$1,000,000 Questions thread...

[Quizzical1]

Here it is guys. Ask away!

Nice dissertation on the tote boards Ellis.

As for me, I guess I'm SOL right out of the gate since 99% of the tables I play have to be from shoe starts. I was (am?) hoping that the S4D could help solve this dilemma. Fingers crossed.....

[kramden]

SOL??? That is not the Way to the American Dream!!

There are other things that noone has even noticed. (at least noone is openly

talking about them)

I will not spell them out again.

And hey! Where are the two testers? Mr Davis gave them the keys to

the car and now they stole it, never to be heard from again?? WTF??

Now that IS the American Way. Once you "make it" to hell with your neighbors.

Am I right or wrong here?

But if someone takes the time to read, to take me seriously, I would contribute to those

people only.

Like Mr. Davis, I have a headache.

I enjoy this forum, but it isnt moving anywhere after the crash of the 4d. Which is still, IMO, worth

exploring. It just might need a new "twist".

At any rate, the mm approach is the most important aspect of it

right now. IMO.

Can anyone answer my questions about a comparison of the 1-2-3 versus a 1-2-4?

This may act as some excedrine.

:)

[Quizzical1]

SOL??? That is not the Way to the American Dream!!

There are other things that noone has even noticed. (at least noone is openly

talking about them)

I will not spell them out again.

And hey! Where are the two testers? Mr Davis gave them the keys to

the car and now they stole it, never to be heard from again?? WTF??

Now that IS the American Way. Once you "make it" to hell with your neighbors.

Am I right or wrong here?

But if someone takes the time to read, to take me seriously, I would contribute to those

people only.

Like Mr. Davis, I have a headache.

I enjoy this forum, but it isnt moving anywhere after the crash of the 4d. Which is still, IMO, worth

exploring. It just might need a new "twist".

At any rate, the mm approach is the most important aspect of it

right now. IMO.

Can anyone answer my questions about a comparison of the 1-2-3 versus a 1-2-4?

This may act as some excedrine.

:)

Agreed!

The two testers supposedly have long term results (2+ yrs I believe) on the std 4D. It would be GREAT if they could chime in on how, historically, different kinds of runs were handled as they were played. That way we can nail down when to keep net betting the low count OR flat bet the highest count.

[kramden]

Hey Glenn,

You are a hard worker. Im sure its appreciated by more people

than will ever say so. So thanks.

Two things have happened to the testers. Either they gave up because the 4d

is a failure or they are making their winning superbets and becoming

rich. I guess the smart thing todo would be to keep their mouths shut.

The only problem I have with it is they were given the info from this

forum and its founder. It is pretty foul that we cant get closure either way. And believe me

I am no whiny beaatch looking to know what my ex girlfriend is

doing today. But whats right is right.

The only other explanation is it was a hoax from the beginning.

However, the theory is sound and it does track the game like never

before.

So shame on the testers. Until proven otherwise.

[kramden]

Now for you Glenn I give you this idea, as I dont really need the

testers. (but would like to onow if there is something i am missing):

Try to stop focusing on how to beat the runs. To me the runs are

the detriment of the whole NOR application.

I am not going to spell it out on the open forum, but what if there was a way

to make runs a break even situation? Then all you

had to do was focus on playing the "non runs"????

Now to NOR's credit, it tells you how todo that. AND it bases

much of its theory on the fact that ot4bl is the backbone of

record bac profits.

Those bastards!! They are going to pay for their insolance!! (spell checker please).

LOL

[Quizzical1]

Hey Glenn,

You are a hard worker. Im sure its appreciated by more people

than will ever say so. So thanks.

Two things have happened to the testers. Either they gave up because the 4d

is a failure or they are making their winning superbets and becoming

rich. I guess the smart thing todo would be to keep their mouths shut.

The only problem I have with it is they were given the info from this

forum and its founder. It is pretty foul that we cant get closure either way. And believe me

I am no whiny beaatch looking to know what my ex girlfriend is

doing today. But whats right is right.

The only other explanation is it was a hoax from the beginning.

However, the theory is sound and it does track the game like never

before.

So shame on the testers. Until proven otherwise.

Hey Kramden,

Definitely NOT a hoax.

I can get results from it with only 1 month of practice.

Ellis et al, were REALLY onto something, but its "sail lost its wind" due to the advent of Oz's 3D100 around the time of the seminar which caused a major sidetrack.

[Quizzical1]

Now for you Glenn I give you this idea, as I dont really need the

testers. (but would like to onow if there is something i am missing):

Try to stop focusing on how to beat the runs. To me the runs are

the detriment of the whole NOR application.

I am not going to spell it out on the open forum, but what if there was a way

to make runs a break even situation? Then all you

had to do was focus on playing the "non runs"????

Now to NOR's credit, it tells you how todo that. AND it bases

much of its theory on the fact that ot4bl is the backbone of

record bac profits.

Those bastards!! They are going to pay for their insolance!! (spell checker please).

LOL

PM me then kramden if you don't wish to post here.

Do me a favor when you get a chance.

Go on Wizard of Odds website and play a shoe or two on his Baccarat simulator using S4D.

The way he has it programmed, you'll see there are a few runs that pop up. How do you handle them?

To me, it's great I found a place to practice the weak points of S4D, but now the quest becomes HOW do we solve it?

And anyone else, please don't say that's not reality. I've had this EXACT scenario pop up in actual play many times.

[ECD]

Now for you Glenn I give you this idea, as I dont really need the

testers. (but would like to onow if there is something i am missing):

Try to stop focusing on how to beat the runs. To me the runs are

the detriment of the whole NOR application.

I am not going to spell it out on the open forum, but what if there was a way

to make runs a break even situation? Then all you

had to do was focus on playing the "non runs"????

Now to NOR's credit, it tells you how todo that. AND it bases

much of its theory on the fact that ot4bl is the backbone of

record bac profits.

Those bastards!! They are going to pay for their insolance!! (spell checker please).

LOL

When playing either S40 or OTBL in a strong bias shoe, NOT loosing to the occasional runs IS the key to consistent wins. For example, if you are playing OTBL and you encounter a 6iar followed by a 5 or 6 ZZ, the progression kills you in that shoe. In my experience, you are far better to try to capitalize on the bias you are playing (be it chop, streak or neutral), while trying to avoid, or LIMIT you drawdown, on those elements of the shoe that do not follow your bias. If you can do this, and can successfully pick the right bias to play in the shoe (note Ellis' recent post about reading the tote board!), they you can have a consistent winning result. I use a couple techniques to limit drawdowns and avoid certain devestating patterns, and kramden's point of breaking even on the runs will ensure regular wins. Yes, if you play the run perfectly (i.e., like you really know how long it will go), you will make more money. But regular consistent wins come from exploting the BIAS, not from GAMBLING on what might happen next.

[Quizzical1]

When playing either S40 or OTBL in a strong bias shoe, NOT loosing to the occasional runs IS the key to consistent wins. For example, if you are playing OTBL and you encounter a 6iar followed by a 5 or 6 ZZ, the progression kills you in that shoe. In my experience, you are far better to try to capitalize on the bias you are playing (be it chop, streak or neutral), while trying to avoid, or LIMIT you drawdown, on those elements of the shoe that do not follow your bias. If you can do this, and can successfully pick the right bias to play in the shoe (note Ellis' recent post about reading the tote board!), they you can have a consistent winning result. I use a couple techniques to limit drawdowns and avoid certain devestating patterns, and kramden's point of breaking even on the runs will ensure regular wins. Yes, if you play the run perfectly (i.e., like you really know how long it will go), you will make more money. But regular consistent wins come from exploting the BIAS, not from GAMBLING on what might happen next.

Thanks way2fast - I appreciate your input.

[Quizzical1]

Excellent post regarding BaS40 and reading the tote board, Ellis!

Now THAT'S what I'm talkin' about!!!

[LOU30]

Thanks Way2fast,

Glen,I haven't done the home work on this yet but as way2fast point out and we all should know it is the streaks that can cost us in are shoes and in some cases break are stop loss margin.I know you are looking into when to switch from the IAR,s on Net Betting,I think as we progress in the shoe capture points should govern when we stop/suspend our losses in the streak.

If we are to avoid the runs/streaks all together or break even on them and concentrate on the bias at hand which makes perfect sense to eliminate the runs Doesn't what Ellis say about a PROG with in a PROG address this problem...

So OK, you are only trying to get to +5 so we don't need a lot of 3 bets.

You lose your primary prog of 1,2 against a run.

You start your secondary prog of 12358 at 1.

So after losing your 1,2 you go back to a 1 bet.

If the OR count is - you bet your 1 ON the run.

If the OR count is + you bet your 1 AGAINST the run.

If you lose that secondary prog 1 bet, next time you lose a primary 1,2 your secondary prog is at 2. (prog within a prog)

Lets say you win your 1 OTR. We achieved our goal. We got 1 unit back of the 2 we lost. Fine. Wait for the run to end.

Lets say you win your 1 ATR. Again you achieved your goal. The run ended so Continue with the primary prog of 1,2

Lets say you lose your 1 ATR. Again wait for the run to end. But the next run your secondary prog is at 2.

As I said I haven't had a chance to study this concept yet so what do you think.

One last thing Glen has gone out on a limb here to the benefit of us all,we are one family let's help each other if we have anything that works for us on a personal level please share it with the family after all we are all in this together!

Lou.

When playing either S40 or OTBL in a strong bias shoe, NOT loosing to the occasional runs IS the key to consistent wins. For example, if you are playing OTBL and you encounter a 6iar followed by a 5 or 6 ZZ, the progression kills you in that shoe. In my experience, you are far better to try to capitalize on the bias you are playing (be it chop, streak or neutral), while trying to avoid, or LIMIT you drawdown, on those elements of the shoe that do not follow your bias. If you can do this, and can successfully pick the right bias to play in the shoe (note Ellis' recent post about reading the tote board!), they you can have a consistent winning result. I use a couple techniques to limit drawdowns and avoid certain devestating patterns, and kramden's point of breaking even on the runs will ensure regular wins. Yes, if you play the run perfectly (i.e., like you really know how long it will go), you will make more money. But regular consistent wins come from exploting the BIAS, not from GAMBLING on what might happen next.

[Quizzical1]

Thanks Way2fast,

Glen,I haven't done the home work on this yet but as way2fast point out and we all should know it is the streaks that can cost us in are shoes and in some cases break are stop loss margin.I know you are looking into when to switch from the IAR,s on Net Betting,I think as we progress in the shoe capture points should govern when we stop/suspend our losses in the streak.

If we are to avoid the runs/streaks all together or break even on them and concentrate on the bias at hand which makes perfect sense to eliminate the runs Doesn't what Ellis say about a PROG with in a PROG address this problem...

So OK, you are only trying to get to +5 so we don't need a lot of 3 bets.

You lose your primary prog of 1,2 against a run.

You start your secondary prog of 12358 at 1.

So after losing your 1,2 you go back to a 1 bet.

If the OR count is - you bet your 1 ON the run.

If the OR count is + you bet your 1 AGAINST the run.

If you lose that secondary prog 1 bet, next time you lose a primary 1,2 your secondary prog is at 2. (prog within a prog)

Lets say you win your 1 OTR. We achieved our goal. We got 1 unit back of the 2 we lost. Fine. Wait for the run to end.

Lets say you win your 1 ATR. Again you achieved your goal. The run ended so Continue with the primary prog of 1,2

Lets say you lose your 1 ATR. Again wait for the run to end. But the next run your secondary prog is at 2.

As I said I haven't had a chance to study this concept yet so what do you think.

One last thing Glen has gone out on a limb here to the benefit of us all,we are one family let's help each other if we have anything that works for us on a personal level please share it with the family after all we are all in this together!

Lou.

Thanks Lou,

Possibly. Yes, this may work.

Anyone want to try S4D on this?

B211122142221331141111222

This is a fairly easy one (no long runs) and playing the std 1234 prog I can get to +5 at hand 22 (20% PA) starting my betting at hand 8. Max drawdown is -4 at hand 13 (1st 4 unit bet) with a high of +10 at hand 36 (also 20% PA). Using 1-2 prog I get a +5 also at hand 22 with a max drawdown of -2 at hand 13 (25% PA - hmmm, something to this maybe?).

Keep in mind please - I played this purely mechanically letting the counts be my guide - the forte' of S4D! NO GUESSING NEEDED!!

[ECD]

Thanks Way2fast,

Glen,I haven't done the home work on this yet but as way2fast point out and we all should know it is the streaks that can cost us in are shoes and in some cases break are stop loss margin.I know you are looking into when to switch from the IAR,s on Net Betting,I think as we progress in the shoe capture points should govern when we stop/suspend our losses in the streak.

If we are to avoid the runs/streaks all together or break even on them and concentrate on the bias at hand which makes perfect sense to eliminate the runs Doesn't what Ellis say about a PROG with in a PROG address this problem...

So OK, you are only trying to get to +5 so we don't need a lot of 3 bets.

You lose your primary prog of 1,2 against a run.

You start your secondary prog of 12358 at 1.

Lou, your logic has some merit as one way to try to reduce the tendacy to chase runs or to go too deep into a betting progression. Where I have a problem though is the secondary progression (12358). In real casino experience, it is NOT unheard of to lose 5 bets in a row. This secondary progression is not consecutive bets, and in some shoes you may not even make the bet 5 times. But irregardless of when the bets occur, you will experience, from time to time, a loss of 19 units on that progression, which was designed to capture just one more unit from a "run." I find that risk/reward unacceptable. A better way to manage that risk would be to not attempt to capture that one more unit from the run -- just stop after your 1,2 and wait it out. The downside is you accept a loss on the run event; the upside is you know exactly what that loss will be. Provided you are playing the right over-all bias in the shoe, your "winning" events will make up for the losers, especially if you cap your loosing event to a known amount. The key to consistent small wins (i.e. 5 units per shoe) is to eliminate the tails from the distribution of event outcomes. Chasing any event with a 12358 only fattens the wrong tail of outcomes.

[Guest]

Lou, your logic has some merit as one way to try to reduce the tendacy to chase runs or to go too deep into a betting progression. Where I have a problem though is the secondary progression (12358). In real casino experience, it is NOT unheard of to lose 5 bets in a row. This secondary progression is not consecutive bets, and in some shoes you may not even make the bet 5 times. But irregardless of when the bets occur, you will experience, from time to time, a loss of 19 units on that progression, which was designed to capture just one more unit from a "run." I find that risk/reward unacceptable. A better way to manage that risk would be to not attempt to capture that one more unit from the run -- just stop after your 1,2 and wait it out. The downside is you accept a loss on the run event; the upside is you know exactly what that loss will be. Provided you are playing the right over-all bias in the shoe, your "winning" events will make up for the losers, especially if you cap your loosing event to a known amount. The key to consistent small wins (i.e. 5 units per shoe) is to eliminate the tails from the distribution of event outcomes. Chasing any event with a 12358 only fattens the wrong tail of outcomes.

Way to fast, you don't seem to be getting it. The 12358 secondary prog is not bets in a row. It is one bet either on or against each run. When you lose the 1, the 2 bet may not come up for 15 plays or whatever. By that time you have more history to go on. I have never lost this secondary prog. It is almost impossible. To lose it you would have to have like either 5 3s with no 4s or 5 4s with no 3s or an exact mixture of the 2. Almost impossible. In fact it is nearly impossible to even finish a prog within a shoe.

Study it a little more.

[Guest]

Guys, relax, there is no conspiracy re the testers. I don't know what happened to Fiona but I suspect she is simply too busy at her job.

John B simply doesn't like to post. I don't get why but maybe he got burned as so often happens on other forums. But I assure you that he follows all of your posts on a daily basis to the point that he can recite most of them. I talk to him and compare notes several times a week.

He totally agrees with me re the math surrounding betting opposites on the lowest count.

No question about it: The lowest count produces the most opposites.

He also questions why you are concerned about runs. His point is why fight them? Just drop low side and continue with high side - which by then, you should have already started. He also really likes the idea of +5.

Don't worry about John. He's right there with us every step of the way, even if he has something against posting.

[Quizzical1]

Guys, relax, there is no conspiracy re the testers. I don't know what happened to Fiona but I suspect she is simply too busy at her job.

John B simply doesn't like to post. I don't get why but maybe he got burned as so often happens on other forums. But I assure you that he follows all of your posts on a daily basis to the point that he can recite most of them. I talk to him and compare notes several times a week.

He totally agrees with me re the math surrounding betting opposites on the lowest count.

No question about it: The lowest count produces the most opposites.

He also questions why you are concerned about runs. His point is why fight them? Just drop low side and continue with high side - which by then, you should have already started. He also really likes the idea of +5.

Don't worry about John. He's right there with us every step of the way, even if he has something against posting.

Agree 100% Ellis on betting opposites on the low count - I'm proving it everytime I play. That's why I told kramden 4D is def NOT a hoax since I can use it and win.

Regarding runs, can you / John please post some example shoes showing how to handle them? What is the magic number to switch over and SS flat bet. 4?, 5?, and for how many bets? Til your 1st loss? Until the high count returns below "X"?

I ask this because I personally run into this situation where the high count "flutters" and is inconsistent to switch to SS flat betting- sometimes at 4 or 5 or even 6 at times.

Opposite betting the low count (aka net betting) works perfectly on all counts (PvB, etc.) up to 4 high and is the foundation of 4D.

Once we have concrete rules nailed down as to handling runs (counts that "sort of" run away) removing any ambiguity (i.e. subjective decision making) THEN we really have something.

Past shoes played would be of great help here. No sense re-inventing the wheel as I'm sure the original testers have already ran into these situations many times. How was it handled in each case?

Again, the goal here it total mechanical playing - IF that's achievable. If not, I'll accept 99% mechanical play....;o}

UPDATE: I will be working with Ellis' prog within a prog (1,2,3,5,8) for runs in the meantime. Although he may have it worked out, I need to get it straight in my brain. Any help in this area would be greatly appreciated.

[LOU30]

Hi Glen,

UPDATE: I will be working with Ellis' prog within a prog (1,2,3,5,8) for runs in the meantime. Although he may have it worked out, I need to get it straight in my brain. Any help in this area would be greatly appreciated.

Reading between the lines,this looks like the classic FOLLOW the shoe.

We have the + count streak/repeat and the - chop/opposite basically M2/OTR for one bet or ATR for one bet either way until the RUN has passed,using the now progressing shoe history to assist us in our decision making (Letting the Shoe tell us what to Do part).

Now with the PROG With in a PROG as a safety net WE would have to bet against WHAT THE SHOE is telling us do for us to lose the 12358 secondary prog.

I am still to do my home work on this but it looks right to me...Ellis?

Regards Lou.

.

Way to fast, you don't seem to be getting it. The 12358 secondary prog is not bets in a row. It is one bet either on or against each run. When you lose the 1, the 2 bet may not come up for 15 plays or whatever. By that time you have more history to go on. I have never lost this secondary prog. It is almost impossible. To lose it you would have to have like either 5 3s with no 4s or 5 4s with no 3s or an exact mixture of the 2. Almost impossible. In fact it is nearly impossible to even finish a prog within a shoe.

Study it a little more.

[Quizzical1]

Hi Glen,

UPDATE: I will be working with Ellis' prog within a prog (1,2,3,5,8) for runs in the meantime. Although he may have it worked out, I need to get it straight in my brain. Any help in this area would be greatly appreciated.

Reading between the lines,this looks like the classic FOLLOW the shoe.

We have the + count streak/repeat and the - chop/opposite basically M2/OTR for one bet or ATR for one bet either way until the RUN has passed,using the now progressing shoe history to assist us in our decision making (Letting the Shoe tell us what to Do part).

Now with the PROG With in a PROG as a safety net WE would have to bet against WHAT THE SHOE is telling us do for us to lose the 12358 secondary prog.

I am still to do my home work on this but it looks right to me...Ellis?

Regards Lou.

.

Lou,

Correct me if I'm wrong, I think you may have the + and - counts backwards.

If we're following the OR count and it's minus that means bet WITH the streak. If the OR count is positive you bet OPPOSITE the streak.

We ALWAYS want the shoe to tell us what to do next - that's what 4D is all about. In the case of a streak there's an ambiguity that develops between 2 or more counts (one low / the other high) caused by the streak making you choose between net betting the lowest or SS betting the highest. The prog within a prog could help guide your next bet via the OR count value at that point in the shoe.

Will you be right 100% of the time? NO. That's what the 1,2,3,5,8 unit betting prog is for.

In a nutshell, the way I interpret the "inner prog" is (Ellis, please correct me if I'm wrong):

1. The prog within a prog is governed by the OR count.

2. For a 1,2 main progression, after losing the 2nd bet (2 unit) note the OR count (labeled "1" column for S4D) value at this point.

a. If it's positive, bet against the run (if you lost to a PP (streak) bet 1 on B (chop)) or (if you lost to a PB (chop) bet 1 on B (streak)).

b. If it's negative, bet on the run (if you lost to a PP (streak) bet 1 on P (streak)) or (if you lost to a PB (chop) bet 1 on P (chop)).

c. If it's 0, no bet that hand since no direction was given.

3. If you win the bet, remain at 1 unit and stay OTR until a loss (or ATR if OR was +). If you lose that bet return to the main 1,2 prog but bet 2 units upon next 2 losses of main prog and follow the 1,2,3,5,8 progression on future in-a-row losses. Back to 1 unit on a win.

4. Return to main 1,2 prog upon losing 1st OTR / ATR bet net betting the lowest count.

Is the second half of 2a and 2b correct, Ellis?

[LOU30]

Yes I understand the bet placement part of the +/- and I can see in the post how it can be miss interpreted,what I meant was to go OTR/ATR after 2 losses hence (M2) sorry for any confusion .

What I was thinking about was by following the shoe as it progressed was IF our PROG was advancing along and losing was to look at passed EVENTS M/C, are 2,s staying 2,s M/C or L/C and FOLLOWING THE EVENTS not the +/- counts AS you have just said some times we will have a 0 count and we might miss an opportunity to win our chips back in the play of a single shoe and miss the chance to complete the PROG...hence Follow the Shoe as some times counts can point in one direction and events in another.

Ellis??? Sorry Glen just thinking out loud.

Lou.

Lou,

Correct me if I'm wrong, I think you may have the + and - counts backwards.

If we're following the OR count and it's minus that means bet WITH the streak. If the OR count is positive you bet OPPOSITE the streak.

We ALWAYS want the shoe to tell us what to do next - that's what 4D is all about. In the case of a streak there's an ambiguity that develops between 2 or more counts (one low / the other high) caused by the streak making you choose between net betting the lowest or SS betting the highest. The prog within a prog could help guide your next bet via the OR count value at that point in the shoe.

Will you be right 100% of the time? NO. That's what the 1,2,3,5,8 unit betting prog is for.

In a nutshell, the way I interpret the "inner prog" is (Ellis, please correct me if I'm wrong):

1. The prog within a prog is governed by the OR count.

2. For a 1,2 main progression, after losing the 2nd bet (2 unit) note the OR count (labeled "1" column for S4D) value at this point.

a. If it's positive, bet against the run (if you lost to a PP (streak) bet 1 on B (chop)) or (if you lost to a PB (chop) bet 1 on B (streak)).

b. If it's negative, bet on the run (if you lost to a PP (streak) bet 1 on P (streak)) or (if you lost to a PB (chop) bet 1 on P (chop)).

c. If it's 0, no bet that hand since no direction was given.

3. If you win the bet, remain at 1 unit and stay OTR until a loss (or ATR if OR was +). If you lose that bet return to the main 1,2 prog but bet 2 units upon next 2 losses of main prog and follow the 1,2,3,5,8 progression on future in-a-row losses. Back to 1 unit on a win.

4. Return to main 1,2 prog upon losing 1st OTR / ATR bet net betting the lowest count.

Is the second half of 2a and 2b correct, Ellis?

[Rich333]

And another thought about the second progression. Are you saying there be a 12358 for OTR and a seperate 12358 for ATR? I don't want to fog it up, just trying to to follow along

[uneek]

Ellis,

What's the recommended stop loss for the 1,2 and prog within a prog?

[Guest]

Ellis,

What's the recommended stop loss for the 1,2 and prog within a prog?

Good question. I hate making the stop loss more than the stop win and I've never gone less than -8. Let's try -5 but also lrt's be prepared to go back to -8 if -5 proves to be too small.

But +5 is not a solid stop win. If we get to +5 within our first 20 actual bets, I think we should capture 4 and keep going and use half decade cash mgt to determine our stopping point. We need our fair share of +10s and +15s to make up for our occassional -5s.

[Guest]

A couple of our best players have asked me to reexplain BaS40 in a more detailed way because it is too easy to go down the wrong road the way I left it.

So I'm going to go back and devote a chapter to BaS40. We will be playing that nearly half the time so it is critically important to get it exactly right.

Also, I'm putting the $1,000,000 manual in the 4D forum for the time being. So if you don't have access to the 4D forum let me and Keith know and we will fix that. Later, hopefully, I can put all of the $1,000,000 chapters in the correct sequence in their own $1,000,000 thread.

Darn, I just realized that if you don't have 4D access, you won't see this instruction. Hmm, I think I can fix that because I think I know who you are.

For those of you not following it, the guys still working on the 4D have come up with a much simplified version we are calling the S4D. It has a big mathematical advantage and on line play to a goal of +5 has done very well.

Therefore I need to incorporate it into the $1,000,000 manual as another pretty much guaranteed way to get to +5.

OK, watch for a new $1,000,000 chapter on BaS40.

[Guest]

And another thought about the second progression. Are you saying there be a 12358 for OTR and a seperate 12358 for ATR? I don't want to fog it up, just trying to to follow along

No Rich. I think ATR is always best. Sooner or later there's got to be a 3 in a +OR count game.

[Guest]

There are a few other questions and comments back there but I think my new Chapter on BaS40 covers all of them. We only play BaS40 in solidly + OR count shoes so its best to play it only Mode 3 (always opposites, always ATR) That makes it pretty hard to even get to a 3 bet, let alone an 8.

0 or hovering 0 shoes we are better off with BaOTB4L.