I actually won 5 more

bets than I lost! And remember: we would have hit our stop loss playing M3 - so the new rule gave us a 35 unit swing in our

favor in ONE shoe. And it would have been a 50 unit swing had we bet U1D1. That speaks volumes for the new shoe start rule.

But I'll never hear the end of it from our SAP boys! They will be quick to point out that I failed to capitalize on the extremely high

volume of 3 or mores. So, I'll play it over again for you on the next scan playing NORSAP. You'll see what all that fuss is about!

Oh, just one thing you might ask about - Why didn't I stay OTR for one more bet at play 47 per the M2 rules. Becuse when I

attempted that back at play 6, I lost. We always do what would have worked best last time. See that?